Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: I took coach and to the King's house, and by and by comes after me my wife with W. Hewer and his mother and Barker, and there we saw The Tameing of a Shrew, which hath some very good pieces in it, but generally is but a mean play; and the best part, Sawny, done by Lacy, hath not half its life, by reason of the swords, I suppose, not being understood, at least by me

Event Comment: Benefit Chapman. Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. N.B. The afore-nam'd Gentlemen attempt those Characters for their own Diversion (as other Gentlemen have done before 'em) and Mr Chapman's Profit only

Event Comment: Benefit Chapman. Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. N.B. The afore-nam'd Gentlemen attempt those Characters for their own Diversion (as other Gentlemen have done before 'em) and Mr Chapman's Profit only

Event Comment: [By John Gay.] Never Acted before. Receipts: #169 12s. Probable attendance: boxes, 247 paid and 3 orders; stage, 8 paid; balcony, 7 paid; pit, 301 paid and 1 order; slips, 56 paid and 5 orders; first gallery, 437 paid and 7 orders; second gallery, 191 paid. For the first night, see Schultz, pp. 1-5

Event Comment: For an account of the play, see John Wilson's The Cheats, ed. Milton C. Nahm (Oxford, 1935). It was licensed on 6 March (p. 124), acted, then forbade on 22 March in an order: Letter to Mr Tho. Killigrew: Signifying the Ks Pleasure that the New Play called the Cheates be no more represented till it be reuiewed by Sir Jo. Denham & Mr Waller. 22 March. 1662-3 (p. 130). Abraham Hill to John Brooke, 28 March 1663: P.S. The new play, called The Cheats, has been attempted on the Stage; but it is so scandalous, that it is forbidden (Familiar Letters of? Abraham Hill, [London, 1717], p. 103. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) concerning Lacy: @For his just Acting, all gave him due Praise,@His Part in the Cheats, Jony Thump, Teg and Bayes,@In these Four Excelling, The Court gave him the Bays.

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: And there took up my wife and Ashwell to the Theatre Royall, being the second day of its being opened. The house is made with extraordinary good contrivance, and yet hath some faults, as the narrowness of the passages in and out of the pitt, and the distance from the stage to the boxes, which I am confident cannot hear; but for all other things it is well, only, above all, the musique being below, and most of it sounding under the very stage, there is no hearing of the bases at all, nor very well of the trebles, which sure must be mended. The play was The Humerous Lieutenant, a play that hath little good in it, nor much in the very part which, by the King's command, Lacy now acts instead of Clun. In the dance, the tall devil's actions was very pretty....I am resolved to deny myself the liberty of two plays at court, which are in arreare to me for the months of March and April, which will more than countervail this excess, so that this month of May is the first that I must claim a liberty of going to a Court play according to my oath

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, by John O'Keeffe. Prologue by John Taylor (see text). Address by John Wolcot (Pocket Magazine, supra)]: With new Dresses and Decorations. [Mrs Lee was from the Salisbury theatre.] Morning Chronicle, 11 May 1795: This Day is published Life's Vagaries (2s.). Receipts: #268 3s. 6d. (259.19.6; 8.4.0)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) refers to Hart's acting Don John. Wilson (All the King's Ladies, p. 170) lists Rebecca Marshall as possibly play1ng First Constantia. The Works of Beaumont and Fletcher (1711), p. ix: Mr Hart played the Part of Don John to the highest Satisfaction of the Audience, the Play had a great run, and ever since has been follow'd as one of the best Entertainments of the Stage. Pepys, Diary: And took them [Mrs Pepys and Betty Michell] against my vowes, but I will make good my forfeit, to the King's house, to show them a play, The Chances. A good play I find it, and the actors most good in it; and pretty to hear Knipp sing in the play very properly, All night I weepe; and sung it admirably. The whole play pleases me well; and most of all, the sight of many fine ladies--among others, my Lady Castlemayne and Mrs Middleton

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the Songs were advertised in the Flying Post, 6-8 Dec. 1698, and the play in the London Gazette, 19-22 Dec. 1698; hence, the premiere was certainly not later than early December and was probably not later than November. In fact, on 5 Dec. 1698 Dr. William Aglionby wrote Matthew Prior, referring to Dennis, "a poor poet who has made us a fine entertainment of Rinaldo and Armida" (quoted in The Works of John Dennis, II, 489). In a dialogue written by John Oldmixon (Reflections on the Stage [London, 1699], p. 101) Savage, referring to Rinaldo and Armida, states: I have seen it 3 or 4 times already, but the Musick is so fine, and the Play pleases me so well, that I shall not think it a burthen [to see it again] (in The Works of John Dennis, I, 479). The Musical Entertainments in the Tragedy of Rinaldo and Armida (1699) is reprinted, with an introduction by Herbert Davis, in Theatre Miscellany (Luttrell Society Reprints, No 14, Oxford, 1953), pp. 103-15. One song, Ah queen, ah wretched queen, give o'er, sung by Gouge, is in Mercurius Musicus, 1699; and another, Jolly breeze that comes whistling, sung by Gouge, is in Twelve New Songs, 1699. A Comparison between the Two Stages (1702), p. 22: Critick: At last, (as you say) the old Stagers moulded a piece of Pastry work of their own, and made a kind of Lenten Feast with their Rinaldo and Armida; this surpriz'd not only Drury-lane, but indeed all the Town, no body ever dreaming of an Opera there; 'tis true they had heard of Homer's Illiads in a Nut-shel, and Jack in a Box, and what not?...Sullen: Well, with this Vagary they tug'd a while, and The Jolly-Jolly breeze-came whistling thro'-all the Town, and not a Fop but ran to see the Celebrated Virgin in a Machine; there she shin'd in a full Zodiack, the brightest Constellation there; 'twas a pleasant Reflection all this time to see her scituated among the Bulls, Capricorns, Sagittaries, and yet the Virgo still remain itacta....Critick: But this merry Time lasted not always; every thing has an end, and at length down goes Rinaldo's inchanted Mountain; it sunk as a Mole-hill seen on't: What a severity was this? that the Labour of such a gigantick Poet, nay Critick, shou'd give up the Ghost so soon: The renown'd Author thought himself immortal in that Work, and that the World was to last no longer than his Rinaldo; and tho' he stole every thing from the Italian, yet he said, what the Italian did was but Grub-street to his. See also 5 Jan. 1698@9 for a letter written by Mrs Barry, in part concerning Rinaldo and Armida

Event Comment: [By Sir John Vanbrugh and Colley Cibber.] All the Characters new drest. Mist's 13 Jan.: On Wednesday last a most horrid, barbarous, and cruel Murder was committed...upon a posthumous Child of the late Sir John Vanbroog, by one who, for some Time past, has gone by the Name of Keyber. It was a fine Child born, and would certainly have lived long, had it not fallen into such cruel Hands. Davies (Dramatic Miscellanies, III, 260-61): In all the tumults and isturbances of the theatre on the first night of a new play, which was formerly a time of more dangerous service, to the actors, than it has been of late, Mrs Oldfield was entirely mistress of herself; she thought it her duty, amidst the most violent opposition and uproar, to exert the utmost of her abilities to serve the author. In the comedy of uproar, to exert the utmost of her abilities to serve the author. In the comedy of the Provoked Husband, Cibber's enemies tried all their power to get the play condemned. The reconciliation scene wrought so effectually upon the sensible and generous part of the audience, that the conclusion was greatly and generously approved. Amidst a thousand applauses, Mrs Oldfield came forward to speak the epilogue; but when she had pronounced the first line,-Methinks I hear some powder'd critic say-a man, of no distinguished appearance, from the seat next to tne orchestra, saluted her with a hiss. She fixed her eye upon him immediately, made a very short pause, and spoke the words poor creature! loud enough to be heard by the audience, with such a look of mingled scorn, pit, and contempt, that the most uncommon applause justified her conduct in this particular, and the poor reptile sunk down with fear and trembling. See also Cibber, Apology, I, 310-11; Victor, History of the Theatres, II, 105

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by Sir John Vanburgh [sic], with Alterations [by John Philip Kemble]. [Afterpiece in place of Arthur and Emmeline, advertised on playbill of 22 Oct.] Receipts: #176 1s. (140.1.0; 31.9.6; 4.10.6)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but according to the Gentleman's Journal, May 1694, it followed Have at All: the other call'd The married Beau, or the Curious Impertinent, by Mr Crown, already acted many times (p. 134). The manuscript of a song composed by John Eccles and sung by Doggett is in Bodleian, School of Music Collection, c. 95, f 102. One by Henry Purcell, See, where repenting Celia lyes, sung by Mrs Ayliff, is in Thesaurus Musicus, 1695. See also Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), xvii-xviii

Event Comment: [By John Vanbrugh. Date of premiere unknown. Published 10 Feb.

Event Comment: Written by Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: #15 2s. 6d

Event Comment: Not Acted these Ten Years. Written by Sir John Vanbrug. Receipts: #22 9s

Event Comment: Benefit Quin. Written by Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: money #48 4s.; tickets #93 9s

Event Comment: Benefit Lesac and Miss Latour. Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: money #12 10s. 6d.; tickets #54 2s

Event Comment: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh

Event Comment: Benefit Rowland and Widow Atkins. Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: money #9 9s.; tickets #108 8s. Probable attendance: boxes, 13 by money and 200 by tickets; stage, 2 by money; pit, 8 by money and 256 by tickets; first gallery, 15 by money and 200 by tickets; second gallery, 19 by money

Event Comment: Written by Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: #18 10s. Probable attendance: boxes, 6 paid and 9 orders; pit, 58 paid and 32 orders; slips, 11 paid and 7 orders; first gallery, 75 paid and 23 orders; second gallery, 46 paid and 4 orders

Event Comment: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: #100 19s. Probable attendance: boxes, 49 paid and 29 orders; pit, 259 paid and 14 orders; slips, 28 paid and 4 orders; first gallery, 252 paid and 7 orders; second gallery, 183 paid. [This is the last entry in the Harvard Manuscript which lists the receipts in various sections of the theater.

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: #53 12s. 6d

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir John Vanbrugh. Receipts: #13 0s. 6d