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: Rich's Company. There is no certainty as to the date of the first performance, and the play has been sometimes assigned to mid-summer 1697 because the Preface refers to a summer production and the play was printed in 1697. Nevertheless, the presence of Verbruggen in the cast suggests that the summer of 1696 is more likely, as Verbruggen left Drury Lane on 1 Jan. 1696@7 and thereafter appeared at Lincoln's Inn Fields. Preface, Edition of 1697: Amongst a number of New Plays that of late have crowded the Stage.... As it is, it may bear up in the Winter, notwithstanding the little Encouragement it met with at its first Appearance from a thin Town, and the Scarcity of Money. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702): Sullen: Unhappy Kindness, the same Author's [as of Mock Marriage], but very word stole. Ramble: The success? Sullen: Damn'd

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: Betterton's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but Dryden, on 14 Dec. 1699, indicated that the run of the play had been completed by that day. A copy in the Folger Shakespeare Library has a notice of its publication. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 45: Iphigenia a Tragedy, wrote by Mr Dennis, a good Tragedy and well Acted; but answer'd not the Expences they were at in Cloathing it. [In The Life of Mr John Dennis (London, 1734) the author states that Colonel Codrington prevailed on all his friends to take tickets for the dramatist's third night.] Preface, Edition of 1700: And from the first representations I expected all the success that I could reasonably desire. I never in my life at any Play took notice of a more strict attention, or, a more profound silence. And there was something like what happen'd at the Representation of Pacuvius his Tragedy. For upon Orestes discovering his passion to Iphigenia in the fourth Act, there was a general murmur through the Pit, which is what I had never seen before. But after three or four representations, several people, who during that time had wholly abandon'd themselves to the Impression which Nature had made on them, began to study how to be discontented by Art; and repented heartily at having been pleas'd with what Athens and Rome and Paris had been pleas'd before. A Comparison between the Two Stages (1702), p. 23: Critick: I must needs Complement him [Dennis] with the Success of his laborious Iphigenia: Ay, here's a Tragedy with a witness--show a more tragick Poet if you can--'twas a smart Epilogue. But I marvel a Man of Mr Dennis's Penetration wou'd suffer, nay beg his Friend to Burlesque him at that unreasonable rate: But the Author was conscious the Audience might mistake it for a Comedy, and so he gets Colonel C-(he was sure his Word wou'd be taken) to tell 'em it was not a Comedy but a Tragedy: The hint was good and necessary, for o' my word very few knew what to make of it before, tho' there were many Tremendous things in't. [The dialogue continues to examine Dennis' Preface, and Dennis's assertions there concerning his play.

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but it very probably occurred not later than May 1691, as the play was advertised in the London Gazette, 4-8 June 1691. For discussions of it, see E. W. White, Early Performances of Purcell's Operas, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1958-59), 44-45, and R. E. Moore, Henry Purcell and the Restoration Theatre, Chapter III. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42: King Arthur an Opera, wrote by Mr Dryden: it was Excellently Adorn'd with Scenes and Machines: The Musical Part set by Famous Mr Henry Purcel; and Dances made by Mr Jo. Priest: The Play and Musick pleas'd the Court and City, and being well perform'd, twas very Gainful to the Company. Roger North: I remember in Purcell's excellent opera of King Arthur, when Mrs Butler, in the person of Cupid, was to call up Genius, she had the liberty to turne her face to the scean, and ner back to the theater. She was in no concerne for her face, but sang a recitativo of calling towards the place where Genius was to rise, and performed it admirably, even beyond any thing I ever heard upon the English stage....And I could ascribe it to nothing so much as the liberty she had of concealing her face, which she could not endure should be so contorted as is necessary to sound well, before her gallants, or at least her envious sex. There was so much of admirable musick in that opera, that it's no wonder it's lost; for the English have no care of what's good, and therefore deserve it not (Roger North on Music, ed. John Wilson [London, 1959], p. 217-18)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not precisely known, but it seems likely to have been in mid-January. See the discussion under 10 Jan. 1693@4 and Evelyn's remarks on 11 Jan. 1693@4. Part of the music for the play was composed by John Eccles: Young I am and yet unskill'd, sung by a girl, in Gentleman's Journal, January@February 1693@4, and Thesaurus Musicus, 1694: What state of life can be so blest, -Mrs Hudson, in Thesaurus Musicus, 1694. One song was set by Henry Purcell, How happy's the husband, the words by Congreve and sung by Mrs Ayliff, in Thesaurus Musicus, 1694: see also Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), xiii-xiv

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: [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