Event Comment: Rich's Company. Post Man, 28-30 April 1696: The Venetian Ambassadors went yesterday to see a Play called the Indian Queen, accompanied by about 30 persons in 6 coaches

Event Comment: Rich's Company. Lady Morley attended this performance. Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 377: Lady Morley and two at the Indian Queen 15s

Event Comment: Rich's Company. Lady Morley attended this performance. Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 377: Lady Morley and three in the Box att Indian Queen #1

Event Comment: Rich's Company. Post Boy, 16-18 Dec. 1697: We hear that the Marquiss of Carmarthen who lately Entertain'd the Great Officer from the Czar of Muscovy, at the Opera call'd the Prophetess, has this day Bespoke the Entertainment of the Indian Queen at the Theatre Royal

Event Comment: For the Author (Cross Diary). The West Indian publish'd at 1s. 6d

Event Comment: [A lengthy critique of the West Indian appeared in the St James's Chronicle. The author "never received more pleasure from any theatrical performance." Each character is analysed in terms of the naturalness of the sentiments it speaks.

Event Comment: Mrs Jordan being very ill, instead of The Impostors[advertised on playbill of 27 Jan.] will be performed The West Indian. Receipts: #125 3s. (62.16.0; 59.18.6; 2.8.6)

Event Comment: Never Acted before. [Author not known. Apparently not published.] By a Company of Comedians dropt from the Clouds, late Servants to their thrice-renown'd Majesties, Kouly Kan and Theodore. With new Scenes, Habits, and proper Decorations. Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. Gallery 2s. 1st N.B. To prevent the Imposition of Box-Keepers, Gentlemen and Ladies are humbly desir'd to take Tickets at the Office, or to send for them at the Theatre, where Attendance will be given every Day, and Places may be taken. 2d N.B. The Company will endeavour to entertain the Town the remaining part of the Season. [In advance bill in Daily Advertiser, 23 Feb.: 2d N.B. Considering the extraordinary Expence that must necessarily attend equipping so many Monarchs of different Nations, the Proprietor hopes the Town will not take Umbrage at the Prices being rais'd. 3rd. N.B. The Proprietor begs leave to enter his Caveat against all (what Names soever distinguish'd) who may hire, or be hir'd, to do the Drudgery of Hissing, Catcalling, &c. and entreats the Town would discourage, as much as in them lies, a Practice at once so scandalous and prejudicial to Author, Player, and every Fair Theatre Adventure.

Event Comment: SSquire Richard-Mr Obrien ($Hopkins). Benefit for King. Receipts: #250 (MacMillan); charges: #64 4s. [Profit to King: #185 16s.

Event Comment: Benefit for King. House charges #76 10s. [Profit to King #55 14s.] Paid Master Burney 15 nights #3 2s. 6d. Printer's bill #9 6s. (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #132 4s. (Treasurer's Book). At 5 went to the Pit at Drury Lane to see the Clandestine Marriage...I could see this play, as it is now performed, every night, but J. Palmer was not so good in Brush as the other Mr Palmer whose character it is. Plym did not please tonight. The scene between the lawyers was omitted. We had the Irish Lilt by Mrs King, Giorgi, &c., and a comic scene by her and M Dugermay, with Linco's Travels...Mrs King is certainly a very fine dancer and has the best legs I ever saw. Past eleven ere we got out. A little girl of 7 or 8 years old danced very prettily (Neville MS Diary)

Event Comment: Benefit for King

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 215: King and Queene. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@147, p. 260: A King & no King at Whitehall. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351

Event Comment: The United Company. Lord Ashburnham's Diary: I went to the Play (a King and no King) and came home in good time a very rayny night (Ashburnham MS 932; see 14 Dec. 1686)

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is known from a playbill. See Eleanore Boswell, A Playbill of 1687, Library, 4th Series, XI (1931), 499-502, and Cecil Price, A Playbill, c. 1686, Notes and Queries, Vol. 194 [1949), p. 519. The bill Price saw is in the State Papers James II, 31@3, ff. 215-16, among documents referring to 1686, but the date and day of the week point to 1687. The bill reads: At the Theatre Royall this present Tuesday being the Twenty second day of February will be presented, A Play called, A King, and No King. Beginning Exact...t Four of the Clock....their Majesties Servants. VIVAT REX

Event Comment: Benefit for King. 1st piece: In one act; not acted these 20 years [not acted since 12 Nov. 1772]. 2nd piece [1st time; D 3, author unknown. Larpent MS 1250; not published]. Morning Chronicle, 10 Apr.: Tickets to be had of King at his house, Store-street, Bedford-square. Receipts: #437 14s. (241.3.0; 57.7.6; odd and after-money: tickets: 137.0.6) (charge:#231 7s.)

Event Comment: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Lord Granville, writing on 5 May 1688, refers to the King's presence on the third day, and since The Squire of Alsatia may have begun its run about 2 May 1688, Crowne's play must have been produced by the end of April. Lord Granville to Sir William Leveson, 5 May 1688: The town is as empty of news as the Court; we have had a new play called The Fall of Darius (written by Crown), by which the poet, though he could get no fame, yet had a most extraordinary third day by reason the King's presence at it; the first day of its acting Mrs Bower [Barry] was taken so violently ill in the midst of her part that she was forced to be carried off, and instead of dying in jest was in danger of doing it in earnest. Mrs Cook is dead and Mrs Boute...is again come upon the stage, where she appears with great applause. We are promised this week another new play of Shadwell's called the Alsatia Bully, which is very much commended by those who have had the private perusal of it (HMC, 5th Report, Part II, pP. 197-98). Dedication, Edition of 1688: A misfortune fell upon this Play, that might very well dizzy the Judgments of the Audience. Just before the Play began, Mrs Barry was struck with a very violent Fever, that took all Spirit from her, by consequence from the Play; the Scenes She acted fell dead from her; and in the 4th Act her distemper grew so much upon her, She cou'd go on no further, but all her part in that Act was wholly cut out and neither Spoke nor Read; that the People went away without Knowning the contexture of the Play, yet thought they knew all....[My] Thanks to His Majesty for the Honor of his Presence, on the Day which was to be for my Advantage; which He was pleased to Grant me. [See L. C. 5@148, p. 195--in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 356--for a grant of #20 as a gift from the King to Crowne for this play.

Event Comment: Benefit for King. Last till Holidays. No building on Stage

Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs King. Theodosius Advertis'd. Mr Barry Ill (Cross Diary). Tickets deliver'd for Theodosius will be taken. Mainpiece: By Particular Desire

Event Comment: Mrs King being to Quit the Stage at the end of this Season Mr G. kindly play'd for her Benefit great Applause (Hopkins Diary). Benefit for King. Pit and Boxes laid together. Paid salary list #494 18s. 6d.; Mrs Abington's Cloaths acct #2; Mr S. French, 6 days #1 10s. Receipts: #287 6s. Charges: #64 4s. Profits to Mrs King: #223 2s. [Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but see the discussion of Wits Led by the Nose, mid-June 1677, for the relationship of the two plays. The Rival Kings was entered, and deleted, in the Stationers' Register, 26 July 1678; but because the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, November 1677, it seems likely that its premiere occurred in 1677

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. As the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1681, it was probably first acted not later than March 1681. The title page states: Revis'd with Alterations

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the premiere is not knwon, but the Dedication is dated February 1699@1700, the play was entered in the Term Catalogues in February 1699@1700, and advertised in the Flying Post, 16 March 1699@1700. The latest likely date for the first production is January 1700, but the play may have appeared in late December as a rival to lif's production of I Henry IV early in January 1700. Cibber, Apology, I, 275: But the Master of the Revels, who then licens'd all Plays for the Stage, assisted this Reformation [of the morality of the stage] with a more zealous Severity than ever. He would strike out whole Scenes of a vicious or immoral Character, tho' it were visibly shewn to be reform'd or punish'd; a severe Instance of this kind falling upon my self may be an Excuse for my relating it: When Richard the Third (as I alter'd it from Shakespear) came from his Hands to the Stage, he expung'd the whole first Act without sparing a Line of it. This extraordinary Stroke of a Sic volo occasion'd my applying to him for the small Indulgence of a Speech or two, that the other four Acts might limp on with a little less Absurdity! no! he had no leisure to consider what might be separately inoffensive. [Cibber continues with an explanation of the censor's argument for cutting the act.] Preface to Cibber's Ximena, 1719: Richard the Third, which I alter'd from Shakespear, did not raise me Five Pounds on Third Day