Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell's copy (Huntington Library) of the play bears the date of acquisition 3 June [1690, apparently], and the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No 2566, 12-16 June 1690. See Fredson Bowers, A Bibliographical History of the Fletcher-Betterton Play, The Prophetess, 1690, The Library, 5th Series, XVI (1961), 169-75. It seems likely that the opera was first given early in June 1690. An edition of The Vocal and Instrumental Musick of The Prophetess appeared in 1691. See Works of Henry Purcell, Purcell Society, IX. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42): The Prophetess, or Dioclesian an Opera, Wrote by Mr Betterton; being set out with Coastly Scenes, Machines and Cloaths: The Vocal and Instrumental Musick, done by Mr Purcel; and Dances by Mr Priest; it gratify'd the Expectation of Court and City; and got the Author great Reputation. [See also R. E. Moore, Henry Purcell and the Restoration Theater (Cambridge, Mass., 1961), Chapter V; and E. W. White, Early Theatrical Performances of Purcell's Operas, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1958-59), 44.] The Muses' Mercury (January 1707, pp. 4-5): This prologue was forbidden to be spoken the second Night of the Representation of the Prophetess. Mrs Shadwell was the occasion of its being taken notice of by the Ministry in the last Reign: He happen'd to be at the House on the first Night, and taking the beginning of the Prologue to have a double meaning, and that Meaning to reflect on the Revolution, he told a Gentleman, He would immediately Put a stop to it. When that Gentleman ask'd, Why he wou'd do the Author such a Disservice? He said, Because while Mr Dryden was Poet Laureat, he wou'd never let any Play of his be Acted. Mr Shadwell informed the Secretary of State of it, and representing it in its worst Colours, the Prologue was never Spoken afterwards, and is not printed in Mr Dryden's Works, or his Miscellanies. Cibber, Apology (ed. Lowe, II, 13-14): A Prologue (by Dryden) to the Prophetess was forbid by the Lord Dorset after the first War in Ireland. It must be confess'd that this Prologue had some familiar, metaphorical Sneers at the Revolution itself; and as the Poetry of it was good, the Offence of it was less pardonable

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 3130, 7-11 Nov. 1695, suggests that it was acted not later than October 1695, although the first production may have been earlier than that. Part of the music was composed by Henry Purcell: Celia has a thousand charms, sung by Young Bowen; Take not a woman's anger ill, sung by Leveridge; and How happy is she, sung by Miss Cross; all are in Deliciae Musicae, The Third Book, 1696. See also Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XXI (1917), x-xi. Another song, To me you made a thousand vows, set by John Blow, is in Amphion Anglicus, 1700. Dedication, Edition of 1696: I...found so much interrutpion and discouragement from some prejudic'd Gentlemen, who ought to have us'd me better, or, at least, had no reason to use me ill, that I repented I had bestow'd any time upon it....In spite of 'em, my Lord, it was kindly receiv'd, and that too, at a time when the Town was never thinner of Nobility and Gentry

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Prologue refers to The World in the Moon, suggesting a premiere during (or shortly after) the run of that opera. Since The Innocent Mistress was advertised in the Post Boy, 29-31 July 1697, this fact points also to a late June premiere. A song, When I languished and wished, set by John Eccles and sung by Mrs Hodgson, is in Wit and Mirth, Second Edition, 1707. Gildon, English Dramatick Poets, p. iii: This is a diverting Play, and met with good Success, tho' acted in the hot Season of the Year. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 20: Tho' the Title calls this Innocent, yet it deserves to be Damn'd for its Obscenity

Event Comment: Not acted in 30 years. Principal Characters new Dress'd. Written by Otway (General Advertiser). Mr Woodward did ye part of Malagene in which he took off Mr Foote & would have many of ye Actors but the Audience grew so outragious, that he was forc'd to desist ye 4th & 5th Acts were much hooted, Mr Havard in a part where he says Whir was severely treated, nor could he ever appear after in ye play, but the whole Audience echoed that Word--it was given out again, wch so enrag'd the Audience yt they call'd loudly for Garrick, but as he was not this Night at the House, they pull'd up the Benches, tore down ye King's Arms, & wou'd have done much more mischief had not Mr Lacy qone into the Pit, & talk'd to 'em, what they resented was giving out a piece again after they had damn'd it--the Gallery resented ye Guards being sent in--Mr Lacy was oblig'd to go upon the Stage after & tell 'em I had given out the play again, as ne'er a Manager was present to give other Directions--In his Argument Mr Lacy call'd a Witness in ye pit, saying that Gent: next to ye painter knows I was in ye pit when ye Guards went into the Gallery, so I cou'd not send 'em this painter after ye rout came behind the scenes & was angry for being call'd painter (his name was Hudson) but at length he as well as ye rest was pacified--and we gave out Provok'd Husband (Cross). [See Foote's retaliation in Daily Advertiser, 26 Jan.] Paid Capt. Turber 1!2 year's rent #11 3s. 4d. (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #140 (Cross); #137 12s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Nothing said abour ye prolog: (Cross). The Music of the Funeral Procession compos'd by Dr Boyce. [See "William Boyce's 'Solemn Dirge' in Garrick's Romeo and Juliet Production of 1750," by Charles Haywood, Shakespeare Quarterly, Spring, 1960.] This day is Publish'd at 1s. 6d. Romeo and Juliet a Tragedy, revised and alter'd from Shakespear by Theophilus Cibber, First revised in September 1744, at the Theatre in the Haymarket; now acted at the Theatre Royal in Drury Lane. To which is added a Serio-Comic Apology for Part of the Life of Mr Theophilus Cibber, Comedian, written by himself. Interspers'd with memoirs and anecdotes relating to the Stage Managements, Theatrical Resolutions, &c. also cursory Observations on principal Players: particularly Mr Quin, Mr Ryan, Mrs Woffington, Mrs Ward, and Miss Bellamy; Mr Garrick, Mr Barry, Mrs Cibber, Mrs Clive, Mrs Pritchard, &c. Likewise Original Letters that passed between the late Sir Thomas DeVeil and Mr Theophilus Cibber relating to the Stage Act, Concluding with a copy of Verses, call'd the Contrite Comedian's Confession. Printed for C. Corbett, the Publisher, at Addison's Head, facing St Dunstan's Church, Fleet St; G. Woodfall, at the King's Arms, the corner of Craig's Court, Charing Cross. [See 11 Oct.] Receipts: #170 (Cross)

Event Comment: This play was wrote by Mr Moor but as he had some Enemies, came out under ye Name of Mr Spence--went off well, except some few Words & a Song wch are since omitted--Mr Havard not being able to play the part design'd for him The following advertisement was put at ye Bottom of ye Bills for he first 2 Days: N.B. The Managers being engag'd to act two New Plays this Winter, cou'd not longer defer this Tragedy in waiting for Mr Havard's Recovery; Mr Davies at a very short Warning, has willingly undertaken the Character which Mr Havard was to have acted, and humbly hopes for the Indulgence of the Public (Cross). [This N.B. note from the Cross Diary is printed verbatim on the playbill]. Never Acted before. Tis hoped no Gentlemen will desire to be admitted behind the Scenes, this night. Receipts: #217 (Cross)

Event Comment: Never acted. [See Genest's comment (IV, 618) derived from Cumberland and the London Magazine-its appeal to the fashionable circles, its damnation at first performance because of the hanging of Harlequin in full view, and its modification thereafter. See 18 June and Horace Walpole to George Montagu [Arlington Street] July 28, 1761: I came to town yesterday through clouds of dust to see The Wishes, and went ac- [I, 381] tually feeling for Mr Bentley, and full of the emotions he must be suffering. What do [you] think in a house crowded was the first thing I saw! Mr and Madam Bentley perked up in the front boxes and acting audience at his own play--no, all the impudence of false patriotism never came up to it! Did one ever hear of an author that had couraee to see his own first night in public? I don't believe Fielding or Foote himself ever did--and this was the modest bashful Mr Bentley, that died at the thought of being known for an author, even by his own acquaintance! In the stage-box was Lady Bute, Lord Halifax and Lord Melcomb-I must say the two last entertained the house as much as the play-your King was prompter, and called out to the actors every minute to speak louder-the other went backwards and forwards behind the scenes, fetched the actors into the box, and was busier than Harlequin. The curious prologue was not spoken, the whole very ill-acted. It turned out just what I remembered it, the good parts extremely good, the rest very flat and vulgar-the genteel dialogue I believe might be written by Mrs Hannah. The audience was extremely fair. The first act they bore with patience, though it promised very ill-the second is admirable and was much applauded-so was the third-the fourth woeful-the beginning of the fifth it seemed expiring, but was revived by a delightful burlesque of the ancient chorus-which was followed by two dismal scenes, at which people yawned-but were awakened on a sudden by Harlequin's being drawn up to a gibbet nobody knew why or wherefore-this raised a prodigious and continued hiss, Harlequin all the while suspended in the air-at last they were suffered to finish the play, but nobody attended to the conclusion-modesty and his lady all the while sat with the utmost indifference-I suppose Lord Melcombe had fallen asleep [p. 382] before he came to this scene and had never read it. The epilogue was about the King and new Queen, and ended with a personal satire on Garrick-not very kind on his own stage-to add to the judge of this conduct, Cumberland two days ago published a pamphlet to abuse him. It was given out for tonight with more claps than hisses, but I think it will not do unless they reduce it to three acts." [p. 383]. Correspondence with George Montagu. Ed. W. S. Lewis & Ralph Brown. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941), I, 381-83] Note: (I, 381n): Bentley's play of The Wishes or Harlequin's Mouth Opened, was offered to Garrick and Rich the beginning of 1761, but wasrefused by both. His nephew Cumberland showed it to Lord Melcomb, who carried it to Lord Bute, with a compliment in verse to that Lord by Mr Cumberland. Lord Bute showed it to the King, who sent Bentley #200 and ordered the new summer company to play [it]. There was a prologue, flattering the King and Lord Bute which Foote refused to act. Two days before it was played, Cumberland wrote an anonymous pamphlet, addressed to Mr Bentley, and abusing Garrick, who had refused to act Cumberland's tragedy of Cicero's banishment, which he printed this year [1761], unacted. The Wishes were played for the first time July 27th, 1761; the 2d 3d and part of the 4th, acts were much applauded, but the conclusion extremely hissed. The Epilogue concluded with a satire on Garrick. It was acted five nights. About the same time he wrote a tragedy called Philodamus, which he was to read to Garrick, but the latter was so angry at their treatment of him, that he declared against seeing Mr Bentley" (MS account by HW of Bentley's writings, in the collection of Lord Waldegrave at Chewton Priory)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Beaumont and Fletcher, reviv'd. Afterpiece: Not acted these three years. [See 8 Aug. 1761.] Mr Powell made his first appearance this Night in Philaster. His Reception was very great, he play'd the part amazingly well, & Seems to have Requisites to make a very Capital Performer. N.B. Covent Garden Theater begun to play every Night (Hopkins). Philaster by Mr Powell. Prodigious applause (Cross Diary). This play [Philaster] was wrote by Beaumont and Fletcher, and is now altered by Mr Colman. Mr Powell, a young gentleman clerk to Sir Robert Ladbrook, made his first appearance in the character of Philaster.--A greater reception was never shown to anybody,--he was so very much frightened, he could not speak for some time, and, when he did, the tears ran fast down his cheeks,--but he soon recovered himself, and went through the part with a great deal of nature and feeling,--Continued claps and huzza of bravo! &c. &c. Upon the whole I think him possessed of every requisite necessary to make him an ornament to the stage.--N.B. Mr D. Garrick instructed him in this part--when I see him in another shall be able to judge better of his capabilities.--Miss Pope appeared this Night in the character of Maria in the Citizen,--by endeavoring to be very fine she overdid it,--and it was plain to see she wanted her master. N.B.--Covent Garden began to play of our nights--the first time they ever begin first since Mr Garrick was manager (Hopkins Diary--MacMillan). Receipts: #258 11s. 6d. (MacMillan)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: A New Comedy [by Richard Cumberland] never performed. [Genest, V, 282, reports that Garrick was in the House this night and was agreeably surprised at the complimentary reference to him in the Epilogue: Who but has seen the celebrated strife Where Reynolds calls the Canvass into life: And, 'twixt the Tragic, and the Comic Muse, Courted of both, and dubious where to chuse, Th'immortal Actor stands?' A long retelling of the plot appeared in the Freeholder's Magazine for Dec., concluding: This comedy was received with great applause by the Audience. It is said to be written by Mr Cumberland, who has already oblig'd the Public with a musical piece, called the Summer's Tale. The Performers, particularly Mr Smith, Mr Woodward, Mr Yates, Mrs Green, Mrs Bulkley, and Mrs Yates, did great justice to their characters. The Prologue was spoken by Mr Smith, and the Epilogue, which alluded to the celebrated picture of Sir Joshua Reynolds, where Comedy and Tragedy are contending for Mr Garrick, by Mrs Yates." Receipts: #215 18s

Event Comment: Paid 6 days salary at #82 16s. 5d. per diem--#496 18s. 6d.; Mrs Abington on cloaths account #2; Mr French on acct #2. Mr D. Garrick's Night. Charges #84 (Treasurer's Book). Profit to D. G. for sixth night of Inst of Garter #115 7s. 6d. Mainpiece: Not acted in 4 years. [See 2 Dec. 1767.] Garrick recovered from his illness (Winston MS 10). [Of the mainpiece: "How the managers could think of shoving Mr Cautherly into the part of Captain Plume, is, to us, a matter of surprize....The part requires elegance, vivacity and the easy deportment of an accomplish'd gentleman. We never remember to have seen this character more completely performed, than by Mr Smith at Covent Garden Theatre (who is everything that criticism can wish) nor much worse, than by Mr Cautherly, who does not possess one requisite for the character, and is the effeminate and insipid School-boy throughout the whole. To this we may add, that he was not perfect, and made a great mistake, by coming in where he should not which oblig'd him to retire again. This was an unpardonable fault, though it was the first time of his appearing in this character."--Theatrical Review, 2 Nov. Of the afterpiece: "We were not a little pleased to observe this evening, that Mr King, in the character of Sir Dingle, omitted the parody on the lines with which the third act of Otway's Orphan concludes. But we think the introducing a chine of roast beef, decorated with a flag, to be carried off in triumph by the rabble, accompanied, from the orchestra with music of the old song of that title is a pitiful addition to the performance, and intended only as a sacrifice to the caprice of the riotous inhabitants of the upper gallery. Had this Entertainment been exhibited at a French theatre it would have had some claim to merit. This seems to be a piece of stage policy, arising from a consciousness, that the whole performance is too contemptible to meet with countenance from any but the sons of riot, for which reason they are brib'd to support it, by this notable trick."--Theatrical Review, 2 Nov.] Receipts: #199 7s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Paid Mr Wright's note to Herring and Chas., #14 15s. 10d.; Mr G. Garrick's 2 notes for Mr Weston #24 3s. 6d.; Mr J. French 2nd Nov. last, #13; Mr J. Aickin per order #5 1s.; Mr Rollett, on note #10 10s.; Chorus 2 nights (this incl.) #5 1s. (Treasurer's Book). Receipts: #140 11s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: In Mr G. fine Scene with Thomas , Just as he was going to trust him with the Secret the House was very Silent and Mr G. very fine a fellow in the Gallery bawld out--Speak louder--It disconcerted Mr G. very much (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble differs slightly.] Paid Mr Waller's Bill (hosier) #30 16s. 9d.; Mr Pryer [Turner] #3 2s.; Mr Bannizter [sic] for two songs #5 5s. Receipts: #242 6s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: By Command of their Majesties. When the play began there was a very great Noise the performers were oblig'd to Stop and go off the Stage Mr Reddish went on and desir'd to Know their pleasure they said they wanted the Pit door be open'd to let out some of the people for so many had Crowded in that they could not Sit down-the door was open'd and in a little time after all was quiet and the Play was begun once more at a quarter after Seven. During this time the King Sent Two Messages to Mr G. to desire that he would not let this Noise disconcert him and his Majesty would take care that all should be quiet before the play began (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble: "I cannot say enough of Mr Garrick's Performance tonight." Kemble further notes that Garrick's fatigue led them to abandon further performances until Saturday 8 June.] Paid Mr Heard extra allowance #3; Ditto on note #5 5s.; Mr Carpenter's salary 15s.; Mr Martini a grautity #10 10s.; Wallis salary in full 13s. 4d. Receipts: #293 5s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Benefit for Clarke. Mr Clarke begs leave to inform his Friends, from his violent Indisposition, and Incapacity to perform for his Benefit, Mr Yates offered his assistance to play the character of Scrub; but unfortunately Mr Yates is attacked by a violent fit of the Gout, and prevented from fulfilling his kind Intentions. Mr Quick has readily consented to play the part for Mr Clarke. Mr Clarke hopes his present severe Indisposition, which has prevented his playing for several Months past, will be considered by his Friends as a sufficient Apology for his not performing at his Benefit, and solicits their Patronage this Evening. Morning Chronicle, 22 Apr.: Tickets to be had of Clarke, No. 15, Great Russel-street, Covent Garden. Receipts: #101 16s. 6d. (98/4/6; 3/12/0; tickets: none listed) (charge: #105)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5 by Thomas Holcroft. Prologue and Epilogue by the author (London Chronicle, 21 Feb.)]. Morning Herald, 29 Feb. 1792: This day is published The Road to Ruin (1s. 6d.). Receipts: #233 5s. (231.1; 2.4)

Event Comment: Benefit for King. [This was Smith's last appearance on the stage, from which he had officially retired on 9 June 1788.] Broadside in Kemble playbills announcing this benefit: Mr King most respectfully informs the Public that his Night is fixed for Friday the 18th of May, when will be presented The School for Scandal. Mr King has the pleasure to add that Mr Smith, who was so long and so worthily applauded by the Public, and was the original performer of Charles Surface in the above, distinguished Comedy, at the particular request of Mr King, backed by a strong assurance from many admirers and encouragers of the Drama that it will not only add to Mr King's emolument but highly gratify the Town, has kindly consented to return to the Theatre for one night, and resume his favourite Character. "We had been told that Smith pourtrayed the Manners of a finished gentleman with more delicacy and characteristic propriety than any actor of his day; but this did not appear to us to be his particular excellence; he stands too wide to be graceful, and his deportment gains no advantage from a perpetual application of his hand to the lower part of the waist. These habits are far from elegant. His Charles, however, is a favourable specimen of that sort of acting which commonly falls under the denomination of the old school: light, airy, and natural; which excites applause without any anxious endeavour to produce it; which suffers the points to tell of themselves, and does not place them as so many traps to ensnare the injudicious part of the audience" (Monthly Mirror, May 1798, p. 299). "He was received with the most heart-felt gratulations by an audience who did not expect any apology for such acting, though he saw fit to deliver one at the conclusion of the play" (Monthly Visitor, May 1798, p. 72). Times, 4 May: Tickets to be had of King at his house, New Store-street, Bedford-square. Receipts: #674 6s. (388.0.6; 55.17.6; 2.0.0); tickets: 228.8.0) (charge: #212 5s. 6d.)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. It is not certain this is the first performance, but it may well have been. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@139, p. 125. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. Pepys, Diary: Sir W. Pen and I to the Duke's house, where a new play. The King and Court there: the house full, and an act begun. And so went to the King's. Downes (p. 28): Sir Martin Marral, The Duke of New-Castle, giving Mr Dryden a bare translation of it, out of a Comedy of the Famous French Poet Monseur Moleire: He adapted the Part purposely for the Mouth of Mr Nokes, and curiously Polishing the whole....All the Parts being very Just and Exactly perform'd, specially Sir Martin and his Man, Mr Smith, and several others since have come very near him, but none Equall'd, nor yet Mr Nokes in Sir Martin: This Comedy was Crown'd with an Excellent Entry. In the Last Act at the Mask, by Mr Priest and Madam Davies; This, and Love in a Tub, got the Company more Money than any preceding Comedy

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347. This performance may well be the premiere. In the Preface the author states that the play was asked for on Shrove Tuesday and he wrote it within a week; a premiere, then, before this date would allow very little time for rehearsal. This play is certainly a "Lenten" performance, for it was acted on a Wednesday in Lent and was referred to in the Prologue as a "Lenten Play." See the discussion under The Spanish Rogue (March 1673) and Gray, pp. 785-86. See also J. G. McManaway, The Copy for The Careless Lovers," MLN, XLVI (1931), 406-9. Preface to the edition of 1673: [This play] was written at the Desire of the Young Men of the Stage, and given them for a Lenten-Play, they ask't it not above a Week before Shrove-Tuesday

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the premiere is not known. The Dedication to the play, written in Rome, is dated 20 Aug. 1695 N.S., and advertisement of the play in the London Gazette, No 3200, 9-13 July 1696, represent the limits on its production. In a letter, dated (probably) November 1695, Dryden refers to the forthcoming appearance of his son's play, and on 26 May 1696 he negotiates with Tonson for its publication (Letters of John Dryden, pp. 79, 82). Probably the play appeared early in 1696, and certainly not much later than April 1696. John Barnard, The Dates of Six Dryden Letters, Philological Quarterly, XLII (1963), 400-401, believes that Dryden's letter was written ca. 26 May 1695 and that the play was probably acted in late 1695

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is uncertain, and the play has been sometimes assigned to December 1695. There are indications, however, that the play first appeared at a later time, but certainly not later than 14 March 1695@6, the date attached to the Dedication. The Epilogue has some allusions which suggest mid-February, for it refers to the "Fasting time" of Lent and to "Dancing at Drapers-Hall last Masquerade" (a masquerade ball was held there on 4 Feb. 1695@6). Dedication, Edition of 1696: This Play was given to my Care by a Friend: I promis'd him not to neglect it in the Difficulties it was to pass through. It has had hitherto but an unpleasant Journey; and I knew no better way to make Amends, than by taking up its Rest with you [Sir John Smith]; where I am assured its Reception will be the best a truly Noble and Generous Soul can give. I beg not your Protection, Sir, from those wide-mouth'd Curs, the Criticks: But since they have had their Ends in running it down, 'tis under the Shelter of your Name I desire a poor maim'd Thing, that did its best to shew them Sport, may lye secure from farther Danger....H. Horden. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 18: Damn'd