Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; CO 3, by Joseph George Holman]: The Overture and the whold of the Musick by Davy. Books of the Songs to be had at the Theatre. [Miss Wheatley was from cg.] Morning Chronicle, 20 Aug. 1800: This day at twelve o'clock is published What a Blunder! (2s.)

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is known from a document in The Theatrical Inquisitor and Monthly Mirror, July 1816, p. 26, and in Fitzgerald, A New History, I, 145. This document lists the receipts and attendance: The King's box, #1 10s., possibly six persons; Mr Hayles' boxes, #2 16s., possibly 14 persons; Mr Mohun's boxes, #3 16s., possibly 19 persons; Mr Yate's boxes, #1 15s. 6d., possibly 9 persons; James' boxes, #2 4s., possibly 11 persons. Mr Kent's pit, 112 persons; and Mr Britan's pit, 79 persons; a total of 191 persons paying #23 17s. 6d. Mr Bracy's gallery, 100 persons; Mr Johnson's gallery, 44 persons; a total of 144 persons, paying #10 16s. Upper Gallery, 119 persons, paying #5 19s. Mrs Kempton (upper gallery?), 5s. The house rent is listed as #5 14s. The attendance appears to total at least 513 persons. Compare these data with those for 12 Dec. 1677

Event Comment: The Gentleman's Journal, November 1693: Mr Durfey's Richmond Heiress has been Revis'd, and Acted several times, with Alterations and Amendments. We are to have this Winter a Play by him, call'd Don Quixote....We are impatiently expecting a Play by Mr Dryden; 'tis of the Nature of his Spanish Fryar. We are also to have a Tragedy by Mr Southern; a Comedy by Mr Crown; and the Tragedy of Pyrrhus, by Mr H. I need not say any thing of Mr Congreve's Double-Dealer (the only new Play since my last) after the Character which Mr Dryden has given of it

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by Shakespear. London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 12 Dec: Whereas, on Saturday last, the Audience . . . was greatly incens'd at their Disappointment in Mr Poitier and Madem Roland's not Dancing, as their Names were in the Bills for the Day; and Mr Quin, seeing no way to appease the Resentment then shewn, but by relating the real Messages sent from the Theatre, to know the Reasons why they did not come to perform, and the Answers return'd: And whereas there were two Advertisements in the Daily Post of Tuesday last, insinuating that Mr Quin had with Malice falsely accus'd the said Mr Poitier and Madem Roland, I therefore think it (in Justice to Mr Quin) incumbent on me to assure the Publick, that Mr Quin has conducted himself in this Point towards the Abovemention'd with the strictest regard to Truth and Justice; and as Mr Quin has acted in this Affair in my Behalf, I think myself oblig'd to return him Thanks for so doing. Charles Fletewood

Event Comment: HHopkins Diary: This morning a printed paper was handed about requesting the lovers of theatrical Performances to meet this evening at the theatre to insist upon the doors not being opened till five o'clock.--As soon as the curtain was up, they called for Mr Garrick, and would not suffer the play to begin. Mr King went on and told the audience, "that he was desired by the managers to tell them the doors for the future should not be opened till Five," A great Clap,--He added, "that the managers was always willing to oblige the publick in everything that was in their power; but they thought that on very full nights it would be attended with some inconvenience." They would not hear of any alteration,--he then told them, "the doors should always for the future be opened at five, unless the public applyed to have it altered." All then was quiet and the play began. Mr Weston, whose name was in the Bills for Jerry, was taken suddenly ill, and Mr W. Palmer went on for it without an apology.--called out, "Mr Holland, what is the reason we have not Mr Weston according to your publication in the Bills?" They then were told he was taken suddenly ill--"then pray make an apology for him" they said.--Another gentleman called out "Don't answer him, Mr Holland, you do him too much honor by deigning to answer him."--then all was quiet, and the play went on

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 20 years. [See 11 Nov. 1752.] Characters New Dressed in the Habits of the Times. This play is alter'd by Mr Colman and receiv'd with Some Applause, but it don't seem to hit the present Taste a few hisses at the End (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble differs slightly.] Paid salary list #630 1s. 6d.; Widow Hunter #2 2s.; King's glass bill #3 17s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book). [Mainpiece reviewed and contrasted with the original in the Westminster Magazine for Jan.: "Upon the whole we cannot esteem this a striking comedy, even with the assistance it has now received,--the fine manner in which it is got up, and the great expence which the managers have been at in habiting the whole dramatis personae in splendid and characteristic Old English dresses. All the actors except Mr King and Mr Parsons performed but indifferently. Bensley is the worst Old Man we ever saw. He presents the countenace of a sickly old woman; and the uniform goggle of his eye, by which he means to express infirmity and distress is the look of a man in anguish from the colic. Mr Palmer, Mr Brereton, and Mr Davis have a bloated vulgarity about them, which should ever deter the manager from assigning them the parts of cavaliers or men of fashion. Baddeley, as usual, overdid his part, and Mr Yates, as usual, was not very perfect in his."] Receipts: #192 11s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Mrs Abington continuing ill, The Maid of the Oaks oblig'd to be deferr'd. Soon after the Farce began off off--no, more, no more, was the General Cry with much hissing--Mr King went on Two or three times to know their pleasure but they would not hear him. They Call'd for Mr Garrick he attended--but they would not hear him for a long time tho' Attempted Several times to speak--at last Somebody said hear him! hear him!--Mr G. told them that he would wait their [sic] all Night with pleasUre if they requir'd it--hear him! again was bellow'd out--he told them he waited to know their pleasure--whether they would have the Blackamoor go on or if they would have any other Farce then a great Noise ensued; as soon as they were quiet Mr G. told them that his Theatrical Life would be very Short and he should be glad to end it in peace--A man in the Pit said if you have a mind to die in Peace don't let this Farce be play'd again Mr Garrick was on and off the Stage several times nothing would content them--at Length Mr King told them that the Author had taken the Copy from the Prompter and was gone away with it.--Soon after this they withdrew So ended this troublesome Affair (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble is considerably lengthened.] Paid Mr Rowland's bill for dinners #8 9s. 3d. Receipts: #284 18s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: Last time but one of the Company's performing this season. House. Mr Garrick as before Mr Vernon being hoarse Mr Davies play'd Sr. John Loverule some body in the Pit call'd for Vernon as his Name was in the Bills Mr Davies told them that Mr Vernon had been ill these two day [sic] and it was thought unnecessary to trouble them with an apology they afterwards call'd for the Early Horn Mr Davies told them he did not know of doing the part till after two therefore he was not prepar'd. they call'd out & bid him go on his own way (Hopkins Diary). [MacMillan's note from Kemble omits the comment on the afterpiece. Song The Early Horn had been traditional for the part of Sir John for over 30 years. See 10 Sept. 1741.] Paid Mr Short, Chorus, 5s.; Blurton 4 days salary in full #1 6s. 8d.; French on acct #100. Receipts: #305 13s. 6d. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The Prologue and Epilogue, separately printed, bear Luttrell's date of acquisition, 21 April 1682 (Huntington Library), and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 102-05. The Prologue and Epilogue were advertised in The Observator, 27 April 1682, with the statement: Recommended to All Men of Sense and Loyalty

Event Comment: The date of the first performance of this play is not known. The play was licensed for publication on 27 Jan. 1689-90 and advertised in the London Gazette, 10 Feb. 1689@90; hence, it was probably given not later than early January, possibly first given in December 1689

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