Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. Luttrell, however, dated the copy he purchased 6 July 1680 (VanLennep, Two Restoration Comedies, pp. 57-58) and attributed it to Mrs Aphra Behn. If copies were available in early July, the play was most probably performed in June 1680. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 547) had heard that Mrs Behn was the author, but A Comparison between the Two Stages (p. 11) attributed it to Thomas Betterton. For a discussion of the authorship, see also Ten English Farces, ed. Leo Hughes and A. H. Scouten (Austin, Texas, 1948), pp. 203-4

Event Comment: The date of the premiere is not known, but the fact that the opera was advertized in the Post Man, 14-16 Jan. 1696@7, suggests that it was first acted not later than December 1696. As the title page indicates, the work had been intended for presentation before the Court, but the death of Queen Mary prevented its appearance at Court. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 19: Sullen: But to go on, Cynthia and Endymion. Ramble: What a Pox is that? I never heard on't. Sullen: I believe not; 'tis one of Durfey's Toys. Ramble: Durfey's? what again? 'twas just now we parted with him. Sullen: Ay but Sir, you must know this is an Opera--and as he tells us in the Title-page, design'd t be perform'd at court before the late Queen--there's for you; Durfey in his Altitudes--but notwithstanding the vain and conceited Title-page, 'tis good for nothing within: He's the very Antipodes to all the Poets, Antient and Modern: Other Poets treat the Deities civilly, but Mr Durfey makes the Gods Bullies, and Jilts of the chastest Goddesses. Ramble: So, I suppose that was mawl'd, notwithstanding the Honour which he says the Queen intended it. Sullen: 'Twas well for Durfey her late Majesty never saw it; Gad if she had, People wou'd ha' said, it had first been the cause of her Illness, and then of her Death; for 'tis a mortifying Piece o' my Word; Yes, yes,--it was Damn'd

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: Benefit Lacy. Afterpiece: A new Satyrical, Allegorical, Political, Philosophical Farce, [Apparently by Lacy.] Daily Advertiser, 30 April: Yesterday I accidentally call'd in at the Theatre in the Hay-Market, and saw the Rehearsal of a new Farce call'd Fame...Which is to be acted there on Wednesday next...for the Benefit of Mr Lacy the Author. As I am neither acquainted with him, nor the Master of the Playhouse, I cannot be accus'd of Partiality, in affirming, that I think this the best Farce this Age has produc'd. It seems to be writ in Imitation of Shakespear, and entirely calculated for the present Taste. The Characters are strong, lively, majestic, and just; the incidents natural and moving; the Conduct regular; the Distresses extremely affecting; the Stile sublime; the Sentiments grand, full of Patriotism; and the Catastrophe so masterly wrought up, that, I am persuaded, no Farce whatsoever, now acting, will draw more Tears than this. But what affected me beyond all, was, the Zeal, the exemplary Zeal of a worthy Magistrate, who so strictly adheres to the very Letter of the Law, as to send a rich and honest Merchant, and Freeholder, to the House of Correction, as a sturdy Beggar, or Loiterer. I could enlarg in its Praise, but fear I may do the Author wrong, in raising your Expectations too high. See it, and I am convinc'd you will entertain the same Sentiments of it, as does Your Humble Servant, James Lacy. Alias Fustian, alias Sour-Wit, alias--But hold:--If I should be arraign'd for the Murder of this Farce, so many Alias's will half condemn me before I am heard

Event Comment: [This day Horace Walpole wrote as follows to George Montagu, forshadowing an event to take place on 27 July: "If you will stay with me a fortnight or three weeks, perhaps I may be able to carry you to a play of Mr Bentley's--you stare--but I am in earnest--nay, and de par le roy. In short, here is the history of it. You know the passion he always had for the Italian comedy. About two years ago he writ one, intending to get it offered to Rich--but without his name--he would have died to be supposed an author, and writing [I, 372] for gain. I kept this a most inviolable secret. Judge then of my surprise when about a fortnight or three weeks ago I found my Lord Melcomb reading this very Bentleiad in a circle at my Lady Hervey's. Cumberland had carried it to him, with a recommendatory copy of verses, containing more incense to the King and my Lord Bute, than the Magi brought in their portmanteaus to Jerusalem. The idols were propitious, and to do them justice, there is a great deal of wit in the piece, which is called The Wishes or Harlequin's Mouth Opened. A bank note of #200 was sent from the Treasury to the author, and the play ordered to be performed by the summer company. Foote was summoned to Lord Melcomb's, where Parnassus was composed of the peer himself, who, like Apollo as I am going to tell you, was dozing, the two Chief Justices and Lord Bute. Bubo read the play himself, with handkerchief and orange by his side. But the curious part is a prologue which I never saw. It represents the god of verse fast asleep by the side of Helicon. The race of modern bards try to wake him, but the more they repeat of their works, the louder he snores. At last "Ruin seize thee ruthless King" is heard, and the god starts from his trance. This is a good thought, but will offend the bards so much, that I think Dr Bentley's son will be abused at least as much as his father was. The prologue concludes with young Augustus, and how much he excels the ancient one, by the choice of his friend. Foote refused to act this prologue, and said it was too strong. 'Indeed,' said Augustus's friend, 'I think it is.' They have softened it a little, and I suppose it will be performed. You may depend upon the truth of all this; but what is much more credible, is that the comely young author appears every night in the Mall in a milkwhite coat with a blue cape, disclaims any benefit, and says he has done with the play now it is out of his own hands, and that Mrs Hannah Clio alias Bentley writ the best scenes in it. He is going to write a tragedy, and she, I suppose, is going--to court."--Horace Walpole's Correspondence with George Montagu. Ed. W. S. Lewis and Ralph S. Brown Jr (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1941), I, 372-73. [IX, 372-373.

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 3177, 20-23 April 1696, suggests that it was first performed not later than March 1696. Preface, Edition of 1696: This Comedy by the little success it met with in the Acting, has not at all deceived my Expectations....Give me leave to thank the Well-natur'd Town for Damning me so suddenly; They would not suffer me to linger in suspence, nor allow me any degrees of Mortification; neither my Sex, Dress, Musick and Dancing, cou'd allow it a three Days Reprieve. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 17: Ramble: I never heard of that. Sullen: Oh this is a Lady's

Event Comment: Afterpiece: The Musick composed by Storace. Powell: Englishman in Paris rehearsed at 10; Children in the Wood at 11 (Master Welsh absent; rehearsal dismissed); Love a-la-Mode at 12 (Suett and Miss Heard, one scene). Receipts: #416 3s. (343/7/6; 61/19/0; 10/7/6; tickets not come in: 0/9/0)

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Not acted these 3 years. Tickets delivered by the young D'Egvilles, Jones, Newbold, Shaw, Dale, Purser Sen., Smith, Aberdein, Mills, Miss Tidswell, Mrs Heard, Miss Dancer, Miss Bradshaw, Mrs Haskey, will be admitted. Receipts: #241 8s. 6d. (23.4.0; 15.3.6; 0.15.0; tickets: 202.6.0)

Event Comment: Benefit for Phillimore, Denman, Cooke, Stokes, Miss Tidswell, Miss Heard, Mrs Benson. Morning Herald, 9 June: Tickets to be had of Miss Heard at Mrs Fletcher's, No. 239, Piccadilly; True Briton, 5 June: of Mrs Benson, No. 31, Hart-street, Bloomsbury [no others listed]. Receipts: #78 10s. (35.0.6; 41.2.6; 2.7.0; tickets: none listed) (charge: #224 15s. 3d.)

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 3140, 12-16 Dec. 1695, to be published 17 Dec. 1695, suggests that its first appearance was not later than November 1695. According to the Edition of 1695, the music was set by the late Henry Purcell, Courteville, Samuel? Aykerod, and other composers. For Purcell's music, see Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xxix-xxxi. The songs were sung by Miss Cross and Mrs Verbruggen. Preface, Edition of 1696: I must inform the Reader, that this Third Part before it came upon the Stage was acknowledg'd and believ'd by all that saw it, and were concern'd (as well those that heard it read, as those that were Actors, who certainly, every one must own, are in their Affairs skilful enough to know the value of things of this Nature) to be much the best of all the Three Parts;...tho prepar'd by my indefatigable Diligence, Care, Pains, nay, the variety which I thought could not possibly miss the expected Success, yet by some Accidents happening in the Presentment, was disliked and explored; The Songish part which I used to succeed so well in, by the indifferent performance the first day, and the hurrying it on so soon, being streightned in time through ill management--(tho extreamly well set to Musick, and I'm sure the just Critick will say not ill Writ) yet being imperfectly performed, was consequently not pleasing; and the Dances too, for want of some good Performers, also disliked; all which, tho impossible for me to avoid, and not reasonably to be attributed any way to a fault in me, yet the noisy Party endeavour'd to use me as ill as if it were, till the generous Opposition of my Friends gave me as much reason to thank them for their Justice, as to despise the others Malice.... As to the Poppet Shew in the Fourth Act, the Accident of its being plac'd so far from the Audience, which hindred them from hearing what either they or the Prolocutor said, was the main and only reason of its diverting no better. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702) p. 17: Sullen: The third Part of Don Quixote. Ramble: Oh the ever-running Streams of Helicon! by all that's Poetical, my Friend Durfey; good lack! I thought I shou'd meet with him before we got half way: Well, in the name of Impudence, what luck? Sullen: Damn'd, Damn'd to all intents and purposes. Ramble: His first and second Part did well