Event Comment: Benefit for Fawcett. 3rd piece: By permission of Thomas Harris, Esq.; never acted at this theatre, and for that night only. [Address by Thomas Hurlstone (Morning Herald, 25 Aug.)]. Morning Herald, 19 Aug.: Tickets to be had of Fawcett at his house, No. 9, Tottenham-Court-Road, opposite Howland-street

Event Comment: [Miss Humphries, who was from the Private Theatre, Tottenham Court Road, is identified by MS annotation on Kemble playbill. In afterpiece the playbill retains Barrymore as Sir Rowland, and Bannister Jun. as Walter, but "The Public are respectfully informed that Bannister being suddenly afflicted with a Hoarseness, and Barrymore having met with an unfortunate Accident, are both rendered incapable of the honour of appearing before them this Evening. To prevent a disappointment of The Children in the Wood Dowton will perform...Walter, and C. Kemble Sir Rowland, presuming humbly upon the usual kind indulgence experienced upon such emergencies" (printed slip attached to Kemble playbill).] Receipts: #259 18s. (160.0.6; 98.12.6; 1.5.0)

Event Comment: Benefit for the Four Youngest Orphans of the late Mr Palmer [see dl, 18 June]. As it is presumed that the well-known liberality of the Publick will be strongly excited on the present occasion, the Proprietor of the [Haymarket] Theatre has requested the use of the Opera-House for this Evening, that the largest number of persons who wish to patronize the undertaking may be accomodated with places. The Proprietor of the Opera-House has, with the utmost readiness, granted the request. Tickets to be had of the Miss Palmers, at Dixon's, Upholsterer, the corner of Bedford-Court, Bedford-Street, Covent-Garden; of Messrs Ransom, Morland and Co., Bankers, Pall-Mall; of Jewell, No. 26, Suffolk-Street, Charing-Cross, of whom, and of Rice, at the Box-Office, Places for the Boxes may be taken. Boxes 5s. Pit 3s. Gallery 2s. "[His brother] R. Palmer attempted to deliver an address at the end of the play, but he was so much overpowered that he...left the address unrecited, and [his] part in the farce was given up to another performer" (Monthly Mirror, Aug. 1798, p. 117, which also records that the receipts were approximately #700)

Event Comment: By Permission of the Lord Chamberlain. Benefit for an Infant Orphan Family. Tickets to be had at No. 17, Tufton-street, Westminster; of Appleby, Hosier, Parliament-street; Mrs Cleaver, Cannon-row, Parliament-street; Newcomb, Confectioner, Bridge-street, Westminster; Taylor, Linen-draper, Whitehall; Thomas, Butcher, Charing-cross; Medhurst, Pastry Cook, Russel-court, Drury-lane; Rice, at the Theatre, where Places for the Boxes may be taken

Event Comment: "...Richard III, which I saw performed at Drury-lane theatre at the beginning of the present season...The dresses of the characters which here make their appearance are in the usual half-and-half mode, made up from portraits of Charles I's reign, and from unrestrained fancy. Richard's habit, indeed, shews a faint hint, at the costume of his day; but how modernized! A fancy cap and feather,with a milliner's white-ribband rose, sewed thereon. A deep ruff, of that make not known until the reign of James I From the neck depends a ribband With the George: this decoration never seen in paintings till about the fashions of the abovementioned monarch's court. On his legs and feet, white silk stockings, white shoes, and red roses. These latter ornaments unknown before Elizabeth or James I's modes of dress prevailed; at any rate, they should have been white ones to have accorded with the party-badge in his cap." Writer signing himself "An Artist and an Antiquary" in Gentleman's Magazine, Apr. 1800, p. 319. Receipts: #225 16s. 6d. (178.3.6; 47.12.0; 0.1.0)

Event Comment: Benefit for Fawcett. "We were careful to repair to the Theatre at an early hour. But, to see the whole street lined with carriages and blockaded on both sides with pedestrians vainly pressing for admittance, was more than we had anticipated. Hundreds, who had purchased tickets, were under the necessity of returning home, without passing the threshold of the Theatre...Fawcett exerted the whole scope of his abilities, in grateful return for the patronage with which he was so profusely honoured...Whenever Fawcett moves in his proper sphere, as a comic actor, he is never known to fail" (Dramatic Censor, III, 129). Morning Chronicle, 6 Sept.: Tickets to be had of Fawcett, No. 3, Tanfield-court, Temple

Event Comment: Edward Gower to Sir R. Leveson, 26 Feb. 1660@1: No more plays at court after this night, and but three days this week at the playhouse (HMC, 5th Report, 1876, p. 202). Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 279) accepts this as evidence that a play was acted at Court on this night. As this was Shrove Tuesday, Gower's statement may well reflect the restrictions upon plays during Lent

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 282) thinks that this play given on the L. C. lists--see Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346--between 29 Oct. and 6 Nov., may have been acted on this day. See also an order for supplies for the comedians acting at court in Alwin Thaler, Shakespear to Sheridan, p. 290. Pepys, Diary: I to White Hall, where I staid walking up and down till night, and then got almost into the playhouse, having much mind to go and see the play at Court this night; but fearing how I should get nome, because of the bonefires and the lateness of the night to get a coach, I did not stay

Event Comment: The King's Company. For an edition of this play from the MS prompt copy, see The Change of Crownes, ed. F. S. Boas (Oxford University Press, 1949). For the consequences of Lacy's ad libbing, see 16, 20, and 22 April, and 1 May. Pepys, Diary: I to the King's house by chance, where a new play: so full as I never saw it; I forced to stand all the while close to the very till I took cold, and many people went away for want of room. The King and Queene, and Duke of York and Duchesse of York there, and all the Court, and Sir W. Coventry. The play called The Change of Crownes; a play of Ned Howard's the best that ever I saw at that house, being a great play and serious; only Lacy did act the country-gentleman come up to Court, who do abuse the Court with all the imaginable wit and plainness about selling of places, and doing every thing for money. The play took very much.... Gervase Jaquis to the Earl of Huntington, 16 April: Here is another play house erected in Hatton buildings called the Duke of Cambridgs play-house, and yester-day his Matie the Duke & many more were at the King's Playe house to see some new thing Acted (Hastings MSS, HA 7654, Huntington Library)

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: Benefit Dukes. 5s., 3s., 2s. At the General Session...for Courts of Middlesex...on Thursday the 10th Day of May, 17 George II....This Court being informed, that several common Players of Interludes have for several Years used and accusdomed to assemble and meet together at or near a certain place called Tattenhoe, alias Tattenhall, alias Tottenham Court, in the Parish of St.@Pancras in this County, and to erect Booths, and act or exhibit Drolls and other Shews...whereby great Numbers of His Majesty's Subjects have been encouraged to assemble and to commit Riots and other Misdemeanors, in breach of His Majesty's Peace, and to the disturbance of the Neighborhood, of that Place; and that some of the said Players of Interludes, and other evil disposed Persons, are now seeking out and contracting for ground in or near the Place aforesaid, to build Booths for showing and acting said Plays and Drolls...and whereas all such Players of Interludes are deemed and declared Rogues and Vagabonds, and the Acting of such Plays, Drolls and Shews, are contrary to the Inns and Statues of the Realm...require the High Constable to apprehend all and every Players of Interludes, Plays, and Drolls.--Daily Advertiser, 17 May

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: To the New Theatre [Vere St], which, since the King's players are gone to the Royal one [Bridges St], is this day begun to be employed by the fencers to play prizes at

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list at Harvard. See William VanLennep, "Plays on the English Stage", p. 13. The edition of 1668 states: As it was Acted (with great Applause) by the Servants of His Royal Highness the Duke of York, at the Theatre in Lincolns-Inn Fields

Event Comment: The King's Company. See 3 March 1668@9 for another play acted(on a Wednesday in Lent by the young players. Langbaine, (English Dramatick Poets, p. 208): Coxcomb, a Comedy, which was reviv'd at the Theatre-Royal, the Prologue being spoken by Jo. Haines. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, and there saw The Coxcomb, the first time acted, but an old play, and a silly one, being acted only by the young people

Event Comment: In the Term Catalogues a new edition of John Wilson's The Cheats was announced as licensed on 30 May 1671. This play had previously been given in March 1663. The edition of 1671 states that it has been given by the King's Company at the Theatre Royal, and it may have been revived at this time

Event Comment: This play was reprinted in 1672, being entered in the Term Catalogues, 20 Nov. 1671. It probably was acted in the late summer of 1671. The title page states that it was acted at the Theatre Royal, Bridges Street

Event Comment: Journal of the Earl of Anglesey, 25 Jan. 1671@2: At eight of the clock The King's playhouse took fire, and most of that side of Russell Street and many other houses thereabout were burnt down, and we in Drury Lane and all about in great danger; but the Lord had mercy, and by great industry and blowing up houses the fire was overcome: I had no rest, but sat up almost all night, even till six in the morning. The Lord pardon sin, which brings judgements (HMC, 13th Report, Part VI [London, 1893], p. 270. The Bulstrode Papers (I, 217): About 8 hapened a sad and violent fire, which begun in the King's Theater, and in a few howers burnt down that...severall were hurt and killed, amongst which was Mr Bell, one of the actors in that house. For a poem, On the Unhappy Conflagration of the Theatre Royal, January 25th, 1672, see Fitzgerald, A New History of the English Stage, I, 137

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but John Harold Wilson, Six Restoration Play-Dates, Notes and Queries, June 1962, p. 221, has argued, primarily on references in the Epilogue, that the play was probably produced before the opening of the new Theatre Royal in Drury Lane and following two unsuccessful plays: The Mall and The Amorous Old Woman. The Prologue is in New Songs and Poems a la Mode, 1677. Preface to the edition of 1675: This play was left in Mr Dryden's hands many years since. The Author of it was unknown to him, and return'd not to claim it

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance, which marks the opening of the new Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 73. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. The Prologue and Epilogue were printed in Miscellany Poems, 1684. That the Prologue was spoken by Mohun is indicated in BM Sloane MSS. 4445

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 216: K: & Q:. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 348. Nell Gwyn also attended this performance. See VanLennep, Nell Gwyn's Playgoing, p. 406. BM Add. Mss. 27, 962v, f. 312 (a transcript of a newsletter by Salvetti), 14 Dec. 1674 (translation): On last Wednesday all the royal family were present at the theatre to hear the tragedy of Hamlet, which, for their greater entertainment, was adorned and embellished with very curious dances between the acts. [I am indebted to Professor George Hilton Jones, Kansas State University, for this item.

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues in November 1680, it was probably first acted in September or October 1680. The Dedication refers to the ineffectiveness of the company at this time. Dedication, Edition of 1680: A Play so worthless, and so Unfortunate. Nay, to sum up all its Misfortunes, it does not only owe so little to the Composers Hand, but breath'd too in a Season, when Poetry even with its softest and more Curious Aires, to the Ears of this untunable Age, sounds but harsh and unpleasant: nay, and what's yet worst of all, perform'd by the feeble Fragment of a Company.--'Tis true, the Theatre Royal was once all Harmony....But when this hapless Play came forth, its sweetest Pipes were stopt; [Praise of Hart]. But, Alas, the very best of Plays now find but a cold Reception

Event Comment: Nahum Tate published a poem The Battle of the B@@d's in the Theatre Royal Dec. 3, 1680, in Poems Written on Several Occasions, 2d edition, 1684, pp. 153-54

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is known by the separately printed Prologue and Epilogue: Prologue. By Mr Otway to his Play call'd Venice preserv'd or the Plot discover'd. Acted at His Royal Highness the Duke of Yorks Theatre, the 9th of February, 1681. [These have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 61-66.] Luttrell dated his copy of the Prologue and Epilogue 11 Feb. 1681@2 (Huntington Library). It is not certain that 9 Feb. 1681@2 represents the first performance, but it may well be. For a comment by Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, on Mrs Barry, see The Orphan, February 1679@80