Event Comment: Principal Instrumental Performers-C. Ashley, Bridgtower, Archer, Harvey, Sarjant, Mahon, Boyce, Cantelo, Parkinson, Taylor, J. Sharp, Lavenu, Napier, Simpson, the Flacks, Purney, Seutze, Gwilliam, Monro, Wood, Warren, Woodham, Francis, M. Sharp, &c. Organ by J. Ashley. Double Drums by R. Ashley. The Chorusses will be numerous and compleat, and the Orchestra will consist of upwards of Two Hundred Performers. The whole under the Direction of Ashley. Boxes 6s. Pit 3s. 6d. Gallery 2s. Upper Gallery 1s. Places to be taken, and Tickets for the Boxes may be had of Brandon at the Office in Hart-street. The Doors to be opened at 5:30. To begin at 6:30 [same throughout oratorio season]. [This performance was originally advertised to take place at the Pantheon, Oxford-street, but "The routed Host of Harmonists, driven from their new works in Oxford-road, hastily encamped last night [at Covent Garden]. Their performance...went off as might be expected from a scanty band, thus collected, without any previous rehearsal" (Morning Herald, 21 Feb.). The Pantheon had been destroyed by fire in January 1792. Work on its reconstruction had only recently been begun, and Was still not completed. It was reopened with a masquerade on 9 April 1795, the "usual licenses being now fully renewed and established" (Morning Herald, 9 Apr.).

Event Comment: The Rose is a New Musical performance of Two Acts by Dr Arne a very dull insipid piece. Mr G. protested against its being perform'd its being perform'd it was hiss'd from the beginning & wd not Suffer it to be given out again, therefore Mr King went on & told them it Should not be perform'd again until it be alter'd (Hopkins Diary). [Macmillan's note from Kemble differs slightly. See critical damnation of The Rose in British Theatre Article in The London Magazine, Dec. 1772.] Book of the Entertainment to be had at the Theatre (playbill). Paid Mr Petit for men's cloaths, #8 8s. CTreasurer's Book). [Reviewer for Town and Country Magazine (Theatre, No. XLI) disappointed with the Rose: "We are told that this precious piece of stuff is the production of an Oxford student; it may be so, of this every auditor is certain, that the collegian who penned it was so entirely lost in the pursuit of some abstruse study, that he has totally forgot grammar, common sense, and even his mother tongue...it was unanimously damn'd."] Receipts: #172 6s. (Treasurer's Book)

Event Comment: The United Company. This play was in rehearsal before the death of Charles II-see 6 Feb. 1684@5-and was staged shortly after the playhouse reopened. Luttrell's date of acquisition of the separately-printed Prologue and Epilogue is 9 May 1685 (in possession of Pickering and Chatto, Ltd., 1938), and the play may have been first given on that date or during the week preceding Saturday 9 May 1685. For Cibber's account of Mountfort as Sir Courtly, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 129. The separately-printed Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 228-30. A separately-printed Three New Songs in Sir Courtley Nice (1685) contains three songs, with the music by Samuel Ackroyde and an unknown composer. In addition, two songs, As I grazed unaware and O be kind my dear be kind, both composed by R. King, are in The Theater of Music, Second Book, 1685. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 40-41): The first new Comedy after King James came to the Crown, was Sir Courtly Nice, wrote by Mr Crown:...The Comedy being justly Acted, and the Characters in't new, Crown'd it with a general Applause: Sir Courtly was so nicely Perform'd, that not any succeeding, but Mr Cyber has Equall'd him. Note, Mr Griffin so Excell'd in Surly, Sir Edward Belfond, The Plain Dealer, none succeeding in the 2 former have Equall'd him, except his Predecessor Mr Hart in the latter. The Lover's Session; In Imitation of Sir John Suckling's Session of Poets (in Poems on Affairs of State, II [1703], 162): @Montrath was in Foppery conceiv'd another@Of Whitehall true Breed, Sir Nices Twin Brother:@None could tell, so alike all their Follies did seem,@Whether he acted Mumford, or Mumford him.

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but it had been acted by the time the January 1692@3 issue of the Gentleman's Journal appeared in March (on page 1 of that issue, the editor states that We are now in March): Mr Southerne's New Comedy, call'd, The Maid's last Prayer, or Any rather than fail, was acted the 3d time this evening, and is to be acted again to morrow. It discovers much knowledge of the Town in its Author; and its Wit and purity of Diction are particularly commended (p. 28). The first song in the play, Tho you make no return to my passion, composed by Henry Purcell, was sung, according to the printed play, by Mrs Hodgson; by Mrs Dyer, according to Thesaurus Musicus, First Book, 1693. The second song, composed by Samuel? Akeroyd, was sung by Mrs Ayliff (Thesaurus Musicus, The First Book, 1693). Another song, No, no, no, no, resistance is but vain, written by Anthony Henley, composed by Henry Purcell, and sung by Mrs Ayliff and Mrs Hodgson, Act IV, is in Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), xiv-xv. A song, Tell me no more I am deceiv'd, written by William Congreve, set by Henry Purcell, and sung by Mrs Ayliff, is in Works, XX (1916), xv-xvi. According to the London Gazette, No. 2852, 9-13 March 1692@3, the play was published "this day" (13 March 1692@3)

Event Comment: New Scenes and Habits. Ladies send servants by 3 o'clock. The Music compiled from Favourite Airs of the most celebrated Composers. Books of the opera to be had at the Theatre. [See note 16 Oct. 1764. Edition of 1765 states music by Samuel Arnold.

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; T 5, by Thomas Hull; also ascribed to Samuel Jackson Pratt. Author of Prologue unknown. Epilogue by S. J. Pratt. {Miscellanies, 1785,1,271). MS: Larpent 603; not published]: With a grand Masquerade Scene, and Decorations incident to the Piece. Receipts: #234 17s. (223/13/0; 11/1/6; 0/2/6)

Event Comment: Not Acted these Fifteen Years. [After this performance the dl at Oxford, where Betterton spoke a prologue written by Joseph Trapp. It appeared as a broadside and in The Players Turn'd Academicks and has been reprinted by Wiley. p. 124.

Event Comment: For an account of the play, see John Wilson's The Cheats, ed. Milton C. Nahm (Oxford, 1935). It was licensed on 6 March (p. 124), acted, then forbade on 22 March in an order: Letter to Mr Tho. Killigrew: Signifying the Ks Pleasure that the New Play called the Cheates be no more represented till it be reuiewed by Sir Jo. Denham & Mr Waller. 22 March. 1662-3 (p. 130). Abraham Hill to John Brooke, 28 March 1663: P.S. The new play, called The Cheats, has been attempted on the Stage; but it is so scandalous, that it is forbidden (Familiar Letters of? Abraham Hill, [London, 1717], p. 103. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) concerning Lacy: @For his just Acting, all gave him due Praise,@His Part in the Cheats, Jony Thump, Teg and Bayes,@In these Four Excelling, The Court gave him the Bays.

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Being full of my desire of seeing my Lord Orrery's new play this afternoon at the King's house, The Black Prince, the first time it is acted; where though we come by two o'clock, yet there was no room in the pit, but we were forced to go into one of the upper boxes, at 4s. a piece, which is the first time I ever sat in a box in my life. And in the same box come, by and by, behind me, my Lord Barkeley and his lady; but I did not turn my face to them to be known, so that I was excused from giving them my seat; and this pleasure I had, that from this place the scenes do appear very fine indeed, and much better than in the pit. The house infinite full, and the King and Duke of York was there. By and by the play begun, and in it nothing Particular but a very fine dance for variety of figures, but a little too long. But, as to the contrivance, and all that was witty (which, indeed, was much, and very witty), was almost the same that had been in his two former plays of Henry the 5th and Mustapha, and the same points and turns of wit in both, and in this very same play often repeated, but in excellent language, and were so excellent that the whole house was mightily pleased with it all along till towards the end he comes to discover the chief of the plot of the play by the reading of a long letter, which was so long and some things (the people being set already to think too long) so unnecessary that they frequently begun to laugh, and to hiss twenty times, that, had it not been for the King's being there, they had certainly hissed it off the stage. But I must confess that, as my Lord Barkeley says behind me, the having of that long letter was a thing so absurd, that he could not imagine how a man of his parts could possibly fall into it; or, if he did, if he had but let any friend read it, the friend would have told him of it; and, I must confess, it is one of the most remarkable instances that ever I did or expect to meet with in my life of a wise man's not being wise at all times, and in all things, for nothing could be more ridiculous than this, though the letter of itself at another time would be thought an excellent letter, and indeed an excellent Romance, but at the end of the play, when every body was weary of sitting, and were already possessed with the effect of the whole letter, to trouble them with a letter a quarter of an hour long was a most absurd thing. After the play done, and nothing pleasing them from the time of the letter to the end of the play, people being put into a bad humour of disliking (which is another thing worth the noting), I home by coach, and could not forbear laughing almost all the way home, and all the evening to my going to bed, at the ridiculousness of the letter, and the more because my wife was angry with me, and the world, for laughing, because the King was there, though she cannot defend the length of the letter

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Particular desire. Afterpiece: Never Acted Before. [The Farce by Fielding is a sequel to The Virgin Unmasked.] Forbidden soon by the Lord Chamberlain. It being supposed that a particular man of quality was pointed at in one of the characters. The prohibition short of duration (Genest, III, 652). See A Letter to a Noble Lord to whom it alone belongs, occasioned by a representation at Drury Lane of a Farce call'd Miss Lucy in Town (1742), [a 20 page pamphlet criticizing the Lord Chamberlain for allowing this farce. Author gives a scene by scene account emphasizing the bawdry and discounting the pious conclusion. He concludes with remarks on theatrical dancing]: As to Dances, I think your province of prohibition does not extend; so the Public cannot owe their gratitude to you for several. I appeal to those who have been on the coast of Malabar and the banks of the Ganges whether we have not had some that have exceeded on posture, or anything of that kind so common amongst the polite Indians of Indostan. Afterpiece: Mrs Clive mimics the Muscovita admirably, and Beard Amorevoli intolerably (H. Walpole to H. Mann, 26 May).-Horace Walpole Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, I, 435. Receipts: #70

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time at a public theatre; C 3, by Elizabeth Craven, Baroness Craven, afterwards Margravine of Anspach, 1st acted privately at the Town-Hall, Newbury, 6 Apr. 1780. Text (G. Riley, 1781) assigns no parts. Prologue by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Epilogue by Joseph Jekyll (see text)]: With new Dresses, &c. "The Prologue [the first 30 lines and the concluding couplet of which were used by Sheridan as the Prologue to Pizarro (see dl, 24 May 1799)] was so much admired that at the request of the Duchess of Devonshire and several other of the nobility it was respoken after the piece; but as King was absent from the theatre, it was delivered by Palmer" (Town and Country Magazine, May 1780, p. 23 ). "The chief singularity was that [Lady Craven] went to it herself the second night, in form; sat in the middle of the front row of the stage-box, much dressed, with a profusion of white bugles and plumes, to receive the public homage due to her sex and loveliness. The Duchess of Richmond, Lady Harcourt,...Mrs Damer, Lord Craven,...and I were with her. It was amazing to see so young a woman entirely possess herself-but there is such an integrity and frankness in her consciousness of her own beauty and talents, that she speaks of them with a naivete as if she had no property in them, but only wore them as gifts of the gods. Lord Craven on the contrary was quite agitated by his fondness for her and with impatience at the bad performance of the actors, which was wretched indeed, yet the address of the plot, which is the chief merit of the piece, and some lively pencilling carried it off very well, though Parsons murdered the Scotch lord, and Mrs Robinson (who is supposed to be the favourite of the Prince of Wales) thought on nothing but her own charms, or him. There is a very good though endless prologue written by Sheridan and spoken in perfection by King, which was encored (an entire novelty) the first night: and an epilogue that I liked still better and which was full as well delivered by Mrs Abington, written by Mr. Jekyl. The audience, though very civil, missed a fair opportunity of being gallant, for in one of those ----logues, I forget which, the noble authoress was mentioned, and they did not applaud as they ought to have done, especially when she condescended to avow her pretty child and was there looking so very pretty...Yet Lady Craven's tranquillity had nothing displeasing;...and it was tempered by her infinite good nature, which made her make excuses for the actors instead of being provoked at them" (Walpole [28 May 1780], XI, 178-80). Public Advertiser, 14 July 1781: This Day at Noon will be published The Miniature Picture (price not listed). Receipts: #144 9s. (94.9; 48.3; 1.17)