Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, by Thomas Holcroft, adapted from Le Complaisant, by Antoine de Feriol comte de Pont-de-Veyle, and from Clavigo, by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. It has been attributed to John Fenwick (Genest, VII, 360-61; London Chronicle, 14 Feb. 1798). But for Holcroft's acknowledgment of authorship see his Life, ed. Elbridge Colby, 1925, II, 170. Author of Prologue unknown. Epilogue by the author (Knapp, p. 88)]. Times, 12 Apr. 1798: This Day will be published He's Much to Blame (2s.). "Mrs Mattocks has of late habituated herself to a constant titter, which destroys the effect of her best scenes" (Times, 14 Feb.). Receipts: #249 1s. (240.5; 8.16)

Event Comment: 2nd piece [1st time; C 3, by Thomas John Dibdin, altered from Die Versohnung, by August Friedrich Ferdinand von Kotzebue. Author of Prologue unknown. Epilogue by the author (see text)]: With new Scenery, Dresses, &c. [3rd piece in place of The Old Cloathsman, advertised on playbill of 6 Apr.] Receipts: #180 3s. (177.1; 3.2)

Event Comment: Benefit for Mrs Jordan. Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, based partly on Die Indianer in England, by August Friedrich Ferdinand von Kotzebue. Prologue, Epilogue by the author (see text)]: Written by the Author of The Castle-Spectre [Matthew Gregory Lewis]. Receipts: #706 5s. 6d. (350.16.6; 42.4.0; odd and after-money: 7.4.6; tickets: 306.0.6) (charge: free)

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time; C 5, by Charlotte Smith. Prologue by the author (Knapp, 202). Author of Epilogue unknown]: With new Scenery, Dresses, &c. Morning Chronicle, 26 July 1799: This Day published What is She? (2s.). Receipts: #161 11s. (158.2.6; 3.8.6). pking's Ines de Castro. As 16 Feb

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by the Author of The Castle-Spectre [Matthew Gregory Lewis, also the author of Prologue and Epilogue (see text)]. "The Epilogue was spoken by Bannister Jun. in the character of Queen Elizabeth, who ascends from a trap in the middle of the stage, and who is supposed to have obtained the permission of Pluto to revisit her kingdom, in order to witness the representation of the East Indianv" (Monthly Mirror, Dec. 1799, p. 367). Receipts: #200 13s. 6d. (131.11.0; 67.9.6; 1.13.0)

Event Comment: Mr Salomon having insinuated that he alone is in possession of a correct Score of this celebrated Oratorio, I feel compelled, in justice to myself, to state that the Oratorio was published by subscription at Vienna, and that the printed Copy, from which I had the Parts transcribed, was delivered by Dr Haydn to a subscriber in Vienna, and brought from thence expressly for me, and on which is the Doctor's initials. The accuracy with which it was performed, and the enthusiasm with which it was received, are, I hope, convincing proofs that no other directions are necessary to "produce the effect required by the Author." I should not thus have obtruded myself, but I conceived it requisite to justify myself from the imputation of having attempted to impose a spurious production upon that public to whom I am under so many obligations. I am, with the greatest respect and gratitude, their most obedient servant, John Ashley. March 29. [On 29 Mar. the following card had appeared in most of the daily newspapers: Mr Salomon having received from Dr Haydn an early Copy of his New Oratorio called The Creation of the World, and having been favoured by him exclusively with particular directions on the style and manner in which it must be executed, in order to produce the effects required by the Author, begs to acquaint the Nobility and Gentry, that he means to perform it on Monday, the 21st of April next, at the King's Theatre. The performance took place on that date in the Ancient Music Room, i.e. the large concert-room situated inside the King's, on the east side, level with the first tier of the boxes. The reason for this change was, states the playbill, "the present Performances in the Opera House not allowing sufficient time to erect an Orchestra on the Stage." The principal singers were Mme Mara, Mme Dussek, Small, Page, Denman, Bartleman. Samuel Wesley presided at the organ and at the piano forte.

Event Comment: Benefit for Lewis. 3rd piece [1st time; M. INT 1, by Thomas John Dibdin. Larpent MS 1288; not published]: Founded on a late Glorious Naval Achievement [the recapture by Capt. Edward Hamilton, on 25 Oct. 1799, of the British frigate Hermione, from the Spaniards]. The Music selected and composed by Attwood. Morning Chronicle, 1 Apr.: Tickets to be had of Lewis, No. 52, Great Queen-street, Lincoln's Inn Fields. Receipts: #361 17s. (263.2.0; 33.5.6; tickets: 65.9.6)

Event Comment: 1st piece [1st time; C 3, by Thomas John Dibdin. In 1801 expanded by the author to 5 acts, and entitled The School for Prejudice. Author of Prologue unknown.]. Receipts: #205 17s. 6d. (202.10.0; 3.7.6)

Event Comment: The Lord Mayor's Show. By John Tatham. The author mentions as his assistants: Andrew Dakers and William Lightfoot, painters; Thomas Whiting, joyner; and Richard Clear, carver

Event Comment: Charles II entered London on this day, an event which occasioned several works of a quasi-dramatic nature. One was The Famous Tragedie of the Life and Death of Mrs Rump...As it was presented on a burning Stage at Westminster the 29th of May, 1660. It has a Prologue and Epilogue; the author is not known. A second is An Ode Upon the Happy Return of King Charles II to his Languishing Nations, May 29. 1660. This work, by James Shirley, with music by Dr Coleman, was printed in 1660, and reprinted in A Little Ark, ed. G. Thorn-Drury (1921), pp. 21-23. A third is A True Relation of the Reception of his Majestie and Conducting him through the City of London...on Tuesday the 29 of this instant May, being the Day of his Majesties Birth

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. If the run of The Wits occurred as it is outlined above, this would presumably be the first day of Hamlet. Pepys, Diary: To the Opera, and there saw Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, done with scenes very well, but above all, Betterton did the prince's part beyond imagination. Downes (p. 21): The Tragedy of Hamlet: Hamlet being Perform'd by Mr Betterton, Sir William (having seen Mr Taylor of the Black-Fryars Company Act it, who being Instructed by the Author Mr Shakespear) taught Mr Betterton in every Particle of it; which by his exact Performance of it, gain'd him Esteem and Reputation, Superlative to all other Plays...No succeeding Tragedy for several Years got more Reputation, or Money to the Company than this

Event Comment: The King's Company. This play appears on Herbert's List, following the entry for 26 Oct. 1661. (See William VanLennep, "Thomas Killigrew prepares his Plays for Production," J. Q. Adams Memorial Studies (Washington, D. C., 1948, p. 803.) Pepys, Diary: W. Pen and I to the Theatre, but it was so full that we could hardly get any room, so he went up to one of the boxes, and I into the 18d. places, and there saw Love at first sight, a play of Mr Killigrew's and the first time that it hath been acted since before the troubles, and great expectation there was, but I found the play to be a poor thing, and so I perceive every body else do. BM Add. Mss. 34217, fol. 31b, in Hotson Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 246: @First then to speake of his Majestys Theatre@Where one would imagine Playes should be better@Love att the first sight did lead the dance@But att second sight it had the mischance@To be so dash'd out of Countenance as@It never after durst shew itts face@All though its bashfullnesse as tis thought@Be far from being the Authors ffault.

Event Comment: This play was presumably acted by the Duke's Company. In the preface to Heraclius, Emperour of the East, published in 1664, the author, Lodowick Carlell, complains that he had submitted his translation of Corneille, only to have it returned the very day that this version appeared on the stage. See also the letter by Katherine Philips, under Pompey the Great, Jan. 1663@4. Pepys, Diary: We made no long stay at dinner; for Heraclius being acted, which my wife and I have a mighty mind to see, we do resolve, though not exactly agreeing with the letter of my vowe, yet altogether with the sense, to see another this month, by coming hither instead of that at court, there having ueen none conveniently since I made my vowe for us to see there, nor like to be this Lent, and besides we did walk home on purpose to make this going as cheap as that would have been, to have seen one at Court, and my conscience knows that it is only the saving of money and the time also that I intend by my oaths....The play hath one very good passage well managed in it, about two persons pretending, and yet denying themselves, to be son to the tyrant Phocas, and yet heire of Mauricius to the crowne. The garments like Romans very well. The little girle is come to act very prettily, and spoke the epilogue most admirably. But at the beginning, at the drawing up of the curtaine, there was the finest scene of the Emperor and his people about him, standing in their fixed and different postures in their Roman habitts, above all that ever I yet saw at any of the theatres

Event Comment: The King's Company. This play is on the L. C. list, 5@12, p. 17: the King here. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 344. Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Terryll, 10 Feb. 1668@9: one of my Lord of Newcastle's for whch printed apoligies are scattered in the assembly by Briden's order, either for himself who had some hand in it, or for the author most; I think both had right to them (Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, IV, 14)

Event Comment: Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Terryll: The censure of our plays comes to ee at the second hand. There has not been any new lately revived and reformed, as Catiline, well set out with clothes and scenes; Horace, with a farce and dances between every act composed by Lacy and played by him and Nell, which takes; one of my Lord of Newcastle's, for which printed apologies are scattered in the assembly by Briden's order, either for himself who had some hand in it, or for the author most; I think both had right to them (The Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. Bray, IV, 14)

Event Comment: The Travels of Cosmo the Third (Thursday 25 April 1669 NS; Thursday 15 April OS): After dinner, he recommenced his visits to the ladies; going towards evening to the King's Theatre, to hear the comedy, in his majesty's box. This theatre is nearly of a circular form, surrounded, in the inside, by boxes separated from each other, and divided into several rows of seats, for the greater accommodation of the ladies and gentlemen, who, in conformity with the freedom of the country, sit together indiscriminately; a large space being left on the ground-flobr for the rest of the audience. The scenery is very light, capable of a great many changes, and embellished with beautiful landscapes. Before the comedy begins, that the audience may not be tired with waiting, the most delightful symphonies are played; on which account many persons come early to enjoy this agreeable amusement. The comedies which are acted, are in prose; but their plots are confused, neither unity nor regularity being observed; the authors having in view, rather than any thing else, to describe accurately the passions of the mind, the virtues and the vices; and they succeed the better, the more the players themselves, who are excellent, assist them with action, and with the enunciation of their language, which is very adapted for the purpose, as being a variation, but very much confined and curtailed, of the Teutonic idiom; and enriched with many phrases and words of the most beautiful and expressive description, taken both from ancient and modern languages (London, 1821, pp. 190-91)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Langbaine, English Dramatick Poets, p. 509: [It] was alter'd (as I have heard by Mr Carthwright) by Mr Betterton. Downes, p. 30: [Done] by the same Author [Betterton]...and all the other Parts Exactly perform'd, it lasted Successively 8 Days, and very frequently Acted afterwards. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke of York's playhouse, and there, in the side balcony, over against the musick, did hear, but not see, a new play, the first day acted, The Roman Virgin, and old play, and but ordinary, I thought; but the trouble of my eyes with the light of the candles did almost kill me

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Although this performance is not certainly the premiere, it is the earliest known acting of the play. This performance is on the L. C. lists at Harvard. See VanLennep, "Plays on the English Stage", p. 14. John Boyle, Fifth Earl of Orrery: Master Anthony too the sequel of Guzman was after Lord Orrery's Death brought upon the Stage, but being disrelish'd by the Audience appear'd only one Night. It is probable The Author had not supervis'd and corrected It sufficiently before he died (The Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, ed. W. S. Clark II, II, 950). If these private notes, written some fifty years after the premiere, are correct, this performance may have been the premiere and the only day of acting it

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. lists at Harvard. See VanLennep, "Plays on the English Stage", p. 18: The New Utopia. There is no indication as to whether this performance was the premiere. The Preface refers to malice against the plays, and the edition of 1671 has a poem: To the Author of the New Utopia. On the Miscarriage of his Play in Acting

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: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but, as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1674, a first production not later than March 1674 is likely. In addition, the relatively large number of minor actors suggests that it might be a Lenten performance by the young players of the company. As to the authorship, the title page states: Written by a Person of Honour. On the other hand, Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 526) reports that he had heard that it was written by Duffett. The second Prologue is in Covent Garden Drollery, 1673, but the fact that it was intended but not spoken does not assist in dating the first performance

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 116. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. This play was reprinted in 1675, as the third edition: With Amendments and large Additions by the Author

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 81. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 348. There is no certainty as to whether this is the date of the first performance. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 35): Then the Conquest of China by the Tartars, by Mr Settle; in this Play Mr Jevon Acting a Chinese Prince and Commander in it, and being in the Battle, Vanquisht by the Tartars; he was by his Part to fall upon the point of his Sword and Kill himself, rather than be a Prisoner by the Tartars: Mr Jevon instead of falling on the point of his Sword, laid it in the Scabbard at length upon the Ground and fell upon't, saying, now I am Dead; which put the Author into such a Fret, it made him speak Treble instead of Double Jevons answer was; did not you bid me fall upon my Sword

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. There is no indication of the first date of performance, but a licensing date of 19 Feb. 1676@7 suggests a December 1676 or January 1677 production.Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 38): Titus and Berenice, Wrote by the same Author [Thomas Otway], consisting of 3 Acts: With the Farce of the Cheats of Scapin at the end: This Play, with the Farce, being perfectly well Acted; had good Success

Event Comment: The author is not known. The edition of 1678 gives no performers' names