Haymarket Opera House

[The Queen's Theatre, in the Haymarket.] Theatres ... are 3; The Queens, a strong built spacious one, situate in the Haymarket, of the Dorick Order: The Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, and the Dukes in Dorset Gardens; at the 2 former are acted Tragedies, Opera's, Commedies or Farces, except during Lent and the time of Bartholomew Fair.

Haymarket Opera House, known at different times of its history as the Queen's Theatre, the King's Theatre, and Her Majesty's Theatre. The present building is the third theatre on the same site. The first theatre (built and established by Sir John Vanbrugh) was opened April 9, 1705, with a performance of Dryden's Indian Emperor. On July 13, 1703, Vanbrugh writes to Jacob Tonson that all the "writings for the Playhouse are finished," and that "the ground is the second stable-yard going up the Haymarket; I give 2000 for it, but have layd such a scheme of matters, that I shall be reimbursed every penny of it by the spare ground ... I have drawn a design for the whole disposition of the inside, very different from any other house in being; but I have the good fortune to have it absolutely approved by all that have seen it." Colley Cibber says, "of this theatre I saw the first stone laid, on which was inscribed THE LITTLE WHIG, in honour to a lady of extraordinary beauty, then the celebrated Toast and Pride of that party." This was Lady Sunderland, the second daughter of the great Duke of Marlborough. The name of the stable-yard which furnished the site was the Phoenix a name singularly prophetic of the future fate of the building, twice burnt to the ground and each time rising with greater beauty than before. Vanbrugh's house was burnt down June 17, 1789.

The first stone of the second house was laid April 3, 1790. It was erected from the designs of Michael Novosielski, and altered and enlarged by J. Nash and G.S. Repton in 1816–1818. The colonnade was erected in 1820, and the basso-relievi by G. Bubb added on the Haymarket front. The building was greatly admired for its internal elegance and acoustic qualities, but the stage was inconveniently shallow. On the night of December 6, 1867, it was entirely destroyed by fire, with the exception of the outer walls. A new theatre was shortly commenced from the designs of Mr. C. Lee, and completed in twelve months, in May 1869. But owing to some proprietary differences it was not opened for operatic performances till the spring of 1878; and during the last few years it has only occasionally been used for operas and plays and sometimes for miscellaneous entertainments.

The present building is on the site of its predecessor, but the giving up of the little Bijou Theatre permitted of a rearrangement of the interior by which the audience part is pushed back and the stage greatly deepened. The exterior was not altered. The interior retains the old horse-shoe form; is 70 feet from the curtain to the back of the centre box, and 50 feet across at the widest part. It has four tiers of boxes, and will hold 1800 persons. The proscenium is 40 feet wide and 36 feet high. The first Italian singer of note that acquired celebrity in London was Francesca Margherita de l'Epine, who retired in 1718. Her great rival was Mrs. Katherine Tofts, an English-woman; and to such a height was the fever of party admiration carried, that on February 5, 1703–1704, Margherita was both hissed and pelted. The first opera performed entirely in Italian was Almahide in January 1710. Nicolini came to England in 1708, Handel in 1710, Francesca Cuzzoni in 1723, and Farinelli in 1734. Since then all the first singers in Europe have appeared here, but the prestige of the Opera House was destroyed when Mario, Grisi, Persiani and Tamburini seceded in 1847 and went to the new opera house in Covent Garden.

The Haymarket Opera House

With the single exception of the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, the southern part of the site of Her Majesty's Theatre in the Haymarket has been in continuous use for theatrical entertainment for longer than any other place in London. From the middle of the reign of Queen Anne to the middle of that of Queen Victoria the opera nights at the theatre were amongst the most notable events of the London season. Musicians connected with the theatre include Handel and Haydn; dramatists, Vanbrugh, Congreve and Sheridan; architects, Vanbrugh, Novosielski, Leverton, Nash and George Repton. …

During the reign of Queen Anne the theatre was called the Queen's Theatre. From the accession of George I (1714) to that of Queen Victoria (1837) it was known as the King's Theatre. From 1837 to 1901 it was called Her Majesty's Theatre, and from then until the accession of Queen Elizabeth II (1952), His Majesty's.

The theatre (Plates 24, 39) was originally built by (Sir) John Vanbrugh in 1704–5. Important alterations to the interior were made in 1778, perhaps by Robert Adam, and in 1782 by Michael Novosielski, and the theatre was destroyed by fire in 1789. It was rebuilt on a slightly larger site to the designs of Novosielski in 1790–1, and in 1816–18 it was provided with façades to Charles Street, the Haymarket and Pall Mall by John Nash and George Repton, who also built the Royal Opera Arcade on the west side. The theatre (but not the surrounding façades) was again destroyed by fire in 1867, and was rebuilt to the design of Charles Lee in 1868–9. This theatre and all the surrounding premises designed by Nash and Repton (except the Royal Opera Arcade) were demolished in the 1890's. The present Her Majesty's Theatre (on the northern portion of the site) was designed by C.J. Phipps and opened in 1897. …

Vanbrugh and the building of the theatre

At the opening of the eighteenth century Vanbrugh was a well-established dramatist on the threshold of a career as an architect. The three principal theatres in London were the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, presided over by Christopher Rich, the theatre in Dorset Gardens, already nearing extinction, and the theatre at Lincoln's Inn Fields, where Thomas Betterton had performed in The Provok'd Wife in 1697.²³ Betterton's company was in disorder, and 'To recover them, therefore, to their due Estimation, a new Project was form'd of building them a stately Theatre in the Hay-Market, by Sir John Vanbrugh, for which he raised a Subscription of thirty Persons of Quality, at one hundred Pounds each, in Consideration whereof every Subscriber, for his own Life, was to be admitted to whatever Entertainments should be publickly perform'd there, without farther Payment for his Entrance'.²⁴ These subscribers were probably members of the Kit-Cat Club;²⁵ the only subscriber whose name is known is John Hervey, first Earl of Bristol.²⁶ …

The foundation stone of the theatre was laid in 1704. A contemporary account states that 'The Foundation was laid with great Solemnity, by a Noble Babe of Grace. And over or under the Foundation Stone is a Plate of Silver, on which is Graven Kit Cat on the one side, and Little Whigg on the other. ... And there was such Zeal shew'd, and all Purses open to carry on this Work, that it was almost as soon Finish'd as Begun.'²⁵ The 'Little Whigg' or 'Noble Babe of Grace' was Anne, Countess of Sunderland, second daughter of the Duke of Marlborough.³⁹ Writing in 1882, however, Percy Fitzgerald states that when the walls of the theatre were being repaired in 1825, a stone with the following inscription was discovered: 'April 18th, 1704. This corner-stone of the Queen's Theatre was laid by his Grace Charles Duke of Somerset.'^{40, 1} On 14 December 1704 Vanbrugh and William Congreve received the Queen's authority to form 'a Company of Comedians',⁴¹ and the theatre was opened on 9 April 1705 with a performance of an Italian opera, The Loves of Ergasto.⁴²

The first season was a failure. Congreve withdrew, and Vanbrugh became deeply involved in the interminable squabbles which beset the London stage at this time. On 7 May 1707 he leased the theatre to Owen Swiney for fourteen years,^{43, 2} and on 31 December the Lord Chamberlain ordered that 'all Operas and other Musicall presentments be performed for the future only at Her Majesty's Theatre in the Hay Market', and forbad the performance of plays there.⁴⁴ In July 1708 Vanbrugh wrote to the Earl of Manchester: 'I lost so Much Money by the Opera this Last Winter, that I was glad to get quit of it; and yet I don't doubt but Operas will Settle and thrive in London.'⁴⁵ Italian opera as performed in London at this time was often slightly ridiculous³ and it did not become popular until the arrival of Handel and the first performance of his Rinaldo at the Queen's Theatre on 24 February 1710/11.⁴⁶ Shortly afterwards Swiney 'found the Receipts ... so far short of the Expences, that he was driven to attend his Fortune in some more favourable Climate'⁴⁷—the first of several managers of the theatre to seek foreign refuge from their creditors—and John James Heidegger succeeded him as manager.⁴⁸ Heidegger's connexion with the theatre lasted until his death in 1749, and by 1719 his famous masquerades there were the rage in fashionable London.^{49, 4}

In 1716 Vanbrugh obtained a Crown grant extending his leasehold interest in the site of the theatre and of the houses facing the Haymarket from 1740 to 1765.⁵⁰ In April 1718 he leased the theatre and entrance piazza only to Heidegger for seven years.⁵¹ On 14 January 1718/19 he married Henrietta, daughter of Colonel James Yarburgh of Heslington Hall, Yorkshire.⁵² His marriage seems to have been the occasion for Vanbrugh's withdrawal from virtually all active participation in the management of the theatre. On 16 March 1719/20 he leased the theatre and entrance piazza at a peppercorn rent to James and Thomas Yarburgh for the whole of his term from the Crown (subject to Heidegger's existing sevenyear lease), upon unspecified trusts which probably provided for his wife's future security.⁵³ On 7 October 1719 he settled his interest in the houses facing the Haymarket, which were then in course of rebuilding by John Potter (see above), on his sisters Elizabeth and Robina Vanbrugh for the term of their lives.⁵⁴ On 13 October 1720, in consideration of £6544, he assigned his interest in the theatre and the entrance piazza to his brother Charles, subject to three small annuities to three of his sisters and to the existing leases to Heidegger and the Yarburghs.⁵¹

In the 1720's Sir John Vanbrugh was one of the directors of the Royal Academy of Music at the King's Theatre.⁵⁵ After 1720 possession of the Crown lease was the only other connexion between the theatre and the Vanbrugh family; this connexion lasted until 1792. A letter written by Vanbrugh to Jacob Tonson on 29 November 1719 suggests that he welcomed the end of the association: 'I have no money to dispose of. I have been many years at hard Labour, to work through the Cruel Difficultys, that HayMarket undertaking involv'd me in; notwithstanding the aid, of a large Subscription Nor are those difficultys, quite at an end yet. Tho' within (I think) a tollerable View.'^{56, 5}

Vanbrugh himself was in large measure responsible for the financial failure of the theatre. In Colley Cibber's often-quoted remarks about the building, 'every proper Quality and Convenience of a good Theatre had been sacrificed or neglected to shew the Spectator a vast triumphal Piece of Architecture! ... For what could their vast Columns, their gilded Cornices, their immoderate high Roofs avail, when scarce one Word in ten could be distinctly heard in it? Nor had it then the Form it now [1740] stands in, which Necessity, two or three Years after, reduced it to: At the first opening it, the flat Ceiling that is now over the Orchestre was then a Semi-oval Arch that sprung fifteen Feet higher from above the Cornice; the Ceiling over the Pit, too, was still more raised, being one level Line from the highest back part of the upper Gallery to the Front of the Stage: The Front-boxes were a continued Semicircle to the bare walls of the House on each Side: This extraordinary and superfluous Space occasion'd such an Undulation from the Voice of every Actor, that generally what they said sounded like the Gabbling of so many People in the lofty Isles in a Cathedral. ...' To the structural drawbacks of the theatre Cibber added that of situation, 'for at that time it had not the Advantage of almost a large City, which has since been built in its Neighbourhood: Those costly Spaces of Hanover, Grosvenor, and Cavendish Squares, with the many and great adjacent Streets about them, were then all but so many green Fields of Pasture. ...'⁵⁷

Cibber's remarks on the theatre appear to be the only contemporary or near-contemporary comment of any architectural value. After the important alterations which Cibber mentions and which were presumably made in 1707 or 1708, there is no record of any further structural alteration to the main body of the theatre until 1778.⁶

An important feature of the theatre was the 'long room', in which some of the masquerades were held; others took place on the stage. The plan on Plate 26 shows the long room and five other smaller rooms on the west side of the theatre overlooking Market Lane. These six rooms may probably be identified with the 'Six Rooms even with ye floor of ye Stage built on parte of the Ground lying between the Theatre and Markett Lane ...' which are mentioned in Vanbrugh's lease of 7 May 1707 to Owen Swiney.⁴³ If this identification is correct, the long room must have either been part of the original fabric erected in 1704–5, or have been added during the alterations mentioned by Cibber. The latter appears to be the more likely.

Heidegger evidently found the theatre too small for his masquerades and other entertainments, for as early as 1719 he was in possession of the houses immediately to the south of the main body of the theatre.^{58, 7} These buildings are shown on Plate 26. In order to increase the depth of the stage an archway was made in the party-wall between the south end of the theatre and the adjoining range; the extra space thus acquired was used 'for the purpose of occasionally lengthening the decorations'.⁵⁹ The archway is shown on the plan on Plate 26, and can be seen in the view of the interior of the theatre reproduced on Plate 24b.

---

¹ The 'proud Duke', and a strong Whig.

² There were several other agreements between Vanbrugh and Swiney. See P.R.O., LC7/2 f. 1; Westminster City Library, A. M. Broadley, Annals of the Haymarket, King's Theatre volume, p. 33; The Complete Works of Sir John Vanbrugh, ed. Bonamy Dobrée and Geoffrey Webb, 1928, vol. IV, pp. 16–17, 20–1.

³ See The Spectator, Nos. 5, 13, 18, 22, 29, 31.

⁴ In the Hampshire Record Office (Mildmay Collection 15 50/127) there is an account book for 1716–17 which contains weekly statements of receipts and payments, and mentions a number of the productions by name.

⁵ For the general history of the theatre up to 1719 the following sources also exist in addition to those already cited: P.R.O., C7/668/31, C7/299/10, suit between Owen Swiney and Robert Wilkes, Thomas Doggett and Colley Cibber concerning the management of the theatre, 1710–11; ibid., LC7/2, Book of Contracts for the King's [sic] Theatre, 1706, 1714, ibid., LC7/3, which inter alia contains a number of unpublished letters from Vanbrugh to the Lord Chamberlain's Office concerning a tedious dispute over a stock of 'playhouse clothes', 1714; ibid., LC5/154–5 passim, Lord Chamberlain's theatrical licences; Westminster City Library, A. M. Broadley, Annals of the Haymarket, King's Theatre volume, miscellaneous items.

⁶ In 1723 Heidegger spent £1000 on 'beautifying and new painting by some of the best Masters'. His use of the adjoining houses for theatrical purposes is discussed below.

⁷ The ground on which these houses stood was never in the possession of the Vanbrugh family, and the fact that the site of the slightly larger theatre which Novosielski erected in 1790–1 stood on ground belonging to two different Crown lessees proved extremely troublesome.

²³ Colvin.

²⁴ An Apology for the Life of Mr. Colley Cibber, ed. R. W. Lowe, 1889, vol. i, pp. 315, 319.

²⁵ The Rehearsal of Observator, 5–12 May 1705.

²⁶ The Diary of John Hervey, First Earl of Bristol ... 1688 to 1742, 1894, p. 157.

³⁹ Robert Wilkinson, Londina Illustrata, 1825, vol. ii, p. 163, 163 n.

⁴⁰ Percy Fitzgerald, A New History of the English Stage, 1882, vol. i, p. 238 n.

⁴¹ P.R.O., LC5/154, p. 35.

⁴² Laurence Whistler, Sir John Vanbrugh, Architect and Dramatist, 1938, p. 107.

⁴³ P.R.O., C7/668/31.

⁴⁴ Ibid., LC5/154, pp. 299–300.

⁴⁵ The Complete Works of Sir John Fanbrugh, etc., vol. iv, p. 24.

⁴⁶ O. E. Deutsch, Handel, A Documentary Biography, 1955, p. 34.

⁴⁷ An Apology for the Life of Mr. Colley Cibber, etc., vol. ii, p. 108.

⁴⁸ D.N.B.
⁴⁹ Country Life, 2 Sept. 1949, pp. 672–5.

⁵⁰ P.R.O., LR1/282, ff. 32–3.

⁵¹ Ibid., LR1/282, ff. 190–1.

⁵² Whistler, op. cit., pp. 247–51.

⁵³ M.L.R. 1719/6/323.

⁵⁴ P.R.O., LR1/282, ff. 142–4.

⁵⁵ Ibid., LC7/3, minutes of the Royal Academy of Music.

⁵⁶ The Complete Works of Sir John Vanbrugh, etc., vol. iv, p. 123.

⁵⁷ An Apology for the Life of Mr. Colley Cibber, etc., vol. i, pp. 321–2.

⁵⁸ M.L.R. 1722/2/109.

⁵⁹ Soane Museum, Opera House plans, note on plan of 1790 in drawer 38, set 3. See also W.P.L., A. M. Broadley, Annals of the Haymarket, King's Theatre volume, p. 53, articles of agreement of I Sept. 1747 between J. J. Heidegger and Robert Arthur.