Harlequin in Waterford

Theatrical Activity in Waterford in the Eighteenth Century

Masters in Arts & Heritage Management 2009

 Harlequin in Waterford
Theatrical Activity in Waterford in the Eighteenth Century

Lynn Cahill

This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Degree of Masters in Arts & Heritage Management, Waterford Institute of
Technology, Waterford.

Research Supervisor: Dr. Úna Kealy Ph.D.

Submitted to Waterford Institute of Technology

August 2009

ii
iii
 ABSTRACT

This thesis documents the history of theatrical activity in Waterford in the eighteenth century,
taking in the two purpose-built theatres which were built in the city during the century, and
the touring theatre companies who performed there. Theatrical activity at a local level is also
examined, along with an analysis of audience behaviour during a period of political unrest.
The history of theatrical activity in Waterford in the eighteenth century is interwoven with the
history of theatrical activity in Dublin and London, and this thesis examines the major
theatrical themes which relate specifically to the research question ‘Harlequin in Waterford:
Theatrical Activity in Waterford in the Eighteenth Century’, including the phenomenon of
theatrical touring, the establishment of touring patterns and customs, and the dramatic works
which were staged in Waterford.

The primary sources of data for this thesis are contemporaneous newspapers which are
available to view on microfilm in libraries in Waterford, Kilkenny and Dublin. However,
there are periods of time throughout the eighteenth century for which this type of data is not
available, as it does not appear to have survived the passage of time. Thus, the thesis is an
account of theatrical activity in Waterford at junctures for which information is available.

The research design is a retrospective study of a cultural phenomenon, using qualitative data
to inform a descriptive account of the subject. A theory of cultural anthropology is the
philosophical perspective supporting the research. A significant discovery was made by the
researcher of a series of nineteenth century theatre play bills which are specific to Waterford
and which are held in an American collection. This find indications that there are potentially,
additional discoveries to be made, and the thesis concludes by recommending further
research into the nineteenth and twentieth century theatrical history of Waterford

Finally, a recommendation is made that theatre organisations in Ireland be encouraged to

archive material relating to their activities, in order to facilitate historical research in the
future. This initiative could be effectively achieved through the dissemination of archiving
guidelines through existing Irish theatre networks.
To my mother and father
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My thanks are due to:

Dr. Úna Kealy for her unrelenting support and belief, Donal Moore for his patience and good
humour in the face of endless questions, Erica Fay, Orla Scully, David Pollock M.I.A.I.,
Kenneth Wigham, Dr. Charles Benson, Christopher Fitz-Simon, Dr. John C. Greene, Micah
Hoggatt of the Houghton Library at Harvard University, Dr. Lionel Pilkington, Alistair
Lindsay, R.I.A.I. Conservation Architect; Eamonn McEneaney, Dr. Christopher Morash,
Donnchadh O’Callaghan, Dr. Hugh Maguire, Julian Walton, Ben Barnes, Joanne Rothwell,
the staff at the Dr. John Archer Library at the University of Regina in Canada, the staff of
Waterford City Library, Waterford City Archives, Kilkenny Library, the Irish Architectural
Archives, the Royal Irish Academy, the Early Printed Books Library at Trinity College, and
the National Library of Ireland.

I wish to thank my family for their love and support, and my work colleagues at Christ
Church Cathedral and the Theatre Royal for their patience.

A special word of thanks to my fellow students who walked the road with me, especially
Oren Little, Nollaig Healy and T.V. Honan.
I declare that this dissertation is wholly my own work, except where I have made explicit
reference to the work of others.

I have discussed, agreed and complied with whatever confidentiality or anonymity terms of
reference were deemed appropriate by those participating in the research.

________________________________
Lynn Cahill

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
no
Abstract i

Dedication ii

Acknowledgements ii

Ethical Declaration iv

Table of Contents v

List of Figures vi

Chapter One Introduction 1

Chapter Two Setting the Scene 5

Chapter Three Research Methodology 18

Chapter Four Two Waterford Theatres 24

Chapter Five Plays, Players and Audiences 31

Chapter Six Conclusion 40

References 43

Bibliography 45

Appendix 48

Word count of thesis: 15,461

Note on chapter formatting:

Following discussions with my thesis supervisor, Dr. Úna Kealy, it was agreed that the
standard chapter formatting which is outlined on page 28, 13.11 of the Research Policy
Procedures and Guideline appeared unsuitable for this thesis, as it is a descriptive study, and
would most likely benefit the reader by being presented in a narrative form, thereby allowing
the major themes and constituent parts of the research to be interwoven.

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1 Section of 1764 Richards and Scalés Map of Waterford City
which shows the location of the Playhouse at Blackfriars.

Figure 4.2 Outline of the Playhouse at Blackfriars.

Figure 4.3 Photograph of the north wall of Playhouse at Blackfriars, which

was discovered during archaeological excavations in July 2009.

Figure 4.4 Section of 1764 Richards and Scalés Map of Waterford City which
shows the site where the Theatre Royal was later built.

Figure 4.5 Drawing which corresponds comparatively to Waterford Town

Hall and Theatre Royal, artist unknown.

Figure 5.1 Drawing of the Fitzgerald Monument in Christ Church

Cathedral, artist unknown.
 Chapter One

INTRODUCTION

This thesis sets out to accurately document the history of theatrical activity in Waterford city
in the eighteenth century. For the most part, the history of Waterford is well represented,
particularly in relation to its Viking heritage and its later role as an important port city in
Ireland. However, the early theatrical history of the city thus far remains under-researched,
and the purpose of this thesis is to fill part of that gap in Waterford’s cultural and social
history. It is intended to provide a comprehensive representation of theatrical activity in
Waterford and to reveal its relationship with the theatrical scenes of Dublin and London at
that time. While it would appear that most of the theatrical productions staged in Waterford
had origins elsewhere, the title prefix Harlequin in Waterford, serves as an indication that
there were instances of theatrical activity in the eighteenth century which were specific to
Waterford.

The principal aim is to examine theatrical activity in Waterford, taking in the circumstances
surrounding the establishment of two theatres within the city, along with a study of the
pattern of theatrical touring to Waterford which emerged in the eighteenth century, and which
still exists in the present day. In the process, the thesis examines further elements which add
to the theatrical history of Waterford, such as various dramatic works staged in the city,
including a small number which appear to have been specifically written for Waterford
audiences. Other elements under consideration are the customs and behaviour of the touring
and strolling theatre companies who performed in Waterford, as well as an analysis of the
behaviour of Waterford audiences during a period of political unrest.

My contribution to knowledge will be to document the history of theatrical activity in

Waterford in the eighteenth century, and in the process, to record an important aspect of the
social and cultural history of Waterford.

The history of theatrical activity in Waterford city over the past three hundred years is
extensive; therefore, this thesis has confined its research to the eighteenth century, in order to
provide a thorough account of the subject. While there are records of theatrical activity taking
place elsewhere in the county of Waterford during the period under research, the time
allowed for completion of this thesis was deemed insufficient to complete a thorough
investigation and analysis of that activity, and it was therefore considered appropriate and
justifiable to limit the scope of the research to theatrical activity which took place in the city
of Waterford. For the purposes of clarity, the term ‘Waterford’ when used in this thesis will
refer to the city of Waterford.

The principal aim of this research paper is to provide an accurate account of theatrical
activity in Waterford in the eighteenth century, and in so doing, realise the following
objectives:
To identify the location of theatres within the city and the time period in which they were
built.
To ascertain how and when the Theatre Royal got its name.
To examine the behaviour and customs of touring theatre companies that performed in
Waterford.
To realise the level of local involvement in theatrical productions which were staged by
touring theatre companies.
To analyse a brief extract from an original dramatic work which premiered in Waterford.
To examine the working conditions of touring theatre performers.
To discuss evidence of audience behaviour in Waterford in the final decade of the century.

For the purposes of clarity, it is useful to define the applied terms within this thesis according
to their historical context:
Theatrical activity – refers to any action, occurrence or behaviour which relates to the
presentation of dramatic works.
Dramatic works – plays, musicals, operas, pantomimes, mainpieces, interludes, entr’actes and
prologues.
Theatre – refers to the performance of dramatic works.
Theatre – also refers to a physical structure in which dramatic works were staged.
Playhouse - is also used to identify a physical structure in which dramatic works were
staged.
Waterford – refers specifically to Waterford city and excludes Waterford county.
Eighteenth century – refers to the period from 1700 to 1799.
Players – eighteenth century term for actors, actresses, singers, dancers, performers and
entertainers.
Mainpiece – the main theatrical presentation of the evening.
Prologue - an introductory speech, often in verse, introducing the themes of the play.
Interlude – an entertainment provided at intervals between the acts of a play. Most commonly
musical, but also included miscellaneous entertainments, such as juggling, dancing, comedy
sketches and contortionist acts.
Entr’acte – a performance of music or dancing given during an interval between two
consecutive acts of a play.

The methodological framework for this thesis is that of a retrospective examination of a

cultural anthropological phenomenon, using qualitative data to formulate a descriptive study.
The research methods employed enable this thesis to be measured alongside the development
of theatrical activity in areas outside of Waterford, in order to provide an informed cultural
comparison.

The thesis is structured into six chapters, beginning with this chapter which acts as an
introduction to the research question, and outlines the aims and objectives of the thesis, along
with the terms of reference employed. The research methodology is briefly outlined, followed
by a breakdown of the subsequent chapters of the thesis.

Chapter two examines the relevant literature in the field and, in the process, creates a wider
context for the research question. The history of theatrical activity in Waterford in the
eighteenth century is inextricably linked with the history of theatrical activity in Dublin and
London, and the touring phenomenon which grew out of those theatrical scenes. The main
themes of this research were arrived at as a result of the review of relevant literature.
Chapter three presents the methodological framework for the thesis, including an outline of
the underlying theoretical perspective of cultural anthropology which informs the research
strategy. It also outlines the methods of research employed in the process, relative to the aims
and objectives of the thesis.

The initial part of the research findings are presented in Chapter four, with sufficient use of
source material, combined with discursive analysis encompassing the main themes examined
in chapter two. The earliest known reference to theatrical activity in Waterford is revealed, as
well as details of the opening night of the theatre which later became known as the Theatre
Royal, and which is still in operation two hundred and twenty five years later. The data
sources for the research in chapters four and five are newspapers which were printed in the
eighteenth century, and which are available to view on microfilm in libraries in Waterford,
Kilkenny and Dublin. It is important to note that page numbers are not available as part of the
referencing. This is due to the fact that the newspapers generally consisted of a single folded
sheet of paper, and does not appear to contain numbered pages at that time.

Chapter five considers the touring theatre companies that staged plays in Waterford, and
examines the level of local involvement in the staging of dramatic works. The chapter also
discusses several eyewitness accounts of audience behaviour, which reveal the political
tensions which existed in Waterford in the final decade of the eighteenth century.

This thesis is significant in that it contributes new knowledge to the understanding of an

aspect of the cultural and social history of Waterford. By beginning the process of examining
Waterford’s theatrical history, a foundation is laid for the next stage of research; that of the
history of theatrical activity in Waterford in the ensuing centuries, thereby providing an
opportunity to realise the complete theatrical legacy of Waterford.
 Chapter Two

SETTING THE SCENE

This chapter examines the existing research by historians of the theatrical scene in Ireland
and England in the eighteenth century, with a view to placing Waterford’s theatrical history
of that period into a wider context. The constituent parts of the research were selected
because all of the outlined elements contributed to the development of a theatrical scene in
Waterford in the eighteenth century. In order to gain an understanding of how the theatrical
scene developed in Waterford, it is necessary to examine the wider context of theatrical
activity in Ireland and England, and in particular, the phenomenon of touring theatre
companies, wherein lies a significant part of Waterford’s theatrical history in the eighteenth
century. Later chapters of this thesis reveal that the majority of theatrical activity which took
place in Waterford in the eighteenth century is likely to have originated elsewhere.

The theatrical links between London and Dublin, and by extension, the provinces of Ireland,
form the framework for this chapter, and the theatrical elements under examination relate
directly to the objectives identified in the research question and which are specific to
Waterford in Chapters four and five of this thesis. These elements include mapping the
emergence of purpose-built theatres, an examination of the culture of touring theatre
companies, notable plays, playwrights and players of the era, as well as an investigation into
theatre customs and audience behaviour.

The key authors in the field of research into Ireland’s theatrical history of the eighteenth
century are Dr. Christopher Morash, Christopher Fitz-Simon, Dr. John C. Greene, La
Tourette Stockwell and William Smith Clark; all of whom are authors of scholarly papers and
academic books on the subject. Their research work has been extensively examined in an
effort to better understand the scope of the field of research, and in order to present accurate
and relevant discussion.

The eighteenth century in Ireland is the period when theatre as a form of entertainment began
to take on a formal structure, with the building of purpose-built theatres, the emergence of
touring theatre companies, and the rise in popularity of performers and plays. Although the
theatre scene in Ireland, particularly in Dublin, was inextricably linked to London through
performers and playwrights, it is interesting to note that, according to Morash, the fact that
historians were already beginning to write accounts of Irish theatrical activity at the time,
most notably Robert Hitchcock’s An Historical View of the Irish Stage (1778) and Joseph
Cooper Walker’s An Historical Essay on the Irish Stage (1788), is a strong indication that
theatre in Ireland was already ‘an integral part of the Irish cultural landscape, not simply an
exiled annex of London’ (Morash, 2002, p. 75). Stockwell meanwhile, begins her study on
the history of Dublin theatres and theatre customs by stating that ‘the history of dramatic
representation in Ireland belongs to the history of the English in Ireland, and its progress has
been in a line which parallels the evolution of the theatre in England’ (Stockwell, 1968 p. xv).
She goes on to claim that the theatres of Dublin were planned and built following the manner
of theatres in London. Garlick asserts that ‘Dublin performers and Dublin society were intent
on emulating London in every way’ (2004, p.166). It is certainly the case that there were
strong theatrical links between London and Dublin, and by extension, the provinces of
Ireland. This is most evident in the movement of players and playwrights between Ireland
and England, and in the plays which were being staged.

London in the eighteenth century was the largest city in the English-speaking world. Theatre-
going was an enormously popular past-time in London, and the audience capacity of the
theatres which were built there throughout the century reflected that demand. Drury Lane
Theatre held over three thousand, six hundred people, Covent Garden Theatre held three
thousand, while the Sadler’s Wells Theatre had an audience capacity of two thousand, six
hundred (Holland and Patterson, 2004). By the middle of the eighteenth century, up to twelve
thousand people a week were going to the theatre in London, and it was considered to be an
important industry which provided a considerable source of employment:

Hundreds of theatre workers and their families depended on ticket sales to

support actors, dancers, singers, ticket collectors and property men: bill
stickers and accountants: guards, scenemen, scene-painters and machinists;
janitors of both genders; chief operating officers, prompters and treasurers
(Auburn, 2004, p. 150).
In England in the early part of the eighteenth century, the majority of the population lived
in villages or in rural areas, and the only large centres of population (approximately thirty
thousand) were London, Norwich and Bristol. As a result of this, the only purpose-built
theatres were in London, as the smaller towns were not considered large enough to provide
an adequate audience. (Lane, 2004). As well as the main theatres of Drury Lane and Covent
Garden, smaller theatres in London included the Haymarket, the Theatre Royal,
the Queens Theatre and Lincoln’s Inn Fields. However, by the mid to late eighteenth
century, England’s population began to shift towards towns and cities as a result of the
industrial revolution, and consequently, many new theatres began to appear in provincial
towns. The numbers and size of theatres outside of London increased at a prodigious rate, and
this growth was mirrored in Ireland (Holland and Patterson, 2004).

Prior to the eighteenth century, there are reports of theatrical activity taking place in Ireland
in the form of religious pageantry, such as annual Corpus Christi events which took place
in Dublin and Kilkenny; records of which can be found in the corporation minutes of both
cities. In the seventeenth century, Dublin was the centre of theatrical activity
in Ireland, with the earliest known theatre in Ireland erected on Werburgh Street circa 1635.
The location of the first theatre just yards from Dublin Castle on Werburgh Street is
noteworthy, as it indicates for whom the theatrical entertainment was intended; Dublin Castle
was the British administrative centre of Ireland and the English militia
and officials were based there. By 1662, a second formal theatre had opened in Dublin, a few
hundred yards north of Werburgh Street. This second theatre was known as the Smock Alley
Playhouse and was the first Theatre Royal in Dublin (Morash, 2002). At time of writing,
excavation works are underway at the site of the original Smock Alley Playhouse, and part of
the original walls and floors have been revealed, as well as artefacts including wine bottles
and a man’s hair curler (The Irish Times, 2009).

In the eighteenth century, the name Theatre Royal was commonly used by theatres which had
been granted a royal patent by the British Government to perform spoken dramas. The
granting of royal patents had begun in 1660 under King Charles II, and was later amended
when the Licensing Act was passed in 1737, which decreed that only theatres with a royal
patent could stage spoken plays (Garlick, 2002). The act also stipulated that theatres could
only obtain a royal patent by petitioning the British parliament, which was both costly and
time consuming. The introduction of the act created theatrical monopolies in London and
Dublin, and many theatres without royal patents were limited to staging only musicals and
light entertainments. Although the Licensing Act was enforced in Dublin, it is possible that
theatres elsewhere in Ireland operated without royal patents. In an email, Mr. C. Morash
surmised that:

Outside of Dublin, where the competition for a fashionable audience was

less intense, theatres simply opened, and no one bothered to prosecute them
because it would have been unpopular to do so, and it would have served no
purpose (C. Morash, pers. comm., 15 June 2009).

The questions of how and when the Theatre Royal in Waterford got its name and whether it
held a royal patent are discussed in Chapter four.

As early as 1720, theatre entertainment had become an important part of the social and
cultural life of Dublin city. Throughout the eighteenth century, several purpose-built theatres
opened in Dublin city. A theatre in Aungier Street opened in 1734 and shortly after that, the
Smock Alley Playhouse, which had originally been built in 1662, was demolished and
quickly rebuilt. Theatres opened on Rainsford Street in 1735, on Capel Street in 1745 and on
Crow Street in 1760, while an additional theatre opened on Fishamble Street in 1784 (Greene,
2000). The establishment of theatres in Dublin was important to the development of a
theatrical scene in Waterford, as it was from there that the theatrical touring phenomenon
began that would instigate the construction of theatres outside of Dublin.

Popular forms of entertainment in the eighteenth century across Ireland included spas,
circuses, taverns, pleasure gardens, bowling greens, concerts, dances and fireworks
(Donohue, 2004). Ireland in the eighteenth century was a country that was growing in wealth,
and as its towns and cities began to develop, the demand grew for theatrical entertainment,
with the result that theatres and playhouses began to be built in large population centres
outside of Dublin.
The first purpose-built theatre outside of Dublin was established in Cork, when the Theatre
Royal on Dunscomb’s Marsh was built in 1736. A purpose-built theatre was built in Limerick
in 1770, while in Belfast, the first formal theatre known as ‘The Mill Gate’ was erected in
1768 (Greene, 2000). A contemporary eyewitness account tells of a small theatre in Galway
existing in 1783 known as Kirwan’s Lane, although according to Fitz-Simon, there was
relatively little theatrical activity in Galway for a city of its size and importance. Fitz-Simon
suggests that this may serve as ‘a reminder that the Gaelic literary tradition, which lingered in
the west longer than elsewhere, was inimical to the drama’ (Fitz-Simon, 1983, p 76).
Kilkenny’s first formal theatre was not built until 1794 and up until then, the court house and
town hall were used to stage visiting theatre productions (Fitz-Simon, 1983). The exact year
that a theatre was first built in Waterford is not known. However, research indicates that
Waterford’s first purpose-built theatre may have been one of the earliest that was established
outside of Dublin, and this theory is examined further in Chapter four.

While dramatic entertainment before 1720 had been confined almost wholly to Dublin, the
phenomenon of theatrical touring almost certainly began in the 1730s and early 1740s,
coinciding with the establishment of theatres outside of Dublin. Morash observes that ‘the
geography of Irish theatre began to take form in the decade after 1735, when rival Dublin
companies travelled south and north respectively during the summer season’ (Morash, 2002,
p. 44). The annual summer circuits to the south encompassed Limerick, Cork, Kilkenny and
Waterford, with the northern touring circuit taking in Belfast, Derry and Newry. Morash
notes that ‘by 1741, a basic map of the geography of Irish theatrical activity had been traced...
[and]...it would last right up until the 1930s’ (Morash, 2002, p.45). The data concerning
touring companies that staged theatre productions in Waterford is discussed in Chapters four
and five of this thesis, with supporting evidence sourced from local contemporaneous
newspapers.

Theatrical touring by Dublin based theatre companies to Irish towns and cities outside of
Dublin often coincided with the week-long assizes, (civil and criminal trial sessions), which
were held in spring, summer or autumn, and the Dublin companies often toured specifically
to perform during the assizes (Clark, 1965). Theatrical touring grew out of a need to find a
larger audience, as the Dublin audience base was not large enough to support its existing
theatres; and in order to recoup the financial losses that they made in the winter season, the
theatre companies were required to tour their productions. Towards the latter half of the
eighteenth century, theatre touring in Ireland began to expand beyond the established routes
to take in smaller towns, including Antrim, Lisburn, Ennis, Wexford, Sligo, Athlone,
Castlebar, Clonmel, Tralee, Youghal, Bray and New Ross (Morash, 2002). Touring became a
way of life for the people involved in the Irish theatre scene in the eighteenth century, and
Greene stresses that the distinction must be made between strolling and touring theatre
companies:

Strolling companies were comprised of actors, usually of the second or third

rate (and often novices), who had little or no “regular” employment at major
theatres in Dublin or in Britain and who lived a peripatetic existence
between the medium-sized towns of Ireland, and the British provinces,
performing sporadically in whatever venues they could hire for a few nights
(Greene, 2000, p. 33).

Surviving playbills record that strolling companies usually numbered between twelve to
fifteen performers, and the ratio of men to women was in the region of three to one. The
strolling players were usually led by one person who would have some standing or reputation
in order to draw an audience, and the women travelling with the group were almost always
married and acted alongside their husbands (Greene, 2000).

Touring companies, on the other hand, were most often companies which were Dublin based
and attached to established theatres, such as the Smock Alley Playhouse. Greene defines
them thus:

In its purest form, the touring company is typified by the troupes that
Dublin-based managers...sent on an annual circuit to theatres that they
owned or leased in Cork, Waterford, Limerick, and elsewhere... In general,
touring companies were larger than strolling companies, comprising about
25 actors, or about one-half of the regular Dublin company (Greene, 2000,
pp. 33 & 34).

When in the south of Ireland, the touring companies typically spent most of their tour
schedule in the larger city of Cork, visiting Waterford and Limerick to coincide with calendar
events such as fair days and horse racing meetings, when the population of those locations
would increase. Actors based in England were often invited to Ireland to join the touring
companies during the summer months in order to attract an audience (Donohue, 2004). The
history of touring and strolling theatre companies in Ireland during the eighteenth century is
worthy of note, as much of the theatrical activity in Waterford at that time is as a result of
their visits to the city. It is interesting to note that the touring patterns which were established
in the eighteenth century are still in use in the present day, with theatre companies touring to
regional locations to coincide with annual festivals and events, such as the Cork Mid-Summer
Festival, Kilkenny Arts Festival and the Galway Arts Festival.

Fitz-Simon describes the typical life of an eighteenth century touring actor as being
extremely hard, with poor pay and conditions. A journey from Dublin to Belfast, for example,
which would have been a regular trip for an actor, took three days by post-chaise (carriage).
Fitz-Simon outlines how an actor of the time, Andrew Cherry (1762 – 1812), earned a total of
ten pence and a halfpenny in one year for his acting work. Cherry was a strolling player who
performed regularly in Waterford, and his early career was typical of that of an actor of his
time, earning very little, and travelling the country while moving from one company to
another:

When he was unable to pay for his lodgings in Athlone the landlady
impounded his wardrobe, including the few costumes which he wore on the
stage and which were, so to speak, the tools of his trade. A kindly local lady,
seeing him moping at an inn, lent him her husband’s cloak and allowed him
to sell on a bundle of hay (Fitz-Simon, 1983, p. 75).

Cherry went on to have a successful career as a comedian and he eventually moved to

London, where, by 1802, he was taking leading parts at Drury Lane Theatre (Fitz-Simon,
1983). He was a noted humorist, as can be seen from a note written by him to the manager of
a Dublin theatre, whom Cherry claimed had broken an agreement with him:

Sir, - I am not so great a fool as you take me for. I have been bitten once by
you, and I will never give you the opportunity of taking two bites of
A. Cherry (Croften Croker, 1839, p. 46).

Surviving evidence as to the employment arrangements between performers and managers in

the eighteenth century suggests that theatre managers generally engaged performers with
formal contracts which stipulated the duration of their engagement; the number
of performances per week, and the nightly or weekly salary. The contract would also specify
the number of benefit nights to which the actor was entitled, along with the approximate date
on which the benefit night would take place. A ‘benefit night’ meant that the actor would
receive the evening’s income from the ticket sales, minus operating expenses which were
retained by the manager. The hierarchy of benefit nights ranged from principal actors
receiving one or two benefits per season, secondary actors receiving a single benefit night,
and tertiary actors receiving one benefit night which would have to be shared with other
actors of the same status (Greene, 2000). However, performers who toured with strolling
companies did not have such formal arrangements, and they often simply received a share in
the ticket sales in lieu of a regular salary. Senior performers generally chose which role they
would play for their own benefit; often putting together the programme for the entire evening
in order to attract as large an audience as possible. The beneficiaries often attempted to pre-
sell tickets to their benefit nights, and it was customary for them to go about the town,
knocking on doors and requesting that people attend (Langhans, 2004). Surviving newspaper
advertisements for touring companies visiting Waterford in the eighteenth century reveal that
a majority of the performances were benefit nights for specified performers. This may have
been due to the fact that Waterford was one of the larger cities on the touring circuit, and it
could have been seen as an opportunity for performers to profit from a substantial audience
pool.

Prior to the 1730s, audiences paid most attention to the play or the playwright, but as the
century moved on; audiences began to go to the theatre in order to see favourite performers.
(Hume, 2004) The eighteenth century saw the rise of the actor and was when the public
began to follow the career of particular performers. The first use of the term ‘star’ is reported
to have been in relation to the London actor David Garrick (1717 – 1779), when he was
described by a critic in 1761 as a ‘bright luminary in the theatrical hemisphere...[which] soon
after became a star of the first magnitude and was called Garrick’ (Holland and Patterson,
2004, p. 261). In London, the star system quickly developed, and stalls and shops began
selling mezzotint (printed plate) engravings of famous actors, while newspapers and journals
of the day began to carry stories and anecdotes about popular performers. Fitz-Simon (1983)
notes that by the middle of the eighteenth century, many of Ireland’s finest actors had high
profiles in the British theatre scene, while Morash verifies that it was not unusual for English
actors to travel back and forth between Ireland and England; ‘Leading English actors could
always be lured to Ireland for a lucrative run in a favourite role’ (Morash, 2002, p. 51). One
of the most famous performers on the London scene in the latter part of the eighteenth
century was Mrs. Dorothea Jordan, who is reputed to have been born in Waterford circa
1761. The theatrical links between Mrs. Jordan and Waterford are examined in Chapter five.

According to Fitz-Simon (1983), the most outstanding theatrical personality in Ireland in the
mid-eighteenth century was Thomas Sheridan (1719 – 1788), who worked as an actor-
manager. The term actor-manager was used to describe a person who chose the plays which
were to be staged, performed leading roles, and managed the theatre company’s business
arrangements. Sheridan was successful in ending the custom which saw members of the
public sitting on the stage during performances, and which had been a common practice since
the Elizabethan times, when theatre goers (mostly young men) would sit on stage in order to
be seen by people in the audience. Sheridan’s ploy was to increase the ticket price of the on-
stage chairs so that the demand began to decrease, until the practice ceased altogether.
Sheridan also introduced the tradition of describing forthcoming entertainments on playbills,
and increasing the size of newspaper advertisements from small announcements to display-
advertisements (Fitz-Simon, 1983). Sheridan was clearly an influential figure on the Irish
theatrical scene, and it is likely that his initiatives in theatre customs were imitated in
Waterford.

Another important theatrical figure in eighteenth century Ireland was the actor-manager
Thomas Ryder, who was born in Dublin in 1735 to parents who were both performers. Ryder
spent many years acting at the Smock Alley Playhouse, and was a popular performer among
audiences. In 1765, Ryder assembled a group of strolling players and for approximately five
years, travelled around Ireland, taking in Kilkenny, Waterford, Sligo, Galway and Derry
(Greene, 2000) Ryder married an actress whom he had met at the Smock Alley Playhouse
and the couple form an important part of Waterford’s theatrical history, as surviving records
of their visits to the city reveal in Chapter five.

The population of Dublin in the 1730s is estimated to have been in the region of sixty-five
thousand people, and the audience base was mostly made up of individuals referred to as the
ascendancy, British officials and militia, students of Trinity College; and wealthy urban
merchants, with their respective servants filling the upper galleries (Stockwell, 1968). Hume
(2004) maintains that theatre’s auditorium arrangements established the hierarchy in the
audience, and that where members of the audience sat in the theatre was dictated by their
station and status in the social order. The gentry, including women, sat in the boxes and in the
pit on rows of cloth covered benches, while above them in the galleries, ‘those of the greatest
quality sat lowest, with the lower orders in the uppermost gallery’ (Morash, 2002, p. 14). The
audience had a tendency to wander in and out of all parts of the theatre, including backstage
and were ‘noisy, erratically attentive, and inclined to walk about, chat and eat’ (Hume, 2004,
p. 56). It was quite common for performers to be pelted with eggs or fruit in the middle of a
performance, and Garlick (2004) reports that in the Smock Alley Playhouse, stones and
apples were frequently thrown down into the pit and orchestra from the upper gallery.
Morash depicts going to the theatre in eighteenth century Dublin as follows:

Play-going...[was]...at the best of times, a noisy, boisterous, contact sport, a

public bear-pit in which servants, parliamentarians, butchers, Trinity
students, haberdashers and ‘ladies of quality’ debated art, sex politics and
fashion (Morash, 2002, p. 58).

A typical evening’s entertainment on offer to audiences on the Irish theatre touring circuit
consisted of a mainpiece, an afterpiece, and entr’acte or interlude entertainments. The
mainpiece of the evening was often drawn from a repertoire of tried and tested stock plays,
interspersed with new pieces which had recently been successful in the theatres of Dublin and
London (Greene, 2000). The afterpieces were generally one-act comic plays, particularly if
the mainpiece was sentimental or serious (Holland and Patterson, 2004). The entr’acte
entertainments which were inserted at intervals during the longer pieces, were generally short
musical interludes, and occasionally featured incidental entertainers, such as dancers, singers,
contortionists and jugglers, and a typical evening at the theatre in the eighteenth century
could last anything up to four or five hours (Auburn, 2004).

Tragic plays were common as mainpieces in the first half of the eighteenth century while in
the second half of the century, three-act comic operas became more popular as the mainpiece
of the evening. One and two-act afterpieces were extremely popular and were billed as farces,
ballad operas, burlettas and operettas. John Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera, Farquhar’s The
Beaux Stratagem and Colman’s The Jealous Wife were the most frequently performed
dramatic works in the theatres of London, Dublin and on the Irish touring circuit of the
eighteenth century (Greene, 2000). Sentimental comedies were also fashionable in the
eighteenth century, as the new middle-class audiences in Dublin and London ‘required
something less rarefied, less remote from ‘ordinary’ life’ (Fitz-Simon, 1983, p. 37). While
other literature of the time was beginning to explore age of enlightenment themes such as
social reform, human rights, political satire and geographical exploration in such works as
Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift and Voltaire’s Candide, theatre audiences on the other
hand appeared to have been satisfied with slight comedies which contained elaborate plots.
Although many new plays were written in the eighteenth century, Hume argues that they
‘lack depth, originality and literary quality, and were outdone by the previous century’s
writers, most notably William Shakespeare’ (Hume, 2004, p. 70). Moreover, he maintains
that theatre historians are faced with the fact that new plays in the eighteenth century were the
product of a theatre system which ‘emphasized the appeal of favourite actors and relied
heavily on stock repertory’ (Hume, 2002, p. 53). He concludes that the eighteenth century
was not a classic era of playwriting, with the notable exceptions of Richard Brinsley Sheridan
and Oliver Goldsmith, and that new plays were simply vehicles which were contrived for star
performers.

The plays of William Shakespeare (1564 – 1616) remained popular throughout the eighteenth
century, and were performed regularly on the stages of London, Dublin and throughout the
touring circuit of Ireland. Greene has compiled a comprehensive daily record of nearly seven
hundred theatrical performances that took place in Belfast from the earliest surviving record
in 1736, through to 1800, and his research reveals that the plays which were most performed
were Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet and Richard III (Greene, 2000).

The two rival Dublin theatres, Smock Alley Playhouse and Crow Street Theatre were
‘continually tripping over each other in an attempt to stage the latest London plays’ and yet
some of the most popular new work being staged in London during the latter half of the
eighteenth century was written by Irish playwrights, such as Isaac Bickerstaffe and Oliver
Goldsmith (Morash, 2002, p. 51). One of the most successful Irish people on the London
theatre scene toward the latter part of the century was Thomas Sheridan’s son, Richard
Brinsley Sheridan, who quickly came to prominence by writing three well-received plays in
1775 (The Rivals, The Duenna and St. Patrick’s Day), and by taking over the management of
Drury Lane Theatre in 1776 (Morash, 2002). According to Fitz-Simon:

Richard Brinsley Sheridan is considered to be one of the two greatest

writers of comedy in the English language in the latter half of the
eighteenth century, with the other writer being Oliver Goldsmith (1983, p.
59).

Fitz-Simon postulates that if it were not for the domination of Goldsmith and Brinsley
Sheridan, John O’Keefe (1747 - 1833) may well be remembered as the leading Irish
playwright of the eighteenth century, writing over two dozen comedies and farces, and up to
fifty comic operas, pantomimes and interludes, the majority of which are no longer extant. In
1780, O’Keefe staged a play at the Theatre Royal in Cork entitled Tony Lumpkin’s Ramble
Thro’ Cork, which promised audiences local views of The Mall and Sunday’s Well, most
likely achieved through the use of painted scenery. O’Keefe’s character of ‘Tony Lumpkin’
was a direct use of Goldsmith’s character of the same name from his highly successful play
She Stoops to Conquer. However, the borrowing of another writer’s work may not have been
uncommon at the time, as Fitz-Simon suggests that Goldsmith himself may have borrowed a
plot line from Bickerstaffe’s play Love in a Village for his She Stoops to Conquer. O’Keefe’s
Tony Lumpkin’s Ramble was later performed in Dublin and London, and his plays were
regularly reworked to include references which were relevant to whichever location his
company was performing in; with on-stage scenery painted to reflect
well known and picturesque views (Fitz-Simon, 1983). Given its popularity,
it is possible that Tony Lumpkin’s Ramble was adapted to, and performed in Waterford at
some stage, although there is no known surviving evidence of this. The only eighteenth
century plays which are regularly revived today are Gay’s The Beggar’s Opera,
Goldsmith’s She Stoops to Conquer and Brinsley Sheridan’s The Rivals and The School for
Scandal (Auburn, 2004). At time of writing, a production of Sheridan’s The Rivals
is playing nightly at the Abbey Theatre in Dublin, and a review of the current production
notes that the play ‘is still in thrall to the intricate verbal comedy of two centuries ago
(Crawley, P. (2009) ‘Reviews’ [online], The Irish Times, Dublin. Available from
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2009/0730/1224251654154.html
[Accessed: 1st August 2009].
The eighteenth century witnessed the emergence of a vibrant theatrical industry, with
purpose-built theatres supporting a theatrical touring scene, and a growing culture of theatre-
going in towns and cities in Ireland and England. While theatrical customs were being
established and defined, a style of theatre evolved which placed an emphasis on pleasing the
audience, and suiting plays to star performers, with stock themes and repertoires. Although
the theatrical legacy of the eighteenth century may not be found in playwriting, and relatively
few plays have withstood the test of time (with some notable exceptions as previously
mentioned), perhaps the theatrical legacy of the eighteenth century lies in the establishment
of a formal theatre industry, with the development of practices such as public relations and
marketing methods which were designed to attract an audience, many of which are continued
to this day. The eighteenth century saw patterns of audience behaviour emerge, including the
custom of following a favourite actor, a tradition which has carried on into the present day.
Most notably, the eighteenth century firmly established the tradition of theatre-going as an
integral part of the cultural and social way of life among the middle and upper classes.

There are many options of live entertainment for audiences in the twenty first century,
including going to the cinema, festivals and concerts; and audiences now have many
alternatives to going to the theatre. Theatre audiences have declined in recent years, and the
most recent statistics published by the Arts Council of Ireland report a seven per cent decline
in theatre attendance between 1994 and 2006, while cinema attendance is greater than theatre
attendance by twenty seven per cent (The Public and the Arts, 2006). However, while it is
true to say that theatre-going is not as popular as it was in the eighteenth century; the Irish
theatrical scene over the past one hundred and twenty years has thrived through the Irish
literary revival, and through the establishment of a national theatre in 1904. Many Irish
theatre practitioners have enjoyed international acclaim, including Oscar Wilde, Sean
O’Casey, Brian Friel, Frank McGuinness, Martin McDonagh, Garry Hynes, as well as
Waterford actress Anna Manahan, who received a Tony Award for her performance in
McDonagh’s The Beauty Queen of Leenane in New York in 1998.
 Chapter Three

Research Methodology

The primary purpose of this thesis is to provide accurate and useful information and analysis,
while its secondary purpose is to identify and recommend areas within the subject matter
which require further research. This chapter discusses the selection process behind the chosen
research design, and the methods of research which were employed, relative to the aims and
objectives of the research. The theory of cultural anthropology, which is the philosophical
perspective supporting this thesis is briefly outlined, and its relevance to the research is
considered.

The philosophy underpinning this research is one of cultural anthropology, which is an area
of theory concerned with understanding the emergence and development of human culture
and society, drawing on areas such as archaeology, ethnology and language, among others.
This theory is relevant to the line of research undertaken, as the thesis relates specifically to a
recognised socio cultural phenomenon which emerged in Ireland during the eighteenth
century; that of the development of a theatrical scene, which in its turn was informed by
matters of social class and issues of political concern.

The research design for this thesis is a retrospective descriptive study of a cultural
phenomenon, observing the emergence of social and cultural customs and behaviour. The
study is primarily based on secondary data available from a defined period of time, and
relevant to the specified geographical location. The principal source of data is from
newspapers and books which were written and printed in the eighteenth century, and which
can yield a substantive amount of information on the subject matter. The newspapers
accessed for this thesis were printed in Waterford, Dublin, Clonmel and Kilkenny and are
available on microfilm in Waterford Library and in the National Library of Ireland in Dublin.
The rationale for this research method is that the theatre companies that toured to Waterford
in the eighteenth century advertised their plays in order to attract audiences. The
advertisements generally contained details such as play titles, performance dates, the names
of the performers, as well as other relevant information which is discussed in Chapters four
and five of this thesis. Newspapers also occasionally carried reviews and extracts of dramatic
works which contribute richly to the understanding of attitudes and behaviour at the time.
This data is analysed to provide an accurate representation of theatrical activity in Waterford,
while further informing as to the style and content of dramatic works being staged in that
period. The official record books of Waterford Corporation which date back to the mid
seventeenth century were also thoroughly searched in an effort to find relevant data. These
research methods directly informed the specific aims and objectives which are outlined in
Chapter one.

The content of the thesis is presented in a descriptive format, which was selected as the most
appropriate method for a historic themed thesis that is revealing events which took place over
two centuries ago. The descriptive method facilities the chronicling of an aspect of
Waterford’s history, which is of theoretical, cultural and social significance.

The function of the selected research design is to realise the stated aims and objectives of the
thesis in examining the elements which constitute the history of theatrical activity in
Waterford in the eighteenth century, and the research methods were chosen in order to
provide an accurate and informed account of this cultural phenomenon. The thesis measures
its findings alongside the development of theatrical activity in London, Dublin and other
regional cities in Ireland in the eighteenth century, with a view to providing a cultural
comparison of the development of theatrical activity in Waterford at the same time.

One of the limitations exposed within the research design is the fact that gaps exist in the
information available, with the result that the thesis findings are incomplete. This is due to
the fact that the thesis is a work of historical research which is reliant on source material
which has survived the passage of time, and unfortunately, much of the data concerning
theatrical activity in Waterford in the eighteenth century is no longer extant, or is as yet
undiscovered. In the time permitted, every endeavour has been made to uncover the data
which has survived, including a thorough search of the record books of Waterford
Corporation, as well as searches of national and international theatre collections. Extensive
research was undertaken utilising electronic on-line resource facilities, taking in the Royal
Irish Academy, the National Library of Ireland, the Society for Theatre Research in London,
the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, the University of Kent at Canterbury, Yale
University, the British Library, the Folger Library in Washington, Harvard University,
Princeton University, Trinity College Dublin, the Princess Grace Irish Library of Monaco and
the University of Regina in Canada. A significant discovery was made through contact with
Harvard University, revealing that the University’s Houghton Library is in possession of a
series of original nineteenth century playbills which are specific to productions which were
staged in Waterford. The library is also in possession of an original script of a play which was
performed in the Theatre Royal in Waterford in 1825. While the playbills and the script are
outside the timeframe of this thesis, they are important documents in Waterford’s theatrical
history, and copies have been obtained which will add to any further research of the subject.
The discovery of these playbills is further discussed in the concluding chapter of this thesis.
Research was also undertaken online at the National Archives Department at the Office of
Public Sector Information in England, to ascertain whether the Theatre Royal in Waterford
had ever been granted a royal patent.

One concern arising from the research method is that the data collected from newspapers of
the day are in the form of advertisements, promoting an event that has yet to take place.
Therefore, it cannot be verified conclusively that the event did indeed take place. It could, for
example, have been cancelled due to bad weather, as can be seen in Chapter five, page
twenty. However, the information informing the original advertisements remains valid, as the
findings are based on evidence confirming the existence of the theatre, the presence of the
theatre company, and the intention to stage a play. A further concern is that samples of data
taken from newspapers in the form of reviews may have issues of personal bias. However,
they are firsthand eyewitness accounts of the subject matter and are therefore a rich source of
information and provide relevant insights into attitudes and behaviour at that time.

This thesis was originally intended as a study of the early history of Waterford’s Theatre
Royal which opened in 1784. At time of writing, the theatre is undergoing major restoration
work and is scheduled to reopen on 1 October 2009, and it therefore appeared timely to
research the theatre’s early history and consider its position in the wider context of Ireland’s
theatrical history. However, early investigation revealed that early Theatre Royal archives
may not be extant, and much of the theatre’s early history may have been lost or destroyed
over the past two centuries through lack of formal archiving. The lack of archiving by theatre
organisations over the centuries is a common problem facing researchers of Irish theatrical
history. This knowledge led to a decision to expand the research question to examine the
phenomenon of ‘Public and Private Theatre in Waterford and Kilkenny 1780 - 1880’, taking
in the instances of private theatrical performances among the ascendancy in their country
homes known as ‘Big Houses’; alongside the history of popular theatre taking place within
public theatre buildings. However the scope of this research was deemed beyond the time
limitations of this research, thus the question was rephrased to cover the history of ‘Theatre in
Waterford from 1770 to 1880’. The decision to encompass the specified time period was
reached by virtue of the fact that 1770 was believed to be the earliest reference to theatrical
activity in Waterford, and the Theatre Royal was remodelled into its current form in 1876,
thereby covering a time period of approximately one hundred and ten years. However,
subsequent research undertaken at Trinity College revealed that the earliest record of
theatrical activity in Waterford predated the Theatre Royal by at least fifty years, pushing
back the original date to 1737. It therefore appeared both logical and appropriate to document
the history of theatrical activity in Waterford beginning with the earliest known record; thus
the research question was refined to its final incarnation ‘Harlequin in Waterford: Theatrical
Activity in Waterford in the Eighteenth Century’.

The prefix, Harlequin in Waterford, is the title of a play which was staged in Waterford in
1767, and serves as an indicator that an element of the theatrical activity which took place in
Waterford in the eighteenth century was specific to Waterford and its audience, and therefore
plays a significant part in realising the theatrical heritage of the city.

As previously outlined, research undertaken for this thesis suggests that information relating
to theatre and performance history in Waterford prior to 1737 is not extant. In contrast,
information pertinent to the nineteenth century is considerable and, as such, requires
extensive examination and analysis which is beyond the limitations of this thesis. Therefore,
the research for this thesis concludes at the turn of the eighteenth century.
Research work began with a collection and study of literature relevant to the topic. Several
notable historians of eighteenth century Irish theatre were consulted by telephone and email
throughout the research process: Dr. Christopher Morash, Christopher Fitz-Simon and Dr.
John C. Greene. This level of personal communication was instrumental in further
progressing the thesis, helping to define and clarify issues which arose in the course of the
research. Similarly, consultations with archaeologist Orla Scully and conservation architect
Alistair Lindsay, who were both engaged in an excavation dig at the Theatre Royal in the
summer of 2009, provided information regarding the architectural design of the Theatre
Royal. However, the majority of the architectural information was relevant to the nineteenth
century remodelling of the theatre which took place in 1876, and was therefore outside the
parameters of this thesis. It is hoped that at some point in the future, the complete history of
the Theatre Royal will be documented, and that the various sources of information from
across the centuries can be brought together.

By coincidence, excavation work was also undertaken in the summer of 2009 at the site of
the Playhouse which appears on the 1764 Richards and Scalés map of Waterford city. During
the course of the excavation, a surviving wall of the Playhouse was revealed. This is a
momentous discovery in the theatrical history of Waterford, and its significance is discussed
in Chapter four of this thesis.

A further challenge facing the research is the matter of the time available to complete this
thesis, and the research question was refined in order to take that issue into account. In the
course of researching this paper, it became evident that in order to create a comprehensive
and detailed study of the history of theatre in Waterford beyond the eighteenth century,
additional research is required, particularly in the area of public and private theatre
collections in universities and libraries in Ireland and further afield. Although this level of
research is beyond the time limit allowed for this thesis, it holds rich potential for future
research.

In summary, this chapter has discussed the decision to produce a retrospective descriptive
historical study and has outlined in detail the sources and methods surrounding data
collection undertaken in order to support the research design. The theory of cultural
anthropology was discussed as the most appropriate philosophy underpinning the thesis in its
effort to represent an aspect of Waterford’s social and cultural history. The framework of
research methods supporting the research design was outlined, and its strengths, weaknesses
and limitations have been taken into account. The process of how the final terms of the
research problem were reached was described, and the relevance of the prefix to the title was
clarified.
 Chapter Four

Two Waterford Theatres

This chapter initially deals with evidence that confirms the existence of theatrical activity in
Waterford in the eighteenth century, and goes on to detail the chronology and location of
theatres within the city. The history surrounding the two theatres in Waterford city which are
known to have been in existence in the eighteenth century are outlined; the earlier Playhouse
at Blackfriars that is featured on the 1764 Richards and Scalés map of Waterford city, and
which was superseded by a later theatre housed within the civic offices on The Mall, and
which became known as the Theatre Royal. Details of the opening night of the latter theatre
are revealed, along with an account of a famous opera singer’s experience in Waterford.
Finally, a theory as to how and when the Theatre Royal in Waterford got its name is
proposed.

The earliest known reference to theatrical activity in Waterford is recorded in the Dublin
News Letter of 25 June 1737 when it is announced that the Smock Alley players,
accompanied by three guest performers from London, were ‘in a short time to set out for
Waterford and to open there with The Committee; or, The Faithful Irishman, a political
comedy written by the English playwright Sir Robert Howard (1626 - 1698) (Clark, 1965). It
is probable that Waterford’s first purpose-built theatre was erected sometime in the mid
1730s, at approximately the same time as a new theatre was built at Dunscomb’s Marsh in
Cork city, in the summer of 1736. Clark (1965) claims that the theatre in Waterford was
financed and owned by the estate of the Dublin theatre manager Thomas Elrington, whose
brother subsequently sold on the titles for both the Cork and Waterford theatres in August
1741. It is therefore likely that the first known reference to theatrical activity in Waterford
took place at the Playhouse at Blackfriars in 1737.

It is most likely that the site of the first purpose-built theatre in Waterford was in an area of
Waterford city known as Blackfriars, on the west side of Conduit Lane, adjacent to the
Dominican Friary (see Figure 4.1). In recent years, the site has been home to a Penny’s
department store, and at time of writing, the building has been recently demolished.
Excavation work undertaken at the site in the summer of 2009 may add weight to the mid-
1730s construction date of the playhouse at Blackfriars, as the archaeologist on site, Mr.
David Pollock, discovered a north wall dating back to the early eighteenth century, which he
claimed in a telephone call was most likely part of the Playhouse marked on the 1764
Richards and Scalés map of Waterford city (see Figure 4.2). This conclusion was reached by
the location and fabric of the wall, as well as the brick edging on a surviving single timber
window which was consistent with an early eighteenth century building (see Figure 4.3). Mr.
Pollock also noted in the telephone call, that the unusual construction (the only window was
towards the top of the wall), would suggest that it was part of a purpose- built theatre. (D.
Pollock, pers. comm., 15 July 2009). The exact year that a theatre was first built in Waterford
is not known. However, research indicates that the first theatre in Waterford may have been
one of the earliest that was established outside of Dublin, and it almost certainly predates
theatres in Limerick, Galway, Kilkenny and Belfast. It seems most likely that Waterford’s
first theatre was built in the 1730s, which offers insight as to the life style in the city in the
early eighteenth century. Clearly, there was a demand for theatrical entertainment from some
sections of Waterford society, and the establishment of a purpose-built theatre would have
enabled touring theatre companies to regularly visit Waterford and continue to cultivate a
theatre-going audience.

There is little known evidence about the interior of the Playhouse at Blackfriars, and no
extant newspaper advertisements mention the presence of a stage, pit or boxes for the
audience. However there is a reference to the existence of a gallery in an advertisement for a
performance of a play entitled The Conscious Lovers by Richard Steele, when ‘the two first
rows of the Gallery will be railed in for the Friendly Brothers’ (Waterford Chronicle 17 – 20
September 1771). The Waterford City Archivist indicated in a telephone conversation that
the ‘Friendly Brothers’ were most likely a fraternal guild: an association made up of people
with shared skills and trades which were common in Ireland in the eighteenth century. (D.
Moore, pers. comm., 18 August 2009). The reference to the existence of a gallery adds
weight to the conclusion that the Playhouse at Blackfriars was a purpose-built theatre.
There are two references to theatrical activity in Waterford in the 1740s. Stockwell notes a
newspaper advertisement ‘To be sold. The Play-Houses of Corke and Waterford’ (Finn’s
Dublin Journal, 22 – 24 December 1741, cited by Stockwell, 1968). While later that same
decade, in a travel diary entitled A Tour through Ireland in Several Entertaining Letters, the
author describes the theatre in Waterford as:

...a neat theatre, which I was surprised to see Scenes so elegantly painted.
This, like that of Cork, belongs to the King’s company of Dublin; but there
were no plays exhibited while we were here’. [sic]. (Chetwood, 1748, p.
160).

The ‘King’s company’ referred to by Chetwood most likely refers to a company of players
from the Smock Alley Playhouse in Dublin which held a royal patent at that time and was
referred to as the Theatre Royal in newspapers of the day (Stockwell, 1968). Smock Alley
Playhouse held the only existing patent in Dublin in the 1740s (C. Fitz-Simon, pers. comm., 6
August 2009).

Very little information survives regarding theatrical performances in Waterford in the mid-
eighteenth century and is not known at what point the Playhouse at Blackfriars ceased
operation, although given the fact that a new theatre opened nearby in 1784, it is possible that
the older theatre simply closed down, as it is unlikely that the Waterford audience base was
sufficient to support two theatres. However, it is very probably that touring and strolling
theatre companies regularly visited Waterford throughout the period for which data has not
survived. It may be possible to go some way towards reconstructing theatrical activity in
Waterford throughout that period by examining surviving records from other cities, especially
Cork, Limerick and Kilkenny. However, the limitations of this thesis did not permit such
extensive research.

Towards the second half of the eighteenth century, fuelled by a thriving import and export
industry aided by the location of the port, Waterford began to prosper. The city entered into a
period of development and renewal, the results of which may still be seen in landmark
buildings such as the City and County Infirmary (1785), the Anglican Christ Church
Cathedral (1779) and the Roman Catholic Cathedral of the Most Holy Trinity (1793). The
‘Age of Enlightenment’1 dawned in Waterford, and the city council sought ways to improve
the quality of life for its inhabitants, with such initiatives as the development of The Mall as a
recreational area, the erection of a new bridge across the River Suir, and the construction of
civic offices, containing assembly rooms and, significantly, a new theatre. The Waterford
Corporation Minute Book records that on the 18 May 1784, the city council ‘Resolved that
the sum of £200 be granted by the Corporation for the purpose of carrying on the building of
the new Play House and Assembly Rooms and that the Mayor be empowered to sign an
Order for the same’. This record would suggest that building work on the new theatre was
already well under way and that the project may have run over budget, requiring financial
support from the corporation in order to be completed, as it was a mere two months later that
the new theatre held its opening performance. There are no known surviving architectural
plans of the stated ‘Play House and Assembly Rooms’, although John Roberts has been
identified as the architect who designed the civic offices on The Mall within which the new
theatre was housed (see Figure 4.4). In 2004, the Irish Architectural Archive published an
unidentified drawing which it states corresponds comparatively with the original interior
design of the building (An Introduction to the Architectural Heritage of County Waterford,
2004, p. 30) (see Figure 4.5).

The new theatre opened on the evening of Monday 26 July 1784 with a speech by the actor-
manager John Vandermere, who had earlier that year announced in The Leinster Journal that
he was to be the manager of the new theatre in Waterford. The main play of the evening was
Shakespeare’s popular five-act comedy As You Like It. However, it is unlikely that the play
was performed in its entirety, as a full production would have taken several hours, and was
just one of several entertainments scheduled for the evening. It is probable that an abridged
version was presented, featuring highlights such as the popular monologue beginning ‘All the
world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players’ (Act II, Scene VII). As You Like
It was followed by a presentation of Arthur Murphy’s popular two-act farce The Citizen,
which was first produced in London’s Drury Lane Theatre in 1761. Special orchestral
numbers with Charles Clagget of Dublin as conductor were promised, while top of the bill
was the famous opera singer from England, the soprano Mrs Billington, who had made her
Irish debut in Dublin several months beforehand to great acclaim (Clark, 1965).

1
For more on the Age of Enlightenment, see The Rise of the Public in Enlightenment
Europe by J. Melton. Cambridge University Press, 2001
Vandermere’s opening night reveals his ambitions for the new theatre. Starting the evening’s
proceedings with a Shakespeare play signalled that he intended the theatre to be a venue for
the classics. Following that with a popular London comedy indicated that the theatre would
also be a place for popular contemporary plays, while the presence of Charles Clagget with
an orchestra, along with an opera star from England suggests that Vandermere was going to
great lengths to impress his audience. Vandermere continued to manage the new theatre for
just two seasons, up to his death in February 1786 (Clark, 1965).

A newspaper account of the opening night of the new theatre in Waterford was reported in
Belfast, and described ‘the superb theatre...[which was]...built by the inhabitants’ (The
Belfast Mercury, 6 August 1784, cited by Clark, 1965, p. 154). The fact that the opening of
the theatre was reported in a newspaper several hundred miles away indicates the national
significance of the event, suggesting that journalists from around the country may have been
invited to attend the opening night.

Mrs. Billington performed for a number of nights in Waterford subsequent to the opening of
the new theatre, and the following incident was reported in a controversial biography
published about her in 1792:

In Waterford all was apparently peace and regularity, until her second
benefit night, which not being an overflowing house, though nearly
so, induced Mrs. B. to break out into the most scurrilous and abusive
invectives, against the truly respectable inhabitants of that city; which
she continued to do during the ensuing day, particularly at the music
shop on the quay, to the astonishment of all who heard her, as such
oaths and imprecations were uttered, as to induce her auditors to
imagine themselves addressed by a Billinsgate, (instead of a
Billington) or common street walker (Ridgway, 1792, p. 22).

Billingsgate is a slang word for anything that is coarse or vulgar, and it derives from the
Billingsgate Fishmarket in London circa 1645. That the new theatre in Waterford was already
struggling to achieve a full house, even with a star attraction from London, may be an
indication of the limited size of the theatre-going audience in Waterford city and its environs.
It is impossible to know for certain the seating capacity of the theatre in 1784 as there are no
surviving interior plans extant, however, the architect responsible for the 2009 restoration
work on the Theatre Royal, surmised in conversation that, given that the theatre was
remodelled on the same ground area in 1876 to a capacity of 670, it is likely that the original
theatre held approximately the same amount of seats (K. Wigham, pers. comm., 18 August
2009).

A newspaper advertisement for a performance of The Grecian Daughter at the Theatre Royal
announces tickets prices as ‘Boxes 3s 3d, - Pit 2s 2d – Gallery, 1s 1d’ (The Waterford Herald,
23 August 1792). This proves conclusively that the newly built theatre contained auditorium
arrangements similar to theatres in London and Dublin, with similar price structuring, i.e. the
more expensive seats in the house were in the boxes and the pit, with cheaper seats up in the
gallery.

The facts surrounding how and when the Theatre Royal in Waterford got its name remains in
question. It is likely that outside of Dublin, theatres simply adopted the name without being
in possession of a royal patent (C. Morash, pers. comm., 15 June 2009). Conversely, Mr. C.
Fitz-Simon argued in a telephone conversation that because the new theatre was housed
within civic offices, it was likely that the officials of the day would have been keen to legally
apply to the British authorities for a royal patent (C. Fitz-Simon, pers. comm., 12 June 2009)
However, there is no known evidence of a royal patent ever having been issued to the Theatre
Royal in Waterford. One possible theory could be that it occurred circa 1786, when the
holder of the royal patent in Dublin, Richard Daly, took on the lease of the Waterford theatre
for four years. Daly’s Theatre Royal company performed regularly in Waterford throughout
the four years with a range of popular pieces including The Beggar’s Opera, The Constant
Couple, The Beaux Stratagem and The School for Scandal, as well as Shakespeare’s Romeo
and Juliet and Othello (Clark, 1965). It is likely that Daly advertised plays in Waterford
under the banner of his ‘Theatre Royal’ company, and the theatre may have simply assumed
the title during this period through common usage. There is no known evidence to suggest
that the theatre had any other name prior to assuming the title of Theatre Royal.

Waterford was regarded as an important city in Ireland in the eighteenth century, second only
to the capital city of Dublin. Testament to that status is the construction of two purpose-built
theatres during the eighteenth century; the Playhouse at Blackfriars which was built sometime
in the 1730s and which was in line with the development of the theatrical scene in Dublin;
and the 1784 Theatre Royal, which was considered important enough to be housed within
new civic offices.

The construction of the two theatres demonstrates that public demand existed in Waterford
for theatrical entertainment, and that theatre-going played an important part in the social and
cultural development of the city throughout the eighteenth century.

Chapter Five

Plays, Players and Audiences

The history of theatre in Waterford in the eighteenth century is interwoven with the history of
the theatrical touring and strolling companies who visited the city. This chapter presents an
account of some of these companies when they were in Waterford, and highlights instances
of theatrical involvement at a local level. While the overall majority of theatrical productions
staged in Waterford were stock plays which had originated elsewhere, a small amount of
evidence remains of a dramatic work which was written by an individual who was living in
Waterford toward the end of the century, and which was performed by the one of the strolling
companies. Towards the end of this chapter, a short extract from the locally written text is
placed in context, in so far as is possible, with regard to the prevailing socio-political climate
in Waterford in the latter part of the eighteenth century. Finally, eyewitness accounts of
disturbances among Waterford audiences in the final decade of the century are discussed in
the context of growing national political unrest, and the subsequent rebellion of 1798.

Between 1765 and 1773, the actor-manager Thomas Ryder headed a company of strollers that
visited Waterford on a regular basis, and in one instance, he is recorded as bringing the
company to the Playhouse at Blackfriars in Waterford for three weeks in 1767. Ryder
advertised a new pantomime entitled Harlequin in Waterford; or, The Dutchman Outwitted,
announcing that he had spent forty pounds on the scenery, which depicted scenes of Tramore
and Waterford Quay. The pantomime was almost certainly written by the Irish playwright
and actor John O’Keefe, who was a friend of Ryder’s, and the following year in 1768,
O’Keefe and Ryder acted together in a theatre in Derry in a pantomime entitled Harlequin in
Derry, or, The Dutchman Outwitted. There are no known records of a version of the piece
being performed elsewhere in Ireland or England (outside of Waterford and Derry), and the
script does not appear to have survived (Clark, 1965). The staging of Harlequin in Waterford
is significant in Waterford’s theatrical history, as it indicates that the piece was written
specifically for Waterford audiences. The fact that Ryder and O’Keefe located the piece in
Waterford and provided scenery which depicted well known local landmarks would appear to
suggest that they were attempting to root the piece in its current location, thereby providing
Waterford audiences with theatre beyond the usual stock second hand plays from London and
Dublin.
Also at the Playhouse at Blackfriars in November 1767, Ryder presented the premiere of a
new play entitled Love and Despair, ‘a tragedy written by an unnamed Waterford gentleman’
(Leinster Journal, 21 November 1767, cited by Clark, 1965). The author of the play is not
recorded, nor is any subsequent performance outside of Waterford (Clark, 1965). Ryder’s
strolling company was clearly prepared to engage with the theatre-going public in Waterford.
He displayed a willingness to involve people at a local level, both by setting plays in
Waterford, as can been seen with Harlequin in Waterford, and by mounting a production of a
play written by the ‘Waterford gentleman’. It is evident that Ryder worked at establishing
theatrical relationships in the city, most likely with a view to cultivating an audience and
boosting ticket sales.

Dorothea Jordan, who was reputed to have been born in Waterford circa 1761, became a
famous actress on the London theatre scene in the eighteenth century, and later became the
mistress and long-time companion of the future King William IV of England, with whom she
bore ten children. During the course of research for this thesis, a reference was discovered to
her performing a small part in a Thomas Ryder production of Shakespeare’s As You Like It,
before she left Waterford in 1774 to go and work at the Theatre Royal in Cork (Boaden,
1831). While the exact date and location within Waterford of Ryder’s production of As You
Like It are not specified, his theatre company were frequent visitors to the Playhouse at
Blackfriars throughout Dorothea Jordan’s early years in Waterford, and it is therefore
possible that the famous Mrs. Jordan made her stage debut at the Playhouse in Blackfriars
sometime before 1774.

In October of 1771, Ryder’s company announced a benefit night in aid of Mrs Ryder. The
advertisement concluded thus:

The whole to conclude with the Ramble through Dublin, containing a visit
to Stephen’s Green, the College green, Music Hall in Fishamble Street; a
Lick at Modern O’Economy, with an Address to the Ladies and Gentlemen
of Waterford, written and to be sung by Mr. RYDER. Tickets to be had of
Mrs RYDER, at Capt Byrne’s, on the Quay: Mrs Crawley, Peter Street, and
the Printers hereof. N.B. The reason of putting the above off till this
evening, was on account of the bad weather yesterday (Waterford
Chronicle, 25 – 29 October 1771).
This newspaper advertisement indicates how precarious the theatre business was that ticket
sales would have been adversely affected by bad weather, and companies clearly had to be
flexible in their reaction to difficult circumstances. The evening in question was advertised as
a benefit night for Ryder’s wife, and may have been an important source of income for the
couple. The evening’s programme demonstrates yet again Ryder’s commitment to engaging
with the local audience, writing and performing material specific to Waterford, and it also
reveals something of the content that a Waterford audience was accustomed to, with ‘a Lick
at Modern O’Economy’ implying a humorous sketch about the state of the economy. The
description also suggests that Ryder’s company travelled with a set of painted scenery
depicting well-known landmarks, a theatre custom which became fashionable in the
eighteenth century.

There follows a gap in available information of approximately fifteen years, until the opening
of a new theatre housed within the civic offices on The Mall, which has been discussed in
Chapter four. It is likely, though not conclusive, that theatrical activity in Waterford after
1784 shifted from the Playhouse at Blackfriars, to the new theatre on The Mall. The majority
of newspaper advertisements after 1784 simply refer to plays taking place at ‘the theatre’,
suggesting that only one theatre remained in operation.

In January 1792, a strolling theatre company arrived into Waterford which included a couple
named Mr. and Mrs. McCrea and other performers who were identified as Mr. Wells and Mr.
Power. Neither Wells nor the McCrea’s are named in Greene’s (2000) comprehensive list of
performers working in Ireland in the eighteenth century, and Power is listed only as a minor
actor. This strolling company of performers presented a ‘new pantomime’ entitled The
Witches of the Rocks; or, the Regions of Fancy, with an ‘elegant display of scenes, dresses,
and decorations’ (The Waterford Herald, 28 January 1792). An eyewitness account described
the staging of the piece:

The first scene showed a grove so romantic and charming as to cause a burst
of applause from the whole house – and the trees instantly transformed
themselves into the weird sisters of Macbeth. Then Harlequin appeared in
the churchyard in the likeness of Time, with a scythe, even like the
sculptured marble of the Fitzgeralds, in Christ Church (The Waterford
Herald, 2 February 1792).
The Fitzgerald monument in Waterford’s Christ Church Cathedral had been created twenty
two years earlier in 1770 by the Dutch sculptor Johann Van Nost the Younger (see Figure
5.1). The reference to the Fitzgerald monument would suggest that it was considered to be
significant in Waterford at the time, and the fact that a visiting performer took on the likeness
of the statue displays the flexibility of the theatre company, and their willingness to adapt
elements of their stage productions in order to connect with the audience at whichever
location they were performing in. The Fitzgerald monument in Christ Church Cathedral
underwent extensive restoration work in 2009, which was facilitated by The Heritage Council
of Ireland.

In March of 1792, the same strolling theatre company presented the premiere of a new opera
written by a local Doctor, James St. John, entitled The Siege of Waterford, or, The Marriage
of Earl Strongbow to the Princess Eva. The plot centered on King Diarmuid’s capture of
Waterford in 1170, and Strongbow’s subsequent marriage to Diarmuid’s daughter Eva
(Aoife). An unidentified critic reviewed the production:

To those who have had an opportunity of being acquainted with the literary
abilities of the author, it will be needless to observe that the language is at
once sublime, nervous and animated. On the whole, The Siege of Waterford
cannot but prove a great acquisition to the stage, for notwithstanding the
many disadvantages under which its first representation laboured (which
would be, perhaps uncharitable to criticise upon), it was nevertheless
received with a degree of applause and satisfaction that can be no less
grateful to the feelings of the author than creditable to the discernment of
the Ladies and Gentlemen of Waterford (The Waterford Herald, 27 March
1792).

The Siege of Waterford was staged again later that same year, presented by ‘a Number of
YOUNG GENTLEMEN of this city, at the Theatre, for the benefit of the author’ (The
Waterford Herald, 6 November 1792). Another review appeared which was once again
lukewarm in its appreciation of the evening’s entertainment:

To say there were no faults, would be no less ridiculous than

insulting: and some characters were well sustained. Master Bowman’s
hornpipe and his song of The Good Ship Rover received and merited
the ample plaudits of the whole house. Of the other gentlemen, we
shall only observe generally, that if they were not equally forceful
 with those we have mentioned, it was not from want of inclination or
exertion (The Waterford Herald, 22 November 1792).

While the critic of the day was clearly unimpressed by the production, it does represent the
only known evidence of the staging of a dramatic work by people living in Waterford, and
the ‘young gentlemen of the city’ were an early version of a local amateur drama society, a
pastime which became popular towards the latter part of the nineteenth century in Ireland.

A short extract in the form of a song from the Siege of Waterford was printed in a Waterford
newspaper, as sung by the character of Sir Teague O’Regan:

Yerrow, now my dear jewels, is not this the case,

That Spalpeens should come here, to fight us to our face
What boobies e’er thought we Irish would yield
Or give up one inch of sweet shamrogueshire field;
but, by my own soul, ‘tis myself you may blame,
If they skip not back faster than ever they came.

Those Danes are a pack of unmannerly scrubs,

And I believe, by St. Patrick, they count us mere cubs,
They think they will drive us before them – on home!
But we’ll learn those rapscallions we’re blood to the bone:
We’ll kick them, and cuff them and bother their souls,
Still their health, till we meet them, let’s drink in full bowls!
[Emphasis in original] (The Waterford Herald, 9 June 1792)

The term ‘spalpeen’ is a pejorative term for a rascal or scamp, and derives from the Irish
word spailpín, ‘an agricultural labourer who travelled around the country at certain seasons
seeking work and who sometimes got into scraps for whatever reason’ (Dolan, 1999, p. 253).
The word ‘shamrogueshire’ was a slang word for ‘Ireland’ which was in use in the eighteenth
century; ‘Shamrogueshire is a name so commonly applied to Ireland, that is does not require
illustration’ (Croften Croker, 1839, p. 36). St. John’s use of the term ‘shamrogueshire’ may
simply have been intended as a comic device, however, its use in this context merits further
investigation. When the word is taken apart into three sections, a description of Ireland
emerges as a place which is merely an extension of England that is inhabited by dishonest
scoundrels – sham: something that is not what it purports to be, in use since circa 1670;
rogue: a dishonest scoundrel, in use since circa 1655, and shire: a British county. In The
Siege of Waterford, St. John may simply have been writing about the Norman invasion of
Waterford six hundred years previously, but it is also possible that his words reflected the
atmosphere of the time, demonstrating the mood of a section of Waterford society that felt
itself under threat; the ascendancy, the Anglo-Irish gentry, and the ruling Protestant class.
However, the use of the word ‘shamrogueshire’ to describe Ireland also conflicts with the
manifestly patriotic rhetoric employed by St. John in his defence of Ireland. A theme of
resisting change and driving away invaders is present in the extract, and there is a
rationalisation of taking extreme measures in order to defend a position and protect the status
quo. Given that the 1798 rebellion of the United Irishmen took place just six years later, with
some of the most violent battles taking place just forty miles away in County Wexford, St.
John’s piece may have been the voice of the majority of the theatre-going audience in
Waterford at that time, which would have reflected the city’s power base. 2 St. John
announced his intention to publish three hundred copies of The Siege of Waterford; however,
no known copies of the play have survived (The Waterford Herald, 30 October 1792).

Early in August of 1792, a notice appeared in the newspaper advising the public that ‘On
Account of the Exhibition of Fire-works To-morrow Evening, there will be no Performance
at the Theatre’ (The Waterford Herald, 2 August 1792). Research has not revealed any
historic event which would have been the cause of such a firework display in Waterford on
that date, and it may simply have been a celebratory occasion. However, it was considered
popular enough for the management of the theatre to decide not to schedule a performance on
the same evening, most likely to avoid having to compete to attract an audience. It is possible
that the exhibition of fireworks was planned to celebrate Lughnasa, an ancient Irish festival
which was traditionally held at the beginning of every August to celebrate the beginning of
the harvest season. It is interesting to note that the date of the firework display in 1792
coincides with the annual Spraoi Festival that was founded in Waterford in 1993 and which
concludes its celebrations with an exhibition of fireworks.

In late August 1792, an advertisement appeared in the newspaper for a benefit night by a
strolling theatre company at the Theatre Royal in aid of the well-known actress Mrs.
Melmoth. The advertisement promised a production of Richard Steele’s The Conscious

2
For more on the 1798 rebellion, See Robert Emmet and the Rebellion of 1798 by Rúan
O’Donnell. 2003, Irish Academic Press
Lovers, followed by a farce and other entertainments, all unspecified. Notably, the
advertisement declared that:

The part of Myrtle by a YOUNG GENTLEMAN of this City, who will also
recite Dryden’s Ode on ALEXANDER’S FEAST. (Being his first
appearance on any stage) [Parentheses in original] (The Waterford Herald,
30 August 1792).

The ‘young gentleman’ in question appears to have been making his professional stage debut
with the company, and this level of local involvement may have been an early promotional
device, aimed at attracting a larger local audience, keen to see ‘one of their own’ on stage.
However, it is odd that the advertisement especially announces his appearance without
actually naming him. It may have been the case that the theatre-going public in Waterford
were already aware of who he was simply by word of mouth. Another possibility is that not
naming him may have been a matter of protocol to keep the peace among the other
performers, as resentment might have been caused by advertising an unknown newcomer
while omitting other company members.

Well known performers who appeared in Waterford in the latter half of the eighteenth century
include Andrew Cherry, Charles Bannister, an actor from London’s Drury Lane Theatre;
Robert Owenson, a popular Irish comedian; and John Philip Kemble, a London celebrity.
Kemble was a major star on the London theatre scene and was most likely touring the Irish
circuit with one of the reputable Dublin theatre companies (Clark, 1965). Waterford was
clearly considered to be an important stop on the Irish touring circuit by established
performers, indicating a healthy potential for ticket sales from a substantial audience base.

In May 1794, an incident occurred at the Theatre Royal which reflected the growing political
unease in Waterford at the time. Two audience members sitting in the auditorium refused to
remove their hats when God Save the King was played at the end of the evening’s
entertainment:

An uproar ensued, and rumours of further incendiary action arose. The

Mayor promptly ordered the playhouse to be shut until measures could be
taken to prevent the threatened outrage (Clark, 1965, pp. 160 – 161).
This incident reveals the mounting political tension and division amongst the citizens of
Waterford, and demonstrates that not all of the people in the audience were loyal to British
rule. Morash states that in Dublin theatres:

From the early 1780s onwards, there is evidence of a vociferously patriotic

upper gallery, populated by a growing audience of servants, small
tradesmen and labourers who could be moved by the badges of nationality
(2002, p. 71)

It is possible that a similar pattern was emerging at the Theatre Royal in Waterford, with
demonstrations of dissatisfaction toward British rule evident among some members of the
audience. In contrast, an eyewitness account of a night at the theatre in Waterford in 1796
reveals the loyalist fervour that prevailed in Waterford at the time:

The public demanded the air of ‘God Save the King, and, according to
custom, obliged all the actors who had appeared in the piece to present
themselves and sing in chorus. Shouts of ‘Off with the hats’ were directed
with single fury against those who had forgotten to uncover. A good
creature who had been asleep was unmoved by the cries until a soldier came
and gave him a sound blow on the side of the head, at the same time pulling
his hat off and throwing it into the pit (De Latocnaye, 1984, p. 65).

The fact that the soldier threw the hat into the pit, might suggest that the ‘poor creature’ was
sitting somewhere up in the gallery in the cheaper seats, among those who were perhaps
unsympathetic towards Protestant rule and British occupation. It certainly appears that not
everyone in the audience automatically removed their hats when God Save the King was
sung, and the incident reveals a level of political tension and social unrest. This episode took
place just two years prior to the 1798 United Irishmen rebellion. Although there are reports of
incidents of violence in Waterford county leading up to and including the time of the 1798
rebellion, it appears that Waterford city remained relatively peaceful, although this may have
been due in part to the fact that two companies of British militia arrived into Waterford city
in February 1798, several months before the rebellion was underway (Ryland, 1824).

In the final decade of the eighteenth century, the only surviving reports of theatrical activity
in Waterford are of audience behaviour in a difficult political climate. There are no known
further accounts of any on-stage theatrical activity in Waterford as the century came to a
close, and it is not known if the Theatre Royal remained open throughout the 1798 Rebellion
and its aftermath.
For sections of Waterford society in the eighteenth century, theatre-going was an important
social and cultural activity. An evening at the theatre was likely to have been quite a social
occasion, presenting an opportunity to meet peers and enjoy theatrical entertainments. The
travelling and strolling theatre companies brought theatrical artistry and contemporary themes
from the capital cities of Dublin and London with them to Waterford. Elements of the theatre-
going public in Waterford would have had strong links to England, and the performers and
plays from London on stage in Waterford would have been an important connection to
English society and culture.

It is clear from the surviving evidence that there was a lively theatrical scene existed in
Waterford in the eighteenth century. It is regrettable that there are large gaps in the surviving
evidence, as the existing sources reveal a flavour of the rich social and cultural tapestry of
theatrical activity in the city. Given the level of detail which is actually revealed from such
scarce sources, is highly likely that there was a high level of theatrical activity throughout the
eighteenth century, including new dramatic works which may have been written and staged in
Waterford, of which no evidence remains.

Chapter Six

CONCLUSION

This thesis set out to present an accurate account of theatrical activity in Waterford in the
eighteenth century. The principal objective was to examine theatrical activity in Waterford,
and in so doing, to realise the circumstances surrounding the establishment of two purpose-
built theatres within the city; the playhouse at Blackfriars and the Theatre Royal, and to
present a study of theatrical touring customs and behaviour which emerged in Ireland in the
eighteenth century and which still exist in the present day. The thesis explored further
elements which added to the theatrical history of Waterford, such as a variety of dramatic
works which were staged in the city, including a small number which appear to have been
specifically written for the Waterford stage. Other elements considered in this thesis include
the working conditions of performers at the time, the questions of how and when the Theatre
Royal got its name, along with a discussion regarding audience behaviour in Waterford in the
final decade of the century.

The principle aim of this research paper was to provide an accurate account of theatrical
activity in Waterford in the eighteenth century, and in so doing, realise the following
objectives:
To identify the location and chronology of theatres within the city.
To ascertain how and when the Theatre Royal got its name.
To examine the behaviour and customs of touring theatre companies that performed in
Waterford.
To realise the level of local involvement in theatrical productions which were staged by
touring theatre companies.
To analyse a brief sample from an original dramatic work which premiered in Waterford.
To examine the working conditions of touring theatre performers.
To discuss evidence of audience behaviour in Waterford in the final decade of the century.

A review of the literature in Chapter two placed in context the main themes of the research
question, which were selected for their contribution to the development of a theatrical scene
in Waterford. The key conclusions from the review of the literature are that a formal
theatrical scene began to take shape in Ireland in the eighteenth century, and that many of the
theatrical behaviour and customs which emerged during that period are still in use in the
present day, such as a variety of marketing methods aimed at attracting an audience. It was
also concluded that, apart from the notable exceptions of Richard Brinsley Sheridan and
Oliver Goldsmith, the theatrical legacy of the eighteenth century does not include any
significant or lasting plays or playwrights.
Chapters four and five provided an account of theatrical activity in Waterford in the
eighteenth century, in line with the stated aims and objectives of the research question. The
conclusion was reached in chapter four that, along with Cork, Waterford appears to have been
the location for one of the first purpose-built theatres in Ireland outside of Dublin, indicating
that there was a demand for theatrical entertainment in Waterford in the early part of the
eighteenth century. It also confirms Waterford’s status as one of the most important cities in
Ireland in the eighteenth century, second only to the capital city Dublin. The theatrical
influences of Dublin and London were evident on the development of theatrical activity in
Waterford, and were reflected in the style and content of dramatic works which were staged
in the city.

Chapter five established that a lively theatre scene emerged in Waterford in the eighteenth
century, detailing the customs and behaviour of touring theatre companies who performed in
Waterford, as well as occasional local involvement in the theatrical productions staged by the
touring companies. These elements combined together indicate that theatrical activity played
a key role in the social and cultural development of Waterford city.

The primary practical conclusion of the thesis is that the history of theatrical activity in
Waterford over the past two hundred years requires extensive further research. While
researching this thesis, a significant discovery was made through contact with the Houghton
Library at Harvard University, when it was revealed that the library is in possession of a
series of nineteenth century playbills which specifically relate to productions which were
staged in Waterford. In addition, the Houghton Library is in possession of the original script
of a play which was performed in the Theatre Royal in Waterford in 1825 entitled The Secret.
While the playbills and script are outside the relevant timeframe of the research question,
they are important to Waterford’s cultural history, and indicate that further research is
required to realise the complete history of Waterford’s theatrical activity, and in particular, to
restore and recreate as much as is possible of the history of the Theatre Royal.
It is recommended that theatre organisations in Ireland be encouraged to maintain archives of
their work, in order to facilitate historical theatre research in the future. This could be
achieved by the dissemination of proven archiving methods through the network of existing
organisations which are concerned with theatrical activity in Ireland, such as the Arts
Council, the Irish Theatre Archive, Theatre Forum Ireland, and the Irish Theatre Institute.

The Theatre Royal is a surviving, tangible part of the legacy of theatrical activity in
Waterford in the eighteenth century. It is one of the oldest theatres in the Europe, and it is a
testament to generations of people in Waterford that the Theatre Royal has not only survived,
but that it continues to be operational in 2009 and beyond. The interior of the 1784 Theatre
Royal was considerably remodelled internally in 1876, and at time of writing is undergoing
major restoration work, and is scheduled to reopen on the 1 October 2009. There are also
plans to rededicate the Theatre Royal to the people of Waterford on 5 November 2009, with
the world premiere of a specially commissioned musical play by Bernard Farrell, entitled
Wallace, Balfe, and Mr Bunn.

Waterford in the twenty first century has been shaped by the past, and its character has been
determined by political, religious, societal, and cultural influences. Historical research reveals
rich details which can contribute to our ability to understand the past, and, in so doing, realise
the present and plan for the future. The complete account of Waterford’s theatrical history is
waiting to be revealed and it is hoped that this thesis has laid the foundation to facilitate
further research.

REFERENCES

Auburn, M.S. (2004) ‘Garrick at Drury Lane, 1747 – 1776’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The
Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
United Kingdom.
The Arts Council, (2006) The Public and The Arts 2006, Dublin.

Boaden, J. (1831) The Life of Mrs Jordan: Including Original Private Correspondence, and
Numerous Anecdotes of her Contemporaries, Edward Bull, London.

Chetwood, W.R. (1748) A Tour Through Ireland in Several Entertaining Letters, Wilson,
London.

Clark, W.S. (1965) The Irish Stage in the County Towns 1720 – 1860, Clarendon Press,
Oxford.

Croften Croker, T. (1839) The Popular Songs of Ireland, Henry Colburn Publisher, London.

De Latocnaye, C. (1984) A Frenchman’s Walk Through Ireland 1796 – 1797, (2nd edn),
Blackstaff Press, Dublin.

Dolan, T. P. (1999) A Dictionary of Hiberno-English, Gill & Macmillan, Dublin.

Donohue, J. (2004) ‘The Theatre from 1660 to 1800’ in Donohue, J. (ed) The Cambridge
History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Fitz-Simon, C. (1983) The Irish Theatre, Thames and Hudson, London.

Garlick, G. (2004) ‘Theatre Outside London, 1660 – 1775’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The
Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Greene, J. C. (2000), Theatre in Belfast 1736 – 1800, Associated University Press, London.

Hartnoll, P. and Found, P. (1992) The Concise Oxford Companion to the Theatre, (2nd edn),
Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Holland and Patterson (1995) ‘Eighteenth Century Theatre’, in Brown, R.B. (ed) The Oxford
Illustrated History of Theatre, Oxford University Press.

Hume, R.D. (2004) ‘Theatres and Repertory’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The Cambridge History of
British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Langhans, E. A. (2004) ‘1776: A Critical Year in Perspective’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The

Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Lane, P. (1975) The Theatre, Batsford Limited, London.

Morash, C. (2002) A History of Irish Theatre 1601 – 2000 Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Ridgway, J. (1792), Memoirs of Mrs Billington, From Her Birth: Containing a Variety of
Matter, Ludicrous, Theatrical, Musical, and, With Copies of Several Original Letters, Now in
Possession of the Publisher, Written by Mrs Billington to her Mother, the Late Mrs Weichsel.
London

Ryland, R. H. (1824) The History, Topography and Antiquities of the County and City of
Waterford: With an Account of the Present State of the Peasantry of that Part of the South of
Ireland, Murray, London.

Stockwell, L. T. (1968) Dublin Theatres and Theatre Customs (1637 – 1820), (2nd edn),
Benjamin Blom, London.

Newspapers

The Waterford Herald, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1796.

Waterford Chronicle 1770, 1771, 1777.

Crawley, P. (2009) ‘Reviews’, The Irish Times, [online] 30 July 2009, available from
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2009/0730/1224251654154.html
[Accessed: 1st August 2009].

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Auburn, M.S. (2004) ‘Garrick at Drury Lane, 1747 – 1776’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The
Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
United Kingdom.

The Arts Council, (2006) The Public and The Arts 2006, Dublin.

Boaden, J. (1831) The Life of Mrs Jordan: Including Original Private Correspondence, and
Numerous Anecdotes of her Contemporaries, Edward Bull, London.

Brown, J. R. (1995) The Oxford Illustrated History of Theatre. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.

Chetwood, W.R. (1748) A Tour Through Ireland in Several Entertaining Letters, Wilson,
London.

Clark, W. S. (1965) The Irish Stage in the County Towns 1720 – 1860, Clarendon Press,
Oxford.

Croften Croker, T. (1839) The Popular Songs of Ireland, Henry Colburn Publisher, London.

De Latocnaye, C. (1984) A Frenchman’s Walk Through Ireland 1796 – 1797, (2nd edn),
Blackstaff Press, Dublin.

Dolan, T. P. (1999) A Dictionary of Hiberno-English, Gill & Macmillan, Dublin.

Donohue, J. (2004) ‘The Theatre from 1660 to 1800’ in Donohue, J. (ed) The Cambridge
History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Edwards, A. (2003) Provincial Theatre in Britain, 1773 – 1808: The Burney Playbills
Examined, The Society of Theatre Research, London.

Fitz-Simon, C. (1983) The Irish Theatre, Thames and Hudson, London.

Fitz-Simon, C. (2003) Popular Irish Drama in the Decade Leading up to the Opening of the
Abbey Theatre. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ulster.

Fletcher, A. J. (2000) Drama, Performance and Polity in Pre-Cromwellian Ireland, Cork

University Press, Cork.

Garlick, G. (2004) ‘Theatre Outside London, 1660 – 1775’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The
Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Greene, J. C. (2000), Theatre in Belfast 1736 – 1800, Associated University Press, London.

Hartnoll, P. and Found, P. (1992) The Concise Oxford Companion to the Theatre, (2nd edn),
Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Hitchcock, R. (1788) An Historical View of the Irish Stage (2 Vols), Marchbank, Dublin.
Holland and Patterson (1995) ‘Eighteenth Century Theatre’, in Brown, R.B. (ed) The Oxford
Illustrated History of Theatre, Oxford University Press.

Hume, R. D. (2004) ‘Theatres and Repertory’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The Cambridge History of
British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kelly, L. (1998) Richard Brinsley Sheridan, A Life, Pimlico, London.

Kumar, R. (2005) Research Methodology, Sage Publications, London.

Langhans, E. A. (2004) ‘1776: A Critical Year in Perspective’, in Donohue, J. (ed) The

Cambridge History of British Theatre, Vol 2: 1660 to 1895, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

Lane, P. (1975) The Theatre, Batsford Limited, London.

McEneaney, E. (2001) Discover Waterford, O’Brien Press, Dublin.

Morash, C. (2002) A History of Irish Theatre 1601 – 2000, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.

O’Toole, F. (1997) A Traitor’s Kiss: The Life of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, Granta, London.

Pelto, G. H. (1978) Anthropological Research, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Papageorgiou, I. (2002) The Origins of the Star Phenomenon: Stars and the Starring System
in Eighteenth Century British Theatre. Ph.D. Thesis, University of London.

Power, T. and Nolan, W. (1992) Waterford History and Society: Interdisciplinary Essays on
the History of an Irish County, Geography Publications, Dublin.

Ridgway, J. (1792), Memoirs of Mrs Billington, From Her Birth: Containing a Variety of
Matter, Ludicrous, Theatrical, Musical, and, With Copies of Several Original Letters, Now in
Possession of the Publisher, Written by Mrs Billington to her Mother, the Late Mrs Weichsel.
London

Ryland, R. H. (1824) The History, Topography and Antiquities of the County and City of
Waterford: With an Account of the Present State of the Peasantry of that Part of the South of
Ireland, Murray, London.

Slowey, Desmond (2008) The Radicalisation of Irish Drama 1600 – 1900: The Rise and Fall
of Ascendancy Theatre, Irish Academic Press, Dublin.

Stockwell, L. T. (1968) Dublin Theatres and Theatre Customs (1637 – 1820), (2nd edn),
Benjamin Blom, London.

Styan, J. L. (1975) Drama, Stage and Audience, Cambridge Press, Cambridge.

 Newspapers

The Waterford Herald, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1796.

Waterford Chronicle 1770, 1771, 1777.

Crawley, P. (2009) ‘Reviews’, The Irish Times, [online] 30 July 2009, available from
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/features/2009/0730/1224251654154.html
[Accessed: 1st August 2009].
Figure 4.1: Section of 1764 Richards and Scalés map of Waterford city which shows the
location of the Playhouse at Blackfriars
By kind permission of Waterford City Archives
Figure 4.2: Outline of the playhouse at Blackfriars

Courtesy of Mr. David Pollock, M.I.A.I.

Figure 4.3: Photograph of the north wall of the playhouse at Blackfriars, which was
discovered during archaeological excavations in July 2009.

Courtesy of Mr. David Pollock, M.I.A.I.

Figure 4.4: Section of the 1764 Richards & Scalés map of Waterford city which shows the
site where the Theatre Royal was later built.

By kind permission of Waterford City Archives

Figure 4.5: Drawing which corresponds comparatively to Waterford Town Hall and the
Theatre Royal, artist unknown.

From the Irish Architectural Archives 2004 National Inventory of Architectural Heritage.

By kind permission of the Irish Architectural Archives

Figure 5.1: Drawing of the Fitzgerald Monument in Christ Church Cathedral, artist unknown.

By kind permission of Christ Church Cathedral, Waterford.