Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner I went to the theatre, and there saw Love's Mistress done by them, which I do not like it some things so well as their acting in Salsbury Court. [Although Pepys saw this play on 2 March 1660@1 at Salisbury Court, done by the Duke's Company, here he appears to indicate a rival performance of it by the King's Company in Vere St.]

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

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Sir W. Pen, my wife and I to the Theatre, and there saw The Country Captain, the first time it hath been acted this twenty-five years, a play of my Lord Newcastle's, but so silly a play as in all my life I never saw, and the first that ever I was weary of in my life. Herbert (Dramatic Records, p. 118) lists Love's Mistress for this date for Vere St., but the item is out of the normal order of the entries. To move it to 26 Oct. 1662 would place it on a Sunday. The play had been given previously (2 March 1661, 11 March 1661, 25 March 1661) by both the Duke's Company and King's Company. Possibly Herbert entered it on the wrong day. On Herbert's list, following Love's Mistress, are two plays, The Contented Collinell [Brenoralt] and Love at First Sight, each listed without a date. The former, under the title Brenoralt, had been acted at Vere St. on 23 July 1661; the second was soon to be acted there on 29 Nov. 1661

Event Comment: A play, unidentified, was given at the Middle Temple. Since the Duke's Company acted at the Inner Temple, the King's Company probably Played here. The company received the usual fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 170

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: I to the Cockpitt, with much crowding and waiting, where I saw The Valiant Cidd acted, a play I have read with great delight, but is a most dull thing acted, which I never understood before, there being no pleasure in it, though done by Betterton and by Ianthe [Mrs Saunderson], and another fine wench [Mrs Norton] that is come in the room of Roxalana [Mrs Davenport]; nor did the King or Queen once smile all the whole play, nor any of the company seem to take anyPleasure but what was in the greatness and gallantry of the company

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. As Evelyn saw it on 27 April, it seems likely that it was first performed before Easter (April 10). It was not licensed for printing until 8 July 1664. Preface to edition of 1664: I Cou'd not have wish'd my self more fortunate than I have been in the success of this Poem:...The Acting of it has lost me no Reputation. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 25: @Sir Nich'las, Sir Fred'rick, Widow and Dufoy, Were not by any so well done, Mafoy.@ The clean and well performance of this Comedy, got the Company more Reputation and profit than any preceding Comedy; the Company taking in a months time at it #1000

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. L. C. 5@139, p. 125, lists it for 3 March, but as this date falls on Sunday, it is probably an error in dating. The play was licensed on 22 May 1667. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke's playhouse...and I in and find my wife and Mrs Hewer, and sat by them and saw The English Princesse, or Richard the Third; a most sad, melancholy play, and pretty good; but nothing eminent in it, as some tragedys are; only little Mis. Davis did dance a jig after the end of the play, and there telling the next day's play; so that it come in by force only to please the company to see her dance in boy's clothes; and, the truth is, there is no comparison between Nell's dancing the other day at the King's house in boy's clothes and this, this being infinitely beyond the other. Downes (p. 27): Wrote by Mr Carrol, was Excellently well Acted in every Part;...Gain'd them an Additional Estimation, and the Applause from the Town, as well as profit to the whole Company

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and Mercer and I away to the King's play-house, to see the Scornfull Lady; but it being now three o'clock there was not one soul in the pit; whereupon, for shame, we would not go in....[After attending lif] to the King's house, upon a wager of mine with my wife, that there would be no acting there to-day, there being no company: so I went in and found a pretty good company there, and saw their dance at the end of the play

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: [After looking in at lif], and so to the King's house: and there, going in, met with Knepp, and she took us up into the tireing-rooms: and to the women's shift, where Nell was dressing herself, and was all unready, and is very Pretty, prettier than I thought. And so walked all up and down the house above, and then below into the scene-room, and there sat down, and she gave us fruit: and here I read the questions to Knepp, while she answered me, through all her part of Flora's Figary's which was acted to-day. But, Lord! to see how they were both painted would make a man mad, and did make me loath them; and what base company of men comes among them, and how lewdly they talk! and how poor the men are in clothes, and yet what a shew they make on the stage by candle-light, is very observable. But to see how Nell cursed, for having so few people in the pit, was pretty; the other house carrying away all the people at the new play, and is said, now-a-days, to have generally most company, as being better players. By and by into the pit, and there was the play, which is pretty good

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: It being almost twelve o'clock, or a little more, and carried [Mercer, Mrs Horsfield, and Mrs Gayet] to the King's playhouse, where the doors were not then open; but presently they did open; and we in, and find many people already come in, by private ways, into the pit, it being the first day of Sir Charles Sidly's new play, so long expected, The Mulberry Garden, of whom, being so reputed a wit, all the world do expect great matters. I having sat here awhile, and eat nothing to-day, did slip out, getting a boy to keep my place...And so to the play again, where the King and Queen, by and by, come, and all the Court; and the house infinitely full. But the play, when it come, though there was, here and there, a pretty saying, and that not very many neither, yet the whole of the play had nothing extraordinary in it, at all, neither of language nor design; insomuch that the King I did not see laugh, nor pleased the whole play from the beginning to the end, nor the company; insomuch that I have not been less pleased at a new play in my life, I think. And which made it the worse was, that there never was worse musick played--that is, worse things composed, which made me and Captain Rolt, who happened to sit near me, mad. So away thence, very little satisfied with the play, but pleased with my company. [For Bannister's setting a song for Mrs Knepp for this play, see 7 May 1668.

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Epilogue, which was printed in A Collection of Poems Written upon several Occasions by several Persons, 1673, pp. 29-32, and reprinted by Noyes, Ben Jonson on the English Stage, pp. 247-48, by its references to Lent seems to indicate a Lenten revival. As this play was allotted to the King's Company ca. 12 Jan. 1668@9, it has been assigned to that company. The revival may have occurred in March 1670, perhaps not until later

Event Comment: The King's Company. This day marks the resumption of acting by the King's Company after the disastrous fire at Bridges Street, Drury Lane; the players turned to the theatre in Lincoln's Inn Fields which the Duke's Company had recently left. The Prologue was printed in Covent Garden Drollery, 1672. Sloane MS. 4455 folio 26 verso: The Prologue of a Play entitled Witt without Money-Spoken at the Dukes old Theatre (after the Kings was burnt) by the King's players, Feb. 26 1671. The Curtaine being drawne up all the Actors were discover'd on the stage in Melancholick postures, & Moone [Mohun] advancing before the rest speaks as follows, addressing chiefly to ye King then [present]. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 216): Wit Without Money: a Comedy which I have seen acted at the Old House in little Lincolns-Inn-Fields with very great Applause: the part of Valentine being Play'd by that compleat Actor Major Mohun deceas'd. This was the first Play that was acted after the Burning the King's House in Drury-lane: a New Prologue being writ for them by Mr Dryden

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. It is uncertain whether this performance and those for 13 and 28 March belong to 1670@1 or 1671@2. They are on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2 (see also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347), but VanLennep's discovery of an L. C. list for the Duke's Company covering March 1670@1 but not including these plays led him to believe that they Pertain to March 1671@2. See VanLennep, Plays on the English Stage, p. 19. On 9 March 1670@1 or 1671@2 Henry Herbert qranted permission to the Duke's Company to act The Lady Errant. See The Plays and Poems of William Cartwright, ed. G. Blakemore Evans (Madison, Wisc., 1951), p. 85

Event Comment: The King's Company. It is difficult to assign a date to this burlesque, but it is obviously a satiric thrust at Elkanah Settle's The Empress of Morocco, which had been acted on 3 July 1673, and on Macbeth, which had been most recently acted (probably) on 9 Aug. 1673. As the title page of Duffett's burlesque does not name a theatre, it is not known whether it was acted before the King's Company left Lincoln's Inn Fields for the new theatre in Drury Lane. But the fact that Settle's Empress of Morocco was acted again at Dorset Garden on 6 Dec. 1673 makes December 1673 a likely month (or the King's Company to play its burlesque, although it may have been given in the late summer or early autumn, as many lesser actors are in the cast

Event Comment: L. C. 7@1, p. 5: His Majesty? understanding That His Company of Comoedians have left off acting upon private differences and disagreements betweene themselues is very much displeased thereat And hath commanded mee to require and order the said Company forthwith to act and play as formerly And that none of the said Company presume to leave off Acting (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 325n)

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

Event Comment: This work is advertised in The Loyal Protestant 22, 27, and 29 Aug. 1682: at Mrs Saffry's, a Dutch Woman's booth, over against the Greyhound Inne in West Smithfield. [Her first announcement calls the company "By an Approved Company"; the other two notices refer to it as "the first New-market Company." See Rosenfeld, The Theatre of the London Fairs, p. 6.] John Coysh paid #6 for a booth at the Fair (Rosenfeld, The Theatre of the London Fairs, p. 6). See also Morley, Memoirs of Bartholomew Fair, p. 222, for notice of the Indian Water Worksv. In Wit and Drollery (1682), p. 304, are verses on the Fair: @Here's the Whore of Babylon the Devil and the Pope,@The Girl is just agoing on the Rope@Here's Dives and Lazarus and the World's Creation,@Here's the Tall Dutch Woman the like's not in the Nation,@Here is the Booth where the High-Dutch Made is@Hear are the Bears that dance like any Ladies,@Tat, tat, tat, tat, tat says the little penny Trumpet@Here's Jacob Hall, that does so jump it, jump it.@Sound Trumpet Sound, for Silver Spoon and Fork,@Come here's your dainty Pit and Pork.@ [See also August 1680.

Event Comment: Luttrell, A Brief Relation: The 18th, upon the water before Whitehall, in a great barge, was performed an exercise of musick, vocall and instrumental, by the kings musick (I, 445). B. M. Sloane MS 3929, newsletter, 23 June 1688: on Monday night a great performance was upon the water of Vocal and Instrumental Musique in a Barge borrowed from one of the Companies of London stuck around with lighted fflambeaux, and many of the Nobility and Gentry invited thereto (transcribed by Professor John Harold Wilson). J. Pulver, A Biographical Dictionary of Old English Music (London, 1927), under John Abell: The Barge was decorated and illuminated by numerous torches....The performers, vocal and instrumental, amounted to one hundred and thirty....Nobility and company that was upon the water gave three shouts to express their joy and satisfaction; and all the gentlemen of the musick went to Mr Abell's house, which was nobly illuminated and honoured with the presence of a great Company of the nobility

Event Comment: See Cibber, Apology, I, 201-2, for his account of the mistake Betterton's Company made in not retaining Williams and Mrs Mountfort-Verbruggen, and of the problems of Rich's Company. In this passage Cibber implies that Hamlet, Othello, and Julius Caesar were acted at Drury Lane soon after the division of the companies

Event Comment: A new Comic Opera. The Music composed by several celebrated Composers. All Boxes put together, and no Persons admitted without Tickets, which will be delivered this Day at the Office at Half a Guinea each; First Gallery 5s. Second Gallery 3s. By His Majesties Command no Person whatsoever to be admitted behind the Scenes or into the Orchestra. 6:30 p.m. Vivant Rex et Regina. [Repeated in all bills.] [A pasticchio similar to La Schiava (The Humorists). See Nicoll, III, 361. Advertisement for the company of performers at the Opera had been given in the Public Advertiser three months earlier, 6 August: 'Drummond, Vincent and Gordon,Proprietors and Managers of the Opera at the King's Theatre in the Haymarket beg leave to announce that they have engaged the best Company that could be got in Italy...and are expected in London this month. The company are as follows: Serious-the celebrated Guarducci, first man; Signora Aunuciati, first woman; Savoi, second man; Miss Young, second woman; Grassi, Signora Piatti, third woman. Comic-Lovattini, first man, tenor; Signora Zamperini, first woman; Savoi, first man, serious; Miss Young, first woman; Signor Moriggi (the old man) bass; Signora Piatti, second woman; Zamperini second man; Signora Gibbetti [Gibelli in the Gazetteer] third woman."

Event Comment: By Desire. At the Lilliputians Theatre, the Old Tennis-Court. 6:30 P.M. Boxes 3s. Pit 2s. Gallery 1s