Event Comment: Possibly on this day, Davenant and Killigrew, with a united company, began acting at this theatre. In L. C. 5@137, p. 332 (6 Oct. 1660) is a list of His Majesty's Comedians: Burt, Hart, Mohun, Robert Shatterell, Lacy, Wintershell, Clunne, Cartwright, Edward Shatterell, Baxter, Loveday, Kynaston, Betterton. (See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 294; Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 204.) Hotson, p. 205, states that the company acted daily from 8 to 16 Oct. 1660

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of this revival is not precisely known but that it occurred in mid-March is indicated by Luttrell's date of 21 March 1683@4 on his copy of the separately-printed Prologue and Epilogue (Bindley Collection, William Andrews Clark@Jr@Library). It should be noted, however, that Friday 21 March is a Friday in Lent, a day on which the companies sometimes did not act. The Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 202-6. When this play was advertised to be acted on 8 Nov. 1704, the bill bore the heading: "Not Acted these 20 Years." Langbaine (English Dramatic Poets, p. 37): This Play was reviv'd by the Players, since the Union of the Two Houses, and reprinted in quarto Lond. 1684 with a new Prologue and Epilogue, the former written by Jo. Haynes the Comedian

Event Comment: CCraftsman, 9 June: We hear...that the Rebel Players are not yet reduced to their Obedience, but it is thought that They will soon be obliged to surrender at Discretion. In that mean Time, the Publick waits with Impatience to see the Manifesto of their doubty Chief, Mr Theophilus Cibber, which He hath promised in the News-Papers. It is expected that, in this Manifesto, the young Captain will endeavour to prove that the King's Patent, after a solemn Adjudgment in the Court of Chancery, is of no Validity; and that picking a Gentleman's Pocket of Six Thousand Pounds is perfectly consistent with the Principles of Liberty. In the Daily Post, 11 June, Benjamin Griffin, Comedian, published his Humble Appeal to the Publick.The gist of his statement is: (1) Griffin had been under the management of Rich at Lincoln's Inn Fields, without any intention of leaving him, when, at the beginning of the season of 1721, the managers at Drury Lane sent him messages by Thurmond Sr and Shaw, seeking Griffin to treat with them. Griffin at first refused, but Steede, then the prompter of Drury Lane, prevailed upon him. Wilks immediately offered the same conditions Griffin had under Rich: #4 weekly and a benefit before 15 April, at the certain incident charge of #40. Wilks also offered him articles for three years, with a promise of an advance in salary and better terms at that time. (2) No sooner had Griffin agreed than the masters of both companies entered into a private agreement not to receive any one of the other's company, though discharged, without a private agreement to that purpose. (3) At the end of three years, under date of 12 December 1724, R. Castleman, the treasurer of Drury Lane, sent Griffin a note to the effect that the managers were willing to continue him at 10s. nightly (#3 weekly); as Griffin could not return to Rich, he had to accept the reduction in pay as well as a delay of his benefit to May and a payment of #50 for the charges. (4) He remained so until 1729, losing in salary #147 besides the #10 extra benefits. At Norris' illness and death, the managers returned him to #4 weekly but kept the charges at #50. (5) Under date of 4 June 1733, by the signatures of Mary Wilks, Hester Booth, John Highmore, and John Ellys, Griffin received a discharge from Drury Lane and full Liberty to treat with Rich or any one else. He asserts that he had no previous notice and received no reason for his discharge

Event Comment: Benefit for Hallam at the New Wells, Lemon St. A Concert...by a set of Mr Hallam's Friends. Boxes 3s. Pit and Galleries 2s. 6 p.m. As the Wells have been shut up all the past Summer, and are now open'd only upon this occasion, Mr Hallam hopes the Town will be so indulgent, as to honour him with their Company, and the Favour will always be gratefully acknowledged

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Then my wife and I to Drury Lane to the French comedy, which was so ill done, and the scenes and company and everything else so nasty and out of order and poor, that I was sick all the while in my mind to be there. See also Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 280). W. J. Lawrence (Early French Players in England, The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies (1912), pp. 139-40) argues that the play was Chapoton's Le Mariage d'Orphee et d'Eurydice. See also The Description of the Great Machines of the Descent of Orpheus into Hell. Presented by the French Comedians at the cockpit in Drury Lane. The Argument Taken out of the Tenth and Eleventh Books of Ovid's Metamorphosis (1661). Rugg's Diurnal the French players (BM Add. Mss. 10116, f243v)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. See also 15 and 23 Dec. 1662. Pepys, Diary: There being the famous new play acted the first time to-day, which is called The Adventures of Five Hours, at the Duke's house, being, they say, made or translated by Colonel Tuke, I did long to see it; and so made my wife to get her ready, though we were forced to send for a smith, to break open her trunk...and though early, were forced to sit almost out of sight, at the end of one of the lower forms, so full was the house. And the play, in one word, is the best, for the variety and the most excellent continuance of the plot to the very end, that ever I saw, or think ever shall, and all possible, not only to be done in the time, but in most other respects very admittable, and without one word of ribaldry; and the house, by its frequent plaudits, did show their sufficient approbation. Evelyn, Diary: I went to see Sir S: Tuke (my kinsmans) Comedy acted at the Dukes Theater, which so universaly tooke as it was acted for some weekes every day, & was belived would be worth the Comedians 4 or 5000 pounds: Indeede the plot was incomparable but the language stiffe & formall. Downes (pp 22-23): Wrote by the Earl of Bristol, and Sir Samuel Tuke: This Play being Cloath'd so Excellently Fine in proper Habits, and Acted so justly well....It took Successively 13 Days together, no other Play Intervening. Lady Anglesey to her husband, 10 Jan. 1663: Lord Bristol has made a play which is much commended (CSPD 1663-64, p. 8)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 282) thinks that this play given on the L. C. lists--see Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346--between 29 Oct. and 6 Nov., may have been acted on this day. See also an order for supplies for the comedians acting at court in Alwin Thaler, Shakespear to Sheridan, p. 290. Pepys, Diary: I to White Hall, where I staid walking up and down till night, and then got almost into the playhouse, having much mind to go and see the play at Court this night; but fearing how I should get nome, because of the bonefires and the lateness of the night to get a coach, I did not stay

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@12, p. 17: King here. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 344. See Noyes, Ben Jonson on the English Stage, p. 307, for a letter to Lady Sunderland on this performance, and, p. 308, for an anecdote from The Life of the Late Famous Comedian, Jo. Haynes, concerning Haynes and Hart in a scene. For another allusion to the action, see Henri Ferneron, Louise de Keroualle, Duchess of Portsmouth (London, 1807), p. 179n. Pepys, Diary: 15 Jan. 1668@9: It is about my Lady Harvy's being offended at Doll Common's [Mrs Corey's] acting of Sempronia, to imitate her; for which she got my Lord Chamberlain, her kinsman, to imprison Doll: when my Lady Castlemayne made the King to release her. Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Terryll, 10 Feb. 1668@9: There has not been any new lately revived and reformed, as Catiline, well set out with clothes and scenes (Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, IV, 14). See also 7 and 11 Dec. 1667

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. There is considerable uncertainty as to the date of production of this play. Because it was licensed for printing on 2 Aug. 1677, it was probably first acted not later than July 1677. Because some of the names in the cast represent younger actors, it has been thought to be a Lenten production (see Gray, Lenten Casts, pp. 789-90). It seems, however, that the play, because of its reference to performances by the French comedians (the Epilogue refers to "de French Troop at toder end o'Town ") and the offering of Rare en Tout on29 May 1677, probably was acted in June 1677. The Prologue also refers to the comedy as The Women's Play," suggesting that it was produced for the actresses' annual benefit

Event Comment: The Prince of Orange's company of foreign comedians was apparently expected in England on this evening (HMC, 5th Report, Part I, 1876, p. 186). They were under the management of Francis Duperier and apparently remained in England for some four months. See Lawrence, Early French Players in England, p. 150. See also an order, L. C. 5@145, p. 90 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 253n), to prepare the Cockpit for the Prince of Orange's players