Event Comment: W. S. Clark (Works of Orrery, 1, 40-41) believes that this is Thomas Middleton's play, not one by Orrery. Henry Savile to George Savile: I am come newly from my Lord of Orrery's new play called The Widow, whose character you will receive from better hands. I will only say that one part of it is the humour of a man that has great need to go to the close stool, where there are such indecent postures as would never be suffered upon any stage but ours, which has quite turn'd the stomach of so squeamish a man as I am, that am used to see nothing upon a theatre that might not appear in the ruelle of a fine lady (Savile Correspondence, ed. W. D. Cooper, Camden Society, LXXI [1858], 4)

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Discoursed most about plays and the Opera, where, among other vanities, Captain Cooke had the arrogance to say that he was fain to direct Sir W. Davenant in the breaking of his verses into such and such lengths, according as would be fit for musick, and how he used to swear at Davenant, and command him that way, when W. Davenant would be angry, and find fault with this or that note--but a vain coxcomb I perceive he is, though he sings and composes so well. But what I wondered at, Dr Clerke did say that Sir W. Davenant is no good judge of a dramatick poem, finding fault with his choice of Henry the 5th, and others, for the stage, when I do think, and he confesses, The Siege of Rhodes as good as ever was writ

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Several good plays are likely to be abroad soon, as Mustapha and Henry the 5th

Event Comment: At Mr Croome's, at the Sign of the Shoe and Slap, near the Hospital Gate in West Smithfield, is to be seen, The Wonder of Nature, A Girl, above Sixteen Years of Age, born in Chesire, and not above Eighteen Inches long, having shed the Teeth seven several Times, and not a perfect Bone is any part of her, only the Head; yet she hath all senses to Admiration, and Discourses, Reads very well, Sings, Whistles, and all very pleasant to hear. Sept. 4, 1667. God Save the King. (Henry Morley, Memoirs of Bartholomew Fair, p. 189)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Being full of my desire of seeing my Lord Orrery's new play this afternoon at the King's house, The Black Prince, the first time it is acted; where though we come by two o'clock, yet there was no room in the pit, but we were forced to go into one of the upper boxes, at 4s. a piece, which is the first time I ever sat in a box in my life. And in the same box come, by and by, behind me, my Lord Barkeley and his lady; but I did not turn my face to them to be known, so that I was excused from giving them my seat; and this pleasure I had, that from this place the scenes do appear very fine indeed, and much better than in the pit. The house infinite full, and the King and Duke of York was there. By and by the play begun, and in it nothing Particular but a very fine dance for variety of figures, but a little too long. But, as to the contrivance, and all that was witty (which, indeed, was much, and very witty), was almost the same that had been in his two former plays of Henry the 5th and Mustapha, and the same points and turns of wit in both, and in this very same play often repeated, but in excellent language, and were so excellent that the whole house was mightily pleased with it all along till towards the end he comes to discover the chief of the plot of the play by the reading of a long letter, which was so long and some things (the people being set already to think too long) so unnecessary that they frequently begun to laugh, and to hiss twenty times, that, had it not been for the King's being there, they had certainly hissed it off the stage. But I must confess that, as my Lord Barkeley says behind me, the having of that long letter was a thing so absurd, that he could not imagine how a man of his parts could possibly fall into it; or, if he did, if he had but let any friend read it, the friend would have told him of it; and, I must confess, it is one of the most remarkable instances that ever I did or expect to meet with in my life of a wise man's not being wise at all times, and in all things, for nothing could be more ridiculous than this, though the letter of itself at another time would be thought an excellent letter, and indeed an excellent Romance, but at the end of the play, when every body was weary of sitting, and were already possessed with the effect of the whole letter, to trouble them with a letter a quarter of an hour long was a most absurd thing. After the play done, and nothing pleasing them from the time of the letter to the end of the play, people being put into a bad humour of disliking (which is another thing worth the noting), I home by coach, and could not forbear laughing almost all the way home, and all the evening to my going to bed, at the ridiculousness of the letter, and the more because my wife was angry with me, and the world, for laughing, because the King was there, though she cannot defend the length of the letter

Event Comment: In L. C. 5@139, p. 373, is a list of plays allowed to the Duke's Company: The Poetaster [by Ben Jonson]. Cupids Reuenge [by Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher. See 17 Aug. 1668]. Timon of Athens [by William Shakespeare]. Troyolus and Grisseida [by William Shakespeare]. Three parts of H. ye 6 [by William Shakespeare]. The honest mans fortune [by John Fletcher and others]. Woemen pleas'd [by John Fletcher]. Witt at Seuerall Weapons [by Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher]. The Woemen Hater or The hungry Courtier [by Francis Beaumont]. All fooles [by George Chapman]. Birons Conspiracy [by George Chapman]. Broken heart [by John Ford]. Bird in a Cage [by James Shirley]. Chabot Admirall of ffranse [by James Shirley, with George Chapman]. ffaithful Shepherd [possibly Guarini's Il Pastor Fido]. Herod and Antipater [by Gervase Markham with William Sampson]. Humor out of breath [by John Day]. Jealous Louers [by Thomas Randolph]. Loues Melancholy [Lover's Melancholy, by John Ford]. Muliasses the Turke [by John Mason]. Queene of Arragon [by William Habington]. Revenge of Bussy D'Ambois [by George Chapman]. Revenge for Honor [or The Parricide, by Henry Glapthorne]

Event Comment: William Cartwright's The Lady Errant was licensed by Sir Henry Herbert to the Duke's Company on this date. See Bentley, Jacobean and Caroline Stage, III, 128-32

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 Duke's Company. This play is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 216. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 348. The date on the list seems to be "3," but as this is a Sunday, it is more likely "9." This performance may well be the one to which Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 31) refers: Note, Mr Cademan in this Play [The Man's the Master], not long after our Company began in Dorset-Garden; his Part being to Fight with Mr Harris, was Unfortunately, with a sharp Foil pierc'd near the Eye, which so Maim'd both the Hand and his Speech, that he can make little use of either; for which Mischance, he has receiv'd a Pension ever since 1673, being 35 Years a goe. [For a discussion of this accident, see William VanLennep, Henry Harris, Actor, Friend of Pepys, Studies in English Theatre History (London, 1952), p. 16, and the entry under 20 Aug. 1673.

Event Comment: The Dowager Countess of Sunderland to Henry Sidney, 19 Feb. 1679@80: The players have been disturbed again by drunken people's jokes. They called my Lord Arran a rogue; and one Fitzpatrick pointed at Mr Thinne, and called him that petitioning fool, and swore a hundred oaths; he said that he deserved #20,000 a-year, but that fool deserved nothing (R. W. Blencowe, Diary of the Times of Charles the Second [London, 1843], I, 279-80). See also 2 and 9 Feb. 1679@80

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This is another in the series of Court performances in L. C. 5@145, p. 120. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 350, and 11 Feb. 1679@80. Mountstevens to Henry Stevens, 20 Feb. 1679@80: Upon Sunday the Court is to be in mourning for the death of the Princess Elizabeth, sister to Prince Rupert. (R. W. Blencowe, Diary of the Time of Charles the Second [London, 1843], I, 283)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not certain, but the Dedication speaks of its being acted two days and an order, L. C. 5@144, p. 29 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p.1 on), dated 14 Dec. 1680, banning it suggest that it was performed on 11 and 13 Dec. 1680. It is possible, however, that Tate's statements may refer to performances on 18 and 19 Jan. 1680@1. Dedication, Edition of 1681: For the two Days in which it was Acted, the Change of the Scene, Names of Persons, &c. was a great Disadvantage: many things were by this means render'd obscure and incoherent that in their native Dress had appear'd not only proper but gracefull. I call'd my Persons Sicilians but might as well have made 'em Inhabitants of the Isle of Pines. Henry Purcell composed the music for a song, "Retir'd from any mortal's sight." See Purcell, Works, The Purcell Society, XX (1916), ix-x

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was entered in the Term Catalogues in February 1681@2 and advertised in The Loyal Protestant, 7 March 1681@2, suggests a premiere in December 1681. A certain performance on 14 Jan. 1681@2 may indicate, however, that the play did not have its first performance until that month. A song for this play, Retired from mortal's sight, set by Henry Purcell, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, 1683

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Newdigate newsletters, 5 Aug. 1682: [Yesterday the] Dutchess goes to ye Dukes Theatre--that and ye Kings house haveing Joyned interests the latter being Discontinued where will be purposely Acted for her Anna Bullen being a deepe Tragedy of the beheading of the said Lady by Henry the 8th (Wilson, Theatres Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 81). See also London Mercury, 8 Aug. 1682. Juliana Brabazon to the Countess of Rutland, Aug. 1682: The Dutches of Yorke kept her bed the day after seeing Anna Bulloigne acted (HMC, 12th Report, Rutland MSS., Part V, 1889, p. 77)

Event Comment: The program was published in 1684: A Musical Entertainment Perform'd on November XXII. 1683, It Being the Festival of St Cecilia, a great Patroness of Music; Whose Memory is Annually Honour'd by a public Feast made on that Day by the Masters and Lovers of Music, as well in England as in Foreign Parts. [Henry Purcell signed the Preface: To the Gentlemen of the Musical Society, and particularly the Stewards.] An advertisement in Vinculum Societatis, 1691, states that Christopher Fishburn composed the verse

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the latest likely date is early summer, for it was licensed for publication on 14 Aug. 1685. if it did not appear before the death of Charles II, July 1685 is a likely date, as May was occupied with Sir Courtly Nice and June with Albion and Albanius. Dedication, Edition of 1685: [The Scenes] had no better Success on the Stage, was for this Reason: The principal Part (on which the Diversion depended) was, by Accident, disappointed of Mr Nokes's Performance, for whom it was design'd and only proper. A song, How great are the blessings of government made, set by Henry Purcell, is in The Musical Companion, The Second Book, 1686

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@148, p. 145. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351. By this time Henry Purcell had apparently composed the Act tunes for this play. See Purcell, Works, The Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xxxii. Luttrell [A Brief Relation, I, 431): The 6th was observed as a festival of joy for the king s comeing to the crown;...and at night was a play at court

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@149, p. 368: The Queene a Box, and a Box for the Maids of Honor at the Spanish Fryer. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. A warrant, dated 8 June 1689, L. C. 5@149, p. 154 (see Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 356), calls for a payment of #25 to Mrs Barry and presumably represents payment for this performance. Daniel Finch, ca. June 1689: The only day Her Majesty gave herself the diversion of a play, and that on which she designed to see another, has furnished the town with discourse for a month. The choice of the play was the Spanish Fryar, the only play forbid by the late K@@. Some unhappy expressions, among which those that follow, put her in some disorder, and forc'd her to hold up her fan, and often look behind her and call for her palatine and hood, and any thing she could next think of, while those who were said. (Sir John Dalrymple, Memoirs of Great Britain [London, 1771-88], in the pit before her, whenever their fancy led them to make any application of what was Volume II, Appendix, Part II, pp. 78-80.) Henry Purcell's new setting for whilst I with grief did on you look may have been made by this date. It is in Deliciae Musicae, 1695

Event Comment: London Gazette, No 2542, 20-24 March 1689@90: The Annual Yorkshire Feast will be held the 27th instant at Merchant-Taylor's-Hall in Threadneedle-street; with a very splendid Entertainment of all sorts of Vocal and Instrumental Musick. D'Urfey (Wit and Mirth, I, 114-16): An Ode on the Assembly of the Nobility and Gentry of the City and County of York, at the Anniversary-Feast, March the 27th 1690. Set to Musick by Mr Henry Purcell, One of the finest Compositions he ever made, and cost 100l. the performing

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@151, p. 369. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. This appears to be a substitution for a previously scheduled performance of Amphitryon (Nicoll, p. 352). In L. C. 5@150, p. 74 (Nicoll, p. 357) is an order for a large looking glass to be provided for Sir Courtly Nice at this performance. In addition, there appears to have been a concert in honor of the Queen's birthday. See D'Urfey, Wit and Mirth, I, 62-64: An Ode on the Anniversary of the Queens-Birth. Set to Musick by Mr Henry Purcel, April 30th, 1690

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, and the play is one of a large group commonly assigned to September-December 1690. As the Prologue implies an autumn production, it has been placed at late September, although the premiere may have been October. It was advertised in the London Gazette, 18-22 Dec. 1690, and entered in the Term Catalogues, Feb. 1690@1. The music was composed by Henry Purcell. See Purcell, Works, Purcell Society, XXI (Dramatic Music, III, 1917), xii-xiv. Dedication: So visibly promoting my Interest on those days chiefly (the Third and the Sixth) when I had the tenderest relation to the welfare of my Play [i.e. Southerne had two benefits]. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, 1691, Appendix): This Play was acted with extraordinary Applause, the Part of Sir Anthony Love being most Masterly play'd by Mr Montfort: and certainly, who ever reads it, will find it fraught with true Wit and Humour. Gentleman's Journal, January 1691@2: [The Wives' Excuse, newly performed] was written by Mr Southern, who made that call'd Sir Anthony Love, which you and all the Town have lik'd so well

Event Comment: The United Company. There is no certainty as to when the first performance occurred, but it can hardly be later than 11 Nov. 1690, when it was entered in the Stationers' Register; it was then advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2618, 11-15 Dec. 1690. On the assumption that the performance of Amphitryon on 21 Oct. 1690 followed its premiere, Distress'd Innocence has been assigned to late October 1690. The Overture and seven Act Tunes were composed by Henry Purcell. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xix. Dedication, Edition of 1691: I must still own my self indebted on all Hands, not only to the kind Audience, but likewise to the kind Company, who amongst other Favours, were pleased to be at the Charge of dressing my Play to so much Advantage. But above all I must make my publick Acknowledgments to Mr Betterton for his several extraordinary Hints to the heightening of my best Characters, nor am I a little indebted to Mr Montfort, for the last Scene of my Play which he was so kind to write for me

Event Comment: The United Company. This play was apparently never published, but it was mentioned in the Prologue to King Edward the Third (ca. Nov. 1690) and again in tne Gentleman's Journal, Jan. 1691@2. Gentleman's Journal, Jan. 1691@2: You have often ask'd me, who was the author of that, call'd The Gordian Knot unty'd; and wondred, with many more, why it was never printed. I hear that Gentleman who writ lately a most ingenious Dialogue concerning Women, now translated into French, is the Author of that witty Play, and it is almost a Sin in him to keep It and his name from the world. [This statement points to William Walsh's A Dialogue Concerning Women, Being a Defence of the Sex. Written to Eugenia (London, 1691).] Henry Purcell wrote the instrumental music for this work. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), vii

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but it followed The Gordian Knot Unty'd, which is mentioned in the Prologue. Edward III was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2629, 19-22 Jan. 1690@1, and entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1690@1. The authorship is uncertain. The title page bears no author's name, but the Dedication is signed by Will. Mountfort. In addition, on 10 Oct. 1691 Mountfort received a grant of #10 when Edward III was played before the Queen (L. C. 5@150, p. 306, in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 357). On tne other hand, the Gentleman's Journal, October 1692, stated that it was written by the author of Henry the Second, which has been attributed to John Bancroft. See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 388-89, for a summation of the evidence on this problem. Alfred Harbage, Elizabethan-Restoration Palimpsest, Modern Language Review, XXXV (1940), 319, thinks that this is a revision of Robert Davenport's The Politic Queen