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 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: 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 King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but a letter--see 2 Jan. 1670@1--indicates that the first part had been acted before that date and that Part II was to be shortly staged. The point of the Prologue spoken by Ellen Gwyn seems to have derived from an incident at Dover (see Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 20) in May 1670, when James Nokes attired himself in a ridiculous fashion, including "Broad wast Belts." The speakers of the Epilogue and the Prologue to the Second Part are mentioned in Sir William Haward's MS (Bodl. MS Don. b., pp. 248-49); see The Poems of John Dryden, ed. James Kinsley (Oxford, 1958), IV, 1848-49. In Part I a song Beneath a myrtle shade, with music by John Bannister, is in Choice Songs and Ayres, First Book, 1673. Another, Wherever I am, with music by Alphonso Marsh, is in the same collection, as is also How unhappy a lover am I, the music by Nicholas Staggins. Mrs John Evelyn to Mr Bohun, ca. Jan. 1670@1: Since my last to you I have seen The Siege of Grenada, a play so full of ideas that the most refined romance I ever read is not to compare with it; love is made so pure, and valour so nice, that one would image it designed for an Utopia rather than our stage. I do not quarrel with the poet, but admire one born in the decline of morality should be able to feign such exact virtue; and as poetic fiction has been instructive in former ages, I wish this the same event in ours. As to the strict law of comedy I dare not pretend to judge: some think the division of the story is not so well if it could all have been comprehended in the day's actions (The Diary and Correspondence of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, IV, 25). According to John Evelyn--see 9 Feb. 1670@1--Robert Streeter did some of the scenes for this play. In the Preface to The Fatal Discovery, ca. February 1697@8, George Powell, in discussing revivals of Dryden's plays, stated: In relation to our reviving his Almanzor...very hard crutching up what Hart and Mohun could not prop

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but a licensing date of 28 March 1678 suggests a first performance not later than February 1678. One song, One night while all the village slept, with music by Louis Grabu and words by Sir Car Scroop, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Third Book, 1681. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 17): Major Mohun...[in] Mithridates, &c. An Eminent Poet seeing him Act this last, vented suddenly this Saying: Oh Mohun, Mohun! Thou little Man of Mettle, if I should write a 100 Plays, I'd Write a Part for thy Mouth; in short, in all his Parts, he was most Accurate and Correct. [Downes, p. 12, gives an identical cast except for omissions.] Princess Anne apparently played Ziphares and Frances Apsley played Semandra in a production of this drama, probably at St James's Palace or at Sir Allen Apsley's house in St James's Square, between January 1677@8 and August 1679. See Benjamin Bathurst, Letters of Two Queens (London, 1924), p. 61

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 116. The King's Company. According to Wright, Historia Histrionica, 1699, Mohun played Bellamante shortly after the Restoration

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 116. The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: I to the new playhouse and saw part of the Traitor, a very good Tragedy; Mr Moon [Mohun] did act the Traitor very well

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: In haste to carry my wife to see the new play I saw yesterday, she not knowing it. But there, contrary to expectation, find The Silent Woman. However in; and there Knipp come into the pit...[and] tells me the King was so angry at the liberty taken by Lacy's part to abuse him to his face, that he commanded they should act no more, till Moone [Mohun] went and got leave for them to act again, but not this play. The King mighty angry; and it was better indeed, but very true and witty. I never was more taken with a play than I am with this "Silent Woman," as old as it is, and as often as I have seen it. There is more wit in it than goes to ten new plays. Nathaniel Wanby, Coventry, 1667: We have known in our time that the Silent Woman hath had the loud applause of a whole theatre (BM Harleian MS. 6430, p.23)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, and there,--in an upper box...did see The Moor of Venice: but ill-acted in most parts; Mohun, which did a little surprise me, not acting Iago's part by much so well as Clun used to do; nor another Hart's, which was Cassio's; nor, indeed, Burt doing the Moor's so well as I once thought he did

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance, which marks the opening of the new Theatre Royal in Drury Lane, is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 73. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. The Prologue and Epilogue were printed in Miscellany Poems, 1684. That the Prologue was spoken by Mohun is indicated in BM Sloane MSS. 4445

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is known through a document summarized in The Theatrical Inquisitor and Monthly Mirror, July 1816, p. 25, and summarized in Fitzgerald, A New History, I, 145. Although this performance is the first certainly known, it is probably not the premiere, for the attendance (see below) was too small for the premiere of a new work by John Dryden. Since the play was entered in the Stationers' Register, January 1678, the first production was probably not long before this performance. The document in The Theatrical Inquisitor gives this information: The King's Box, no receipts; Mr Hayles' boxes, #3 (probably 15 spectators); Mr Mohun's boxes, #1 12s. (probably 8 spectators); Mr Yeats' boxes, 12s. (probably 3 spectators); James' boxes, #2 (probably 10 spectators). Mr Kent's pitt, 82 spectators, and Mr Britan's pitt, 35 spectators, a total of 117, paying #14 12s. 6d. Mr Bracy's gallery, 42 spectators; and Mr Johnson's gallery, 21 spectators; a total of 63 spectators, who paid #4 14s. 6d. Mr Thomson's gallery, 33 spectators, paying #1 13s. The total attendance appears to have been 249; the receipts were #28 4s. The house rent came to #5 14s. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 11) gives a cast which is identical except for omissions

Event Comment: Mainpiece: By Particular desire. Afterpiece: Never Acted Before. [The Farce by Fielding is a sequel to The Virgin Unmasked.] Forbidden soon by the Lord Chamberlain. It being supposed that a particular man of quality was pointed at in one of the characters. The prohibition short of duration (Genest, III, 652). See A Letter to a Noble Lord to whom it alone belongs, occasioned by a representation at Drury Lane of a Farce call'd Miss Lucy in Town (1742), [a 20 page pamphlet criticizing the Lord Chamberlain for allowing this farce. Author gives a scene by scene account emphasizing the bawdry and discounting the pious conclusion. He concludes with remarks on theatrical dancing]: As to Dances, I think your province of prohibition does not extend; so the Public cannot owe their gratitude to you for several. I appeal to those who have been on the coast of Malabar and the banks of the Ganges whether we have not had some that have exceeded on posture, or anything of that kind so common amongst the polite Indians of Indostan. Afterpiece: Mrs Clive mimics the Muscovita admirably, and Beard Amorevoli intolerably (H. Walpole to H. Mann, 26 May).-Horace Walpole Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, I, 435. Receipts: #70

Event Comment: Afterpiece [1st time at a public theatre; C 3, by Elizabeth Craven, Baroness Craven, afterwards Margravine of Anspach, 1st acted privately at the Town-Hall, Newbury, 6 Apr. 1780. Text (G. Riley, 1781) assigns no parts. Prologue by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Epilogue by Joseph Jekyll (see text)]: With new Dresses, &c. "The Prologue [the first 30 lines and the concluding couplet of which were used by Sheridan as the Prologue to Pizarro (see dl, 24 May 1799)] was so much admired that at the request of the Duchess of Devonshire and several other of the nobility it was respoken after the piece; but as King was absent from the theatre, it was delivered by Palmer" (Town and Country Magazine, May 1780, p. 23 ). "The chief singularity was that [Lady Craven] went to it herself the second night, in form; sat in the middle of the front row of the stage-box, much dressed, with a profusion of white bugles and plumes, to receive the public homage due to her sex and loveliness. The Duchess of Richmond, Lady Harcourt,...Mrs Damer, Lord Craven,...and I were with her. It was amazing to see so young a woman entirely possess herself-but there is such an integrity and frankness in her consciousness of her own beauty and talents, that she speaks of them with a naivete as if she had no property in them, but only wore them as gifts of the gods. Lord Craven on the contrary was quite agitated by his fondness for her and with impatience at the bad performance of the actors, which was wretched indeed, yet the address of the plot, which is the chief merit of the piece, and some lively pencilling carried it off very well, though Parsons murdered the Scotch lord, and Mrs Robinson (who is supposed to be the favourite of the Prince of Wales) thought on nothing but her own charms, or him. There is a very good though endless prologue written by Sheridan and spoken in perfection by King, which was encored (an entire novelty) the first night: and an epilogue that I liked still better and which was full as well delivered by Mrs Abington, written by Mr. Jekyl. The audience, though very civil, missed a fair opportunity of being gallant, for in one of those ----logues, I forget which, the noble authoress was mentioned, and they did not applaud as they ought to have done, especially when she condescended to avow her pretty child and was there looking so very pretty...Yet Lady Craven's tranquillity had nothing displeasing;...and it was tempered by her infinite good nature, which made her make excuses for the actors instead of being provoked at them" (Walpole [28 May 1780], XI, 178-80). Public Advertiser, 14 July 1781: This Day at Noon will be published The Miniature Picture (price not listed). Receipts: #144 9s. (94.9; 48.3; 1.17)