Event Comment: John Dryden to Lord Latimer, July 1677: But the Kings Comedy [probably Mr Limberham] lyes in the Sudds till you please to send me into Northamptonshyre: it will be almost such another piece of business as the fond Husband, for such the King will have it, who is parcell poet with me in the plott; one of the designes being a story he was pleas'd formerly to tell me; and therefore I hope he will keep the jeast in countenance by laughing at it...I have a farther honour to beg, that my Tragedy [All for Love], which will be acted at Michaelmasse, & is already written, may have the honour to be addressed to my Lord Treasurer; & that your Lordship and My Lord Mulgrave wil I hope beg together for me (The Letters of John Dryden, ed. Ward, pp. 11-12)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, and it may have been acted before this season; hence, it is entered also in the preliminary list in the season of 1676-77. As the play was licensed for printing on 4 Oct. 1677, September 1677 is probably the latest time at which it could have been produced. The play is an alteration of Thomas Middleton's No Wit, No Help, Like a Woman's. It has been attributed to both Mrs Aphra Behn and Thomas Betterton

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known. As the play was licensed for printing on 2 Nov. 1677, it may have had its First performance in October rather than September

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known. Although the play was not entered in the Term Catalogues until February 1677@8, it was advertised in the London Gazette, 29 Oct.-1 Nov. 1677, and was probably acted in October 1677 or earlier. See also, in the introductory list of plays, Thomas Rymer's Edgar, which may have been acted in opposition to Ravenscroft's play

Event Comment: The Duke's Company acted an unnamed play on this day. See A Calendar of Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 177. Although the payment is dated 13 Feb., it may be a delayed payment for a play on this date

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known. It was not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1678, but the very large number of new plays acted by the Duke's Company in the spring of 1678, many of them more precisely dated, makes it probable that this was an early spring production which had title success. The title page states: Written by a Person of Quality. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, 1691, p. 554) ascribes it to "Mr Rawlins." A Library of Congress copy has on the title page: "by L. Baker.

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known. As the licensing date for this play was 30 April 1678, it probably was acted before Easter, but it may have had its first production immediately after Easter, Sunday 31 March 1678

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@143, p. 162. An entry for the same play on L. C. list, 5@144, p. 120, with the date 25 April, is possibly an error. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 348-49. There is no indication that this performance is the premiere, but a licensing date of 31 May 1678 suggests a premiere in April 1678

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is uncertain. The date of licensing was 3 Jan. 1678@9, but Wilson (Six Restoration Play-Dates, p. 222) has argued that it may well have been the first new play of the season. The Prologue refers to it as "The first Play bury'd since the Wollen Act," the Act going into effect on 1 Aug. 1678. For Sandford as Creon, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 131. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 37): Oedipus King of Thebes, Wrote by Mr Nat. Lee and Mr Dryden: The last Writing the first two Acts, and the first the 3 last. This play was Admirably well Acted; especially the Parts of Oedipus and Jocasta: One by Mr Betterton, the other by Mrs Betterton; it took prodigiously being Acted 10 Days together

Event Comment: There may have been a play given on this day, but the evidence is confusing. See A Calendar of Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, 127-28

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but as the play was licensed for printing on 27 March 1679, the premiere must have been no later than March 1679. It is possible that Midnight's Intrigue--see introductory note to the 1676-77 season-is an earlier version of this play. The Epilogue suggests that the players faced thin audiences during the spring and that Drury Lane had been closed for some time: So hard the Times are, and so thin the Town, @Though but one Playhouse, that must too lie down. It is possible that Mrs Behn's The Young King may have been acted at this time. See September 1679

Event Comment: The True News; or, Mercurius Anglicus, 4-7 Feb. 1679@80: On Munday night last happened a great dispute in the Duke's Play-house, some Gentlemen in their Cupps entring into the Pitt, flinging Links at the Actors, and using several reproachfull speeches against the Dutchess of P. and other persons of Honour, which has occasioned a Prohibition from farther Acting, till his Majesties farther pleasyre. A letter written by the Dowager Countess of Sunderland to Henry Sidney, dated 6 Jan. 1679@80 [possibly misdated] refers to disorders which are similar to those recorded in The True News: You must needs hear of the abominable disorders amongst us, calling all the women whores and the men rogues in the playhouses--throwing candles and links--calling my Lord Sunderland traitor, but in good company; the Duke of York?, rascal; and all ended in "God bless his Highness, the Duke of Monmouth. We will be for him against the world." I am told they may be fined a great deal if they are prosecuted. Two of these are knights of shires, Sir Scroope How, and my Lord Wharton's@eldest son; the only sufferer yet is Porter. They are ashamed, I hear, and afraid (R. W. Blencowe, Diary of the Times of Charles the Second by the Honourable Henry Sidney [London, 1843], I, 237)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known. Although the play was not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1681, Wilson (Six Restoration Play-Dates, p.222) has argued that the reference in the Prologue to the young men (presumably Gray, Goodman, and Clarke; see February 1679@80) who had gone to Scotland and returned empty-handed suggests a performance near March 1680, when these references would have more point than they would have a year later

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the reference in the Prologue to "this good Godly time of Lent" would place it between 25 Feb. and 3 April 1680. It was entered in the Term Catalogues in May 1680

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Newdigate newsletters, 29 May 1680: Their Matyes players have put out a Bille that on Munday next they will Act a new play abt the ffemale prelate or the History of Pope Joan (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80). Newdigate newsletters, 3 June: On Munday last the King's players began to Act the new play called Pope Joan (ibid.)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known; an entry in L. C. 5@145, p. 120, lists it for 1 March, but leaves the year in question. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349. Because the Prologue upbraids the audience for deserting Dorset Garden to see The Female Prelate at Drury Lane (beginning 31 May 1680) and because the Epilogue refers to railing at the Penny Post, a service inaugurated on 1 April 1680, a performance in mid-June 1680 seems the likely first production. If so, the L. C. entry for 1 March probably represents a revival for 1 March 1680@1. A song, Bonny lass gin thou wert mine, with music by Thomas Farmer, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Third Book, 1681. For Leigh as Sir Jolly and Nokes as Sir Davy, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 147-48. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 36): These two Comedies [The Soulder's Fortune and D'Urfey's The Fond Husband] took extraordinary well, and being perfectly Acted; got the Company great Reputation and Profit

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not certain, particularly since an entry in L. C. 5@145, p. 120 (see also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349) lists this play for 8 March, the year uncertain. Since the entry follows one for The Souldier's Fortune which followed the premiere of The Female Prelate, 31 May 1680, the L. C. entry probably is one for 8 March 1680@1. That the premiere occurred near 1 Nov. 1680 is suggested by a letter of Anne Montague to Lady Hatton, 1 Nov. 1680: For I never see the towne fuller, for I was to see the new play, The Spanish Frier, and there was all the world, but the Court is a letell dull yet; the Queen being sick, there is noe drawing room (Hatton Correspondence, Camden Society, XXII [1878], 240). A song, Farewell ungratefull Traytor, with music by Captain Pack and sung by Mrs Crofts, is in Act V. For Leigh's and Nokes' acting, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 143, 145-46. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 37): 'Twas Admirably Acted, and produc'd vast Profit to the Company

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. After the banning of The Sicilian Usurper, it was brought on again under a new title and survived two days before it also was banned. Tate's statement concerning its reception--see 11 Dec. 1680--may refer to these two performances rather than to the sequence in December. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 20 Jan. 1680@1: K. Richd ye 2.d a play, being forbid acting att ye Ks house the Poet put the name Tyrant of Sicily upon it by wch means it was acted twice this weeke, but the Cheate being found out it was forbid acting againe (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. As the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1681, it was probably first acted not later than March 1681. The title page states: Revis'd with Alterations

Event Comment: The King's Company. This play was acted at Oxford on 19 March 1680@1 before Charles II (see True Protestant Mercury, 19-23 March 1680@1; Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80; and Smith's Protestant Intelligence, 24-28 March 1681). The play may have been given first in London; if not, it probably was not acted there until after Easter, 3 April 1681. The company also performed The Plain Dealer in Oxford on 21 March 1680@1 (Smith's Protestant Intelligence, 24-28 March 1681)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but its listing in the Term Catalogues, November 1681, suggests late October as a likely latest date for its premiere. If Mithridates was acted in mid-October at the opening of Drury Lane, Sir Barnaby Whigg may well be the first new play offered by the King's Company in the autumn. A Song in Act I, Blow Boreas Blow, with music apparently by Henry Purcell, is in A Third Collection of New Songs...Words by Mr D'Urfey, 1685, and in Dramatic Works of Henry Purcell, Purcell Society, III (1917), xiv-xv

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@145, p. 120. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 020. The date of the first performance is not known, but it may well have been about this time, as the Prologue refers to Michaelmas Term and the reopening of the playhouses ("Theatres are up"). The play was entered in the Term Catalogues in February 1681@2

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 King's Company. The date of the premiere is not certain. This performance is known from an entry in the Newdigate newsletters, which also states that Rollo was to be acted on the following Monday. If this statement is accurate, the performance of The Loyal Brother on 4 Feb. 1681@2 may be the third night rather than the opening performance. Newdigate newsletters, 4 Feb. 1681@2: On Monday morn [the Moorish Ambassador] & ye Comers meet to conclude ye treaty and in ye afternoon goes to see Rollo D. of Normandy at ye Ks playhouse wre ye K was this afternoon to see ye new play calld ye Loyall brothr (Wilson, More Theater Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59). The Prologue and Epilogue were printed separately and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 70-72. Luttrell acquired his copies (Huntington Library) on 7 Feb. 1681@2. In The Life of John Dryden (Chapel Hill, 1961), Charles E. Ward believes (pp. 166, 355) that The Loyal Brother was first acted in the autumn of 1681; but the entry in the Newdigate newsletters seems to make February 1682 the more probable time