Event Comment: Written by the late Mr Dryden. Set to Musick by Mr Handel. Pit and Boxes half a Guinea. Galleries 4s. and 2s. 6d. London Daily Post and General Advertiser, 20 Feb.: Last Night his Royal Highness the Duke, and her Royal Highness the Princess Amelia were at. . . Mr Dryden's Ode, set to Musick by Mr Handel. Never was upon the like Occasion so numerous and splendid an Audience at any Theatre in London, there being at least 1300 Persons present; and it is judg'd that the Receipt of the House could not amount to less than 450l. It met with general Applause, tho attended with the Inconvenience of having the Performers placed at too great a distance from the Audience, which we hear will be rectified the next Time of Performance. [Egmont also present.]

Event Comment: On this date, L. C. 5@16, p. 101 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 10n) Nathaniel Lee's The Duke of Guise was banned. John Drummond to Marquis and Duke of Queensberry, 16 July 1682: Ther is a play hear to be acted that maks a great business, for the Duke of Munmuth has complained of it, and they say that notwithstanding it is to be acted sometime nixt weik. They call it the Duke of Guise, but in the play the true story is cheinged to the plott time hear (HMC, Buccleuch-Queensberry MSS., 1903, II 108). Newsletter, 29 July 1682: A play by Mr Dryden, termed the Duke of Guise, wherein the Duke of Monmouth was vilified and great interest being make for the acting thereof, but coming to His Majesty's knowledge is forbid, for though His Majesty be displeased with the Duke yet he will not suffer others to abuse him (HMC, 15th Report, Part VII, 1898, p. 108). Newdigate newsletters, 29 July 1682: A play having been made [by] Mr Dryden termed ye Duke of Guise supposed to Levell att the villifying the Duke of Monmouth & many other protestants & great Interest made for the Acting thereof but bringing to the knowledge of his Matie the same was forbidd for though his Maties pleasure is to be dissatisfyed and angry with the Duke of Monmouth, yet hee is not willing that others should abuse him out of a naturall affection for him (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 81)

Event Comment: Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 413: By order of the queen, the lord chamberlain has sent an order to the playhouse prohibiting the acting Mr Dryden s play called the tragedy of Cleomenes, reflecting much on the government. Gentleman's Journal, April 1692 (licensed 13 April): I was in hopes to have given you in this Letter an account of the Acting of Mr Dryden's Cleomenes; it was to have appear'd upon the Stage on Saturday last, and you need not doubt but that the Town was big with Expectation of the performance; but Orders came from Her Majesty to hinder its being Acted; so that none can tell when it shall be play'd

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but Dryden, on 14 Dec. 1699, indicated that the run of the play had been completed by that day. A copy in the Folger Shakespeare Library has a notice of its publication. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 45: Iphigenia a Tragedy, wrote by Mr Dennis, a good Tragedy and well Acted; but answer'd not the Expences they were at in Cloathing it. [In The Life of Mr John Dennis (London, 1734) the author states that Colonel Codrington prevailed on all his friends to take tickets for the dramatist's third night.] Preface, Edition of 1700: And from the first representations I expected all the success that I could reasonably desire. I never in my life at any Play took notice of a more strict attention, or, a more profound silence. And there was something like what happen'd at the Representation of Pacuvius his Tragedy. For upon Orestes discovering his passion to Iphigenia in the fourth Act, there was a general murmur through the Pit, which is what I had never seen before. But after three or four representations, several people, who during that time had wholly abandon'd themselves to the Impression which Nature had made on them, began to study how to be discontented by Art; and repented heartily at having been pleas'd with what Athens and Rome and Paris had been pleas'd before. A Comparison between the Two Stages (1702), p. 23: Critick: I must needs Complement him [Dennis] with the Success of his laborious Iphigenia: Ay, here's a Tragedy with a witness--show a more tragick Poet if you can--'twas a smart Epilogue. But I marvel a Man of Mr Dennis's Penetration wou'd suffer, nay beg his Friend to Burlesque him at that unreasonable rate: But the Author was conscious the Audience might mistake it for a Comedy, and so he gets Colonel C-(he was sure his Word wou'd be taken) to tell 'em it was not a Comedy but a Tragedy: The hint was good and necessary, for o' my word very few knew what to make of it before, tho' there were many Tremendous things in't. [The dialogue continues to examine Dennis' Preface, and Dennis's assertions there concerning his play.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Opera, where there was a new play (Cutter of Coleman Street), made in the year 1658, with reflections much upon the late times; and it being the first time, the pay was doubled, and so to save money, my wife and I went up into the gallery, and there sat and saw very well; and a very good play it is. It seems of Cowly's making. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 25): This Comedy being Acted so perfectly Well and Exact, it was perform'd a whole Week with a full Audience. John Dennis, Dedication to The Comical Gallant, 1702: The only Play that ever Mr Cowley writ, was barbarously treated the first night, as the late Mr Dryden has more than once informed me, who has told me that he went to see it with the famous Mr Sprat, now Bishop of Rochester, and that after the Play was done, they both made a visit to Mr Cowley. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 81): This Play met with some Opposition, at its Representation under this new Name, from some who envyed the Authors unshaken Loyalty to the Prince, and the Royal Cause, in the worst of Times. BM Add. Mss. 34217, fol. 31b, in Hotson (Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 247): @The Cutter of Coleman street had more fame@Before the Author chang'd its name@And shewd himselfe an Englishman right@By mending of things to spoyle them quite@And bee's more to blame because he can tell@(No better) to make new strings soe well.

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Alter'd from Beaumont and Fletcher, by Sir John Vanbrugh and Mr Dryden. Afterpiece: An English Opera, written by the late Mr Addison, and new set to Musick by Mr Arne, reserving two or three Favourite Songs, out of his former Opera

Event Comment: Evelyn, Diary, 11 Jan. 1693@4: Sup'd at Mr Ed Sheldons where was Mr Dryden the Poet, who now intending to Write no more Plays (intent upon the Translation of Virgil) read to us his Prologue & Epilogue to his last Valedictory Play, now shortly to be Acted

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the Post Man, 3-5 March 1697@8, suggests that the first performance occurred probably not later than early February 1697@8. The Preface is signed by George Powell, who refers to the author of the play as unknown. In addition, Powell mentions that his company has recently revived some of Dryden's plays: Don Sebastian, Secret Love; or, The Maiden Queen, Marriage a la Mode, King Arthur, and adds: In relation to our reviving his Almanzor...very hard crutching up what Hart and Mohun...could not prop

Event Comment: Alter'd from Shakespear by Sir Wm. Davenant and Mr Dryden. With all the Original Songs and Dances, Serious and Comic, Scenes, Machines, Habits, Flyings, Sinkings, and other Decorations proper to the Play

Event Comment: Not Acted these Forty Years. Written by Mr Dryden. And new Scenes, Machines, and other Decorations, particularly An Exact Representation of Merlin's Cave, as in the Royal Gardens at Richmond. Boxes and Balconies on the Stage 5s. Boxes 4s. Pit 2s. 6d. Gallery 1s. 6d. No After-Money will be taken. [According to edition of 1736, the Prologue and Epilogue were written by Mr Sterling.]

Event Comment: Written by the late Mr Dryden. Set to Musick by Mr Handel

Event Comment: Benefit Castelman, the Treasurer. Mainpiece: Alter'd from Beaumont and Fletcher by Sir John Vanbrugh and Mr Dryden. [Tickets at Castelman's Lodgings, at Mr Watford's, Upholder, over-against the Sun Tavern, Russel Street, Bloomsbury.

Event Comment: Afterpiece: Written by Mr Dryden, and Composed by Mr Henry Purcell

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

Event Comment: The King's Company. The exact date of this performance is not known, but the Prologue refers to "After a four Months Fast," suggesting that the theatre did not reopen until the end of the Long Vacation (24 Oct. 1681 is the beginning of Michaelmas Term). The Epilogue also seems to refer to events at Bartholomew Fair, and the Prologue to the King's visit to Newmarket, from which the King did not return until 12 Oct. 1681. Furthermore, The Impartial Protestant Mercury, No. 54, 28 Oct. 1681, reports: A Revised Play was some days since Acted on an Eminent Publick Theatre, and the Prologue is extreamly talked of. [The periodical reprints some of the lines (which are essentially those in the printed version).] The Loyal Protestant, No. 70, 29 Oct. 1681, refers to the same performance and reprints part of the Epilogue (which also is essentially that of the separately printed Epilogue). All of these elements point to a performance in mid-October. Both the Prologue and the Epilogue were printed separately, and have been reprinted by Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 43-45. Broadside copies of the Prologue and Epilogue in the Huntington Library bear Luttrell's manuscript notations that both were written by Dryden. Luttrell's date of acquisition is 13 Feb. 1681@2, an instance in which Luttrell's date of purchase does not apparently correspond closely to a date of performance

Event Comment: [The King's Company. Evelyn, Diary: Saw the Virgin Queene a play written by Mr Dryden &c. [Possibly the run of this play continued, for Pepys saw it again on 25 March and there are no certain performances of other plays at the King's Theatre. If Secret Love was acted without interruption, except for the customary non-acting days in Lent, it was probably given on 16, 18, 19, 21, and 23 March.

Event Comment: The King's Company. This play is one of a series represented by Prologues and Epilogues in Covent Garden Drollery, 1672, all of which may have been acted by the actress only. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 213) states: This Play was One of those that were represented at the old Theatre in Lincolns-Inn-Fields, when the Women acted alone. The Prologue and Epilogue were spoken by Mrs Marshall, and printed in Covent-garden Drollery, pag. 18. About this Time there was a Prologue written on purpose for the Women by Mr Dryden, and is printed in his Miscellany Poems in octavo, p. 285

Event Comment: Edward Bedingfield to the Countess of Rutland, 1 Jan. 1684@5: Wee are in expectation of an opera composed by Mr Dryden, and set by Grabuche [Grabut], and so well performed at the repetition that has been made before his Majesty at the Duchess of Portsmouth's pleaseth mightily, but the rates proposed will not take soe well, for they have set the boxes at a guyny a place, and the Pitt at halfe. They advance 4,000 l. on the opera, and therefore must tax high to reimburse themselves (HMC, 12th Report, Appendix, Rutland MSS., Part V, Vol. II, p. 85)

Event Comment: Gentleman's Journal, March 1691@2 (licensed 9 March 1691@2): And after Easter we are to have a New Opera; and Mr Dryden's Cleomenes very shortly

Event Comment: Newdigate newsletters, 26 March 1696: Mr Dryden ye famous Poet is writing a play wch will bee Intituled Englands deliverance from Popish Conspirators (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 82)

Event Comment: Benefit Mills. At the Desire of Several Persons of Quality. Written by the late Famous Mr Dryden

Event Comment: At the particular Desire of several Ladies of Quality. As it was altered from Shakespear by Sir Will. D'avenant, and the late Mr Dryden, Poets Laureat. With new Scenes, Machines, and all the Original Decorations proper to the Play

Event Comment: Mainpiece: Written by Mr Dryden

Event Comment: As it was alter'd (from Shakespear) by the late Sir William Davenant and Mr Dryden