Event Comment: See Nicoll (Restoration Drama, p. 298n) for an order to this company to cease acting; the suspension was not, however, in effect very long

Event Comment: It is uncertain at which theatre this play was performed, but it has been assigned to the King's Company because Pepys saw that company act it on the following day, 27 Nov. Evelyn, Diary: I saw Hamlet Pr. of Denmark played: but now the old playe began to disgust this refined age; since his Majestie being so long abroad

Event Comment: Nethercot (Davenant,pp. 337-78) believes that this play was brought out in the late summer of 1663. The Epilogue refers to the Long Vacation, presumably the summer of 1663, as the play is referred to in Stapylton's The Stepmother, which was licensed 26 Dec. 1663. In Act V is a farce relating to Pompey; as Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 405) states: Pompey, a Tragedy, which I have seen acted with great Applause, at the Duke's Theatre, and at the End was acted that Farce printed in the fifth Act of The Play-house to be Let. [See also June 1663.

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary, 24 Dec.: By and by comes in Captain Ferrers to see us, and, among other talke, tells us of the goodness of the new play of Henry VIII, which makes me think it long till my time is out

Event Comment: This play was presumably acted by the Duke's Company. In the preface to Heraclius, Emperour of the East, published in 1664, the author, Lodowick Carlell, complains that he had submitted his translation of Corneille, only to have it returned the very day that this version appeared on the stage. See also the letter by Katherine Philips, under Pompey the Great, Jan. 1663@4. Pepys, Diary: We made no long stay at dinner; for Heraclius being acted, which my wife and I have a mighty mind to see, we do resolve, though not exactly agreeing with the letter of my vowe, yet altogether with the sense, to see another this month, by coming hither instead of that at court, there having ueen none conveniently since I made my vowe for us to see there, nor like to be this Lent, and besides we did walk home on purpose to make this going as cheap as that would have been, to have seen one at Court, and my conscience knows that it is only the saving of money and the time also that I intend by my oaths....The play hath one very good passage well managed in it, about two persons pretending, and yet denying themselves, to be son to the tyrant Phocas, and yet heire of Mauricius to the crowne. The garments like Romans very well. The little girle is come to act very prettily, and spoke the epilogue most admirably. But at the beginning, at the drawing up of the curtaine, there was the finest scene of the Emperor and his people about him, standing in their fixed and different postures in their Roman habitts, above all that ever I yet saw at any of the theatres

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play in on the L. C. list, 5@139, p. 125. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. It is possible that this is a delayed third performance and that the conjectured one for 7 Oct. did not occur. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I and Willet to the Duke of York's house, where, after long stay, the King and Duke of York come, and there saw The Coffee House, the most ridiculous, inspid play that ever I saw in my life, and glad we were that Betterton had no part in it

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, and there saw The Black Prince again: which is now mightily bettered by that long letter being printed, and so delivered to every body at their going in, and some short reference made to it in heart in the play, which do mighty well; but, when all is done, I think it is the worst play of my Lord Orrery's. But here, to my great satisfaction, I did see my Lord Hinchingbroke and his mistress, with her father and mother; and I am mightily pleased with the young lady, being handsome enough--and, indeed, to my great liking, as I would have her. I could not but look upon them all the play

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: It being almost twelve o'clock, or a little more, and carried [Mercer, Mrs Horsfield, and Mrs Gayet] to the King's playhouse, where the doors were not then open; but presently they did open; and we in, and find many people already come in, by private ways, into the pit, it being the first day of Sir Charles Sidly's new play, so long expected, The Mulberry Garden, of whom, being so reputed a wit, all the world do expect great matters. I having sat here awhile, and eat nothing to-day, did slip out, getting a boy to keep my place...And so to the play again, where the King and Queen, by and by, come, and all the Court; and the house infinitely full. But the play, when it come, though there was, here and there, a pretty saying, and that not very many neither, yet the whole of the play had nothing extraordinary in it, at all, neither of language nor design; insomuch that the King I did not see laugh, nor pleased the whole play from the beginning to the end, nor the company; insomuch that I have not been less pleased at a new play in my life, I think. And which made it the worse was, that there never was worse musick played--that is, worse things composed, which made me and Captain Rolt, who happened to sit near me, mad. So away thence, very little satisfied with the play, but pleased with my company. [For Bannister's setting a song for Mrs Knepp for this play, see 7 May 1668.

Event Comment: [The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and Mercer, and W. Hewer and Deb., to the King's playhouse, and I afterwards by water with them, and there we did hear the Eunuch (who, it seems, is a Frenchman, but long bred in Italy) sing, which I seemed to take as new to me, though I saw him on Saturday last [see 10 Oct. 1668], but said nothing of it; but such action and singing I could never have imagined to have heard, and do make good whatever Tom Hill used to tell me. [The Eunuch may be Baldassare Ferri.

Event Comment: An order of the Lord Chamberlain (5@12, p. 202) dated 1 April 1671, states that the theatres are to be closed because of the death of the Duchess of York on 31 March 1671. See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 322. It is uncertain how long the theatres were closed, but probably the closure extended for six weeks

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the play followed The Citizen Turned Gentleman (4 July 1672) and refers to it in the Prologue. Edward Ravenscroft replied in the Preface and Prologue to The Careless Lovers, which appeared in February or March 1672@3. A song, Long betwixt Love and fear Phillis tormented, set by Robert Smith, is in Choice Songs and Ayres, The First Book, 1673. Preface to The Assignation: It succeeded ill in the representation, against the opinion of many of the best Judges of our Age. Langbaine, English Dramatick Poets, p. 154: This Play was Damn'd on the Stage

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347. There is no certainty that this performance is the premiere, but it may well be. Two songs, Ah false Amyntas, and Amyntas led me to a grove, both set by Robert Smith, are in Choice Songs and Ayres, 1673. Preface to the edition of 1673: Good, Sweet, Honey, Sugar-candied Reader, ...Indeed that day 'twas Acted first, there comes into the Pit a long, lither, plegmatick, white, ill-favour'd, wretched Fop, an Officer in Masquerade newly transported with a Scarfe & Feather out of France, a sorry Animal that has nought else to shield it from the uttermost contempt of all mankind, but that respect which we afford to Rats and Toads, which though we do not well allow to live, yet when considered as a part of God's Creation, we make honourable mention of them. A thing, Reader--but no more of such a Smelt: This thing, I tell ye, opening that which serves it for a mouth, out issued such a noise as this to those that state about it, that they were to expect a woful Play, God damn him, for it was a womans.... Reader, I have a complaint or two to make to you, and I have done; Know then that this Play was hugely injur'd in the Acting, for 'twas done so imperfectly as never any was before, which did more harm to this than it could have done to any of another sort; the Plot being busie (though I think not intricate) and so requiring a continual attention, which being interrupted by the intolerable negligence of some that acted in it, must needs much spoil the beauty on't. My Dutch Lover spoke but little of what I intended for him, but supplied it with a great deal of idle stuff, which I was wholly unacquainted with until I heard it first from him. According to the Preface, the Prologue was lost

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Preface implies that it was a vacation (summer) production. The play was entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1674@5. Preface, Edition of 1675: It happening to be in my hands in the long Vacation, a time when the Play-house are willing to catch at any Reed to save themselves from Sinking, to do the House a kindness, and serve the Gentleman [who had apparently composed much of the play] I begged leave of him to turn it into Prose

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Nell Gwyn attended this performance. See VanLennep, Nell Gwyn's Playgoing, p. 408. There is no certainty that this is the premiere, but the reference in the Prologue to the long vacation and the licensing date of 25 Sept. 1676 point to a summer production

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. It is not certain that this play was revived at this time, but Tom Essence, which was probably acted toward the end of August or in early September (it was licensed 4 Nov. 1676) contains a scene in "Malfey's Chamber," suggesting that a revival of The Duchess of Malfi had occurred not long before the production of Tom Essence. On the other hand, it should be noted that the cast in the edition of 1678 contains names which point to a much earlier production; for example, Cademan probably acted little after his injury in the summer of 1673 and Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 35) states that Cogan and Price died ca. 1673-74

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@143, p. 162; on a similar list (L. C. 5@145, p. 120) the date is given as 25 May, but the second list may have been compiled from the first one and subject to error. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349. There is no indication that this is the first production, but the Epilogue refers to the shortly expected "long Vacation," a suggestion that the premiere came in May. The play was not licensed until 29 Aug. 1678

Event Comment: Evelyn, Diary: Came to my house some German strangers, & Signor Pietro Reggio a famous Musitian, who had ben long in Sweden in Queene Christina s Court: he sung admirably to a Guittar & has a perfect good tenor & base: & had set to Italian composure, many of Abraham Cowleys Pieces which shew'd extremely well

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: Lady Anne Howe to the Countess of Rutland, [18 Dec. 1681]: I have seene but one play since I came, but I must goe to one to see [the Russian Ambassador] sure he cannot live long, for he makes noe thing of a pint of brandie at a draught with a spoonful of white pepper in it (HMC, Rutland MSS., Report XII, Appendix, Part V, p. 63)

Event Comment: Newdigate Newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 6 Sept. 1684: A Crocdile was this weeke brought over from the E. Indies & showed in the faire the like haveing never been seen before it is a young one abt 4 ffoot long. [I owe this notice to Professor John Harold Wilson.

Event Comment: London Gazette, No 2581, 4-7 Aug. 1690: These are to give Notice, That by Order of the Lord-Mayor and Court of Alderman of the City of London, the Fair, commonly called Lady-Fair, in the Borough of Southwark, will from henceforth be held on the 7th, 8th, and 9th of September only in every Year (according to the Grant thereof of the City) and that the Booths or Shedds will be permitted to stand in the streets there any longer than the said three days