Event Comment: [Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 4 Feb. 1674@5: Tuesday night after Counsell their Maties & Court were present at the Rehearsal of the great Maske wch is to be publiquely acted on Shrove Tuesday; by wch tyme her Royall Highness will be able to be present at it, being already very well after her Lying in, as is also ye young princess (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). The Bulstrode Papers (1, 277): 8 Feb. 1674@5: On Wed night after Councell their Maties and Royal Highnesses were present at the rehearsall of the Great Maske wch will be publiquely acted on Tuesday 7 night next. [The two sources agree on the intended date of the performance but disagree upon the date of the rehearsal.

Event Comment: On this date the masque was certainly acted, and the possible performance on 15 Feb. 1674@5 may have been a final rehearsal. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library): This day the great maske at court is publiquely acted wch is intended to exceed all others of that Nature, the 2 young Princesses, the Duke of Monmouth & all ye principall persons of quality abt ye Court having parts in it (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). The Bulstrode Papers (1, 277): 15 Feb. 1674@5: To-morrow the great mask at Court is to be publickly acted in all its bravery and pompe, the like of whch was never yett seene, all the greatest persons of quality about Court having pts in it

Event Comment: Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 23 Feb. 1674@5: Last night ye mask at Court was publiquely acted in ye presence of their Maties, R:11 Hsess & ye whole Court & will be once more acted before his Matie goes to Newmarket (Wilson, Theatre Notes, pp. 79-80). [Wilson points out that this performance is nowhere else mentioned.

Event Comment: The Bulstrode Papers (I, 302): There is arrived Scaramouchy, ye famous Italien comedian with his crew, to act againe, & are to have ye King's Theatre in Whitehall for their use during their stay, and all people are allowed to come there & see them, playing as they doe at other houses, so yt now a Papist may come to Court for halfe a crowne. This is not much lik'd by our other players, for it will half break both our houses. [See also a Treasury warrant for the importing of their belongings, Calendar of Treasury Books, 1672-1675, p. 757, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 121.

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, 22 Nov. 1676, suggests that it was first acted not much later than September 1676. The Dedication: I know it is a triffle that by the meaness of the stile, the want of good design, and the ill representation at the Theatre, being play'd to the worst advantage, has got little credit with the World

Event Comment: In L. C. 5@141, p. 528, is an order for altering the stage in the theatre in Whitehall for the French comedians. See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 380

Event Comment: L. C. 5@142, p. 38 (see also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 355): Order to Mr Staggins, Master of his Majesty's Musick, and in his absence to Mr Lock, who officiates for him:--That all His Majesty's musitians doe attend to practise in the theatre at Whitehall at such tymes as Madam Le Roch and Mr Paisible shall appoint for ye practiceing of such musick as is to be in ye French comedy to be acted before His Matie [the 29 May]

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the licensing of the play on 13 Aug. 1677 suggests a production not later than July 1677. Dedication to edition of 1678: But having...suffer'd so much through the defects of setting off, when it came on the Stage, it dares not now reject any Accomdation the Press cane give it. For (with the Theatres good leave to speak Truth,) it cannot receive greater Disadvantage in the Reading, than it met in the Presenting, The chief Parts Acted by Women; and, for their Ease, and somewhat of decorum, as was pretended, whole scenes left out, and scarcely any one Speech unmangled and entire. As for Adornments, in Habit, Musick, and Scene-Work it was Vacation-time, and the Company would not venture the Charge

Event Comment: In November 1678 the Duke of Modena sent his troupe of comedians to London. They remained there until mid-February 1678@9 but apparently played only six times in three months. For an account of this troupe, see A. L. Bader, The Modena Troupe in England, Modern Language Notes, L (1935), 367-69, and I. K. Fletcher, Italian Comedians in England in the 17th Century, Theatre Notebook, VIII (1954), 86-91. See also Calendar of Treasury Books, 1676-1679, pp. 1160, 1230, and Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 124

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is uncertain. The fact that the Epilogue suggests that it followed Settle's The Female Prelate is not a factor in the dating, as the Newdigate newsletters--see Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80--show that Settle's play was first acted on 31 May 1680, whereas Caesar Borgia was entered in the Term Catalogues, November 1679. Although the reference in the Epilogue to burning the Pope's Effigies" has been argued as referring to the Pope-burning procession of 17 Nov. 1679, the references in the Epilogue to Father Lewis, who was tried and convicted at York, 28 March 1679, suggest that it was written before his execution, 27 Aug. 1679. Hence the play may have been acted first some time in the late spring or the summer. A song, Blush not redder than the Morning, with music by Thomas Farmer, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Third Book, 1681

Event Comment: John Verney to Sir R. Verney, 23 June 1679: Churchill, for beating an orange wench in the Duke's playhouse, was challenged by Capt. Otway (the poet), and were both wounded, but Churchill most. The relation beinb told the King, by Sir John Holmes, as Churchill thought to his prejudice he challenged Holmes, who fighting, disarmed him, Churchill. On Saturday, at the Duke's Theatre, happened a quarrel between young Bedlow and one of the novices of St Omer's, and many swords were drawn, but as yet I have not heard whether any blood was shed in this religious quarrel (HMC, Verney MSS., 7th Report, Appendix, 1879, p. 473)

Event Comment: The Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 9 Feb. 1679@80: The late disorders at the Playhouse hath soe much incenst his Matye that tis said he hath commanded the persons to be proceeded Agt as Ryotters (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 80). [In Domestick Intelligence, 8-10 Feb. 1679@80, is a reference to an information in the King's Bench brought against those who participated in the disorders in the Duke's playhouse.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of this performance is uncertain. It is one of a series of plays acted at Court, in L. C. 5@145, p. 120. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 350. In view of the recent disorders at the Duke's Theatre, it is somewhat surprising to have this series of plays acted at Court at this time, but three of the entries would fall on Sunday if the sequence is assigned to the season of 1680-81; hence, the series has been assigned to 1679-80

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Newdigate newsletters, 3 June 1680: On Munday last the King's players began to Act...Pope Joan & on Tuesday the D. of Norolke was there to see it (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Newdigate newsletters, 3 June 1680: But on Wednesday the Duchesse of Portsmouth to disoblige Mr Settle the Poet carryed all the Court with her to the Dukes house to see Macbeth (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

Event Comment: John Perin paid #1 10s. for a booth at the Fair in 1680. See Rosenfeld, Theatre of the London Fairs, p. 6

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues in November 1680, it was probably first acted in September or October 1680. The Dedication refers to the ineffectiveness of the company at this time. Dedication, Edition of 1680: A Play so worthless, and so Unfortunate. Nay, to sum up all its Misfortunes, it does not only owe so little to the Composers Hand, but breath'd too in a Season, when Poetry even with its softest and more Curious Aires, to the Ears of this untunable Age, sounds but harsh and unpleasant: nay, and what's yet worst of all, perform'd by the feeble Fragment of a Company.--'Tis true, the Theatre Royal was once all Harmony....But when this hapless Play came forth, its sweetest Pipes were stopt; [Praise of Hart]. But, Alas, the very best of Plays now find but a cold Reception

Event Comment: Nahum Tate published a poem The Battle of the B@@d's in the Theatre Royal Dec. 3, 1680, in Poems Written on Several Occasions, 2d edition, 1684, pp. 153-54

Event Comment: Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 29 Jan. 1680@1: Upon some disgust given to his Matie by ye Ds Players acting plays he likd not does intend its said to take away yr pattent (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

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: Richard Shore paid #5 for space at Bartholomew Fair. See Rosenfeld, Theatre of the London Fairs, p. 6

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 Duke's Company. Two sources naming the play attended by the Morocco ambassador differ as to what play was presented. CSPD, Charles II, 1682, p. 35: 19 Jan. 1681@2: To-day the Morocco Ambassador goes to a play named Circe at the Duke's House. Impartial Protestant Mercury, 20-24 Jan. 1681@2: The Morocco Ambassador, On Thursday last, went to the Duke's Theatre, where was Acted Psyche, a Play of extraordinary splendor, with which his Excellency was extreamly pleas'd

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Loyal Protestant, 2 Feb. 1681@2: This day his Excellency the Embassedor of Morocco was present at the Dukes Theatre, where the Tempest was acted with which his Excellency seem'd extreamly pleased. [Essentially the same report is in Monthly Recorder, 1 Feb.-1 March 1681@2.