Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known. As Evelyn saw it on 27 April, it seems likely that it was first performed before Easter (April 10). It was not licensed for printing until 8 July 1664. Preface to edition of 1664: I Cou'd not have wish'd my self more fortunate than I have been in the success of this Poem:...The Acting of it has lost me no Reputation. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 25: @Sir Nich'las, Sir Fred'rick, Widow and Dufoy, Were not by any so well done, Mafoy.@ The clean and well performance of this Comedy, got the Company more Reputation and profit than any preceding Comedy; the Company taking in a months time at it #1000

Event Comment: Mainpiece [1st time, i.e. as an alteration of Richard Savage's play; T 5, by William Woodfall. Prologue by Richard Brinsley Sheridan. Epilogue by Richard Cumberland (see text)]: with New Scenes and Dresses. Public Advertiser, 13 Feb. 1777: Sir Thomas Overbury (the Publication of which was unavoidably postponed) will be ready this Morning, at Ten o'Clock (1s. 6d.). Receipts: #212 4s. 6d. (210.7.6; 1.17.0)

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: At the Desire of several Ladies of Quality. Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: Benefit Ryan. Mainpiece: Written by Sir George Etheridge. Afterpiece: A Pastoral Entertainment of Vocal and Instrumental Musick. Receipts: money #54 7s. 6d.; tickets #100 1s

Event Comment: Not Acted these Sixteen Years. For the Entertainment of his Excellency Sid Mahomet Ben Ali Abogly, Ambassador from the Emperor of Morocco. Written by Sir William D'Avenant, and very carefully revis'd with Alterations. Receipts: #31 9s. 6d

Event Comment: Not Acted these Seven Years. At the Desire of several Persons of Quality. Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: For the Entertainment of Tomo Chachi. . . Tenauki . . . Prince Toonahowi. Mainpiece: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: [Advertised as performed but once, but see 18 Jan. Sheridan in Preface to Edition of 1775 (2nd) refers to withdrawing the piece to remove those imperfections in the first representation which were too obvious to escape reprehension, and too numerous to admit of hasty correction." He blames his inexperience and want of judgment in theatrical effects, the extreme length of the play act by act, and haste in writing. From the Westminster Magazine Feb., which outlined the plot in five columns: The present state of the Rivals is widely different from that in which we found it on the first night's representation. Sir Lucius O'Trigger being re-touched, has now the appearance of a character; and his assigning Beverley's reflection on his country as the grounds for his desire to quarrel with him, is a reasonable pretence, and wipes off the former stigma undeservedly thrown on the sister Kingdom. An alteration of a principal incident gave a very favorable turn to the fable and the whole piece: that where young Acres now delivers his challenge to his friend Absolute, begging him to carry it to his Rival Beverly, not knowing the two characters composed but one man; its being at first given to Sir Lucius, the person who indited it, was highly inconsistent...we should be induced from many evident traits of literary genius to pronounce the Rivals a good comedy."

Event Comment: At the Desire of several Persons of Quality. Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: Benefit Mrs Mills. Mainpiece: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: By Command of Their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Wales. Mainpiece: Written by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: As 27 Nov. 1738. Mainpiece: by Sir George Etheridge

Event Comment: This play is in Herbert, Dramatic Records p. 118: Cornelia a New Play, sir W. Bartleys. The date in Herbert is 1 June, a Sunday in 1662, with another play in the same group falling on Sunday. Nevertheless, the verse comment (see below) written, apparently, before the summer of 1662 points toward 2 June 1662 rather than 1 June 1663. Edward Browne also lists it as one of the plays he attended. The play was not printed. BM Add. Mss. 34217, in Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 246: @For Cornelia they all doe say@There was abundance of witt in the play@Indeed t'had soe much t' was the worse for 't@For t' was to witty for the vulgar sort@And they who'd have poetts their Benefactors@Say witt without mony's naught for the Actors.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Davenant's alterations were apparently not published. Pepys, Diary: To a play...at the Duke's house, where Tu Quoque was the first time acted, with some alterations of Sir W. Davenant's; but the play is a very silly play, methinks; for I, and others that sat by me, Mr Povy and Mr Progers, were weary of it; but it will please the citizens

Event Comment: Written by the Author of Sir Courtly Nice

Event Comment: Written by Mr Crown, the Author of Sir Courtly Nice

Event Comment: At Cushing's Booth, facing the King's Head, Smithfield. The tragedy contains the barbarous contrivances of King John against his nephew Prince Arthur; his method of persuading Hubert to undertake the cruel murder of that youth; the sufferings of Arthur in his confinement, where Hubert attempts to put out eyes with a red-hot iron, til moved to compassion by the tender entreating of the young prince, he quits his horrid purpose. The manner of Arthur's leaping from the battlements of the tower where he was imprisoned, when by attempting to escape his severe treatment he loses his life. The terrors that attended the villainous Uncle King John, and at length his dreadful death, who is poisoned in the midst of all his glory, and in terrible anguish and distraction, pays his nephew's blood with the price of his own. The comic contains the exquisite drolleries of Sir Lubberly and his man, their whimsical journey from Cumberland, and no less whimsical exploits in London; the odd reception they met with from their three faithful friends, Tom Rash the Porter, Jeffrey Holdfast the Constable, and Moll Tatter the Beggar Woman, the one getting a wife, the other a bastard

Event Comment: Sir Robert Southwell to Edward Southwell, 26 Aug. 1685 (in Morley, Bartholomew Fair, pp. 224-26): I think it not now so proper to quote you verses out of Persius, or to talk of Caesar and Euclide, as to consider the great theatre of Bartholomew Fair....You wou'd certainly see the garboil there to more advantage if Mr Webster and you wou'd read, or cou'd see acted, the play of Ben Jonson, call'd Bartholomew Fair:...The main importance of this fair is not so much for merchandize, and the supplying what people really want; but as a sort of Bacchanalia, to gratify the multitude in their wandring and irregular thoughts. Here you see the rope-dancers gett their living meerly by hazarding of their lives, and why men will pay money and take pleasure to see such dangers, is of separate and philosophical consideration. You have others who are acting fools, drunkards, and madmen, but for the same wages which they might get by honest labour, and live with credit besides. Others, if born in any monstrous shape, or have children that are such, here they celebrate their misery, and by getting of money forget how odious they are made