Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner Sir Tho. Crew and my Lady to the Playhouse to see The Silent Woman

Event Comment: For an account of the play, see John Wilson's The Cheats, ed. Milton C. Nahm (Oxford, 1935). It was licensed on 6 March (p. 124), acted, then forbade on 22 March in an order: Letter to Mr Tho. Killigrew: Signifying the Ks Pleasure that the New Play called the Cheates be no more represented till it be reuiewed by Sir Jo. Denham & Mr Waller. 22 March. 1662-3 (p. 130). Abraham Hill to John Brooke, 28 March 1663: P.S. The new play, called The Cheats, has been attempted on the Stage; but it is so scandalous, that it is forbidden (Familiar Letters of? Abraham Hill, [London, 1717], p. 103. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) concerning Lacy: @For his just Acting, all gave him due Praise,@His Part in the Cheats, Jony Thump, Teg and Bayes,@In these Four Excelling, The Court gave him the Bays.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of performance is uncertain. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 15 Feb. 1663@4, and its publication noted in The Newes, 3 March 1663@4. Katherine Philips, writing from Cardigan, Wales to Lady Temple in London, 24 Jan. 1663@4: I beleive er'e this you have seen the new Pompey either acted or written & then will repent your partiallity to ye other, but I wonder much what preparations for it could prejudice Will Davenant when I heare they acted in English habits, & yt so aprope yt Caesar was sent in with his feather & Muff, till he was hiss'd off ye Stage & for ye Scenes I see not where they could place any yt are very extra-ordinary, but if this play hath not diverted ye Cittizens wives enough Sr W: D: will make amends, for they say Harry ye 8th & some later ones are little better then Puppett-plays. I understand ye confederate-translators are now upon Heraclius, & I am contented yt Sr Tho. Clarges (who hath done that last yeare) should adorn their triumph in it, as I have done in Pompey (Harvard Theatre Collection)

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 is the premiere. A song, A heart in love's empire, with music by Robert Smith, and another, Let's drink dear friends, set by Thomas? Farmer, are in Choice Songs and Ayres, The First Book, 1673. The Dedication in the edition of 1672 is to Prince Rupert and states: tho' of thirty times it has been acted, you seldom fail'd to honour it with your presence. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 32): The next new Comedy [at dg] was the Mamamouchi, or the Citizen turn'd Gentleman, Wrote by Mr Ravenscroft [cast as in edition of 1672 except French Tutor and Singing Master, by Mr Haines: (He having Affronted Mr Hart, he gave him a Discharge and then came into our House)]; This Comedy was look[ed] upon by the Criticks for a Foolish Play; yet it continu'd Acting 9 Days with a full House; upon the Sixth the House being very full: The Poet added 2 more Lines to his Epilogue, viz. @The Criticks came to Hiss, and Dam this Play,@Yet spite of themselves they can't keep away.@ However, Mr Nokes in performing the Mamomouchi pleas'd the King and Court, next Sir Martin, above all Plays

Event Comment: John Verney to Sir Ralph Verney, 25 April 1675: The King on Saturday night sent for the keys from the Earl of Clarendon--'tis said the reason is, that last Thursday a play was acted at court, and after orders given that no more should be let in, his lordship came to the door, which the guard refused to open, tho' he told them who he was, on which he broke it open and struck a yeoman of the guard. Some say a chamberlain was never before turned out for beating a yeoman of the guard (HMC, 7th Report, Appendix, [1879], p. 464)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is known from a disturbance which occurred on this day; Langbaine states that the play was Macbeth. John Verney to Sir Ralph Verney, 30 Aug. 1675: On Saturday last, at the Duke's playhouse, Sir Tho. Armstrong killed Mr Scrope....Their quarrel is said to [be] about Mrs Uphill, the player, who came into the house maskt, and Scrope would have entertained discourse with her, which Sir T. Armstrong would not suffer, so a ring was made wherein they fought (HMC Verney MSS., 7th Report, 1879, p. 465). See also The Hatton Correspondence, Camden Society, XXII (1878), 121

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@147, p. 361: The King at ye Mistress. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351. There is no indication as to whether this performance was the premiere. As the play was licensed on 24 May 1687, the premiere may have been as late as 12 May, but possibly was earlier. Sir George Etherege to Will Richards, 19 May 1687: I have heard of the success of The Eunuch, and am very glad the town has so good a taste to give the same just applause to Sir Charles Sedley's writing, which his friends have always done to his conversation (Letterbook, ed. Rosenfeld, p. 212). Sir George Etherege to Middleton, 2O June 1687: I saw a play about ten years ago Called the Eunuch, so heavy a lump the players durst not charge themselves with the dead weight, but it seems Sir Charles Sedley has animated the mighty mass and now it treads the stage lightly (ibid., p. 227). [See also 26 March 1687 and season of 1676-77.] Thomas Shadwell, The Tenth Satyr of Juvenal (licensed, 25 May 1687.) Dedication to Sir Charles Sedley: Your late great obligation in giving me the advantage [presumably the third day's gain] of your comedy, call'd Bellamira, or the Mistress, has given me a fresh subject for my Thanks; and my Publishing this Translation affords me a new opportunity of owning to the world my grateful resentments to you. I am heartily glad that your Comedy (as I never doubted) found such success, that I never met with any Man of Sence but applauded it: And that there is abundance of Wit in it, your Enemies have been forced to confess....For the Judgment of some Ladies upon it that it is obscene, I must needs say they are Ladies of a very quick apprehension, and did not find their thoughts lye very much that way, they could not find more obscenity in that than there is in every other Comedy. A song, Thyrsis unjustly you complain, headed A Song in Bellamira, or, the Mistress. Set by Mr Tho. Shadwell, is in Vinculum Societatis, 1687 (licensed 8 June 1687)

Event Comment: The United Company. On 23 April 1689 Luttrell purchased a copy of the Prologue. The broadside copy, with Luttrell's date of acquisition, is in the possession of Mr Louis Silver, Wilmette, Illinois, to whose courtesy I am indebted for permission to use this date. When the Prologue, which is reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 271-72, appeared in The Fourth and Last Volume of the Works of Mr Tho. Brown (1719), the Prologue has the title: Jo. Haines in Penance; Or, his Recantation-Prologue, at his acting of Poet Bays in the Duke of Buckingham's Play call'd The Rehearsal. Spoken in a white Sheet, with a burning Taper in his Hand, upon his Admittance in to the House after his Return from the Church of Rome. In the Preface to his play, The Fatal Mistake (1691-92), Haines stated: In troth I have Acted Mr Bays so often, and so feelingly, that I could not possibly forbear copying after so fair an Original

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but it followed The Gordian Knot Unty'd, which is mentioned in the Prologue. Edward III was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2629, 19-22 Jan. 1690@1, and entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1690@1. The authorship is uncertain. The title page bears no author's name, but the Dedication is signed by Will. Mountfort. In addition, on 10 Oct. 1691 Mountfort received a grant of #10 when Edward III was played before the Queen (L. C. 5@150, p. 306, in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 357). On tne other hand, the Gentleman's Journal, October 1692, stated that it was written by the author of Henry the Second, which has been attributed to John Bancroft. See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 388-89, for a summation of the evidence on this problem. Alfred Harbage, Elizabethan-Restoration Palimpsest, Modern Language Review, XXXV (1940), 319, thinks that this is a revision of Robert Davenport's The Politic Queen

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 369. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. In L. C. 5@150, p. 156, is an order to prepare the stage for the play, and, in L. C. 5@150, p. 164, is another order for new equipment. Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 125: The 4th, being his majesties birth day...and at night was a consort of musick, and a play afterwards. Matthew Prior wrote A Pindarique Ode which was sung before Their Majesties at court on this day. See The Literary Works of Matthew Prior, ed. H. B. Wright and M. K. Spears (Oxford, 1959), I, 96-98; II, 858. Cibber, Apology, I, 128: The agreeable was so natural to [Mountfort], that even in that dissolute Character of the Rover he seem'd to wash off the Guilt from Vice, and gave it Charms and Merit. For tho' it may be a Reproach to the Poet to draw such Characters not only unpunish'd but rewarded, the Actor may still be allow'd his due Praise in his excellent Performance. And this is a Distinction which, when this Comedy was acted at Whitehall, King William's Queen Mary was pleas'd to make in favour of Monfort, notwithstanding her Disapprobation of the Play

Event Comment: The United Company. Tne date of the first performance is not known, but the Gentleman's Journal, March 1692 (licensed 9 March 1691@2), refers to its having already been produced. See also a letter concerning it dated 19 Jan. 1691@2. Probably the play was given in early February 1692. A song, How long must women wish in vain, the music by Robert King, is in Comes Amoris, The Fourth Book, 1693. Gentleman's Journal, March 1692: We have had lately a new Play, called, The Innocent Impostors. It hath been acted four times. Mr Shadwell Poet-Laureat, usher'd it into the Stage. It is said that the Author of it is not one of the Laity; therefore since he desires not to be known, I shall not presume to let you know his Name, tho the Play being Historical, and altogether of the Tragick kind, and withal treated with all the decency imaginable, can never be inglorious to its ingenious Author

Event Comment: Gentleman's Journal, February 1691@2 (licensed 12 Feb. 1691@2): Mr Dryden has compleated a new Tragedy, intended shortly for the Stage, wherein he hath done a great unfortunate Spartan no less justice than Roman Anthony met with in his All for Love. You who give Plutarch a daily reading, can never forget with what magninimity (under all his tedious misfortunes) Cleomenes behaved himself, in the Aegyptian Court. This Hero, and the last Scene of his Life, has our best Tragic Poet chose for his fruitful Subject....Mr Dryden makes his Spartans, in this, speak as manly heroic Lacedaemonians, those more than Romans ought to speak, and since I am certain of your assent, at least, to my faith, I shall be bold to add, That tho I cannot but grant that Cleomenes alone could be author of his own glorious performances, yet I am most confident that their intire lustre will be fully maintained by Dryden's lively description, and Mr Betterton's natural imitation