Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell dated his copy, 17 Dec. 1681; hence a November 1681 first production is likely. See VanLennep, Two Restoration Comedies, pp. 57-58

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but it was probably this day. A letter dated 26 Jan. 1681@2 speaks of the preceding day's performance as the "poet's day," presumably the third day; it is likely, therefore, that the premiere fell on Monday, 23 Jan. 1681@2. The Prologue and Epilogue, were printed separately in 1682 and reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 50-51. Luttrell's copy (Huntington Library) bears his acquisition date of 14 Feb. 1681@2. A note on the Library of Congress copy indicated that Smith spoke the Prologue. A song, Great Augustus like the glorious sun, with music by John Blow, is in A New Collection of Poems and Songs, 1683. Another, Now the Tones all must droop, sung by Bowman, is in the same collection, but without indication of the composer, and a third, Twa bonny lads were Sawney and Jockey, without singer or composer, is in the same collection

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The play was apparently never published, but the Prologue and Epilogue were printed and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 43-45. The Epilogue also appeared in Miscellany, Being a Collection of Poems by several Hands, 1685, and has been reprinted in A Little Ark, ed. G. Thorn-Drury, p. 46. The latest date at which the play, with the Prologue and Epilogue, first appeared is 5 April 1682, the date Luttrell placed on his copies (Huntington Library), presumably representing the day on which he acquired them. G. Thorn-Drury, commenting upon the Epilogue, points out that it refers to the trial of Pilkington, one of the Sheriffs of London, ca. 25 March 1681@2. It seems likely, then, that this lost play was presented in March

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell purchased his copies of the separately printed Prologue and Epilogue on 15 May 1682 (Huntington Library); hence, the premiere occurred before that date. The Prologue also refers to the feast which the Whigs attempted to hold at Haberdashers' Hall on 21 April 1682 but were restrained, pointing toward late April as a probable date for the first performance. The separately printed Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 77-79. A song, In Phyllis all vile jests are met, with music by Giovanni Draghi, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Fourth Book, 1683. Langbaine (English Dramatic Poets, 1691, p. 19): This Play had the luck to be well receiv'd in the Town

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: The United Company. The date of the first Performance is not known, but, as the play was advertised in The Observator, 8 Aug. 1683, it was probably first acted not later than July 1683. A song, Welcome mortal to this place, set to music by Captain Pack for this play, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, 1684

Event Comment: Lord Preston (in Paris) to the Duke of York, 22 Sept. 1683, N.S.: I should not have presumed to give your Highness the trouble of this if something of charity had not induced me to it. I do it at the instance of a poor servant of his Majesty's who some time since was obliged by a misfortune to leave England. It is Mr Grahme [Grabut?], sir, whom perhaps your Highness may remember. Mr Betterton coming hither some weeks since by his Majesty's command, to endeavour to carry over the Opera, and finding that impracticable, did treat with Monsr Grahme to go over with him to endeavour to represent something at least like an Opera in England for his Majesty's diversion. He hath also assured him of a pension from the House, and finds him very willing and ready to go over. He only desireth his Majesty's protection when he is there, and what encouragement his Majesty shall be pleased to give him if he finds that he deserves it (HMC, 7th Report, Part I, p. 290). W. J. Lawrence (Early French Players in England, p. 149) argued that Grahme should be Grabut, who had once been Master of the King's Music (to 1674) and who had settled in Paris. Grabut was certainly back in London in the spring of 1684

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but it was very likely this day. Writing on 12 May 1688, Peregrine Bertie states that it had been acted nine days successively. If the ninth performance fell on Friday 12 May, the premiere probably occurred on Wednesday 3 May. The Prologue and Epilogue, printed separately, are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 261-63. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 41): This Play by its Excellent Acting, being often Honour's with the presence of Chancellor Jeffereies, and other great Persons had an Uninterrupted run of 13 Days together. Note, The Poet receided for his third Day in the House in Drury Lane at single Prizes 130 l. which was the greatest Receipt they ever had at that House at single Prizes. Dedication, Edition of 1688: This, I must confess, made me hope for success upon the Stage, which it met with, but so great, as was above my expectation (in this Age which has run mad after Farces) no Comedy, for these many years, having fill'd the Theatre so long together: And I had the great Honour to find so many Friends, that the House was never so full since it was built, as upon the third day of this Play; and vast numbers went away, that could not be admitted. For Leigh as Belfond Sr, see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 147-48; and for Underhill as Lolpoop, I, 154-55. For further comment upon the play, see 12 May 1688

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was announced in the London Gazette, 23-27 May 1689, and entered in the Term Catalogues, June 1689, suggests that the premiere probably occurred not later than April 1689, possibly very early in May 1689

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: 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

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: Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 437: This being the queen s birth day, a new ode was sung before her upon the occasion: the nobility and gentry, with the lord mayor and aldermen of this citty, attended to compliment thereon. Gentleman's Journal, May 1692: The 30th of April, being Her Majesties Birth-day, was observ'd with all the usual Solemnity. I design'd to have sent you an Attempt of mine in Verse, on that noble Subject: But having happily obtain'd a Copy of those writ by Sir Charles Sidley, it would have been an unpardonable Crime, to have joyn'd my weak Essay to a Piece by so great a Master. [The Ode, Love's Goddess Sure, the music by Henry Purcell, is in Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XXIV (1926), i.

Event Comment: The United Company. As 9 Nov. 1692 is known to be the second day, it is assumed that 8 Nov. 1692 represents the first performance. (See entry for 9 Nov. 1692.) The authorship is uncertain; William Mountfort signed tne Dedication, but its authorship is linked with that of Edward III (November 1690), which may have been by Bancroft. Gentleman's Journal, October 1692 (not issued until November): Henry the Second, King of England, A new Play, by the Author of that call'd Edward the Third, which gave such universal satisfaction, hath been acted several times with applause. It is a Tragedy with a mixture of Comedy....Had you seen it acted, you would own that an Evening is pass'd very agreeably, when at a Representation of that pleasing Piece. [Alfred Harbage, Elizabethan-Restoration Palimpsest, Modern Language Review, XXXV (1940), 312-18, argues that this play is the Elizabethan Henry II once in the possession of Moseley. A song, In vain 'gainst Love I strove, composed by Henry Purcell and sung by Mrs Dyer, not in the printed play, is in Comes Amoris, 1693, and Joyful Cuckoldom 1695. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), vii

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@151, p. 369: ye Q a Box & a Box for ye Maids of Honr double dealer. [See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352.] Cibber relates an incident which may pertain to this performance, Apology, I, 185-86: Queen Mary having commanded the Double Dealer to be acted, Kynaston happen'd to be so ill that he could not hope to be able next Day to perform his Part of the Lord Touchwood. In this Exigence, the Author, Mr Congreve, advis'd that it might be given to me, if at so short a Warning I would undertake it. The Flattery of being thus distinguish'd by so celebrated an Author, and the Honour to act before a Queen, you may be sure made me blind to whatever Difficulties might attend it. I accepted the Part, and was ready in it before I slept; next Day the Queen was presented at the Play, and was received with a new Prologue from the Author, spoken by Mrs Barry, humbly acknowledging the great Honour done to the Stage....After the Play, Mr Congreve made me the Compliment of saying, That I had not only answer'd, but had exceeded his Expectations, and that he would shew me he was sincere in his saying more of me to the Masters.--He was as good as his Word, and the next Pay-day I found my Sallary of fifteen was then advanced to twenty Shillings a Week