Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner I went to the theatre, and there saw Love's Mistress done by them, which I do not like it some things so well as their acting in Salsbury Court. [Although Pepys saw this play on 2 March 1660@1 at Salisbury Court, done by the Duke's Company, here he appears to indicate a rival performance of it by the King's Company in Vere St.]

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: Then by water, Creed and I, to Salisbury Court and there saw Love's Quarrell acted the first time, but I do not like the design or words

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary So back to the Opera, and there I saw again Love and Honour, and a very good play it is

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: My wife and I to the Opera, and there saw again Love and Honour, a play so good that it has been acted but three times and I have seen them all, and all in this week; which is too much, and more than I will do again a good while

Event Comment: See Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 169, for a fee of #20 paid to Sir William Davenant's@company, the receipt being signed by Richard Baddeley; and for #1 5s. for baize to cover the stage and scenes. The play may well have been Love and Honour

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Evelyn, Diary: I was so idle as to go see a play, cald Love and honor

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: We by coach to the Theatre and saw Love in a Maze. The play hath little in it but Lacy's part of a country fellow, which he did to admiration

Event Comment: The King's Company. For praise of Lacy, see Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16, or 27 Nov. 1662. Pepys, Diary: To the Royal Theatre by water, and landing, met with Captain Ferrers his friend, the little man that used to be with him, and he with us, and sat by us while we saw Love in a Maze. The play is pretty good, but the life of the play is Lacy's part, the clown, which is most admirable; but for the rest, which are counted such old and excellent actors, in my life I never heard both men and women so ill pronounce their parts, even to my making myself sick therewith

Event Comment: This play, which was licensed on 22 April 1664, was a revision of Flecknoe's Love's Dominion, 1654. There is no indication, other than the date of licensing, which points to a specific time when it was acted. The Duke's Company

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Evelyn, Diary: Saw a facecious Comedy Cald Love in a Tub

Event Comment: H. B. Wilson, The History of the Merchant-Taylors' School (London, 1814), 1, 344n: 15 March 1664@5. There was this day presented to the court, the bill of charges in erecting the Stage and Seates and other necessaries in the hall, when the Schollers of the companies schoole, at St Laurence Pounctneys, London, acted the play called Love's Pilgrimage, amounting unto seventeen Poundes, Tenn-shillings, and nine-pence

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, all alone, and saw Love's Maistresse. Some pretty things and good variety in it, but no or little fancy in it

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I to the Duke of York's house, and there saw Love Trickes, or the School of Compliments; a silly play, only Miss Davis?'s dancing in a shepherd's clothes did please us mightily

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: With Sir Philip Carteret to the King's playhouse, there to see Love's Cruelty, an old play, but which I have not seen before and in the first act Orange Moll come to me, with one of the porters by my house, to tell me that Mrs Pierce and Knepp did dine at my house to-day, and that I was desired to come home. So I went out presently, and by coach home, and they were just gone away; so, after a very little stay with my wife, I took coach again, and to the King's playhouse again, and come in the fourth act; and it proves to me a very silly play, and to everybody else, as far as I could judge. But the jest is, that here telling Moll how I had lost my journey, she told me that Mrs Knepp was in the house, and so shews me to her, and I went to her, and sat out the play.... I could not but observe that Sir Philip Carteret would fain have given me my going into a play; but yet, when he come to the door, he had no money to pay for himself, I having refused to accept of it for myself, but was fain; and I perceive he is known there, and do run upon the score for plays, which is a shame.... In the pit I met with Sir Ch. North

Event Comment: Pepys does not name the theatre in which he saw this play, but previous performances of the play were given by the King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To a play, Love's Cruelty.... Play part 2s. Oranges, 1s

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the King's playhouse, and there saw Love's Mistresse revived, the thing pretty good, but full of variety of divertisement

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke of York's house, and there saw Cupid's Revenge, under the new name of Love Despised, that hath something very good in it, though I like not the whole body of it. This day the first time acted here

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the premiere is not known, although a reference in the text to 1690 suggests that the play may have been produced in that year; but the fact that it was not advertised in the London Gazette until 6-9 April and not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1691 suggest that it posaibly appeared early in 1691. This play was discussed in Wit for Money, or Poet Stutter; A Dialogue between Smith, Johnson, and Poet Stutter; containing Reflections on some late Plays, and particularly on Love for Money, or The Boarding School. The British Museum copy of this pamphlet has a manuscript date of 23 April 1691. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42: The Boarding School; Wrote by Mr Durfy, it took well being justly Acted. Earl of Ailesbury, mid-January 1690@1: My Lady Fenwick was a great intriguer, and had always castles in the air in her imagination to that degree, that I was present at a play where she was brought in. If I mistake not it was The Boarding School, and the famous comic, Mr Lee, in woman's clothes represented her to the life, and so exactly had her features and complexion that one could hardly have distinguished one from the other (Memoirs, [London, 1890], II, 390-91)

Event Comment: It is not known in which theatre this revival occurred. It was witnessed by van Constantijn Huygens, Monday 19 Dec. 1695 N.S. [translation]: In the afternoon I was at the comedy with my wife and Mrs Creitsmar. They played an old show called: The Love in the Tubb (Publications of the Dutch Historical Society, New Series, XXV [Utrecht, 1877], 560)

Event Comment: Rich's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but Cibber (see below) states that it was acted in January; the Dedication was signed 7 Feb. 1695@6, and the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No 3157, 10-13 Feb. 1695@6. Two songs were published separately: Go home, unhappy wench, set by Francks and sung by Mrs Cross and the Boy (in Thesaurus Musicus, The Fifth Book, 1696) and What an ungratefull devil moves you, set by Daniel Purcell (in Deliciae Musicae, The First Book of the Second Volume, 1696). A separately-printed sheet of the second song states that it was sung by "The Boy", Cibber, Apology, I, 212-14: The next Year I produc'd the Comedy of Love's last Shift; yet the Difficulty of getting it to the Stage was not easily surmounted; for, at that time, as little was expected from me, as an Author, as had been from my Pretensions to be an Actor. However, Mr Southern, the Author of Oroonoko, having had the Patience to hear me read it to him, happened to like it so well that he immediately recommended it to the Patentees, and it was accordingly acted in January 1695 [i.e., 1695@6]. In this Play I gave myself the Part of Sir Novelty, which was thought a good Portrait of the Foppery then in fashion. Here, too, Mr Southern, though he had approv'd my approv'd my Play, came into the common Diffidence of me as an Actor: For, when on the first Day of it I was standing, myself, to prompt the Prologue, he took me by the Hand and said, Young Man! I pronounce they Play a good one; I will answer for its Success, if thou dost not spoil it by thy own Action....I succeeded so well in both, that People seem'd at a loss which they should give the Preference to. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 16: Ramble: Ay, marry, that Play was the Philosopher's Stone; I think it did wonders. Sullen: It did so, and very deservedly; there being few Comedies that came up to 't for purity of Plot, Manners and Moral: It's often acted now a daies, and by the help of the Author's own good action, it pleases to this Day

Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the Post Man, 7-9 July 1696, suggests that it was first presented not later than June 1696. The cast also has a large number of relatively new players, suggesting a performance in the early summer, when the young actors had more opportunities to act. Several Songs, with the names of the singers, were published separately: Hark you, madam, can't I move you, set by John Eccles, and sung by Bowman and Mrs Bracegirdle; Shou'd I not lead a happy life, set by John Eccles and sung by Reading and M. Lee; From Aberdeen to Edinburgh, set by Ackeroyd and sung by Mrs Hudson; all in Deliciae Musicae, The Second Book of the Second Volume, 1696. Preface, Edition of 1696: I am almost asham'd to mention the extraordinary Success of a Play which I myself must condemn....Let me leave this ungrateful Subject to acknowledge my obligations to Mr John Eccles, who not only set my three Dialogues to most charming Notes, but honour'd the Words to Admiration. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 44: Love's a Jest, a Comedy, done by Mr Mateox; succeeded well, being well Acted, and got the Company Reputation and Money

Event Comment: Rich's Company. Lady Morley attended this performance. Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 377: Lady Morley and ffower in the Box at Loves last Shift #1