Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but as the play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 16 Jan. 1677@8, it was probably first acted not later than December 1677

Event Comment: The Earl of Arran to the Duchess of Ormond, 19 Jan. 1677@8: I met her Lord [Lord Cavendish] last night at the French play (HMC, Ormonde MSS., New Series, 1906, IV, 90). Henri Forneron, Louise de Keroualle, Duchess of Portsmouth (London, 1887): [The Duchess of Portsmouth] was at the last extremity when a slight change for the better took place, and she got up, had herself dressed, and dragged herself to her Sedan chair, to be carried to the French play, where she heard the king was to be with Madame Mazarin. The players had come to London for a short time, and Charles attended all their representations (pp. 197-98). Forneron apparently drew this information from a letter dated 20 Jan. 1677@8

Event Comment: The King's Company apparently acted an unnamed play on this occasion. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, III, 127

Event Comment: The Memoirs of Sir John Reresby, ed. Browning: I was with the King at the French play that night (p. 136)

Event Comment: During February and March 1678@9 two plays, titles unknown, were acted before the King. See an order: To Edward Griffin, Esq. Treasurer of the Chamber, to be paid over to John Lacy, assigne of Charles Killigrew, Mastr of the revells, for two plays acted before his said Majestie in Feb'ry and March 1678@9 (Moneys Received and Paid for Secret Services, ed. J. Y. Akerman, Camden Society, LII 1851, 34)

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: It is not certain that this performance was given by the King's Company, but because it first produced the play, it has been assigned to Drury Lane. Pepys, Diary: Tuesday January the 27th...comeing home at night (after I had carryed my Cozen Winn Houblon home from a Play (shee would if she could). [Mornamont MS II, folio 1192, Cambridge University Library.] See also Arthur Bryant, Samuel Pepys: Years of Peril (New York, 1935), p. 314

Event Comment: During this month the dissident players from the King's Company--Goodman, Gray, and Clarke--returned from Edinburgh. For details, see Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, pp. 262-63

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 King's Company. The date of the first production is not known. Although the play was not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1681, Wilson (Six Restoration Play-Dates, p.222) has argued that the reference in the Prologue to the young men (presumably Gray, Goodman, and Clarke; see February 1679@80) who had gone to Scotland and returned empty-handed suggests a performance near March 1680, when these references would have more point than they would have a year later

Event Comment: The King's Company acted at Oxford during this month. See Sybil Rosenfeld, Some Notes on the Players in Oxford, 1661-1713, Review of English Studies, XIX (1943), 369-70

Event Comment: A new agreement, intended to improve affairs in the King's Company, was signed this day. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, pp. 264-65

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: The King's Company. After the banning of The Sicilian Usurper, it was brought on again under a new title and survived two days before it also was banned. Tate's statement concerning its reception--see 11 Dec. 1680--may refer to these two performances rather than to the sequence in December. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 20 Jan. 1680@1: K. Richd ye 2.d a play, being forbid acting att ye Ks house the Poet put the name Tyrant of Sicily upon it by wch means it was acted twice this weeke, but the Cheate being found out it was forbid acting againe (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

Event Comment: The finances of the King's Company continued to deteriorate and to be a source of dissension and confusion. For some months, beginning with February 1681, the receipts were often under #10 nightly, and sometimes the company apparently ceased acting. For a full account, see Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, pp. 266-67

Event Comment: This day is one of several on which, according to William Morley, treasurer of the King's Company, the receipts fell below #10, to #3 14s. 6d. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 267

Event Comment: On this day the receipts at the King's House fell to #3 2s. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 267

Event Comment: In an inquiry concerning how many days the King's Company had been unable to act in the spring, William Cartwright on this day stated that he had been ill and absent and had not been among the players more than four or five times since 1 Feb. 1680@1. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 267

Event Comment: The receipts of the King's Company on this day were only #3 13s. See Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 267

Event Comment: The Marquis of Worcester to the Marchioness, 12 Nov. 1681: the King went to a play in the afternoon, a thing he does very seldom, and I not much oftener (HMC, 12th Report, Appendix, Beaufort MSS., IX, 87)

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 in February 1681@2 and advertised in The Loyal Protestant, 7 March 1681@2, suggests a premiere in December 1681. A certain performance on 14 Jan. 1681@2 may indicate, however, that the play did not have its first performance until that month. A song for this play, Retired from mortal's sight, set by Henry Purcell, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, 1683

Event Comment: The King's Company. CSPD, Charles II, 1682, p. 24: 12 Jan. 1681@2: On Friday the second part of the Siege of Jerusalem is acted by his [Russian ambassador's] particular command and on Monday he goes home

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Lady Anne Howe to the Countess of Rutland, 26 Jan. 1681@2: The King went by water to the new play yesterday, it being the poet's day, and is call'd the Loyallest (HMC, Rutland MSS., 12th Report, Appendix, Part V, p. 64). Newsletter, 26 Jan. 1681@2: Yesterday was a new play called the Royalist, where the Salamanca Doctor is exposed (HMC, 10th Report, Appendix, Part IV, p. 175)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not certain. This performance is known from an entry in the Newdigate newsletters, which also states that Rollo was to be acted on the following Monday. If this statement is accurate, the performance of The Loyal Brother on 4 Feb. 1681@2 may be the third night rather than the opening performance. Newdigate newsletters, 4 Feb. 1681@2: On Monday morn [the Moorish Ambassador] & ye Comers meet to conclude ye treaty and in ye afternoon goes to see Rollo D. of Normandy at ye Ks playhouse wre ye K was this afternoon to see ye new play calld ye Loyall brothr (Wilson, More Theater Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59). The Prologue and Epilogue were printed separately and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 70-72. Luttrell acquired his copies (Huntington Library) on 7 Feb. 1681@2. In The Life of John Dryden (Chapel Hill, 1961), Charles E. Ward believes (pp. 166, 355) that The Loyal Brother was first acted in the autumn of 1681; but the entry in the Newdigate newsletters seems to make February 1682 the more probable time

Event Comment: The King's Company. Newdigate newsletters, 4 Feb. 1681@2: On Monday morn [the Moorish Ambassador] & ye Comers meet to conclude ye treapy & in ye Afternoon goes to see Rollo D. of Normandy at ye Ks playhouse (Wilson, More Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59)