Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is in a membrandum of Lord Cheyne, Huntington Library MS EL II, 145: for Coach to a play calld Tartuff

Event Comment: Lord Cheyne saw a performance by Scaramuchio. See Huntington Library MS EL II, 145

Event Comment: A disturbance occurred at this theatre on this day. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 21 March 1673@4: His Maty has also been pleased to Order ye Recorder of London to examine ye Disorders & disturbances on Tuesday last at ye Dukes Theatre by some persons in drink (John Harold Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). See also CSPD, 1673-1675, p. 231

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Sometime in September Nell Gwyn attended this play, but the document listing her attendance is mutilated and the exact date is lost. See William VanLennep, Nell Gwyn's Playgoing at the King's Expence, Harvard Library Bulletin, IV (1950), 406

Event Comment: Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 10 Sept. 1674: This Evening their Maty & Court are diverted by a play Acted by his Royall Hss Servants at Whitehall. [Transcribed by Professor John Harold Wilson.

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 116. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. There is no certainty that this is the premiere, but the frequency of performance of The Tempest during September-October-November would make November 1674 a suitable time for a burlesque of this sort. A small quarto, The Songs & Masque in the New Tempest (in the Huntington Library, 122925), without a title page, contains what are apparently the songs and concluding masque of the play. It may have been issued during the run of the play and sold at the theatre. It does not name any performers. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 177): This Play was to draw the Town from the Duke's Theatre, who for a considerable time had frequented that admirable reviv'd Comedy call'd The Tempest

Event Comment: Evelyn, Diary: Saw a Comedie at night, at court, acted by the Ladys onely, viz: The Lady Mary & Ann his R. Highnesses two Daughters, & my deare friend Mrs Blagg, who having the principal part, perform'd it to admiration: They were all covered with Jewels. [It seems likely that Evelyn saw a rehearsal or was in error concerning the date of performance.] Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library): On Twelfe day the principallest abt ye Court divert their Matys with a Play & Opera where in ye Splendor & Grandeur of the English Monarchy will be seen (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 357-58, for an order of this date, L. C. 5@141, p. 83, concerning habits for the opera

Event Comment: [Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 4 Feb. 1674@5: Tuesday night after Counsell their Maties & Court were present at the Rehearsal of the great Maske wch is to be publiquely acted on Shrove Tuesday; by wch tyme her Royall Highness will be able to be present at it, being already very well after her Lying in, as is also ye young princess (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). The Bulstrode Papers (1, 277): 8 Feb. 1674@5: On Wed night after Councell their Maties and Royal Highnesses were present at the rehearsall of the Great Maske wch will be publiquely acted on Tuesday 7 night next. [The two sources agree on the intended date of the performance but disagree upon the date of the rehearsal.

Event Comment: On this date the masque was certainly acted, and the possible performance on 15 Feb. 1674@5 may have been a final rehearsal. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library): This day the great maske at court is publiquely acted wch is intended to exceed all others of that Nature, the 2 young Princesses, the Duke of Monmouth & all ye principall persons of quality abt ye Court having parts in it (Wilson, Theatre Notes, p. 79). The Bulstrode Papers (1, 277): 15 Feb. 1674@5: To-morrow the great mask at Court is to be publickly acted in all its bravery and pompe, the like of whch was never yett seene, all the greatest persons of quality about Court having pts in it

Event Comment: Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 23 Feb. 1674@5: Last night ye mask at Court was publiquely acted in ye presence of their Maties, R:11 Hsess & ye whole Court & will be once more acted before his Matie goes to Newmarket (Wilson, Theatre Notes, pp. 79-80). [Wilson points out that this performance is nowhere else mentioned.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known. It was not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1678, but the very large number of new plays acted by the Duke's Company in the spring of 1678, many of them more precisely dated, makes it probable that this was an early spring production which had title success. The title page states: Written by a Person of Quality. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, 1691, p. 554) ascribes it to "Mr Rawlins." A Library of Congress copy has on the title page: "by L. Baker.

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: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the fact that Narcissus Luttrell purchased a copy on 22 March 1679@80 suggests that the premiere occurred not later than February. A copy, with Luttrell's date of purchase, is in the Ohio State University Library. (I am indebted to Professor J. H. Wilson for this information.

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 Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: March 6 Saturday: See 2 acts of the New Play Orphan (Mornamont MS II, f. 1207, Cambridge University Library)

Event Comment: Pepys attended an unnamed play. See Mornamont MS II, f. 1208 (Cambridge University Library)

Event Comment: Pepys again attended an unnamed play. See Mornamont MS II, f. 1230 (Cambridge University Library)

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: Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 29 Jan. 1680@1: Upon some disgust given to his Matie by ye Ds Players acting plays he likd not does intend its said to take away yr pattent (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the date 31 May 1681 on a copy in the Ohio State University Library, representing Luttrell's purchase of a copy, argues for a performance initially in April or early May 1681. See Wilson, Six Restoration Play-Dates, p. 222

Event Comment: The King's Company. The exact date of this performance is not known, but the Prologue refers to "After a four Months Fast," suggesting that the theatre did not reopen until the end of the Long Vacation (24 Oct. 1681 is the beginning of Michaelmas Term). The Epilogue also seems to refer to events at Bartholomew Fair, and the Prologue to the King's visit to Newmarket, from which the King did not return until 12 Oct. 1681. Furthermore, The Impartial Protestant Mercury, No. 54, 28 Oct. 1681, reports: A Revised Play was some days since Acted on an Eminent Publick Theatre, and the Prologue is extreamly talked of. [The periodical reprints some of the lines (which are essentially those in the printed version).] The Loyal Protestant, No. 70, 29 Oct. 1681, refers to the same performance and reprints part of the Epilogue (which also is essentially that of the separately printed Epilogue). All of these elements point to a performance in mid-October. Both the Prologue and the Epilogue were printed separately, and have been reprinted by Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 43-45. Broadside copies of the Prologue and Epilogue in the Huntington Library bear Luttrell's manuscript notations that both were written by Dryden. Luttrell's date of acquisition is 13 Feb. 1681@2, an instance in which Luttrell's date of purchase does not apparently correspond closely to a date of performance

Event Comment: The King's Company. Newdigate newsletters (Folger Shakespeare Library), 15 Nov. 1681: This being ye Q.s birthday ye K.s players acted Alexdr ye great after wch was a ball & entertainment given to ye Ct. (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 80). Luttrell, 15 Nov. 1681: The 15th, being the birth day of her majestie, was kept with ringing of bells, bonefires, &c.; and at night there was a play acted at Whitehall before the king and queen, where the court appeared in great splendor (A Brief Relation, I, 144). The Earl of Arran to Ormond, 15 Nov. 1681: I am going to a play at court (HMC, Ormonde MSS., New Series, VI, 230). L. C. 5@144, p. 246, 22 Nov. 1681: Whereas Jeoffrey Ayleworth, Thomas ffarmer, Thomas ffinall & Richard Tomlinson foure of his Mates Musitians have neglected their dury in attending at ye play acted before his Mate at Whitehall on Tuesday night last for which I have suspended them (L. C. to the Treasurer of the Chamber, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 100)

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 Duke's Company. This performance is known by the separately printed Prologue and Epilogue: Prologue. By Mr Otway to his Play call'd Venice preserv'd or the Plot discover'd. Acted at His Royal Highness the Duke of Yorks Theatre, the 9th of February, 1681. [These have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 61-66.] Luttrell dated his copy of the Prologue and Epilogue 11 Feb. 1681@2 (Huntington Library). It is not certain that 9 Feb. 1681@2 represents the first performance, but it may well be. For a comment by Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, on Mrs Barry, see The Orphan, February 1679@80