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. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@145, p. 120: with ye Queene & a box for ye Maides of honor. [It is not certain in which theatre this play was given, but dl seems to have been preferred for drama, dg for operatic pieces. This play was reprinted in 1683.

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@145, p. 120: with Ye Q: & a box for ye Maides of honor. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349. This play was reprinted in 1682, but without actors' names. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, 1691, p. 207) may refer to a performance around this period: Being acted with extraordinary applause at the Theatre in Dorset-Garden, and printed with the Alterations London. 40 1682

Event Comment: The United Company. The players received the customary fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 179. Newdigate newsletters, 3 Feb. 1682@3: Yesterday the Governors? of ye Temple Invited the Greate Lds: of [...] together with the Ld. Keeper to dinner where afterwards they were entertayned with variety of songs & a play was Acted before them Called the Chances by the Kings players (Wilson, More Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 59)

Event Comment: In L. C. 5@144, p. 510 (Boswell, Restoration Court Stage), is an order for changes to be made in the Court Theatre "for Mr Abel to represent his Musick." Nothing further is known of an intended concert

Event Comment: On this day Luttrell purchased a copy (Bindley Collection, William Andrew Clark@Jr@Library) of The Beggars Delight As it was Sung at the Theatre Royal, published in 1684 by J. Dean

Event Comment: On this day Charles II died. Although the order to close the theatres was not issued until 20 Feb. 1684@5 (L. C. 5@145, p. 153), acting Probably ceased on Thursday 5 Feb. 1684@5. At this time John Crowne's Sir Courtly Nice was in rehearsal. John Dennis gives a dramatic account of the last day of rehearsing: The Play was now just ready to appear to the World; and as every one that had seen it rehears'd was highly pleas'd with it; every one who had heard of it was big with the Expectation of it; and Mr Crown was delighted with the flattering Hope of being made happy for the rest of his Life, by the Performance of the King's Promise; when, upon the very last Day of the Rehearsal, he met Cave Underhill coming from the Play-House as he himself was going towards it; Upon which the Poet reprimanding the Player for neglecting so considerable a Part as he had in the Comedy, and neglecting it on a Day of so much Consequence, as the very last Day of Rehearsal: Oh Lord, Sir, says Underhill, we are all undone. Wherefore, says Mr Crown, is the Play-House on Fire? The whole Nation, replys the Player, will quickly be so, for the King is dead. At the hearing which dismal Words, the Author was little better; for he who but the Moment before was ravish'd with the Thought of the Pleasure, which he was about to give to his King, and of the Favours which he was afterwards to receive from him, this Moment found, to his unspeakable Sorrow, that his Royal Patron was gone for ever, and with him all his Hopes. The King indeed reviv'd from his Apoplectick Fit, but three Days after dyed, and Mr Crown by his Death was replung'd in the deepest Melancholy (John Dennis, Original Letters, 1721, I, 53-54). [It is not clear whether the last sentence refers to the day on which Crowne had seen the King and had assurances from His Majesty, the King dying three days later, or whether there was a false rumor of the King's death on 3 Feb. 1684@5.

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not precisely known, but a broadside copy of the Epilogue, in the Bodleian Library, has a licensing date of 20 Aug. 1685, a MS date of 24 Aug. 1685. The play was licensed on 11 Sept. 1685. These dates suggest a premiere in mid-to late-August 1685. For Anne Bracegirdle as Clita and speaker of the Epilogue, see Lucyle Hook, Anne Bracegirdle's First Appearance, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1959), 135. The Prologue and Epilogue, separately printed, are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 239-41. The broadside Prologue has a more detailed heading than that in the edition of 1686: Prologue To A Commonwealth of Women, Spoke by Mr Haynes, Habited like a Whig, Captain of the Scyth-men in the West, a Scythe in his Hand. Two songs, set by Samuel Ackroyde, are in The Theater of Musick, The Third Book, 1686

Event Comment: Sir Robert Southwell to Edward Southwell, 26 Aug. 1685 (in Morley, Bartholomew Fair, pp. 224-26): I think it not now so proper to quote you verses out of Persius, or to talk of Caesar and Euclide, as to consider the great theatre of Bartholomew Fair....You wou'd certainly see the garboil there to more advantage if Mr Webster and you wou'd read, or cou'd see acted, the play of Ben Jonson, call'd Bartholomew Fair:...The main importance of this fair is not so much for merchandize, and the supplying what people really want; but as a sort of Bacchanalia, to gratify the multitude in their wandring and irregular thoughts. Here you see the rope-dancers gett their living meerly by hazarding of their lives, and why men will pay money and take pleasure to see such dangers, is of separate and philosophical consideration. You have others who are acting fools, drunkards, and madmen, but for the same wages which they might get by honest labour, and live with credit besides. Others, if born in any monstrous shape, or have children that are such, here they celebrate their misery, and by getting of money forget how odious they are made

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance, which is out of the chronological order, is on L. C. list, 5@147, p. 68; the list does not indicate which Part of this play was given. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 350, and page 380, for an order (L. C. 5@147, p. 1) for rehabilitation of the seats in the theatre

Event Comment: London Gazette, 25-29 Nov. 1686: Whereas Mr Thomas Otway some time before his death made Four Acts of a Play, whoever can give Notice in whose Hands the Copy lies, either to Mr Thomas Betterton, or Mr William Smith, at the Theatre Royal, shall be well Rewarded for his pains

Event Comment: The United Company. Lord Ashburnham's Diary: I waited on my Mother home and afterwards I went into the play (the Maiden Queen) There was a great deale of company, I came home before 8 at night, I am now not charm'd with Playes &c. (Ashburnham MS 932, East Sussex County Record Office, County Hall, Lewes, Sussex; I owe this entry and the subsequent ones from this MS to the kindness of Professor George Hilton Jones, Kansas State University). This is an unusual example of the revival of a play at the public theatre the day before its presentation at court

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is known from a playbill. See Eleanore Boswell, A Playbill of 1687, Library, 4th Series, XI (1931), 499-502, and Cecil Price, A Playbill, c. 1686, Notes and Queries, Vol. 194 [1949), p. 519. The bill Price saw is in the State Papers James II, 31@3, ff. 215-16, among documents referring to 1686, but the date and day of the week point to 1687. The bill reads: At the Theatre Royall this present Tuesday being the Twenty second day of February will be presented, A Play called, A King, and No King. Beginning Exact...t Four of the Clock....their Majesties Servants. VIVAT REX

Event Comment: This score of Albion and Albanius was licensed for publication, 15 March 1686@7, and sold at the Theatre Royal (Drury Lane) entrance. Possibly a revival occurred at this time

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@147, p. 361. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351. The date of the first performance of this revision is not known. As it is somewhat unlikely that a play would have its premiere at court, the first production possibly appeared earlier in the month. See 6 Nov. 1668 for an earlier revision of this work. The title-page of the edition of 1687 states: As it is Acted at the Theatre-Royal. Reviv'd with Alterations

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: A troupe of French Comedians played at theatre in Windsor Castle. On 25 July 1688 a warrant (L. C. 5@17, pp. 60, 65, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, pp. 61, 127) ordered the playhouse there to be made ready for the foreign company. According to L. C. 5@17, in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 65, the French players arrived on 11 Aug. and remained at Windsor until 22 Sept

Event Comment: In The Theatre of Compliment, 1688, are verses similar to those apparently referring to August 1686: @Here is the Rarity of the whole Fair,@Pimper-la-Pimp, and the Wise Dancing Mare;@Here's valiant St George and the Dragon, a farce;@Here's Vienna Besieged, a most delicate thing;@And here's Punchinello, shown thrice to the King.@ John Verney entertained some of his wife's family who were in town to see Bartholomew Fair. See Memoirs of the Verney Family, ed. Margaret M. Verney (London, 1699), IV, 435

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first production is not known. The play was entered in the Term Catalogues, June 1689, and announced in the London Gazette, 24-27 June 1689. In the extreme scarcity of information concerning the theatres during the disturbed winter of 1688-89, it is difficult to know when this play may have been first presented. It was probably acted not later than April, possibly in March

Event Comment: The United Company. Rowland Davies, 13 June 1689: After dinner I went with Mr N. Lysaght and W. Jephson to see Circe acted at the Queen's Theatre, which was done to admiration, with better scenes than I could imagine (The Journal of the Very Rev. Rowland Davies, Camden Society, Vol. 68 [1856], 24)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell's copy (Huntington Library) of the play bears the date of acquisition 3 June [1690, apparently], and the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No 2566, 12-16 June 1690. See Fredson Bowers, A Bibliographical History of the Fletcher-Betterton Play, The Prophetess, 1690, The Library, 5th Series, XVI (1961), 169-75. It seems likely that the opera was first given early in June 1690. An edition of The Vocal and Instrumental Musick of The Prophetess appeared in 1691. See Works of Henry Purcell, Purcell Society, IX. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42): The Prophetess, or Dioclesian an Opera, Wrote by Mr Betterton; being set out with Coastly Scenes, Machines and Cloaths: The Vocal and Instrumental Musick, done by Mr Purcel; and Dances by Mr Priest; it gratify'd the Expectation of Court and City; and got the Author great Reputation. [See also R. E. Moore, Henry Purcell and the Restoration Theater (Cambridge, Mass., 1961), Chapter V; and E. W. White, Early Theatrical Performances of Purcell's Operas, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1958-59), 44.] The Muses' Mercury (January 1707, pp. 4-5): This prologue was forbidden to be spoken the second Night of the Representation of the Prophetess. Mrs Shadwell was the occasion of its being taken notice of by the Ministry in the last Reign: He happen'd to be at the House on the first Night, and taking the beginning of the Prologue to have a double meaning, and that Meaning to reflect on the Revolution, he told a Gentleman, He would immediately Put a stop to it. When that Gentleman ask'd, Why he wou'd do the Author such a Disservice? He said, Because while Mr Dryden was Poet Laureat, he wou'd never let any Play of his be Acted. Mr Shadwell informed the Secretary of State of it, and representing it in its worst Colours, the Prologue was never Spoken afterwards, and is not printed in Mr Dryden's Works, or his Miscellanies. Cibber, Apology (ed. Lowe, II, 13-14): A Prologue (by Dryden) to the Prophetess was forbid by the Lord Dorset after the first War in Ireland. It must be confess'd that this Prologue had some familiar, metaphorical Sneers at the Revolution itself; and as the Poetry of it was good, the Offence of it was less pardonable

Event Comment: Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 313, 17 Dec. 1691: Last Tewsday [i.e., Wednesday] a great disorder at the playhouse, where the lord Grey of Ruthin and viscount Longueville were knockt downe, and 2 other lords puncht with the butt ends of muskets; they complained of the affront to his majestie, who referred them to the house of lords, where they made their application yesterday; and the lords thereon desired his majestie would be pleased to command the suspending acting of playes till further order. Newdigate newsletters, 17 Dec. 1691: Last night the Kings play House was shut up upon complaints given in to the King by the Lord Grey Viscount Longville and other Lords that they had received severall Affronts from and were badly used by ye door keepers, and 'tis said the future Acting is suspended till further order (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 82). See also HMC, 13th Report, Appendix Five, pp. 464-65

Event Comment: Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 316: The players have begg'd pardon of the lords abused there, and have leave to act again on Monday. [The order for reopening is in L. C. 5@150, p. 345 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 361).] Newdigate Newsletters, 19 Dec. 1691: We heare that the Play house will be againe opened this Night or on Monday & will Continue to Act as formerly and tis S. the Sentinell who discharged his Musquet was tryed by a Court Martial and acquitted (Wilson, Theatre Notes from the Newdigate Newsletters, p. 82)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not certain, but it lies between Saturday 9 and Saturday 16 April. Luttrell, A Brief Relation (II, 413) stated on 9 April that the Queen had prohibited its being acted; on 16 April (II, 422) he reports that it has been acted. Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 422, 16 April: Mr Dryden s play has been acted with applause, the reflecting passages upon this government being left out. The Gentleman's Journal, May 1692 (licensed 14 May): I told you in my last, that none could then tell when Mr Dryden's Cleomenes would appear; since that time, the Innocence and Merit of the Play have rais'd it several eminent Advocates, who have prevailed to have it Acted, and you need not doubt but it has been with great applause. Preface, Edition of 1692: Mrs Barry, always Excellent, has, in this tragedy, excell'd Herself, and gain'd a Reputation beyond any Woman whom I have ever seen on the Theatre. [See also Cibber, Apology, I, 160, for a discussion of Mrs Barry in Cleomenes.] A song, No, no, poor suffering heart no change endeavour, the music by Henry Purcell, is in Comes Amoris, The Fourth Book, 1693, and also, with the notice that it was sung by Mrs Butler, in Joyful Cuckoldom, ca. 1695. See also Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XVI (1906), xviii-xix; Epistolary Essay to Mr Dryden upon his Cleomenes, in Gentleman's Journal, May 1692, pp. 17-21. When the play was revived at Drury Lane, 8 Aug. 1721, the bill bore the heading: Not Acted these Twenty-Five Years

Event Comment: BM Add. Mss. 34096, folio 63r 64v, Whitehall, 15 July 1692: The Prince and Princesse of Danemarke...yesterday...tooke barge to Goe to ye Play House. [See Benjamin Bathurst, Letters of Two Queens (London, 1924), p. 225, for a letter by Princess Anne ordering boats to take her to the theatre.