was born. He composed two remarkable works during his retreat—the ‘Annus Mirabilis,’ which, with occasional lapses into his juvenile faults, shows a great advance in sustained vigour of style; and the ‘Essay on Dramatic Poesy,’ which appeared in 1668 and included part of a rather sharp controversy with Sir Robert Howard. Dryden had written the tragic scenes of the ‘Rival Ladies’ in rhyme, and had defended the practice in a preface to the published play in 1664. The ‘Essay’ defends the same thesis in answer to some criticisms in Howard's preface to his own plays (1665), and, like all Dryden's critical writings, is an interesting exposition of his principles. A contemptuous reply followed from Howard in the preface to his ‘Duke of Lerma,’ and a ‘Defence’ by Dryden in 1668. The friendship of the two disputants was not permanently broken off. They were on friendly terms during the last years of Howard's life. He died in 1698.
With the reopening of the theatres Dryden again became active. A comedy called ‘Secret Love, or the Maiden Queen,’ was produced at the King's Theatre in March 1667. Pepys was enraptured with the play and with the acting of Nell Gwyn, who was beginning her career on the stage. In the same year Dryden produced ‘Sir Martin Mar-all,’ one of his most successful plays, founded on a translation of Molière's ‘L'Etourdi’ by the Duke of Newcastle, and an alteration of the ‘Tempest,’ for which, however, D'Avenant seems to have been chiefly responsible. Both plays were produced at the Duke's Theatre. Their success had so raised Dryden's reputation that he now made a contract with the company of the King's Theatre. From a petition of the company to the lord chamberlain in 1678 (first printed by Malone), it appears that Dryden undertook to provide three plays a year, and received in return a share and a quarter out of the twelve shares and three quarters held by the whole company. He failed to provide the stipulated number of plays, not always producing one in a year; but he received his share of profits, amounting at first to 300l. or 400l. a year. The theatre was burnt in 1672, and debts were contracted for the rebuilding, which cost about 4,000l. Dryden's profits were consequently diminished. The company say that upon his complaint they allowed him the customary author's ‘third night’ for his ‘All for Love’ (1678), although as a shareholder he had no right to this payment, and they protest against his giving a new play, ‘Œdipus,’ to the rival Duke's company without compensating his own shareholders. The result does not appear, nor Dryden's answer, if he made one.
In 1668 the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the king's request, conferred upon Dryden the degree of M.A. In 1670 he had the more solid appointments of poet laureate and historiographer. Malone points out that among the powerful patrons who may have helped him at this season were Lord Clifford, Sir Charles Sedley, Lord Buckhurst (Earl of Dorset), Lord Mulgrave, and the Duchess of Portsmouth. He acknowledges general obligations in various dedications; but we may believe that he was appointed on his merits. D'Avenant, who died in 1668, was his predecessor in the first, and James Howell, who died in 1666, in the last appointment. The offices were now joined in one patent, with a salary of 200l. a year and a butt of canary wine. Dryden was also to have the two years' arrears since D'Avenant's death. His whole income, including his private estate and fees from dedications and profits from publication, is estimated by Malone (pp. 440–6) as reaching at the highest (1670–6) 557l. a year, afterwards falling to 420l. till the loss of his offices on the revolution. The salary, however, was so ill paid that in 1684 it was four years in arrear. An additional salary of 100l. a year was granted to him some time before 1679 (Treasury Warrants, first published by Peter Cunningham in notes to Johnson's ‘Lives,’ i. 334, and by R. Bell in edition of Dryden's ‘Poems,’ 1854). His income would have been a good one for the time if regularly received, but it was mainly precarious.
Between 1668 and 1681 Dryden produced about fourteen plays of various kinds. His comedies have found few apologists. Whatever their literary merits, they gave offence even at the time by their license. Pepys condemns his next venture, ‘An Evening's Love, or the Mock Astrologer’ (1668) (from the Feint Astrologue of the younger Corneille, and the Dépit Amoureux), partly upon this ground, and Evelyn mentions it as a symptom of the degeneracy and pollution of the stage. Another play called ‘Ladies à la Mode,’ produced in September of the same year, and apparently a complete failure, is only known from Pepys's mention. (Mr. Gosse thinks that it may perhaps be identified with a play called ‘The Mall, or the Modish Lovers,’ published in 1674 with a preface by ‘J.D.,’ Saintsbury, Dryden, p. 58.). Two were performed in 1672, the ‘Marriage à la Mode,’ which succeeded, and the ‘Assignation,’ which failed. A comedy called ‘The Kind Keeper, or Mr. Limberham,’ produced in 1678, was withdrawn after three days on account of the enmity of the vicious persons attacked by its honest satire, according to Dryden; according to others, because the satire, honest or not, was disgusting.
