Every Man Out was first staged in autumn 1599 at the new Globe Theatre, which had opened in August or September. It was probably performed between mid-November and Christmas, since the play directly mentions Histriomastix at 3.1.148, which the Children of Paul’s revived on 13 November (H&S, 9.186). The precision of this terminus a quo is somewhat weakened, however, by Roslyn Lander Knutson’s recent arguments that Histriomastix was an anonymous play dating from as early as the late 1580s or early 1590s (2001b, 75-102).

The title-page of the 1600 quarto informs potential buyers that Every Man Out of His Humour had been ‘publicly spoken’ and ‘acted’ before being expanded for the printed version. Jonson’s terms presumably invoke his characteristic distinction between hearing and watching plays (see Title-page, 4n.). Unusually for published plays at this time, however, the title-page does not identify the acting company. They were the Lord Chamberlain’s Men, named on the title-page and in a notice at the end of the 1616 folio edition. Both pages identify 1599 as the year of first performance. The notice adds that ‘The principal comedians were, Ric[hard] Burbage. Aug[ustine] Philips. Will[iam] Slye. Joh[n] Hemings. Hen[ry] Condel. Tho[mas] Pope’, all members of the Chamberlain’s men (Gurr, 1996b, 278-300). They may have hired Puntarvolo’s greyhound as a ‘guest’ performer from the Huntsman (possibly his owner or trainer) who brings him onstage at 2.2.0 SD and does not re-appear thereafter. The folio notice also states that the play was allowed (i.e. licensed for public performance) by the Master of the Revels. Like the double reference to the Chamberlain’s Men, this information bolsters the impression the play was blessed with cultural authority from its inception. Conversely, the quarto’s omission of this information indicates that such a pedigree had yet to be earned or constructed: Jonson had already ended his association with the Chamberlain’s Men by the time the quarto was issued in April 1600, and he wished to underline his literary composition and exclusive artistic ownership of his first printed play.

Jonson’s description ‘at the first playing’ in his defence of the opening performance (Print Edition, Appendix A, 1.421) implies that Every Man Out was publicly staged more than once, as perhaps does Macilente/Asper’s address to the ‘happier spirits in this fair-filled Globe’ in the revised ending of the 1600 quarto. The play may also have been performed privately at court between Christmas and Candlemas 1599-1600. The Declared Accounts of the Chamber record that John Heminges received £30 on behalf of the Chamberlain’s Men for performances on 26 December, 6 January, and 3 February. The heading of the revised folio ending, 'Which, in the presentation before Queen E[lizabeth] was thus varied, by Macilente', suggests that Every Man Out may have been one of them, although the Declared Accounts unfortunately do not name it or any of the other plays staged that season (Chambers, 1923, 4.166).

It is certain, however, that the play, as 'Euery on out of his Umor', was revived by the King’s Men (successors to the Chamberlain’s) for a court performance on 8 January 1605 (Chambers, 1923, 4.172). As W. David Kay (1969-70, 227-9) and Helen Ostovich (2001, 40) have observed, this revival preceded Every Man In on 2 February and may indicate the ‘sequel’ play’s greater contemporary standing. So too may the larger number of quotations from Every Man Out in Robert Allot’s England Parnassus (1600), though this could also have been due to the more conspicuously literary character of Every Man Out than Every Man In, a quality more appropriate to Allot’s poetic anthology.

Partly owing to the seventeenth century’s high regard for Jonson as neoclassical writer, Every Man Out was among a group of Restoration plays acted ‘but now and then; yet being well performed, were very satisfactory to the town’, according to John Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, 1708, 8-9). Gerard Langbaine recalled it was accounted 'an excellent Old Comedy', and was revived for a performance at the Theatre Royal in July 1675 with a new prologue and epilogue written by Thomas Duffett and spoken by Joseph Haines (An Account of the English Dramatic Poets, 1691, 290-91). Duffett’s additions (printed in his New Poems, 1676, 72-6) say nothing directly about the play itself, although they do adopt Jonson’s adversarial stance towards ‘ign’rant crowds’ and ‘queazy gallants’ who failed to appreciate superior dramatic art. In the absence of any performances for positive comparison, eighteenth-century critics condemned the play as unbelievable and unnatural, though both David Erskine in 1764 and Thomas Davies in 1784 thought that ‘with some judicious alterations’ it might be restaged (H&S, 9.188; Noyes, 1935, 296-300, Ostovich, 2001, 39). In modern times there has been a single revival of Every Man Out as part of a conference at the University of Toronto on November 7-12, 2006, directed by Jeremy Lopez. Otherwise, though, Erskine and Davies’s recommendations have yet to be taken up.