Event Comment: A play, unidentified, was given by the Duke's Company at this time. The customary fee of #20 was paid. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, II

Event Comment: See HMC, Report III, Appendix, p. 215a; Hotson, pp. 214-15; B. M. Wagner, "John Rhodes and Ignoramus," Review of English Studies, V (1929), 43-48. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 302n, 423. This appears to be the Duke's Company

Event Comment: This was probably acted by the King's Company, which acted the play several times in 1660-61. Pepys, Diary: At White Hall by appointment, Mr Creed carried my wife and I to the Cockpitt, and we had excellent places, and saw the King, Queen, Duke of Monmouth, his son, and my Lady Castlemaine, and all the fine ladies; and The Scornfull Lady, well performed. They had done by eleven o'clock

Event Comment: The King's Company. This is the first known performance of the comedy, but it may not be the premiere. Evelyn, Diary: At night saw acted the Committe, a ridiculous play of Sir R. Howards where that Mimic Lacy acted the Irish-footeman to admiration: a very Satyrus or Roscius. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16: @For his Just Acting, all gave him due Praise,@His Part in the Cheats, Jony Thump, Teg and Bayes,@In these Four Excelling; The Court gave him the Bays.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Evelyn, Diary: I saw acted the Law against Lovers

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke's House, where we saw The Villane again; and the more I see it, the more I am offended at my first undervaluing the play, it being very good and pleasant, and yet a true and allowable tragedy. The house was full of citizens, and so the less pleasant, but that I was willing to make an end of my gaddings, and to set to my business for all the year again to-morrow. Here we saw the old Roxalana [Mrs Davenport] in the chief box, in a velvet gown, as the fashion is, and very handsome, at which I was glad

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Creed and I to my wife again, and...to the Cockpitt, where we saw Claracilla, a poor play, done by the King's house (but neither the King nor Queen were there, but only the Duke and Duchess, who did show some impertinent and, methought, unnaturall dalliances there, before the whole world, such as kissing, and leaning upon one another); but to my very little content, they not acting in any degree like the Duke's people

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Duke's house, and there saw Twelfth Night acted well, though it be but a silly play, and not related at all to the name or day. Downes, p. 23: Twelfth Night, Or what you will; Wrote by Mr Shakespear, had mighty Success by its well Performance:...All the Parts being justly Acted Crown'd the Play. Note, It aas got up on purpose to be Acted on Twelfth Night

Event Comment: The Duke's Company, the receipts for #20 being signed by Richard Baddeley (A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 170). W. J. Lawrence (Review of English Studies, IX (1933), 221) suggests The Adventures of Five Hours as a possibility. Pepys, Diary: I met Madam Turner...she and her daughter having been at the play to-day at the Temple, it being a revelling time with them

Event Comment: The King's Company. Apparently this was the premiere. Prologue: First Astrol. reads. A Figure of the heavenly Bodies in their several Apartments, Feb. the 5th half an hour after three after Noon, from whence you are to judge the success of a new Play call'd the Wild Gallant. Evelyn, Diary: I saw the Wild Gallant, a Comedy

Event Comment: L. C. 5@137, p. 389, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 281. By the Duke's Company. Charles II to Madame (his sister), 9 Feb. 1662@3: I am just now called for to goe to Play (C. H. Hartman, Charles II and Madame [London, 1934], p. 68)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: So resolved to take my wife to a play at court to-night, and the rather because it is my birthday....While my wife dressed herself, Creed and I walked out to see what play was acted to-day, and we find it The Slighted Mayde. But, Lord! to see that though I did know myself to be out of danger, yet I durst not go through the street, but round by the garden into Tower Street. By and by took coach, and to the Duke's house, where we saw it well acted, thought the play hath little good in it, being most pleased to see the little girl [Moll Davis] dance in boy's apparel, she having very fine legs, only bends in the hams, as I perceive all women do

Event Comment: The King's Company. See 5 Feb. Pepys, Diary: [The Slighted Maid] being done, we took coach and to court, and there got good places, and saw The Wilde Gallant, performed by the King's house, but it was ill acted, and the play so poor a thing as I never saw in my life almost, and so little answering the name, that from beginning to end, I could not, nor can at this time, tell certainly which was the Wild Gallant. The King did not seem pleased at all, all the whole play, nor any body else, though Mr Clerke whome we met here did commend it to us....Now as my mind was but very ill satisfied with these two plays themselves, so was I in the midst of them sad to think of the spending so much money and venturing upon the breach of my vow, which I found myself sorry for, I bless God, though my nature would well be contented to follow the pleasure still. But I did make payment of my forfeiture presently, though I hope to save it back again by forbearing two plays at court for this one at the Theatre, or else to forbear that to the Theatre which I am to have at Easter. But it being my birthday and my day of liberty regained to me, and lastly, the last play that is likely to be acted at Court before Easter, because of the Lent coming in, I was the easier content to fling away so much money

Event Comment: This play was seen by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 334, 336), but no theatre is named. The most recent dated performance was given by the Duke's Company, 5 Dec. 1661

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: After dinner by water to the Royall Theatre [Bridges St]; but that was so full they told us we could have no room. And so to the Duke's House; and there saw Hamlett done, giving us fresh reason never to think enough of Betterton. Who should come upon the stage but Gosnell, my wife's maid? but neither spoke, danced, nor sung; which I was sorry for. But she becomes the stage very well

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Royall Theatre [Bridges St], but they not acting today, then to the Duke's house, and there saw The Slighted Mayde, wherein Gosnell acted Pyramena, a great part, and did it very well, and I believe will do it better and better, and prove a good actor. The play is not very excellent, but is well acted, and in general the actors, in all particulars, are better than at the other house

Event Comment: The Faithful Virgins (MS Bodleian Rawl. Poet. 195, ff. 49-78) bears a permit to be acted by the Duke's Company, a permit signed by Henry Herbert. Since Herbert retired in July 1663, the play, if performed, can be dated from about 1661 to June 1663

Event Comment: The King's Company. For praise of Lacy, see Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16, or 27 Nov. 1662. Pepys, Diary: To the Royal Theatre by water, and landing, met with Captain Ferrers his friend, the little man that used to be with him, and he with us, and sat by us while we saw Love in a Maze. The play is pretty good, but the life of the play is Lacy's part, the clown, which is most admirable; but for the rest, which are counted such old and excellent actors, in my life I never heard both men and women so ill pronounce their parts, even to my making myself sick therewith

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: With my wife by water to the Royall Theatre; and there saw The Committee, a merry but indifferent play, only Lacey's part, an Irish footman, is beyond imagination. Here I saw my Lord Falconbridge, and his Lady, my Lady Mary Cromwell, who looks as well as I have known her and as well clad; but when the House began to fill she put on her vizard, and so kept it on all the play; which of late is become a great fashion among the ladies, which hides their whole face

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary To the Royall Theatre, where I resolved to bid farewell, as shall appear by my oaths to-morrow against all plays either at publique houses or Court till Christmas be over. Here we saw The Faithfull Sheepheardesse, a most simple thing, and yet much thronged after, and often shown, but it is only for the scenes' sake, which is very fine indeed and worth seeing; but I am quite out of opinion with any of their actings, but Lacy's, compared with the other house

Event Comment: This play was seen by Olaus Borrichius (Seaton, Literary Relationships, p. 337). As its later performances were given by the King's Company, it was probably acted at Bridges St on this occasion. The play was not printed until 1674, and the date of the premiere is not known

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play is assigned to this period because it was licensed on 16 Oct. 1663 and advertised in The Intelligencer, 23 Nov. 1663. There is no specific evidence that it was acted in the autumn of 1663. See 20 and 21 March 1666@7 for a later production

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The play was licensed on 26 Dec. 1663, but the date of the premiere is uncertain. The Prologue and Epilogue refer to the end of the Long Vacation, and the beginning of Michaelmas Term on 9 Oct. 1663 suggests a performance in October

Event Comment: By the King's Company. The fee paid the players was the customary #20. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, 16: To Drake, the upholsterer, for a serge Curtain and for hire of a screen on All Hallows day, #1