Event Comment: Charles II to Madame, 10 Dec. 1663: I am just now going to see a new play (C. H. Hartmann, Charles II and Madame[1934], p. 89). The Duke's Company. W. J. Lawrence, in a review of Boswell, The Restoration Court Stage, in Modern Language Review, XXVIII (1933), 103, suggests that it was The Step-Mother which was given on this occasion. The edition of 1664 lists: The Prologue to the King at the Cockpit at White-Hall. The Epilogue to the King

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. On Thursday 10 Dec. 1663, Pepys reported that this play was to be acted the following week, but the date of the first performance is uncertain. But--except for the holidays--it was probably acted on consecutive days until 1 Jan. 1663@4, when Pepys saw it. The play is also in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138, as a "Revived Play." Pepys, Diary: I perceive the King and Duke and the Court was going to the Duke's playhouse to see Henry VIII. acted, which is said to be an admirable play. But, Lord! to see now near I was to have broken my oathe, or run the hazard of 20s. losse, so much my nature was hot to have gone thither; but I did not go. Downes (p.24): King Henry the 8th, This Play, by Order of Sir William Davenant, was all new Cloath'd in proper Habits: The King's was new, all the Lords, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Doctors, Proctors, Lawyers, Tip-staves, new Scenes: The part of the King was so right and justly done by Mr Betterton, he being Instructed in it by Sir William, who had it from Old Mr Lowen, that had his Instructions from Mr Shakespear himself, that I dare and will aver, none can, or will come near him in this Age, in the performance of that part: Mr Harris's performance of Cardinal Wolsey, was little Inferior to that, he doing it with such just State, Port, and Mein, that I dare affirm, none hitherto has Equall'd him:...Every part by the great Care of Sir William, being exactly perform'd; it being all new Scenes; it continu'd Acting 15 Days together with general Applause

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of performance is uncertain. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 15 Feb. 1663@4, and its publication noted in The Newes, 3 March 1663@4. Katherine Philips, writing from Cardigan, Wales to Lady Temple in London, 24 Jan. 1663@4: I beleive er'e this you have seen the new Pompey either acted or written & then will repent your partiallity to ye other, but I wonder much what preparations for it could prejudice Will Davenant when I heare they acted in English habits, & yt so aprope yt Caesar was sent in with his feather & Muff, till he was hiss'd off ye Stage & for ye Scenes I see not where they could place any yt are very extra-ordinary, but if this play hath not diverted ye Cittizens wives enough Sr W: D: will make amends, for they say Harry ye 8th & some later ones are little better then Puppett-plays. I understand ye confederate-translators are now upon Heraclius, & I am contented yt Sr Tho. Clarges (who hath done that last yeare) should adorn their triumph in it, as I have done in Pompey (Harvard Theatre Collection)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. William Hamon (or Hammond) saw a performance near the end of the period between Michaelmas 1663 and Lady Day 1664. The entry in his journal (which I owe to the courtesy of Dr. Giles Dawson) reads: Item spent in carrying Mrs & sistar to King Lear 00 09 06 (Folger MS. v. a. 422)

Event Comment: The King's Company. There is no indication as to whether this is the first performance of the play. Pepys, Diary: I took my wife out, for I do find that I am not able to conquer myself as to going to plays till I come to some new vowe concerning it, and that I am now come, that is to say, that I will not see above one in a month at any of the publique theatres till the sum of 50s. be spent, and then none before New Year's day next, unless that I do become worth #1,000 sooner than then, and then am free fo come to some other terms.... to the King's house, and there met Mr Nicholson, my old colleague, and saw The Usurper, which is no good play, though better than what I saw yesterday. However, we rose unsatisfied

Event Comment: The King's Company. It is difficult to determine the run of the play, as all the known performances fall on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, but, except for 30 January, a Fast Day, it may well have been performed daily. L. C. 5@138, f. 15: A Warrant to the Master of the Great Wardrobe to prouide and deliuer to Thomas Killigrew Esq. to the value of forty pounds in silkes for to cloath the Musick for the play called the Indian Queen to be acted before their Maties Jan. 25th 1663 (Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 354)

Event Comment: The King's Company. The players received the customary fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, 25

Event Comment: This play, which was licensed on 22 April 1664, was a revision of Flecknoe's Love's Dominion, 1654. There is no indication, other than the date of licensing, which points to a specific time when it was acted. The Duke's Company

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I by coach to The Duke's house, where we say The Unfortunate Lovers; but I know not whether I am grown more curious than I was or no, but I was not much pleased with it, though I know not where to lay the fault, unless it was that the house was very empty, by reason of a new play at the other house. Yet here was my Lady Castlemaine in a box. In An Elegy on the Death of Edward Angel, 1673, two lines suggest that Angel acted Friskin: @Adieu, dear Friskin: Unfort'nate Lover weep,@Your mirth is fled, and now i' th' Grave must sleep.

Event Comment: This play was presumably acted by the Duke's Company. In the preface to Heraclius, Emperour of the East, published in 1664, the author, Lodowick Carlell, complains that he had submitted his translation of Corneille, only to have it returned the very day that this version appeared on the stage. See also the letter by Katherine Philips, under Pompey the Great, Jan. 1663@4. Pepys, Diary: We made no long stay at dinner; for Heraclius being acted, which my wife and I have a mighty mind to see, we do resolve, though not exactly agreeing with the letter of my vowe, yet altogether with the sense, to see another this month, by coming hither instead of that at court, there having ueen none conveniently since I made my vowe for us to see there, nor like to be this Lent, and besides we did walk home on purpose to make this going as cheap as that would have been, to have seen one at Court, and my conscience knows that it is only the saving of money and the time also that I intend by my oaths....The play hath one very good passage well managed in it, about two persons pretending, and yet denying themselves, to be son to the tyrant Phocas, and yet heire of Mauricius to the crowne. The garments like Romans very well. The little girle is come to act very prettily, and spoke the epilogue most admirably. But at the beginning, at the drawing up of the curtaine, there was the finest scene of the Emperor and his people about him, standing in their fixed and different postures in their Roman habitts, above all that ever I yet saw at any of the theatres

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play apparently was not printed. Pepys, Diary: and then with my wife by coach to the Duke's house, and there saw The German Princess acted, by the woman herself; but never was any thing so well done in earnest, worse performed in jest upon the stage; and indeed the whole play, abating the drollery of him that acts her husband, is very simple, unless here and there a witty sprinkle or two

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Evelyn, Diary: Saw a facecious Comedy Cald Love in a Tub

Event Comment: The King's Company. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 27 June 1664. For the Epilogue, see R. G. Ham, "Dryden's Epilogue to The Rival Ladies, 1664," Review of English Studies, XIII (1937), 76-80

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: [Mrs Pepys] and I to the King's house, and saw The Silent Woman; but methought not so well done or so good a play as I formerly thought it to be, or else I am now-a-days out of humour. Before the play was done, it fell such a storm of hayle, that we in the middle of the pit were fain to rise; and all the house in a disorder

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The play apparently was never printed. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 26: Made out of Spanish, by the Earl of Bristol. Pepys, Diary: Went to a play, only a piece of it, which was at the Duke's house, Worse and Worse; just the same manner of play, and writ, I believe, by the same man as The Adventures of Five Hours; very pleasant it was, and I begin to admire Harris more than ever

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: And seeing The Bondman upon the post, I consulted my oaths and find I may go safely this time without breaking it...There I saw it acted. It is true, for want of practice, they had many of them forgot their parts a little; but Betterton and my Poor Ianthe outdo all the world. There is nothing more taking in the world with me than that play

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Thence to the King's play-house, and there saw Bartholomew Fayre, which do still please me; and is, as it is acted, the best comedy in the world, I believe. I chanced to sit by Tom Killigrew, who tells me that he is setting up a Nursery; that is, is going to build a house in Moorefields, wherein he will have common plays acted. But four operas it shall have in the year, to act six weeks at a time; where we shall have the best scenes and machines, the best musique, and every thing as magnificent as is in Christendome; and to that end hath sent for voices and painters and other persons from Italy

Event Comment: The King's Company. For Mrs Corey as Dol Common, see 27 Dec. 1666. For the murder of Clun, see An Elegy Upon the Most Execrable Murther of Mr Clun (1664), and the reprint in A Little Ark, ed. G. Thorn-Drury, pp. 30-31. Pepys, Diary, 4 Aug.: Clun, one of their [King's] best actors, was, the last night, going out of towne (after he had acted the Alchymist, wherein was one of his best parts that he acts) to his country-house, set upon and murdered; one of the rogues taken, an Irish fellow. It seems most cruelly butchered and bound. The house will have a great miss of him

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Sir W. Pen...did carry me to a play and pay for me at the King's house, which is The Rivall Ladys, a very innocent and most pretty witty play. I was much pleased with it, and it being given me, I look upon it as no breach to my oathe

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: So my wife and I abroad to the King's playhouse, she giving me her time of the last month, she having not seen any then; so my vowe is not broke at all, it costing me no more money than it would have done upon her had she gone both her times that were due to her. Here we saw Flora's Figarys. I never saw it before, and by the most ingenuous performance of the young Jade Flora, it seemed as pretty a pleasant play as ever I saw in my life

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys does not indicate that this performance is the premiere, and Summers, The Playhouse of Pepys, p. 137, states, without offering his evidence, that the play first appeared on 11 Aug. 1664. The play also appears in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138. If Pepys saw the premiere, the play was possibly given on 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24 Aug. Pepys, Diary: Mr Creed dining with me I got him to give my wife and me a play this afternoon, lending him money to do it, which is a fallacy that I have found now once, to avoyde my vowe with, but never to be more practised I swear, and to the new play, at the Duke's house, of Henry the Fifth; a most noule play, writ by my Lord Orrery; wherein Betterton, Harris, and Ianthe's parts are most incomparably wrote and done, and the whole play the most full of height and raptures of wit and sense, that ever I heard; having but one incongruity, or what did not please me in it, that is, that King Harry promises to plead for Tudor to their Mistresse, Princesse Katherine of France, more than when it comes to it he seems to do; and Tudor refused by her with some kind of indignity, not with a difficulty and honour that it ought to have been done in to him. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 27-28: This Play was Splendidly Cloath'd: The King, in the Duke of York's Coronation Suit; Owen Tudor, in King Charle's: Duke of Burgundy, in the Lord of Oxford's, and the rest all New. It was Excellently Perform'd, and Acted 10 Days Successively

Event Comment: The King's Company, presumably. For a version of this play, see R. G. Howarth, "A Manuscript of James Shirley's Court Secret," Review of English Studies, VII (1931), 302-13. The manuscript is in the Worcester College Library (Plays 9. 21). Pepys, Diary: My wife going to-day to dine with Mrs Pierce, and thence with her and Mrs Clerke to see a new play, The Court Secret. [The play had not been acted before the Restoration.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This apparently was not the first performance, but the time of premiere is not known. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I and Mercer to the Duke's house, and there saw The Rivalls, which is no excellent play, but good acting in it; especially Gosnell comes and sings and dances finely, but, for all that, fell out of the key, so that the musique could not play to her afterwards, and so did Harris also go out of the tune to agree with her. Downes (p. 23): The Rivals, A Play, Wrote by Sir William Davenant; having a very Fine Interlude in it, of Vocal and Instrumental Musick, mixt with very Diverting Dances: M Price introducing the Dancing, by a short Comical Prologue, gain'd him an Universal Applause of the Town....And all the Womens Parts admirably Acted; chiefly Celia, a Shepherdess being Mad for Love; especially in Singing several Wild and Mad Songs

Event Comment: The King's company. On 31 Aug. or 1 Sept. 1664 Orrery wrote to Sir Henry Bennett: Ther was noe Play of myne Acted, they are now but Studyinge it; I hope within less then a Fortnight twill be on ye Theater And if you are not surfetted, with what of mine you have already seene [Henry V], I will beg ye honour to wait on you when tis Acted (see The Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, ed. W. S. Clark@II [Cambridge, Mass., 1937], 1, 102). The play is also on the list of Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138. Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 281, lists it among the plays given at court, but Sir Heneage Finch's note (see below) seems to indicate an afternoon performance. Sir Heneage Finch to Sir Edward Dering, 15 Sept. 1664: Yesterday was acted, in the Greatest and noblest presence wch ye Court can make, before ye fullest Theatre, & with the highest applause imaginable, my Lo Orerys new play calld ye Generall formerly acted in Ireland by the name of Altamira, but much altered & improved. From thence the whole Court went to Wallingford house, where the Earl of Arran and the Lady Mary Stuart were that night before Supper marryd in the Gallery (Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, I, 103, from Stowe MS 744 f. 81)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: By coach to White Hall, thinking to have met at a Committee of Tangier, but nobody being there but my Lord Rutherford, he would needs carry me and another Scotch Lord to a play, and so we saw, coming late, part of The Generall, my Lord Orrery's (Broghill) second play; but, Lord! to see how no more either in words, sense, or design, it is to his Harry the 5th is not imaginable, and so poorly acted, though in finer clothes, is strange. And here I must confess breach of a vowe in appearance, but I not desiring it, but against my will, and my oathe being to go neither at my own charge nor at another's, as I had done by becoming liable to give them another, as I am to Sir W. Pen and Mr Creed; but here I neither know which of them paid for me, nor, If I did, am I obliged ever to return the like