Event Comment: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118. BM Add. Mss. 34217, in Hotson, p. 246: @O' th' contrary Salendina for witt@Most say did come far short of it@And though I confesse there was some fault there@Yett this I'll say in defense of the Author@A good Plott though ill writt lookes more like a Play@Then all your fine lines when the plott is away.

Event Comment: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118. This was a new play, but it is not clear that this day was the premiere. BM Add. Mss. 34217, in Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 246: @For the surprizall it was a good proofe@By its getting them mony it took well enough@Without which Divell take the Play@Be it never so good the Actors say@But they may thanke God with all their hart@That Lacy plaid Brankadoros part.

Event Comment: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118. Langbaine (English Dramatic Poets, p. 477): This Play has been received with Success (as I said) in our Time; and as I remember, the deceas'd Mr Lacy acted Jonny Thump, Sir Gervase Simple's Man, with general Applause

Event Comment: This play is in Herbert, Dramatic Records p. 118: Cornelia a New Play, sir W. Bartleys. The date in Herbert is 1 June, a Sunday in 1662, with another play in the same group falling on Sunday. Nevertheless, the verse comment (see below) written, apparently, before the summer of 1662 points toward 2 June 1662 rather than 1 June 1663. Edward Browne also lists it as one of the plays he attended. The play was not printed. BM Add. Mss. 34217, in Hotson, Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 246: @For Cornelia they all doe say@There was abundance of witt in the play@Indeed t'had soe much t' was the worse for 't@For t' was to witty for the vulgar sort@And they who'd have poetts their Benefactors@Say witt without mony's naught for the Actors.

Event Comment: In an edition of Covent Garden Drollery, M. Summers, p. 67, prints an Epilogue, Spoken by the Lady Mary Mordant, before the King and Queen, at court, to the faithfull Shepherdess; Summers includes a letter (p. 121) from Gerrard to Lord Strafford, 9 Jan. 1662@3, concerning a performance of The Faithfull Shepherdess at Court. In another edition of the Covent Garden Drollery (London, 1928), G. Thorn-Drury argues that the performance belongs to Twelfth Night, 1633@4 (pp. 146-47)

Event Comment: Flora's Figarys appears in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 148, under this date. As Flora's Vagaries, it had been acted at Christ Church, Oxford, on 8 Jan. 1663. The play was not published before 1670, and the entry in Herbert's list has sometimes been regarded as the date of licensing, sometimes as the date of a performance in London. Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 427, assigned it to ca. January 1662@3 at Vere St, presumably because "Mr Bird" in the cast in the quarto of 1670 referred to Theophilus Bird, who died before 3 Nov. 1663. But the cast in the edition of 1670 is presumably that for 5 Oct. 1667, when Pepys saw the play and referred to Nell Gwyn and Mrs Knepp as acting in it; they, too, are listed in the quarto of 1670 but could hardly have played in it in 1663. If the cast in the 1670 edition is not that for 3 Nov. 1663 and if the "Mr Bird" is Theophilus Bird Jr, then the obstacles to consiuering 3 Nov. 1663 as the date of a performance rather than of licensing are less formidable. [I am indebted to professor John Harold Wilson for much of this argument.

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. 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: On Herbert's list (Dramatic Records, p. 138) appears at the end Eluira [Elvira] which is characterised as "the last" of the sequence which begins with Floras Figarys on 3 Nov. 1663. As Henry V, The Generall, Parsons Wedding, and Macbeth were acted after that date-Macbeth on 5 Nov. 1664--it is possible that Elvira; or, The Worst Not Always True may have appeared in late November. Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 530) attributes it to Lord Digby

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@139, p. 125. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. The play, licensed on 27 Nov. 1667, was not printed until 1667. There is no certainty that this is the premiere, but it may well have been, as Pepys saw it on 30 March and on 11 April suggested that it had recently had its first showing: [The Duchess of Newcastle] was the other day at her own play, The Humourous Lovers; the most ridiculous thing that ever was wrote, but yet she and her Lord mightily pleased with it; and she, at the end, made her respects to the players from her box, and did give them thanks

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play is on the L. C. list 5@139, p. 125. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. Gervase Jaquis to the Earl of Huntington, 7 May: Upon monday last the Duchesse of Newcastl's play was Acted in the theater in Lincolns Inne field the King and the Grandees of the Court being present and soe was her grace and the Duke her husband (Hastings MS., Ha 7657, Huntington Library)