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: 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 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: Nethercot (Davenant,pp. 337-78) believes that this play was brought out in the late summer of 1663. The Epilogue refers to the Long Vacation, presumably the summer of 1663, as the play is referred to in Stapylton's The Stepmother, which was licensed 26 Dec. 1663. In Act V is a farce relating to Pompey; as Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 405) states: Pompey, a Tragedy, which I have seen acted with great Applause, at the Duke's Theatre, and at the End was acted that Farce printed in the fifth Act of The Play-house to be Let. [See also June 1663.

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: Pepys, Diary: And called at Wotton's.... He tells me that by the Duke of York's persuasion Harris is come again to Sir W. Davenant upon his terms that he demanded, which will make him very high and proud

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: Pepys, Diary: Calling at Wotton's...he tells me...that Harris is come to the Duke's house again; and of a rare play to be acted this week of Sir William Davenant's; the story of Henry the Eighth with all his wives

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: Pepys, Diary: But my wife and I rose from table, pretending business, and went to the Duke's house, the first play I have been at these six months, according to my last vowe, and here saw the so much cried-up play of "Henry the Eighth"; which, though I went with resolution to like it, is so simple a thing made up of a great many patches, that, besides the shows and processions in it, there is nothing in the world good or well done

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. The date of the first performance is not known. As Evelyn saw it on 27 April, it seems likely that it was first performed before Easter (April 10). It was not licensed for printing until 8 July 1664. Preface to edition of 1664: I Cou'd not have wish'd my self more fortunate than I have been in the success of this Poem:...The Acting of it has lost me no Reputation. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 25: @Sir Nich'las, Sir Fred'rick, Widow and Dufoy, Were not by any so well done, Mafoy.@ The clean and well performance of this Comedy, got the Company more Reputation and profit than any preceding Comedy; the Company taking in a months time at it #1000

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. Evelyn, Diary: Saw a facecious Comedy Cald Love in a Tub

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: An unnamed play was given by the Duke's Company, with the usual fee of #20 received by Thomas Crosse. See A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 171

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: Mr Moore and I to Love in a Tubb, which is very merry, but only so by gesture, not wit, at all, which methinks is beneath the House

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. An entry in the journal of William Hamon--see also Late January 1664--refers to a performance ca. 6 Jan. 1664@65: Item given my 4 sistars for the Rivalls 00 06 00 (Folger MS. v. a. 422)

Event Comment: Evelyn, Diary: Saw a fine Mask at court perform'd by 6 Gent: & 6 Ladys surprizing his Majestie, it being Candlemas day. Pepys, Diary, 3 Feb.: Then Mrs Pickering...did, at my Lady's command, tell me the manner of a masquerade before the King and Court the other day. Where six women (my Lady Castlemayne and Duchesse of Monmouth being two of them) and six men (the Duke of Monmouth and Lord Arran and Monsieur Blanfort, being three of them) in vizards, but most rich and antique dresses, did dance admirably and most gloriously. God give us cause to continue the mirthe!

Event Comment: The Duke's Company, presumably. Evelyn, Diary: This night was acted my Lord Brahals Tragedy cal'd Mustapha before their Majesties &c: at Court: at which I was present, very seldom at any time, going to the publique Theaters, for Women now (& never 'til now) permitted to appeare & act, which inflaming severall young noble-men & gallants, became their whores, & to some their Wives, wittnesse the Earle of Oxford, Sir R. Howard, Pr. Rupert, the E. of Dorset, & another greater person than any of these, who fell into their snares, to the reproch of their noble families, & ruine both of body & Soule: I was invited to see this Tragedie, exceedingly well writ, by my Lord Chamberlain, though in my mind, I did not approve of any such passe time, in a season of such Judgements & Calamitie. Pepys, Diary: Here my Lord Bruncker proffered to carry me and my wife into a play at court to-night, and to lend me his coach home, which tempted me much; but I shall not do it

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: [Mrs Knipp] told us they begin at both houses to act on Monday [29] next. But I fear, after all this sorrow, their pains will be but little. Mrs Williams says, the Duke's house will now be much the better of the two, because of their women; which I am glad to hear

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 282) thinks that this play given on the L. C. lists--see Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346--between 29 Oct. and 6 Nov., may have been acted on this day. See also an order for supplies for the comedians acting at court in Alwin Thaler, Shakespear to Sheridan, p. 290. Pepys, Diary: I to White Hall, where I staid walking up and down till night, and then got almost into the playhouse, having much mind to go and see the play at Court this night; but fearing how I should get nome, because of the bonefires and the lateness of the night to get a coach, I did not stay

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: [Mrs Knipp] tells me how Smith, of the Duke's house, hath killed a man upon a quarrel in play; which makes every body sorry, he being a good actor, and, they say, a good man, however this happens. The ladies of the Court do much bemoan him, she says

Event Comment: The Duke's Company, presumably. Richard Legh, writing to his wife, 3 Jan. 1667@7, stated that he had seen The Valiant Cid but he did not indicate on what day he saw the play. See Lady Newton, The House of Lyme (London, 1917), p. 240