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: Pepys, 7 March, refers to a new play at the King's Theatre. Possibly it was Thomas Porter's The Carnival, published in 1664, with no actors' names, no prologue, no epilogue, and announced in The Intelligencer, 2 May 1664

Event Comment: This play, possibly an adaptation from Corneille, was apparently not printed. It bears, however, some resemblances to Walter Hawkesworth's Latin comedy, Labyrinthus (which was first acted at Trinity College, Cambridge, in March 1602@3); and this Restoration play may be a variation on Hawkesworth's. Pepys, Diary: To the King's Playhouse...my wife and I and Madamoiselle. I paid for her going in, and there saw The Labyrinth, the poorest play, methinks, that ever I saw, there being nothing in it but the odd accidents that fell out, by a lady's being bred up in men's apparel, and a man in a woman's

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, 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 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

Event Comment: The Kings' Company. The play was probably acted through 11 Oct. Pepys, Diary, 4 Oct.: To-morrow they told us should be acted, or the day after, a new play, called The Parson's Dreame, acted all by women

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: Luellin...tells me what a bawdy loose play this Parson's Wedding is, that is acted by nothing but women at the King's house, and I am glad of it

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

Event Comment: An unnamed play was acted by the King's Company at the Cockpit at Court. See L. C. 5@138, p. 156, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 281

Event Comment: The Vestal-Virgin; or, The Roman Ladies (by Sir Robert Howard) was probably acted by February 1664@5. It was entered in the Stationers' Register on 7 March 1664@5 and published in 1665 in Four New plays. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus p. 15) lists it by title only. The King's Company

Event Comment: The King's Company. The players receided the customary fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, 38

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: [Pepys, Diary: After dinner we walked to the King's play-house, all in dirt, they being altering of the stage to make it wider. But God knows when they will begin to act again; but my business here was to see the inside of the stage and all the tiring-rooms and machines; and, indeed, it was a sight worthy seeing. But to see their clothes, and the various sorts, and what a mixture of things there was; here a wooden-leg, there a ruff, here a hobby-horse, there a crown, would make a man split himself to see with laughing; and particularly Lacy's wardrobe, and Shotrell's. But then again, to think how fine they show on the stage by candlelight, and how poor things they are to look now too near hand, is not pleasant at all. The machines are fine, and the paintings very pretty

Event Comment: Roger Boyle, Earl of Orrery, to Edward, Viscount Conway, 17 July 1666: If we meet at London you will see a Play Acted, wh I writt by ye King s Command; I call it, Edward ye Black Prince; And if ever I writt anythinge fit for ye Theatre this Play is it (Calendar of State Papers, Ireland, 1666-1669, p. 158; in The Dramatic Works of Roger Boyle, 1, 43)

Event Comment: On this day Pepys heard a report about the reopening of the play-houses which probably was an erroneous rumor: And found Sir W. Pen talking to Orange Moll [Mary Meggs] of the King's house, who, to our great comfort, told us that they begun to act on the 18th of this month

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: I away before to White Hall and into the new play-house there, the first time I ever was there, and the first play I have seen since before the great plague. By and by Mr Pierce comes, bringing my wife and his, and Knipp. By and by the King and Queene, Duke and Duchesse, and all the great ladies of the Court; which, indeed, was a fine sight. But the play being Love in a Tub, a silly play, and though done by the Duke's people, yet having neither Betterton nor his wife, and the whole thing done ill, and being ill also, I had no manner of pleasure in the play. Besides, the House, though very fine, yet bad for the voice, for hearing. The sight of the ladies, indeed, was exceeding noble; and above all, my Lady Castlemayne. The play done by ten o'clock. I carried them all home, and then home myself, and well satisfied with the sight, but not the play

Event Comment: The King's Company. In L. C. 5@139, p. 129, the play is given on one list as The Silent Woman on another list for the same day, The Scornful Lady. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 343

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To White Hall, and got my Lord Bellasses to get me into the playhouse; and there, after all staying above an hour for the players, the King and all waiting, which was absurd, saw Henry the Fifth well done by the Duke's people, and in most excellent habits, all new vests, being put on but this night. But I sat so nigh and far off, that I missed most of the words, and sat with a wind coming into my back and neck, which did much trouble me. The play continued till twelve at night. A Prologue for this play is in A Letter from a Gentleman to the Honourable Ed. Howard (London, 1668)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Here my Lord Bruncker would have made me promise to go with him to a play this afternoon, where Knipp acts Mrs Weaver's great part in The Indian Emperour, and he says she is coming on to be a great actor. But I am so fell to my business, that I, though against my inclination, will not go

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is in the L. C. lists, 5@139, p. 129. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 343

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary, 23 Jan.: Knipp made us stay in a box and see the dancing preparatory to to-morrow for The Goblins, a play of Suckling's, not acted these twenty-five years; which was pretty. Pepys, Diary, 24 Jan.: And, anon, at about seven or eight o'clock, comes Mr Harris, of the Duke's playhouse, and brings Mrs Pierce with him, and also one dressed like a country-mayde with a straw hat on; which, at first, I could not tell who it was, though I expected Knipp: but it was she coming off the stage just as she acted this day in "The Goblins"; a merry jade

Event Comment: The King's Company. L. C. list 5@139, p. 129 names Flora's Vagaries; L. C. 5@12, p. 17 names Rule a Wife, and Have a Wife. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 343

Event Comment: This performance is on the two L. C. lists, 5@139, p. 129, and 5@12, p. 17. The second list states that the King attended the play. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 343. The play may have continued its run on 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, and 13 March, as it was certainly given on 14 March