Event Comment: See Pepys, Diary, 27 Jan. For several decades this day was regularly observed as a Fast Day, with no plays acted

Event Comment: See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 117. The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Theatre, and there sat in the pit among the company of fine ladys, &c.; and the house was exceeding full, to see Argalus and Parthenia, the first time that it hath been acted: and indeed it is good, though wronged by my over great expectations, as all things else are

Event Comment: The Countess of Derby to the Duchess de la Tremoille, 25 Feb. 1660@1: Plays are often acted at court, and the King and their Royal Highnesses have been present at two this evening, at the Duchess of Buckingham's (Madame Guizot de Witt, The Lady of Latham [London, 1869], p. 268)

Event Comment: Edward Gower to Sir R. Leveson, 26 Feb. 1660@1: No more plays at court after this night, and but three days this week at the playhouse (HMC, 5th Report, 1876, p. 202). Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, p. 279) accepts this as evidence that a play was acted at Court on this night. As this was Shrove Tuesday, Gower's statement may well reflect the restrictions upon plays during Lent

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: And so to Salisbury Court, where the house as full as could be; and it seems it was a new play, The Queen's Maske, wherein there are some good humours: among others, a good jeer to the old story of the Siege of Troy, making it to be a common country tale. But above all it was strange to see so little a boy as that was to act Cupid, which is one of the greatest parts in it

Event Comment: At Oxford on this day the so-called red bull players acted All's Lost by Lust in the morning, The Young Admiral in the afternoon. According to Richard Walden (Io Ruminans, 1662) Anne Gibbs played Dionysia in the former, Rosinda in the latter

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. If the play was acted on eight successive days, as Downes states, this would be the eighth, and last, performance in this run Pepys, Diary: I took her [Mrs Pepys] to the opera, and shewed her The Witts, which I have seen already twice, and was most highly pleased with it

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I to the Theatre...where the King came to-day, and there was The Traytor most admirably acted; and a most excellent play it is

Event Comment: See Nicoll (Restoration Drama, p. 277) and Hotson (Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 114) for discussion of an order addressed to George Jolly forbidding him to act further until differences between him and Beeston are settled

Event Comment: On this date Jean Chamouveau received #300 for the services of a French company, who presumably acted at court on 16 Dec. 1661 (CSP, Treasury Books, 1660-1667, p. 311, in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 252)

Event Comment: This play was seen by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335). Jolly's company acted this play at Norwich

Event Comment: Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks attended this performance, but do not indicate the theatre. See Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 334, 336. As this play had been acted by the King's Company on 11 Jan. 1661@2, it has been assigned to Vere St.

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: I went to see if any play was acted, and I found none upon the post, it being Passion week

Event Comment: Although Pepys attended this performance, he did not name the theatre. As this play was acted at Vere St. on 15 March 1661@2 and there also on 19 May 1662, it has been assigned to that playhouse. Pepys, Diary: Thence to the play, where coming late, and meeting with Sir W. Pen, who had got room for my wife and his daughter in the pit, he and I into one of the boxes, and there we sat and heard The Little Thiefe, a pretty play and well done

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: The King's Company. See Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 118. John Wright (Historia Histrionica [1699], p. 3): [Hart] Acted the Dutchess in the Tragedy of The Cardinal, which was the first Part that gave him Reputation

Event Comment: An unnamed play was acted at court. See L. C. 5@137, p. 389, in Boswell, Restoration Court Stage, p. 280

Event Comment: Some time (probably not long) before this date Aglaura [by Sir John Suckling] was acted by the King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Thence to Mr Wotton, the shoemaker's, and there bought a pair of boots, cost me 30s., and he told me how Bird hath lately broke his leg, while he was fencing in Aglaura, upon the stage, and that the new theatre of all will be ready against term

Event Comment: A play, unidentified, was given at the Middle Temple. Since the Duke's Company acted at the Inner Temple, the King's Company probably Played here. The company received the usual fee of #20. See A Calendar of the Middle Temple Records, ed. Hopwood, p. 170

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: I hearing what play it was that is to be acted before the King tonight, I would not stay

Event Comment: For an account of the play, see John Wilson's The Cheats, ed. Milton C. Nahm (Oxford, 1935). It was licensed on 6 March (p. 124), acted, then forbade on 22 March in an order: Letter to Mr Tho. Killigrew: Signifying the Ks Pleasure that the New Play called the Cheates be no more represented till it be reuiewed by Sir Jo. Denham & Mr Waller. 22 March. 1662-3 (p. 130). Abraham Hill to John Brooke, 28 March 1663: P.S. The new play, called The Cheats, has been attempted on the Stage; but it is so scandalous, that it is forbidden (Familiar Letters of? Abraham Hill, [London, 1717], p. 103. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16) concerning Lacy: @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: It is possible that Katherine Phillips' Pompey, which was given in Dublin in February 1662@3, may have been presented in London in the late spring of 1663. Sir William Davenant's The Playhouse To Be Let, which apparently appeared in London in the late summer of 1663, has in Act V some elements of travesty upon Pompey. It is unlikely that its appearances in Dublin would make satire upon it have much point to London audiences without a performance in London; the spring of 1663 would be the most likely time for a presentation in London

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: And there took up my wife and Ashwell to the Theatre Royall, being the second day of its being opened. The house is made with extraordinary good contrivance, and yet hath some faults, as the narrowness of the passages in and out of the pitt, and the distance from the stage to the boxes, which I am confident cannot hear; but for all other things it is well, only, above all, the musique being below, and most of it sounding under the very stage, there is no hearing of the bases at all, nor very well of the trebles, which sure must be mended. The play was The Humerous Lieutenant, a play that hath little good in it, nor much in the very part which, by the King's command, Lacy now acts instead of Clun. In the dance, the tall devil's actions was very pretty....I am resolved to deny myself the liberty of two plays at court, which are in arreare to me for the months of March and April, which will more than countervail this excess, so that this month of May is the first that I must claim a liberty of going to a Court play according to my oath

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: 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