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: On this date a band of French comedians received a permit authorizing them to bring their scenes and stage decoration to England. See W. J. Lawrence, "Early French Players in England," The Elizabethan Playhouse and Other Studies, p. 140; Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 252; and Madame M. Horn-Monval, "French Troupes in England during the Restoration," Theatre Notebook, VII (1953), 82

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 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: Pepys, Diary: And took my wife out immediately to the King's Theatre, it being a new month, and once a month I may go, and there saw The Indian Queen acted; which indeed is a most pleasant show, and beyond my expectation; the play good, but spoiled with the ryme, which breaks the sense. But above my expectation most, the eldest Marshall did do her part most excellently well as I ever heard woman in my life; but her voice not so sweet so Ianthe's [Mrs Betterton's]; but, however, we came home mightily contented

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 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: A facsimile of a bill announcing A Trial of Skill at this playhouse, 30 May 1664, is in Rariora, ed. John Eliot Hodgkin (London, n.d.), III, 53-54. See also William VanLennep, The Death of the Red Bull, Theatre Notebook, XVI (1962), 133-34

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: Mrs Pepys attended a play, but the theatre and the play are not named by Pepys

Event Comment: The play was entered in the Stationers' Register on 26 May 1665. In addition, the Prologue alludes to The Indian Queen (25 Jan. 1663@4): @The Scenes are old, the Habits are the same,@We wore last year, before the Spaniards came.@ Printed with The Indian Emperour was The Connexion of the Indian Emperour to the Indian Queen, which may have been distributed at the theatre, for Bayes, in The Rehearsal, remarks: Besides, Sir, I have printed above a hundred sheets of paper to insinuate the Plot into the Boxes

Event Comment: W. S. Clark (Works of Orrery, 1, 40-41) believes that this is Thomas Middleton's play, not one by Orrery. Henry Savile to George Savile: I am come newly from my Lord of Orrery's new play called The Widow, whose character you will receive from better hands. I will only say that one part of it is the humour of a man that has great need to go to the close stool, where there are such indecent postures as would never be suffered upon any stage but ours, which has quite turn'd the stomach of so squeamish a man as I am, that am used to see nothing upon a theatre that might not appear in the ruelle of a fine lady (Savile Correspondence, ed. W. D. Cooper, Camden Society, LXXI [1858], 4)

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: The King's Company. This performance is listed in the L. C. records 5@139, p. 129: at the Theatre the Queenes Mate there. L. C. 5@12, p. 17 reads: King & Queene here

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: By and by with Lord Bruncker by coach to his house, there to hear some Italian musique: and here we met Tom Killigrew, Sir Robert Murray, and the Italian Signor Baptista, who hath composed a play in Italian for the Opera, which T. Killigrew do intend to have up; and here he did sing one one of the acts. He himself is the poet as well as the musician.... This done, T. Killigrew and I to talk: and he tells me how the audience at his house [Bridges St.] is not above half so much as it used to be before the late fire. That Knipp is like to make the best actor that ever come upon the stage, she understanding so well: that they are going to give her #30 a-year more. That the stage is now by his pains a thousand times better and more glorious than ever heretofore. Now, wax candles, and many of them; then, not above 3 l6s. of tallow: now, all things civil, no rudeness anywhere; then, as in a bear-garden: then, two to three fiddlers; now, nine or ten of the best: then, nothing but rushes upon the ground, and every thing else mean; and now, all otherwise: then, the Queen seldom and the King never would come; now, not the King only for state, but all civil people do think they may come as well as any....That he hath gathered our Italians from several Courts in Christendome, to come to make a concert for the King, which he do give #200 a-year a-piece to: but badly paid, and do come in room of keeping four ridiculous gundilows, he having got the King to put them away, and lay out money this way; and indeed I do commend him for it, for I think it is a very noble undertaking. He do intend to have some times of the year these operas to be performed at the two present theatres, since he is defeated in what he intended in Moorefields on purpose for it; and he tells me plainly that the City audience was as good as the Court, but now they are most gone

Event Comment: [The King's Company. Evelyn, Diary: Saw the Virgin Queene a play written by Mr Dryden &c. [Possibly the run of this play continued, for Pepys saw it again on 25 March and there are no certain performances of other plays at the King's Theatre. If Secret Love was acted without interruption, except for the customary non-acting days in Lent, it was probably given on 16, 18, 19, 21, and 23 March.

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: And took up my wife, and to Polichinelli at Charing Crosse, which is prettier and prettier, and so full of variety that it is extraordinary good entertainment. (See also George Speaight, The History of the English Puppet Theatre [London, 1955], p. 75.

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: In haste to carry my wife to see the new play I saw yesterday, she not knowing it. But there, contrary to expectation, find The Silent Woman. However in; and there Knipp come into the pit...[and] tells me the King was so angry at the liberty taken by Lacy's part to abuse him to his face, that he commanded they should act no more, till Moone [Mohun] went and got leave for them to act again, but not this play. The King mighty angry; and it was better indeed, but very true and witty. I never was more taken with a play than I am with this "Silent Woman," as old as it is, and as often as I have seen it. There is more wit in it than goes to ten new plays. Nathaniel Wanby, Coventry, 1667: We have known in our time that the Silent Woman hath had the loud applause of a whole theatre (BM Harleian MS. 6430, p.23)

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@139, p. 129, and 5@12, p. 17; Bartholomew fayre at the Theatre. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 343

Event Comment: On 22 July 1667 Pepys implies that the theatres had been closed in June and early July, possibly because of the naval encounters with the Dutch. On 6 June, however, he records in his Diary: After dinner my father and wife to a play [Pepys, Diary]

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: With Sir W. Pen, my wife, and Mary Batelier to the Duke of York's house, and there saw Heraclius, which is a good play; but they did so spoil it with their laughing, and being all of them out, and with the noise they made within the theatre, that I was ashamed of it, and resolve not to come thither again a good while, believing that this negligence, which I never observed before, proceeds only from their want of company in the pit, that they have no care how they act

Event Comment: Pepys, Diary: [After looking in at lif], to Charing Cross, there to see Polichinelli. [It being begun, Pepys did not stay. See Speaight, English Puppet Theatre, p. 75.

Event Comment: Mrs Pepys attended a play, but the theatre and the title of the play are not known

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. lists, 5@139, p. 129, and 5@12, p. 17. The former states: The Goblins at ye Theatre. The latter adds: The King here. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 344

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. lists, 5@139, p. 129, and 5@12, p. 17. The former states: The Maydes Tragedie at ye Theatre. The second adds: The King here. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 344