Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance was attended by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks at the Duke's Theatre (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary [Sir W. Pen] and I and my wife to the Theatre...and there saw Rule a Wife and have a Wife very well done

Event Comment: This play was seen by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335). As this play was presented by the King's Company on 15 Nov. 1660 and again on 30 Dec. 1661, it was probably given at Vere St.

Event Comment: This play was seen by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335). As this play was given as recently as 5 Feb. 1661@2 by the King's Company, it has been assigned to Vere St.

Event Comment: This play was seen by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 333, 335). As the King's Company is the only one known to gave given it since the Restoration, it has been assigned to Vere St

Event Comment: This performance was attended by Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks, who stated: Judged to be their best play (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 334-36). This performance may have been the premiere. The Duke's Company. BM Add. Mss. 34217, in Hotson (Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, p. 247): @Then came the Knight agen with his Lawe@Against Lovers the worst that ever you sawe@In dressing of which he playnely did shew it@Hee was a far better Cooke then a Poet@And only he the Art of it had@Of two good Playes to make one bad.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: I went [to the Opera] and there saw The Law Against Lovers, a good play and well performed especially the little girl's [Viola?-and singing; and were it not for her, the loss of $Roxalana">Moll Davis] (whom I never saw act before) dancing and singing; and were it not for her, the loss of $Roxalana [Hester Davenport] would spoil the house

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the Opera, and there saw Romeo and Juliet, the first time it was ever acted; but it is a play of itself the worst that ever I heard in my life, and the worst acted that ever I saw these people do, and I am resolved to go no more to see the first time of acting, for they were all of them out more or less. Downes (p. 22): Note, There being a Fight and Scuffle in this Play, between the House of Capulet, and House of Paris; Mrs Holden Acting his Wife, enter'd in a Hurry, Crying, O my Dear Count! She Inadvertently left out, O, in the pronuntiation of the Word Count! giving it a Vehement Accent, put the House into such a Laughter, that London Bridge at low-water was silence to it. This Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet, was made some time after into a Tragi-comedy, by Mr James Howard, he preserving Romeo and Juliet alive; so that when the Tragedy was Reviv'd again, twas Play'd Alternately, Tragical one Day, and Tragicomical another; for several Days together. [No specific notices are known which would indicate when Howard's version appeared.

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. See also The Variety, in Bentley, Jacobean and Caroline Stage, III, 149-51; and James Shirley's The Ball; or, French Dancing Master, in Bentley, V, 1079. See also 10 Nov. 1661

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: Jacques Thierry and Will Schellinks saw this performance (Seaton, Literary Relationships, pp. 334, 336). Although this performance falls in Passion Week, the date seems correct. Because the patent theatres normally closed during Passion Week, this performance has been tentatively assigned to the red bull Company. As Jolly played Part I (A Girle Worth Gold) at Norwich, this is probably a presentation of Part I

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: [Mr Herbert] and I and the two young ladies and my wife to the playhouse, the Opera, and saw The Mayde in the Mill, a pretty good play

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife and I by water to the Opera, and there saw The Bondman most excellently acted; and though we had seen it so often, yet I never liked it better than to-day, Ianthe [Mrs Saunderson] acting Cleora's part very well now Roxalana [Mrs Hester Davenport] is gone. We are resolved to see no more plays till Whitsuntide, we having been three days together. Met Mr Sanchy, Smithes, Gale, and Edlin at the play, but having no great mind to spend money, I left them there

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.