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: In an edition of Covent Garden Drollery, M. Summers, p. 67, prints an Epilogue, Spoken by the Lady Mary Mordant, before the King and Queen, at court, to the faithfull Shepherdess; Summers includes a letter (p. 121) from Gerrard to Lord Strafford, 9 Jan. 1662@3, concerning a performance of The Faithfull Shepherdess at Court. In another edition of the Covent Garden Drollery (London, 1928), G. Thorn-Drury argues that the performance belongs to Twelfth Night, 1633@4 (pp. 146-47)

Event Comment: The King's Company. Apparently this was the premiere. Prologue: First Astrol. reads. A Figure of the heavenly Bodies in their several Apartments, Feb. the 5th half an hour after three after Noon, from whence you are to judge the success of a new Play call'd the Wild Gallant. Evelyn, Diary: I saw the Wild Gallant, a Comedy

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: Pepys, Diary: To the New Theatre [Vere St], which, since the King's players are gone to the Royal one [Bridges St], is this day begun to be employed by the fencers to play prizes at

Event Comment: The King's Company. For praise of Lacy, see Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 16, or 27 Nov. 1662. Pepys, Diary: To the Royal Theatre by water, and landing, met with Captain Ferrers his friend, the little man that used to be with him, and he with us, and sat by us while we saw Love in a Maze. The play is pretty good, but the life of the play is Lacy's part, the clown, which is most admirable; but for the rest, which are counted such old and excellent actors, in my life I never heard both men and women so ill pronounce their parts, even to my making myself sick therewith

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: With my wife by water to the Royall Theatre; and there saw The Committee, a merry but indifferent play, only Lacey's part, an Irish footman, is beyond imagination. Here I saw my Lord Falconbridge, and his Lady, my Lady Mary Cromwell, who looks as well as I have known her and as well clad; but when the House began to fill she put on her vizard, and so kept it on all the play; which of late is become a great fashion among the ladies, which hides their whole face

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary To the Royall Theatre, where I resolved to bid farewell, as shall appear by my oaths to-morrow against all plays either at publique houses or Court till Christmas be over. Here we saw The Faithfull Sheepheardesse, a most simple thing, and yet much thronged after, and often shown, but it is only for the scenes' sake, which is very fine indeed and worth seeing; but I am quite out of opinion with any of their actings, but Lacy's, compared with the other house

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

Event Comment: By the King's Company. The fee paid the players was the customary #20. See A Calendar of the Inner Temple Records, ed. Inderwick, III, 16: To Drake, the upholsterer, for a serge Curtain and for hire of a screen on All Hallows day, #1

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