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

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

Event Comment: The Journal of Sir Richard Bulstrode (p. 19): This evening is repeated in the great Hall by foure persons of quality the Indian Emper, but the Company is made very private, soe as few attempt to gett in. Jean Chappuzeau, Le Theatre Francois (Paris, 1675), p. 55, states that in 1668 he saw a revival of The Indian Emperor in London. Pepys, Diary: 14 Jan.: They fell to discourse of last night's work at court, where the ladies and Duke of Monmouth and others acted The IndianEmperour; wherein they told me these things most remarkable: that not any woman but the Duchesse of Monmouth and Mrs Cornwallis did any thing but like fools and stocks, but that these two did do most extraordinary well: that not any man did any thing well but Captain O'Bryan, who spoke and did well, but, above all things, did dance most incomparably. That she did sit near the players of the Duke's house; among the rest, Mis Davis, who is the most impertinent slut, she says, in the world; and the more, now the King do show her countenance; and is reckoned his mistress, even to the scorne of the whole world; the King gazing on her, and my Lady Castlemayne being melancholy and out of humour, all the play, not smiling once. The King, it seems, hath given her a ring of #700, which she shews to every body, and owns that the King did give it her; and he hath furnished a house for her in Suffolke Street most richly, which is a most infinite shame. It seems she is bastard of Colonell Howard, my Lord Berkshire, and that he do pimp to her for the King, and hath got her for him; but Pierce says that she is a most homely jade as ever she saw, though she dances beyond any thing in the world

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Jean Chappuzeau, Le Theatre Francois (Paris, 1675), states that he saw a revival of this play in 1668. Pepys, Diary: Sent my wife and Deb. to see Mustapha acted...and so to the Duke of York's playhouse, and there saw the last act for nothing. Where I never saw such good acting of any creature as Smith's part of Zanger; and I do also, though it was excellently acted by [...], do yet want Betterton mightily