Event Comment: Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 307, lists The Comical Revenge (the Duke's Company) for the Inner Temple, 2 Feb. 1667@8. As this date falls on Sunday and as the sequence of entires quggests a later date, this performance appears under 2 Feb. 1668@9

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: My Lord Brouncker and I to the Duke of the York's playhouse, and there saw the latter part of The Master and the Man

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Pepys, Diary: [Creed] and I to the Duke of York's playhouse; and there coming late, he and I up to the balcony-box, where we find my Lady Castlemayne and several great ladies; and there we sat with them, and I saw The Impertinents once more, now three times, and the three only days it hath been acted. And to see the folly how the house do this day cry up the play more than yesterday! and I for that reason like it, I find, the better, too: by Sir Positive At-all, I understand, is meant Sir Robert Howard. My Lady [Castlemayne] pretty well pleased with it

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: My wife, and Deb., and I, to the King's house again, coming too late yesterday to hear the prologue, and do like the play better now than before; and, indeed, there is a good deal of true wit in it, more than in the common sort of plays

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: To the King's house, and saw a piece of Henry the Fourth; at the end of the play, thinking to have gone abroad with Knepp, but it was too late, and she to get her part against to-morrow, in The Silent Woman

Event Comment: The Travels of Cosmo the Third [Tuesday 30 April 1669 NS; Tuesday 20 April 1669 OS]: This day, his highness went to the comedy at the Duke of York's theatre, where the music and dancing, after the English manner, were less pleasing than the operas performed by the comedians; because, being in the English language, the only pleasure which we who heard them, can derive from the latter, is that of observing their action, which it cannot be denied, was supereminently excellent (London, 1821, p. 194)

Event Comment: The King's Company. For the identification of this play and details of its performance, see W. J. Lawrence, "Foreign Singers and Musicians at the Court of Charles II," Musical Quarterly, IX (1923), 217-25, and James G. McManaway, "Entertainment for the Grand Duke of Tuscany," Theatre Notebook, XVI (1961), 20-21. The Travels of Cosmo the Third [Monday 3 June 1669 NS; Monday 24 May 1669 OS]: In the afternoon his highness left home earlier than usual to make his visits, that he might be at the King's Theatre in time for the comedy, and a ballet set on foot and got up in honor of his highness by my Lord Stafford, uncle of the Duke of Norfolk. On arriving at the theatre, which was sufficiently lighted on the stage and on the walls to enable the spectators to see the scenes and the performances, his highness seated himself in a front box, where, besides enjoying the pleasure of the spectacle, he passed the evening in conversation with the Venetian ambassador, the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Stafford, and other noblemen. To the story of Psyche, the daughter of Apollo, which abounded with beautiful incidents, all of them adapted to the performers and calculated to express the force of love, was joined a well-arranged ballet, regulated by the sound of various instruments, with new and fanciful dances after the English manner, in which different actions were counterfeited, the performers passing gracefully from one to another, so as to render intelligible, by their movements, the acts they were representing. This spectacle was highly agreeable to his highness from its novelty and ingenuity; and all parts of it were likewise equally praised by the ladies and gentlemen, who crouded in great numbers to the theatre, to fill the boxes, with which it is entirely surrounded, and the pit, and to enjoy the performance, which was protracted to a late hour of the night (pp. 347-48). In BM Add. Mss. 10117, folio 230, Rugge's Diurnall states that towards the end of May 1669 Cosmo, Prince of Tuscany had several plays acted for him

Event Comment: The King's Company. The Epilogue, which was printed in A Collection of Poems Written upon several Occasions by several Persons, 1673, pp. 29-32, and reprinted by Noyes, Ben Jonson on the English Stage, pp. 247-48, by its references to Lent seems to indicate a Lenten revival. As this play was allotted to the King's Company ca. 12 Jan. 1668@9, it has been assigned to that company. The revival may have occurred in March 1670, perhaps not until later

Event Comment: This play was reprinted in 1672, being entered in the Term Catalogues, 20 Nov. 1671. It probably was acted in the late summer of 1671. The title page states that it was acted at the Theatre Royal, Bridges Street

Event Comment: The King's Company. There is uncertainty as to the date of the first performance, but in A Bibliography of John Dryden, p. 193, Macdonald cites as evidence for this date, Wood's Ath. Ox., IV, 209. The play was certainly first acted not later than this month, because John Evelyn saw it on 14 Dec. 1671. For further details, see 14 Dec. 1671

Event Comment: Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 8) gives a cast for Julius Caesar [by William Shakespeare] which includes Richard Bell, who died in the Drury Lane fire at the end of this month. It is not known when a performance of this play occurred, but a Prologue to Julius Caesar is in Covent Garden Drollery, 1672. Downes lists: Julius Caesar-$Bell; Cassius-$Major Mohun; Brutus-$Hart; Anthony-$Kynaston; Calphurnia-$Mrs Marshal. [Downes adds Portia-$Mrs Corbet, but this probably refers to a later performance.

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2: Charles 8. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This date of the premiere is not known, but the presence of Cademan (who was injured in August 1673) in the cast suggests a late spring or early summer production. In addition, two songs, in the play, Beauty no more shall suffer eclipse, and Full round the health good natured and free, both set by Robert Smith, are in Choice Ayres and Songs, 1673 (which was entered in the Stationers' Register, June 1673). It is possible, then, that the play was first given early as May 1673. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 33: A Comedy call'd The Reformation, Written by a Master of Arts in Cambridge; the Reformation in the Play, being the Reverse to the Laws of Morality and Virtue; it quickly made its Exit, to make way for a Moral one

Event Comment: The King's Company. It is difficult to assign a date to this burlesque, but it is obviously a satiric thrust at Elkanah Settle's The Empress of Morocco, which had been acted on 3 July 1673, and on Macbeth, which had been most recently acted (probably) on 9 Aug. 1673. As the title page of Duffett's burlesque does not name a theatre, it is not known whether it was acted before the King's Company left Lincoln's Inn Fields for the new theatre in Drury Lane. But the fact that Settle's Empress of Morocco was acted again at Dorset Garden on 6 Dec. 1673 makes December 1673 a likely month (or the King's Company to play its burlesque, although it may have been given in the late summer or early autumn, as many lesser actors are in the cast

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but, as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1674, it was probably first presented not later than the early months of 1674

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but, as the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1674, a first production not later than March 1674 is likely. In addition, the relatively large number of minor actors suggests that it might be a Lenten performance by the young players of the company. As to the authorship, the title page states: Written by a Person of Honour. On the other hand, Langbaine (English Dramatick Poets, p. 526) reports that he had heard that it was written by Duffett. The second Prologue is in Covent Garden Drollery, 1673, but the fact that it was intended but not spoken does not assist in dating the first performance

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 359. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 345. There is no certainty that this performance is the premiere, but an additional performance on 20 Nov. 1675 and the entry of the play into the Stationers' Register, 29 Nov. 1675, suggest that the first production probably occurred in early or mid-November 1675. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 10-11), gives a cast which is identical except for omissions. For Kynaston's acting of Morat (especially in the later years of the century), see Cibber, Apology, ed. Lowe, I, 124-26

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the date of licensing, 4 May 1676, suggests a production not later than March or April 1676. The Dedication indicates that the play was also acted privately at the residence of the Duchess of Albemarle, New-Hall

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the large proportion of minor actors and the licensing for printing on 4 Nov. 1676 suggest a production in the late summer or early autumn

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the fact that the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, 22 Nov. 1676, suggests that it was first acted not much later than September 1676. The Dedication: I know it is a triffle that by the meaness of the stile, the want of good design, and the ill representation at the Theatre, being play'd to the worst advantage, has got little credit with the World

Event Comment: The King's Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 359: The Rivall Queene. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 346. That this is the premiere is indicated by a letter from the Marquis of Worcester to the Marchioness, 17 March 1676@7: Sir Charles Sedley's Cleopatra has been acted often, and to-day a new play of the death of Alexander, but I have not been to see either, living a mighty drudging life (HMC, 12th Report, Appendix, Beaufort MSS., IX, 66). Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 11), has a cast which agrees (except for omissions) with that in the edition of 1677. Downes adds (p. 16): [Hart in] Alexander, towards the latter End of his Acting; if he Acted in any one of these but once in a Fortnight, the House was fill'd as at a New Play, especially Alexander, he Acting that with such Grandeur and Agreeable Majesty, That one of the Court was pleas'd to Honour him with this Commendation; That Hart might Teach any King on Earth how to Comport himself

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. There is considerable uncertainty as to the date of production of this play. Because it was licensed for printing on 2 Aug. 1677, it was probably first acted not later than July 1677. Because some of the names in the cast represent younger actors, it has been thought to be a Lenten production (see Gray, Lenten Casts, pp. 789-90). It seems, however, that the play, because of its reference to performances by the French comedians (the Epilogue refers to "de French Troop at toder end o'Town ") and the offering of Rare en Tout on29 May 1677, probably was acted in June 1677. The Prologue also refers to the comedy as The Women's Play," suggesting that it was produced for the actresses' annual benefit

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but the licensing of the play on 13 Aug. 1677 suggests a production not later than July 1677. Dedication to edition of 1678: But having...suffer'd so much through the defects of setting off, when it came on the Stage, it dares not now reject any Accomdation the Press cane give it. For (with the Theatres good leave to speak Truth,) it cannot receive greater Disadvantage in the Reading, than it met in the Presenting, The chief Parts Acted by Women; and, for their Ease, and somewhat of decorum, as was pretended, whole scenes left out, and scarcely any one Speech unmangled and entire. As for Adornments, in Habit, Musick, and Scene-Work it was Vacation-time, and the Company would not venture the Charge

Event Comment: The King's Company. The date of the first production is not known, but as the play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 16 Jan. 1677@8, it was probably first acted not later than December 1677

Event Comment: Henry Savile to the Earl of Rochester, 17 Dec. 1677: I had allmost forgott for another argument to bring you to towne that a French troop of comaedians bound for Nimeguen were by adverse winds cast into this hospitable port and doe act at Whitehall soe very well that it is a thousand pittyes they should not stay, especially a young wench of fifteen, who has more beauty and sweetnesse than ever was seen upon the stage since a friend of our left it (HMC, Bath MSS., 1907, II, 161). W. J. Lawrence (Early French Players in England, pp. 148-49) identifies the French actress as Francoise Pitel, later Mlle Raisin