Event Comment: Betterton's Company. The date of the premiere is not known, but the fact that the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 3151, 20-23 Jan. 1695@6, and entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1695@6, suggests that it was probably acted not later than December 1695. According to the Edition of 1696, the music was set by John Eccles: Come, Thyrsis, come was sung by Reading and Mrs Hodgson; the other songs in the edition lack the names of the singers. In addition, Rich mines of hot love are rooted here, sung by Bowman, was in Deliciae Musicae, The First Book of the Second Volume, 1696; and Let us revel and roar, set by John Eccles and sung by Curco and Reading, was published in Thesaurus Musicus, The Fifth Book, 1696. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 44: Lovers Luck, a Comedy, Wrote by Captain Dilks, which fill'd the House 6 Days together, and above 50# the 8th, the Day it was left off. A Comparison Between the Two Stages (1702), p. 20, lists it among the plays under the heading: Damn'd

Event Comment: Author's Day. [Publication of the play announced in the Public Advertiser this day, along with the following "puff" by Censor Dramaticus: "Sir: I have just given the new comedy, the Double Mistake, its first reading, and must confess I never was better pleased at a first reading than at present: It is chaste, sententious and genteel in its dialogue, interesting in its plot, the characters all of consequence, strongly marked and happily kept up, and even the virtuoso entertaining without being tiresome. I heartily wish it success, and congratulate the author on such a production, which shows that virtuous principles in high life render the persons that possess them doubly charming, and add real grace and dignity to their appearance in public life....I hope I may be believed when I say I have not the most distant knowledge of the author, and that impartiality shall ever be, and ever was my constant plan in observations of this kind."

Event Comment: Preface: In the reading of which, I fear, you will not meet with that satisfaction which you have had in seeing it on the Stage, the chief parts of it both serious and comick, being performed to that height of excellence

Event Comment: The King's Company. Pepys, Diary: Being full of my desire of seeing my Lord Orrery's new play this afternoon at the King's house, The Black Prince, the first time it is acted; where though we come by two o'clock, yet there was no room in the pit, but we were forced to go into one of the upper boxes, at 4s. a piece, which is the first time I ever sat in a box in my life. And in the same box come, by and by, behind me, my Lord Barkeley and his lady; but I did not turn my face to them to be known, so that I was excused from giving them my seat; and this pleasure I had, that from this place the scenes do appear very fine indeed, and much better than in the pit. The house infinite full, and the King and Duke of York was there. By and by the play begun, and in it nothing Particular but a very fine dance for variety of figures, but a little too long. But, as to the contrivance, and all that was witty (which, indeed, was much, and very witty), was almost the same that had been in his two former plays of Henry the 5th and Mustapha, and the same points and turns of wit in both, and in this very same play often repeated, but in excellent language, and were so excellent that the whole house was mightily pleased with it all along till towards the end he comes to discover the chief of the plot of the play by the reading of a long letter, which was so long and some things (the people being set already to think too long) so unnecessary that they frequently begun to laugh, and to hiss twenty times, that, had it not been for the King's being there, they had certainly hissed it off the stage. But I must confess that, as my Lord Barkeley says behind me, the having of that long letter was a thing so absurd, that he could not imagine how a man of his parts could possibly fall into it; or, if he did, if he had but let any friend read it, the friend would have told him of it; and, I must confess, it is one of the most remarkable instances that ever I did or expect to meet with in my life of a wise man's not being wise at all times, and in all things, for nothing could be more ridiculous than this, though the letter of itself at another time would be thought an excellent letter, and indeed an excellent Romance, but at the end of the play, when every body was weary of sitting, and were already possessed with the effect of the whole letter, to trouble them with a letter a quarter of an hour long was a most absurd thing. After the play done, and nothing pleasing them from the time of the letter to the end of the play, people being put into a bad humour of disliking (which is another thing worth the noting), I home by coach, and could not forbear laughing almost all the way home, and all the evening to my going to bed, at the ridiculousness of the letter, and the more because my wife was angry with me, and the world, for laughing, because the King was there, though she cannot defend the length of the letter

Event Comment: Boswell (Restoration Court Stage, pp. 180-81) believes that a performance occurred on this day, as well as on 16 Feb. 1674@5, Shrove Tuesday, the date often specified in advance statements. For previous notices, see 2 Feb. 1674@5, 15 and 22 Dec. 1674. Edition of 1675:....followed at innumerable Rehearsals, and all the Representations by throngs of Persons of the greatest Quality...at the 20th or 30th, for near so often it had been Rehearsed and Acted....And the Composer of all the Musick both Vocal and Instrumental Mr Staggins. Langbaine. (English Dramatick Poets, p. 92): a Masque at court, frequently presented there by Persons of great Quality, with the Prologue, and the Songs between the Acts: printed in quarto Lond. 1675....This Masque was writ at the Command of her present Majesty: and was rehearsed near Thirty times, all the Representations being follow'd by throngs of Persons of the greatest Quality, and very often grac'd with their Majesties and Royal Highnesses Presence. John Evelyn (The Life of Mrs Godolphin): [Mrs Blagge] had on her that day near twenty thousand pounds value of Jewells, which were more sett off with her native beauty and luster then any they contributed of their own to hers; in a word, she seemed to me a Saint in Glory, abstracting her from the Stage. For I must tell you, that amidst all this pomp and serious impertinence, whilst the rest were acting, and that her part was sometymes to goe off, as the scenes required, into the tireing roome, where severall Ladyes her companions were railing with the Gallants trifleingly enough till they were called to reenter, she, under pretence of conning her next part, was retired into a Corner, reading a booke of devotion, without att all concerning herself or mingling with the young Company; as if she had no farther part to act, who was the principall person of the Comedy...[With] what a surprizeing and admirable aire she trode the Stage, and performed her Part, because she could doe nothing of this sort, or any thing else she undertooke, indifferently....Thus ended the Play, butt soe did not her affliction, for a disaster happened which extreamly concern'd her, and that was the loss of a Diamond of considerable vallue, which had been lent her by the Countess of Suffolke; the Stage was immediately swept, and dilligent search made to find it, butt without success, soe as probably it had been taken from her, as she was oft inviron'd with that infinite crowd which tis impossible to avoid upon such occasion. Butt the lost was soon repair'd, for his Royall Highness understanding the trouble she was in, generousely sent her the wherewithall to make my Lady Suffolke a present of soe good a Jewell. For the rest of that days triumph I have a particular account still by me of the rich Apparell she had on her, amounting, besides the Pearles and Pretious Stones, to above three hundred pounds (ed. Samuel Lord Bishop of Oxford [London, 1847], pp. 97-100). See also 15 Dec. 1674

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