Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@147, p. 361: The King at ye Mistress. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 351. There is no indication as to whether this performance was the premiere. As the play was licensed on 24 May 1687, the premiere may have been as late as 12 May, but possibly was earlier. Sir George Etherege to Will Richards, 19 May 1687: I have heard of the success of The Eunuch, and am very glad the town has so good a taste to give the same just applause to Sir Charles Sedley's writing, which his friends have always done to his conversation (Letterbook, ed. Rosenfeld, p. 212). Sir George Etherege to Middleton, 2O June 1687: I saw a play about ten years ago Called the Eunuch, so heavy a lump the players durst not charge themselves with the dead weight, but it seems Sir Charles Sedley has animated the mighty mass and now it treads the stage lightly (ibid., p. 227). [See also 26 March 1687 and season of 1676-77.] Thomas Shadwell, The Tenth Satyr of Juvenal (licensed, 25 May 1687.) Dedication to Sir Charles Sedley: Your late great obligation in giving me the advantage [presumably the third day's gain] of your comedy, call'd Bellamira, or the Mistress, has given me a fresh subject for my Thanks; and my Publishing this Translation affords me a new opportunity of owning to the world my grateful resentments to you. I am heartily glad that your Comedy (as I never doubted) found such success, that I never met with any Man of Sence but applauded it: And that there is abundance of Wit in it, your Enemies have been forced to confess....For the Judgment of some Ladies upon it that it is obscene, I must needs say they are Ladies of a very quick apprehension, and did not find their thoughts lye very much that way, they could not find more obscenity in that than there is in every other Comedy. A song, Thyrsis unjustly you complain, headed A Song in Bellamira, or, the Mistress. Set by Mr Tho. Shadwell, is in Vinculum Societatis, 1687 (licensed 8 June 1687)

Event Comment: By Command of their Royal Highnesses the Prince and Princess of Wales. Benefit the Author of Sir John Cockle at Court. Mainpiece: Written by the late Sir Richard Steele

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. On Thursday 10 Dec. 1663, Pepys reported that this play was to be acted the following week, but the date of the first performance is uncertain. But--except for the holidays--it was probably acted on consecutive days until 1 Jan. 1663@4, when Pepys saw it. The play is also in Herbert, Dramatic Records, p. 138, as a "Revived Play." Pepys, Diary: I perceive the King and Duke and the Court was going to the Duke's playhouse to see Henry VIII. acted, which is said to be an admirable play. But, Lord! to see now near I was to have broken my oathe, or run the hazard of 20s. losse, so much my nature was hot to have gone thither; but I did not go. Downes (p.24): King Henry the 8th, This Play, by Order of Sir William Davenant, was all new Cloath'd in proper Habits: The King's was new, all the Lords, the Cardinals, the Bishops, the Doctors, Proctors, Lawyers, Tip-staves, new Scenes: The part of the King was so right and justly done by Mr Betterton, he being Instructed in it by Sir William, who had it from Old Mr Lowen, that had his Instructions from Mr Shakespear himself, that I dare and will aver, none can, or will come near him in this Age, in the performance of that part: Mr Harris's performance of Cardinal Wolsey, was little Inferior to that, he doing it with such just State, Port, and Mein, that I dare affirm, none hitherto has Equall'd him:...Every part by the great Care of Sir William, being exactly perform'd; it being all new Scenes; it continu'd Acting 15 Days together with general Applause

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. Downes (p. 29): It took well, but Inferior to Love in a Tub. Pepys, Diary: I to the Duke of York's playhouse; where a new play of Etherige's called She Would if she Could; and though I was there by two o'clock, there was 1000 people put back that could not have room in the pit: and I at last, because my wife was there, made shift to get into the 18d. box, and there saw; but, Lord! how full was the house, and how silly the play, there being nothing in the world good in it, and few people pleased in it. The King was there; but I sat mightily behind, and could see but little, and hear not all. The play being done...here was the Duke of Buckingham to-day openly sat in the pit; and there I found him with my Lord Buckhurst, and Sidly, and Etherige, the poet; the last of whom I did hear mightily find fault with the actors, that they were out of humour, and had not their parts perfect, and that Harris did do nothing, nor could so much as sing a ketch in it; and so was mightily concerned: while all the rest did, through the whole pit, blame the play as a silly, dull thing, though there was something very roguish and witty; but the design of the play, and end, mighty insipid. Thomas Shadwell, Preface to The Humorists (1671): The last (viz.) imperfect Action, had like to have destroy'd She Would if she could, which I think (and I have the Authority of some of the best Judges in England for't) is the best Comedy that has been written since the Restauration of the Stage: And even that, for the imperfect representation of it at first, received such prejudice, that, had it not ben for the favour of the Court, in all probability it had never got up again; and it suffers for it, in a great measure, to this very day

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This play is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 2. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 347. It is uncertain, however, just when this performance occurred. The L. C. lists at Harvard (see VanLennep, Plays on the English Stage, p. 19) suggest that the three performances at the head of this list belong to the spring of 1672 rather than the spring of 1671. If this is correct, this performance of Sir Solomon is out of place in the list, for it can hardly be placed at 14 Nov. 1672, yet it is surprising that, so soon after the opening of dg, the Duke's Company should act at court, especially when the King and Queen attended dg on the following day, 15 Nov. 1671. This performance of Sir Solomon should be judged as an uncertain one

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. This performance is known from a disturbance which occurred on this day; Langbaine states that the play was Macbeth. John Verney to Sir Ralph Verney, 30 Aug. 1675: On Saturday last, at the Duke's playhouse, Sir Tho. Armstrong killed Mr Scrope....Their quarrel is said to [be] about Mrs Uphill, the player, who came into the house maskt, and Scrope would have entertained discourse with her, which Sir T. Armstrong would not suffer, so a ring was made wherein they fought (HMC Verney MSS., 7th Report, 1879, p. 465). See also The Hatton Correspondence, Camden Society, XXII (1878), 121

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The play was not printed. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@145, p. 120. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 349. Andrew Marvell to Sir Edw. Harley, 17 Nov. 1677: To-day is acted the first time Sir Popular Wisdom or the Politician, where my Lord Shaftesbury and all his gang are sufficiently personated. I conceive the King will be there (HMC, 14th Report, Appendix, Part II, 1894, Portland MSS., Volume III, p. 357)

Event Comment: At the Desire of several Persons of Quality

Event Comment: At the Desire of several Persons of Quality

Event Comment: The Days being long, the Doors will not be open'd till Five, and the Play will begin exactly at half an Hour after Six a Clock, Particular Care being taken to keep the House cool

Event Comment: At the particular Desire of several Persons of Quality