Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is uncertain, but the Prologue and Epilogue, printed separately, bear a licensing date of 20 Nov. 1689. Luttrell's copy of the Prologue and Epilogue (in the possession of Mr Louis Silver, Wilmette, Illinois, who kindly permits me to use his dating) bears his date of acquisition: 25 Nov. 1689. The Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 283-85. Dedication, Edition of 1690: The Play had not that Success which it deserv'd....The main fault ought to lye on those who had the management of it. Had our Authour been alive she would have Committed it to Flames rather than suffer'd it to have been Acted with such Omissions as was made....And Lastly, many of the Parts being false Cast, and given to those whose Tallants and Genius's suited not our Authors Intention

Event Comment: The United Company. A somewhat puzzling entry in the Reverend Robert Kirk's description of London in 1689 implies a performance of The Committee undertaken but not completed: At a play in Whitehall King Charles, his trage-comedy, when the actors were come to that part of seducing King Charles II, some Williamites in the pit below hissed at it (as if the play had meant the like of King James in Ireland). At this there sprang such huzzas and holloes above applauding that part of the play, that it was in a confusion, and they durst pursue it no further, lest the two parties made violence one upon another. Two or three noblemen were remarked to be forward in the acclamations of joy, and therefore are looked on as Jacobites. The Play's name is The Committee, November 28, 1689 (Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archeological Society, New Series, VI, 655)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known. The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 13 Feb. 1689@90, and advertised in the London Gazette, 20-24 Feb. 1689@90; hence, it was probably first given in January 1690, certainly no later than early February 1690. Preface, Edition of 1690: The time was, upon the uniting of the two Theatres, that the reviveing of the old stock of Plays, so ingrost the study of the House, that the Poets lay dorment; and a New Play cou'd hardly get admittance, amongst the more precious pieces of Antiquity, that then waited to walk the Stage; and since the World runs all upon Extremes, as you had such a Scarcity of new ones then; 'tis justice you shou'd have as great a glut of them now; for this reason, this little Prig makes bold to thrust in with the Crowd

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@151, p. 369. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. The MS music composed for a revival of this play, apparently at this time, by G. Finger and Daniel Purcell, is in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Dedication is dated 5 May 1690; the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1690; and it was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2557, 12-15 May 1690. Although the play may not have been first acted until mid-April, it may have been given in late March 1690. Dedication, Edition of 1690: I have no reason to complain of the reception of this Play. A song, The fire of love in youthful blood, the music composed by R. King, is in Apollo's Banquet, 1691

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@151, p. 369. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. This appears to be a substitution for a previously scheduled performance of Amphitryon (Nicoll, p. 352). In L. C. 5@150, p. 74 (Nicoll, p. 357) is an order for a large looking glass to be provided for Sir Courtly Nice at this performance. In addition, there appears to have been a concert in honor of the Queen's birthday. See D'Urfey, Wit and Mirth, I, 62-64: An Ode on the Anniversary of the Queens-Birth. Set to Musick by Mr Henry Purcel, April 30th, 1690

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell's copy (Huntington Library) of the play bears the date of acquisition 3 June [1690, apparently], and the play was advertised in the London Gazette, No 2566, 12-16 June 1690. See Fredson Bowers, A Bibliographical History of the Fletcher-Betterton Play, The Prophetess, 1690, The Library, 5th Series, XVI (1961), 169-75. It seems likely that the opera was first given early in June 1690. An edition of The Vocal and Instrumental Musick of The Prophetess appeared in 1691. See Works of Henry Purcell, Purcell Society, IX. Downes (Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42): The Prophetess, or Dioclesian an Opera, Wrote by Mr Betterton; being set out with Coastly Scenes, Machines and Cloaths: The Vocal and Instrumental Musick, done by Mr Purcel; and Dances by Mr Priest; it gratify'd the Expectation of Court and City; and got the Author great Reputation. [See also R. E. Moore, Henry Purcell and the Restoration Theater (Cambridge, Mass., 1961), Chapter V; and E. W. White, Early Theatrical Performances of Purcell's Operas, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1958-59), 44.] The Muses' Mercury (January 1707, pp. 4-5): This prologue was forbidden to be spoken the second Night of the Representation of the Prophetess. Mrs Shadwell was the occasion of its being taken notice of by the Ministry in the last Reign: He happen'd to be at the House on the first Night, and taking the beginning of the Prologue to have a double meaning, and that Meaning to reflect on the Revolution, he told a Gentleman, He would immediately Put a stop to it. When that Gentleman ask'd, Why he wou'd do the Author such a Disservice? He said, Because while Mr Dryden was Poet Laureat, he wou'd never let any Play of his be Acted. Mr Shadwell informed the Secretary of State of it, and representing it in its worst Colours, the Prologue was never Spoken afterwards, and is not printed in Mr Dryden's Works, or his Miscellanies. Cibber, Apology (ed. Lowe, II, 13-14): A Prologue (by Dryden) to the Prophetess was forbid by the Lord Dorset after the first War in Ireland. It must be confess'd that this Prologue had some familiar, metaphorical Sneers at the Revolution itself; and as the Poetry of it was good, the Offence of it was less pardonable

Event Comment: The United Company. This play was apparently never published, but it was mentioned in the Prologue to King Edward the Third (ca. Nov. 1690) and again in tne Gentleman's Journal, Jan. 1691@2. Gentleman's Journal, Jan. 1691@2: You have often ask'd me, who was the author of that, call'd The Gordian Knot unty'd; and wondred, with many more, why it was never printed. I hear that Gentleman who writ lately a most ingenious Dialogue concerning Women, now translated into French, is the Author of that witty Play, and it is almost a Sin in him to keep It and his name from the world. [This statement points to William Walsh's A Dialogue Concerning Women, Being a Defence of the Sex. Written to Eugenia (London, 1691).] Henry Purcell wrote the instrumental music for this work. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XX (1916), vii

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but it followed The Gordian Knot Unty'd, which is mentioned in the Prologue. Edward III was advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2629, 19-22 Jan. 1690@1, and entered in the Term Catalogues, February 1690@1. The authorship is uncertain. The title page bears no author's name, but the Dedication is signed by Will. Mountfort. In addition, on 10 Oct. 1691 Mountfort received a grant of #10 when Edward III was played before the Queen (L. C. 5@150, p. 306, in Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 357). On tne other hand, the Gentleman's Journal, October 1692, stated that it was written by the author of Henry the Second, which has been attributed to John Bancroft. See Nicoll, Restoration Drama, pp. 388-89, for a summation of the evidence on this problem. Alfred Harbage, Elizabethan-Restoration Palimpsest, Modern Language Review, XXXV (1940), 319, thinks that this is a revision of Robert Davenport's The Politic Queen

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@141, p. 369. See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352. In L. C. 5@150, p. 156, is an order to prepare the stage for the play, and, in L. C. 5@150, p. 164, is another order for new equipment. Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 125: The 4th, being his majesties birth day...and at night was a consort of musick, and a play afterwards. Matthew Prior wrote A Pindarique Ode which was sung before Their Majesties at court on this day. See The Literary Works of Matthew Prior, ed. H. B. Wright and M. K. Spears (Oxford, 1959), I, 96-98; II, 858. Cibber, Apology, I, 128: The agreeable was so natural to [Mountfort], that even in that dissolute Character of the Rover he seem'd to wash off the Guilt from Vice, and gave it Charms and Merit. For tho' it may be a Reproach to the Poet to draw such Characters not only unpunish'd but rewarded, the Actor may still be allow'd his due Praise in his excellent Performance. And this is a Distinction which, when this Comedy was acted at Whitehall, King William's Queen Mary was pleas'd to make in favour of Monfort, notwithstanding her Disapprobation of the Play

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of this performance is not certainly known. On 7 Nov. 1690 an order was issued to pay Mrs Barry #25 for Circe, acted by command

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known. This is the second of three plays which have been assigned to December 1690 (see Alphonso and The Mistakes). It was entered in the Term Catalogues, Feb. 1690@1, and advertised in the London Gazette, No. 2638, 19-23 Feb. 1690@1

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Preface states:...the many inconveniences this hasty Peice has been expos'd to, as the Season of the being [sic] so near Christmas. [The Preface also refers to several scenes omitted in the action and expresses gratitude to Mountfort who wrote one scene of the fifth act.] This play was entered in the Term Catalogues, Feb. 1690@1

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the premiere is not known, although a reference in the text to 1690 suggests that the play may have been produced in that year; but the fact that it was not advertised in the London Gazette until 6-9 April and not entered in the Term Catalogues until May 1691 suggest that it posaibly appeared early in 1691. This play was discussed in Wit for Money, or Poet Stutter; A Dialogue between Smith, Johnson, and Poet Stutter; containing Reflections on some late Plays, and particularly on Love for Money, or The Boarding School. The British Museum copy of this pamphlet has a manuscript date of 23 April 1691. Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 42: The Boarding School; Wrote by Mr Durfy, it took well being justly Acted. Earl of Ailesbury, mid-January 1690@1: My Lady Fenwick was a great intriguer, and had always castles in the air in her imagination to that degree, that I was present at a play where she was brought in. If I mistake not it was The Boarding School, and the famous comic, Mr Lee, in woman's clothes represented her to the life, and so exactly had her features and complexion that one could hardly have distinguished one from the other (Memoirs, [London, 1890], II, 390-91)

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the Prologue refers to a "Lenten Dish." The play was entered in the Stationers' Register, 4 April 1691, announced in the London Gazette, No 2657, 27-30 April 1691, and listed in the Term Catalogues, May 1691. Very probably the play made its first appearance not later than March 1691

Event Comment: The United Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but the face that the play was entered in the Term Catalogues, May 1691, and noticed in the London Gazette, No 2664, 21-25 May 1691, suggests that it was given in April, probably soon after Passion Week. Gildon, The Lives and Characters, p. 102: A very pretty Comedy, and has been always received with general Applause

Event Comment: On this date the Queen granted permission for the company to act at Oxford from 10 July 1691 for twelve days. See CSPD, 1690-91, p. 430; Sybil Rosenfeld, Some Notes on the Players in Oxford, 1661-1713, pp. 370-71; and A Long Prologue to a Short Play, Spoken by a Woman at Oxford Drest like a Sea Officer, in Poems on the Affairs of State, Part III, 1698, p. 581

Event Comment: The Ode is in D'Urfey, Wit and Mirth, I, 70-71. Gentleman's Journal, January 1691-2, pp. 4-5: On that day [22 Nov.] or the next when it falls on a Sunday, as it did last time, most of the Lovers of Music, whereof many are persons of the first Rank, meet at Stationers-Hall in London, not thro' a Principle of Superstition, but to propagate the advancement of that divine Science. A splendid Entertainment is provided, and before it is always a performance of Music by the best Voices and Hands in Town; the Words, which are always in the Patronesses praise, are set by some of the greatest Masters in Town. This year Dr John Blow, that famous Musician, composed tne Music, and Mr Durfey, whose skill in things of that nature is well enough known, made the Words....Whilst the Company is at Table, the Hautboys and Trumpets play successively. Mr Showers hath taught the latter of late years to sound with all the softness imaginable, they plaid us some flat Tunes, made by Mr Finger, with a general applause, it being a thing formerly though impossible upon the Instrument design'd for a sharp Key