Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell dated his copy, 17 Dec. 1681; hence a November 1681 first production is likely. See VanLennep, Two Restoration Comedies, pp. 57-58

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The play was apparently never published, but the Prologue and Epilogue were printed and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 43-45. The Epilogue also appeared in Miscellany, Being a Collection of Poems by several Hands, 1685, and has been reprinted in A Little Ark, ed. G. Thorn-Drury, p. 46. The latest date at which the play, with the Prologue and Epilogue, first appeared is 5 April 1682, the date Luttrell placed on his copies (Huntington Library), presumably representing the day on which he acquired them. G. Thorn-Drury, commenting upon the Epilogue, points out that it refers to the trial of Pilkington, one of the Sheriffs of London, ca. 25 March 1681@2. It seems likely, then, that this lost play was presented in March

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The date of the first performance is not known, but Luttrell purchased his copies of the separately printed Prologue and Epilogue on 15 May 1682 (Huntington Library); hence, the premiere occurred before that date. The Prologue also refers to the feast which the Whigs attempted to hold at Haberdashers' Hall on 21 April 1682 but were restrained, pointing toward late April as a probable date for the first performance. The separately printed Prologue and Epilogue are reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 77-79. A song, In Phyllis all vile jests are met, with music by Giovanni Draghi, is in Choice Ayres and Songs, The Fourth Book, 1683. Langbaine (English Dramatic Poets, 1691, p. 19): This Play had the luck to be well receiv'd in the Town

Event Comment: Lord Preston (in Paris) to the Duke of York, 22 Sept. 1683, N.S.: I should not have presumed to give your Highness the trouble of this if something of charity had not induced me to it. I do it at the instance of a poor servant of his Majesty's who some time since was obliged by a misfortune to leave England. It is Mr Grahme [Grabut?], sir, whom perhaps your Highness may remember. Mr Betterton coming hither some weeks since by his Majesty's command, to endeavour to carry over the Opera, and finding that impracticable, did treat with Monsr Grahme to go over with him to endeavour to represent something at least like an Opera in England for his Majesty's diversion. He hath also assured him of a pension from the House, and finds him very willing and ready to go over. He only desireth his Majesty's protection when he is there, and what encouragement his Majesty shall be pleased to give him if he finds that he deserves it (HMC, 7th Report, Part I, p. 290). W. J. Lawrence (Early French Players in England, p. 149) argued that Grahme should be Grabut, who had once been Master of the King's Music (to 1674) and who had settled in Paris. Grabut was certainly back in London in the spring of 1684

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: Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 413: By order of the queen, the lord chamberlain has sent an order to the playhouse prohibiting the acting Mr Dryden s play called the tragedy of Cleomenes, reflecting much on the government. Gentleman's Journal, April 1692 (licensed 13 April): I was in hopes to have given you in this Letter an account of the Acting of Mr Dryden's Cleomenes; it was to have appear'd upon the Stage on Saturday last, and you need not doubt but that the Town was big with Expectation of the performance; but Orders came from Her Majesty to hinder its being Acted; so that none can tell when it shall be play'd

Event Comment: The United Company. This performance is on the L. C. list, 5@151, p. 369: ye Q a Box & a Box for ye Maids of Honr double dealer. [See also Nicoll, Restoration Drama, p. 352.] Cibber relates an incident which may pertain to this performance, Apology, I, 185-86: Queen Mary having commanded the Double Dealer to be acted, Kynaston happen'd to be so ill that he could not hope to be able next Day to perform his Part of the Lord Touchwood. In this Exigence, the Author, Mr Congreve, advis'd that it might be given to me, if at so short a Warning I would undertake it. The Flattery of being thus distinguish'd by so celebrated an Author, and the Honour to act before a Queen, you may be sure made me blind to whatever Difficulties might attend it. I accepted the Part, and was ready in it before I slept; next Day the Queen was presented at the Play, and was received with a new Prologue from the Author, spoken by Mrs Barry, humbly acknowledging the great Honour done to the Stage....After the Play, Mr Congreve made me the Compliment of saying, That I had not only answer'd, but had exceeded his Expectations, and that he would shew me he was sincere in his saying more of me to the Masters.--He was as good as his Word, and the next Pay-day I found my Sallary of fifteen was then advanced to twenty Shillings a Week