Event Comment: [Mainpiece in place of Merope, announced on playbill of 4 Jan. "We played last night Much Ado about Nothing, and had an apology to make for the change of three principal parts. About twelve o'clock Mr Henderson sent word he was not able to play. We got Mr Lewis from Covent Garden, who supplied the part of Benedick. Soon after Mr Parsons sent word he could not play. Mr Moody supplied the part of Dogberry; and about four in the afternoon Mr Vernon sent word he could not play. Mr Mattocks supplied his part of Balthazar...In the middle of the first act, a message was brought me that Mr Lamash (who was to play the part of Borachio) was not come to the House. I had nobody there that could go on for it, so I was obliged to cut his scenes in the first and second acts entirely out, and got Mr Wrighten to go on for the remainder of the part. At length we got the play over without the audience finding it out. We had a very bad house. Mr Parsons is not able to play in The School for Scandal to-morrow night; do not yet know how we shall be able to settle that" (Garrick, Private Correspondence, II, 328-29: Hopkins, prompter,in letter to Garrick, 6 Jan. 1779. He does not state who took Wrighten's place as the Sexton.).] On account of the sudden Illness of a Principal Performer, the new Pantomime [The Wonders of Derbyshire, announced on playbill of 4 Jan.] is obliged to be deferred till Friday. Receipts: #74 11s. (48.19; 25.10; 0.2)

Event Comment: The Duke's Company. The Prologue and Epilogue, separately printed, bear Luttrell's date of acquisition, 21 April 1682 (Huntington Library), and have been reprinted in Wiley, Rare Prologues and Epilogues, pp. 102-05. The Prologue and Epilogue were advertised in The Observator, 27 April 1682, with the statement: Recommended to All Men of Sense and Loyalty

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