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 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. The date of the first performance is stated in Luttrell, A Brief Relation, II, 435, 28 April 1692: On Monday will be acted a new opera, call the Fairy Queen: exceeds former playes: the clothes, scenes, and musick cost 3000#. [According to Some Select Songs As they are Sung in the Fairy Queen (1692) tne singers were Mrs Ayliff, Mrs Dyer, Freeman, Mrs Butler, and Pate. See Purcell's Works, Purcell Society, XII (1903), ii; E. W. White, Early Performances of Purcell's Operas, Theatre Notebook, XIII (1958-59 ), 45; and R. E. Moore, Henry Purcell and the Restoration Theatre, Chapter IV.] Downes, Roscius Anglicanus, pp. 42-43: The Fairy Queen, made into an Opera, from a Comedy of Mr Shakespeare s: This in Ornaments was Superior to the other Two [King Arthur and The Prophetess]; especially in Cloaths, for all the Singers and Dancers, Scenes, Machines and Decorations, all most profusely set off; and excellently perform'd, chiedly the Instrumental and Vocal part Compos'd by the said Mr Purcel, and Dances by Mr Priest. The Court and Town were wonderfully satisfy'd with it; but the Expences in setting it out being so great, the Company got very little by it. Gentleman's Journal, May 1692: The Opera of which I have spoke to you in my former hath at last appear'd, and continues to be represented daily: it is call'd, The Fairy Queen. The Drama is originally Shakespears, the Music and Decorations are extraordinary. I have heard the Dances commended, and without doubt the whole is very entertaining. [As the May issue of the Gentleman's Journal was licensed on 14 May, the statement that The Fairy Queen continued to be acted daily may indicate consecutive performances from 2 May to at le ast 14 May 1692.

Event Comment: At Penkethman-W. Giffard Booth. Written by the late facetious Mr Doggett. [Advertised also on 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 Aug.