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: For the order silencing Cibber, see Blanchard, Correspondence of Richard Steele, p.146

Event Comment: Cibber, Apology, I, 203-9, refers to an incident which occurred after the division of the companies, perhaps early in their competition. Essentially, Drury Lane, learning that Lincoln's Inn Fields was to act Hamlet on a Tuesday, posted it for Monday at Drury Lane, whereupon Betterton's Company, having announced The Old Batchelor for Monday, cancelled it in favor of Hamlet. As a countermove, Drury Lane altered its program to The Old Batchelor on Monday, Powell to mimic Betterton. A last-minute discovery that no one had been assigned to Fondlewife, originally played by Dogget, gave Cibber an opportunity to play the role, which he learned on short notice and which he acted with applause; he was pleased to see Dogget in the pit watching his performance

Event Comment: By Permission of the Lord Chamberlain. Benefit for The Literary Fund. [In this performance the male parts were acted chiefly by amateurs; the female parts were acted by professionals. Prologue and Epilogue by Thomas Morris (Morning Herald, 17 Apr.).] The Committee for the Management of the Literary Fund respectfully inform the Public that affecting instabces of Merit in distress exceed their power of relief by the ordinary Subscription; and that they wish to have recourse to every honourable expedient to increase that power. The Admission will be by Tickets, at the Opera Prices. Boxes and Pit 10s. 6d. 1st Gallery 5s. 2nd Gallery 3s. No more Company will be admitted than the House will hold with perfect convenience; and when the proper number of Tickets is issued, no means of admission can be obtained. The Doors to be opened at 6:00. To begin at 7:00 precisely. Registers: Thomas Dale, M. D.; Mr Deputy Nichols. Treasurers: Thomas Morris, Esq.; Mr E. Brooke. "In the course of the play we observed several restorations of Shakespeare's text, with some interpolations. The boldest of the latter was the introduction of Richard's son to him in the tent, the night befiredthedbefore the Battle of Bosworth field. This scene was borrowed, as we believe, from Thomas? Hull's Legendary Tale of Richard Plantagenet. It was well written, and produced a considerable degree of effect. The Ghosts were banished, and the start and stagger of Richard, heretofore the theatrical trick of the scene, necessarily omitted" (Diary, 17 Apr.)