The performance could not, in any event, have taken place before 1720, as the theatre was not privileged until that date, and the play-bill announces it as privileged. There need be little hesitation in assuming that this play was founded upon, if it was not identical with, the English dramatic entertainment published in 1723. The German play-bill expressly states, inter alia, that the performance was arranged after the fashion of English pantomime. It is also curiously comfirmative evidence that the English publication should, like the German one mentioned by Scheible, number exactly sixteen pages. A play-bill of a performance by the Neuber'schen Company at Hamburg, in 1738, closes, like Mountford's farce, with a ballet round Faust in Pluto's palace; and another play-bill of a performance at Frankfort, in 1742, has a similar termination. In 1749, a pantomime was put upon the stage, entitled "Arlequin als Faustus Diener" (Harlequin as Faustus' servant), a title which, coming after the plays and performances already mentioned, seems absolutely conclusive. Harlequin in Mountford's farce assumes the rôle of knavish

'Programme: "Heute Samstag den 9 Junii zum Erstenmahl wird dem von Ihrer röm. Kaiserl. und Königl. Cathol. Majest. privilegirten Theatro bey dem Kürtner Thor aufgeführt werden: Der nach teutscher Comödien -Engellandischer Pantomimien-und Italienischer Music-Art eingerichtete D. Faust," etc.

It only counts, however, fifteen, including the title-pages. The edition of 1731 contains an extra scene, but although the pagination differs it also only counts fifteen pages. It may be noted here that "The Short Account of Doctor Faustus," prefixed to the English publication, speaks of "the theatres having revived the memory of Faustus by drawing him into their grotesques."

servant. As Lessing rated Professor Gottsched for banishing harlequin from the stage, it may be taken for granted that, along with the harlequin's knavery and humours, a great deal of the original tragedy was still preserved; just as in Mountford's farce, every here and there, lines of Marlowe's stand out, like huge obelisks, from the arid and barren waste of Mountford's burlesque.

The last indignity reserved for the drama of "Faust" seems to have been inflicted upon it in 1776, when it was advertised at Vienna, in the French language, as a pantomime to be played by children. "Dernier jour " (so ran the advertisement) “du Docteur Faust Pantomime dressé sur un plan allemand d'un de nos amateurs du Théâtre, representé par des enfants au Théâtre Imp. et Royal." "Dernier jour" indeed! from this time forth "Faust" vanished from the stage to preserve the rags of dignity in the booths of the wandering showmen.1

Let us see now, thus far, how the account stands. Leaving out of consideration altogether the many probabilities suggested, the points established may be enumerated shortly as follows:

1. The direct and powerful influence of the English upon the German drama, enduring for nearly a hundred years from the close of the sixteenth century.

The nearest approach to evidence of a connection between the German Puppet-play and the stage appears to be contained in the play-bill of a performance by a company of actors at Frankfort in 1767 (v. Engel's "Zusammenstellung," p. 477), where the incidents set out in the bill will be found to resemble, in many respects, those of the Puppet-play as it has come down to us. A Puppet-play of " Faust," it may be unnecessary to remind the reader, was in existence long before this date.

2. No German play of "Faust," printed or in MS known to exist prior to the eighteenth century.

3. A drama of "Faust" played in Germany, earl in the seventeenth century, by a company of Englis actors, who also gave a representation of another pla undoubtedly by Marlowe.

4. A farce and ballets founded upon "Faust" i England, followed in Germany by similar entertain ments, containing indications of English sources.

5. A Puppet-play of "Faust," known to have existe in England, and frequently alluded to in English literature, years before the German Puppet-play is hear of anywhere.

To these it might be added, as a fact, that othe English dramas were put upon the stage of the Puppet theatres in Germany.1

Strongly suggestive as these points are, in suppor of the contention that the German Puppet-play sprang directly or indirectly, from Marlowe's tragedy, the strength is enormously increased by the internal ev dence, in the same direction, furnished by a compariso of the contents of the Puppet-play with those of th tragedy. Düntzer says the assertion that the Puppe play points undeniably to Marlowe is wholly unfounde His principal reason, apparently, for this stateme appears to be that the Puppet-play contains none of t alterations to be found in the later editions of Marlowe tragedy. Assuming, for the moment, that the Puppe

1 e.g. "The Tempest," under the title of "Die Bezauberte Insel," || "The Enchanted Island:" circa 1780, etc.

play shows no trace of the influence of subsequent corruptions, such a fact would scarcely suffice to disprove any connection with the tragedy. It would rather, it seems to me, go to prove that the Puppet-play was based upon one of the earliest editions of the tragedy, or that the adapter, if he drew upon a later edition, found nothing in the subsequent interpolations suited to his purpose. The wonder is, after the lapse of nearly three centuries, not that the Puppet-play should contain so little, but that it should contain so much, in common with the tragedy. Scattered throughout the notes to the text, and in the Appendix, will be found many curious parallels and resemblances. These, I have no doubt, might be considerably augmented by a more careful examination of the various versions of the Puppet-play. But it is not necessary to rely upon these isolated passages alone. The strongest evidence of derivation is to be found in the general scope and construction of the two works. Take, for instance, some of the most striking features in Marlowe's tragedy, those chiefly which are due to his inventive dramatic faculty.

In the Ulm version we have Picklehäring as the clown. In Actus I. Pickleharing says: "My father was called Stockfish, my mother Blatteis." A sentence reminiscent of a passage in the scene with the Seven Deadly Sins in Marlowe's play. Again, in Actus VI. in this version, Faust exclaims: "Ist das die schöne Helena? Komm her, ich will dein Paris seyn!" An apostrophe that sounds like an epitome of Marlowe's amplified lines. In this version, too, we have the apparition of Alexander the Great and his Paramour, instead of the figures from Jewish history common to the other versions; and we have also a final colloquy between Faust and some students, in character and tone recalling Marlowe.

First of all, there is the opening scene in Faust's study, in which the key-note of the whole play is struck-the weariness of the flesh that comes of much learning, and the insatiable hunger after knowledge and power. The enumeration of the learned faculties-the bitter discontent with all they have to give even the scraps of Latin with which the famous soliloquy is garnished,-—all these are reproduced in the Puppet-play. They are not to be found in the Volksbuch. Goethe, here, is little more than a mere elaborator. Again, Faust is translated by Marlowe into a heroic figure; in the Puppet-play he is cast in the same mould; in the Volksbuch he is a vulgar cheat and juggler, held up to contempt and loathing. The next salient invention of Marlowe's dramatic genius is the introduction of the good and evil spirits striving for the mastery of Faust's soul. This feature reappears in the Puppet-play, and in both works the dialogue of the opposing angels is, at times, almost identical. The same idea, differently wrought, lies deeply imbedded in Goethe's "Faust." Following the course of the play, we come next to the clown. Whether Marlowe is responsible for this character is of no consequence. It is enough, for the purposes of the argument, that both the clown and the scenes in which he plays a part appear in the first known edition of the tragedy we possess. It is obvious that there is a strong family likeness between the clown of the tragedy and the Casper of the Puppet-play. It is remarkable, too, that both should be introduced to the audience in a