{
  "meta": {
    "schema_version": "1.1",
    "endpoint": "/api/sources/goethe-works/faust/faust-ii/12-act-v-mountain-gorges-redemption.json"
  },
  "work": {
    "slug": "faust-ii",
    "name": "Faust II (1832)"
  },
  "parents": [
    {
      "slug": "goethe-works",
      "name": "Works of Goethe",
      "url": "/sources/goethe-works/"
    },
    {
      "slug": "faust",
      "name": "Faust (Parts I and II)",
      "url": "/sources/faust/"
    }
  ],
  "chapter": {
    "num": 12,
    "slug": "12-act-v-mountain-gorges-redemption",
    "title": "Act V — Mountain-Gorges (Redemption of Faust)",
    "of": 12,
    "words": 53656,
    "text": "Divided in ascending planes, posted among the ravines.\n\nCuorvus anD Ecuo.\nORESTS are waving grand,\nRocks, they are huge at hand,\n\nClutching, the roots expand,\nThickly the tree-trunks stand ;\nFoaming comes wave on wave;\nShelter hath deepest cave ;\nLions are prowling dumb,\nFriendly where'er we come,\nHonoring the sacred place,\n\nRefuge of Love and Grace!\n\nPater Ecstaticus 182\n(hovering up and down).\nEndless ecstatic fire,\n\nGlow of the pure desire,\n\n420 faust.\n\nPain of the pining breast,\nRapture of God possessed !\nArrows, transpierce ye me,\nLances, coerce ye me,\nBludgeons, so batter me,\nLightnings, so shatter me,\nThat all of mortality's\nVain unrealities\n\nDie, and the Star above\nBeam but Eternal Love!\n\nPaTerR Prorunpus.'83\n(Lower Region.)\n\nAs at my feet abysses cloven\n\nRest on abysses deep below;\n\nAs thousand severed streams are woven\nTo foamy floods that plunging go;\n\nAs, up by self-impulsion driven,\n\nThe tree its weight sustains in air,\n\nTo Love, almighty Love, 't is given\n\nAll things to form, and all to bear.\nAround me sounds a Savage roaring,\n\nAs rocks and forests heaved and swayed,\n\nYet plunges, bounteous in its pouring,\n\nAct V. A421\n\nThe wealth of waters down the glade,\nAppointed, then, the vales to brighten;\n\nThe bolt, that flaming struck and burst,\n\nThe atmosphere to cleanse and lighten,\nWhich pestilence in its bosom nursed, —\nLove's heralds both, the powers proclaiming,\nWhich, aye creative, us infold.\n\nMay they, within my bosom flaming,\nInspire the mind, confused and cold,\n\nWhich frets itself, through blunted senses,\nAs by the sharpest fetter-smart !\n\nO God, soothe Thou my thoughts bewildered,\nEnlighten Thou my needy heart !\n\nPaTeER SERAPHICUS.!54\n(Middle Region.)\nWhat a cloud of morning hovers\nO'er the pine-trees' tossing hair!\nCan I guess what life it covers?\n\nThey are spirits, young and fair.\n\nCuorus or BiessepD Boys. 185\n\nTell us, Father, where we wander ;\n\nTell us, Kind One, who are we.\n\n422 faust.\n\nHappy are we; for so tender\nUnto all, it 1s, To Be.\n\nPaTER SERAPHICUS.\n\nBoys, brought forth in midnights haunted,\nHalf-unsealed the sense and brain,\nFor the parents lost when granted,\nFor the angels sweetest gain!\n\nThat a loving heart is nigh you\nYou can feel: then come to me!\nBut of earthly ways that try you,\nBlest ones! not a trace have ye.\nEnter in mine eyes: enjoy them,\nOrgans for the earthly sphere!\n\nAs your own ye may employ them:\n\nLook upon the landscape here!\n\n(He takes them into himself.) *®©\nThose are trees, there rocks defend us;\nHere, a stream that leaps below,\nAnd with plunges, wild, tremendous,\n\nShorteneth its journey so.\n\nBuessepD Boys (from within him).\n\nTo a vision grand we waken,\n\nBut the scenes too gloomy show ;\n\nAct V.\n\nWe with fear and dread are shaken:\nKindest Father, let us go!\n\nPaTER SERAPHICUS.,\n\nUpward rise to higher borders!\nEver grow, insensibly,\n\nAs, by pure, eternal orders,\n\nGod's high Presence strengthens ye! |\n\nSuch the Spirits' sustentation,\nWith the freest ether blending ;\nLove's eternal Revelation,\n\nTo Beatitude ascending.\n\nCuorus oF BLEssEpD Boys\n\n(circling around the highest summit),\n\nHands now enring ye,\nJoyously wheeling!\nSoar ye and sing ye,\nWith holiest feeling !\nThe Teacher before ye,\nTrust, and be bold!\nWhom ye adore, ye\nHim shall behold.\n\n, 423\n\nA24 faust.\n\nANGELS ©\n(soaring in the higher atmosphere, bearing the immortal part of Faust).\n\nThe noble Spirit now is free,\n\nAnd saved from evil scheming:\nWhoe'er aspires unweariedly\n\nIs not beyond redeeming.'®7\n\nAnd if he feels the grace of Love\nThat from On High is given, |\nThe Blessed Hosts, that wait above,\n\nShall welcome him to Heaven!\n\nTHe YOuNGER ANGELS.\n\nThey, the roses, freely spended\n\nBy the penitent, the glorious,\nHelped to make the fight victorious,\nAnd the lofty work is ended.\n\nWe this precious Soul have won us;\nEvil ones we forced to shun us;\nDevils fled us, when we hit-them:\n\"Stead of pangs of Hell, that bit them,\nLove-pangs felt they, sharper, vaster :\nEven he, old Satan- Master,\n\nPierced with keenest pain, retreated.\n\nNow rejoice! The work 's completed !\n\nAct V.. 425\n\nTue More PEerFect ANGELS.\n\nEarth's residue to bear\nHath sorely pressed us;\n\nIt were not pure and fair,\nThough 't were asbestus.\nWhen every element\n\nThe mind's high forces\nHave seized, subdued, and blent,\nNo Angel divorces\nTwin-natures single grown,\nThat inly mate them:\nEternal Love, alone,\n\nCan separate them.\"\n\nTHE YOuNGER ANGELS.\n\nMist-like on heights above,\nWe now are seeing\n\nNearer and nearer move\nSpiritual Being.\n\nThe clouds are growing clear;\nAnd moving throngs appear\nOf Blessed Boys,\n\nFree from the earthly gloom,\nIn circling poise,\n\nFaust,\n\nWho taste the cheer\n\nOf the new spring-time bloom\nOf the upper sphere.\n\nLet them inaugurate\n\nHim to the perfect state,\nNow, as their peer!\n\n'THE Buessep Boys.\n\nGladly receive we now\nHim, as a chrysalis:\nTherefore achieve we now\nPledge of our bliss.\n\nThe earth-flakes dissipate\nThat cling around him!\nSee, he is fair and great!\nDivine Life hath crowned him.\n\nDoctor Marianus 189\n(in the highest, purest cell).\nFree is the view at last,\nThe spirit lifted :\nThere women, floatin g past,\nAre upward drifted :\nThe Glorious One therein,\n\nAct V.\n\nWith star-crown tender, —\nThe pure, the Heavenly Queen,\nI know her splendor.\n\n(Enraptured.)\nHighest Mistress of the World!\n\nLet me in the azure\nTent of Heaven, in light unfurled,\nHere thy Mystery measure!\nJustify sweet thoughts that move\nBreast of man to meet thee,\nAnd with holy bliss of love\nBear him up to greet thee!\nWith unconquered courage we\nDo thy bidding highest ;\nBut at once shall gentle be,\nWhen thou pacifiest.\nVirgin, pure in brightest sheen,\nMother sweet, supernal, —\nUnto us Elected Queen,\nPeer of Gods Eternal!\nLight clouds are circling\nAround her splendor, —\nPenitent women\n\nOf natures tender,\n\nFaust\n\nHer knees embracing,\nEther respiring,\nMercy requiring!\nThou, in immaculate ray,\nMercy not leavest,\nAnd the lightly led astray,\nWho trust thee, receivest !\nIn their weakness fallen at length,\nHard it is to save them:\nWho can crush, by native strength,\nVices that enslave them?\nWhose the foot that may not slip\nOn the surface slanting?\nWhom befool not eye and lip,\n\nBreath and voice enchanting ?\n\n(The Mater Groriosa soars into the space.)'9\n\nCuorvus oF WoMmEN PENITENTS.\n\nTo heights thou 'rt speeding\nOf endless Eden:\n\nReceive our pleading,\nTranscendent Maiden,\n\nWith Mercy laden!\n\nAct V.\n\nMacna Peccatrix.!9! (S¢. Luke, vii. 36.)\n\nBy the love before him kneeling, —\nHim, Thy Son, a godlike vision ;\n\nBy the tears like balsam stealing,\nSpite of Pharisees' derision ;\n\nBy the box, whose ointment precious\nShed its spice and odors cheery ;\n\nBy the locks, whose softest meshes\nDried the holy feet and weary ! —\n\nMutter SaAMaRITANA. (St. Fohn, iv.)\n\nBy that well, the ancient station\nWhither Abram's flocks were driven ;\nBy the jar, whose restoration\n\nTo the Saviour's lips was given ;\n\nBy the fountain, pure and vernal,\nThence its present bounty spending, —\nOverflowing, bright, eternal,\n\nWatering the worlds unending ! —\n\nMaria /Ecyptiaca. (Acta Sanctorum.)\n\nBy the place, where the Immortal\nBody of the Lord hath lain ;\nBy the arm, which, from the portal,\n\nto\n\n430 faust.\n\nWarning, thrust me back again ;\nBy the forty years' repentance\n\nIn the lonely desert-land ;\n\nBy the blissful farewell sentence\nWhich I wrote upon the sand! —\n\nTHe THREE.\nThou Thy presence not deniest\nUnto sinful women ever, —\nLiftest them to win the highest\nGain of penitent endeavor, —\nSo, from this good soul withdraw not —\nWho but once forgot, transgressing,\nWho her loving error saw not —\n\nPardon adequate, and blessing!\n\nUna PanitENTIvM 19?\n\n( formerly named Margaret, stealing closer).\nIncline, O Maiden,\nWith Mercy laden,\nIn light unfading,\nThy gracious countenance upon my bliss!\nMy loved, my lover,\nHis trials over\n\nIn yonder world, returns to me in this!\n\nAct V. A431\n\nBiesseD Boys\n(approaching in hovering circles).\n\nWith mighty limbs he towers\nAlready above us;\n\nHe, for this love of ours,\n\nWill richlier love us.\n\nEarly were we removed,\n\nEre Life could reach us;\n\nYet he hath learned and proved,\nAnd he will teach us.\n\nTHe PENnITENT\n(formerly named Margaret).\n\nThe spirit-choir around him seeing,\nNew to himself, he scarce divines\n\nHis heritage of new-born Being,\nWhen like the Holy Host he shines.\nBehold, how he each band hath cloven,\nThe earthly life had round him thrown,\nAnd through his garb, of ether woven,\nThe early force of youth is shown!\nVouchsafe to me that I instruct him!\n\nStill dazzles him the Day's new glare.\n\n432 faust.\n\nMatTER GLoriosa.\n\nRise, thou, to higher spheres! Conduct him,\nWho, feeling thee, shall follow there | +93\n\nDoctor Marianus\n(prostrate, adoring).\n\nPenitents, look up, elate,\nWhere she beams salvation ;\nGratefully to blessed fate\nGrow, in re-creation!\n\nBe our souls, as they have been,\nDedicate to Thee!\n\nVirgin Holy, Mother, Queen,\n\nGoddess, gracious be!\n\nCuorus Mysticus.1!94\n\nAll things transitory\n\nBut as symbols are sent:\nEarth's insufficiency\n\nHere grows to Event:\n\n'The Indescribable,\n\nHere it is done:\n\nThe Woman-Soul leadeth us\nUpward and on!\n\nNOTES.\n\n'\"¢ Born Parts are symmetrical in their structure. The First moves with deliberate swiftness\nfrom Heaven through the World to Hell: the Second returns therefrom through the World to\nHeaven. Between the two lies the emancipation of Faust from the torment of his conscious\nguilt, — lies his Lethe, his assimilation of the Past.\n\n''In regard to substance, the First Part begins religiously, becbies metaphysical, and termi-\nnates ethically. The Second Part begins ethically, becomes zsthetic, and terminates religiously.\nIn one, Love and Knowledge are confronted with each other: in the other, Practical Activity and\nArt, the Ideal of the Beautiful.\n\n\"In regard to form, the First Part advances from the hymnal chant to monologue and dia-\nlogue: the Second Part from monologue and dialogue to the dithyrambic, closing with the hymn,\nwhich here glorifies not alone The Lord and His uncomprehended lofty works, but the Human\nin the process of its union with the Divine, through Redemption and Atonement.\"\n\nRoszNKRANZ.\n\nae Google\n\nNOTES.\n\n1. ARIEL.\n\nThis first scene has the character of\na Prologue to the Second Part of Faust,\nthe action of which commences with\nthe following scene. An _ indefinite\nperiod of time separates the two parts\nof the drama. Neither in his own life\nnor in his poetical creations did Goethe\never give space to remorse for an irrev-\nocable deed. When Faust disappears\nwith Mephistopheles, all his later tor-\nture of soul has been already suggested\nto the reader, and nothing of it can\nproperly be introduced here, where\nthe whole plan and scope of the work\nis changed.\n\nGoethe firmly believed in healthy\nand final recovery from moral as from\nphysical hurt: his remedial agents were\nTime and Nature. In Riemer's col-\nlection of Brocardica I find the fol-\nlowing fragment :—\n\nNichts taugt Ungeduld,\nNoch weniger Reue:\nJene vermehrt die Schuld,;\nDiese schafft neue.\n\n(Impatience is of no service, still less\nRemorse. That increases the offence,\nthis creates new offences.) He over-\ncame his own great sorrows by tempo-\n\nrarily withdrawing from society and\nsurrendering himself to the influences\nof Nature ; and we are to suppose that\nFaust repeats this experience. The\nhealing process is symbolized in this\nopening scene, wherein the elves repre-\nsent the delicate, mysterious agencies\nthrough which Nature operates on the\nhuman soul. Ariel — who was Poetry\nin the Intermezzo of the Walpurgis-\nNight — here takes the place of Oberon\nas leader of the elves, possibly because\nthe soul capable of a poetic apprehen-\nsion of Nature is most open to her sub-\ntle consolations.\n\n2. Four pauses makes the Night upon ber\ncourses.\n\nGoethe here refers to the four wvigi-\nHa, or night-watches, of the Romans,\neach of three hours ; so that the whole,\nfrom six in the evening until six in the\nmorning, include both sunset and sun-\nrise. I- see no reason to suspect, in\naddition, a reference to Jean Paul's four\nphases of slumber, especially as the lat-\nter division is rather fantastic than real,\nthe phases of healthy slumber being\nonly three. The line, —\n\n\"Then sprinkle him with Lethe's drowsy spray,\"\n\nrecalls a passage in one of Goethe's\nletters to Zelter: '* With every breath\nwe draw, an ethereal current of Lethe\nflows through our whole being, so that\nwe remember our joys but imperfectly,\nour cares and sorrows scarcely at all.\"\n\n3. CHorvs.\n\nThe four verses of the Chorus cor-\nrespond to the four vigilie. The first\ndescribes the evening twilight; the\nsecond, the dead of night; the third,\nthe coming of the dawn; and the fourth,\nthe awaking to the day. The direc-\ntion in regard to the chanting of the\nverses by the alternate or collective\nvoices of the elves was added, in view\nof the possible representation of the\ndrama upon the stage. Even where he\nhad no such special intention, Goethe\nwas fond of attaching a theatrical reality\nto his poetic creations ; but throughout\nthe Second Part he has purposely done\nthis, in order to counteract the ten-\ndency of his symbolism to become\nvague and formless.\n\n4. With a crash the Light draws near.\n\nWe may conjecture that Goethe had\nin his mind the Rospigliosi Aurora of\nGuido, which suggests noise and the\nsound of trumpets ; but he also referred\nboth to ancient myths and the guesses\nof the science of his day. 'Tacitus\nspeaks of a legend current among the\nGermans, that, beyond the land of the\nSuiones, the sun gives forth audible\nsounds in setting. The same statement\nis found in Posidonius and Juvenal. In\nMacpherson's Ossian, \"the rustling\n\nFaust.\n\nsun comes forth from his green-headed\nwaves.\" Also in the German mediz-\nval poem of \" Titurel,\" the sun is said\nto utter sounds sweeter than lutes and\nthe songs of birds, on rising. The\ncrash described by Ariel is only audible\nto the ''spirit-hearing\" of the elves,\nwho at once disappear, and Faust\nawakens, his being '* cleansed from the\nsuffered woes.\"\n\n5. Look up!— The mountain summits,\ngrand, supernal.\n\nThe scene described is Swiss, and\nfrom the neighborhood of the Lake of\nthe Four Forest Cantons. Goethe's\nprojected journey to Italy in 1797 ter-\nminated with a tour in that region, in\ncompany with the artist Meyer. In\nthe third volume of Eckermann's Con-\nversations, he is reported as having\ngiven the following account of his stud-\nies for the proposed epic of ' Tell,\"\nand the use he afterwards made of the\nmaterial ; —\n\n«I visited again the lake and the\nlittle 'Cantons, and those attractive,\nbeautiful, and sublime landscapes made\nsuch a renewed impression upon me,\nthat I was tempted to embody in a\npoem the variety and richness of the\nscenery. In order, therefore, to add\nthe proper interest and life-to my de-\nscription, I resolved to people the im-\nportant locality with equally important\npersonages, and the legend of Tell was\nthe very thing I needed.\"\n\nAfter sketching his conceptions of\nthe different characters, Goethe con-\ntinued: \"I was entirely possessed with\n\nNotes.\n\nthe subject, and already began, from\ntime to time, to hum my hexameters.\nI saw the lake in quiet moonshine, with\nilluminated mist in the gorges of the\nmountains. I saw it in the glow of the\nloveliest morning sun, and the awaken-\ning life and rejoicing of grove and\nmeadow. Then I painted a storm, a\nthunder-gust, hurled from the gorges\nupon the lake. Moreover, there was\nno lack of night and silence, and se-\ncret meetings on bridges and Alpine\npaths.\n\n«© T communicated all this to Schiller,\nin whose soul my landscapes and char-\nacters grew to a drama. Since I had\nother things todo, and postponed more\nand more the fulfilment of my plan, I\nfinally made over my material to him,\nand he thereupon produced his admira-\nble poem.\"\n\n\"*T stated,\" said Eckermann, '* my\n'impression, that the splendid descrip-\ntion of sunrise, written in ferza rima,\nin the first scene of the Second Part of\nFaust, might have sprung from the\nmemories of those landscapes of the\nLake of the Four Forest Cantons.\"\n\n«*T will not deny,\" said Goethe,\n''chat the features of the description\nare thence drawn. Nay,I could not\neven have imagined the substance of\nthe terzinen, without the fresh impres-\nsions of that wonderful scenery. But\nthat is all which I coined for myself\nout of the gold of my Tell-locali-\nties: the rest I relinquished to Schil-\nler.\"\n\nThere seems to be a slight obscurity\nin the passage commencing :—\n\n'°T is thus, when unto yearning hope's en-\ndeavor,\"\"\n\nThe substance of German comment ~\nis, that Faust is overwhelmed, as when\nthe Earth-Spirit appears to him in the\nFirst Part, by the apparition of perfect\nand universally illuminating Truth,\nwhich his human eyesight cannot en-\ndure. The sudden and complete ful-\nfilment of a hope, he reflects, has the\nsame bewildering effect ; and he hides\nhimself '*in youthful drapery \" (vei/,\nin the original), since youth is content\nwith an amazed acceptance of the high-\nest revelations of Life, without seeking\nto penetrate their mysteries.\n\n6. Life is not light, but the refracted\n\ncolor.\n\nHere the above thought is repeated ©\nin a metaphor drawn from Goethe's\nstudies of Color. The waterfall is a\nsymbol of human endeavor, — impetu-\nous, never-ending, destructive, yet in-\nspiring, and creating force; and the\nrainbow is the divided ray of the intol-\nerably keen white light of Truth, as it\nis reflected in and overhangs the move-\nment of life. Shelley expresses exactly\na similar thought in a different im-\nage : —\n\n\" Life, like a dome of many-colored glass,\n\nStains the white radiance of Eternity.\"\n\nIn Goethe's description of the Falls\nof the Rhine, at Schaffhausen, we find\nthe germ from which his thought\ngrew: '* The rainbow appeared in its\ngreatest beauty: it stood with unmov-\ning foot inthe midst of the tremendous\n\nfoam and spray, which, threatening for-\ncibly to destroy it, were every moment\nforced to create it anew.\"\n\nI have not translated the above line\nstrictly in harmony with Goethe's Far-\nbenlebre. ** Am farbigen Abglanz ba-\nben wir das Leben\" is, literally: 'In\nthe colored reflection we have Life.\"\nGoethe's theory is that Color is not\nproduced by the refraction of the ray,\nbut is the result of the mixture of\nlight and darkness, in different degrees.\nHis conclusions were drawn from only\npartial observation, and have been\nproved to be incorrect. I therefore\nfee] justified in using a term which\nbest interprets his thought as a poet,\nwithout reference to this glimpse of his\ntheory as a man of science.\n\nThe opening scene strikes the key-\nnote which reverberates through the\nSecond Part. Faust lets his 'dead\nPast bury its dead\": but his intellect\nhas been purified by his experience of\nhuman love, delight, and suffering.\nHe resumes, in another and more en-\nlightened sense, his aspiration for the\n''highest being,\" and we must accom-\npany him, henceforward, with our in-\ntellectual, and not, as in the First Part,\nwith our emotional] nature.\n\n7. EMPEROR.\n\nOn the 1st of October, 1827, Goethe\nread the manuscript of this scene to\nEckermann. 'In the Emperor,\" said\nhe, '<I have endeavored to represent a\nPrince who has all possible qualities\nfor losing his realm — in which, in-\ndeed, he afterwards succeeds,\n\nFaust.\n\n«¢ The welfare of the Empire and of\nhis subjects gives him no trouble; he\nthinks only of himself, and how he\nmay amuse himself, from day to day,\nwith something new. The land is\nwithout order and law, the judges\nthemselves accomplices with the crimi-\nnals, and all manner of crime is com-\nmitted unhindered and unpunished.\nThe army is unpaid, without discipline,\nand ranges around plundering, in order\nto help itself to its pay, as best it can.\nThe treasury is without money and\nwithout the hope of further contribu-\ntions, In the Emperor's household\nthings are not much better: there are\ndeficiencies in kitchenand cellar. The\nLord High Steward, more undecided\nfrom day to day what course to pursue,\nis already inthe hands of usurious Jews,\nto whom everything has been mort-\ngaged, and even the bread on the Em-\nperor's table has been eaten in advance.\n\n'«*The Council means to represent\nto His Majesty all these evils, and to\nconsult with him how they may be\nremoved ; but the Most Gracious Rul-\ner has no inclination to Jend his ear to\nsuch disagreeable things: he would\nmuch rather be diverted. Here, now,\nis the true element for Mephisto, who\nhas speedily made away with the former\nFool, and as new Foo! and Councillor\nstands at the Emperor's side.\"\n\nGoethe took from the old legend the\nidea of presenting Faust at the Court\nof the German Emperor. The proper\nmanner of Faust's introduction, how-\never, seems to have given him a great\ndeal of trouble: more than one outline-\n\nNotes.\n\nsketch must have been rejected, and this\ninitial difficulty probably retarded for\nmany years the completion of the work.\nFalk givesus the following plan, as having\nbeen communicated to him by Goethe\n(probably between 1806 and 1813) : —\n\n'* Because Faust desires to know the\nwhole world, Mephistopheles proposes\nto him, among other things, that he\nshall seek for an audience with the Em-\nperor. It is the time of the latter's\ncoronation. Faust and Mephistopheles\narrive safely in Frankfurt, and must\nnow be announced. Faust refuses, be-\ncause he knows not upon what subject\nto converse with the Emperor. But\nMephistopheles encourages him with\nthe promise that he will accompany\nhim at the appointed time, support him\nwhen the conversation flags, and, in\ncase it should fail entirely, will assume\nboth his speech and his form, so that\nthe Emperor will really not know with\nwhom he has spoken or not spoken.\nWith this understanding Faust finally\naccepts the proposition. Both betake\nthemselves to the hall of audience and\nare received. Faust, on his part, in or-\nder to show himself worthy of the Im-\nperial grace, summons up all his wit\nand knowledge, and speaks of the lofti-\nest things. Nevertheless, his fire warms\nonly himself: the Emperor remains\ncold, yawns continually, and is on the\npoint of terminating the interview.\nMephistopheles perceives this in the\nnick of time, and comes to Faust's as-\nsistance, as he had promised. He\nassumes the same form, and stands bod-\nily before the Emperor as Faust, with\n\nthe latter's mantle, doublet, ruff, and\nthe sword at his side. He now contin-\nues the conversation, just where Faust\nleft off; but with a very different and\nmuch more brilliant result. He chat-\nters, swaggers, and prates so to the right\nand the left, hither and thither, of all\nthings on earth and outside of it, that\nthe Emperor is beside himself with\namazement, and assures the lords pres-\nent that this is a thoroughly learned\nman, to whom he could listen for days\nand weeks, without becoming weary.\nAt first, indeed, he was not particularly\nedified, but after the man had warmed\nto his subject, nothing finer could be\nimagined than the manner in which he\nset forth all things so briefly, yet so\ngracefully and intelligently. He, as\nEmperor, must confess that he had nev-\ner before found united in one person\nsuch treasures of thought and experience,\nwith such knowledge of human nature, —\nnot even in the wisest of his Councillors.\"\n\nThis plan, although humorous, would\nrequire too much elaboration to serve as\nthe mere vehicle of Faust's introduction\nat Court; and the fact that Goethe re-\nlated it to Falk is sufficient proof that\nhe had already rejected it. We have\nhis own word for the fact that he never\ndared to communicate his poetical ideas\nin advance, even to Schiller; and he\nwould be much less likely to bestow so\nintimate a confidence upon a man s0\nvain and garrulous as Falk.\n\n8. What 'scursed and welcomely expected?\n\nMephistopheles commends himself to\nthe Emperor's grace by a riddle of\n\nwhich himself (the Fool) is the solu-\ntion. Some, however, consider ' Jus-\ntice' to be the true interpretation, and\nHartung insists on finding in the lines\na resemblance to Schiller's riddle of\n** Genius.\"\n\ng. Murmurs or THE Crown.\n\nThe part given to the crowd of spec-\ntators in this and the following scene is\nevidentiy imitated from the Greek Cho-\nrus. 'The '*murmurs\" are confused\nand fragmentary comments on the ac-\ntion, and they also seem to have been\npartly designed to represent the masses\nwho passively accept Life in whatever\nform it comes to them, or as it may be\nmoulded tor them by active and positive\nindividual natures. The satire indicated\nin these passages is for the most part\npointless, and we cannot but feel that\nthey add an unnecessary heaviness to\nwhat is, without them, the least edifying\npart of the drama.\n\n10. But tell me why, in days so fair.\n\nGoethe's conception of the character\nof the Emperor (given in Note 7) is\nhere illustrated. The Fool and the\nAstrologer, standing on his right and\nleft hand, are the two Court officials to\nwhose counsel he is most inclined to\nlisten. The former relieves the tedium\nof state affairs, and the latter has cast an\nauspicious horoscope of his fortunes;\nyet, even with their aid, he consents re-\nluctanuy and with a half-protest to hear\nthe reports of his ministers. The titles\nof the latter are taken from the mediz-\nval organization of the German Imperial\n\nFaust ,\n\nCourt, where they were hereditary in\ncertain princely houses. The dignity\nof Arch Chancellor belonged to the\nElector of Mayence; of Arch Banner-\nLord (for which Goethe has substituted\n'* General-in-Chief\"') to the Elector of\nWirtemberg ; of Arch-Treasurer to the\nElector of Brunswick; and of Arch-\nMarshal to the Elector of Saxony. I\nhave translated the word Marschalk, on\naccount of the character of the office,\ninto ** Lord High Steward.\" In spite\nof the conjectures of some of the\nGerman commentators, it is not prob-\nable that reference is made to any\nparticular historical period. The deca-\ndence of am Empire is necessary for the\npart assigned to Mephistopheles and the\nJater impatience of Faust with his expe-\nrience of \"the greater world.\"\n\n11. The Saints and Knights are they.\n\nThe satire in this passage — of which\nthe Chancellor himself is quite uncon-\nscious — needs no explanation. Nature\nand Mind, in all ages, are the bugbears\nof privileged classes, and the speaker,\nhere, is the representative of both the\nSaints (the priesthood) and the Knights.\n\nIn the Paralipomena there is a frag-\nment of a scene which must have been\nintended as a substitute for the present.\nIt is sketched in prose : —\n\nBisnor.\nThey are pagan views ; I have found similar\n\nones in Marcus Aurelius. They are the pagan\nVirtues.\n\nMEPHisToPRELes. .\nAnd that means—splendid vices. It is\njust, for that reason, that the prisoners should\none and all be burned.\n\nNotes.\n\nEMPpEror,\n\nI find it hard: what say you, Bishop?\n\nBishop.\n\nWithout evading the sentence of our all-wise\nChurch, I am inclined to believe that, at\nonce —\n\nMEPHISTOPHELES.\n\nPardon! Pagan virtues? I would fain\nhave had them punished; but if it may not be\notherwise, we will pardon them,— For the\npresent thou art absolved, and again in thy\nright. —\n\n12. The spheres of Hour and House are\nin bis ken.\n\nThe astrologers divided the celestial\nhemisphere into twelve parts, which\nwere called Houses. In casting a horo-\nscope, it was necessary to have, first,\nthe hour of birth and the latitude and\nlongitude of the birth-place. The loca-\ntion of the sun, moon, planets, and the\nsigns of the zodiac in the different\nhouses, was then ascertained. As each\nhouse represented a special human inter-\nest or passion, and each planet a special\ncontrolling force, the various combi-\nnations which thus arose furnished\nthe material out of which the horoscope\nwas constructed.\n\nThe speech of the Astrologer, prompt-\ned by Mephistopheles, refers to the\nseven metals, to which the medizval\nalchemists attached the names of the\nseven planets. The sun is gold, the\nmoon silver; Mercury is quicksilver,\nVenus copper, Mars iron, Jupiter tin,\nand Saturn lead.\n\n13. There hes the fiddler, there the gold!\n\nClemens Brentano, in his ** Boy's\nWonder-horn,\" states that it is a com-\nmon superstition in Germany, that,\nwhen one accidentally stumbles, he is\npassing over the spot where a fiddler is\nburied.\n\nThe expressions of Mephistopheles\nrefer to the power of divination sup-\nposed to be possessed by certain persons.\nThey suggest a passage in Wilhelm\nMeister, where Jarno describes a man\nwho accompanies him on his mineral-\nogical journeys: '* He possessed very\nwonderful faculties, and a most peculiar\nrelation to all which we call stone,\nmineral, or even element. He felt not\nonly the strong effect of the subterra-\nnean streams, deposits of metal, strata of\ncoal, and all such substances as are found\nin masses, but also, what was more re-\nmarkable, his sensations changed with\nevery change of the soil.'\"? Goethe,\nhimself, seems to have had a half-belief\nin the possibility of an occult instinct\nof this nature.\n\n94. He seeks saltpetre where the clay-\nwalls stand.\n\nOld walls, especially in damp cellars\nand subterranean passages, become cov-\nered with an incrustation of saltpetre,\nthe collection of which was formerly a\ngovernment monopoly.\n\n15. A cask of tartar holds the wine.\n\n\"~-\n\nIt is a general belief in Germany that\nwhen a cask of wine has been kept for\ncenturies, it gradually deposits a crust\n\nof tartar, which may acquire such a\nconsistency as to hold the liquid when\nthe staves have rotted away. The\nwine thus becomes its own cask, and\npreserves itself in a thick, oily state. It\nis then supposed to possess wonderful\nmedicinal powers.\n\n16. Carnivat MasQuerabe.\n\nIn the ** Carnival Masquerade \" we\nreach the first entangling episode of the\nSecond Part of Faust. 'That the entire\nscene is an allegory, is evident; and we\ncan scarcely be mistaken in assuming\nits chief motive to be the representation\nof the human race in its social and polit-\nical organization. This basis has been\naccepted, almost unanimously, by the\nGerman critics; but upon it each has\nbuilt his own individual theory of the\ndevelopment of the idea through the\ncharacters introduced. Whether inten-\ntionally or unconsciously, Goethe him-\nself has added not a little to the confu-\nsion by introducing, now and then, a\ndouble (possibly even a ¢rip/e) symbol-\nism: therefore, although we may feel tol-\nerably secure in regard to the elements\nwhich he represents, so many additional\nmeanings are suggested that we walk the\nlabyrinth with a continual suspicion of\nour path.\n\nI shall endeavor to hold fast to the\nfirm determination with which I com-\nmenced the work, — that of not adding\nanother to the many theories already in\nexistence. The reader, nevertheless,\nrequires, if not an infallible clew, at\nleast an adequate number of indications\npointing in the same direction, to carry\n\nFaust.\n\nhim forwards. Unless he is sufficiently\ninterested to add his own guesses, on the\nway, to those of the critics and com-\nmentators, — to perceive, at least, the\nconcentric meanings in which the alle-\ngorical forms are enveloped, — he will\nprobably grow weary long before this\ndigression returns again to the original\ncourse of the drama.\n\nThe design of the Carnival Masquer-\nade is similar to that of Scene IT. («« Be-\nfore the City-Gate \"\") of the First Part.\nThe latter gives us a picture of life in a\nsmall German town, —a narrow circle\nof individual characters, as they would\nappear to Faust in his * little world.\"\nThe broader sphere into which he has\nnow entered requires an equally broad\nand comprehensive picture of Human\nLife, as it is moulded by Society and\nGovernment. Schiller, to whom Goe-\nthe confided his literary plans more\nfully than to any other friend, foresaw\nthe difficulty to be encountered. He\nwrote (in June, 1797): '* A source of\nanxiety to me is, that Faust, according\nto your design, seems to require such a\ngreat amount of material, if the idea is\nfinally to appear complete; and I find\nno poetical hoop which can encircle\nsuch a cumulative mass. Well, you\nwill no doubt be able to help yourself.\nFor example : Faust must necessarily, to\nmy thinking, be conducted into the ac-\ntive life of the world, and whatever\npart of it you may choose out of the\ngreat whole, the very nature of it seems\nto require too much particularity and\ndiffuseness.\"\n\nGoethe, who wrote to Schiller, 'it\n\n| Notes.\n\ngives one a new spirit for labor, when\none sees one's own thoughts and pur-\nposes indicated externally, by another,\"\nwas unable, in the end, to select any\ndetachable phase of Society, and there-\nfore attempted to present the elements\nwhich enter into all human association,\nunder the form of a mask. We are\nfirst introduced to types of the classes\nof persons who are found in Society ;\nthen to the moral elements, represented\nby the Graces, the Parce, and the Fu-\nries; the symbol of a wisely organized\ngovernment follows, with an interlude\nin which Poetry appears as the com-\npanion of Wealth. The debasing influ-\nences of the lust of gain and the mad-\nness of speculation are set forth, the\nFauns, Satyrs, and Gnomes are intro-\nduced as types of the ruder forces of\nhuman nature, and the Carnival closes\nwith a catastrophe in which most of the\ncritics see Revolution symbolized.\n\nThis is the simplest and most obvious\noutline of the scene. At every step,\nhowever, there are additional references\nand suggestions, the most important of\nwhich are explained in the succeeding\nNotes. The views of German com-\nmentators are tolerably accordant in re-\ngard to Goethe's general design; but,\nwhen they come to particulars, they\nstrike so many individual tangents from\nthe central thought. Diintzer says:\n\"' The collective representations of the\nMasquerade refer to civil and political\nlife. The first group of masks whom\nwe meet exhibit the external blessings\nof life, followed by another group who\nset forth those moral features of life\n\nwhich are most influenced by external\npossessions. 'The State, prudently gov-\nerned, and made prosperous by the\nwise activity of its Ruler, is then pre-\nsented to us in an allegorical] picture,\nwhereto the concluding symbol of a\nState overthrown by the selfishness and\nweakness of a self-indulgent Ruler forms\nan explanatory contrast.\"\n\nSchnetger divides the scene into five\nparts: I. «*A picture of the cheerful,\nrich garden of Life.\" II. A sketch of\nthe disorganizing influences in human\nsociety, which require to be governed ;\nof the beneficent powers which have\nlost their sway in our modern world,\nand of the darker elements which have\ntaken their place. III. A representa-\ntion of a well-governed State. IV.\nThe worship of Mammon in human\nsociety, and the vulgar hunger of the\nmultitude for gold. V. The collision\nof the cupidity of the People with that\nof the Prince, followed by a general\nconflagration.\n\nHartung considers that the forms and\nforces of social life are directly present-\ned, and finds a class of persons, not of\nideas, behind each mask. He seems to\ninclude the elephant and its attendants\n(generally accepted as the symbol of the\nState) among the social allegories, but\nsees, in the conclusion, the overthrow\nof civil order.\n\nDeycks and Késtlin reject the idea of\na complete and consistent allegory of\nSociety and Government. The latter,\nmoreover, gives a different explanation\nof the final catastrophe, which is quoted\nin its appropriate place.\n\nKreyssig says of the scene: ' Here the\npoet introduces that singular masquerade\nin which the action of the next follow-\ning scenes is announced and allegorically\nhinted, and which, to the dispassionate\nmind, if not exactly the most difficult\nto be comprehended, is yet one of the\nmost entangled and unrefreshing por-\ntions of the whole poem. Here the\ndiction first displays all those ostenta-\ntious singularities, which have brought\nthe Second Part of Faust into such bad\nrepute with a part of the reading world.\nHere the poet first manifests, in easy\nlatitude, his known tendency to myste-\nrious, symbolic pranks, and loads the\npoem with a multitude of adjuncts which\nseem to us unnecessary for the compre-\nhension and proper effect of the whole,\n— but rich material for the interpreters\nwho are skilled in esthetic filigree-\nwork.\"\n\nThe careful reader will find that there\nis some truth in each one of the fore-\ngoing explanations, and that the chief\nconfusion has arisen from the circum-\nstance that Goethe could not find, as\nSchiller feared, a poetic hoop capable\nof encircling such a cumulative mass of\nmaterial. I will only add, thar, in the\nNotes which follow, referring to the\nseparate masks, I have given preference\nto the simplest and most direct interpre-\ntation, which 1s always the more poetic\nand the more consistent with the laws\nof Gocthe's mind, as manifested in his\nother works.\n\nThe scene of the Masquerade is not\nin Italy, as some suppose, but at the\nGerman Court, after the Emperor's re-\n\nFaust.\n\nturn from his coronation by the Pope,\nat Rome. Maximilian I. was the first\nGerman Emperor who omitted this\nceremony.\n\n17. Garpen-Gir-s.\n\nThe Masquerade is properly opened\nby the lightest, gayest, and most attrac-\ntive element of Society, —the young,\nunmarried women. Goethe took the\nfroraje of Florence (not the present\nrace!) as types of grace, beauty, ard\nthat art which seems artlessness. These\nqualities are the * flowers which blos-\nsom all the year.\" Hartung, in his\nnotice of this passage, says: Every wo-\nman, who dresses herself with taste, is\nan artist for her own body.\"\n\n\"They \" (the Garden-Girls) « rep-\nresent, in contrast to the foregoing de-\nscription of the needs of the Court, the\nsimple, joyous, and enjoying nature of\nthe race. The picturesque character\nof the poetry and the sententious grace\nof the address make this one of the most\nagreeable groups.\" — Leutbecher.\n\nIf the allegory is consistently devel-\noped, we must suppose that the Olive-\nBranch, the Wreath of Ears, and the\nFancy-Wreath are types of female char-\nacter, or of the different forms of attrac-\ntion whereby women draw towards\nthem the complementary male charac-\nters. Schnetger, however, gives a dif-\nferent interpretation: ' Joy and enjoy-\nment flourish under the sheltering\nbranch of Olive, the certain warrant of\npeace. Under its shadow, in the Gar-\n\nOuive-BRancH, WITH Fruit.\n\nNotes.\n\nden of Life, Nature creates the Golden\nEar for the one who desires the Beauti-\nful in union with the Useful ; and Fan-\ncy, or Art, creates a thousand wreaths\nfor the other, who only takes delight in\ngay and graceful forms.\"\n\nGoethe's maxim, throughout the\nwhole of the masquerade, seems to have\nbeen that of the Manager, in the * Prel-\nude on the Stage\" : —\n\n\" Who offers much, brings something unto\nmany.\"\n\nI do not think it necessary, therefore,\nto load each detail with all the varieties\nof explanation. The reader, in any\ncase, will find himself infected by the\nsuggestiveness of the text, and thereby\nunconsciously led to interpret the forms\naccording to his own individual taste.\n\n19. What our name is, Theophrastus.\n\nThe reference is not to Theophrastus\nParacelsus, but to Theophrastus of Les-\nbos, born B. C. 390, the disciple of\nPlato and the successor of Aristotle.\nAmong his extant works is a '* Natural\nHistory of 'Plants,' a translation of\nwhich, by Sprengel, was published at\nAltona, in 1822; and his name was\nprobably thereby suggested to Goce-\nthe.\n\nThe \" Fancy Nosegay \" seems to be\ndesigned as a type of the wilful, artful,\nbewildering power of woman, which\ndoes not attract all of the opposite sex,\nbut the more surely fascinates a portion\nof it. This version of the mask is cer-\ntainly indicated by the ' Challenge,\"\nwhich next appears, and which is one\n\nwith the \" Rosebuds.\" We are to sup-\npose that the emblematic rosebuds which\nshe carries are temporarily concealed,\nand then suddenly produced as a con-\ntrast, exhibiting the superior charms\nof sweet, timid, modest maidenhood\nover the glamour of acquired feminine\nart.\n\nHartung says: \" 'The Fancy-Wreath\nand the Fancy Nosegay mean tounite Art\nand Poetry, which create a second arti-\nficial nature within Nature: and espe-\ncially the latter, the poetic temperament,\nseeks a heart capable of recognition and\nlove. The Rosebud, on the contrary,\ndoes not make herself conspicuous by\nshow and glitter: she will only open\nher glowing bosom to the lucky finder.\"\n\nIn Goethe's \" Four Seasons\" there is\nthe following distich : —\n\nThou to the blooming maiden mayest be likened,\nO Rosebud !\n\nWho as the fairest is seen, yet through her\nmodesty fair.\n\n20. GARDENERS.\n\nAlthough some commentators assert\nthat the preceding masks of flowers repre-\nsent the attraction of appearance, and the\nfruits which are now brought forward\nmust therefore represent positive pusses-\nsion, I prefer to stand by the more ob-\nvious solution, and to see in the garden-\ners only the male element of Society.\nIn the latter, grace and beauty are second-\nary qualities; the decision which fol-\nlows mutual attraction must not be left\nto the eye alone; the internal flavor of\ncharacter must be tasted. The spectac-\nular arrangement of the fruits and flow-\n\ners, under green, leafy arcades, suggests\nGoethe's description of the Neapolitan\nfruit-shops, in his Jtalienische Reise.\n\n21. Morser anp DaucurTer.\n\nHere the meaning is not easily to be\nmistaken, and the critics, although some\nof them have shown remarkable skill in\ntheir efforts to attach some additional\nsignificance to the characters, have not\nbeen able to escape the direct allusion\nto scheming mothers with marriageable\ndaughters. 'The masks are appropriately\nintroduced as a transition from the nat-\nural, unperverted attraction of the sexes\nin youth, which is the primitive cause\nand charm of Society, to the introduc-\ntion of other and disturbing elements.\n\nThe game alluded to in the third\nstanza (Dritter Mann),1 only know by\nits old English name of '* Hindmost of\nThree,\" which may possibly be a local\ndesignation ; but it wil] at least indicate\nthe game to those who happen to know\nit under another name.\n\nThe stage directions, in brackets, fol-\nlowing this passage, as well as those on\npage 39, were added by Riemer, under\nGoethe's direction. They thus ap-\npeared in the twelfth volume of Goethe's\nComplete Works, in 1828, and it is un-\nderstood that they were intended to in-\ndicate additional scenes, not written at\nthe time. The failure, afterwards, to\nfil] these gaps, was certainly not forget-\nfulness, as Diintzer charges, but rather\nweariness and the absence of fortunate\nmoods, on the part of the octogenarian\npoet.\n\nA theatrica] atmosphere undoubtedly\n\nFaust,\n\npervades, not only this, but many other\nscenes of the Second Part of Faust, and\nthe English reader who may be not\nalways agreeably conscious of this cir-\ncumstance, should bear in mind that\nGoethe's long management of the Wei-\nmar theatre, and his constant production\nof plays, masques, and vaudevilles (many\nof them of an \" occasional \"? character),\nled him to consider, while writing, the\npossible representation of the drama\nupon the German stage. Prince Radzi-\nvill had already composed music for the\nFirst Part (in 1814,) and at the very\ntime when Goethe was preparing the\nCarnival Masquerade for publication, in\n1828, Kar] von Holtei was engaged in\nbringing out the First Part as a melo-\ndrama, with music by Eberwein. Nor\nmust we forget that the German public\nhad been educated to an appreciation\nand enjoyment of even allegorical repre-\nsentations. After Sophocles had been\nproduced on the Weimar stage, and\nSchiller had revived the antique Chorus\nin his ** Bride of Messina,\"? Goethe not\nunreasonably conjectured that the Second\nPart of Faust might be acceptably rep-\nresented. The attempt has not yet\nbeen made; but a day may come when\nit shall be possible.\n\n22. Woop-Cutrers. PuLctneE.ut.\n\nPARASITES.\n\nThe ruder and less attractive — nay,\nfrequently repellant — elements of Soci-\nety are represented in these three\nclasses. The interpretation of each\nwill depend upon the circumstance,\nwhether we give them a purely social,\n\nNotes.\n\nor also a political character. In the\nformer case, the Wood-Cutters are typ-\nical of those coarse-natured, brusque\nindividuals, who pride themselves on\ndisregarding the social graces and pro-\nprieties; the Pulcinelli are the obse-\nquious idlers, triflers, and gossip-mon-\ngers; the Parasites are described by\ntheir name. If we are asked to give\n\nthem a broader significance, the Wood-\n\nCutters are the rude, unrefined masses,\nupon whose labor rests the finer fabric\nof Society ; the Pulcinelli are the loaf-\ners who manage to live without any\nvisible means of support, and are never\nidler than when they seem to be most\nbusy ; and the Parasites remain the\nsame, only with a broader field of ac-\ntion.\n\nSome lines in the address of the lat-\nter suggest a passage in the Third Satire\nof Juvenal : —\n\nGrieve, and they grieve; if you weep silently,\nThere seems a silent echo in their eye:\n\nThey cannot mourn like you, but they can ery.\nCall for a fire, their winter clothes they take:\nBegin you but to shiver, and they shake;\n\nIn frost and snow, if you complain of heat,\nThey rub th' unsweating brow, and swear they\n\nsweat.\nDryden's Translation.\n\n23. Drunken Man.\n\nGoethe's object, here, is to represent\nsensual indulgence, of which intemper-\nance is but one form. 'This being the\nlast of the masks which symbolize so-\ncial classes, there is all the more reason\nfor restricting the explanation to Soci-\nety alone; since, if the author had\n\nmeant to typify political classes, he\nmust have necessarily closed the group\nwith criminals instead of sensualists.\nDiintzer, nevertheless, insists that this\nand the three preceding masks represent\n\"the slavish dependence of men upon\nexternal possessions\"! But Leutbecher\nsurpasses all other commentators in as-\nserting that the Wood-Cutters, the Pul-\ncinelli and Parasites typify \" intellectual\nmanifestations and their relation to each\nother,\" while in the Drunken Man he\nfinds ** the struggle of the Real as a\ncounterpoise to the Ideal \"!!\n\n24. The Herald announces various Poets.\n\nFrom this point to the appearance of\nthe Graces, we have the skeleton of an\nunwritten scene, the character of which\nmay partly be conjectured from Goethe's\nexpressions to Eckermann. The various\nclasses of poets whom he meant to rep-\nresent, and the jealousy of the cliques\nwith which they were associated (un-\nfortunately a characteristic of German\nliterary life at the present day), may\nreadily be guessed. Although no one\ndllows the others to speak, the Satirist\nsucceeds in declaring that his delight is\nin uttering what no one likes to hear.\nUnder the title of «* Night and Church-\nyard Poets\" the author may have hinted\nat Matthisson and Salis, and the earlier\nlyrics of Lenau. The allusion to the\nvampire we are able definitely to trace.\nEarly in 1827, Merimée published his\nLa Guzla: Poésies Illriques, of which\nGoethe wrote: \" The poet, as a genu-\nine Romanticist, calls up the ghostliest\nforms: even his localities create a dread.\n\nChurches by night, graveyards, cross-\nroads, hermits' huts, rocks and ravines\nuncannily surround the reader, and then\nappear the newly dead, threatening and\nterrifying, alluring and beckoning as\nshapes or flames, and the most horrid\nvampirism, with all its concomitants.\"\n\nThe new Romantic school in France,\nand especially its leader, Victor Hugo,\naroused Goethe's keenest wrath. He\ncalled Notre Dame de Paris **an abomi-\nnable book ! \" and thus expressed himself\nto Eckermann: 'In place of the beau-\n'tiful substance of the Grecian mythology\nwe have devils, witch-hags, and vam-\npires, and the noble heroes of the early\ntime must give way to swindlers and\ngalley-slaves. Such things are piquant /\nThey produce an effect! But after the\npublic has once eaten of this strongly\npeppered dish, and become accustomed\nto the taste, it will demand more and\nstronger ingredients.\" Herein is an ex-\nplanation of the reference to the Grecian\nMythology, \"which, even in modern\n-masks, loses neither its character nor its\npower to charm.\"\n\n25. THe Graces.\n\nHere the masks represent social qual-\nities and forces, not varieties of indiyid-\nual character. In the Graces we see\ngiving, receiving, and thanking or ac-\nknowledging, not in the narrower sense\nof an act, but as symbolical of the inter-\ncourse of men, —the communication of\none nature to another, the impressions\nbestowed and received, the reciprocal\nappreciation of character.\n\nAccording to Hesiod, the Graces\n\nFaust.\n\nwere Aglaia, Euphrosyne, and Thalia.\nIn place of the latter Goethe substituted\nHegemone (one of the two Graces re-\nvered by the Athenians), perhaps for\nthe reason that the name of Thalia is\nbetter known as that of a Muse.\n\n26. THe Parca.\n\nAs in the Graces we have the activity\nof beneficent social qualitics, so now, in\nthe Parce, we find those forces of order,\nrestraint, and control, without which\nthere could be no permanence in human\nintercourse. Hartung considers that\nthey represent the 'necessities'? to\nwhich Life must submit, and Diintzer\ncalls them the embodiment of ' moral\nlimitations \" — but these are simply dif-\nferent forms of the same solution.\n\nGoethe has purposely changed the\nparts of Atropos and Clotho. The\nformer carefully spins a soft and even\nthread, warning the maskers that it\nmust not be stretched too far, even in\nenjoyment. Clotho, the youngest of the\nFates, announces that the shears have\nbeen given to her, because Atropos pro-\nlonged useless lives and clipped the\nthreads of the young and hopeful, and\nshe, therefore, thrusts the shears into\nthe sheath, in order to make no similar\nmistakes. I confess I am unable to ex-\nplain the exact significance of this action.\nSome find in ita hint that the ancient\ngloomy, inexorable idea of Fate is ban-\nished from modern society ; others that\nthe needful moderation and self-control\nwill make the threatening shears unne-\ncessary.\n\nThe task of Lachesis is evidently to\n\nNotes.\n\narrange and twist together the separate\nthreads into an even, ordered chain, —\na symbol which requires no further ex-\nplanation. |\n\n27. They are Tue Furies.\n\nHere we have the activity of evil\nforces in society. Goethe changes the\nErinnys of the Greeks, who were rep-\nresented as fierce, baleful figures, with\nsnakes and torches in their hands, into\nfair, young, wheedling creatures, seem-\ningly harmless as doves. His design\ncannot be for a moment doubted. The\n\nunresting Alecto of modern society is\n\nthe insinuation that breeds mistrust, the\nslander that wears an innocent face, the\npower that in a thousand ways thrusts\nitself between approaching hearts and\ndrives them apart. Megzra typifies the\nalienation which arises from selfish\nwhims, from indifference or satiety ;\nand Tisiphone alone, the avenging Fury,\nremains true to her ancient name and\noffice.\n\n28. And bere Asmodi as my follower lead.\nAsmodi (or Ashmedai), the Destroyer,\n\nwas an evil demon of the Hebrews.\nHe is mentioned in the Talmud, and\nJewish tradition reports that he once\ndrove Solomon from his_ kingdom.\nSince, in the Book of Tobias, he kills\nin succession the seven husbands of Sara,\nhe has been credited with a special en-\nmity to married happiness. In this\nquality he appears as the follower of\nMegezra. As '* Asmodeus\" we find\nhim in Wieland's Oderon, and the Dia-\nble Boiteux of Lesage, through which\n\nhe is almost as widely known as Me-\nphistopheles.\n\n29. You see a mountain pressing through\nthe throng.\n\nThe Herald's expression: * For that\nwhich comes is not to you allied,\"\nseems to indicate a change in the char-\nacter of the allegory; and I am dis-\nposed to agree with those who attach a\npolitical meaning to the coming masks,\nrather than with those who would in-\nclude the latter in the representation of\nsociety. The former interpretation is\ncertainly the more simple and complete.\nThe elephant is Civil Government, or\nThe State, as another form of organized\nhuman life. He is guided by Prudence,\nwhile on either hand walk Fear and\nHope, in fetters. Fear, who shrinks\nfrom every undertaking, and Hope,\nwho would undertake all things without\nconsidering results, are, as Prudence\ndeclares, ** two of the greatest of human\nfoes.\" They thus represent the politi-\ncal elements of blind conservatism and\nreckless passion for change. In an or-\ndered and intelligent State both these\nforces are chained, Prudence guides the\ncolossal organism, and the Goddess of\nall victorious active forces sits aloft on\nher throne. Each change in the course\nof the allegory, the reader will observe,\ncommences with the bright and attract-\nive aspects of life and then advances to\nthe opposite.\n\nEckermann reports a conversation\nwhich he had with Goethe in Decem-\nber, 1829, concerning this scene:\n\"* We spoke of the Carnival Masquer-\n\nade, and how far it would be possible\nto represent it on the stage. * It would\nstill be something more,' said I, ¢ than\nthe market in Naples.'\n\n«© «It would require an immense the-\natre,' remarked Goethe, 'and is hardly\nconceivable.'\n\n«©«T hope to live to see it,' was my\nanswer. 'I shall take especial delight\nin the elephant, guided by Prudence,\nwith Victory above, and Fear and Hope\nin chains at the sides. Really, there\ncan scarcely be a better allegory.'\n\n¢<« Tt would not be the first elephant\non the stage,' said Goethe. 'One in\nParis plays a complete part. He be-\nlongs toa political party, and takes the\ncrown from the King to set it on his\nrival's head.....So you see that in\nour Carnival, we could depend on the\nelephant. But the whole is much too\ngreat, and would require a manager,\nsuch as is not easily found.' \"\n\nThe addresses put into the mouths of\nFear, Hope, and Prudence have less\npoint and importance than any others in\nthe Masquerade.\n\n30. Zoiro-THERSITES.\n\nGoethe takes Thersites from the\nIliad, and unites him to the Thracian\nbarrator, Zoilus, who, in the third cen-\ntury before Christ, became so renowned\nby his venomous abuse of Plato, Iso-\ncrates, and especially Homer, that his\nname was applied by the Greeks to all\nvulgar, malicious scolds. The two\ncharacters, combined, represent the class\nof political slanderers, defamers of all\ngood works, pessimists in the most of-\n\nFaust.\n\nfensive sense. The characteristics of\nthis class are exhibited in still stronger\nand more repulsive forms, when Zoilo-\nThersites is changed into the Adder\nand Bat by the magic wand of the Her-\nald.\n\nThe ** Murmurs of the Crowd \" are\nhere introduced, as in Scene IT., to sup-\nply the place of a Chorus, and assist in\ndescribing the action.\n\nBlack lightning of the eyes, the\ndark locks glowing.\n\nThe costume of the Boy Charioteer,\nas described by the Herald, is that of\nthe Apollo Musagetes. It is the same\nwhich Schlegel gives to Arion, in his\nwell-known ballad : —\n\n\"6 He hides his limbs of loveliest mould\nIn gold and purple wondrous fair 3\nEven to his feet falls, fold on fold,\nA robe as light as summer air;\nHis arms rich golden bracelets deck,\nAnd round his brow, and cheeks, and\nneck,\nIn fragrance floats the leaf-crowned hair.\"\nD. F. Mac-Carthy's Translation.\n\nThe appropriateness of this costume is\nexplained in the following note.\n\nI have used the phrase \"a four-horse\nchariot,\" because, in the original text,\nit is thrice spoken of as a Viergespann,\n— 'a team of four,'—and the Boy\nCharioteer uses the word '* steeds\"\n(Rosse). Diintzer and some other Ger-\nman writers consider that the chariot Is\ndrawn by dragons, although the latter\nare specially mentioned as guardians of\nthe treasure-chests. This is not a mat-\nter of much importance: I give the\n\nNotes.\n\noriginal words, in order that the reader\nmay take his choice.\n\n32. I am Profusion, Iam Poesy!\n\nEckermann, in 1829, reports: ** We\nthen talked of the Boy Charioteer.\n\n«¢¢ That Faust is concealed under the\nmask of Plutus, and Mephistopheles\nunder that of Avarice,' Goethe remarked,\n\"you will have already perceived ; but\nwho is the Boy Charioteer ?'\n\n«cT hesitated, and could not immedi-\nately answer.\n\n«©« Tt is Euphorion,' said Goethe.\n\n«¢« But how can he appear in the\nCarnival here,' I asked, 'when he is\nnot born until the third act ?'\n\n«¢¢ Euphorion,' replied Goethe, ' is\nnot a human but an allegorical being.\nIn him-is personified Poetry, which is\nbound neither to time, place, nor person.\nThe same spirit, who afterwards chooses\nto be Euphorion, appears here as the\nBoy Charioteer, and is so far like a\nspectre that he can be present every-\nwhere and at all times.' \"\n\nThe episode of Plutus and the Boy\nCharioteer is a double allegory. The\nfirst and most direct interpretation is\nthat which belongs to the characters as\na portion of the masquerade. The\nBoy is not only Poetry, but the poetic\nelement as it is manifested in all Art;\nand we may therefore say that he repre-\nsents the highest intellectual possessions,\nas Plutus represents material possessions.\nFurther on, we shall see the manner\nin which the gifts of both are received\nby the multitude.\n\n33. And only gives what golden gleams.\n\nAlthough Poetry and Profusion are\none, and the Poet (Artist) is rich in\nproportion as he spends his own best\ngoods — although Art and Taste esteem\nthemselves wealthier than Wealth itself,\nsince they bestow all which the latter\ncan never of itself possess — nothing is\nless appreciated by the mass of mankind\nthan the gifts which they freely scatter.\nPearls become beetles, and jewels but-\nterflies, and even the vision of the\ncourtly Herald (possibly a type of the\nwholly artificial society of Courts) sees\nnothing beyond the external appearance.\n\nThe \" flamelets \" which the Boy also\nscatters, and which he afterwards de-\nscribes as leaping back and forth among\nthe crowd of masks, lingering awhile on\none head, dying out instantly on others,\nand very seldom rekindled into a tempo-\nrary brilliancy, need not, now, be fur-\nther interpreted to the reader.\n\n34. Thy brow when laurels decorate,\nHave I not them with hand and\nfancy braided ?\n\nThe appeal of the Boy Charioteer to\nPlutus brings us to the second and more\ncarefully concealed allegory, which lies\nbeneath the first, and does not seem to\nhave been guessed by the German com-\nmentators. The only special reason\n\nwhy Faust appears in the mask of Plutus\n\nis the part which Mephistopheles ar-\nranges for him to play at the Emperor's\nCourt — to assist in restoring the shat-\ntered finances of the realm by a scheme\nof paper-money based on buried treas-\n\nure. At this point, and hence to\nthe close of the Carnival Masquerade,\na thread taken from the regular course\nof the drama is also introduced, and\nlightly woven into the allegory. There\nis no difficulty in following both, and\nwe might, if it were really necessary, be\nsatisfied without looking further; but\nthe conversation between Plutus and\nthe Boy Charioteer, on pages 56 and\n60, provokingly hints of an additional\nmeaning. When Plutus says \" soul of\nmy soul art thou!\" it is certainly not\nWealth speaking to Art: when the\nBoy Charioteer says 'as my next of\nkindred, do I love thee!\" it is certainly\nnot Art speaking to Wealth.\n\nThe Chancellor von Miller, in his\nwork: 'Goethe as a Man of Action,\"\nwas the first and only one to discover\nthe key to these expressions. The no-\nble and intimate relation which for fifty\nyears existed between the Grand Duke\nKarl August and' Goethe —the Rul-\ner and the Poet — is here most deli-\ncately and feelingly drawn. The\nmanner in which the Grand Duke as-\nsisted Goethe in his flight into Italy ;\nthe care with which he watched lest\nthe duties of his office should interfere\nwith his poetic and scientific activity ;\nthe tecut.tul renown given by the latter\nin return for this freedom, — are all indi-\ncated in a few lines, When the Herald\nfirst describes Plutus, it is neither Faust\nnor Wealth whom we see, but Karl\nAugust as Goethe saw him: —\n\n'6 Blest those, who may his favor own |\nNo more has he to earn or capture;\nHie glance detects where aught 's amiss,\n\nFaust\n\nAnd to bestow his perfect rapture\n\nIs more than ownership and bliss.\"\n\nThe correspondence between Goethe\nand the Grand Duke so thoroughly jus-\ntifies this interpretation, that I do not\nsee how it can be avoided. The strong\nimpression which I have received from\na careful study of the He/ena (Act III.),\nthat Euphorion is not really Byron, but\nGottuHeE bimself in bis poetic activity, is\njustified by Goethe's declaration that\nthe Boy Charioteer and Euphorion are\none, and also—as I shall endeavor to\nshow in subsequent notes— the Ho-\nmunculus of the Classical Walpurgis-\nNight. Although thistheory has not been\nadopted by any of the German critics, it\nseems to me to furnish the simplest and\nmost satisfactory solution of the most\nperplexing puzzle which the Second\nPart contains — simplest, because all\nthe illustrations which support it are\ndrawn from Goethe's life and poetical\ndevelopment, and most satisfactory, be-\ncause I can find no other which har-\nmonizes and consistently explains the\nthree characters.\n\nIt is proper to make the statement\nnow, where the first evidence is fur-\nnished. The additional reasons which\nI shall offer to the consideration of the\nreader will be given when Homunculus\nand Euphorion make their appearance.\n\n35. Then Avaritia was my name. —\n\nMephistopheles, true to his character\nof Negation, wears the mask of Avarice,\nwhich is the opposite of active and os-\ntentatiously exhibited weaith. His ad-\ndress to the women is suggested by the\n\nNotes.\n\ndifference of gender between the ancient\nLatin word, avaritia, which is feminine,\nand the German, der Geiz, which is\nmasculine. The Women are perhaps\nintroduced here, instead of the former\nmixed crowd, because avarice 1s more\nrepulsive to their nature and habits than\nto those of the men.\n\n36. Drive thou this people from the\nfield !\n\nWith the departure of Euphorion,\nthe additional character given to Plutus\nceases, and he is simply the type of\nWealth. When he opens the treasure-\nchest, the action of the multitude, con-\ntrasted with their reception of the Boy\nCharioteer's gifts, explains itself. The\nintellectual weaith turned into beetles\nin their hands; the tongues of flame,\ncast upon their heads, flickered and went\nout; but now the show of riches, which\nthe Herald declares to be a cheat, a joke\nof Carnival, excites them to a madden-\ning exhibition of greed. The acticn of\nPlutus, in driving back the crowd with\nhis burning wand, appears to symbolize\nthe usual termination of those popular\nexcitements which have wealth for their\nobject, —such golden bubbles, for in-\nstance, as the Mississippi scheme of\nLaw, the railway mania in England,\npetroleum in America, etc. 'The fury\nfor sudden enrichment is followed by a\ngeneral scorching.\n\n37- What will the lean fool do?\n\nThe predominance of a coarse, mate-\nrial greed of gain in the people brings\nafter it a general demoralization, the\n\nembodiment of which in a palpable form\nis appropriately given to Mephistophe-\nles. He takes the gold and kneads it\ninto shapes, the character of which is\nso evident that they need not be de-\nscribed, and which express the natural\nconsequences of wealth without culture\nand refinement. It seems probable, as\nmany commentators have surmised, that\nGoethe had in view the condition of\nFrance under Louis XV. and XVI.\nDiintzer says: '* He shows us how, in\na period of material prosperity, the pas-\nsion for wealth and indulgence increases,\nuntil it leads the people to the highest\npitch of shameless immorality.\"\n\n38. They know not whitherward they're\nwending,\nBecause they have not looked abead.\n\nWe now reach the last group of the\nCarnival masks, and the closing scene\nof the allegory. The commentators\n(with the exception of Késtlin and\nKreyssig) are agreed that it represents\nthe revolutionary overthrow of a State,\nand they differ only in regard to the in-\nterpretation of the details. 'The \" sav-\nage hosts\"? are the masses of ignorant\npeople, whose ruder qualities are pres-\nently typified under the forms of Fauns,\nSatyrs, and Gnomes. Since they lack\nthat foresight which comes of intelli-\ngence and wider experience, they drift\ninto Revolution without knowing whith-\nerward they are wending. Schnetger\nthinks the Emperor takes the mask of\nPan (the All), in the sense in which\nLouis XIV. declared: \" L'Etat, c'est\nmoi!\" Hartung insists that the line\n\n¢¢ Full weil I know what every one does\nnot\" refers to Free-Masonry and its\nsupposed connection with the French\nRevolution! Diintzer considers that\nthe Ruler and his Court are responsible\nfor the catastrophe (a view which seems\nto be justified by Goethe's expressions,\nquoted in Note 7), while others assert\nthat it is brought on by the thirst of the\npeople for gold and their subsequent de-\nmoralization.\n\nThere is one objection to this inter-\npretation, which I give for what it may\nbe worth. The Fauns, Satyrs, Nymphs,\nand Gnomes are the attendants of Pan\n(the Emperor), and their parts are\n' played — as the catastrophe shows us —\nby the personages of the Court. Kreys-\nsig says: ** They storm onwards like a\nsavage host, the Emperor as Pan, his\nassociates as Gnomes and Fauns, col-\nlectively the representatives of rude\nnatural forces and desires, in contrast to\nthe spiritualized, Olympian forms of\nlight, and when they rashly approach\nthe fire and spirit fountain of Plutus,\nafter their first, amazed admiration,\nthey are properly tormented by the\nmagic glow, although meanwhile only\nin sport. The part they play is more\ndistinguished and externally stately, but\nnot much more dignified than that of\nthe holiday carousers whom Mephis-\ntopheles so tricked in Auerbach's Cel-\nlar.\"\n\n39. GNoMEs.\n\nDiintzer asserts that the Fauns repre-\nsent unrestricted indulgence in all forms\nof sensual appetite ; the Satyrs the arro-\n\nFaust.\n\ngant will of a Ruler who looks down\nupon and despises the people; the\nGnomes the unbounded greed of power\nand wealth; and the Giants the stupid\nand stubborn nature of those counsellors\nwho surround the throne and endeavor\nto crush every movement arising from\nthe development of the people. Nei-\nther this nor any other of the more\nparticular elucidations of the scene\nseems to me infallible. According to\nHartung, the Fauns are _ peasants\n(Bauern), and the Satyrs demagogues.\nThe field of conjecture, here, is still\nopen to whoever wishes to enter it;\nand I shall not undertake to decide\nwhether the masks represent classes or\nqualities.\n\nThe Gnomes are the only ones who\nhave something more than an allegori-\ncal part to play. They are evidently\nintroduced as the guardians of buried\ntreasure, in connection with the\nfinancial scheme of Mephistopheles.\nThis is clearly expressed, when their\nDeputation approaches Pan and an-\nnounces the new and wonderful foun-\ntain of wealth, the spell of which must\nbe broken by him. The Chancellor\nrefers to this episode in the following\nscene (page 79), when he assures the\nEmperor that the latter actually signed\nthe mandate authorizing the issue of\npaper-money.\n\nThe greeting * Gléck auf!\" (which\nI have translated '\"*Good cheer!\"\nthough it may also be rendered \" Luck\nto you!'') is in use among the miners,\neverywhere throughout Germany. It\nappears to be exclusively an underground\n\nNotes.\n\nhail, and therefore appropriate to the\nGnomes.\n\nThe Giants, as they are here de-\nscribed, naked, with an uprooted fir-\ntree in the hand, may still be seen on\nthe coat-of-arms of more than one\nprincely house in North Germany.\nThey are called Waldmanner (Men of\nthe Woods) by the people, and are\nsupposed, by some archzologists, to be\nlineal descendants of the Grecian\nFauns.\n\n40. At midday sleeping, oer bis brow.\n\n«The foliage of these oaks and\nbeeches is impenetrable to the strongest\nsunshine: I like to sit here after dinner\non warm summer days, when on yon-\nder meadows and on the park all around\nthere reigns such a silence, that the an-\ncients would have said of it: ' Pan\nsleeps.' \"\" — Goethe to Eckermann, 1824.\n\n«The hour of Pan now fell upon\nme, as always upon my journeys. I\nshould like to know whence it derives\nsuch a power. According to my view,\nit lasts from eleven or twelve until one\no'clock ; therefore the Greeks believe\nin Pan's hour, the people and also the\nRussians in an hour of day, when the\nspirits are active. 'The birds are si-\nlent at this time; men sleep beside\ntheir implements. In all nature there\nis something secret, even uncanny, as if\nthe Dreams were creeping around the\nnoonday sleepers. Near at hand'all is\nsilent; in the distance, on the borders\nof the sky, there are hovering sounds.\nNot only do we recall the past, but the\nPast overtakes us and penetrates us with\n\nhungry yearning; the ray of Life is\nbroken into singularly distinct colors,\n'Towards the vesper, existence gradually\ngrows fresher and stronger.\"? — Richter,\nFlegeljabre.\n\nPerhaps as a contrast to this silence\nof the sleeping Pan, the Nymphs recall\nthe old Greek tradition of his terrible\nvoice, wherewith he even alarmed the\nTitans fighting against Jove. In battle,\nalso, his cry was sometimes heard, and\nwe still retain the expression of the sud-\nden, collective terror it was supposed to\ninspire, in our word panic.\n\n41. The Emperor burns and all bis\nthrong.\n\nAlthough this scene is generally ac-\ncepted as symbolizing Revolution, its\ncharacter is not so clear and consistent\nas to forbid other interpretations. The\nEmperor's account of his vision during\nthe magic conflagration, given in the\nnext scene, scarcely harmonizes with\nan allegorical representation of his own\noverthrow; and there are various de-\ntails — such as the Dwarfs (Gnomes)\nbeing the conductors of the Emperor to\nthe fount of fire, the Herald holding\nthe wand which Plutus afterwards uses\nto quench the flame—to which we\ncannot easily give a political symbolism.\n\nI have quoted Kreyssig's view (Note\n38), and here add that of Késtlin:\n'© When Pan, or the Emperor, arrives\nwith his suite, a deputation of the\nGnomes, the spirits of the metals, ad-\nvances and conducts him to the flowing\ngold in the chest of Plutus, which they\nhave just discovered. The chief object\n\nof the Carnival Masquerade is there-\nwith fulfilled ; the Emperor is solemnly\ndeclared to be lord of the inexhaustible\nstore of metals hidden in the earth.\nThen the whole, since it is only illusion\nand pleasantry, apparently terminates\nterribly,... . not the Revolution, as\nDintzer's gloomy interpretation asserts,\nbut, as it is immediately afterwards\nstyled, a cheerful \" jugglery of flame,\"\nwhich terrifies only to banter, and also\nserves, through the seeming terror and\nthe speedy quelling of the conflagration,\nto show the magic art of Faust in its\nentire glory. At the most, there is\nherein a hint that wealth may result in\ndamage, and that al] material splendor\nis threatened with the danger of anni-\nhilation.\"\n\nIt is possible that the scene may be\na phantasmagoric picture of the conse-\nquences of the new financial scheme,\nwhich the Emperor has just (uncon-\nsciously) authorized. Most of the\nGerman commentators, however, accept\nthe theory of \"* Revolution.\" There is\nnothing, indeed, to prevent us from\napplying both solutions at the same\ntime.\n\nSome have supposed that the burning\nof the Emperor and the surrounding\nmasks was suggested by the terrible\nconflagration which occurred: at the\n\nball given by Prince Schwarzenberg to:\n\nNapoleon, at Paris, in 1810. But it 1s\nmuch more likely that Goethe remem-\nbered the following passage from\nGottfried's Chronik, which he must\nhave read as a boy: ' About two\nyears afterwards (1394), when things\n\nFaust\n\nwerea little better for the King (Charles\nVI. of France), divers lords sought to\ndo him a pleasure, to which end, on\nCaroli day in January, they arranged a\nmasque and disguised six of themselves\nin the likeness of Satyrs or wild men.\nThe garment which they had on was\ntight, lying close upon the body, thereto\nsmeared with pitch or tar, whereon tow\nhung like as hair, that so they appeared\nrough and savage. This pleased the\nKing so well that he was fain to be the\nseventh, and in like form. Now it\nwas at night, and they must use torches,\nbecause this dance was begun in the\npresence of the ladies. The King came\nthus disguised to the Duchesse de\nBerry, and, to her thinking, made him-\nself all too silly and rude, wherefore\nshe held him fast and let him not go\ntill she should find who he was. But\nas he did not disclose himself, che\nDuc d'Orleans, who was beholding\nthe dance, took a torch from the hand\nof a servant, and lighted under the\nKing's face, whence caught the pitch\non the fool's-garment, and the King\nbegan to burn. Now when the others\nsaw such, forgot they their garments,\nran thither, and would quench the\nKing's blaze; but they were in like\nguise caught by the flame, and because\nevery one hurried to the King, four of\nthose French gentlemen were burned\nso miserably that they thereupon\ndied. 'Truly the King was preserved,\nand no particular injury to his body,\nbut because of the fright and the great\noutcry he fell again into his former\nmadness.\"\n\nNotes.\n\n42. So bear and see the fortune-freight-\ned leaf.\n\nCarnival and Allegory close together,\nand with this scene we return to Faust,\nand his experiences at the Court of the\nEmperor. As I have already remarked,\nthe Emperor's description of what he\nsaw in the realm of fire does not at all\nharmonize with the Revolutionary solu-\ntion, whence Dintzer, who holds fast\nto the latter, is obliged to surmise that\nGoethe must have forgotten the close\nof the foregoing scene when he wrote\nthe commencement of this! I should\nmuch prefer to believe that Goethe al-\nlowed one part of his duplicate allegory\nto drop (its purpose having been ful-\nfilled), and here introduces the Empe-\nror's vision as a further explanation of\nthe other part, —a deceptive picture of\nthe additional splendor and homage\nwhich shall foilow the new financial\nscheme. Mephistopheles falls ironically\ninto the same strain, and scoffs while he\nseems adroitly to flatter.\n\nThe paper-money device was proba-\nbly suggested by the history of John\nLaw's operations in Paris, under the\nOrleans Regency,— from 1716 to\n1720. It is also likely that Goethe re-\nmembered a passage in Pope's epistle\nto Lord Bathurst (\"On the Use of\nRiches\") : —\n\n** Blest paper-credit! last and best supply !\nThat lends corruption lighter wings to fly !\nGold imp'd by thee, can compass hardest\n\nthings,\nCan pocket states, can fetch or carry kings;\nA single leaf shall waft an army o'er,\nOr ship off senates to some distant shore;\n\nA leaf, like Sibyl's, scatter to and fro\n\nOur fates and fortunes as the winds shall blow;\n\nPregnant with thousands flits the scrap un-\nseen,\n\nAnd silent sells a king or buys a queen.\"\n\nEckermann writes, December 27,\n1829: '* After dinner, to-day, Goethe\nread to me the paper-money scene.\n\n«¢ You will remember,' said he,\n'that at the Imperial Council the bur-\nden of the song is that money is lacking,\nand Mephistopheles promises to furnish\nit. This subject runs through the\nMasquerade, wherein Mephistopheles\nso manages that the Emperor, in the\nmask of the great Pan, signs a paper,\nwhich, receiving the value of money\nfrom his signature, is then a thousand-\nfold copied and circulated. Now in\nthis new scene the circumstance is dis-\ncussed before the Emperor, who does\nnot yet know what he has done. The\nTreasurer hands over the bank-notes,\nand explains the transaction. The\nEmperor, at first angry, but after a\ncloser comprehension of his gain delight-\ned, bestows the new paper-money lav-\nishly upon the circle around him, and\nfinally, in leaving, drops several thou-\nsand crowns, which the fat Foo] gathers\ntogether and then hastens at once to\nchange from paper into real estate.'\n\n**Scarcely had the scene been read\nand some remarks concerning it been\nexchanged, when Goethe's son came\ndown and took his seat at the table.\nHe spoke of Cooper's last romance,\nwhich he had just read, and which he\nvery intelligently discussed. We made\nno reference to the scene which had\n\nbeen read, but he began, of his own ac-\ncord, to talk of the Prussian treasury-\nnotes, and that they were taken at more\nthan their actual value. While the\nyoung Goethe thus spoke, I looked at\nthe father with a smile which he an-\nswered, and we thereby showed that\nwe both felt the seasonable character of\nthe scene.\"\n\nSoret reports, in 1830: '* Goethe\nmentioned his want of faith in paper-\nmoney, and gave reasons based on his\nown experience. As another evidence\nhe related to us an anecdote of Grimm,\nin the time of the French Revolution,\nwhen the latter, who was no longer safe\nin Paris, returned to Germany and was\nliving in Gotha.\"? Goethe then de-\nscribed how Grimm, one day at dinner,\nhad exhibited his lace sleeve-ruffles, de-\nclaring that no king in Europe possessed\nso costly a pair. The others estimated\ntheir value at from one to two hundred\nlouis d'or; whereupon he laughed and\nsaid: 'I actually paid 250,000 francs\nfor them, and was lucky to get that\nmuch for my assignats, which, the next\nday, were not worth a farthing.\"\n\nThe purpose of the scene, as a part\nof the plot, is to procure Faust a posi-\ntion at the Imperial] Court. The char-\nacter of its satire is drawn from sub-\njective sources, and hence—since all\nsuccessful satire must have a basis of\ngenerally evident truth—is only par-\ntially effective.\n\nThey house within their special\nHades.\n\nGoethe now returns to the original\n\nFaust\n\nFaust-legend (vide Appendix I., Firse\nPart) in giving Faust the task of invok-\ning the shades of Paris and Helena. In\nthe legend, however, Mephistopheles\nvoluntarily produces Helena asa succuba,\nto be the spouse of Faust: here he re-\nmains true to his Gothic character and\nhis negation of Beauty. The heathen\nrace, he confesses, has its own special\nHades, with which he has no concern.\nHis disinclination to assist Faust is so\nvery evident that we may almost as-\ncribe to him an instinct of the elevating\nand purifying influence which Helena,\nas the symbol of the Beautiful, will after-\nwards exercise. Being, nevertheless,\nbound by the terms of the compact, he\nconsents to point out the method of in-\nvocation, leaving the performance to\nFaust.\n\n44. They are Tue Mortuess!\n\nHere is the second enigma, a com-\nplete and satisfactory solution of which\nis not to be expected. I will first quote\nall that Goethe himself has said in re-\nlation to this passage. On the roth\nof January, 1830, Eckermann writes:\n\"'To-day, as a supplement to the\ndinner, Goethe gave me a great enjoy-\nment, by reading to me the scene where\nFaust goes to the Mothers. The new,\nunsuspected character of the subject,\ntogether with the tone and manner in\nwhich Goethe recited the scene, took\nhold of me with wonderful power, so\nthat I found myself at once in the con-\ndition of Faust, who feels a shudder\ncreep over him when Mephistopheles\nmakes the communication.\n\nNotes. 459\n\n«JT had heard and clearly compre-\nhended the description, but so much of\nit remained enigmatical to me that I felt\nmyself forced to beg Goethe to enlight-\nen me a little. He, however, accord-\ning to his usual habit, assumed a myste-\nrious air, looking at me with wide-open\neyes and repeating the words : —\n\nThe Mothers! Mothers! It sounds so singular!\n\n«©¢T can only betray so much,' he\nthen said, 'that in reading Plutarch, I\nfound that in Grecian antiquity the\nMothers are spoken of as Goddesses.\nThis is all which I have borrowed,\nhowever ; the remainder is my own in-\nvention. You may take the manuscript\nhome with you, study it carefully, and\nsce what success you will have with\nit.' 99\n\nRiemer, in his Mitthetlungen aber\nGoethe, relates that during a season at\nCarlsbad, the latter read the whole of\nPlutarch's Morals, in Kaltwasser's trans-\nlation. '¢ This,\" says Riemer, ' gave\nus material for conversation at the table,\nor in our walks, and the enigmatical\n'Mothers' in Faust may have remained\nin Goethe's memory from some one of\nthese occasions. For when he ques-\ntioned me on this point twenty years\nafterwards — perhaps about the time\nwhen he wished to use the material in\nworking on Faust — I could not immedi-\nately say where the Mothers were to be\nfound; but he then remembered that he\nhad read of them in Plutarch. At first\nI could not find the passages, and neg-\nlected or forgot to make further search ;\nbut, after his death, when I arranged\n\nthe manuscript of Faust, memory and\nresearch awoke again. I found both\npassages, but did not quote them because\nthey give no explanation of the use\nwhich Goethe has made of those mystic\ndzmons.\"\n\nPlutarch's mention of the Mothers,\nhowever, is not to be found in his Mo-\nralia, but in the Life of Marcellus:\n\"< In Sicily there is a town called Engy-\njum, not indeed great, but very ancient\nand ennobled by the presence of the\nGoddesses, called the Mothers. The\ntemple, they say, was built by the Cre-\ntans; and they show some spears and\nbrazen helmets, inscribed with the\nnames of Mcriones, and (with the same\nspelling as in Latin) of Ulysses, who\nconsecrated them to the Goddesses.\"\n\nHartung has discovered another pas-\nsage in Plutarch (De Defect. Orac. 22),\nwherein the Mothers are not mentioned,\nit is true, but which Goethe evidently\nbore in his mind and applied in this\nscene: 'There are a hundred and\neighty-three worlds, which are arranged\nin the form of a triangle. Each side\nhas sixty worlds in a line, the other\nthree occupying the corners. In this\norder they touch each other softly, and\never revolve, as in a dance. The\nspace within the triangle is to be con-\nsidered as a common fold for all, and is\ncalled the Field of Truth. Within it\nlie, moveless, the causes, shapes, and\nprimitive images of all things which\nhave ever existed and which ever shall\nexist. They are surrounded by Eternity,\nfrom which Time flows forth as an\neffuence upon the worlds.\"\n\nThe reader must bear in mind that\nParis and Helena are together typical of\nthe highest and purest physical embodi-\nment of the idea of Beauty —the Hu-\nman Form (vide Note 87 to the First\nPart), and that Helena, alone, afterwards\nbecomes the symbol, both of Beauty\nand of the Classic element in Art and\nLiterature. The Mothers, therefore,\n(admitting the significance of the name,\nwhich suggested their use to Goethe)\nmust of necessity symbolize the original\naction of those elemental forces in\nMan, out of which grew the esthetic\ndevelopment of the race, in whatever\nform. We may find the primitive\nsource of all science in material neces-\nsity; our other knowledge is based\nupon the operation of natural laws:\nbut the Idea of the Beautiful has a more\nmysterious origin, springs from a diviner\nnecessity, and finds only hints, not per-\nfect results, in the operations of Nature.\n\nGoethe made it a rule to discover\nsome positive, however dimly outlined,\nForm, in which to clothe abstract ideas.\nThis is always a difficult and sometimes\na hazardous experiment. Here the\nforms, instead of more clearly represent-\ning, seem to have further confused the\nthought, if we may judge from the vari-\nety of interpretations which have been\noffcred. Dr. Anster has managed to\npresent the latter with so much brevity,\nand at the same time so correctly, in his\nnote on this passage, that I follow the\norder of his summary, only enlarging\nit by the introduction of additional\nviews and giving a translation of the\nphrases he quotes.\n\nFaust.\n\nEckermann, after taking home Goe-\nthe's manuscript and duly pondering\nover it, evolved out of his inmost con-\nsciousness the discovery that the Moth-\ners are the 'creating and sustaining\nprinciple, from which everything pro-\nceeds that has life and form on the sur-\nface of the Earth.\" Késtlin denies that\nthey are creative, but says they are the\nsustaining and conservative principle,\nadding: ** They are Goddesses, who\npreside over the eternal metamorphoses\nof things, of all that already exists.\"\nDintzer calls the Mothers the ' primi-\ntive forms (or ideas) of things,\" —\nUrbilder der Dinge. But, according to\nRosenkranz, they are \"the Platonic\nIdeas,\" while Hartung, agreeing with\nDiintzer that they are \" the primitive\nforms of things,\" adds that 'they\ndwell in the desert of speculative\nthought.\" Weisse states that they are\n'<«the formless realm of the inner world\nof spirit—the invisible depth of the\nmind, struggling to bring forth its\nown conceptions.\" From this view it\nis but a step to the matrices of Paracel-\nsus, which, in fact, we find partly ac-\ncepted by Deycks, who sees in the\nMothers, as in the matrices, \"the ele-\nmental or original material of all forms.\"\nRiemer's view is substantially the same,\n— 'they are the elements from which\nspring all that is corporeal as well as all\nthat is intellectual.\"\n\nThe theories which most of the\nabove critics spin from these interpre-\ntations are too finely and consistently\nmetaphysical to have been intended\nby a poet like Goethe, whose nature\n\nNotes.\n\nrecoiled from metaphysical systems.\nNevertheless, they are all guesses in the\nsame direction, and perhaps if we do\nnot attach too literal a significance to\nGoethe's mysterious Deep, wherein is\nno Space, Place, or Time, and are\ncontent to stop short of the very ' ut-\nterly deepest bottom\" of conjecture,\nwe may get a little nearer to his actual\nconception, It is not easy to conceive\nhow Formlessness can be represented\nby Form, though we may very well\naccept it as a vast, mysterious back-\nground; and this is all, I feel sure, that\nGoethe intended.\n\nSchnetger has picked up the most\nsatisfactory clew, Kreyssig has followed\nit, and Goethe himself has given us an\nunconscious hint of its correctness. The\ncommentary of the first is much too\nlong to be quoted, but it is substantially\nthis: The primitive idea of forms does\nnot exist in Nature, which works ac-\ncording to the pattern set by a First\nDesigner. The realm of the original\nconceptions of things is therefore out-\nside of Space and Time, and the Moth-\ners are imaginary existences, who typify\nthe unknown and unfathomable origin\nof all forms, and chiefly, here, of those\neternal Ideals of Beauty which become\nmore real to the Poet and Artist than\nthe never utterly perfect work of Na-\nture.\n\nKreyssig says: ** The poet evidently\n\nprepares to lead the character of his\n\nhero towards that refining and purifying\nexperience, to which he himself con-\nsciously owed his greatest gain and his\nhighest joy, — the refinement following\n\nan earnest, creative worship of those\nideals of Beauty which have descended\nto earth in the masterpieces of classic\nart. With what fervor Goethe and\nhis equal friend (Schiller) reverenced\nthese, with what sacred fecling, what\nsevere, devoted solemnity they served\nat the same shrine, their common\nactivity Is a single, continuous evidence.\nGoethe, especially, dated a new life, a\ncomplete spiritual regeneration, from\nhis penetration into the spirit of the\nancient masters. A profound with-\ndrawal into himself, an almost abrupt\nrelinquishment of the society around him,\ncharacterized the first earnest beginning\nof his studies. .... Only a firm,\nmanly resolution leads Faust to the sa-\ncred tripod, the primitive symbol of\nWisdom, through the contact of which\nhe wins power over the primitive\nforms of things, over the radical con-\nditions of that beautiful state of be-\ning, accordant with Nature, which the\nArtist must know before he can * call\nthe Hero and Heroine from the\nShades,'\"' and create imperishable forms\nas the fair material revelations of his\ndreams. What Goethe here celebrates\nunder the form of the Mothers en-\nthroned in Solitude, is sung by Schiller,\nif our instinct does not deceive us,\nin that thoughtful poem, \"of the re-\ngions where the pure forms dwell.'\"' *\nIn Eckermann's third volume, he de-\nscribes a conversation which he had\nwith Goethe, during a drive along the\nErfurt road, in April, 1827: «I must\nlaugh at the zstheticians (£sthetiker),'\n® Das Ideal und das Leben.\n\nsaid Goethe, 'who so torment them-\nselves to epitomize in a few abstract\nwords all the unutterable ideas for\nwhich we use the expression, deautiful.\nThe Beautiful is a primeval phenomenon,\nwhich indeed never becomes visible itself,\nbut the reflection of which is seen in\na thousand various expressions of the\ncreative mind, as various and as mani-\nfold, even, as the phenomena of Na-\nture.'\n\n«¢¢T have often heard it said,' Ecker-\nmann remarked, ¢ that Nature is always\nbeautiful, —that she is the despair of\nthe artist, because he is seldom capable\nof fully equalling her.'\n\n«<¢T well know,' Goethe answered,\n'that Nature often exhibits an unattain-\nable charm; but I am by no means of\nthe opinion that she is beautiful in all\nher manifestations. Her designs are\nalways well enough, indeed, but not so\nthe conditions which are necessary in\norder that the designs shall be completely\ndeveloped.'\"\n\nThe realm where the Mothers dwell\nis visible to the secret vision of the Poet\nand the Artist. The Goddesses only\nsee \"' wraiths'; around them is *¢ For-\nmation, transformation\"; there is no\nway to them, and no spot whcreon to\nrest, — but who and where they are is\nclearly revealed in\n\n| The light that never was on sea or land,\nThe consecration and the poet's dream.\"\n\nThey are the unknown, \" unreachable,\"\n«© unbeseechable \" sources of all immor-\ntal embodiments of Beauty, — the mys-\nterious, primeval forces which manifest\n\nFaust.\n\nthemselves through Genius in a manner\n\ninexplicable to all ordinary human con-\n\nsciousness; which remove those who\nknow them far from Space and Time,\ninto a spiritual isolation which only the\nbrother-genius can comprehend, but\neven he cannot share.\n\nIn the Dedication to his Poems,\n\nGoethe thus addresses the Muse : —\n\n6 While yet unguided, I had many comrades ;\nNow that I know thee, I am left alone.\"\nThere might seem a contradiction to\n\nthe purely zsthetic interpretation of this\nscene, in the circumstance that Faust is\ndirected to the Mothers by Mepbis-\ntopbeles, but here, as occasionally else-\nwhere in the Second Part, the mask of\nMephistopheles drops and we see the\nface of Goethe himself. 'To insist on\nthe rdle of Negation, which explains\nthe forms assumed by Mephistopheles\nin the Carnival Masquerade, the Clas-\nsical Walpurgis-Night, and the Helena,\nwould lead to great confusion. 'There\nis, however, a partial return to dramat-\nic truth in the expression of Faust, that\nhe hopes to find his All in the Nothing\nof Mephistopheles.\n\n45. Here, take this key!\nThe symbols of the Key and the\n\nTripod have also given rise to much\nspeculation. 'Their meaning, of course,\nis entirely dependent upon that which\nmay be attributed to the Mothers, since\nthe key is to guide Faust to the latter,\n\ne e e °\nand then enable him to gain possession.\n\nof the tripod, the incense-smoke of\nwhich will shape itself into the ideals\nof Human Beauty. Schnetger and\n\n| Notes.\n\nKreyssig agree that the tripod is a sym-\nbol of the profoundest wisdom, and the\nformer attaches to it the idea of *in-\ntuition.\"\" What we call the intuition\nof Genius, however, is the highest and\npurest form of wisdom, and Goethe,\ntherefore, may have intended to typify\nthat wondrous, unerring instinct, which\nfrom the *' airy nothing \" of the incense-\nsmoke can evoke the immortal Beautiful.\nSchnetger considers the key to be a\n«' glowing sense of the charms of the\nWith others, it is a\nsymbol of intense, passionate Desire.\nIf Goethe had specially in view the\ncreation of ideals of Beauty by the Gre-\ncian mind, still other meanings would be\nsuggested. We must seek é# Nature forthe\nkeys tothe myths of Greece, which, them-\nselves, were designed to be keys ¢o Nature.\n\nWhat Mr. Ruskin says of the works\nof Homer: '* They were not conceived\ndidactically, but they are didactic in\ntheir essence, as all good art is\" — is\nequally true of this and other episodes\nof the Second Part of Faust. We find\ntraces of that truth which reaches the\npoet by a deeper intuition, having the\ninvoluntary nature, yet also the distinct-\nness, of a dream; and which always\ncontains more than its utterer can\nclearly express. He cannot reject it,\nfor it comes to him with an irresistible\nauthority : he must therefore be silent,\nand suffer it to stand as a mystery for\nhis contemporaries.\n\nmaterial form.''\n\n46. A gentle kick permit, then, from\nmy foot !\nThe motive of this scene seems to be,\n\nto renew the contrast between the\nshallow, artificial society of the great\nworld, and pure devotion to ideal aims.\nAt the same time it enables Mephis-\ntopheles to resume his old character,\nand Goethe (through him) to satirize\nthe homeopathic theory of medicine, in\nthe cure of the Brunette.\n\nIn the Paralipomena there are two\nfragments which seem to _ belong\nhere : —\n\nMEPpHISTOPHELES.\n\nCourt-doctors must do every service:\nWe with the stars begin, and then\nCome down at last to corns and bunions.\n\nThe dapper race of courtiers here\n\nWas only born for our vexation :\n\nIf some poor devil once is right, \"tis clear\nThe King thereof will never hear narration.\n\n47. Heratp.\n\nThe Herald, whose office is to pro-\nclaim in advance the character of the\naction, acknowledges himself baffled:\nhe sees only 'a wildering distraction \"\nin the coming performance, and there-\nfore describes the scene instead. Even\nin the few lines of description there is\na covert satire. The Emperor is placed\nwhere he may comfortably see the pic-\ntures of battles; in the background are\nlovers, who recognize in the occasion\nonly an opportunity for coming to-\ngether.\n\nGoethe intended at one time to in-\ntroduce a play, as in \" Hamlet,\" and he\nappears to have chosen Fortinbras,\nHamlet's successor, as the hero. The\n\nfragment of a scene which remains\ngives us no hint of the character of the\nplay, nor can we be certain that it\nwould have been introduced in connec-\ntion with the appearance of Paris and\nHelena. Nevertheless, the fragment\nmay be here given : —\n\nTHEATRE.\n\n(The actor, who plays the King, appears to have\n\nbecome weary.)\n\nMepuistorxrres. Bravo, old Fortinbras, old\nYou are feeling badly; from my heart\nMake an effort, — only a\nWe shall not soon again\n\nchap !\nI'm sorry for you.\nfew words more!\nhear a King talk.\nCHANCELLOR. Instead of that, we shall have\nthe fortune, to hear the wise remarks of His\nMajesty the Emperor so much the oftener.\nMepuistorneces. That is something very\ndifferent.\nWhat we other wizards say is quite unprejudi-\ncial.\nFaust. Hush! hush! he moves again.\nActor. Depart, thou ancient swan, depart!\nBlessed be thou for thy last song, and all the\ngood which thou hast spoken. The evil, which\nthou wert obliged to do, is small\nLorp Hicu Stewarp. Do not speak so loud !\nThe Emperor sleeps; His Majesty does not\nseem well.\n\nYour Excellency need not protest.\n\nMepruistorugces. His Majesty has only to\n\ngive the order, and we will cease. Besides, the\n\nspirits have nothing more to say.\n\nWhy do you look around?\nMrruistorneces. Where, then, are the\n\napes hidden? [I hear them talking all the\n\ntime.\n\nFaust.\n\n48. ARCHITECT.\n\nThe scene upon the stage is a Doric\ntemple; the massive character of the\npillars is here hinted, and the triglyphs\n\n_ that at Cologne.\n\nFaust.\n\nare afterwards mentioned. By intro-\nducing the Architect, Goethe means\nnot only to satirize the exclusive devo-\ntion of the German mind to Gothic art,\nbut also to show how the Classic and\nRomantic repel each other when first\nbrought into contact. It was simply\nnecessary that he should remember the\ncharacter of his own development. In\n1772 he published an essay \"* On Ger-\nman Architecture\" (the word German\nbeing purposely used instead of Gothic),\ncontaining a glowing panegyric on\nErwin von Steinbach, the architect of\nStrasburg Cathedral. Yet in 1810 he\nwrote to Count Reinhard: '* Formerly\nI had also a great interest in these things,\nand cherished a sort of idolatry for the\nStrasburg Cathedral, the facade of which\nI still consider, as then, greater than\nBut the most singular\nthing to me is our German patriotism,\nwhich endeavors to represent the evi-\ndent Saracenic growth as having origi-\nnally sprung up on German soil.\"\n\nThe Doric temples at Girgenti and\nPzstum produced such a profound im-\npression upon Goethe's mind, that, by,\na natural reaction, he was for a time\nrepelled by Gothic art. In describing\nthe architrave of the Temple of An-\ntoninus and Faustina, in Rome, he\nwrote: \" This is indeed something\nother than our cringing saints of the\nfinical Gothic spirit, piled one over\nanother on brackets and _ corbels, —\nsomething other than our tobacco-pipe\ncolumns, pointed turrets and flowery\npinnacles. From these, thank God, I\nam now eternally delivered ! \"\n\nNotes.\n\n49. Whate'er once was, there burns and\nbrightens free\nIn splendor — for *t would fain\neternal be.\n\nFaust's invocation, it seems to me,\ncannot easily be interpreted from any\nother point of view than that which I\nhave chosen for the Mothers. The\nexpression '* Whate'er once was\" cer-\ntainly does not apply to all forms of\nLife upon the earth —still less to ab-\nstract thoughts, speculations, or philo-\nsophical systems. What can it be but\nall creations of Beauty, whether lost to\nthe world or still possessed? They\nwould fain be eternal, and the Artist\nnever admits to himself that they have\nactually perished. In that mysterious\nrealm of the imagination where their\nforms were first designed, they still\nexist as \"* wraiths,\" in company with\nall those forms which never advanced\nfrom design to fulfilment, — with the\nunwritten poems of Homer, and Dante,\nand Shakespeare, the unchiselled gods\nof Phidias, the completed Dawn of\nMichel Angelo, the unpainted dreams\nof Tintoretto and Raphael. I interpret\nthe line: —\n\n\" Life seizes some, along his gracious course,\"\n\nas referring less to the life of these con-\nceptions in Art, than to the occasional\nrevelations of the Beautiful in Man and\nNature. The Magician, who arrests\nother forms, and ** bestows as his faith\ninspires\"? would then be the Artist,\nwhose nature is for the time (as we\nhave already seen) typified in Faust.\n\nWho doth not know the gentle\nParis well?\n\n§0.\n\nThe description of the Doric temple\nfirst prepares us for the apparition of\nthe Grecian ideals of Beauty, and now\nthe mysterious music, the ringing of the\nshafts and triglyphs, the singing of the\nwhole bright temple, is introduced with\nwonderful effect. When Paris advances\n\"'with rhythmic step,\" we have a sug-\ngestion of Poetry, in addition to Music\nand Architecture, so that al] Art cele-\nbrates the coming of the highest dream\nof Beauty in the Human Form.\n\nThe personages of the Imperial Court\nnot only represent, through their com-\nments on Paris and Helena, the manner\nin which the Artist's purest achieve-\nments present themselves to common-\nplace and conventional natures, but, if\nRiemer be correct, they have a personal\ncharacter, also. He says: '*To the\nWeimar public, or rather to the privi-\nleged persons of the Weimar Court cir-\ncle, there was an element of interest which\nwe cannot feel: the six or seven ladies\nand gentlemen who take part in the dia-\nlogue represented well-known persons.\"\n\nThis scene may have been suggested\nby one of Count Hamilton's tales,\n«© The Enchanter Faustus,'\"? wherein the\nlatter calls up Helen of Troy, and other\nwomen noted for their beauty, before\nQueen Elizabeth and her Court. The\nimpression which Helen makes upon\nthe Queen and courtiers is so similar to\nGoethe's description, that I quote a por-\ntion of it: —\n\n«« This figure walked a certain time\n\nbefore the company, and then turning\nface to face with the queen, that she\nmight have a better view of her, took\nleave of her with a kind of half-pleasant,\nhalf-haggard smile, and went out by the\nother door.\n\n«* As soon as she had disappeared, the\nqueen exclaimed, 'What! is that the\nlovely Helen? Well, I don't plume\nmyself on my beauty,' she continued,\n'but may I die, if I would change faces\nwith her, even if it were possible.'\n\n\"©«T told your majesty as much,' re-\nplied the magician, 'and yet you saw\nher exactly as she appeared when in the\nvery zenith of her beauty.'\n\n«© Still,' said Lord Essex, 'I think\nher eyes may be considered fine.'\n\n«¢Tt must be admitted,' rejoined\nSydney, 'that they are large, nobly\nshaped, black, and sparkling, but what\nexpression is there in them ?'\n\n'«« Not a particle,' replied the favor-\nite. The queen, whose face that day\nwas as red as a turkey-cock's, asked\nthem what they thought of Helen's por-\ncelain complexion.\n\n«© ¢ Porcelain!' cried Essex, *'tis but\ncommon delf at the best.'\n\n*¢* Perhaps,' continued the queen,\n'such may have been the fashion in her\ntime, but you must agree with me that\nthere never could have been an age\nwhen such a pair of feet would be tol-\nerated. I don't dislike her dress, how-\never, and I'm not sure whether I shall\nnot bring it into fashion instead of those\nhorrid hoops, so embarrassing on certain\noccasions to us women, and on others to\nyou men.' \"\n\nFaust.\n\n51. The form, that long erewhile my\nfancy captured.\n\nThis is one of the few references to\nthe First Part, which we find in the\nSecond. Faust remembers the form\nwhich he saw in the magic mirror, in\nthe Witches' Kitchen (First Part, Scene\nVI.), and which, we may now be sure,\nwas neither Margaret nor Helena, bur,\nas I have already stated, the beauty of\nthe female form. There, it was the vis-\nible beauty, as it is more or less devel-\noped in every living form: here, it is\nthe perfect Ideal. Let the reader com-\npare the expression of Faust's passion for\n\nMargaret (First Part, Scene XII.) : —\n\nTo yield one wholly, and to feel a rapture,\nIn yielding, that must be eternal !\nEternal ! — for the end would be despair.\nNo, no, —no ending! no ending !\nwith the ecstasy following the revelation\nof an esthetic Ideal : —\n\n°T is thou, to whom the stir of all my forces,\nThe essence of my passion's forces, —\nLove, fancy, worship, madness, — here I render!\n\nand the meaning of the passage cannot\nbe doubtful to any one who appreciates\nthe fine spiritual passion which possesses\nthe Poet and the Artist.\n\nKreyssig alone, of all the German\ncommentators, scems to have compre-\nhended the spirit of this scene. He\nsays: \"The Artist has seen his Ideal.\nHis joy, his yearning, rises to a burning\ndesire, to a resolution so powerful that\nnothing can intimidate it. Again the\nold, passionate blood seethes, although\nnow warmed by a nobler fire. The\nimpetuous, rash attempt to win at one\n\nNotes.\n\nblow as a permanent possession that\nwhich has only been revealed in a fleet-\ning glimpse, fails, like his former attempt,\nthrough that radical law, which only\ngives the most precious gifts in return\nfor labor and patience. The apparition\nvanishes, and in the abrupt reaction we\nsee him, who would fain be superhuman,\nlying senseless on the earth, The\nfirst assault of his ambitious claim has\nbeen resisted, but his resolution remains\nirrevocable. He cannot, now, remain\nlonger at the Emperor's Court. The\nman of ideal vision and creation must\nequally fail to find his place there,\nas formerly among the dissolute groups\nof the Blocksberg. 'The period of his\nintellectually-artistic development and\nmaturity commences, and the poet inau-\ngurates it by a series of sometimes va-\nried and fantastic allegories, in order to\ncomplete it afterwards in the Third Act,\nthe scenes of which are excellent and\ntruly dramatic, in spite of all their sym-\nbolism and allegory.\"\n\nIt is a great consolation to find a view\nwhich one can so heartily and totally\naccept.\n\nI call the piece: The Rape of\n\nHelena.\n\nThe Astrologer, apparently, only\nuses this expression in order to excite\nFaust by the apprehension of loss, and\nthus bring about the catastrophe with\n\nwhich the act closes. In the line,\nHere foothold is! Realities here centre!\n\nwe have a striking contrast to Faust's\nimpatience and disgust with the results\n\nof all knowledge, in the opening mono-\nlogue of the First Part. It is almost a\nprophecy of that supreme content which\nwould delay the flying Moment; and\nMephistopheles might hope soon to\nclaim his wager, but for the circum-\nstance that his negative nature is utterly\nincapable of comprehending Faust's pas-\nsion for the Beautiful.\n\nSchnetger says: ** The title (The\nRape of Helena) simply means to ex-\npress more clearly that the form was\nonly a prophetic vision, and now van-\nishes; that Faust is not yet sufficiently\nadvanced to retain the Beautiful; that\nHelena, the highest ideal of Art, re-\nsembles that form of the Shades, which\nseems so near that Faust cries: ' How\ncan she nearer be!' and yet is ever\nstolen from him who would too im-\npetuously grasp her.\"\n\nMr. Lowell, in his poem of ** Hebe,\"\nexpresses the same idea : —\n\n\"© spendthrift Haste! await the Gods ;\n\nTheir nectar crowns the lips of Patience ;\n\nHaste scatters on unthankful sods\nThe immortal gift in vain libations.\"\n\nThere is one slight concluding puzzle\nin this scene. If the key which Faust\nholds represents Desire, why should it\nbe aimed (in the manner of a pistol)\nagainst Paris? The latter is here a part\n\nof the ideal Beauty. If the act indicates\n\nmore than Faust's unthinking rashness,\nI cannot explain it.\n\nMEPHISTOPHELES (coming forth\nfrom behind a curtain).\n\n53-\n\nIn December, 1829, Goethe read the\nopening scene of the Second Act to Eck-\n\nermann. At its close, he said: ** The\nconception is so old, and I have so car-\nried and considered it in my mind for fifty\nyears, that the material has greatly in-\ncreased, and my most difficult work, at\npresent, consists in selection and rejec-\ntion. The invention of the entire Second\nPart of Faust is really as old as I say.®\nHence it may bean advantage to the work,\nthat I now write it, after all the affairs\nof life have become so much clearer to\nme. My experience is like that of one\nwho possesses in youth a great many\nsmall silver and copper coins, which he\ngradually exchanges in the course of his\nlife, until he finally sees all his early\nwealth lying before him as pieces of\npure gold.\"\n\nIf, as seems probable from the evi-\ndence, the dialogue between Mephis-\n_ topheles and the Baccalaureus was writ-\nten some thirty or forty years before,\nthe opening pages of the scene may un-\ndoubtedly be referred to the year 1829.\nWhat Goethe says of its conception\nmust not be taken too literally). We\nmay guess that his first intention was to\ngive Faust a part to play in his old\nGothic chamber: the reappearance of\nthe Student of the First Part as Baccalau-\nreus seems t be hardly a sufficient mo-\ntive for the return to Place and the pur-\nposed contrast of Time. Mephistophe-\nles, whose part, throughout the period\nof Faust's esthetic development (Acts\n\n* Gocthe must mean, here, the original con-\nception or ground-plan of the whole, certainly\nnot the arrangement of the separate scenes or\nthe introduction of episodes which were sug-\ngested at a much later date,\n\nFaust.\n\nII. and III.), is supposed to be Igno-\nrance as well as Negation, forgets him-\nself in almost the first words he\nspeaks : —\n\n\"* Whom Helena shall paralyze\nNot soon hi3 reason will recover.\"\n\nThe Idea of the Beautiful is this * in-\nsane root,\" which, in the eyes of con-\nventional humanity, takes the Artist's\nreason prisoner. Faust lies senseless\nuntil he reaches the Pharsalian Fields,\nin the Classical Walpurgis-Night, and\nGoethe, meanwhile, becomes prompter\nto Mephistopheles, as the latter was to\nthe Astrologer. The reader must be\nwarned not to expect any dramatic con-\nsistency in this and the following scene.\nWhile writing them, the First Part, it\nis very evident, was constantly before\nGoethe's mind, not as a still secret and\nvital inspiration, but as something gone\nfrom him forever, something considered,\njudged and set in its place by the world,\nshorn of the joy of private possession\nand powerless to reproduce its own\noriginal power. He translates his\nthoughts from the natural language of\nAge into that of Youth, and, as in all\ntranslation, he is not quite equal to the\nOriginal.\n\n54. Crotchets forever must be batched.\n\nThere is a pun in the German which\ncannot be given. Gri//en means both\ncrickets and crotchets or splenetic humors,\nthe first reference being to the insects\nwhich Mephistopheles has shaken out\nof the old fur. In describing this act\nGoethe makes use of the word farfarel-\n\nNotes.\n\nJen to designate one variety of insects,\n— probably a mistake, intended for the\nItalian word farfalette, which has the\nsame double meaning as Gri/len.\n\nTaking these two words in connec-\ntion with the foregoing satire of Mephis-\ntopheles, we may conjecture that the\n\"Chorus of Insects\" is intended to\nrepresent all the whims, crotchets, and\ntheories of mechanical scholarship, —\nthe verminiferous life which is bred in\nthe mould of pedantry. At the close\nof Scene III., First Part, Mephistophe-\nles declares himself to be\n\n\" The lord of rats and eke of mice,\nOf flies and bedbugs, frogs and lice,\"\n\nfor which reason, apparently, the insects\nhail him as patron and father. Diintzer\nsays: \"©The Devil ridicules the dead\nscholarship, the waste and mould of the\nchamber, wherein Gri//en must ever be\nproduced : we might even suppose that\nthe insects, especially the farfalette\n(moths) and cicadas, are an indication\nof the crotchets and distorted views of\nlife to which savas are so easily dis-\n\nposed.\"\n\n§5. BaccaLaurevs,\n\nThe new Famulus, who is a spiritual\ndescendant of the Wagner of the First\nPart, is introduced to give Mephistophe-\nles the opportunity of continuing his\nirony. Some imagine that in the latter's\ndescription of the immense reputation\nand authority which Wagner has ac-\nquired Goethe intended a reference to\nthe extravagant popularity which Fichte\nenjoyed at the University of Jena. In-\n\nasmuch as the irony of the passage is\nsufficiently clear without this personal\napplication, I do not think it necessary\nto give the grounds on which the con-\njecture is based.\n\nIt seems to me evident that the con-\nversation between Mephistopheles and\nthe Baccalaureus (commencing on page\n123) is one of the earlier fragments.\nFrau von Kalb declared that Goethe\nread to her the whole or a portion of it,\nat least twelve years before the publica-\ntion of the First Part, consequently in\n1796, about which time there are pas-\nsages in the correspondence with Schiller\nwhich furnish an indirect explanation\nof some of the expressions. The Bac-\ncalaureus, moreover, is so admirable\nand consistent a continuation of the\nStudent, and Mephistopheles (except at\nthe very close of the interview) is so\nlike his old self, that the reader of the\noriginal cannot help remarking the dif-\nference inexecution. I trust there may\nbe some evidence of it in the translation.\nThe earlier passage commences at the\nline: 'If, ancient Sir,\" etc.\n\nEckermann asked Goethe whether a\ncertain class of ideal philosophers was\nnot typified in the Baccalaureus.\n\n«©No,\" said Goethe; 'he is the\npersonification of that presumption\nwhich specially belongs to youth, and\nof which we had so many striking ex-\namples in the years immediately after\nour War of Liberation. Every one,\nhowever, believes, in his young days,\nthat the world really began with him,\nand that everything exists for his indi-\nvidual sake. Thus there was once a\n\nman in the Orient, who assembled his\npeople about him every morning and\nsuffered them not to begin their labors\nuntil he had commanded the sun to rise.\nOf course he was shrewd enough not to\nutter the command until the sun was on\nthe point of rising without it.\"\n\nIn an earlier conversation (upon a\nwork of Schubart), Goethe said: «I\nhave always kept myself entirely free\nfrom Philosophy: my standpoint was\nthat of sound human understanding.\"\n\n56. But don't go, absolute, home frombere.\n\nThere is a philosophical antithesis\nimplied in the words * resolute\" and\n'«* absolute,\" in this couplet. Mephis-\ntopheles uses the former word in its\ndouble sense of determined\" and\n\"¢ dissolved,\"' while the latter, according\nto Kreyssig, is a sarcastic allusion to the\nHegelian philosophy. It would seem\nfrom what follows, however, that Goe-\nthe had Fichte in his mind, rather than\nHegel.\n\n57. When one bas passed bis thirtieth year,\nOne then is just the same as dead.\n\nThe reference to Fichte is here not\n. to be mistaken. The following passage\noccurs in his works: '* When they have\npassed their thirtieth year, one well\nmight wish, for their own reputation\nand the advantage of the world, that\nthey would die; since, from that age\non, their lives will only be an increasing\ndamage to themselves and their associa-\ntions.\"\n\nWhen Fichte first. appeared as Profes-\nsor at Jena in 1794, Goethe was very\n\nFaust.\n\nfavorably inclined towards him and his\ntheory, but the prepossession gradually\nwore away, partly in consequence of\nFichte's boundless assumption of infalli-\nbility, and partly, no doubt, from the\nindiscreet conflict of his disciples with\nthe much smaller circle around Goethe\nand Schiller. The latter writes, on\none occasion: ** According to Fichte's\nown expressions, the Me is also crea-\ntive through its representations, and all\nreality exists only in the Me. The\nworld, to him, is nothing but a ball\nwhich the Me tosses up, and which, in\nits contemplation, it catches again! He\nthus actually seems to have declared his\nown Godhood, as we recently antici-\npated.\"\n\nThe expression of the Baccalau-\nreus :\n\n\"Save through my will, no Devil can there be,\"\n\nand the magnificent glorification of the\nIdea, with which he departs from the\nchamber, certainly do not simply ex-\npress the ordinary presumption of youth.\nIf the reader will recall the stanza\nheaded \" Idealist,\" in the Intermezzo of\nthe First Part, which was also written\nin 1796 (a circumstance corroborative\nof Frau von Kalb's testimony), and\nwhich is universally accepted as a rep-\nresentation of Fichte, he will recognize\nprecisely the same features here.\n\n58. Who can think wise or stupid things\nat all,\n\nThat were not thought already in the\nPast?\n\nGoethe was acquainted with a little-\n\nNotes.\n\nknown volume of Sterne, some of the\nmaxims of which, translated by himself,\nwere found among his papers and igno-\nrantly published as original fragments\nby Eckermann and Riemer. The\nwork, which is entitled : ** The Koran,\nor Essays, Sentiments, Characters, and\nCallimachies of Tria Juncta in Uno, M.\nN. A. or Master of No Arts,\" was pub-\nlished in Viennain1798. There appears\nto have been an earlier edition ; but Iam\nunable to say, in view of certain resem-\nblances between Sterne and Lichten-\nberg, which borrowed from the other.\nThe following passage is undoubtedly\nSterne's:—\n\n«* But that nothing is new under the\nsun was declared by Solomon some\nyears ago: and it is impossible to pro-\nvide against evils that have already come\nto pass. So that I am sure I have rea-\nson to cry out, with Donatus, apud Je-\nrom — Pereant qui ante nos nostra dix-\nerunt! For I have ever wrote without\nstudy, books, or example, and yet have\nbeen charged with having borrowed this\nhint from Rabelais, that from Mon-\ntaigne, another from Martinus Scrible-\nrus, etc., without having ever read\nthe first or remembered a word of the\nlatter.\n\n\"So that, all we can possibly say of\nthe most original authors, now-a-days,\nis not that they say anything new, but\nonly that they are capable of saying such\nand such things themselves, 'if they\nhad never been said before them.' But\nas monarchs have a right to call in the\nspecie of a state, and raise its value, by\ntheir own impression ; so there are cer-\n\ntain prerogative geniuses, who are above\nplagiaries,——- who cannot be said to\nsteal, but, from their improvement of a\nthought, rather to borrow it, and repay\nthe commonwealth of letters with inter-\nest again; and may more properly be\nsaid to adopt, than to kidnap, a senti-\nment, by leaving it heir to their own\nfame.\"\n\nGoethe, in his conversations, very\nemphatically repeated this view. In\n1825, he said: *\"* People talk forever of\nOriginality, but what does it all mean!\nAs soon as we are born the world be-\ngins to operate upon us, and continues\nto do sotothe end. And everywhere,\nwhat can we call specially our own, ex-\ncept energy, strength, and will? If I\nshould declare for how much I am in-\ndebted to great predecessors and con-\ntemporaries, there would not be a great\ndeal left.\"\n\nThree years later, he thus expressed\nhimself to Eckermann: ' It is true that\nwe bring capacities into 'life with us,\nbut we owe our development to the\nthousand influences of a great world,\nfrom which we assimilate all we can.\nI owe much to the Greeks and to the\nFrench; my debt to Shakespeare,\nSterne, and Goldsmith is immeasurably\ngreat. Nevertheless, the sources of my\nculture are not therewith indicated : to\nname them all would be an endless task,\nand to no purpose. The main thing is,\nthat a man has a soul loving the Truth,\nand accepting it wherever he finds it.\nBut the world is now so old, and for\nthousands of years past so many impor-\ntant men have lived and thought, that\n\nfew positively new things can be dis-\ncovered and said.\"\n\nThe expression of Mephistopheles,\nhowever, seems to have been more di-\nrectly suggested by a line in Terence:\nNullum est jam dictum, quod non dictum\nSit prius.\n\nThe sudden introduction of a theatri-\ncal detail at the close of this scene is a\npiece of satirical wilfulness on Goethe's\npart. The younger auditors in the\nparquet do not applaud, because they\nare all in sympathy with the Baccalau-\nreus, even as the students of Jena, sev-\nerally and collectively, were enthusiastic\ndisciples of Fichte. The movement\namong the German youth, which cul-\nminated in the famous Wartburg con-\nvention of 1817, was extremely distaste-\nful to Goethe, and led to a coolness on\nthe part of the students which did not\npass away until the next generation.\nFrom various utterances of Goethe on\nthis alienation of youth from him, I\nquote the following verse : —\n\nAs the old ones sung once,\n\nSo twittered then the young ones;\n, The young now give the rhythm,\n_ And old must sing it with \"em.\n\nWhen such the tune and will is,\n_ The best thing, to keep still is.\n\n59. Homuncutus.\n\nThis whimsical, artificial mannikin is,\nin reality, the chief personage in Act\nII. Since he is no less an enigma to\nthe critics than the mysterious '* Moth-\ners,\" and suggests even a greater variety\nof meanings in the course of his adven-\ntures, it will not be so easy to give, in\nadvance, a full and satisfactory explana-\n\n°\n\nFaust\n\ntion of his character. I prefer, there-\nfore, to offer the reader choice of several\ntracks, leaving that which I believe to\nbe the true one to be further followed\nin succeeding notes.\n\nThe name and mode of origin of\nHomunculus are taken from Paracelsus,\nand some hint of the character, possibly,\nfrom Sterne. The former, in the first\nbook of his De Generatione Rerum, says:\n«But now the generatio bomunculorum\nis by no means to be forgotten. For\nthere is something in it; although such\nhas hitherto been held in the greatest\nsecrecy, and there has been no small\ndoubt and question among divers of the\nold philosophers, whether it may even\nbe possible, that a man may be born\nwithout the natural mother. Thereto\nI answer, that it is not at all contrary\nto the ars Spagyrica and to Nature, but\nis quite possible. And although such\nhas hitherto been concealed from the\nnatural man, yet was itnot concealed from\nthe sy/vestres, and nymphs, and giants,\nbut long ago revealed, whence also they\noriginate. For from such bomunculis\nthey grow to full age, monstrous dwarfs\nand other like wonderful creatures,\nwhich are employed as powerful agen-\ncies, are victorious over their enemies\nand know secret things, which men\notherwise could not know. And by\nart they receive their life, by art they\nreceive body, flesh, bones, and blood;\nby art are they born: therefore Art is\nin them incarnate and self-existing, so\nthat they need not learn it from any\nman, but are so by Nature, even as\nroses and other flowers.\" |\n\nNotes.\n\nParacelsus thereupon gives minute\nand exact directions how the Homuncu-\nlus may be created; and the attempt\nhas no doubt been actually made thou-\nsands of times. Sterne, in the second\nchapter of Tristram Shandy, treats the\nsubject with more than his usual wit\nand grace, averring that the Homuncu-\nlus is as much a man and a brother as\nthe Lord Chancellor of England. The\nattraction which such a conception (in-\ntellectually speaking) presented to Goe-\nthe's mind may be readily guessed, and\na curious coincidence probably led to\nits embodiment in this scene. The\nphilosopher, Johann Jacob Wagner,*\nseems to have possessed some of the\ncharacteristics of his namesake of the\nFirst Part. After the appearance of\nthe latter, in 1808, Prof. Kohler, of\nWiirzburg, gave a lecture upon it, in\nwhich, either as jest or malice, he de-\nclared that his fellow-professor was the\noriginal of Faust's Famulus. About the\nsame time, Wagner propounded the most\nastonishing views in his lectures, some of\nwhich — as, for instance, \"all organisms\nare nothing but developed metals,\"? and\nthe assertion that 'Chemistry would\n\n* He was born at Ulm in 1775, and died\nthere in 1841. He studied at Jena and Got-\ntingen, and was for many years Professor in\nWirzburg. Among his works are **A Theory\nof Warmth and Light,\" * A System of Ideal\nPhilosophy,\" '* Philosophy of Education,\" '* Po-\nlitical Economy,\" \" Philosophy and Medicine,\"\nand ** The Principle of Life.\" He was most\nnoted for his attempt to construct a philosophi-\ncal \" Tetrad,\"' from the systems of Kant, Fichte,\nSchelling, and himself. He had, at one time,\n\na circle of devout believers.\n\nfinally succeed in producing organic\nbodies, even in creating human beings\nby crystallization'? — were repeated\nall over Germany,and must have reached\nGoethe's ears. The scene, as it stands,\nwas thus suggested to him; for the at-\ntempt to create life artificially harmonizes\ncompletely with the lifeless pedantry of\nwhich Wagner is the representative.\nProfessor Wagner was an enthusiastic\nadmirer of the original «¢ Fragment\" of\nFaust. He lectured upon it, and even\npublished an analysis of the work,\nin 18393; but he rejected both the Sec-\nond Part and the additions to the First\nPart which appeared in 1808!\nNothing which Goethe has himself\nsaid concerning Homunculus will much\nenlighten us. Indeed, his expressions\nseem to have been purposely uncertain\nand mystical: both here, and in his re-\nmarks upon Euphorion, the care with .\nwhich he guarded the Key-secret is\nvery apparent. After reading the scene\nto Eckermann (December 16, 1829), he\nsaid: \"* You will have noticed, in gen-\neral, that Mephistopheles appears to a\ndisadvantage in contrast with Homuncu-\nlus, who is his equal in intellectual clear-\nness, and much his superior through his\ninclination for the Beautiful and for a\npromotive activity. Besides, he calls\nhim Sir Cousin; for spiritual beings,\nlike Homunculus, who were. not ob-\nscured and limited by a complete human\nincorporation, were classed among the\nDzmons, and therefore a sort of relation-\nship may be presumed between the two.\"\n«* Mephistopheles,\" said Eckermann,\n'' certainly appears here in a subordi-\n\nAT4 Faust.\n\nnate position; but I cannot escape the\nidea that he is secretly implicated in\nthe creation of Homunculus, according\nto our former knowledge of him, and\nalso from his appearance in the Helena\nasa secretly-working agency. 'Thus he\nis again elevated, as a whole, and, with\nhis superior impassiveness, he may over-\nlook some of the details.\"\n\n«* You have a very just instinct of the\nrelation,\" said Goethe ; 'it is really so;\nand I have already reflected whether,\nwhen Mephistopheles goes to Wagner,\nand Homunculus is coming into being,\nI should not put some lines in his mouth,\nwhich might make his co-operation clear\nto the reader.\"\n\n«There would be no harm in that,\"\nEckermann answered. 'Yet it is\nalready hinted, when Mephistopheles\ncloses the scene with the words : —\n\n'Upon the creatures we have made\nWe are, ourselves, at last, dependent.\n\nThe following additional note was\nfound among Riemer's posthumous pa-\npers: 'In answer to my question,\nwhat Goethe meant to represent in\nHomunculus, Eckermann said: Goethe\nthereby meant to present the pure Ez-\ntelechie [PEvredéxea, an Aristotelian\nword signifying the actual being of a\nthing], the Reason, the Spirit, as it en-\nters life before experience; for the\nSoul of Man is highly endowed on its\narrival, and we by no means learn every-\nthing, we bring much with us.* To\n* 'Not in entire forgetfulness,\n\nAnd not in utter nakedness,\n\nBut trailing clouds of glory, do we come.\"\nWordsworth.\n\nGoethe himself the world was véry\nearly opened, in advance of experience ;\nhe penetrated it, before he knew it\nthrough his life. He also pointed out\nto Eckermann the shrewdness and at-\ntentive perception of his little grand-\n\ndaughter Alma. Yes, Goethe himself .\n\nhas a sort of respect for Homunculus.\"\n\nThere is probably a good deal of\npurposed mystification in all this. Noth-\ning that is here reported explains the\nofice of Homunculus as guide to the\nClassical Walpurgis-Night, and the\nprominent part which he there plays,\nto the exclusion of Faust. Let us now\nconsider, as briefly as possible, some of\nthe most important interpretations of\nthe critics. Weisse says: '* Homun-\nculus is the objective expression, the\nhy postatic form of Faust's present spirit-\nual condition, struggling for a new birth\ninto another and unknown condition of\n\nexistence.\" Leutbecher's explanation .\n\nis: '* He appears as the personification\nof that spiritual condition in Faust,\nwhich, sprung to life in the realm of\nexternal, mechanical scholarship, and\nawakened by the keen irony of sensuous\nbeing, is furthered by the repose of the\ngenuine and truly poetical spirit, —a\ncondition in which he first overlooks\nthe whole mythical world of antiquity,\nand through which it is possible for him\nto comprehend the being of the True,\nthe Ethical, and the Beautiful, which\nthat world holds concealed.\"\n\nAnother series of opinions, having\nsome metaphysical or psychological re-\nlationship to the above, may next be\nquoted. Diintzer says: '* Homunculus\n\n_—— =~ =\n\nNotes.\n\nis the thoughtful, striving force, urged\nin vital, self-conscious power towards\nthe Ideal Beauty, which it hopes to\nattain, not, like Faust, by a wild assault,\nbut by a gradual and certain march.\"\nAccording to Horn, he is \"the yearn-\ning for the creation of the Beautiful,\"\nwhile Rétscher considers that he is an\nembodiment of Faust's imperious yearn-\ning for the original home-land of Art.\nSchnetger takes a similar idea, and com-\npresses it into a more definite form.\n\"Homunculus,\" says he, 'is the hu-\nman embryo, the germ of the perfectly\nbeautiful human frame; he is the high-\nest Beauty, developed through a scale of\nthousands of forms, — in a word, he is\nthe embryo of Helena! .... Ho-\nmunculus is Human Beauty in process\nof creation, Helena and Galatea are\nCreated Beauty.\"\n\nI add, in conclusion, those interpre-\ntations which vary more or less widely\nfrom the foregoing. Hartung declares\nthat **what Helena is to Faust, that is\nHomunculus to Mephistopheles, a crea-\ntion of his fancy, and, nevertheless, his\nruling spirit.\" He ignores any connec-\ntion between Homunculus and Faust.\nRosenkranz simply states that Homun-\nculus is a *' comical\"' figure, who, at the\nclose of the Classical Walpurgis-Night,\n\"* manifests himself as Eros.\" Késtlin\nsays, with unconcealed irritation:\n«* Grant that the new spirit is dramati-\ncally necessary, grant that he is cleverly\ninvented, the figure is and remains an\nunedifying trick, a ridiculous image,\nwith which the poet himself plays a\ngame which totally annihilates it. It is\n\ndifficult to say, indeed, what should\nhave appeared in place of this Homun-\nculus, but that 1s no excuse for the poet.\n» +. The figure suffers from the con-\ntradiction, that it is comical and not\ncomical, at the same time.\" Deycks\nthinks he is an elemental spirit, perhaps\nof fire, and adds: ** He appears as born\nKnowledge, yet yearning for the real,\ncorporeal. He endeavors to find them\nin the natural knowledge of the ancients,\nand returns to the elements, as fire, like\nphosphorus in union with water.\"\nFriedrich von Sallet considered him to\nbe German Poetry before Schiller and\nGoethe, and Julian Schmidt Greek-Ro-\nmantic Poetry.\n\nKreyssig, who insists that the reader\nmust approach this part of the drama\nwith '*a vital, receptive spirit, free\nfrom prejudice or prepossession,\" if he\nwishes to enjoy and understand it, en-\ndeavors to solve the problem in a differ-\nent manner. He attaches a spccial\nmeaning to the relation between Wag-\nner and Homunculus, accepting the for-\nmer as a type of solid research and\nknowledge, while he sees in Faust a\npersonification of Genius. '* What the\nexplorer has laboriously produced,\" he\nsays, ** becomes a living light to Genius,\nguiding him into regions which Fate\nhas closed against the former.\" Kreys-\nsig does not seem to perceive that this\nliving light (Homunculus) is a quality\ninherent in Genius itself, and not in the\nproductions of scientific research. Yet\nhe approaches, unconsciously, a little\nnearer the secret, in the passage: '* We\nknow in what full measure the funda-\n\nmental Jaw of a healthy artistic develop-\nment was exemplified in Goethe's life ;\nhow he, in the maturity of his power,\nfar from the daring wantonness of the\n'Storm and Stress' years, found no form\nof knowledge dry and unimportant\nwhich had any bearing on Nature and\nArt; how he studied at the same time\nGeology, Botany, Anatomy, Optics, and\nMetrics, the history of Literature and\nArt.\"\n\nI am satisfied that much more of\nGoethe's own struggle towards a higher\nintellectual and esthetic development is\nreflected in the Second Part of Faust,\nthan the critics seem willing to admit.\nThe first three Acts are saturated,\nthrough and through, with his intellect-\nual subjectiveness. It was not his habit\nof mind to build theories, nor could he\nhave taken the least interest in the\nrepresentation of abstract ideas. He\nwas never satisfied until the vaguest gos-\nsamer-wraith of the imagination had\nfound some corresponding reality of\nform. A careful study of his corre-\nspondence with Schiller and Zelter will\nilluminate all this portion of the drama\nwith a multitude of broken and transient\nlights, which may sometimes confuse,\nbut, in the end, will discover much that\nseemed hidden at first.\n\nMy impression that the Boy Chariot-\neer, Homunculus and Euphorion, are\none and the same elfish, elusive Spirit,\nwhich is the Poetic Genius of Goethe\nhimself (as its ente/echeia, other alle-\ngorical garments being thrown over it\nat will), grew into very distinct form as\na feeling, or instinct, before I made\n\n.of a new tendency.\"\n\nFaust.\n\nany endeavor to apply it. Such an in-\nterpretation does not reject those of\nWeisse, Leutbecher, Dintzer, Horn,\nRotscher, or Schnetger: it only com-\npletes and harmonizes all of them.\nLeutbecher, indeed, stops a little short\nof the same view, when he says: \" As\nin the First Part, Wagner and Mephis-\ntopheles are personifications of certain\ntendencies in Faust, so also here' the\nsame thing must be assumed, and Ho-\nmunculus is added as the personification\nNow, in 1827,\nin speaking of Ampére's review of Faust,\nGoethe said: '* He has expressed him-\nself no Jess intelligently, in asserting that\nnot only the gloomy, unsatisfied striving\nof the chief personage, but also the\nscofing and sharp irony of Mephistoph-\neles, are parts of my own being.\"\n\nAdd to this confession the play of\nthat pranksome (mwuthwillig) spirit in\nGoethe, which even age could not tame,\nand his delight in mystification, which\nhad constant food in the respectful cre-\ndulity of lesser intellects, and I find it\neasy to understand how he has confused,\nin endeavoring to conceal, his design.\nThere will be sufficient opportunity to\nadd whatever illustrations are possible,\nbefore we reach the end of the Classical\nWalpurgis-Night; and I will, now,\nonly beg the reader to notice that the\nIdeal which led Goethe onward and\nupward during the best years of his life,\nis very nearly described in the words of\nParacelsus, — ** Art is in them incarnate\nand self-existing, so that they need not\nlearn it from any man, but are so by Na-\nture, even as roses and other flowers.\"\n\nNotes.\n\n60. Fair scenery!\n\nIn this passage Homunculus describes\nthe dream of the sleeping Faust, which\nis visible to him alone. Faust has\nalready gone further back towards the\norigin of Beauty, in this picture of\nHelena's parents, Leda and the Swan-\nJupiter. The separation of the Classic\nand Romantic elements, which com-\nmenced in the First Act, now becomes\ncomplete, and the occupation of Me-\nphistopheles— at least in his original\ncharacter — is gone for atime. Ecker-\nmann said to Goethe, after the latter\nhad read the manuscript of the passage :\n«Through this dream of Leda in the\nSecond Act, the He/ena afterwards wins\nits proper foundation. There much is\nsaid of swans and the swan-begotten ;\nbut here the event is pictured, and when\none, with the impression on his senses,\ncomes afterwards to Helena, how much\nmore distinct and complete everything\nwill appear!\"\n\nGoethe assented to this, and said:\n\"You will also find that already,\nthroughout these first acts, the Classic\nand the Romantic vibrate, and come to\nexpression, so that, as by a gradually\nascending slope, we are carried upwards\nto the He/ena, where both forms of\nPoetry come prominently to the light\nand find a species of adjustment.\"\n\nThe ignorance of Mephistopheles\nconcerning the Classical Walpurgis-\nNight 1s accounted for by the fact that\nhe is a Gothic, medieval Devil, from\nthe North, and \" brought forth in the\nage of mist.\" The classic world had\n\nceased before he began to exist. He\nhas brought Faust to the old study to\nrecover; but Homunculus sees _ that\n(like Goethe in Weimar before his\nItalian journey) Faust will die unless he\nis instantly transported to the land\nwhere his dream can be made a reality.\n\n61. But, clearlier seen, tis slave that\nfights with slave.\n\nGoethe, here, entirely forgets Me-\nphistopheles and speaks with his own\nvoice. There are many slips of the\nkind, as the reader will have already\nnoticed, but none quite so undramatic\nas this.\n\nThe scene, although not strictly geo-\ngraphically correct, is admirably chosen,\nsince the classic age may be said to\nterminate with the Battle of Pharsalia\n(B. C. 48). The Peneus and Tempe,\nGreece beyond Pindus, on the right,\nOlympus and Ossa overlooking the\nplain, the sea in front, with Samothrace,\nLesbos, Tenedos, and the Troad beyond,\n— these are the features, not all visible,\nbut all suggested by the locality.\n\n62. J may detect the dot upon the I.\"\n\nThis expression (which Goethe some-\ntimes uses in his correspondence to de-\nnote finish, completion) is explained by\nthe endeavor of Homunculus, afterwards,\nto break the glass in which his artificial\nbeing is confined, and commence a free\nand natural existence. A scientific as\nwell asa literary meaning is thereby sug-\ngested, and the clews to both will be\nfound in the true history of Goethe's\nown development.\n\n63. Upon the creatures we have made\nWe are, ourselves, at last, dependent.\n\nThese are the lines quoted by Ecker-\nmann to Goethe, as an evidence that\nHomunculus is really the creation of\nMephistopheles, and not of Wagner.\nGoethe's answer was: '* You are quite\nright. To an attentive reader, the lines\nmight be almost enough ; but I will re-\nflect, nevertheless, whether there should\nnot be other hints.\"\n\n'© But that conclusion,\" Eckermann\n\nFaust.\n\nMasquerade in the First, and, like it, is\na digression from the direct course of\nthe drama. Unlike it, however, its\nsubstance is poetic rather than didactic.\nNeither the many puzzles which it con-\ntains, nor the wilful spirit in which\nGoethe has loaded his original, purely\nesthetic design with a weight of extra-\nneous scientific ideas, can restrain the\nbreeze of Poetry which blows through\nit, fresh from the mountains and seas\nand isles of Greece.\n\nthen said, '' contains a great meaning, / When we have once accepted his\nwhich is not to be exhausted so easily.\" [ double intention of conducting Faust to\n\n«© T should think,\"? Goethe answered, :\n\n«there was provender enough in it, to\nlast for atime. A father, who has six\nsons, is lost, no matter what disposition\nhe may make of himself. Also kings.\nand ministers, who have placed many\npersons in high offices, may apply this\nprofitably to their own experience.\"\n\nThe other lines, wherein the co-op-\neration of Mephistopheles in producing\nHomunculus is indicated, — which were\neither not noticed by Eckermann or\nafterwards added by Goethe, —are the\nfollowing.\n\nOn page 121: —\n\nAn entrance why should he deny me?\n\nI'll expedite his luck, if he'll but try me !\n\nOn page 133: —\nThou rogue, Sir Cousin! here I find thee, too?\n\nAnd at the proper time! My thanks are due:\nA lucky fortune led thee here to me.\n\nThou art adroit in shortening my way.\n\n64. CrasstcaL Wacpurais-NiGuHT.\n\nThis allegory occupies the same place\nin the Second Act, as the Carnival\n\na higher plane of life through the\nawakening and development of his:\nsense of Beauty, and, at the same time, !\nof bringing together the Classic and ,\nRomantic elements in Literature and\nArt, in order to reconcile them in a\nregion lofty enough to abolish all fash-\nions of Race and Time, we have no\ndifficulty in fancying how the plan of a\nClassical Walpurgis-Night must have\npresented itself to Goethe's mind, as a\npendant to the Walpurgis-Night of the\nFirst Part, which is Gothic, Medizval,\nRomantic. We may also conjecture\nthat it was no easy task to arrange the\nscenes and figures of such an episode, as a\nnatural frame-work, capable of enclosing\nboth the allegory and the narrative, —\nthe former so airy, subtile, and shifting,\nthat, while it could only be expressed\nthrough Form, it perpetually eluded the\nconfinement of forms of thought, and\nthe course of the latter so determined\nin advance by the completed He/ena,\nthat it could not further accommodate\nitself to the allegory.\n\nNotes.\n\nThere is direct evidence that this\ndifficulty of execution was felt by\n.Goethe, no doubt with his first concep-\ntion of the episode. The first sketch, or\noutline, was probably made in 1800,\nwhile he was writing the Walpurgis-\nNight, and when the first pages of the\nHelena were produced. We _ have\nEckermann's testimony that it was only\na sketch in 1827, when Goethe said to\nhim: ' The plan exists, indeed, but\nthe great difficulty is yet to be overcome ;\nand the execution really depends alto-\ngether too much on sheer good-luck.\nThe Classical Walpurgis-Night must be\nwritten in rhymes, and yet everything\nmust wear an antique character. It is\nnot easy to invent the proper form of\nverse: and then, the dialogue!\" Eck-\nermann asked if that was not already\nplanned in the sketch. ' The What,\nI may say,\" Goethe answered, * but\nnot the How. And then, just consider\nhow much must be said in that wild\nnight! Faust's address to Proserpine,\nmoving her to restore Helena, — what\nspeech must that be, which shall move\nProserpine herself to tears! Nothing\nof all this is easy to do: a great deal\ndepends on luck, yes, almost entirely\nupon the feeling and power of the mo-\nment.\"\n\nThe poetic elaboration of this early\nsketch, which must have been in prose,\nwas not commenced until January, 1830,\nand was finished, as we learn from\nEckermann's letter from Geneva, in\nAugust of that year, the eighty-first of\nGoethe's life! He knew how to detect\nand secure his fortunate moods; the\n\nplan was traced out, like the pattern of\na piece of embroidered tapestry, and he\nworked here and there, according to the\ncolor and form which were best adapted\nto his intervals of creative desire. The\nvery manuscript, some pages of which\nI have seen, suggests the care and fidelity\nwith which he labored. The hand is\nfirm and clear, the interlineations few\nbut always excellent, and there are\nsometimes broad spaces between the\nstanzas, which suggest long and silent\npacings back and forth on the study-\nfloor or the garden walk.\n\nGoethe tells us that the Classical\nWalpurgis-Night is an ascending slope,\nupon which we gradually rise to the\nHelena. Its leading motive, therefore,\nmust be elopment of the Idea of\nthe Beautiful ; and to this chief clew\nwe must hold fast. But Mephistophe-\nles, the Spirit of Negation, is also intro-\nduced, and a reason must be found for\nhis presence in a scene where he has,\napparently, no business. If there is\nsuch a thing as zsthetic irony, Goethe\nhas-attempted it here. In the forms\nintroduced, with which Faust and Ho-\nmunculus come in contact (the latter.\ntaking the former's part in the end),\nthere is a gradual upward movement on\nthe line of Beauty, from the Sphinxes\nand Griffins to the apparition of Galatea\non her chariot of shell. In following\nMephistopheles, however, from the\nsame starting-point, we move downward\non the line of Ugliness to its intensest\nclassical embodiment in the Phorkyads.\nWoven between these two threads, and\nsometimes cunningly blended with\n\nthem, are personifications of the Nep-\ntunic and Plutonic theories in geology,\nwith satirical illustrations of the latter\nand a resonant glorification of the for-\nmer. Flashing over all, like a Will-o'-\nthe-wisp, is Homunculus, with his\nyearning to commence a natural exist-\nence.\n\nHere are the four leading elements of\nthe episode, only the latter of which\ncan really be called problematic. What-\never variety of interpretation may be\ngiven to the separate forms, or to de-\ntached passages, we can hardly be mis-\ntaken in regard to the first three motives;\nand I find that the German critics are\nhere less active in constructing indepen-\ndent theories than in bending these evi-\ndent elements to their service, in ex-\n\n—\n\n—o\n\nFaust\n\nimportance determines the importance\nof the entire scene, for his development\ninto being is its chief motive,' — and\nwe shall see that by accepting Homun-\nculus as the embodiment of Goethe's\nown yearning for a free and beautiful\npoetic being, we have the simplest key,\nnot only to the Classical Walpurgis-\nNight, but to many of the views which\nit has suggested to the commentators,\nOnly thus, indeed, can we understand\nthe increasing prominence of Homuncu-\nlus, and the early disappearance of\nFaust.\n\nDeycks, also, has this passage : ** This\nmuch seems to be clear: the scene has\nlittle or nothing to do with the history\nof Faust. At best, it prepares his way\nto the attainment of Helena; but he,\nhimself, plays a secondary part. Nei-\n\n|plaining the details. Rosenkranz, for\n/ instance, says that ' Faust is led through\n\nNature to Art,' but inasmuch as he\n\\ afterwards admits that the highest result\n\nther is Mephistopheles much more\nprominent; he meets with (something\n\"quite new to him) one embarrassment\n'after another. There are all the better\n\nof Art is the perfect human form, he\nthus comes back to the original clew.\nWeisse remarks, very correctly, that\nthe scenes \"are filled with an anticipa-\ntion of coming Beauty.\" Kostlin,\nSchnetger, Diintzer, and others do not\ndiffer in substance, and their views need\nnot be quoted.\n\nLeutbecher says: ** As is well known,\nGoethe himself lived and strove in that\nprocess of coming into being, of the\nnew creation of the antique spirit in his\ntime, and to his share therein is due the\nexecution of this important part of the\npoem.\" Add to this Schnetger's declar-\nation that \"the key to the Classical\nWalpurgis-Night is Homunculus: his\n\ngrounds for assuming that Goethe, here,\nhad other purposes, further evidence of\nwhich is shown in the visible love and\nelaboration wherewith the abundant\nforms are presented, the beauty and im-\nportance of so many visions, and the\ncheerful humor which throws a singular,\nshifting charm over the whole. It is\nfull of alluring and mysterious suggestion,\nlike the endless laughter of the sea-\nwaves, in the ancient poet.\"\n\nAnother remark of Goethe (made in\n1831) may be interesting to the reader:\n«¢ The old Walpurgis-Night is monarch-\nical, since the Devil is there everywhere\nrespected asthe positive ruler. But the\n\nNotes.\n\nClassical is thorqughly republican, be-\ncause all are broadly placed side by side,\none being as valid as the other, none\nsubordinate or concerned for the others.\nBut for a life-long interest in the plastic\narts, the execution of the scene would\nnot have been possible. Nevertheless,\nit was very difficult to be moderate with\nsuch abundant material, and to reject all\nfigures which did not completely accord\nwith my design. For example, I made\nno use of the Minotaur, the Harpies, and\nvarious other monsters.\"\n\nMephistopheles is seduced to over-\ncome his dislike for '' antique cronies \"\nby the mention of Thessalian witches,\nand the scene is accordingly opened\nby the witch Erichtho, described by\nLucan as dwelling in the wilds of\nHzmus, where she was consulted by\nPompey, before the battle of Pharsalia.\nHer allusion to the * evil poets \" is un-\ndoubtedly meant for Lucan and Ovid.\nShe speaks in the measure called iambic\ntrimeter (double) ; it is really an iambic\nhexameter, scarcely known to the Eng-\nlish language, but the latter, nevertheless,\nadapts itself as readily to the additional\nfoot as the German.\n\n65. Here, on Grecian land.\n\nFaust recovers from his trance as soon\nas he touches the classic soil: his artis-\ntic instinct tells him at once that he is\non the track of Helena. How much of\nGoethe's own feeling is expressed in\nthese lines may be seen from the fol-\nlowing passage in his works: ' Clear-\nness of vision, cheerfulness of acceptance,\nand easy grace of expression, are the\n\nqualities which delight us: and now,\nwhen we affirm that we find all these\nin the genuine Grecian works, achieved\nin the noblest material, the most pro-\nportioned form, with certainty and\ncompleteness of execution, we shall be\nunderstood, if we always refer to them\nas a basis and a standard. Let each one\nbe a Grecian, in his own way: but let\nhim 4¢ one!\"\n\n66. I find myself so strange, so discon-\n\ncerted.\n\nMephistopheles, on the other hand,\nis entirely out of his proper element.\nHis disgust with the nudity of the an-\ntique forms is an admirable bit of hu-\nmor, through which we can detect Goe-\nthe's own well-known defence of the\nchastity of ancient art. The delicate\nsatire of the line, Doch das Antike find'\nich zu lebendig, is lost in translation.\nWe may almost surmise that when\nMephistopheles speaks of overplastering\nthe figures according to the fashion,\nGoethe referred to the indecent rehabili-\ntation of the statues in the Vatican.\n\nMephistopheles finally addresses him-\nself to the Griffins and Sphinxes, as the\nmost grotesque and unbeautiful of the\nforms around him.\n\nThe source, wherefrom its derivation\nSprings.\n\nDintzer explains that this passage is\nin ridicule of certain philologists, who,\nin Goethe's day, grouped words together\nat random according to their initial let-\nters, and then attempted to trace them\nto a common root. The answer of\n\nMephistopheles is a play upon the\nwords Greif (Griffin) and greifer (to\ngrip) — sufficiently like the English\nwords to be intelligible in translation.\nThe Griffin accepts this explanation,\nand confirms it by slightly changing the\nLatin proverb Fortes Fortuna juvat,\nwhich he applies to his own advan-\ntage.\n\n68. THe ARIMASPEANS.\n\nAccording to Herodotus, the Arimas-\npeans were a one-eyed race who inhab-\nited a distant part of the Scythian\nsteppes, and were engaged in continual\nconflict with the gold-guarding Griffins.\nThe colossal Ants, which were some-\nwhat larger than foxes and dwelt in\nCentral Asia, threw out gold-dust in\nmaking their subterranean burrows.\n\nI confess I can offer no satisfactory\nexplanation of the appearance of these\ncreatures, beyond that of their repulsive\nforms. Schnetger finds ascale of develop-\nment in them, in the following order:\nGriffins, Ants, Arimaspeans, Sphinxes,\nand afterwards Sirens, each grade ap-\nproaching nearer the human form. Har-\ntung, on the other hand, finds that the\nGriffins are philologists ; the gold, scien-\nufic treasures; the Ants, diligentcollectors\nof knowledge; the Arimaspeans, clever\nwriters, who live by stolen thoughts,\nand the Sphinxes, History. Goethe\nwould hardly have buried an allegory so\ndeep as this. Schnetger's explanation\nwould answer very well, were it not\nfor the Ants and Arimaspeans, who\nhave no place in a progressive develop-\nment based on Art. All we can be sure\n\nFaust.\n\nof is, that they are primitive forms of.\nthe Ugly, without the suggestion of pos-\nsible beauty which we find in the Grif-\nfins and Sphinxes.\n\n69. Express thyself, and twill a riddle\nbe.\n\nTt is evident that the Sphinxes im-\nmediately recognized Mephistopheles,\nand their questions are only * chaffing.\"\nWhen they say that their spirit-tones\nbecome material, to him, they hint that\nhe sees nothing more than their semi-\nbestial form. In the answer of Meph-\nistopheles to the demand for his name,\nGoethe uses the English words ' Old\nIniquity.\" This term was given, in\nthe Moralities, to a personification of\nVice, or Sin, who accompanied the\nDevil when he appeared, teased him\nand beat him with a whip. The\nClown, in Shakespeare's '* Twelfth\nNight,\" refers to this character in his\nsong : —\n\nI am gone, sir,\n\nAnd anon, sir,\n\nI°ll be with you again\nIn a trice,\n\nLike to the Old Vice,\nYour need to sustain ;\n\nWho with dagger of lath,\nIn his rage and his wrath,\nCries, ah, ha! to the Devils\nLike a mad lad,\n\nPare thy nails, dad,\n\nAdieu, Goodman Devil!\n\nAlthough Mephistopheles is an entire\nstranger among these antique forms, we\n\nmust not suppose that he has never\nheard of them, and that his demand for\n\nNotes.\n\nan enigma from the Sphinx is out of\nkeeping with the part he plays. But\nhis Romantic sneer is at once crushed\nunder the Beotian irony. The retort of\nthe Sphinx shows that she fully com-\nprehends the medieval Devil. Its keen-\nness will be properly appreciated when\nI state that the word Plastron (which I\nhave translated ' breast-plate\") is a\npiece of impenetrable armor, worn by\nfencing-masters, in order to let their\npupils lunge at them with impunity,\neven as the Devout, in Faust's day, flat-\ntered their ascetic idea of holiness by\nkeeping up an imaginary conflict with\nthe Devil. We cannot much wonder\nthat Mephistopheles should lose his tem-\nper, on receiving such a thrust.\n\n70. SIRENS.\n\nThe Sirens are first mentioned by\nHomer as two in number, but two more\nwere afterwards added by the Athenians,\nThey were located in various places, —\nCrete, Sicily, or Capri, —and there\nwere contradictory accounts of their\norigin and character. It was generally\nbelieved, however, that they were fated\nonly to live until some one should pass\ntheir island without being captivated by\ntheir song, whence the corresponding\nmyths of the Argonauts and Ulysses.\n\nAfter the confused and uncertain\nforms with which the Classical Wal-\npurgis-Night opens, Goethe seems to\nhave selected the Sirens as a point of\ndeparture for the opposite paths of\nFaust and Mephistopheles. They were\ngenerally represented as beautiful maid-\nens to the waist, the lower half having\n\na bird-form, with hideous falcon claws.\nThe grotesque and beautiful are more\nintimately blended in the woman and\nlion of the Sphinx : in the Sirens Beauty\nand Ugliness are simply and sharply\njoined to each other. After leaving\nthem, Faust begins to rise towards his\nIdeal, while Mephistopheles descends\ntowards his.\n\nIn the description which the latter\ngives of the Sirens' song, commencing\n'These are of novelties the neatest,\"\nHartung sees ** Goethe's opinion of cer-\ntain modern poets.\" Some such mean-\ning is certainly suggested by the lines ;\nbut we are already familiar with Goe-\nthe's habit of double and triple allegory,\nand shall not be bewildered by these\nminor glosses.\n\nIn the Repulsive, grand and solid\n\nfeatures.\n\nThis line throws a clear light all\nalong the path we have chosen. Faust\nrecognizes the far-off predictions of the\nBeautiful in the forms of Indian and\nEgyptian Art, the forerunners of that\nof Greece. He is even reconciled to\nwhat is repulsive in them, by their asso-\nciation with the early memories of\nGrecian History and Literature. He\nis filled with fresh spirit, for he now\nfeels that he has aclew which shall\nguide him to Helena. To Mephistoph-\neles, who remembers Faust's disgust for\nthe grotesque phantoms of the Blocks-\nberg, his satisfaction is of course incom-\nprehensible.\n\nThe Sphinxes direct Faust to Chiron,\nthe Centaur, who is not only purely\n\nGreek, but also the last struggle of the\nartistic Ideal of Beauty with animal\nforms; while, after recalling the Stym-\nphalic birds and the heads of the Ler-\nnzan Hydra for the benefit of Mephis-\ntopheles, they shrewdly send him after\nthe Lamiz, who have aroused his desire\nat the first view.\n\n72. PENEUS.\n\nThe Pharsalian Fields lie upon the\nEnipeus, a branch of the Peneus, and\nmany of the commentators charge\nGoethe with having made a mistake ;\nbut it is very evident that he meant to\ninclude in the scene the whole region\nfrom Pharsalus to the base of Olympus\nand the shores of the A:gean Sea.\n\nIn the river-god, Peneus, with his\nattendant Nymphs and _ Tributary\nStreams, we reach a higher plane of de-\nvelopment. Here the forms, though\nrepresenting Nature, are entirely human,\nand an atmosphere of Poetry, as well\nas of Art, encircles them. The verse\nchanges, also, suggesting a clearer moon-\nlight and fresher air.\n\nFaust's dream of Leda and the Swan,\nwhich was described by Homunculus\nin Wagner's laboratory, is here pur-\nposely repeated, as the reality of what\nwas there only presentiment. Now,\nhowever, Leda herself is not seen: the\nthick foliage conceals her form. Faust\nis not yet prepared to behold the con-\nception of the Beautiful.\n\n73. CuHrRon,.\n\nThe Centaur Chiron was the son of\nSaturh and Philyra, the daughter of\n\nFaust.\n\nOceanus. Homer calls him the wisest\nand most just of the Centaurs. He was\nsaid to have taught the human race\noaths, joyous sacrificial services, and\nmusic. In his grotto on Pelion he edu-\ncated the grandest Grecian heroes,\namong them Peleus, Ajax, Achilles,\nfEsculapius, Theseus, and Jason.\nSchnetger has a very ingenious ex-\nplanation of the symbolical significance\nof Chiron in this scene. He interprets\nthe expression of the Sphinx to Faust:\n\nOur very last was slain by Hercules,\n\nas indicating the overthrow of the mon-\nstrous forms of early Art; and Hercules\ntherefore marks the commencement of\nthe Human period. He then says:\n«« If the old forms are entirely overcome\nby the new, in Hercules, then must\nChiron, his instructor, be considered as\nstanding equally in both periods of de-\nvelopment. This position, half here,\nhalf there, is clearly illustrated in his\nfigure, which is a horse behind and in\nfront a nobly formed man. Chiron\nrepresents to us the bridge, the transi-\ntion from the former coarseness and\ndistortion to the later and loftier forms,\nand upon him Faust must pass to ap-\nproach that which he seeks.\"\n\nOne of the finest of the Pompeian\nfrescos, now in the Museo Nazionale\nat Naples, represents Chiron teaching\nthe young Achilles to play upon the\nlyre. Goethe never saw it, but he has\nunconsciously given to the Centaur the\n\nsame dignity, nobility, and yearning\n\nsadness of expression, which are there\nso wonderfully painted.\n\nNotes.\n\n74. No second such bath Gea granted.\n\nThere is.a seeming contradiction in\nthis passage. When Faust suggests the\nname of Hercules, which Chiron has\nomitted from the list of his Argonautic\npupils and friends, the Centaur's burst\nof enthusiasm for the hero whose pois-\noned arrow accidentally caused his own\ndeath is, to say the least, unexpected ;\nwhile Faust's following speech:\n\n\"6 The fairest Man hast thou depicted,\nNow of the fairest Woman speak ! \"\n\ncouples Hercules with Helena as the\nIdeals of male and female beauty. But\nit was Paris and Helena whom he\ncalled from the Shades. We must as-\nsume that when he speaks of the latter\npair to Mephistopheles, in Scene V.\nAct I., as \"the model forms of Man\nand Woman,\" he is merely repeating\nthe conventional ideas of the Emperor\nand the Court circle. In any case it is\nGoethe himself who speaks here. It\nwas probably the famous torso in the\nVatican which first gave him the im-\npression that Hercules is, as he more\nthan once declares in his papers on Art,\n«the highest glorification of masculine,\nbeneficent activity and harmonious com-\n\nbination of power,\" therefore in his\nPp 2\n\nform the highest embodiment of mas-\nculine beauty. In his Vier Fabreszei-\nten, he says: ** Grace is only revealed\nfrom the fulness of Strength.\" In 1832,\nonly a month before his death, Goethe\nsaid to Soret: '* The Hercules of an-\ntiquity is a collective being, the great\nbearer of his own deeds and the deeds\nof others.\"\n\n75- °Tis curious with your mythologic\ndame.\n\nA trifling personal experience is here\ninterpolated, or, at least, suggested.\nWhen Faust says: ** But seven years\nold!\" and Chiron answers:\n\n& Philologists, I see,\n\nEven as they cheat themselves, have cheated\nthee —\n\nwe are directly reminded of a passage\nin Eckermann. Goethe was speaking\nof a line in one of his own poems,\nwhere Professor Géttling had persuaded\nhim to change ** Horace \"' into ** Pro-\npertius,\" to the damage of spirit and\nsound. 'In the same manner,\" said\nEckermann, 'the manuscript of your\nHelena showed that Theseus carried her\noff as a ¢ ten-year-old and slender roe.'\nBut Géttling's representations led you\nto print, instead, 'a seven-year-old and\nslender roe,' which is much too young,\nboth for the beautiful maiden, and for\nher twin-brothers, Castor and Pollux,\nwho rescued her.\"\n\n** You are right,\" said Goethe; «I\nam also of the opinion that she should\nbe ten years old when Theseus carries\n\nher off, and for that reason I afterwards\n\nwrote :—\n\n\"She has been worthless from her tenth year\non.\" (Page 111.)\n\nIn the next edition, therefore, you may\nstill make a ten-years' roe out of the\nseven-years' one.\"\n\nFaust answers Chiron, as a Poet:\n«« Then let no bonds of Time be thrown\naround her!\" He refers to an obscure\nlegend (mentioned by Miller, in his\n\n4.36\n\nwork on * The Dorians''), that Achil-\nles ascended from the Shades to wed\nHelena on the isle of Leuke, — not\nPhera@, which seems to be a mistake of\nGoethe, — where they had a son, Eu-\nphorion.\n\n76. Manto.\n\nGoethe has wilfully taken Manto\nfrom blind Tiresias, '* prophet old,\"\nwhose daughter she was, and given her\nfEsculapius as a father, perhaps to ac-\ncount for her familiarity with Chiron,\nand enable the latter, through her, to\nsend Faust further on his ardent pilgrim-\nage. She was, in reality, devoted to\nthe service of Apollo. After her\nfather's death she wandered to Italy,\nwhere her son, Oknus, founded and\nnamed for her the city of Mantua.\n(Virgil refers to this in the Tenth Book\nof the Zeid, and Dante in the twenti-\neth Canto of the Inferno.)\n\nThe temple shining in the moonlight,\nthe dreaming Manto, and the few Or-\nphic sentences which she utters, pre-\npare us for Faust's mysterious descent\nto Persephone. Goethe's own words\n(quoted in Note 64) show that he had\nprojected the scene; but here, in the\nvestibule, the doors suddenly close, and\nno voice from the adytum of Hades\nreaches our ears. Faust disappears, and\nwe see him no more until the middle of\nthe next Act, where the character of\nthe allegory is entirely changed. There\ncan be no doubt that Goethe found his\npowers inadequate to the execution of\nhis design, and, as at the close of the\nFirst Part, he left the reader's imagina-\n\nFaust.\n\ntion to span the chasm for which he\ncould build no poetic bridge.\n\nThe Classical Walpurgis-Night falls,\nnaturally, into three divisions of nearly\nequal length. The first division closes\nhere: the representation of the develop-\nment of the Beautiful through the\nGrecian mind is temporarily suspended,\nand a very different element is intro-\nduced.\n\n77. Health is none where water fails!\n\nWe return from Manto's Temple, at\nthe foot of Olympus, to the Upper\nPeneus, where the preceding scene\nopens. 'The premonitions which the\nRiver-god then uttered, are about to be\nverified. The Sirens reappear, but (we\nmust assume) stripped of their former\nsymbolism: they are now evidently\nrepresentatives of the Neptunic theory\nin geology, and the * ill-starred folk\"\nof whom they sing must be the Pluto-\nnists. 'The above line—in German,\nOhne Wasser ist kein Heil! — declares\nthe former theory at once, though it\nalso suggests the well-known phrase of\nThales, ariston men?udor. -The word:\nHeil means either health or salvation;\nand the latter rendering would perhaps\nbe more correct here. Goethe un-\ndoubtedly selected the Sirens to describe\nthe earthquake, because they are the\nonly characters already introduced who\nare directly associated with the Sea,\n\n78. SEISMOS.\n\nGoethe makes a personification of the\nEarthquake (Zecpéds), in order the bet-\nter to satirize the Plutonists.\n\nNotes.\n\nIt is now time that I should endeavor\nto represent, as clearly as may be possi-\nble, what Goethe has introduced in this\ndivision of the Classical Walpurgis-\nNight, and why he_ has introduced\nit. A thorough and satisfactory com-\nmentary would involve the statement of\nscientific questions which require much\nspecial knowledge; but, on the other\nhand, it is inexpedient to wander too\nfar from the tracks we have been follow-\ning. Goethe did not intend this epi-\nsode to be a digression. The pains he\nhas taken to weave together the two\nthreads, of such irreconcilable texture,\nare very evident, yet he has none the\nless failed in his attempt. I only feel\nbound, therefore, to present whatever\nmay be strictly necessary to the under-\nstanding of this foreign element, and its\nelimination from the genuine substance\nof the drama.\n\nDiintzer has carefully collected the\nprincipal facts, and so skilfully arranged\nthem that I only need to abbreviate his\nmaterial, and add to ita few illustrations\nfrom Goethe's writings. The Neptunic\ntheory in geology, to which Goethe\nearly became a convert, originated with\nWerner, and is based on his observa-\ntions of mountain-strata. Taking gran-\nite as the original base, he taught that\nthe later formations were successive de-\nposits from a primeval ocean or from\ndenser atmospheres; that, as Goethe\nexpressed it, the Earth, slowly and by\na progressive, harmonious development,\nbuilded itself; and that earthquakes and\nvolcanic fires, although permanent phe-\nnomena, were not universal creative\n\nagencies. When Werner, in 1788, de-\nclared that basalt was formed through\nthe action of water, the struggle of\ntheories commenced, and the _ terms\n<< Neptunists\" and '* Plutonists\"\" began\nto be heard. Inthe Xezien, written in\n1796, Goethe speaks of the short-lived\ntriumph of the latter, in regard to basalt.\n\nNevertheless, Plutonism was not dead.\nThe theory of the upheaval of moun-\ntain-chains through the action of inter-\nnal forces rapidly gained ground in the\nscientific world. Its champions were two\ndistinguished geologists, Leopold von\nBuch in Germany and Elie de Beaumont in\nFrance, to whom, about 1820, was add-\ned Alexander von Humboldt. Goethe,\naroused from his security in regard to\nthe Neptunic theory, now began to ex-\npress his views, less in the way of im-\npartial scientific discussion than as a\nmatter of feeling, —— we may even say,\nprejudice. He wrote, at this time:\n«¢ When the Earth began to interest me\nin a scientific sense, and I endeavored to\nbecome acquainted with its mountain\nmasses, internally and externally, in\ngenerals as in particulars,— in those\ndays, we had a foothold where to stand,\nand we could not have wished a better\none. We were directed to Granite as\nthe highest and the deepest, we respected\nit in this sense, and labored to investi-\ngate it more closely.\"\n\nIt is evident that the rapid and gen-\neral acceptance of the theory of upheaval\nwas a great annoyance to him. Like\nan earthquake, it seemed to threaten his\nfaith in the stability of the Earth itself.\nTo his mind, it substituted violence,\n\nconvulsion, and a series of chaotic acci-\ndents, for the quiet, undisturbed, sublime\nprocess of creation. In a paper enti-\ntled «* Geological Problems and an At-\ntempt at their Solution,\" he wrote:\n«* The case may be as it pleases, but it\nmust be written that I curse this execra-\nble racket and lumber room of the new\norder of creation! And certainly some\nyoung man of genius will arise, who\nshall have the courage to oppose this\ncrazy unanimity.\" In a letter written\nto Zelter in 1827, he says, referring to\nLeopold von Buch, \"I know very well\nwhat we owe to him and others of his\nclass ; but it is not well that the gentle-\nmen immediately set up a priesthood,\nand try to force upon us, together with\nthat for which we are grateful, that\nwhich they do not know, possibly do\nnot believe. Now that the human race\nmoves especially in herds, they will\nsoon lead the majority after them, and\n'@ purely progressive, problem-reveren-\ncing mind will stand alone. Since I\nwill quarrel no more, — which I never\ndid willingly, — JZ now allow myself to\nridicule, and to attack their weak side,\nof which they are no doubt aware.\"\n\nI must add one more passage, from a\nletter written to Zelter in November,\n\n1829, while Goethe was preparing the |\n\nmaterial of the Classical Walpurgis-\nNight: « Unfortunately, my cotempo-\nraries are quite tooeccentric. Recently\nthe Milanese announced to me with\namazement, that Herr von B. [Buch]\nwould demonstrate to their eyes that the\nEuganzan Hills, which they have hith-\nerto looked upon as a natura] outpost of\n\nFaust.\n\nthe Alps, rose up suddenly from the\nearth at some time or other. They are\nabout as well pleased at that, as savages\nat the preaching of a missionary. Now,\nlast of all, it is announced [Humboldt's\nSiberian Journey ?] that the Altai was\nonce conveniently squeezed up from\nthe depths. And you may thank God\nthat the belly of the earth does not\nchoose to fall in somewhere between\nBerlin and Potsdam, in order to get rid\nof the fermentation in the same way.\nThe Academy at Paris has sanctioned\nthe declaration that Mont Blanc arose\nfrom the abyss last of all, after the crust\nof the earth was completely formed.\nThus the nonsense accumulates, and\nwill become a universal faith of the peo-\nple and savaas, like the faith in witches,\ndevils, and their works, in the darkest\nages.\"\nIf these passages show the bitterness\nof Goethe's prejudices, the unreasoning\nhostility he manifested to views based\non honest and careful research, they\nshow at the same time the secret source\nof his irritation. He must have consid-\nered the new theory as one of the\nphenomena of an approaching '* Storm\nand Stress\" period in Science, and\nhave turned from it with the same revul-\nsion of feeling as from that period in\nLiterature, fifty years before. He suf-\nfered his esthetic instincts to mould his\n\n- scientific opinions, for the two had long\n\nbeen harmonized in his own mind.\nWe must, therefore, now turn to that\nfancied harmony for an explanation of\nthe intrusion of his scientific opinions\ninto the lofty zsthetic plan of this epi-\n\nNotes.\n\nsode. The two errors account for each\nother. The desperation with which\nhe clung to the ground, which we can\nsee he felt to be slipping from beneath\nhis feet, shows how his intellect had\nsucceeded in uniting Man and Nature,\nthe individual, the race, and the planet,\nin one consistent and harmonious scheme,\nwherein the poem and the mountain,\nthe flower and the statue, obeyed the\nsame laws of growth. It was thus\nmuch more than the Neptunic theory\nof which the Plutonists deprived him.\n\nViewing the scene from this stand-\npoint, we may guess that Goethe justi-\nfied it to his own mind, and perhaps\nconsidered that his Ideal of the develop-\nment of Nature should of right be inter-\nwoven with his artistic Ideal. The part\ngiven to Homunculus in the illustra-\ntion of the Neptunic scheme strengthens\nthis conjecture. The details of the\ndouble plan will be further explained\nin the following Notes.\n\nIt is also probable that persons, cir-\ncumstances, and events are occasionally\nindicated. The prominence of the\ngeological discussion has long since\npassed away; but the Witches' Kitchen\nand Walpurgis-Night of the First Part\nbetray a wilful habit of reference to\npassing events or temporary interests,\nwhich we may well suppose is retained\nin this scene. Goethe, speaking of the\nClassical Walpurgis-Night as a whole,\nsaid to Eckermann : \" I have so separat-\ned from the particular subjects and gen-\neralized whatever of pique I have in-\ntroduced, that the reader may indeed\ndetect references, but will not recognize\n\nany one to whom they would properly\napply. I have endeavored, however,\nto represent everything in the antique\nmanner, in distinct outlines, and to\navoid any vagueness and uncertainty,\nsuch as is allowed by the Romantic\nmethod.\"\n\n79. For the Sphinxes bere are planted,\n\nThe arbitrary manner in which Goe-\nthe employs the forms of his duplicate\nallegory, using one or the other separate\nmeaning, or blending both, at will, |\nmust not for a moment be lost sight of,\nin threading the mazes of the Classical\nWalpurgis-Night. If the Sphinxes, in\nthe preceding scenes, represent the\nstruggle of Art to rise from the animal\nto the human form, it is very evident\nthat such a symbolism is entirely out of\nplace here, where the new element is\nintroduced. 'They were the prophecy\nof coming Beauty, to Faust, the * grand\nand solid features,\"' manifested in spite\nof the repulsiveness belonging to all\nundeveloped forms. Here, they seem\nto represent calm, stability, unchange,\nin opposition to the violence and con-\nvulsion of Seismos. We may even\nconjecture that the lines:\n\n\"* But no further shall be granted,\nFor the Sphinxes here are planted,\"\nindicate that, while Goethe admits the\nlocal operation of volcanic forces, he\n\n'insists that their agency is limited and\n\nrestricted by the eternal cosmic law of\ngradual and harmonious creation.\n\nThe reference to the island of Delos\nis a variation of a legend mentioned by\nPindar, wherein the island, which had\n\npreviously floated on the waves, was\nmade stationary by Apollo, for the sake\nof his mother Latona. Pliny also speaks\nof the volcanic origin of Delos and\nother isles of the A®gean.\n\nWhen Seismos answers, the poetic\naspect of force, which suggested the\nTitans, seems, in spite of his theory, to\nhave kindled Goethe's imagination,\nForgetting his scientific prejudice, he\ngives full play to the new and pictu-\nresque fancy ; the passage is perhaps the\nfinest in the scene. Some of the com-\nmentators imagine that the line:\n\n'¢ How stood aloft your mountains ever,\"\n\ncontains a reference to Elie de Beau-\nmont; but the pun would be incomplete,\nand its application not very clear.\n\n80. GRIFFINS,\n\nThe sudden appearance of the Grif-\nfins, Emmets, Pygmies, and Dactyls, as\ninhabitants of the newly-created moun-\ntain, and their activity, both in collect-\ning gold and arming toattack the Herons\n(Neptunists), is a new bewilderment,\nand many of the German critics leave\nit without attempting an explanation.\nWhile we cannot hope for a clear and\ncomplete interpretation of every detail,\nthe design of the whole scene at least\npoints out the direction which out\nguesses should take. The circum-\nstance that Goethe represents the\nPlutonists by those purely grotesque\nforms, from which Mephistopheles\ntakes his departure towards the Ideal\nUgliness, shows his attempt to blend\nthe accidental scientific element with\n\nFaust\n\nhis original zsthetic plan. This can\nhardly be a mere coincidence. Thus\nfar, if we accept it, the choice of char-\nacters is explained.\n\nFor their further significance, we\nmust remember the extent to which\nGoethe was irritated by the general ac-\nceptance of the Plutonic theory. The\nGriffins and Ants, we may guess, repre-\nsent those who at once give in their ad-\nherence to every new scientific régime,\nand fancy that its principles are so\nmany great intellectual treasures, which\nthey hasten to collect and possess. The\nPygmies and Dactyls (Thumblings and\nFingerlings) are the crowds of students\nand smatterers who are unable to free\nthemselves from the chains of the new\ntheorist ; who find themselves, without\nknowing how it happened, under his\nauthority, intellectual serfs, forced to\nservice and obedience, without any ref-\nerence to their own wills. The Pygmy-\nElders and the Generalissimo are, of\ncourse, the rulers: it would hardly be\ntoo much to say that the former repre-\nsent the members of the French Acad-\nemy, and that the latter is Elie de\nBeaumont or Leopold von Buch. Ho-\nmer's account of the battle between the\nPygmies and the Cranes suggested the\nintroduction of the Herons as Neptun-\nists. The Generalissimo orders the\nslaughter of these water-haunting birds,\nthat the Pygmies may feather their hel-\nmets with the crested plumes.\n\n81. THe Cranes or Isycus.\n\nThe 'fat-paunched, bow-legged\nknaves\" of Plutonists are triumphant,\n\nNotes.\n\nand wear the plumes they have plun-\ndered from the slaughtered Neptunists.\nBut the Cranes, in their airy voyage,\nhave seen the murder, and like the\n«¢ Cranes of Ibycus,\"' in Schiller's ballad,\nthey are the agents appointed by Fate to\nrevenge the deed.\n\nIbycus, the poet, on his way from\nRhegium to attend the Isthmian games,\nwas attacked by robbers in the pine-\ngrove dedicated to Neptune, near Cor-\ninth. Far from all help, cut down, and\ndying, with his last breath he called to\na flock of cranes, flying in a long file\nover the grove, and invoked them to\nbear abroad the news of the murder.\nHis body was found, carried to Corinth,\nand recognized; and the grief of the\npopulace, assembled at the games, was\nloud for the loss of their favorite singer,\nIbycus. Suddenly, during a pause in\nthe performance, while the great amphi-\ntheatre was silent, a file of cranes passed\noverhead, and a mocking voice was\nheard, saying: '* There are the Cranes\nof Ibycus!\"? The suspicions of the\npeople were instantly aroused, the\nspeaker and his accomplice were picked\nout from the audience, and the amphi-\ntheatre became a tribunal of judgment.\nThe murderers confessed the deed, and\nthe Cranes revenged Ibycus. Such is\nthe story which Schiller has embodied\nin one of his most admirable ballads.\n\nWhen Goethe wrote, in 1827, \" Cer-\ntainly some young man of genius will\narise, who shall have the courage to op-\npose this crazy unanimity,\" he antici-\npated the overthrow of the Plutonic\ntheory. In his selection of Schiller's\n\n«Cranes of Ibycus,\" to summon his\nNeptunic kindred to the revenge which\nis only announced, not immediately per-\nformed, there is a touching suggestion\nef his own loneliness. The 'endless\nhate\" which is sworn is not the true\nsubstance of hate (which Goethe de-\nclared to be a passion only possible to\nyouth): it is merely an impatient ex-\nclamation, veiling a pang of longing for\nthe great friend who had passed away,\nand of disappointment that no one\ncame to his side to help him turn his\nintrenched defence into an open assault.\n\n82. Dame Ilse watches for us from ber\n\nstone.\n\nSchnetger says: ' There is also a\nlittle venom in the circumstance, that\nthe reappearing Mephistopheles finds\nwhat he seeks in this world of the Vul-\ncanists. 'In your fire-world,' Goethe\nvirtually exclaims, ' the Devil can attain\nhis object ; there is enough of the Ugly,\nthe Vulgar, the Abominable there, but\nnothing whatever of the Noble and the\nBeautiful.' But even the Devil grumbles\nover these new surface-inflations, and\npraises his secure Brocken of a thousand\nyears, with its primitive and eternal\nforms of the I]senstein, Heinrichshdhe,\nthe Snorers, and Elend: he greatly pre-\nfers such a soil to this uncertain quake-\nworld.\"\n\nMephistopheles mentions not only\n\"the region of Schierke and Elend\"\nof the First Walpurgis-Night, but also\nthe Ilsenstein, which is one of the fea-\ntures of the approach to the Brocken\non the northern side, by way of the\n\nIlsethal. Heine, in his Ressebilder,\ndescribes the stream of the Ilse, as it\nplunges down the glen, from the Hein-\nrichshohe, in a spirited passage, which\nI quote from Mr. Leland's transla-\ntion: —\n\n\"* No pen can describe the merriment,\nsimplicity, and gentleness with which\nthe Ilse leaps or glides amid the wildly-\npiled rocks which rise in her path, so\nthat the water strangely whizzes or\nfoams in one place among rifted rocks,\nand in another wells through a thousand\ncrannies, as if from a giant watering-\npot, and then, in collected stream, trips\naway over the pebbles like a merry\nmaiden. Yes—the old legend is true,\nthe Ilse is a princess, who, laughing in\nbeauty, runs adown the mountain. How\nher white foam-garment gleams in the\nsunshine! How her silvered scarf flut-\nters in the breeze! How her diamonds\nflah!.... The flowers on the bank\nwhisper, Oh take us with thee; take us\nwith thee, dear sister.\n\n\"'T am the princess Ilse,\nAnd dwell in Ilsenstein ;\nCome with me to my castle,\nThou shalt be blest and mine!\n\nI'll kiss thee and caress thee,\nAs in the ancient day,\n\nI listened to Emperor Henry,\nWho long has past away.\"\n\n83. Lamia.\n\nThe original Lamia, the daughter of\nBelus and Libya, was beloved by Jupi-\nter, and then transformed, through\nJuno's jealousy, into a hideous, child-\n\nFaust.\n\ndevouring monster. Lilith, the noctur-\nnal, female vampire of the Hebrews,\nmentioned in Isaiah, is rendered Lamia\nin the Vulgate. In the piural, they ap-\npear to have corresponded, very nearly,\nto the witches of the Middle Ages, who,\nindeed, were then frequently called\nLamia. Keats's poem of ** Lamia,\" in\nwhich the bride, recognized by the\nkeen-eyed sage, returns to her original\nserpent-form, represents another of the\nsuperstitions attached to the race.\n\nMephistopheles (probably remember-\ning the Thessalian witches promised by\nHomunculus) is attracted by forms hav-\ning so much family likeness to those\nwith which he is familiar; and when\nwe recall Goethe's opinion of Mérimée\nand Victor Hugo (vide Note 24), we\nmay suppose an indirect reference, in\nthis episode, to the approach of the\nClassic and Romantic schools in the\nelements farthest removed from Reauty.\nThe scientific satire, at least, is here\ntemporarily suspended, but to be soon\nagain resumed.\n\n84. Empusa, with the ass's foot.\n\nEmpusa (the ' one-footed,\" as the\nname denotes) had one human foot and\none ass's hoof, and is therefore fairly\nentitled to call Mephistopheles * cousin.\"\nGoethe probably took her, as well as\nsome other characters of the Classical\nWalpurgis-Night, from Bottiger, with\nwhose works he was well acquainted.\nEmpusa is mentioned in * The Frogs\"\nof Aristophanes, and also in the life of\nApollonius Tyana, by Philostratus.\nShe had not the same habit of transfor-\n\nNotes.\n\nmation as the other Lamiz, but sur-\npassed them all in her hideous appear-\nance and her cannibalic habits.\n\nMephistopheles, however, is too ugly\nand repulsive for even these. They\nsimply amuse themselves with him, and\nthen send him further. The transfor-\nmations which they undergo when he\nattempts to grasp them are characteristic\nof the Lamia, but, at the same time,\nthey suggest some additional meaning.\nWhat it is [ cannot guess, and I find noth-\ning in any of the commentaries which\nthrows the least light on the passage.\nDiintzer's explanation is entirely inade-\nquate.\n\n85. Oreap (from the natural rock).\n\nHere the Oread is the spirit of a pri-\nmeval mountain, created according to\nthe Neptunic theory. But she is not\nintroduced solely for the purpose of\nridiculing the neighboring Plutonic\nmountain which Seismos has created\nby upheaval, and which, she declares,\n''will vanish at the crow of cock.\"\nWhen Mephistopheles exclaims :\n\n\"'Honor to thee, thou reverend Head!\"\n\nit is again Goethe who speaks; and\nthe circumstance that Homunculus, who\nhas been invisible during the whole\nPlutonic episode, now suddenly shows\nhis light among the thickets covering\nthe natural rock, hints that the Oread is\nimmediately responsible for his reap-\npearance. If we attach to Homunculus\nthe part which I have ventured to pro-\npose, — if we assume that he is the zs-\nthetic principle in Goethe's own nature,\n\nseeking the commencement of a frée, -\njoyous and harmonious being, — the\npassage receives a distinct and easily in-\ntelligible meaning. As I have given,\nin Note §9, the other varieties of inter-\npretation, the reader may apply them\nfor himself, here as elsewhere, if he\nfinds reason to reject my suggestion.\n\n86. ANaxacoras (fo THALES).\n\nThe representatives of the two geo-\nlogical theories are now introduced.\nGoethe's choice of Anaxagoras and\nThales is too evidently dictated by\nwhat is known of the systems of those\nphilosophers, to need any further expla-\nnation. The former wrote of eclipses,\nearthquakes, and meteoric stones; the\nlatter derived all life and physical phe-\nnomena from water; yet both based\ntheir theories on ** Nature,\" and equally\nsought to solve her mysteries. Homun-\nculus, impatient to begin existence,\nseems to heed the counsel of Mephis-\ntopheles (Goethe) to dare to err, as the\nonly means of arriving at understand-\ning.* Consequently, no sooner does\nthe dispute between the two philoso-\nphers recommence, than he steps be-\ntween them, seeking guidance.\n\n# This is a maxim which Goethe has ex-\nThe line in the\nPrologue in Heaven: ° Es irrt der Mensch, so\n\npressed in manifold forms.\n\nlang er strebt,\" is an important part of the argu-\nment of Faust. In Wilhelm Meister he asserts\nthat each man must be developed in his own\nway in order to attain a genuine independence;\nand therefore, that he had better err when error\nwill gradually lead him into his own true path,\nthan walk mechanically aright on the path pre-\nscribed for him by another.\n\n_ The words of Thales : —\n\nTo every wind the billows yielding are :\nYet from the cliff abrupt they keep them-\nselves afar,\" —\n\nundoubtedly indicate what Goethe con-\nsidered to be the easy acquiescence of\nother geologists in the Plutonic theory,\nand his own stubborn position; yet it\nis.a little singular that he should have\nchosen the Neptunic * billows\" as\nsymbols of his antagonists !\n\n87. And 'tis not Force, even ona mighty\nscale.\n\nThe four lines very tersely express\nGoethe's scientific creed. In 1831 he\nsaid: '**The older I grow, the more\nsurely I rely upon that law by which\nthe rose and the lily blossom.\" He\nrecognized no beauty except in propor-\ntion, no harmony except in gradual,\nordered development. When we re-\nmember his constant aspiration, as an\nauthor, to attain unto a pure objective\nvision, we may well wonder that in this\ninstance he was not only unable, but\nfiercely unwilling, to liberate himself\nfrom prejudice. _ But, after carefully\nstudying his life, we find that we have\nto deal with more than an intellectual\npeculiarity : it rests on the deeper basis\nof his moral, and even physical, nature,\nand was directly inherited from his\nmother. The Frau Aja, as she was\naffectionately called by the Weimar\ncourt-circle, was a woman of clear,\nlively intellect, of admirable frankness\nand honesty, and of warm and strong\nfeelings. Yet, with all her force of\n\nFaust,\n\ncharacter, she was unable to endure\nanxiety, suspense, the ordinary shocks\nand plagues of life. She always begged\nher family and friends to hide from her\nevery coming appearance of misfortune,\nand only to mention that which was\npast, and to be inevitably supported.\nThe circle around Goethe were so fa-\nmiliar with the same peculiarity in his\nnature, that they avoided speaking to\nhim of losses which they knew he felt\nkeenly. Even the love of woman\nseems to have been, to him, more an\nunrest than a bliss, as is clearly shown\nin his relations to Frederike and Lili.\n\nIt would be easy to give many direct\nillustrations of Goethe's hostility to\nevery influence which interfered with\nhis quiet, harmonious development,\nand to show how such a strong quality\nof his nature must have moulded (per-\nhaps unconsciously to himself) his scien-\ntific views. The better our knowledge\nof the poet, the less we shall be sur-\nprised to find him introducing, here, an\nelement foreign to the original plan of\nthe drama. The artistic mistake which\nwe perceive was not one to him.\n\nThe two philosophers take no no-\ntice of Homunculus, until Anaxagoras,\nafter seeing that the new mountain is\nalready peopled, offers to make the for-\nmer king over the Pygmies and Dactyls.\nDiintzer says of this passage: ' Anax-\nagoras does not recognize the genuine\nnature of Homunculus; he sees only\nthe external appearance, the little form,\nthe imprisonment in the phial. On\naccount of his J/itt/eness, and not, as\nothers assert, because he is a spirit of\n\nNotes.\n\nfire, does Anaxagoras esteem him to be\ncompetent to rule over the little people.\nHe seeks to exist, to enter the reality\nof life, which can only be attained\nthrough gradual development; but An-\naxagoras desires to make him king at\none blow, quite in the spirit of the\ntheory of upheaval, which would create\nall things suddenly and violently.\"\n\nThales answers as a Neptunist, and\ndescribes the destruction of the Pygmies\nby the Cranes of Ibycus. The latter\nevent was possibly intended as a proph-\necy; or, at least, as a satirical declara-\ntion that the Plutonists, if forced to give\nup the theory of upheaval, would next\ninsist that mountain-peaks were created\nby meteoric stones projected from the\nvolcanoes of the moon. This view is\nentirely consistent with all that we\nknow of Goethe's temper, before and\nduring the time when the scene was\nwritten,\n\n88. Then were it true, Thessalian Py-\nthonesses.\n\nThis is a reference to an old Grecian\nmyth, mentioned in the Gorgias of Pla-\nto and the C/ouds of Aristophanes.\nHorace, also, (Carm. V.,) has the\n\nlines : —\n\n\" Que sidera excantata voce Thessala\nLunamque ccelo deripit.\"\n\nWe are to suppose that only a me-\nteoric stone has fallen, but that Anax-\nagoras, in his excited fancy, imagines\nthat the orb of the moon is rushing\ndown upon the earth. . Thales per-\nceives nothing but that \"' the Hours are\n\ncrazy\"; the moon is shining quietly in\nher place. But a meteoric mass has re-\nally fallen, giving a pointed head to\nthe round Hill of Seismos, and crushing\nPygmies and Cranes in one common\ndestruction. Perhaps Goethe meant to\nhint, satirically, that the theory of crea-\ntion '* from above\" (as Homunculus\nsays) is quite as rational as that of crea-\ntion by upheaval. Ifso, he has curiously\nanticipated one of the most recent scien-\ntific ideas, —that of the growth and\nphysical change of planets, by accretion\nfrom the meteoric belts.\n\nThales says, positively, to Homun-\nculus: '*'T was but imagined so,\"\nand then sets out, with him, for his\nfavorite element, leaving Anaxagoras\nprostrate on his face. Here the direct\nscientific allegory terminates, and we\npick up the zsthetic thread again.\n\n89. The Phorkyads !\n\nThe Phorkyads, or, more correctly,\nPhorkids, were the three daughters of\nPhorkys (Darkness) and Keto (The\nAbyss). Their names were Deino,\nPephredo, and Enyo: Hesiod, in his\nTheogony, gives only the two last.\nThey were also called the Graie.\nThey were said to have, in common,\nbut one eye and one tooth, which they\nused alternately, and to dwell at the ut-\ntermost end of the earth, where neither\nsun nor moon beheld them. They rep-\nresent the climax of all which the\nGreek imagination has created of horri-\nble and repulsive. Mephistopheles, con-\nsequently, is ravished with delight: he\nhas found the Ideal Ugliness. His flat-\n\ntery serves also to hint that while North-\nern or Romantic Art (in the Middle\nAges) was accustomed to represent the\nDevil and all manner of hideous and\ngrotesque Fiends, Classic Art only oc-\ncupied itself with shapes of beauty.\nThe Phorkyads dwelt in gloom, un-\nunknown, and only not unnamed.\nThe Lamia rejected the Northern\nDevil, for he was still uglier than they,\nbut the Phorkyads admit him into their\ntriad. He suffers a classical change\ninto something hideous and strange,\nand disappears from the Walpurgis-\nNight, to reappear, in his new form, in\nthe Helena.\n\ngo. Rocky Coves or THE AUGEAN SEA.\n\nWith this scene commences the third\nand last of the three parts into which\nthe Classical Walpurgis-Night naturally\ndivides itself. The first part, as we\nhave seen, gradually eliminates the\nBeautiful from the Grotesque, separates\nthe opposite paths of Faust and Mephis-\ntopheles, and closes with the disappear-\nance of Faust, on his way to implore\nHelena from the shades. The second\npart introduces the Plutonic theory in\ngeology as a disturbing element, satirizes\nit, symbolizes its overthrow, decides\nthe course of Homunculus by attaching\nhim to the Neptunic Thales, and closes\nwith the union of Mephistopheles and\nhis ugly Ideal.\n\nThe development of the Idea of the\nBeautiful is now taken up at the point\nwhere it was suspended, and carried\nonward ; but Homunculus is henceforth\nthe central figure of the changing\n\nFaust.\n\ngroups. The reader will remark, how-\never, that this and the following scene\nare strictly Neptunic: the characters\nall belong to the Ocean, and the occa-\nsion which calls them together is a fes-\ntival of Nereus. Although Goethe's\nscientific creed is constantly suggested,\nit is subordinate to his esthetic plan,\nand hardly interferes with it. His few\nbrief references are like so many low\nrocks, which cannot interrupt the multi-\ntudinous dance of the waves.\n\nOken, for whom Goethe felt a hearty\nand admiring respect, has the following\npassage: '*Light shines on the salt\nflood, and it becomes alive. Ill life is\nfrom the sea, nothing from the firm\nland: the entire ocean is living. It is\na billowy, ever-upheaving and again\nsubsiding organism. ... . Love is a\nbirth of the sea-foam. . . . . The first\norganic forms issued from the shallow\nplaces of the great ocean, here plants,\nthere animals. Man, also, is a child of\nthe warm shallows of the sea, in the\nneighborhood of the land.\" This pas-\nsage, which Goethe certainly knew, and\nprobably accepted in a poetical sense,\nwill throw some light on what fol-\nlows.\n\ngt. Steering away to Samothrace.\n\nWe must suppose that the scene\nopens on the Thessalian coast, near the\nmouth of the Peneus, and therefore\nalmost in sight of the mountain-isle of\n\nSamothrace. The purpose of the Ne-\n\n- reids and Tritons, in their journey\n\nthither, will be presently revealed.\nMeanwhile Thales conducts Homuncu-\n\nNotes.\n\nlus to Nereus, the Graybeard of the\nSea, whom Hesiod describes as just and\nfriendly, and well-disposed towards the\nhuman race.\n\nNereus, however, in words which\nare almost an echo of Goethe's own\nexpressions, refuses to give counsel.\n''The giving of advice is a peculiar\nthing,\" said Goethe to Eckermann,\n'¢and when one has had some chance\nof seeing how, in the world, the most\nintelligent plans fail and the absurdest\noften turn out successfully, one is in-\nclined to give up the idea of furnishing\nadvice to anybody. At the bottom, in-\ndeed, the asking of advice denotes a re-\nstricted nature, and the giving of it an\nassuming one.\"\" The reference to Paris\nis suggested by a passage in Horace\n(Ode I.), where Nereus is represented\nas having appeared in a calm to Paris,\non his way to the Troad with Helena,\nand predicted to him the coming war\nand ruin.\n\ngz. The Graces of the Sea, the Dorides.\n\nThe Dorides were the daughters of\nNereus and the sea-nymph Doris, but\nare called Nereids in the Grecian my-\nthology. Goethe's object in calling them\nDorides and presenting them as the\ndaughters of Nereus, while the Nereids\nare introduced without any hint of their\nrelationship, has puzzled the commenta-\ntors; and since any attempt at explana-\ntion must be merely conjecture, without\nevidence, I leave the question as it\nstands. 'There seems, also, to be no\nground whatever for the declaration of\nNereus that Galatea was worshipped at\n\nPaphos in the place of Cypris (Aphro-\ndite). Thus far, none of the Olympian\nGods or Goddesses have been intro-\nduced; and the fresco of Galatea by\nRaphael, which Goethe knew, together\nwith the description of a very similar\npicture, mentioned by Philostratus, un-\ndoubtedly suggested to him the propriety\nof giving her the place which really be-\nlongs to Aphrodite, as the representa-\ntive of Helena (Beauty). .\n\nIt is possible that the reason why\nNereus refuses to help Homunculus to\nbeing, and refers him to Proteus, is,\nthat Goethe intends the former to be\nan embodiment of accomplished, com-\npleted existence, while the latter repre-\nsents Transformation, and therefore —\nsince Homunculus must begin with the\nlowest form of organic life——he must\nbe first consulted.\n\n93. Three have we brought bither.\n\nThe introduction of the Cadiri, an-\ncient Egyptian and Pheenician deities,\nin this place, is more difficult to explain\nthan that of the geological element in\nthe preceding scene. I can discover\n.no dramatic, esthetic, or even metaphys-\nical reason for turning back from the\nhuman forms which we have reached,\nwith their increasing poetry and beauty,\nto the uncouth gods of Samothrace, —\nespecially since nothing comes of the\ncircumstance. The whole episode\nseems to have been wilfully inserted, as\nthe consequence of a whim or a tempo-\nrary interest in the subject.\n\nSchelling's work '* The Deities of\nSamothrace,\" published in 1815, first\n\ndirected Goethe's attention to these\nprimitive creatures. Creuzer, in his\n'Symbolism and Mythology\" and\nLobeck in his ** Aglaophamus \"' contin-\nued the archzological discussion, which,\nconsidering the remote and uncertain\nnature of the subject, was carried on\nfor a time with a good deal of sarcasm\nand bitterness. 'The dispute had not\nsubsided when Goethe wrote this scene\nin 1830; and it was perhaps natural\nthat he should have overrated its impor-\ntance.\n\nThe Cabiri were originally three.\nIn Memphis they had a temple and\nwere worshipped as the sons of Phthas\n(Hephzstos). They appear to have\nbeen colonized on Samothrace by the\nPheenicians, and their mysteries were\ncelebrated there with orgies borrowed\nfrom the phallic worship of the Egyp-\ntians. Three female deities were sub-\nsequently added to their number; but\nCreuzer insists that there were seven,\ncorresponding to the seven planets, with\na possible eighth, representing the sun.\nThe names of the first three were Axi-\nerus, Axiokersus, and Axiokersa, and\nthe fourth, Kadmilus, being added asa\nuniting principle, they became together,\naccording to Creuzer, a symbol of the\nspheral harmony. This may explain\nGoethe's allusion to the fourth.\n\nThe Hebrew word, Kadbirim, is\ntranslated by Gesenius, «* The Mighty.\"\nFirst says that Kaddirim was the name\nof the seven sons of Tzadik, in Pheeni-\ncian mythology. The Arabic word\nkebeer (great), still in use, is evidently\nthe same.\n\nFaust.\n\n94. These incomparable, unchainable.\n\nThis quatrain seems to be aimed at\nthe archzologists. Schelling had as-\nserted that the Cabiri represented a\nchain of symbols, the first being Huzger,\nthe second Nature, gradually rising to\nthe latest and highest, who correspond-\ned to the Zeus of the Greeks. Goethe\ntransfers the desire of these lower dei-\nties to reach the places of the higher to\nthe desire of the archzologists for unat-\ntainable knowledge.\n\nThe answer of the Sirens is a play\nupon Creuzer's adherence to the Ori-\nental symbolism of the sun, moon, and\nstars. Their reference to the Fleece of\nGold, that is, The Cabiri, is also meant\nfor satire, although it is so weak as to\nbe scarcely apparent.\n\n95. Had earthen pots for models.\n\nCreuzer, again. He asserted that\nthe Cabiri were originally worshipped\nunder the form of thick-bellied earthen\njars, or pots. Schelling's interpretation\nof the names had been opposed, not\nonly by Creuzer, but by Paulus, De\nSacy, Welcker, and others, — whence\nthe mention of \" stubborn noddles.\"\n\nHere the episode, which we cannot\nbut feel is altogether unnecessary and\nunedifying, comes to an end.\n\n96. He bas no lack of qualities ideal,\nBut far too much of palpable and\n\nreal,\n\nThe description which Thales gives\nof Homunculus directly suggests many\n\nhints which Goethe let fall in regard to\n\nNotes.\n\nhis own nature. Ideas were never\nlacking to him; on the contrary, their\nvery profusion was a source of unrest\nand perplexity, since it was associated\nwith a difficulty in discovering the ap-\npropriate reality of form which Poetry\nrequires.\ntwo elements was what he most admired\n-and envied in Shakespeare ; and the\nstruggle of his life, to unite the Classic\nand the Romantic, was nothing more than\nto give the rare and subtile and delicate\nspirit of the latter the positive, palpable,\nsymmetrical form which he recognized\njin the former. If Homunculus verily\n{be Goethe's own Poetic Genius, it is\n'all the more easy te perceive how he\nwas here able to symbolize a powerful\naspiration of his nature, for which no\nother form of expression could be\nfound. The theme suggests a multitude\nof illustrations, and I resist with diffi-\nculty the temptation to develop it fur-\nther.\n\n97-\n\nrow pale.\n\nHomer describes the transformations\nof Proteus in the Fourth Book of the\nOdyssey, where Menelaus forces him\nto appear in his proper form. Thales\nmakes use of the curiosity of Proteus to\naccomplish the same result.\n\nGoethe, here, and from this point to\nthe end, attaches an additional meaning\nto Homunculus, partly, no doubt, in\norder to disguise the secret, personal\nsymbolism of the latter, and partly, also,\nbecause it enabled him to give a hint\nof his own palingenetic ideas. He\n\nThe perfect fusion of the\n\nOne starts there first within a nar-\n\nsuggests the gradual development of life,\nconstantly evolving higher forms from\nlower asa part of his theory of creation,\nin accordance with the Wernerian sys-\ntem. But when Thales says, in the\nfollowing scene (page 215) : —\n\nBe ready for the rapid plan!\n\nThere, by eternal canons wending,\n\nThrough thousand, myriad forms ascending,\nThou shalt attain, in time, to Man —\n\nhe expresses the psychological view of\nthe ancients rather than the scientific\nsystem of the moderns, of which Dar-\nwin is the latest and most successful\nillustrator. Goethe perhaps considered\nthat as all the series of organic life are\ntraversed in the development of the\nhuman embryo, so, reversely, the lowest\nseries already contains the preparation\nfor, and the prophecy of, the highest.\nSchnetger's interpretation, that Proteus\nrepresents Nature and bears Homuncu-\nlus on his back as the embryo of the hu-\nman race, which is to ascend 'through\nthousand, myriad forms\" to Man, is\nentirely consistent with this view.\n\nTELCHINES OF RHODES.\n\nThe Telchines of Rhodes, who were\ncalled Sons of the Sea, were the first\nworkers in metals. They made the\nknife of Kronos and the trident of\nPoseidon, and cast the first images of\nthe Gods in bronze. Their appear-\nance, here, indicates the dawn of the\nage of higher Grecian art. Pliny and\nTheophrastus are Goethe's authorities\nfor the sunny weather and pure atmos-\nphere of Rhodes. The very movement\nof the verse suggests brightness; we\n\nfeel that the sun and air are not those\nof Rhodes alone, but of all Classical art\nand literature.\n\nThe Telchines exalt Luna as the\nsister of Phabus, who was the tutelar\ndeity of Rhodes: the conclusion of\ntheir chorus seems to indicate the union\nof Religion and Art, and suggests Cole-\nridge's * fair humanities of old religion.\"\nProteus exalts organic being, life in the\nwaters, over the dead works of the\nTelchines, and hints at the overthrow\nof the Rhodian Colossus by an earth-\nquake.\n\nHartung's words upon this passage\nmay also be of service to the reader:\n'* From the rude fetich to an Olympian\nZeus by the hand of a Phidias, there is\nas great a gap as from the mollusk to the\nhuman form; and Art must run through\nthe whole career. In this festival of\nthe Sea, the poet has placed the develop-\nment of organic forms in Nature, rising\nin continual progression to Man, side\nby side with the development of Art, in\nReligion, from the fetich [Cabiri?] to\nthe height of a Phidias.\"\n\n99- That I also think is best.\n\nThe words of Thales are not meant\nas areply to Nereus. 'They are simply\na continuation of what he has before\n\nsaid: —\ns6°T is no ill fate\n\nIn one's own day to be true man and great.\"\n\n100. Psyztyr anp Mars.\n\nGoethe took from Pliny the Psylli\nand Marsi, who were snake-charmers in\n\nFaust.\n\nSouthern Italy and on the Libyan shore.\nHe arbitrarily makes them guardians of\nthe chariot of Cypris, in which they\nstill conduct Galatea by night, \"* unseen\nto the new generations,\" fearing neither\nthe Roman eagle, the winged lion of\nVenice, the crescent of the Saracen, nor\nthe cross of the Crusader. Why they\nare here introduced, is not so easy to\nexplain. Diintzer insists that, being\nmagicians, they represent the magic\npower of Beauty! Schnetger says they\nare nearer to Galatea than the Telchines\nof Rhodes, because they destroy snakes,\nwhich are ugly, and which, according\nto the Bible, are hostile to woman !\n\nIt is not necessary to quote the vari-\nety of meanings given by the commenta-\ntors to the interlude of the Dorides and\nthe young sailors whom they have res-\ncued from shipwreck. They, as well\nas the Telchines, the Psylli and Marsi,\nbelong to the triumphal convoy of\nGalatea. Hence they are all prognosti-\ncations of the coming Beauty, perhaps\nher symbolized attributes; and no sin-\ngle explanation could be satisfactory to\nevery reader. Hartung's guess seems to\nme very plausible, at least: «* The poet\nhas had in his mind the fable of Aurora\nand Tithonus, for that goddess could\nnot prevent her lover, for whom she\nhad obtained immortal life, from wither-\ning up into a grasshopper, from age.\nAnd thus we further perceive from the\npassage that Nature may indeed create\nthe highest beauty, but can only retain\nit for a moment; for Beauty increases\nunti] human maturity, then immediately\nbegins to fade.\"\n\nNotes.\n\n101. Galatea approaches om ber chariot\n\nof shell,\n\nGalatea, the lovely Nereid, here\ntakes the place of Helena, as Homun-\nculus takes the place of Faust. She is\nthe Ideal Beauty, the sea-born successor\nof Aphrodite. Goethe not only select-\ned her asa Neptunist, but he was also\ndirected to her, as I have already re-\nmarked, by Raphael and Philostratus.\nThe latter thus describes a picture of\nher: \"* The broad watery floor heaves\ngently under the chariot of the Beauty ;\nfour dolphins, harnessed together, seem\nurged forward by one impulse ; young\nTritons bridle them in order to curb\ntheir wanton plunges. But she stands\non her shell-chariot ; the purple mantle,\na sport of the wind, swells above her\nhead like a sail and shades her.\"\" Goe-\nthe says: '*It isimportant for our object,\nto place beside this description what\nRaphael, the Caracci and others have\ndone with the same subject.\" Raphael's\nfresco, in the Farnesina Palace in\nRome, represents Galatea standing\nin a chariot drawn by dolphins, who\nare driven by a Cupid. Around\nher are Tritons, blowing their conch-\nshells, and embracing the attendant\nNereids.\n\nIt is only a passing glimpse which the\npoet allows. Thales has hardly finished\nhis pzan to Water, as the creating and\nsustaining principle of life, when the\ntriumphal procession is already afar.\nThe long line of symbols has now\nreached its crown, and the allegory\nmust close.\n\n50!\n\n102. What fiery marvel the billows en-\n\nlightens ?\n\n' Homunculus sees at once the begin-\nning and the perfect result of existence,\nBeauty is all around him: his imprison-\ning glass glows and vibrates with his\npassionate yearning, and shivers itself at\nthe feet of Galatea. The waves around\nthe shell-chariot are covered as with\nfire: he begins life in the phosphores-\ncent animalculz of the Ocean.\n\nSome, here, imagine that Homuncu-\nlus represents Eros; others that he is\nGalatea (!); others that he is Faust's\nesthetic passion. I will only say that\nto one who has closely studied Goethe's\nlife ; who has detected how the cramped\nand restricted existence in Weimar be-\ncame almost unendurable to him, how\na new freedom came through his ac-\nquaintance with Classic Art in Italy,\nwith what passionate devotion he\nstrove to comprehend the Ideal of\nbeauty in the human form, shivering all\nformer moulds in which his intellectual\nbeing was confined, and pouring his na-\nture forth in an effusion of free and joy-\nous desire to create a new being for\nhimself, — to such a one, both symbols,\nwhich are here united in Homunculus,\nbecome clearly intelligible. If, in the\nBoy Charioteer and Plutus we recognize\nGoethe's relation to Karl August,\ncrowned by the leisure for poetic activ-\nity which the princely friend secured\nto the poet, may we not find symbol-\nized in Homunculus the struggle which\nresulted in that zwsthetic growth, that\nintellectual freedom, into which Goethe\n\nrose during and after his Italian journey,\nand finally, in Euphorion, the harmoni-\nous union of the Classic and Romantic\nelements in his own poetry, commen-\ncing with Iphigenia in Tauris and\nTasso?\n\nThe concluding chorus glorifies Eros,\nwhom Hesiod mentions as one of the\noriginal creative Powers. The four\nElements — Water, Fire, Air, and\nEarth — are celebrated, and Love is\nthe generative principle through which\nall life, from its first rudimentary forms\nto the Supreme Beauty, is begotten\nfrom them. We are reminded of one\nof Goethe's epigrams : —\n\nThou, in amazement, show'st me the Sea; it\nseems to be burning :\nWaves are broken in flame, meeting the\nnight-going ship !\nI am no longer amazed: from the Sea was\nborn Aphrodite ;\nWas not then born from her also the Flame,\nas her son?\n\n103. HELENA.\n\nThe Third Act is known in Ger-\nmany as The Helena, not only because\nit was separately published in 1827\nunder the title of ** Helena: a Classico-\nRomantic Phantasmagoria,\"' but also be-\ncause it is a complete allegorical poem\nin itself, inserted in the Second Part of\nFaust by very loose threads of attach-\nment. It represents, indecd, in one\nsense, the esthetic development of\n\n| Faust's nature, as an important part of\n\nhis experience of ** the greater world,\"\n'and a step by which he attains to the\n\\higher being to which he aspires ; but\n|\n\nFaust.\n\nthis has already been announced, and,\nin itself, demands no such elaboration.\nThe chief motive which governed Goe-\nthe was the reconciliation of the Classic\nand the Romantic: this dictated the\nform of the episode, which is quite as\nremarkable as its substance. Goethe,\nhimself, recognized the preponderance\nof the latter allegory, and at one time\ndebated whether he should not complete\nthe Helena as a separate work. It was\nperhaps Schiller's death which prevented\nthe fulfilment of this plan.\n\nI have related (in Appendix IL.,\nFirst Part) how Eckermann's suggestion\nled him, in 1825, to take up the neglect-\ned fragment, which was written in 1800.\nWe can scarcely be wrong in assuming\nthat the earlier scenes, read at the\nCourt of Weimar in 1780, were of an\nentirely different character, and that\nnothing of them was retained. At that\ntime the terms \" Classic\" and \"«* Roman-\ntic'? were not heard: Schiller's essay\n«©On Naive and Sentimental Poetry \"\nled to that literary discussion which\ndivided the German authors into dis-\ntinct parties, thus designated. A quar-\nter of a century later the conflict was\ntransferred to France, where it has\nscarcely yet subsided. The significance\nof the terms is, therefore, now so gen-\nerally understood that no special expla-\nnation is necessary. We need only re-\nmember that the culture of the German\npeople was then so high, and their in-\ntellectual interests so keen, that the sub-\nject possessed an importance which we\nare likely now to undervalue.\n\nWhen the He/ena was published, in\n\nNotes.\n\n1827, Goethe himself announced it in\nhis journal, Kunst und Alterthum, in an\narticle which must needs be quoted\nentire : *—\n\n\"HELENA. INTERLUDE IN FAUST.\n\n''Faust's character, in the elevation\nto whigh latter refinement, working on\nthe old rude tradition, has raised it,\nrepresents a man who, feeling impatient\nand imprisoned within the limits of\nmere earthly existence, regards the pos-\nsession of the highest knowledge, the\nenjoyment of the fairest blessings, as\ninsufficient even in the slightest degree\nto satisfy his longing: a spirit, accord-\ningly, which, struggling out on all sides,\never returns the more unhappy.\n\n'© This form of mind is so accordant\nwith our modern disposition, that vari-\nous persons of ability have been induced\nto undertake the treatment of such a\nsubject. My manner of attempting it\nobtained approval: distinguished men\nconsidered the matter, and commented\non my performance ; all which I thank-\nfully observed. At the same time I\ncould not but wonder that none of those\nwho undertook a continuation and com-\npletion of my Fragment, had lighted on\nthe thought, which seemed so obvious,\nthat the composition of a Second Part\nmust necessarily elevate itself altogether\naway from the hampered sphere of the\nFirst, and conduct a man of such a na-\nture into higher regions, under worthier\ncircumstances,\n\n* I borrow Carlyle's translation from his ar-\nticle 'Goethe's Helena,\" in the Foreign Re-\nview, 1828,\n\n«* How I, for my part, had deter-\nmined to essay this, lay silently before\nmy own mind, from time to time excit-\ning me to some progress; while, from\nall and each, I carefully guarded my\nsecret, still in hope of bringing the work\nto the wished-for issue. Now, however,\nI must no longer keep back; or, in-\npublishing my collective Endeavors,\nconceal any further secret from the\nworld; to which, on the contrary, I\nfeel bound to submit my whole labors,\neven though in a fragmentary state.\n\n«« Accordingly I have resolved that\nthe above-named Piece, a smaller drama,\ncomplete within itself, but pertaining\nto the Second Part of Faust, shall be\nforthwith presented in the first portion\nof my Works.\n\n«©The wide chasm between that\nwell-known dolorous conclusion of the\nFirst Part, and the entrance of an an-\ntique Grecian heroine, is not yet\noverarched ; meanwhile, as a pre-\namble, my readers will accept what\nfollows :\n\n«The old Legend tells us, and the\npuppet-play fails not to introduce the\nscene, that Faust, in his imperious pride\nof heart, required from Mephistopheles\nthe love of the fair Helena of Greece;\nin which demand the other, after some\nreluctance, gratified him. Not to over-\nlook so important a concern in our\nwork was a duty for us: and how we\nhave endeavored to discharge it will be\nseen in this Interlude. But what may\nhave furnished the proximate occasion\nof such an occurrence, and how, after\nmanifold hindrances, our old magical\n\nCraftsman can have found means to\nbring back the individual Helena, in\nperson, out of Orcus into Life, must, in\nthis stage of the business, remain undis-\ncovered. For the present, it is enough\nif our reader will admit that the real\nHelena may step forth, on antique\ntragedy-cothurnus, before her primitive\nabode in Sparta. We then request him\nto observe in what way and manner\nFaust will presume to court favor from\nthis royal all-famous Beauty of the\nworld.\"\n\n104. Corus.\n\nThe opening of the act appears to be\nimitated from \"* The Eumenides\" of\nfEschylus. Until the appearance of\nFaust, the form of the verse is purely\nclassic, the iambic hexameter, and after-\nwards the trochaic octameter, alternat-\ning with the irregular yet wonderfully\nmetrical strophes of the Chorus. Some\nfeatures in the description of the burn-\ning of Troy, in this Chorus, are taken\nfrom the Eneid, but the form and\ncharacter are Goethe's own. The first\nfour strophes, in the original, are very\ngrand. From the opening of the Act\nuntil the introduction of rhyme, after\nFaust's appearance, I have been able\nto retain the exact metres, while giving\nthe lines very nearly as literally as ina\nprose translation.\n\nCarlyle, whose version of this pas-\nsage and of Helena's description of the\nencounter with Phorkyas is so excellent,\nthat, had he given us the whole Act, no\nother translation would have been ne-\ncessary, says of the metres: '* Happy,\n\nFaust.\n\ncould we, in any measure, have trans-\nfused the broad, yet rich and chaste\nsimplicity of these long iambics; or\nimitated the tone, as we have done the\nmetre, of that choral song; its rude\nearnestness, and tortuous, awkward-look-\ning, artless strength, as we have done\nits dactyls and anapests..... @o our\nown minds, at least, there is everywhere\na strange, piquant, quite peculiar charm\nIn these imitations of the old Grecian\nstyle ; a dash of the ridiculous, if we\nmight say so, is blended with the sub-\nlime, yet blended with it softly and\nonly to temper its austerity ; for often,\nso graphic is the delineation, we could\nalmost feel as if a vista were opened\nthrough the long gloomy distance of\nages, and we, with our modern eyes\nand modern levity, beheld afar off, in\nclear light, the very figures of that old\ngrave time; saw them again living in\ntheir old antiquarian costume and envi-\nronment, and heard them audibly dis-\ncourse in a dialect which had long been\ndead. Of all this, no man is more mas-\nter than Goethe.\"\n\n105. PHORKYAS.\n\nThe reader will not have forgotten\nthe transformation of Mephistopheles\ninto a Phorkyad (page 197), in the\nClassical Walpurgis-Night, and will\nthus understand how he, as the Spirit of\n\nNegation, here appears in a_ female\n\nmask, as Ugliness, to torment and\nthreaten Beauty. Carlyle says:\n«*There is a sarcastic malice in the\n'wise old Stewardess' which cannot be\nmistaken.\"\n\nNotes. .\n\n106. Cuoretip I.\n\nThe quarrel between Phorkyas and\nthe Chorus has been variously inter-\npreted ; but it is evidently an imitation\nof the Greek tragedy. Very similar\nscenes occur in the Ajax and Electra of\nSophocles. The sole purpose, here,\nseems to be to bring out in sharper dis-\ntinctness the malice of Phorkyas, and\nto identify her more completely with\nMephistopheles. In the '* Eumenides\"\nof /Eschylus, the members of the Cho-\nrus speak singly, in one scene, fifteen\ntimes in succession. Goethe's Chorus\nevidently consists of twelve, of whom\nsix (one Semichorus) now speak.\n\n107. To bim, the Vision, I, a Vision,\nwed myself.\n\nThe German word is Idol (eidolon) :\nI follow Carlyle in translating it '* Vis-\nion,\" although the word * wraith \" ex-\npresses the meaning more closely.\nStesichorus is Goethe's authority for\nthis myth concerning Helena: he even\ndeclares that it was only her efdo/on, not\nherself, which was present in Troy.\nProfessor Lehrs (Populare Aufsatze aus\ndem Alterthum) says: '* He (Stesichorus)\nwas probably the inventor of the fable\nof the airy image, which he connected\nwith the legend of Helena's residence\nin Egypt, and which he appears to\nhave formed from the analogy of the\ncidolon of Aféneas, about which the\narmies fight in the Iliad, and of that\nwhich Here substituted for herself, for\nthe embraces of Ixion.\" Her captivity\nin Egypt and her rescue from King\n\nProteus, there, is the subject of the\nHelena of Euripides.\n\nThe union of Achilles, called from\nthe shades, to Helena, on the island of\nLeuke, in Pontus (not Phere, as Goethe\nsays), is mentioned by Arctinus and\nPausanias, The name of her son by\nhim was Euphorion. Lehrs says: ' That\nshe was wedded to Achilles on the\nisland of Leuke, which appears to have\nbeen an Oriental Elysium, is based on\nthe idea of uniting the highest beauty\nof Man and Woman.\"\n\nThe meaning of Helena's swoon is\npassed over by most commentators. It\nseems to me that it must be accepted in\na dramatic, not an allegorical sense; or,\nif the latter be demanded, that it may\nhave some reference to the apparent\ndeath of the Classic spirit, before its\nrenaissance in the Middle Ages. What\nGoethe said to Riemer, after complet-\ning the Helena (and he expresses him-\nself similarly in a letter to Wilhelm\nvon Humboldt), may here be quot-\ned.\n\n\"It is time that the passionate con-\nflict between the Classic and Romantic\nschools should be at last reconciled.\nThe main requisite is that we are\ndeveloped: whence our development\ncomes would be indifferent, were it\nnot that we must fear to shape our-\nselves wrongly by false models. In\nthe hope of sympathetic insight, I\nhave freely followed my own mood in\nelaborating the He/ena, without think-\ning of any public or of any single reader,\nconvinced that he who easily grasps and\ncomprehends the whole will also be\n\nable, through loving patience, gradually\nto accept and assimilate the details.\"\n\n108. Queen, the offering art thou!\n\nGoethe here follows one of the many\nGreek legends inrelation to Helena. Al-\nthough Homer relates that Menelaus\nthrew away his sword, overcome by her\nbeauty, when he again met her, yet there\nare frequent references in the poets (Eu-\nripides, among others) to a story of her\nhaving been sacrificed. Goethe makes\na skilful use of it, to account for\nHelena's migration from Classic to\nRomantic soil. Phorkyas maliciously\namuses herself with the terror of the\nChorus: the summoning of the dwarfs\nto prepare for the sacrifice is but a grim\njoke: she is bound, as Mephistopheles,\nto obey Faust's command. Her threat\nof death to the Chorus is suggested by\nthe punishment which Telemachus, in\nthe Odyssey (Book XXII.), inflicts on\nthe faithless maids.\n\n109. Not robbers are they; yet of many\none is Chief.\n\nWe now begin to feel, as by a subtile\npremonition, the approach of the Ro-\nmantic element. Although the line **So\nmany years deserted stood the vallcy-\nhills,\" may be taken as a reference\nto the blank ages which followed the\npassing away of the classic world, yet\nthe form in which the allegory is\nclothed has a singular distinctness and\nreality. Kreyssig speaks of the sun-\nbright atmosphere \" of the He/ena, and\nCarlyle uses nearly the same expression:\n\"It has everywhere a full and sunny\n\nFaust.\n\ntone of coloring; resembles not a trage-\ndy, but a gay, gorgeous mask.\" Noth-\ning, indeed, is more wonderful than the\ndelicate transition by which the antique\nform, spirit, and speech resolve them-\nselves into the life, movement, and\ndithyrambic freedom of Modern Song.\nThe two elements are equally repre-\nsented in the external art, and in the\ncharacters, of the Interlude.\n\nThis must be borne in mind, when\nwe attempt to find a special symbolism\nin every detail. Some things are un-\ndoubtedly introduced for the sake of\nartistic tone; others, again, for their in-\ntrinsic picturesqueness; others, perhaps,\nare the result of fleeting hints and sug-\ngestions which dropped into Goethe's\nmind as he wrote, surrendering himself\nfreely to the mingled visions of the\nhighest culture of the ancient and mod-\nern world. A full and consistent alle-\ngory is here impossible ; but, through\nthe dissolving forms and colors of the\n«« Phantasmagoria,\" we catch continual\nglimpses of the leading idea.\n\nThe race, pressing forth from the\nCimmerian Night, is of course the Ger-\nman, as we learn from the gold-haired\nboys. Diintzer says that the ''/ree-\ngifts\" of which Phorkyas speaks refer to\nthe medizval custom of purchasing se-\ncurity of the feudal barons; but the cir-\ncumstance that Goethe has italicized the\nword hints of some particular signif-\ncance, which I cannot discover. The\ndescription of Gothic architecture and\nthe coats-of-arms is not ironical, as some\nassert, for under the mask of Phorkyas\nthere is a medizval Devil.\n\nNotes.\n\n110. Beauty is indivisible.\n\nPhorkyas, here, and not when Hel-\nena chides her, forgets her part. The\nallegory becomes clear again, and its\nhistorical element is more pronounced.\nKreyssig has a passage which explains\nthis crisis in Helena's fate: '* The al-\nlegory shows us, in narrow space,a few\nboldly conceived dramatic scenes of that\nenormous revulsion, filling nearly a\nthousand years, which laid the antique\nculture in the grave of Barbarism, in\norder to summon it forth therefrom, in\nthe fulness of time, rejuvenated and\nreinspired, as the beaming dawn of\na new day of the world. The\ndemoralization of the Hellenic favorites\nof the Gods themselves tore the crown\nfrom the head of that Culture, even as\nMenelaus, possessing through the favor\nof the Gods the highest Beauty, drives,\nin his ignoble, vulgar passion, the inno-\ncent victim from the house of her fa-\nthers, and compels her to seek protec-\ntion among the Barbarians of the Cim-\nmerian North.\"\n\nCarlyle says of the remarkable Cho-\nrus, wherein the characters are carried\nin mist and vapor from the high House\nof Tyndarus to a feudal Castle of the\nMiddle Ages: \"Our whole Interlude\nchanges in character at this point; the\nGreek style passes abruptly into the\nSpanish ; at one bound we have left the\nSeven before Thebes (fEschylus) and\ngot into the Vida es Suefo (Calderon).\nThe action, too, becomes more and\nmore typical ; or, rather, we should say,\nhalf-typical; for it will neither hold\n\nrightly together as allegory nor as mat-\nter of fact.\"\n\n111. Inner court-yard of a Castle.\n\nThe reader will notice that although\nthe classical form of verse is stil] re-\ntained, the Gothic character of the sub-\nject makes itself more and more promi-\nnent. When the Chorus describes the\nprocession of blond-haired pages, the\nintroduction of an alternate anapzstic\nfoot, followed by the short choriambic\nlines, prepares us for a coming metrical\nchange. 'The transformation of time,\nplace, and spirit is so artfully managed,\nthat it is accomplished before we are\naware, and as in dissolving views, the\nfading outline we have been watching\nproves to be the growing outline of a\nnew scene.\n\nThe description of the youths suggests\nboth Tacitus and the Non Angli sed an-\ngeli of Pope Gregory. It is the ap-\npearance of anew type of human beauty.\nThe doubt and uncertainty of Helena\nand the Chorus, on finding themselves\nsuddenly in the Gothic court-yard, are\nthus explained by Schnetger: *¢ When\nClassic culture, with its ideal of Beauty,\nbegan to migrate northwards, it found\nthe old Romantic world imprisoned in\nthe darkness of priesthood, and sunken\nin monastic barbarism ; the spirit of the\nNorth was as gloomy and unlovely as\nwere its castles, cloisters, and churches.\nFear-inspiring, as a deep, dark pitfall,\nthe medizval walls meet the gaze of the\ndaughter of Greece, accustomed to free-\ndom and to nature; she stands alone,\nunwelcomed on alien soil, for the Ro-\n\nmantic world had in the beginning no\n\nrecognition for the lovely guest from\nafar.\"\n\n112. Whose duty slighted cheated me.of\n\nmine.\n\nFaust drops one foot from the double\ntrimeter, and speaks in modern heroic\nmeasure. The Leader of the Chorus,\nin her description, agrees with Phork-\nyas, preferring him to many of the an-\ntique models of manly beauty. He is\nhere not yet Faust,—not even the\nFaust of the Classical Walpurgis-Night,\n— but the new, virile element in Litera-\nture and Art, the growth of the Mid-\ndle Ages, now so far developed that it\nrecognizes its ideal of Beauty in the\nsupreme esthetic culture of Greece.\nOnly towards the close of the act does\nhe again become the hero of the drama.\n\nThe Warder, Lynceus (pilot of the\nArgonauts), whom he leads in chains to\nHelena's feet, is variously interpreted.\nAccording té some, he represents both\nthe Provengal troubadours and the Ger-\nman Minnesingers, — the poets of love,\nwho, with all their sharp-sightedness,\nsaw not the true art. Carlyle's guess\nseems to me more successful: ' We\ncannot but suspect him of being a\nSchool Philosopher, or School Philoso-\nphy itself, in disguise.\" He may be\nthe embodiment of Lore, in the scholas-\ntic sense, which, during the Middle\nAges, plumed itself on the treasures\nwhich it had secured from antiquity,\nblind to the far greater treasure which\nwas afterwards recalled to life, in the\nfiner development of the race.\n\nFaust.\n\n113. In the South arose the sun.\n\n«As it has frequently happened to\nthe Germans,\" says Kreyssig, We\nsurely have a reference here to the re-\nvival of the antique Beauty in Italian\nArt and Literature. It would be easy\nto illustrate this, as well as other passa-\nges, at length ; but I must endeavor to\nconfine myself strictly to what is neces-\nsary,in these Notes. The text suggests\na wealth of allusions, for it is the at-\ntempt to epitomize the eighty years'\nknowledge and thought of one of the\nclearest and most active of all human\nbrains. But the thoughtful reader will\nbe satisfied with a guiding hint, and the\none who takes up the Second Part of\nFaust for a simple recreation will never -\nreturn to it again.\n\nWith Lynceus, rhyme, and the Ro-\nmantic metre first appear, although, for\na short distance further, the Classic\ncharacters retain their native form of\nspeech.\n\n114. Forth from the East we bither\npressed.\n\nThe second address of Lynceus de-\nscribes the migration of the races from\nthe East, under which the whole Clas-\nsical world was buried, until it slowly\narose from the inundation to assist in\nshaping a new phase of human culture.\nThe chief import of the verses seems\nto be, that all which War and Coloni-\nzation achieved — territory, power,\nwealth, permanence — becomes null\nand vain beside this new vision. It can\nonly be restored, and to a better value,\n\nNotes.\n\nthrough the abiding presence of the\nBeautiful, the worship of which is the\ncrowning element of Civilization.\n\nEach sound appeared as yielding\nto the next.\n\nGoethe has taken a Persian igeda (re-\nlated in his own West-Gstlicher Divan)\nof two lovers, Behram-gour and Dilaram,\nwho invented rhyme in their amorous\ndialogues, and has applied it here with\nconsummate skill, as a means of bring-\ning Faust and Helena nearer. The gifts\nare not all on one side: the Romantic\nwelcomes and worships the Classic, but\nin return it adds the music of rhyme to\nthe proportion of metre. Thus the\nnew element continues to absorb the\nold, through the loving mutual approach\nof the two. The allegory becomes so\nIncarnate in the chief characters that\nit impresses us like an actual human\npassion, and is so described by the\nChorus. The very soul and being of\nthe antique world —the proportion,\nthe reality of form, and the sublime\nrepose of Classic Art-—are wedded,\nin a union perfect as that of love, to the\nsentiment, the passion, and the freedom\nof Romantic Art: and the latter, equally\nyielding, forgets 'Time, Place, and Race,\nand feels only that it now possesses the\nsupreme Ideal of Beauty.\n\nThis is too much for Phorkyas-Me-\nphistopheles: she breaks in upon the\nlovers, addressing them in rhymes which\nseem intended to satirize Rhyme itself,\n—so violent is their contrast to the\nmelting speech of Helena and Faust.\nThe interpenetration of the ancient and\n\nmodern metres in this portion of the\nact is a wonderful piece of poetic art,\nand I must call the reader's special at-\ntention to it. Faust answers in the\nGreek iambic trimeter (for the first\ntime), then returns to rhyme, while the\nChorus and Phorkyas continue the clas-\nsic forms until the appearance of Eupho-\nrion, when the transition is complete,\n\n116. Signals, explosions from the towers.\n\nDiintzer conjectures that these ' ex-\nplosions \" give us a hint of the inven-\ntion of gunpowder and the use of artil-\nlery, towards the close of the Middle\nAges. The commentators are generally\nagreed that Faust is here a type of the\nromantic, chivalrous spirit, which was\nexpressed in the Minnesingers and\nTroubadours, as 'the forerunners of\nModern Literature. The apportion-\nment of the Peloponnesus (except Sparta\nand Arcadia) among the Dukes is cer-\ntainly a literary rather than an historical\nsymbol. 'The literatures of the Ger-\nman, the Goth (Spain), the Frank and\nthe Norman (England) share equally in\nthe classic inheritance. May we not\nguess, then, that, as Helena is Queen\nover all, her special Spartan and Arca-\ndian realm, wherein the Romantic, or\nModern spirit is her spouse, is that re-\ngion of the loftiest achievement, where\nArt and Literature cease to be narrowly\nnational, but are for the world and for\nall time ?\n\n137. This land, before all lands in splendor.\n\nYes: the question, asked at the close\nof the foregoing note, is answered.\n\nThe Arcadia of Faust and Helena is the\nhome-land of the highest Art and Song:\nEt ego in Arcadia is the password which\nhas been transmitted from generation to\ngeneration, and from race to race,\nthrough the long course of the ages.\nThe name itself has a golden clang, and\nnever was its mystic, illuminating power\nmore thoroughly manifested than in\nthese stanzas of the aged Goethe. We\nare reminded, it is true, of Ovid, Hor-\nace, and other ancient poets, and of\nTasso's ** O, bella eta delP oro!\" —\nbut here the ideal character of the\nrealm is so blended with an exquisite\npicture of the actual Grecian prov-\nince, that its hills, gorges, and happy\nmeads rise palpably on our sight, as we\nread,\n\nIn the spring of 1858, after spending\ndays beside the Eurotas and among the\nfastnesses of the Taygetus, I climbed\nfrom Messene into Arcadia, and every-\nwhere, — whether plucking violets on\n\nthe \"* Mount Lyczan\" of Pan, or gaz--\n\ning on the lonely beauty of the temple\nof Apollo Epicureus, crushing the wild\nhyacinths along the mountain paths, or\nresting beside the herded goats and kine\nin the green vale of the Alpheus, — I\nfelt both the magic of the name and its\nimmemorial cause. The mountains,\nthat swell and fall in rhythmic undula-\ntions; the wealth of crystal streams;\nthe grand forests of oak and pine; the\npure, delicious air, and the sweet, happy\nsense of seclusion which seems to brood\nlike a blessing over every landscape,\nmust have been an inspiration to the\nearliest poet who sang to its people.\n\nFaust.\n\nLet it still continue to be a name for\nthe dream of the pure and perfect life\nwhich Poetry predicts, and will predict\nforever!\n\n118. All worlds in inter-action meet.\n\nThe original : —\n\nDenn wo Natur im reinen Kreise waltet,\nErgreifen all Welten sich, —\n\nis one of those pregnant expressions\nwhich make the translator despair, —\nfor, the more thoroughly he is penetrat-\ned with the meaning, the less does it\nseem possible to express that meaning\nin any words, 'The literal translation\nis, \"* For where Nature sways in a pure\ncircle (or orbit), all worlds (human\nand divine) reciprocally take hold on\none another.\" 'The series is nowhere\nviolently interrupted: the Gods reveal\nthemselves through men, even as men\nrise to resemble Gods: the orbits of\nall spheres of existence are harmoniously\ninterlinked. But we here approach the\nhighest regions of the Ideal; and he\nwho has not some little intuition to\nguide him will hardly follow the thought\nfurther.\n\nYe, also, Bearded Ones, who sit\nbelow and wait.\n\n«¢ It appears too, that there are cer-\ntain ' Bearded Ones,' (we suspect, Dev-\nils,) waiting with anxiety, 'sitting\nwatchful there below,' to see the issue\nof this extraordinary transaction ; but\nof these Phorkyas gives her silly women\nno hint whatever.\" — Carlyle.\n\n'If the French only recognize the\n\nNotes.\n\nHelena, they will perceive what may be\nmade of it for their stage. The piece,\nas it is, they will ruin; but they will\nemploy it shrewdly for their own pur-\nposes, and that is all one can wish, or\nexpect. They will certainly supply\nPhorkyas with a Chorus of monsters,\nwhich, indeed, is already indicated in\none passage.\" —— Goethe to Eckermann,\n\nDiintzer, who so rarely lets anything\nescape him, does not seem to have no-\nticed Goethe's remark. He insists that\nthe '' Bearded Ones\" are the spectators,\nwhom Mephistopheles addresses in Act\nII., Scene I., and in Act IV. For my\npart, I find Goethe's meaning so very\nuncertain, that' I prefer to hazard no\nconjecture.\n\nCall'st thou a marcel this,\nCreta's begotten ?\n\n| The son of Faust and Helena, as he\n| is first described by Phorkyas, is Poetry,\nnot an individual. In his naked beauty,\nhis pranks and his sportive, wilful ways,\nhe suggests not only the greater freedom\nof the Romantic element, but also the\nclassic myths of Cupid and the child\nHermes (Mercury). Phorkyas, in pro-\nclaiming him the \" future Master of all\nBeauty,\" quite forgets that she is Me-\nphistopheles.\n\nThe Chorus describes the birth and\nchildish tricks of Hermes, as they are\nrelated in Homer's hymn and Lucian's\ndialogues of the Gods. There is, per-\nhaps, a \" poetic-didactical word\" for\nthe reader, in their relation, as well as\nfor Phorkyas. Hermes may possibly\n\nSII\n\ntypify the Poetic Genius, which boldly\nsteals the attributes of all the Gods, and\neven longs to grasp the thunderbolts of\nZeus, the Father.\n\n121. EupnHorion.\n\nIn the original legend, Faust has by\nHelena a son, to whom he gives the\nname of Justus Faustus, and who disap-\npears with her when his compact with\nMephistopheles comes to an end. In\none of the ancient Grecian myths, Hel-\nena bears a son to Achilles (recalled\nfrom Hade$) on the island of Leuke,\nThis son, born with wings, was called\nEuphorion (the swift or lightly wafted),\nand was slain by the lightning of Jupi-\nter. Goethe unites the two stories,\nand adds his own symbolism to the\n\n\" airy, wilful spirit, resulting from them.\n\nWe have, at the outset, three positive\ncircumstances to guideus, Euphorion is\nhere, as when he formerly appeared in\nthe Boy Charioteer, Poetry; he is born\nof the union of the Classicand Romantic;\nand, shortly before he vanishes from\nour eyes, he becomes the representative\nof Byron. The last of these characters,\nhowever, was not included in Goethe's\noriginal plan. Indeed, it could not\nhave been, since that plan was sketched\nwhile Byron was a boy at Harrow.\nWe are able to fix both the time and\nthe special: influences which led to the\nintroduction of Byron; and, moreover,\nthe point in the allegory where the\nchange commences may be easily de-\ntected.\n\nNeither as we know him, nor as\nGoethe knew him, could Byron be the\n\nchild of Faust and Helena: the only\nmodern English poet to whom the sym-\nbolism would in any wise apply, is\nKeats. Among the Germans we might,\nif there were any indication pointing\ntowards him, accept Schiller; but we\nat once feel, I think, that no poet of\nthis age has so subtly and harmoniously\nblended the two elements in his highest\nachievement, as Goethe himself. His\nIphigenia in Tauris, Tasso, Hermann and\nDorothea, and Die Natirliche Tochter\n(a singularly neglected masterpiece),\nwill suggest themselves as illustrations,\nto all who are acquainted with his\nworks. Besides, the order in which\nthe three boyish sprites are introduced\nreflects the order of his own develop-\nment. In the Boy Charioteer we have\nhis relation to Karl August, and his lib-\neration from Court and official life: in\nHomunculus, his first acquaintance,\nthrough Art in Italy, with the spirit of\nthe Classic world, and his struggle to\nlift himself into another and purer poet-\nical existence; and finally, in Eupho-\nrion, the regeneration and birth of his\nnature in his greatest works. The alle-\ngory is carefully veiled, for long isola-\ntion, misrepresentation, and abuse had\ntaught him to be cautious; but he\nwould not, in any case, have made it\nobvious to the running reader. The\nsecret was too intimate and precious\nto be easily betrayed, yet it has not\nbeen hidden beyond the reach of that\n** love and patience \" on which he relied\nfor a full and final recognition. He who\ndiscovers the symbolism must first pass\nthrough one chamber after another of\n\nFaust.\n\nthe poet's nature, and, when he has\nreached the inner sanctuary, he has\nbreathed the same atmosphere too long\nto see either vanity or arrogance, or\naught but a justified self-consciousness,\nin these fair and mysterious forms.\n\nDuring the appearance of Euphorion\nupon the stage, the Classic form is\nwholly lost, absorbed in the Romantic.\nThe measure becomes a wild, ever-\nchanging, rhymed dithyrambic, which,\nin the original, produces an indescribable\nsense of movement and music. I can\nonly hope that something of the infec-\ntious excitement and delight which I\nhave felt while endeavoring to repro-\nduce it may have passed into the English\nlines, and will help to bear the reader\nsmoothly over the almost endless tech-\nnical difficulties of translation, The\nspirit of the scene is quite inseparable\nfrom its rhythmical character.\n\nThere are references, in the first ut-\nterances of Phorkyas and the Chorus,\nto the new elements of Sentiment and\nPassion in Modern Poetry, as contrast-\ned with the Classic; but they need no\nfurther explanation. Some have sup-\nposed that Helena's first stanza: '* Love,\nin human wise to bless us,\" etc., gives\nthe additional meaning of the Family to\nher relation with Faust. 'The stanza,\ncertainly, h 'this character, but only\n: the reference is too slight\n\nMidst of Pelops land,\nKindred in soul, I stand!\n\nWe may accept the lawlessness of\nEuphorion as, to a certain extent, re-\n\nNotes.\n\nflecting Byron's wild, unregulated youth.\nSome of the German commentators,\nhowever, force the parallel quite too\nfar, endeavoring to discover definite in-\ncidents of the poet's history in his\ndances with the Chorus, and his pursuit\nof the maiden who turns into flame.\nThe individual character of Euphorion\nis very gradually introduced, and is first\ndeclared in the above lines.\n\nByron became acquainted with the\nFirst Part of Faust through Shelley, in\n1816. There was at that time no Eng-\nlish translation of the work, and he of-\nfered to give a hundred pounds if he\ncould have it in English, for his private\nperusal, His Manfred, which was\nwritten immediately afterwards, betrays\nthe strong impression which Faust left\non his mind,—an impression which\nGoethe instantly detected, on first read-\ning Manfred, the following year. The\ntwo poets appear to have occasionally\nexchanged greetings, through common\nacquaintances, and it was the wish of\nboth that they might meet. Byron dedi-\ncated his tragedy of Sardanapalus to\nGoethe, in words, the like of which a\npoet has rarely addressed to one of his\ncontemporaries: 'To the illustrious\nGoethe a stranger presumes to offer the\nhomage of a literary vassal to his liege-\nlord, the first of existing writers, who\nhas created the literature of his own\ncountry, and illustrated that of Europe.\"\nIn February, 1823, Goethe sent the\nfollowing lines to Byron: —\n\n«© He who, with his own inner self at war,\n\nGrows strong, through wont, to bear the deep-\n\nest pain,\n\nBe it well with him, when he himself shall\nknow !\n\nDare he, to name himself as highly blessed,\n\nWhen the strong Muse shall overcome his\n\npangs,\nAnd may he know himself, as I have known\nhim!\"\n\nThis, followed by Byron's letters from\nGenoa and Leghorn, was their only ap-\nproach towards a nearer intercourse.\nGoethe was engaged in completing the\nHelena, in 1826, when Mr. Murray,\nthe publisher, sent him the autograph\nof the Dedication to Sardunapalus ; and,\nfrom some hints which he let fall to\nEckermann, his daughter-in-law, Ottilie\nvon Goethe, who was an enthusiastic\nadmirer of Byron, was another of the\nadditional influences which, in combi-\nnation, led him to change the character\nof Euphorion.\n\nGoethe said to Eckermann (in\n1827): I could use no one but him,\nas the representative of our recent poetic\ntime; he is, without question, the\ngreatest talent.of the century. And\nthen, Byron is not antique, and is\nnot romantic, but he embodies the\nPresent Day. Such a one I needed.\nHe was also appropriate through his\nunsatisfied nature, and his military am-\nbition, which ruined him in Missolon-\nghi..... I had intended,,formerly, an\nentirely different conclusion to the He/-\nena; I had elaborated it, for myself, in\nvarious ways, one of which was quite\nsuccessful ; but I will not betray it to\nyou. Then time brought me Byron\nand Missolonghi, and I let all else go.\nYou have remarked, however, that the\n\nChorus quite loses its part in the Dirge ;\nformerly it was antique throughout, or\nat least never contradicted its maiden-\nnature, but now it suddenly becomes\ngrave and loftily reflective, and gives\nutterance to things which it never be-\nfore thought or could have been able to\nthink.\"\n\nGoethe's estimate of Byron is not\ngenerally understood: it has, at least,\nbeen frequently misrepresented. | I\nhave, therefore, carefully gone through\nthe correspondence with Zelter and\nEckermann's three volumes, for the\npurpose of selecting such passages as\nmay give, in the briefest space, a fair\nrepresentation of his views. There is\nmuch more material, of the highest in-\nterest to the literary critic, but the fol-\nlowing extracts may perhaps suffice to\nexplain the fleeting adumbration of By-\nron which we find in Euphorion : —\n\n«¢ That which I call invention I find\nmore pronounced in him than in any\nother man in the world. The manner\nin which he disentangles a dramatic\nknot is always beyond one's expectation,\nand always better than one's own pre-\nconceived solution.\"\n\n.« Ffad he only known how to impose\nupon himself moral restrictions! It\nwas his ruin that he was unable to do\nthis, and we are justified in saying that\nhis lawlessness was the rock on which\nhe split.\"\n\n\"¢ This reckless, inconsiderate activity\ndrove him out of England, and in the\ncourse of time would have driven him\nout of Europe. Circumstances were\neverywhere too narrow for him, and\n\nFaust.\n\nwith all his boundless personal freedom\nhe felt himself oppressed: the world\nwas for him a prison. His going to\nGreece was not a spontaneous resolution ;\nhe was driven to it through his false re-\nlation to the world.\"\n\n«We are forced to admit that this\nPoet says more than we wish; he\n\n\"speaks the truth, but it gives us a sense\n\nof discomfort, and we should prefer\nthat he remained silent. There are\nthings in the world which the Poet\nshould veil rather than reveal; yet this\nis precisely Byron's character, and we\nshould destroy his individuality in at-\ntempting to change him.\"\n\n«'Byron's boldness, wilfulness, and\ngrandiose manner, is it not an element\nof development? We must avoid seek-\ning that element exclusively in what\nis decisively pure and ethical. All that\nis great, aS soon as we appreciate it,\nfurthers our development.\"\n\n«' Byron's fatal fault was his polemi-\ncal tendency.\"\n\n«« Nevertheless, although Byron died\nso early, it was not a material loss to\nLiterature, through the probable fur-\nther expansion of his powers. He had\nreached the climax of his creative force,\nand, whatever he might have afterwards\naccomplished, he could scarcely have\nenlarged the borders within which his\ntalents were already confined.\"\n\nFrom these, and other utterances of\nGoethe, it is very evident that what\nhe most admired in Byron was not the\nharmonious union of the Classic and\nRomantic elements; not the artistic\nperfection of form; not the breadth\n\nNotes.\n\nand vitality of that Genius which lifts\nitself slowly, but on strong wings,\nthrough the still higher and clearer\nether of thought: but that restless,\nmysterious, ever-creative quality which\nGoethe called Daimonic, the native,\neffortless splendor of rhythm and rhet-\noric, the sentiment of Nature pervaded\nand exalted by Imagination, and that\nvirile power of transmitting himself\nto other minds, which we never can\nclearly analyze. Mr. Matthew Arnold\nhas declared Byron to be \" the greatest\nelemental power in English Literature,\nsince Shakespeare,\" and this phrase\nbriefly expresses Goethe's judgment.\nThe latter was probably the first who\never looked beyond the prejudices of\nByron's day, unmoved by the opposing\ngusts of worship and hate, and separated\nthe poet's supreme and immortal quali-\nties from the confusion of his life and\nthe dross of his simulated misanthropy.\n\n123. The path to Glory opens now.\n\nThe Chorus entreats Euphorion to\nbide in the peaceful Arcadian land of\nPoetry ; and his answer is entirely in\naccord with the spirit of the Philhelle-\nnes, during the Greek Revolution. The\nheroic struggle of the Suliotes, in which\neven women and children shared, is in-\ndicated in the preceding verses, and then\nfollows the closing chant, in which the\nwail of the coming dirge is fore-felt\nthrough the peal of trumpets and the\nclash of cymbals. I am not able to\nstate whether Goethe had read Byron's\nlast poem, written at Missolonghi, on\n\nhis thirty-sixth birthday, when he\n\n-515\n\nwrote the concluding portion of the\nHelena. It is strangely suggested here,\nin spite of the allegory, and the differ-\nence of metre.\n\n124. Cuorvus. [Dirge.]\n\nHere all allegory is thrown aside: the\nfour stanzas are a lament, not for Eu-\nphorion, but for Byron. 'They express\nGoethe's feeling for the poet, while the\nprofound impression created throughout\n\nEurope by the news of his death was\nstill fresh.\n\nHelena's garments dissolve into\nclouds. |\nWhen Phorkyas bids Faust hold fast\n\nto Helena's garment, saying :—\n\n\"It is no more the Goddess thou hast lost,\nBut godlike is it,\" —\n\nwe are forced to forget the part she\nplays. She,— Mephistopheles in the\nmask of the Ideal Ugliness, — to call\nthe garment of the Beautiful a \" grand\nand priceless gift,\" which will bear\nFaust \" from all things mean and low\"'!\nThis is a singular oversight of Goethe,\nand we can only guess that it was not\nnoticed during his life, for the reason\nthat the remainder of the Second Part\nwas still in manuscript, and the charac-\nter of Phorkyas thus not entirely clear\nto the critics.\n\nSince Faust is only temporarily typi-\ncal of the Artist, the symbolism embod-\nied in the disappearance of Helena, and\nhis elevation upon the clouds into\nwhich her garments are transformed,\nis not difficult to guess. The Ideal\nBeauty is revealed to few; but even its\n\nrobe and veil form a higher ether over\nall the life of Man. In the direct\ncourse of the drama, esthetic culture is\nthe means by which Faust risesftom all\nforms of vulgar ambition to that nobler\nactivity which crowns his life.\n\n126. Service and faith secure the indi-\nvidual life.\n\nPanthalis, the Chorage, is the only\nmember of the Chorus who has mani-\nfested an individual character through-\nout the Interlude ; consequently she re-\ntains it here, where the other members\nare about to be lost in the elements.\nWe are reminded, by what she says, of\nGoethe's vague surmises in regard to\nthe future life. He hints on more\nthan one occasion that a strong, inde-\npendent individuality may preserve its\nentelechie (actual, distinctive being),\nwhile the mass of persons in whom the\nhuman elements are comparatively form-\nless will continue to exist only in those\nelements. In 1829, he said to Ecker-\nmann: 'I do not doubt our permanent\nexistence, for Nature cannot do without\nthe extelechie. But we are not all im-\nmortal in the same fashion, and in or-\nder to manifest one's self in the future\nlife as a great ente/echie, one must also\nbecome one.\" The subject seems to\nhave been discussed with others; for\nwe find Wilhelm von Humboldt, in\n1830, writing to Frau von Wolzogen:\n«¢ There is a spiritual individuality, but\nnot every one attains to it. As a pecu-\nliar, distinctive form of mind, it is eter-\nnal and immutable. Whatever cannot\nthus individually shape itself, may\n\nFaust.\n\nreturn into the universal life of Na-\nture.\"\n\n127. Nature, the Ever-living.\n\nThe twelve maidens of the Chorus\ndivide themselves into four groups, re-\nlinquish their human forms, and enter\ninto the being of trees, echoes, brooks,\nand vineyards. Goethe was so well\nsatished with this disposition of an an-\ntique feature for which there seems to\nbe no place in the romantic world, that\nwe can hardly be mistaken as to his de-\nsign. 'The transfusion of Nature with\na human sentiment belongs exclusively to\nModern Literature: it is nat the Dryad,\nbut the tree itself, not the Oread, but\nthe Spirit of the Mountain, which\nspeaks to us now. We have lost the\n'' fascinating existences \" of ancient fa-\nble, in their fair human forms; but\nNature, then their lifeless dwelling,\nnow breathes and throbs with more\nthan their life, for we have clothed her\nwith the garment of our own emotion\nand aspiration.\n\nUnless this transformation, or a very\nsimilar one, were intended, the Chorus\nmust of necessity have returned to\nHades.\n\nThe description of the vintage with\nwhich the act closes resembles, in the\noriginal, a fragment of the frieze of a\ntemple of Bacchus.\n\n128. The curtain falls.\n\nDiintzer interprets the Bacchanalian\ndescription as a picture of the decadence\nof the antique world. When the cur-\n\ntain falls, Phorkyas remains in the pro-\n\nNotes.\n\nscenlum, rises to a giant height, takes off\nher mask, and reveals herself as Mephis-\ntopheles. Perhaps this may indicate that\nthe element of Ugliness and Evil was\nnot lost to the human race when the\nhistorical curtain fell on the beautiful\nculture of the Greeks, but remained as\n\nthe sole link of union between the an-\n\ncient and modern worlds!\n\nThe epilogue, which Goethe appar-\nently planned, was never written. In-\ndeed, after the publication of the He/e-\nma, in 1827, he scarceiy again looked\nat its pages.\n\n129. Yet seems to shape a figure.\n\nThe classic trimeter is purposely re-\ntained in the opening of this Act, as a\nlast, dying reverberation of the Helena.\nFaust's soliloquy has also the character\n_ofanechoandamemory. The clouds\nupon which he has floated take the form\nof Helena, as they recede from him:\nthe Ideal which he has been pursuing\nrests along the distant horizon, and the\nstony summits of actual life are again\nunder his feet.\n\nGoethe began to write Act IV. about\nthe middle of February, 1831. The\napparent calm with which he received\nthe news of his son's death was followed\nby an alarming hemorrhage, and during\nthe month of November, 1830, his life\nwas in danger. His great age and in-\ncreasing physical weakness warned him\nto make use of his remaining time, and\nfill the single remaining gap in the Sec-\nond Part of Faust; but that marvellous\nsecond spring-time of Poetry which we\nfeel in the Helena and the Classical\n\nWalpurgis-Night, was over. Through-\nout this act we notice, if not pre-\ncisely the weariness of age, yet a sense\nof effort, of surviving technical skill\nnot wholly filled and made plastic by\nthe life of the author's conception. His\noriginal design for the Act had-been\ngiven up, and the present substance\nwas evidently adopted, perhaps at the\nlast moment, because it offered fewer\ndifficulties of execution.\n\nIn the Paralipomena we find. some\nfragments of the original plan, which\nlead us to suppose that this Act should\nhave had a political character. Since\nevery other clew thereto has been lost,\nI simply give the fragments in the order\nin which they were printed by Ecker-\nmann and Riemer : —\n\nMEPHISTOPHELES.\nIf wisdom could exist with youth,\nAnd Republics without virtue,\nNear were the world unto its highest aim.\n\nFie, be ashamed, that thou desirest fame !\n\n*T is Fame that charlatans alone befriends.\n\nEmploy thy gifts for better ends\n\nThan vainly thus to seek the world's acclaim.\n\nAfter brief noise goes Fame to her repose ;\n\nThe hero and the vagabond are both forgotten 3\n\nThe greatest monarchs must their eyelids close,\n\nAnd every dog insults the place they rot in.\n\nSemiramis ! did she not hold the fate\n\nOf half the world \"twixt war and peace sus-\npended,\n\nAnd in her dying hour was she not full as great\n\nAs when her hand the sceptre first extended ?\n\nYet scarcely hath she felt the blow\n\nWhich Death deals unawares upon her,\n\nWhen from all sides a thousand libels flow,\n\nHer corpse to cover with complete dishonor.\n\nWho understands what 's possible and fit\n\nMay win some glory from his generation,\nBut, when a hundred years have heard of it,\nNo man will further heed thy reputation.\n\nAnd when you scold, when you complain\nThat my behavior all too rude appears,\n\nWho tells you truth at present, plump and plain,\nHe tells it to you for a thousand years.\n\nGo, let thy luck then tested be !\n\nProve thy hypocrisy on all such matters,\nThen, lame and tired, return to me!\n\nMan only that accepts, which flatters.\nSpeak with the Pious of their virtue's pay,\nSpeak with Ixion of the cloud's embraces,\nWith kings, of rank and rightful sway,\nOf Freedom and Equality, with the races!\n\nFausr.\n\nNor this time am I overawed\n\nBy thy deep wrath, which plans destruction\never, —\n\nThe tiger-glance, wherewith thou\nabroad.\n\nSo hear it now, if thou hast heard it never:\n\nMankind has still a delicate ear,\n\nAnd pure words still inspire to noble deeds;\n\nMan feels the exigencies of his sphere,\n\nAnd willingly an earnest counsel heeds.\n\nWith this intention-I depart from thee,\n\nBut here, triumphant, soon again shall be.\n\nlook'st\n\nMEPHISTOPHELES.\n\nThen go, with all thy splendid gifts, and try it!\n\nI like to see a fool for other fools concerned :\n\nEach finds his counsel good enough, nor seeks\nto buy it,\n\nBut money, when he lacks it, won't be spurned.\n\nWhy men themselves so worry, fret and fray,\nIt is a stale, insipid way ;\n\nThe bread, we beg with daily breath,\n\nIs not the finest, at its best ;\n\nThere 's also naught so stale as Death,\n\nAnd that is just the commonest,\n\nFaust.\n\n130. 4 Seven-league Boot trips forward.\n\nGoethe means to indicate by this\nimage, and the first words of Mephis-\ntopheles, that Faust has been borne far\naway from his previous life, so that the\nformer is obliged to make use of the\nseven-league boots of the fairy tale, in\norder to overtake him.\n\nMephistopheles, finding him among\njagged peaks of stone, (a volcanic forma-\ntion?) immediately claims an infernal\norigin for them. Goethe's hostility to\nthe Plutonic theory is again exhibited\nhere, and with more of his irritation\nthan in the Classical Walpurgis-Night.\nThe episode is so unnecessary (as the\nGermans would say, wamotivirt) that\nwe can only explain it by the conjecture\nthat something must have occurred in\nthe scientific world, about the beginning\nof the year 1831, to renew Goethe's\npartisan feeling. I have not thought it\nnecessary to ascertain this with certainty,\nfor the point is hardly important enough\nto repay the uncertain labor, and the\nattempted satire is sufficiently plain.\n\n131. mystery manifest and well con-\ncealed,\n\nHere, in the original, Riemer has\nadded the reference: '* Ephesians vi.\n12,\" which I have omitted. The text\nis: * For we wrestle not against flesh\nand blood, but against principalities,\nagainst powers, against the rulers of the\ndarkness of this world, against spiritual\nwickedness in high places.\" Luther\ntranslates the last phrase: '¢ against evil\nspirits under heaven.\" The preceding\n\nNotes.\n\nline also suggests ii. 2, of the same\nEpistle. Mephistopheles perhaps means\nto insinuate that through the Plutonic\ndoctrine he and his fellow-devils have\nescaped from their old subterranean\nHell, and he has again become * the\nprince of the power of the air.\"\n\nFaust's reply expresses Goethe's idea\nof Creation, and in almost the same\nwords which he more than once em-\nployed in describing it.\n\nOver all the land the foreign blocks\nyou spy there.\n\nIn February, 1829, Goethe said to\nEckermann: '* Herr von Buch has pub-\nlished a new work, which contains an\nhypothesis in its very title. He means\nto treat of the granite blocks which lie\nabout, here and there, one knows not\nhow nor whence. But since Herr von\nBuch secretly cherishes the hypothesis\nthat such granite blocks were cast out\nfrom within and shivered by some tre-\nmendous force, he indicates this at once\nin the title, where he speaks of scat-\ntered granite blocks. The step from\nthis to the Force which scatters is very\nshort, and the noose of Error is thrown\nover the head of the unsuspecting read-\ner, before he is aware of it.\"?\n\nErratische Blicke 1s the common\nGerman term for ' boulders.\" The\nreader, familiar with the science of our\nday, must remember that the glacial\ntheory was then unknown. Mephis-\ntopheles continues Goethe's satire by\nattributing the scattered boulders to the\neffects of Moloch's hammer, and men-\ntions, in verification, the correspondence\n\nof popular superstition, which sees the\nDevil's hand in every unusual rock-for-\nmation.\n\nThe glory of the Kingdoms of the\nWorld.\n\nHere, again, Riemer has printed, op-\nposite the text: '* Matthew iv.\" It is,\nof course, the eighth verse to which\nhe refers: ** Again, the devil taketh\nhim up into an exceedingly high moun-\ntain, and showeth him all the kingdoms\nof the world and the glory of them.\"\nThe temptation of Christ was evidently\nGoethe's model for this portion of the\nscene. Mephistopheles offers the lures\nof authority and luxury, but Faust's na-\nture has been enlightened and purified,\nand he adheres to his own grand design\nof a sphere of worthy activity.\n\n134. Thesum of rebels thus augmented.\n\nThere is a marked contradiction, in\nthis passage, to Faust's liberal and\nconfiding view of the people, given in\nthe Paralipomena quoted in Note 129.\nGoethe, moreover, frequently declared\nthat revolutions were always occasioned\nby the faults of the rulers, not by a na-\ntive rebellious element in the people.\nIn the description of a capital, which\nMephistopheles gives, it is probable that\nParis was intended ; for the succeeding\npicture of **a pleasure-castle in a pleas-\nant place\"? is undoubtedly Versailles.\nSince the scene was written early in\n1831, the preceding July Revolution\nwas probably fresh in Goethe's memory,\nand we may thus explain Faust's appar-\nent cynicism. |\n\nMine eye was drawn to view the\nopen Ocean.\n\nIn this description, from first to last,\nwe recognize Goethe. He frequently\nasserted that what we call the elements,\nthe active forces of Nature, are full of\nwild, unfettered impulses, constantly\nwarring against each other and against\nMan. The grand Chant of the Arch-\nangels (Prologue in Heaven) represents\ntheir endless operation, and is thus pro-\nphetic of Faust's sphere of activity.\nSociety and Government have not satis-\nfied the cravings of his nature; the\nIdeal, though its consecration is perma-\nnent, cannot be a possession; and he\nnow determines to enter into conflict\nwith a colossal natural force, and com-\npel its submission to the imperial au-\nthority of the human mind.\n\nThey, more than all, therein were\nimplicated.\n\nWe must suppose that Mephistophe-\nles, bound to obedience, unwillingly\nserves in the fulfilment of plans which\nhe cannot comprehend. Although he\nimplicates Faust in the coming military\nmovements, ostensibly for the purpose\nof acquiring possession of the ocean-\nstrand through the help which the lat-\nter shall furnish to the Emperor, he is\never watchful to bring the affair to an-\nother issue. In the passage commen-\ncing: **A mighty error!\" Faust gives\n\nus Goethe's impression of Napoleon. |\n\nMephistopheles naturally casts upon\nthe priesthood the heaviest responsibil-\nity for the anarchy of the realm, and\n\nFaust.\n\nhere, again, we have another view .\nwhich Goethe frequently expressed.\n\nNo! But I've brought, like\nPeter Squence.\n\nShakespeare's Peter Quince becomes,\nin some English farce into which the\ncomic parts of the ** Midsummer Night's\nDream\" were worked, pedant and\nschoolmaster ; and in Gryphius's trans-\nlation of this farce was introduced to\nGermany as \" Herr Peter Squenze.\"\" —\nDintzer.\n\n138. The Three Mighty Men appear.\n\nRiemer here inserts the reference\n\"2 Samuel xxiii. 8.\" But only the\nphrase seems to have been borrowed\nfrom the description of the three mighty\nmen of David. The character given to\nthe \" allegoric blackguards \"' of Mephis-\ntopheles is not suggested by anything in\nSamuel, or the corresponding account\nin 1 Chronicles xi.\n\n139. On THE HeEap.anp.\n\nThe disposition of the Imperial army\nis described with so much exactness of\ndetail that the plan of battle, and the\napplication of the magic arts which\nMephistopheles employs, may be fol-\nlowed as readily as if we were furnished\nwith a topographical chart. We find\nthe Emperor, also, precisely as we left\nhim in Act I., a weak, amiable ruler,\nwith fitful impulses which he mistakes\nfor qualities of character, always plan-\nning great personal achievements which\nhe forgets the next moment. In spite\nof the prosaic substance of this scene, it\n\nNotes.\n\nis overhung by a weird, strange atmos-\nphere; the real and the technical are\nsingularly interfused with the supernatu-\nral, and we seem to be constantly on the\npoint of feeling that vital poetic glow,\nwhich, in Goethe's eighty-second year,\nwas but faintly smouldering under its\nown ashes.\n\nFor they, in crystals and their si-\nlence, furled,\n\nPrecisely what Goethe intends to\nhint in this line is uncertain. It can\nscarcely be crystallomancy, as one of\nthe forms of divination; nor, as Diint-\nzer says, ** wonderful phases of crystal-\nlization, considered as an external sym-\nbol of intellectual research.\" Goethe\nattributed to Crystallization many moun-\ntain-phenomena which the Plutonists\nexplained by upheaval, and this may be,\npossibly, a last, subsiding echo of his\nscientific prejudices.\n\nThe Sabine old, the Norcian nec-\n\nTOMANCET.\n\nFaust introduces an episode of the\nEmperor's coronation in Rome, in ex-\nplanation of his assistance, and the\nArchbishop-Chancellor afterwards men-\ntions the same incident, in the very op-\nposite sense. In one of the notes\nwhich Goethe attached to his transla-\ntion of the Autobiography of Benvenuto\nCellini, we detect the original material\nfrom which he constructed this pas-\nsage: —\n\n' \" From whatever cause the mountains\nof Norcia, between the Sabine land and\nthe Duchy of Spoleto, acquired the\n\nname in old times, they are called to\nthis day the Mountains of the Sibyls.\nOld writers of Romance made use of\nthis locality in order to conduct their\nheroes through the most wonderful ad-\nventures, and thus increased the belief\nin those magical figures, the first out-\nlines of which were drawn by the\nLegend. An Italian story, Guerino\nMeschino, and an old French work, re-\nlate strange occurrences, by which cu-\nrious travellers have been surprised in\nthat region; and Messer Cecco di As-\ncoli, who was burned in Florence in\nthe year 1327, on account of his necro-\nmantic writings, is still remembered,\nthrough the interest felt in his history\nby the chroniclers, painters, and poets.\"\n\n142. Selfis the Man!\n\nAgain Goethe speaks; but his elo-\nquent advocacy of a free, independent\ndevelopment of the individual becomes\na hollow pretence in the Emperor's\nmouth, Faust's reply is a piece of flat-\ntery, which would have been more ap-\n\npropriate to Mephistopheles.\n\n143. Butiy (coming forward.)\n\nThe original of this name 1s Rawfe-\nbold, and those of the other Mighty\nMen Habebald (accompanied by the\nvivandiere, Eilebeute) and Haltefest.\nThe first verse of Isaiah viti.: ** More-\nover, the Lord said to me, Take thee a\ngreat roll, and write in it with a man's\npen concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz\"\n— reads, in Luther's translation: *¢' Und\nder Herr sprach zu mir: Nimm von\ndich einen grossen Brief; und schreib\n\ndarauf mit Menschen-Griffel Rauvbebald,\nEilebeute.\"\n\nI applied to the Rev. Dr. Conant for\nthe exact interpretation of the Hebrew\nwords, and take the liberty of quoting\nhis reply : —\n\n\"' Habebald and Eilebeute were sug-\ngested to Goethe by the symbolic name,\nMabher-shalal-hash-baz, the meaning of\nthis name (hasten the spoil, speed the\nprey) portending that the spoiler and\nplunderer was at hand. In this, as its\ngeneral import, critics are agreed,\nalthough there is a difference of opinion\nas to the grammatical construction.\nGesenius, in his translation of Isaiah,\nexpresses it well by Rawbebald Eilebeute.\nGoethe was familiar with same forms,\ntransposed, in Luther's version. I\ntake it that Goethe regarded the spirit\nof plunder as the foremost element in\nwar ; and hence he has placed its repre-\nsentative, under the symbolic name of\nHabebald, at the head of the central\nphalanx.\n\n\"Half the Hebrew name he has\ngiven to the vivandiere, introduced (as\nI suppose) both to enliven the represen-\ntation and to characterize another revolt-\ning accompaniment of war, 'die Frau\nist grimmig wenn sie greift,\"' etc. Hence\nthe other half of the name, Raudbchald,\nhe is obliged to transform to Habebald,\nboth as better suited to the office of a\nmilitary leader, and to avoid too close a\nresemblance to the name of another of\nhis characters, whose participation in\nthe fruits of victory it truly represents.\"\n\nThere is no doubt that these charac-\nters symbolize the human elements\n\nFaust,\n\nmanifested in war. Bully represents\nthe fierce, brutal, unrestrained spirit of\nfight ; Havequick is the thirst for booty,\nfor the spoils of victory in every form ;\nand Holdfast seems to be the stubborn\nquality of resistance, the chief strength\nof armies.\n\n144. A ruddy and presaging glow.\n\nThe reader, familiar with Goethe's\nworks, is referred to the latter's descrip-\ntion of his attack of '* cannon fever \"\nin the '© Campaign in France \" (1792).\nThe passage is too long to be quoted ;\nbut the circumstance that the entire\nfield of battle appeared to be tinged with\na red color is here introduced, A care-\nful examination of the '* Campaign \"\nwould probably discover much of the\nmaterial which is employed in this scene ;\nand I venture to say that the chief rea-\nson why Goethe relinquished his first\npolitical plan, and accepted a represen-\ntation of War in its stead, was, that it\nwas very much easier for him to draw\nupon his memory than to task his fail-\ning powers of invention.\n\n145. Attend! the sign is now expressed.\n\nAfter introducing the Fata Morgana\nof Sicily and the fires of St. Elmo, Faust\nreassures the Emperor, who has become\nbewildered and somewhat alarmed, by\na sign in the air, such as is described by\nHomer (Iliad, XII.) and Plutarch (7i-\nmoleon). Goethe certainly designed, by\nthese features, to give a ghostly atmos-\nphere to the scene; but he may have\nalso meant to unite the superstition of\nthe people with the brutality of war.\n\nNotes.\n\n146. The thing is done ! —\n\nThe apparent advantage of the ene-\nmy, in carrying the position occupied\nby the left wing of the Emperor's army,\nmakes Faust's aid (through Mephis-\ntopheles) indispensable to victory. The\nlatter, therefore, employs all his magic\ndevices, in turn. Goethe seems to have\nransacked the superstitions of History,\nand combined their most picturesque fea-\ntures. Weare reminded of the storm and\nflood described by Plutarch, of St. Jago\nfighting for Spain, of the apparitions and\nnoises which are reported to have ac-\ncompanied many famous battles; but\nthe most effective agent, after all, is\ntransmitted party bate.\n\n147. Thou sowest treasure on the land.\n\n'«* Did the poet, perhaps, mean to in-\ndicate that booty is usually thoughtlessly\nsquandered again, or only to describe, in\ngeneral, the reckless haste of plunder,\nwhereby the best is lost to the greedy\nrobber hands, which attempt to grasp\ntoo much ?\" — Duntzer.\n\n148. 'Z és Contribution, — cal/ it so!\n\nHavequick retorts that the contribu-\n\ntions levied by armies ina hostile coun-\ntry are only another form of plunder.\n\n149. Emperor.\n\nThe Alexandrine metre, with alter-\nnate masculine and feminine rhymes, in\nwhich the remainder of the scene is\nwritten, is not Goethe's invention, as\nsome have supposed. I find it in a\nPrologue of Lessing, written in 1765;\n\nbut it may also be found, in brief poems,\nfifty years earlier.\n\nThe scene, properly understood, is a\ngrave, powerful satire on the Imperial\nsystem of government. All the arti-\nficial ritualism of Courts is set forth so\nnaturally and consistently, that we must\nrecall the Emperor's assumed manhood\nand the great danger he has just escaped,\nin order to feel the hollow selfishness\nwhich, disregarding the condition of the\nrealm and the grievances of the people,\nonly employs itself with the arrange-\nment of ceremonials.\n\nWhen newly crowned, thou didst\nthe wizard liberate.\n\nThe reader will have already re-\nmarked that the satire of this scene is\nnot limited to its mediaval features. It\nnot only embraces that mechanical states-\nmanship which, after a great histori-\ncal crisis, sees no other policy than the\nre-establishment of previous conditions,\nbut it shows, in a contrast which grows\nsharper towards the close, the grandeur\nof intelligent human ambition, embodied\nin Faust, and the narrow greed and self-\nishness, first of the State, and then of\nthe Church. The indifference of the\nsecular princes becomes almost a virtue,\nbeside the bigotry of the Archbishop.\nThe latter refers to the humanity of the\nyoung Emperor, in saving the life of the\nNorcian necromancer, as an unatoned\nsin. The acceptance of the wizard's\ngratitude, in the aid rendered by Faust\nand Mephistopheles, although it has\nsaved the dynasty, (and the Archbishop\nhimself, with it,) is a still greater sin,\n\ndeserving the ban of the Holy Church.\nThe Emperor is required to make heavy\nsacrifices of land, money, and revenues,\nbefore he can receive full absolution for\nhis guilt. We are reminded of the\npriest's words to Margaret's mother\n(First Part, Scene IX.) « —\n\"The Church alone, beyond all question,\n\nHas for ill-gotten goods the right digestion.\"\n\nBut the climax of rapacity, and also of\n\ninconsistency, is reached when the |\n\nArchbishop demands the tithes of the\nnew land which Faust has not yet re-\nclaimed from the sea.\n\nACT V.\nOn the 13th of February, 1831,\n\nGoethe said to Eckermann, after stating\nthat he had commenced the Fourth\nAct: 'I shall now arrange how to\nfill the entire gap between the Helena\nand the already completed Fifth Act,\nwriting down my thoughts in detail as\na programme (Schema), so that I may\nexecute it with thorough ease and cer-\ntainty, and also that I may work on\nwhatever parts attract me most.\"\nYet, on the 2d of May, Eckermann\nwrites: '* Goethe delighted me with\nthe news that he had succeeded, within\nthe last few days, in supplying the com-\nmencement of the Fifth Act of Faust,\nwhich was bitherto lacking, so that it is\nnow as good as finished. 'The design\nof these scenes also,' said he, 'is more\nthan ¢hirty years old ; it was so impor-\ntant, that I did not lose my interest in\nit, but so difficult to elaborate, that I\nwas afraid of the task. By the employ-\nment of many devices, I have at last\n\nFaust.\n\ntaken up the thread again, and if For-\ntune favors me, I shall finish the Fourth\nAct before I stop.\"\n\nAgain, in a letter to Zelter, written\nJune 1, 1831, Goethe says: \"It is no\ntrifle that one must represent externally\nin one's eighty-second year what one\nhas conceived in one's twentieth, and\nclothe such a living izmer skeleton with\nsinews, flesh, and epidermis.\"\n\nHere are apparent contradictions,\nwhich, I think, may be thus explained: —\nIn his letter to Zelter, Goethe simply\nrefers to the original conception of Fasst.\nThe concluding part of Act V., com-\nmencing at Scene V. (Mipnicut: Four\nGray Women enter), was written about\nthe beginning of the century — certainly\nbetween 1800 and 1806 — and was per-\nhaps intended to be the entire Act. At\nleast, it seems probable that the sphere\nof activity which crowns Faust's life was\nfirst separated from the closing scenes\nof the drama. If Goethe, therefore,\nsimply transferred the first four scenes\nfrom the Fourth Act to the Fifth, after\nremodelling the former, all these dis-\ncrepancies of statement become intel-\nligible.\n\nGoethe also said: ** That which, in\nmy early years, was possible to me\ndaily, and under all circumstances, can\nnow only be accomplished periodically\nand under certain fortunate conditions.\n. . « » Now, I can only work on the\nSecond Part of my Faust during the\nearly hours of the day, when I am re-\nstored by sleep, feel myself strength-\nened, and the distractions of daily life\nhave not confused me. Yet, after all,\n\nNotes.\n\nwhat is it that I accomplish? In the\nluckiest case, one written page; but or-\ndinarily only a hand's breadth of manu-\nscript, and often, in an unproductive\nmood, still less.\"\n\nIt is very evident that the first four\nscenes of this last Act, having a more\nlyrical form than the conclusion of the\nFourth Act, which was written a few\nwecks later, were a sore task to the\naged poet. 'The metre is stiff and al-\nmost painfully constrained, and the con-\nstruction sometimes so crabbed that I\nhave twice or thrice been compelled to\nvary the phrase slightly for the sake of\nfluency. But the reader, no less than\nthe critic, will be generous; and, keep-\ning the grand design in view, will not\ntoo sharply scrutinize the imperfections\nof detail.\n\n1§2. Baucts.\n\n\"' Goethe showed me to-day the be-\nginning of the Fifth Act of Faust, which\nhad been lacking. I read to the pas-\nsage where the hut of Philemon and\nBaucis is burned, and Faust, standing\non the balcony of his palace at night,\nsmells the smoke, borne to him by the\nwind.\n\n«©* The names Philemon and Baucis,'\nsaid I, 'transport me to the Phrygian\nshore, reminding me of that famous an-\ntique pair; but this scene is laid in mod-\nern times and in a Christian region.'\n\n\"© My Philemon and Baucis,' said\nGoethe, ' have nothing to do with that\nantique pair and the legend concerning\nthem. I only gave them the same\nnames, to dignify the characters, The\npersons and circumstances are simular,\n\nand the names thus will have a good\n\neffect.' \"? — Eckermann, June 6, 1831.\n\nWhere the Sea's blue are ts\nspanned,\n\nThe Wanderer is introduced in or-\nder that the changes which Faust has\nwrought in the region may be described.\nThe sea, which broke on the downs\nwhere the former was wrecked, years\nbefore, is now only seen as a blue hori-\nzon-line in the distance.\n\nKnaves in vain by day were\nstorming.\n\nThe original line is: ' Tags umsonst\ndie Knechte larmten.\" Some translators\nhave rendered the word wmsonst into\n\"* unpaid,\" because it has frequently the\nmeaning of ' gratis.\" The other and\nequally correct rendering is suggested to\nme by the circumstance that the work-\nmen were employed by night as well as\nby day. The account which the old\ncouple give of Faust's cruelty must not\nbe taken too literally: they are no\nfriends of innovation.\n\n155. My grand estate lacks full design.\n\nThe Warder, Lynceus, is here intro-\nduced for the purpose of describing the\naction. Schnetger, it is true, says he\n1s the \" prophetic vision of the Poet,\"\nmourning over the destruction of the Beau-\ntiful by the modern Industrial Spirit; but\nI find in him no symbolism whatever,\n-—— certainly nothing which connects\nhim with his namesake of the Heleza.\nGoethe's plan 'could not be embodied\nin dramatic dialogue ; it required de-\n\n526 Faust.\n\nscriptive passages, and the vehicle achievement, in order to understand his\nthrough which to introduce them was_ present impatience and petulance. He\nnot always readily found. loses all joy in his vast possessions, be-\n'* Faust, as he appears in the Fifth cause the neighboring sand-hill, where-\nAct,\"? said Goethe to Eckermann, \"is on he wishes to build a lookout for a\njust one hundred years old, according view over all, his new, thickly-peopled\nto my intention; and I am not certain realm, is the property of another who\nwhether it would not be well toexprese refuses to sell or exchange it. Goethe\nthis positively, somewhere.\" has borrowed this incident from the\nstory of Frederick the Great and the\n\n156. With twenty come to port again. mnillep ak Potsdam,\n\nMephistopheles, still forced to serve,\nturns his commercial into a piratical 159. Still Naboth's vineyard we bebold.\nvoyage, and hopes to secure Faust's\ncomplicity in Evil by tempting him to\naccept the precious spoils of all climes,\nand the vessels which he has accumu-\n\nRiemer has here inserted a side-refer-\nence: \"1 Kings, xxi.\" It will be\nenough to quote the second and third\nverses : —\n\nlated. His argument, that War, Trade, 2. And Ahab spake unto Naboth\n\nand Piracy are 'three in one,\" makes\nno impression on Faust, who, as we\nlearn from the Three Mighty Men,\nturns away from the bribe in disgust.\n\nsaying, Give me thy vineyard, that I\nmay have it for a garden of herbs, be-\nCause it is near unto my house; and I\nwill give thee for it a better vineyard\n157. To-morrow the gay birds hither than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I\nwend. will give thee the worth of it in money.\n\n3. And Naboth said to Ahab, The\nLord forbid it me, that I should give\nthe inheritance of my fathers unto thee.\n\nThis is an obscure line, which some\ninterpret as denoting those seaport si-\nrens who consume so much of the sail-\nor's earnings. The Three Mighty 60, Forgive! not happily 't was done.\nMen represent the sea-faring class, so'\nfar as their character is drawn: Goethe\ndid not feel himself on very secure\nground here, and contented himself\nwith indicating the sailor's blunt coarse-\nness of speech and fondness for carousals.\n\nFaust, impatient at being' so long\nthwarted in his plans, so far yields to\nMephistopheles that he consents to\nemploy force. Here ts yet another —\nand the last — chance for the Spirit of\nEvil to win his wager. Like Jezebel,\n\n158. No sorer plague can us attack, he compasses the death of Naboth-Phil-\nThan rich to be, and something \\emon. The result is incendiarism and\nlack. urder, not forcible removal; and\n\nThe reader must remember Faust's aust, instead of accepting the coveted\nage, and his long course of successful property, curses the rash, inhuman deed\n\nNotes.\n\nThere can be no doubt that the ear-\nlier written portion of the Fifth Act\ncommences with this scene. In the\nabsence of any special evidence, I can-\nnot fix the exact time; but I think it\nmust have been in existence before\nSchiller's death (1805). The atmos-\nphere of the First Part begins to breathe\nupon us again, as if from a distant Past;\ngradually and successively the old\nwarmth and harmony and power revive;\nthe chimes and chants of Easter morn-\ning are heard again in the Choruses of\nthe Angels, and we are lifted, at the\nclose, into a region of Heaven less aus-\nterely sublime than that of the Pro.\nlogue, but burning into clearest white-\nness through the ineffable Presence of\nthe Divine Love.\n\nMopnicnut.\n\nI have followed Dr. Anster in thus\ntranslating Moth, which may also be\nrendered ** trouble' and ''need,\" for\nthe reason that Care, in this scene, in.\ncludes the fermer meaning, and Want\nthe latter.\n\nThe character of the three gray\nsisters, Want, Guilt, and Necessity, is\nexplained when they declare that they\ncannot enter the house of the Rich;\nbut Care, the atra cura of Horace, has\nfree entrance everywhere. Goethe's\nconception of her being seems to be the\nembodied Worry, and the other three\nhave no further: apparent significance\nthan to separate her from the other tor.\nmenting powere of life, and thus the\nmore clearly define her nature.\n\nNecessity, mine.\n\nThen were it worth one's while a\nman to be!\n\nGoethe said to Eckermann (1828) :\n«*But we old Europeans are all more\nor less in evil plight. .... Each is re-\nfined and polite, but no one has the\ncourage to be cordial and true, so that\nan honest man with natural ideas and\nimpulses stands in an unfortunate posi-\ntion. Often one cannot help wishing\nthat one had been born upon one of the\nSouth-Sea Islands, a so-called savage, so\nas once to have purely felt human exist-\nence, without any false flavors.\"\n\nFaust's reference to his magic and to\nhis curse (First Part, Scene IV.) is an-\nother evidence of the time when the\nscene was written, for it shows that the\noriginal conception was still fresh and\nwarm in Goethe's mind. In spite of\nhis great age, we feel that we have\nagain met the Faust of the First Part,\ninstead of his shadowy representative of\nthe preceding acts.\n\n164. This World means something to the\nCapable !\n\nThe original line, Dem Tachtigen tit\ndiese Welt nicht stumm, is difficult to\ntranslate — *' To the capable (or gemu-\nine) man this world is not mute,\" that\nis, it reveals to him its uses and possi-\nbilities. This was the first article in\nGoethe's creed of life, and he has ex-\npressed it, in his poems, in a multitude\nof forms.\n\n165. But in my inmost spirit all is light.\n\nFaust's selfish desire for a station on\nthe linden-trees, whence to overlook\nbis lands, and the crime to which it\n\nled, are justly avenged by his blindness,\nBut with the external darkness comes a\ngrowing spiritual light. the * obscure\naspiration\" gives place to knowledge\nand faith, 'The passage is pregnant\nwith meaning, but nothing in it is\nvague or doubtful.\n166. Lemures.\n\nGoethe has here borrowed (probably\n\nfrom Percy's Religues, which he knew)\n\nthe original song of Lord Vaux, a part\nof which Shakespeare puts into the\n\nmouth of the grave-digger in «* Ham-_\n\nJet.\" But he has taken only the first\nhalf of the verses, completing them\nwith other lines of his own. Therefore\nI have only translated these latter, and\nadded them to the original English\nlines. In \"¢ Hamlet,\" the verses are ; —\nIn youth, when I did love, did love,\nMethought it was very sweet,\nTo contract, O the time, for ah, my behove,\nO, methought there was nothing meet.\nBut Age, with his stealing steps,\nHath clawed me in his clutch,\nAnd hath shipped me into the land,\nAs if I have never been such.\nGoethe shows his knowledge of English\nliterature, in restoring the line of Lord\n\nVaux .—\nHath clawed me with his crutch.\n\nMoreover, his variation of this latter\nverse, at least, is entirely in the spirit\nof the original.\n\n167. They spake not of a moat, but of —\n\na grave.\nThe original line containsa pun which\ncannot be given in translation : —\n\nMan spricht, wie man mi Nachricht gab,\nVon keinem Graben, doch vom — Grab,\n\nFaust.\n\n168. He only earns bis freedom and ex-\nistence,\n\nWho daily conquers them anew\n\nIn these lines Goethe has uncon-\nsciously remembered a passage from\nSchiller's Wilbelm Tell > —\n\n** Dann erst geniess' ich meines Lebens recht,\n\nWenn ich mir 's jeden Tag aufs neu erbeute °\n(Then first do 1 truly enjoy my life,\nwhen I reconquer it every day as a new\npossession.)\n\nIt is hardly necessary that I should\ncall the reader to observe how Faust's\ngreat work, which was at first planned\nto exhibit the victory of Man over the\nforces of Nature, now becomes, to his\nclearer spiritual vision, a permanent gain\nand blessing to the race. All unselfish\nwork is better than the worker knows :\nand if Faust has only given '' free ac-\ntivity \" and not absolute *'* security \" to\nthe millions who shall come, he sees,\nat last, the great value of their very in-\nsecurity, as an agent which shall keep\nalive the virtues of vigilance, associa-\ntion, and the unselfish labor of each for\nthe common good. He foresees a free\npeople, living upon a free soil, — cour-\nage, intelligence, and patriotism con..\nstantly developed anew by danger.\nThere is a passage in Montesquieu's\nEsprit des Lois, whereina similar thought\nis expressed.\n\nThrough this prophetic vision, Faust\nexperiences the one moment of supreme\nhappiness. He has attained it in spite\nof, not through, Mephistopheles. He\nhas blessed his fellow-men for xons to\ncome, by creating for them a ficld of\nexistence, surrounded with conditions\n\nNotes.\n\nwhich assure them its possession and\ntheir own freedom and happiness, Not\nthrough Knowledge, Indulgence, Pow-\ner, — not even through the pure passion\nof the Beautiful, or victory over the\nElements, — has he reached the crown-\ning Moment which he would fain de-\nlay ; the sole condition of. perfect hap-\npiness is the good which he has accom-\nplished for others.\n\n169. But Time is lord, on earth the old\n\nman lies.\n\nMephistopheles almost quotes the\nArchbishop (page 372) :—\n'6 Who patient is, and right, his day shall yet\narise.\"\nHis manner also suggests his words to\nthe Lord, in the Prologue in Heaven : —\n\"Tf I fulfil my expectation,\n\nYou'll let me triumph with a swelling breast.\"\nThe Chorus now purposely repeats the\nexpression used by Fawst, in completing\nthe Compact (First Part, Scene IV.) : —\n\nThen let the death-bell chime the token,\n\nThen art thou from thy service free !\n\nThe clock may stop, the hand be broken,\nThen Time be finished unto me!\n\nThe answer of Mephistopheles to\nthe exclamation of the Chorus: *'T is\npast!\" seems to conflict with the pas-\nsion for annihilation, which he expresses\nin first describing his nature to Faust\n(First Part, Scene III.). He drops his\ncharacter of Negation suddenly, and be-\ncomes the popular Devil, who is a very\npositive personage. From this point to\nthe end, we are reminded of the Mira-\ncle-plays of the Middle Ages.\n\n170. SEPULTURE.\n\nThe chant of the Lemures is here\nagain suggested by the Grave-digger's\nsong in Ham/et, third verse: —\n\n\"6 A pickaxe and a spade, a spade,\nFor and a shrouding sheet:\nO, a pit of clay for to be made\nFor such a guest is meet.\"\n\nHell bath a multitude of jaws, is\nshort.\n\nGoethe's first plan was to send Me-\nphistopheles into the presence of The\nLord, for the purpose of announcing\nthat he had won. This, however,\nwould have interfered with the effect\nof the closing scene, and he selected,\ninstead, the machinery of the Miracle- —\nplays, as better adapted to his purpose.\nThe open jaws of Hell, as they are still\nrepresented in many chapels of Catholic\ncountries, and the two varieties of Dey-\nils, are intentionally introduced as a\ncoarse, almost vulgar framework for a\nscene which is meant to include the\nsharpest contrast of two principles,\nHeaven stooping down, and Hell rising\nup to take hold of the soul of Man.\n\n171,\n\nPluck off the wings, 'tis but a\n\nbideous worm.\n\nThis passage is a satirical reference,\nboth to the old traditions of the appear-\nance of the soul and its manner of escape\nfrom the body, and to various psycho-\nlogical speculations of recent times.\n\n173. And Genius, surely, seeks at once to\nrise.\n\nThe long, lean Devils, in whom a\n\ncommentator (probably related to Nico-\n\nlai) finds a symbol of the Jesuits, are\ndirected to catch the soul in the air, if\nit should escape the clutches of those\nwho bend over the body. All the con-\ntempt of Mephistopheles for Faust's\nideal aspirations seems to be expressed\nin this sneer at ** Genius.\"\n\n174. Is just the thing their prayers de-\nmand.\n\nMephistopheles here becomes Goe-\nthe, for amoment. The latter firmly\nbelieved in the universality of the Di-\nvine Power and the Divine Love, and\nfew things were more repulsive to his\nnature than the horrors of the conven-\ntional Hell of medizval theology.\nNothing could be more savagely satiri-\ncal than this declaration of Mephis-\ntopheles that the worst torments in-\nvented by the fiends are demanded by\nthe faith of the Pious.\n\nHartung says of the appearance of\nthe angels: '* Mephistopheles calls the\nglory which surrounds them an 'un-\nwelcome day,' their chant a 'nasty\ntinkling, a boy-girlish strumming,' etc.\nThis is a satire on the Moravian hymns\nand those of other canting sects.\"\" The\ncorrectness of the last assertion 1s by\nno means evident.\n\nCuorus or ANGELS (scattering\nroses).\n\nThe angelic choruses in this scene\nare scarcely less wonderful than those\nof Easter morning, in the First Part.\nThey present an equal difficulty to the\ntranslator in their interlinking feminine\nand dactylic rhymes, and perhaps a\ngreater one in that unnatural compres-\n\nFaust.\n\nsion of phrase which almost destroys the\nform of the thought. In one or two\ninstances Goethe has attempted the im-\npossible, and failed; yet his failure is\nso grand that we are tempted to accept\nit as a success. I add the literal trans-\nlation of this Chorus, for the help of\nthose who are unacquainted with the\noriginal : —\n\nRoses, ye dazzling,\n\nBalsam out-sending |!\n\nFluttering, hovering,\n\nSecretly animating,\n\nBranch-winged,\n\nBud-unfolded,\n\nHasten to bloom !\n\nLet Spring shoot,\n\nPurple and green !\n\nBear Paradise\n\nTo the One who rests!\n\nIn the closing scene, the Roses are\ndeclared to have been scattered by the\nhands of '*loving, sanctified women-\npenitents.\" They are symbolical of\nLove; but not yet, as some commenta-\ntors suggest, of the Divine Love. I\nagree with Dr. Bloede, who in his\nessay, Die Religions-Philosophie Goethe's,\ncalls them 'acts of Love,\" in which\nthe highest principle of Good, mani-\nfested through Man, overcomes the\nprinciple of Evil.\n\n176. ANGELS.\n\nThe spirit of this Chorus is clear,\nin the original, but not the language.\nEven a literal translation is impossible\nunless we supply, conjecturally, the\nsingular ellipses of the German lines: —\n\nBlossoms, the blissful,\n\nFlames, the joyous,\nLove disseminate they,\n\nNotes.\n\nRapture prepare they,\n\nAs the heart may [receive or contain ?].\nWords, the true,\n\nEther in clearness,\n\nTo Eternal Hosts\n\nEverywhere Day!\n\nThe meaning of the last four lines\nseems to be that true words are the\nclear ether wherein the eternal hosts of\nspirits find everywhere Day —or Light.\nThere are several German interpreta-\ntions of this chant.\n\nThe grotesque, medieval character\nof the strife belongs to the Devils alone;\nthe Angels are not yet seen, only their\nChants fall from the Glory above. The\ncclestial Roses burn and sting, \"sharper\nthan Hell's red conflagration,\" and both\nvarieties of Devils are so tormented that\nthey plunge head foremost into the Jaws\nwhich stand open upon the left hand,\nIcaving Mephistopheles alone. We are\nto suppose that the Angels gradually\ndescend during the singing of this\nChorus, which I also give literally : —\n\nCuorus or ANGELS.\n\nWhat not appertains to you\nMust you avoid ;\n\nWhat troubles your inner being\nDare you not suffer.\n\nShould it press powerfully in,\nWe must be thoroughly strong ;\nLove only the Loving\n\nLeads in to us! .\n\nWhat now restrains me, that I\ndare noi curse?\n\nWhatever may be said of the coarse-\nness and irreverence of this and the fol-\nlowing passage (Julian Schmidt, for in-\nstance, pronounces them \" atrocious ''),\nthere could be no more tremendous il-\n\nlustration of the baseness and blindness\nof the principle of Evil. Although\nMephistopheles is covered from head\nto foot, like Job, with boils which the\nburning roses have left behind them, he\nbecomes enamored of the beauty of the\nAngels. In this languishing mood he\nis doubly a Devil, and the Negation\nembodied in him reaches a climax be-\nyond all previous suggestion, for it is\nplaced in antagonism to sacred purity.\n\n179. CHorus or ANGELS.\n\nLiterally : —\nChange into clearness,\nYe, loving Flames!\nThem who damn themselves\nLet Truth heal,\nThat they from Evil\nJoyously redeem themselves,\nThus in the All-union\nBlessed to be !\n\nThe old case-bardened Devil went\n\nastray.\n\nThe word which I have translated\n\"' case-hardened \"' is ausgepichten, an ad-\njective usually applied to barrels and\nsignifying '*thoroughly seasoned with\npitch.\" This is one of the many in-\nstances where the correct translation\nmust be equivalent, and not \"teral.\nThe impression left upon Mephistoph-\neles is evidently that the Angels have\ntaken advantage of his attack of *¢ sense..\nless passion\"' for them, and sto/en from\nhim the soul of Faust. He under-\nstands only the letter of his compact,\nfor redemption through love and benefi-\ncent labor for others is to him simply\nincomprehensible. Thus, not only con.\nsistent with his original character, but\n\nillustrating, as never before in the whole\ncourse of the drama, the eternal igno-\nrance and impotence of Evil, he disap-\npears from our sight.\n\n181. Hoty AncHORITES.\n\nThis closing scene, although it ends\nin the higher regions of Heaven, ap-\npears to begin on Earth. Goethe evi-\ndently meant to symbolize a continual\nascending scale of being, in which Death\nis simply a form of transition, not a\nprofound gulf between two different\nIn one of his letters to Zel-\nter, he says: 'Let us continue our\n\nworlds.\n\nwork until one of us, before or after the\nother, returns to ether at the summons\nof the World-Spirit! 'Then may the\nEternal not refuse to us new activities,\nanalogous to those wherein we have\nhere been tested! If He shall also add\nmemory and a continued sense of the\nRight and the Good, in His fatherly\nkindness, we shall then surely all the\nsooner take hold or the wheels which\ndrive the cosmic machinery (i# die\nKamme des Weltgetriebes eingreifen).\"\nThe scene (apparently from some\nhint of Goethe's, which has not been\n_recorded*) 1s taken, according to the\nbest German commentators. from Mont-\n\n* An indirect clew may perhaps be found\nin the following passage from a letter which\nWilhelm von Humboldt, after visiting Mont-\nserrat, wrote to Goethe: * Your Mysteries [a\npoem written by Goethe is: 1785] rose distinctly\nin my memory. I have always taken an un-\nusual delizht in that beautiful poem, which ex.\npresses such a wonderfully lofty and human\n\nfecling ; but now, since I have visited this spot,\n\nit interweaves itself with something in my own\n\nexperience.\"\n\nFaust.\n\nserrat, the remarkable, isolated moun-\ntain near Barcelona. This mountain,\nduring the Middle Ages, was inhabited\nby anchorites, who were divided into\nregions according to the degree of spir-\nitual perfection which they attained ;\nthe youngest occupying cells in the\ngreat summit-pyramids of rock, difhcult\nand dangerous of access, while the older,\nafter certain probations, gradually ap-\nproached the base, their privations di-\nminishing as their sanctity increased.\nGoethe reverses this order, commen-\ncing with the spirits who retain most of\nEarth, and rising above the highest sum-\nmits into the pure, spiritual ether.\n\nSchnetger's remarks are as just as\nthey are concise: ** The whole closing\nscene exhibits nothing else to us than a\nuniversal upward movement of loving\nnatures, to whom other loving natures\noffer their hands; so that we have a\nlong chain, the lowest link of which is\non the Earth, the highest in the loftiest\nregions of Heaven, the lowest a man\nstill heavily burdened with the Corpo-\nreal, the highest the Deity. It tsnot a\nHeaven full of eternally inactive bliss,\nsuch as lazy Piety imagines, which is\nexhibited to us, but one of the purest\nloving activity.\"\n\n182. Parer Ecsraticus.\n\nIt is generally agreed — and the ten-\ndency of Goethe's mind during his last\nyears justifies the belief — that the\nthree Patres symbolize different forms\nor manifestations of devotional feeling\nTheir appearance, as we afterwards feel,\nwas suggested by the necessity of avoid\ning a sudden transition from the blas-\n\nNotes.\n\nphemous sensuality of Mephistopheles\nto the '* indescribable \" exaltation of the\nclosing mystery; but they also have\ntheir appropriate place in this ever-ris-\ning and ever-swelling symphony, with\nits one theme of the accordance of Hu-\nman and Divine Love.\n\nSince it was known that Goethe se-\nlected actual figures to serve as, at least,\nan imaginary basis for his spiritual and\nallegorical characters, the commentators\nhave exhibited their research in endeav-\noring to fix upon the originals of these\nPatres. Although the title Eestaticus\nwas bestowed on Dionysius the Car-\nthusian, and is also applicable to St.\nAnthony, it is not likely that Goethe\nmeant to represent the individual char-\nacter of either. St. Theresa, in fact,\nis a better personification of that e&s-\ntasis, which, as here, would tempo-\nrarily annihilate the material and dis-\nsolve the soul in a frenzy of devotional\nlove. :\n\nThe last four lines spoken by the\nPater Ecstaticus must be given literally,\nfor the sake of comparison : —\n'¢ That verily the void, transitory,\nAll be dissipated (or exhaled),\n\n[And] beam the enduring star,\nGerm of Eternal Love!\"\n\n183. Pater Prorunpus.\n\nWe might almost say that the Pater\nEcstaticus represents Devotion as mani-\nfested through temperament or exalted\nsensation; the Pater Profundus, Devo-\ntion as it shapes the intellect, which\nperceives symbols in all things, feels the\nlimitations of the senses, and aspires to-\nwards Divine Truth as the highest form\n\nof knowledge; and finally, the Pater\nSeraphicus Devotion as it possesses the\nsoul in the purest glow of self-abnegation.\n\nThe title Pater Profundus was be-\nstowed on the English theologian,\nThomas of Bradwardyne, and also on\nBernard de Clairvaux, founder of the\nCistercian order, two centuries before\nthe former. It is not necessary, in\neither case, to seek for a parallel which\nwe are not likely to find verified.\n\n184. Pater SERAPHICUS.\n\nThis name was given to St. Francis\nof Assisi, who is mentioned by Dante\n(Paradiso, XI.), and Goethe may pos-\nsibly have borne him in mind, without\nborrowing anything from the story of\nhis life.\n\n185. CHorvus or Bressep Boys.\n\nThese boys, whom Goethe calls\n\"«midnight-born,\" are the spirits of those\nwho died in birth, barely given to Life\nand then taken from it before the awak-\nening of sense or mind. 'The mean-\ning seems to be that they are still un-\ndeveloped in the spiritual world, —\nin other words, that, in the scale of as-\ncending Being, they have missed our\nsphere, and feel only the delight of ex-\nistence (allen ist das Daseym so gelind),\nwithout the intelligence, from which\nmust be born the aspiration for what is\nstill beyond and above them.\n\n186. (He takes them into bimself.;\n\nThe following passage occurs in a\nletter from Goethe to Wolf, author of\nthe famous Homeric Pro/egomena, in\n1806: 'Why can I not at once,\n\n———_\n\nhonored friend, on receiving your let-\nter, sink myself fora short time in your\nbeing, like those Swedenborgian spirits\nwho sometimes receive permission to\nenter into the organs of sense of their\nmaster, and through the medium of\nthese to behold the world?\"\n\n187. Whoe'er aspires unweariedly\n\nIs not beyond redeeming.\n\nEckermann writes, in June, 1831:\n«© We then spoke of the closing scene,\nand Goethe called my attention to the\nfollowing passage\"? [every line is here\nso pregnant with important meaning\nthat an exact rhymed translation be-\ncomes nearly impossible, and I there-\nfore add the verse, in prose] : —\n\n6¢ Rescued is the noble member\nOf the spirit-world from Evil:\nWho, ever striving [aspiring ?], exerts him-\n7 self,\nHim can we redeem.\nAnd if he also participates\nIn the Love from on high,\nThe Blessed Host will meet him\nWith heartiest welcome.\"\n\n«© In these lines,\" said Goethe, \" the\nkey to Faust's rescue may be found. In\nFaust, himself, an ever higher and\npurer form of activity to the end, and\nthe eternal Love coming down to his\naid from above. This is entirely in\n\nharmony with our religious ideas, ac-\n\ncording to which we are not alone\nsaved by our own strength, but through\nthe freely-bestowed Grace of God.\n\n'« Moreover, you will admit that the\nconclusion, where the redeemed soul is\ncarried above, was very difficult to ac-\ncomplish ; and also that I might very\n\nFaust.\n\neasily have lost myself in vagueness, in\nsuch supernatural, hardly conceivable\nsurroundings, if I had not given a fa-\nvorably restricting form and firmness to\nmy poetic designs, through the sharp\noutlines of Christian-ecclesiastical fig-\nures and representations.\"\n\n188. Eternal love, alone,\n\nCan separate them.\n\nThis passage is somewhat obscure,\nbecause it attempts to express a greater\nbulk of meaning than the words will\nhold. The last eight lines are : —\n\nWhen strong intellectual power\nThe elements\n\nHas gathered into itself,\n\nNo angel [may or could] divide\nThe double nature grown into one\n'Of the intimate Two:\n\nEternal Love alone\n\nHas power to separate it.\n\nGoethe undoubtedly meant to say\nthat the elements of earthly knowledge\nand experience become, in life, so\nblended into one with the spiritual\nnature of Man, that the Angels, who\nbear Faust's immortal part, not yet\n\npurified from the traces of its earthly\n\ncareer, cannot separate the two: it\nmust be the work of Eternal Love.\nThe soul of Faust is now given into the\nhands of the Blessed Boys.\n\n189. Doctor Marianus.\n\nSome see in this name a reference to\nMarianus Scotus, who died, as an ere-\nmite, in 1086. Others, again, suppose\nit to be the celestial name of Faust, al-\nthough the soul of the latter has not\nyet awakened to the change. The\ntitle «* Doctor\" impresses us singularly,\n\nNotes.\n\nafter the Patres, and we cannot help\nsurmising some special intention in it,\nalthough the character seems to be in-\ntroduced solely for the purpose of de-\nscribing the approach of the Mater\nGloriosa. But there is nothing said,\nwhich might not, with equal propriety,\nhave been put into the mouth of the\nPater Seraphicus.\n\nThe Mater GLoriosa soars into\nthe space.\n\nIt is easy to understand why, in this\n\nmystic symphony of Love, Goethe\nshould have chosen the Virgin as a\nrepresentative of the sweetest and ten-\nderest attribute of the Deity. This\nvariation from the Prologue in Heaven\nwas directly prescribed by the ecclesi-\nastical framework through which he\nexpresses the symbolism of the scene.\nSome of the critics censure Goethe for\napplying to the Virgin the word \"* God-\ndess,\"\" because it is not used by the\nCatholic Church; as if, in borrowing\nthe form, he must necessarily accept\nthe spirit with it! Nevertheless, a\nCatholic writer, Wilhelm von Schitz,*\nsees in this scene the evidence that\nGoethe was dissatisfied with \" the palli-\native poverty of the Protestant spirit,\"\nand had almost reached Catholicism at\nthe close of his life! On the other hand,\nDr. Barensf illustrates almost every\nportion of the scene by passages from the\n\n*® Goethe's Faust und der Protestantismus's\nManuscailpt fiir Katholiken und Freunde.\nBamberg, 1844.\n\n+ Der zweite Theil und insbesondere die\n\nSchiussscene der Gostheschen Fausttragédie.\nHannover, 1854.\n\nNew Testament, and Pastor Cludius*\ndeclares that '¢ Faust is a sphinx, whose\nenigmas can only be solved by those\nwho are initiated into the mysteries of\nChristianity.\" Add to these views\nthe assertion of a French critic that\nFaust is '* a Gospel of Pantheism,\" and\nwe can appreciate the height of Goe-\nthe's mind above all sectarian or theo-\nlogical boundaries.\n\n191. Macna Peccatrix.\n\nI have retained the references at-\ntached to this and the two following\nstanzas, because I am not sure whether\nthey were originally written by Goethe,\nor afterwards added by Riemer. Mary\nMagdalene and the Woman of Samaria\nrequire no comment: Mary of Egypt\nis described in the Acta Sanctorum as\nan infamous woman of Alexandria, who,\nafter seventeen years of vice, made a\npilgrimage to Jerusalem. On approach-\ning the door of the Church of the Holy\nSepulchre, an invisible arm thrust her\naway. Weeping, overcome with the\nsudden sense of her unworthiness, she\nprayed to the Virgin, and was then\nlifted as by hands and borne into the\nTemple, and a voice said to her: 'Go\nbeyond the Jordan, and thou wilt find\npeace.\" She went isto che Desert\nwhere she lived alone forty-eight years,\nonly visited by a monk who brought\nher the last sacrament, and for whom,\nwhen she died, she left a message writ-\nten upon the sand.\n\nThese three sinful yet penitent and\n\n® Goethe's Faust as Apologie des Christen-\nthums.\n\nglorified women are made intercessors\nfor the soul of Margaret, which has\nnot yet been admitted to the higher\nspheres.\n\nMargaret sees her full pardon in the\nface of the Mater Gloriosa, before it is\nspoken, and the prayer (First Part,\nScene XVIII.) which was a despairing\ncry for help now becomes a strain of\nunutterable joy. The Blessed Boys\napproach, bearing the soul of Faust, al-\nready overtowering them as it grows\ninto consciousness of the new being.\nBy him, who has learned so much of\nLife, they shall be taught at last. Mar-\ngaret, no longer an ignorant maiden, but\nan inspired Soul, sees the beauty and\nglory of the original nature of Faust,\nnow redeemed, releasing itself from its\nearthly disguises and shining like the\nHoly Host. But we hear no voice:\nwe only know that it awakens.\n\nWho, feeling thee, shall falleo\n\nthere.\n\nUna PcnitentTium.\n\nThe literal translation of these two\n\n\"© Come, lift thyself to higher spheres |\nWhen he has a spiritual sense of thy presence,\nhe will follow \"\nThe reader who knows the original\nneed not be told how difficult it is to\nrender the word abnet.\n\n—__\n\n194. CHorus Mysticus.\n\nThe closing lines of the wonderful |\n\nFaust.\n\ndrama must not be read as a comple-\nment to, or a solution of, the problem\nstated in the Prologue in Heaven. They\nsecm to relate almost exclusively to the\nlast scene, in order to connect the heav-\nenly and the earthly spheres, by sug-\ngesting, mysteriously, the relation of\nthe two. The translation I have given\nis nearly literal; but, inasmuch as ev-\nery word is important, I here make it\nentirely so:—\n\nAll that {s transitory\n\nIs only a symbol:\n\nThe inadequate (or insufficient)\n\nHere becomes event; (reality ?)\n\nThe Indescribable,\n\nHere it is done:\n\nThe Eternal- Womanly (or Feminine)\n\nDraws us on and upward.\n\nI can find no English equivalent for\nEwtgweibliche except '' Woman-Soul,\"\nwhich will express very nearly the\nsame idea to those who feel the spirit\n\nwhich breathes and burns throughout ,\nthe scene. Love is the all-uplifting and .\nall-redeeming power on Earth and in |\n\nHeaven; and to Man it is revealed in\n\n. its most pure and perfect form through\nlines must be added : — |\n\nWoman. Thus, in the transitory life\nof Earth, it is only a symbol of its di-\nviner being; the possibilities of Love,\nwhich Earth can never fulfil, become\nrealities in the higher life which fol-\nlows; the Spirit, which Woman inter-\nprets to us here, still draws us upward\n\n(as Margaret draws the soul of Faust)\n\nthere.\n\n—— ee oe\n\n\\\n\n{\n\nCambridge : Electrotyped and Printed by Welch, Bigelow, and Co\n\nsaeeaty Google\n\naes Google\n\nTHE BORROWER WILL BE CHARGED\nAN OVERDUE FEE IF THIS BOOK IS NOT\nRETURNED TO THE LIBRARY ON OR\nBEFORE THE LAST DATE STAMPED\n\nBELOW. NON-RECEIPT OF OVERDUE\nNOTICES DOES NOT EXEMPT THE\nBORROWER FROM OVERDUE FEES.\n\na\n\ns? mri, '7. |? 'he 4 ' Js Gos iii. » ere Tey ay ia\nSAM ET tal ry Shae Shhh\n; 7 ? 7 . ' . : - we\nai, tie . bid : <a ~_ 7\npresets W < Sa\n4 \\ si) .\nA t ' rs } ; ; : *_ A 4 i4 a. %\nised Rh, a . or ; : .\niJ Vy ] rh.* : —_ é 4 aan\np , A ot,* a\"a%™% ®\ntt ils), 5, Me 4h - 1 e i '\n7 t i : ' ' Pa\n4 eit Ky = _) ; ' if J £\n° ' b 'yf ;*\n'it iis petdice ies I Sil ea.\n® \\i 1 > *\nBS petro telat t slit.\ntia ea < au > = ' , «\nCASE ch ae os |\n7 pal t saigaaa hake otis: He PO i\n- | Some ais & betel Rae 2\na5, ' a. Wik } he vate fy i\n' -# +f OE + au Wise Na hrs '\nshe . ~> ale! i>? * ® ibheas\n} . be Dy oy. =}. ' 4S Wit 2; Niet Laieest > bea ] z ;\n\" 7 Ah ¢ . 7 4 aii Dent ij' at ee 4 : me hie\n| a Uae ae tay TAL Tecan rth eateaeeee Pearce tt eno ae \"tt\n' . sl\" te 474 6% i *,! 7 i¢\n| AE Le ce fs \"> ge 41d) ue mast Hit ; ai Leith Le Hehe e\\el4l ted eae eae\n| ~SRa 4} Ph: bee rea 1 m 4? \\ 2? +44 ae 4 yy ive i a4 7) i} . : . 4\n| ie ~ 2°? 7?\" ' is Feats é 4 ws site orale . .\n| ma O4} t 1 U)ik i ai Mighii te $3 ig » a tee ' SPett aa 3°. 0 eae Tu ei ti = \\*/ q :\ntoe \"pre tieyels Seni spr! i; pete Ps. ah ' 4 : ', nie tT)\" haw | y or ; i v\n| CORBBEP WU EPL. Pert Loee Gr) A ye TRabeiaa Pee. M4 i etiowe let hee 4 -\n\"RRR SRTMARURUShe ehaetel stent esac a eee taba PRI Mae a\nscat (inden bee thidasiepetererss sts 137 p> re 1 a A ' l aad Lee. t . ee Dy he Vr rye ' >\n%; saisti 5 het ee Selidst iti ti. 2 oan 4 ©. 40 #94 i tae tb Morel eM id! i ,\nbs «9 ij 4] bn as) ibe oi Al@ Qet 3 \\- sia th ' i é a | ~. i LTE 2 te '\nits a terons btrlicceke . EHH ial ) é i \"7 P25 ' ' ' pry lagers i \"> a | Nes ett '\n+ tk MORAL wea Mba bd de babe { ths tribe Why AN is, : ma adt ly | 1% rs \"se 4 a\nTe ALDH T HHS e ti atta TAM ae ie cl tht SESS Stat a irs -\nBe oeoytosargrs Sets leabirge Ladeseraca seu) etm 1) ane 2 Si ES & ik, '\n\" 41s 4) Mu hvitaie! lit tectte® > —_ en ie i t hits be 7 7; , J : .\ni} tt +4 Jikkt nist + The: é AA, a: Py = itd' , ) :\n3 iPai) erie 77 ates a Hes Ye - i\" ne shed Peat | Wi}; .4 ay °\nTe lr Toit ip tabsts bot ttestts TEU Rea ne Deh Sibert inst '\nas be boty] moPuiore ban selac tres Coangee Wes rch ie if hae 4)\n@° ¢ , ®\n5 * ° e\n» i - nie\n| Se n te aia) 3 ' it :\n) pia ; ; eva | PY Yi 4e' 6 > it i; -t \" 4 ha j a , .\nBi ried halt ate. PALM al th RACY Tiana \"Junta Phe tee 7 : -a® ' 2\niat soot ory 354 i4 i . Pea Sty 'a4. : a oie nl? ; ei\" rt. PAi - ail repeab) sat\n: tahal . auth prristitt! a t ut ey Sainte } Hh. wire. os Tl ete rr >\" : 74 7 '. aie TELE\n( sheet ° { : ih Fy ih) eistas Stab ins ure. er' «} A . > nist ir\n| aati gor Sh AMRadAA TRS MLA De ttt ie per tsar id a EE A vette tr! Wis Set nee\nSR TRCEE TS pares SPR aa ee EN TY UTNE Aas TORN es ee ip Gh PRU LT teeta Mace sicn ent\n| eee at Se eee, 1 44 oe a : 84) : ir ve 'i mapbatt \"4 Solomre. o bbe — ) ' e+? 14 ,\n: af < Matt toe cvs\" . » al} iu} (etd srt . aN rr ] q } > { Ve) . 1) Te , Mote eA Ve ejeit /\nP '24 ? '2a ersiéieate * ee rho '4 a ' ; i > ae) ' : Palade heuas é bias ha Pa\naf. eget eth) in \\3 *i4e eeu vy 45)\" yes Cathe Ans oe 'aCe ans 1 bette terete WE -\ne'« a+ Tir oe : '%e 3 ite hi tii ; i _, 74? , oe | b pb Ps : i '\nit RESON Macibpasetc ee death 13/5) eecr D wit Hes aE nie LS aSME ELSES? raRBeg aa poamd vars | cH24 Fabs gH\n, 4 ys 4 i P a es es wT i. : ** bee: ', ; on 2 4\" ° f >t \"* afi ° ry\nBrtsel 34\" ¢ Rett Te \"ad Wey 5 A yl > ee aie a th + 4 bs ? Moiit O5ee ealece. edt) 4 3)4) een shee : th) '4\n'oe '' i if ies UJ « x 1, '% M4 tT» +5 rr ' . 1 TU, a, a: < pid | bles \\ r4 smbiiiy\n~ ee SES SiGe URE cae eh a teh Sr tel ety] tr atacons aett OS LSet Beas th ONS PLS Lor bee eaten dh\nHISTO TSH bestibabtcc HORS t ia ite 1c | epee mee Bilt eu Ne Re tes Bhi 0M Vibaatoke S280) iri obs tiil\nBRS e+ , } ik Sh a ST wate A oie Be) AD GE - rj LS beb obo So akerr cutee, be) it :\n\"a abhi 4 > f ' at he +2 \\ .,: . . i j\noe, % —s oa 'a! : - Pip EP Eraver vie 's 7\nBch tt ie +2 *'t¢ \"bh? ' 7\n; ei if Ate\n2 ; Le ety Oe ee ee? ' ;\n7ie ' 47 > / O' hr , a . ©\nP thibs y * } \"Ba5 bir , 2% b6 of i 5 * é : bd ;\nlet <i a*. - i) ~tthi oii leery a +4 SPL shales , reits 4 : ag\n: ea 9 ) Haat ts pitt - : | ek sisial y's ih: wt ' = wi '] ait eit A Me ' Ae ag \" ji} > : ,.4 At ' \\ P\na HVAT Er erent ROMEO Tr TST a ae |\n' ' D4 4 b ¢ bad a\" e ty a ~or OF 4 ene i at $f ; i | = b\nbt : rid oF : re. §-?e1, Ts Noh IS Ts 38 j ve 1. if\nyh ithe vats! A aeese cat Pit iyiiteste ict Ue L\noF »* es, . T-tree hk oat a<— eayeyt ted m4 4e, } 1.4; pee i hs 7 oe\noh ces \" 4 ~ — © , ee Sd 1PM \"f a 3 a RDS ant Q re \"4 Lethe\n} sh) \"At of ty 7: 1) sah =P tst-4t bia nets As 3)\n2 iF j ; NRBAU Mii t+ Hi bt yes co 5 (4 +, ; Ave Hips ' Mid at '} \"ee.\n' + 4 2 ' TT? 7 'Lae —s ' Fae * 44\nEG ' ¥) \\ i bee BE ate bya neD A ne onl h tage! —~ AP Pes ela) ey\n. oh : 5) ;? mY i ait! 4 amis -_ \"or - et 4 arota 4 ah 1 t ot ty Pieter\n. i° \\ Th He ' te = a may D4, ears? le\nne booked Bh a pt fe \"fe re trys ' mats ' .\n? > : . » t «pe\nne ty isi Fefté i: ah eT ATI;\n¢ of ' % ' ' » '\nan iy tits ete histis dt iyests *\nip\n\nNasa sf pays Me 7\n\ni ne He th\naf\n\n'\n\naah\nae\n\n'=\n\nat\n\nee\n\nios } oe\nsins imc\n\nse tnslt ae\n\nGe i ol\nAe il a i A\n\nit) ht thy\n\nce HUME\n\nthai Lea ie AR\nif\n\n1154:\n\na MS Eset pal ah Bon Ot Shia\nr Het i -* + 4 WIA it Ti\nHU ene vii Tae Wl) i a> thee: +E; i 1} ;\n\n85 Yards\n\nPal t . i\n. 4 * ie s 4 :\n1H ¢ h4 gies : 7 Pes . 7 4 . bree.\n\n>) ete Sau",
    "project_translation": false,
    "license": null,
    "methodology_url": null
  }
}