well-known to London theatergoers because of several visits to London by Italian actors since the Restoration. Probably, as Borgman notes (p. 36), the first Englishmen to play Scaramouche and Harlequin were Griffin and Haynes who had in 1677 appeared with the King's Company in Ravenscroft's Scaramouch a Philosopher, Harlequin a School-Boy, Bravo, Merchant, and Magician. When Aphra Behn's The Emperor of the Moon appeared in March, 1687, Leigh played Scaramouche and Harlequin was taken by Jevon. It seems probable that in order that these two actors might have a further opportunity to appear as these popular characters, a place was found for Scaramouche and Harlequin in Mountfort's farce.

The text of Mountfort's "Dr. Faustus" reveals that his farce, like any, must depend to a great extent on its farceurs. In Jevon and Leigh he had talented players and much of the script can be regarded merely as an improvisational chart allowing the two famed comics to maneuver. Jevon, as Leo Hughes points out, built up a considerable reputation, chiefly in low comedy roles since his first notice as Osric in a revival of Hamlet in 1673.[12] Having a slight, thin figure, he was noted for his grace of movement and agility on the stage; he played Harlequin. Although Jevon could play such straight roles as Young Bellair in The Man of Mode, he, along with Nokes, Underhill, and Leigh, made his reputation in the boisterous farce of which "Dr. Faustus" is an excellent example.

Anthony Leigh played Scaramouche. Of his acting Cibber says:

In Humour, he lov'd to take a full Career, but was careful enough to stop short, when just upon the Precipice: He had great Variety, in his manner, and was famous in very different Characters.... But no wonder Leigh arriv'd to such Fame, in what was so completely written for him; when Characters that would make the Reader yawn, in the Closet, have by the Strength of his Action, been lifted into the lowdest Laughter, on the Stage (Apology, p. 85-86).

That Jevon and Leigh played well together is evident, and one can see great possibilities in their improvisation of such lazzi as the episode of the "dead body," Act I, Scene i, or in the elaborate show of compliment which ends the first act.

The presence of Scaramouche and Harlequin in Mountfort's adaptation suggests the influence of the Italian and French commedia on the Restoration stage, although, as Leo Hughes points out, the native tradition of farce is paramount (pp. 134-141). Hughes notes that although the commedia influence is obvious, Italian farce is different in style from the English, and that although there were four or five tours by commedia troops between 1660 and 1700, these visits were not enough to influence significantly English farce writing. Furthermore, the Italian's art was improvisational—they used no printed texts, and the English would therefore have even less chance to copy from the commedia. Readers of "Dr. Faustus" will find little trace of commedia influence apart from the conventional names. Hughes acknowledges (p. 141) the greater influence of the French stage in the Restoration, owing chiefly to the great popularity of Molière, whose influence on farce, especially on the afterpiece which became a staple on the English stage after 1695, was long-lived. His prestige was great; he appealed to English taste, and such characters as M. Jourdain, M. Pourceaugnac, and Sganarelle appear repeatedly in English adaptations.

The action of farce is typically a string of blow-ups, stage business highly dependent on fast pacing. Characteristically on the English stage there is a great deal of stage-effect; "Dr. Faustus," produced at the Dorset Garden Theater where farce was often produced in order to take advantage of the elaborate stage machinery available there, makes use of rising tables, a giant which divides in two, good and bad angels which rise and descend, fireworks, a vanishing feast, a view of hell, and even more. Indeed, the often hilarious stage directions give us good insight into the capabilities of the Restoration stage. The finale is typical: "Scene discovers Faustus's Limbs." After the Old Man piously hopes that this "May ... a fair Example be to all, / To avoid such Ways which brought poor Faustus's Fall," the "Scene changes to Hell. Faustus Limbs come together. A Dance, and Song."

Farce often verges on satire, and, as he was to demonstrate in Greenwich Park, Mountfort had an eye for contemporary foibles. At the end of Act I, Harlequin and Scaramouche engage in dialogue which suggests similar passages of rough satire in Wycherley. Asked what practice his master, a doctor, has, Harlequin replies:

Why his Business is to patch up rotten Whores against the Term for Country Lawyers, and Attorneys Clerks; and against Christmas, Easter and Whitsun Holidays, for City Apprentices; and if his Pills [to cure clap] be destroy'd, 'twill ruin him in one Term.

Mountford altered the pageant of the seven sins that he found in Marlowe, changing it in at least one case to bring it up to date. He begins by paraphrasing Marlowe:

Faustus: What art thou the Third?

Envy: I am Envy; begot by a Chimny-sweeper upon an Oyster-wench. I cannot read, and wish all Books burnt.

But then Mountford departs from his source, adding the following lines:

I always curst the Governement, that I was not prefer'd; and was a Male-content in Three Kings Reigns (II, i).

The three kings are, I suppose, Charles I, Charles II, and James II, and the satiric jab is against those who perennially oppose the Establishment. Furthermore, it is easy to imagine that the role of Faustus, whoever played it, could well have been acted as a parody of the "tragical" acting style of the day, with its curious sing-song tone and stylized gestures.

Mountfort's "Dr. Faustus" gives us an often amusing insight into that much despised, ever-popular bastard-child of the Restoration stage: farce. If the direct influence of the commedia is slight, the spirit of improvisational comedy is embodied in the inspired buffoonery of Leigh and Jevon, reinforced by stage-effect and spots of contemporary satire. The play proved a hit and that undoubtedly was the playwright's sole intention. The farce is workmanlike, and as the "Account" prefixed to the 1720 collected plays observes, "THE Life and Death of Doctor FAUSTUS has a great deal of low, but Entertaining Humour; it sufficiently shews his Talents that way."

University of Illinois
Urbana

NOTES TO THE INTRODUCTION