cepting Shakespeare. There is no literature in Europe in which the names of his principal characters are not expressive of the same groups of ideas which he associates with them. For the present, we need only mention his Tartuffe and Bourgeois Gentilhomme in illustration of this. It is true, that an author, writing in the French language, has advantages which no other language affords, since it is studied generally, and more or less spoken, by the educated classes of all nations. At St. Petersburgh and Moscow, as well as at London and Vienna, Berlin and Venice, Rome and Naples, New York and Boston, it is deemed an almost indispensable accomplishment to be more or less familiar with it. This would secure any particular work a ready introduction to a large class of foreigners; but it would not cause it to be translated, except it possessed merit. On the contrary, a work, in a language understood by comparatively few, would be much more likely to be translated, for the simple reason, that in the original the latter could be read by few; whereas the former might have a large audience in any of the enlightened nations of Europe or America, nay, in Asia or Africa.

But there is no comedy of Molière which has not been. translated into all the principal languages of Europe. Of the majority, there are several versions in English, German, Italian, Spanish, Danish, and even in Russian; but in none has justice been done to the original-in no instance, of which we are aware, does the translation give any adequate idea of the inimitable humor of the author, or of his profound knowledge of human nature; and, in order to appreciate it in the original, the reader must be well acquainted with the latter. This we hope to illustrate more or less as we proceed, though the present article is intended merely as an introduction. The comedies of Molière are far too numerous and too pregnant with thought-they contain too many instructive lessons-to be disposed of in one paper. The task, if attempted, would be as vain as if a Frenchman undertook to analyze the works of Shakespeare within equal limits. No author can be fairly judged without copious specimens from his writings-certainly a larger variety than would fill all the pages which we can devote to the author of Tartuffe, on the present occasion. This explanation of our intentions seems the more necessary, because it is so much the habit of the present day to be gigantic and munificent in promises, but Liliputian and niggardly in their fulfilment.

The writings of all are much more influenced by the circumstances by which they are surrounded, through life, than is generally supposed. This is particularly true of Molière, who commenced his career dependent on his own efforts, even for his daily bread. An outline, however brief, of his history, will therefore form a fitting introduction to our observations on his comedies. Like many other celebrated men, Jean-Baptiste Pocquelin has left some doubt as to the place of his birth. To this day it is a matter of discussion; but the best authenticated account is, that he was born in the Rue St. Honoré, at the corner of Rue des Vieilles Etuves, Paris, on the 15th of January, 1622.* His family, though not aristocratic, was respectable. It consisted of decent burghers, who had for generations followed the business of tapestry manufacturers. Jean Pocquelin, the father of the poet, had the reputation of being the best upholsterer in Europe. This seems sufficiently attested by the fact that he received the appointment of valet-de-chambre-tapissier to the king of France, a position which was then deemed one of honor as well as profit. At all events, the father was so well pleased with it, that his highest ambition seems to have been to enable his son to succeed him. He soon found, however, that the future comedian had no taste for upholstery, nor was he slow to discover that he was not destined to be a plodder—that, in short, he possessed genius. Under this impression, he was induced to place him at the Jesuits' College, Clermont, now the college of Louis-Le-Grand, though not without much importunity on the part of the future dramatist, supported by his grandfather. To the latter, Molière himself gave most of the credit for the world-wide fame which he afterwards attained. It seems the old man was passionately fond of the theatre. He was in the habit of attending the performances at the Hôtel de Bourgogne, which was then the great centre of dramatic taste, and he frequently took his grandchild with him. The more the latter saw of the theatre, the more passionately fond of it he became; but it is remarkable that the effect of the most laughter-provoking comedies on him was, to make him sad rather than joyful,

The following is a copy of his baptismal certificate, taken from the register of the parish of St. Eustache:"Du samedi, 15 janvier, 1622, fut baptisé Jean, fils de Jean Pocquelin, tapissier, et de Marie Cressé sa femme, demurant rue Saint-Honoré; la parrain Jean Pocquelin, porteur de grains; la marraine Denise Lescacheux, veuve de feu Sébastien Asselin vivant marchand tapissier."

though it is probably nearer to the truth to say that they made him thoughtful. At all events, he had little taste for working at his trade after he had seen some twenty of the best comedies of the day performed by the best actors. The change thus produced was not a little accelerated by romantic tales which his grandfather took great delight in relating to him, and the old man had also sufficient intelligence to be able to analyze the plots of most of the pieces presented at the theatre, and sufficient literary ambition to attempt a criticism of each. For a time this was anything but pleasant to the father of Jean-Baptiste, who thought it would be the ruin of his son. Nor, indeed, did the prospect seem good to any ordinary observer who knew the family; for the future poet, though now fourteen years old, knew little more than how to read and write and cast up some accounts. Indeed, it seems that he knew less than most of his playfellows. This, however, was not his fault. He was anxious to derive information from every possible source; but he had no time. When not working in his father's shop, he was at the theatre; and when he sat to rest, he devoted himself more to thinking than reading. But, once in college, he was the most industrious of students. In five years he passed through all the regular studies, including rhetoric, criticism and philosophy. The records of the college bear testimony to this day to his wonderful proficiency. Yet it was during the same period he formed those acquaintances which had the greatest influence on his life and fortunes. At Clermont he first met his good friend Chapelle, who at once took such a liking to him that he procured him lessons from the philosopher Gassendi, the fruits of which may be traced throughout his works, especially in the Femmes Savantes. Here, too, he met the traveller Bernier, Colbert, the satirist, the poet Hesnault, the critic Cyrano de Bergerac, and the Prince de Conti, brother of the great Condé. Each of these celebrated men gives us more or less insight into the college life of the author of Tartuffe, but he gives

Some say that he did all he could to discourage him from study. "Si l'on croit quelques biographes," says M. Louandre, le père de Molière, homme dure et borné, aurait tout fait pour étouffer l'intelligence naissante de son fils; il ne lui permittait pas de regarder hors de sa boutique, il ne voulait pas qu'il apprit autre chose qu'à lire, écrir et compter. Par bonheur pour la gloire de la France, l'aïeul paternal, Jean Pocquelin, qui aimait le théâtre, condusait souvent son petit-fils à l'hôtel de Bourgogne. Ce serait là que se serait éveillé son génie."-Œuvres de Molière, vol. i., p. 39.

none himself; and we may add that he is no more communicative in regard to any other period of his history. It is characteristic of him, as of most of the world's greatest thinkers, that he took no thought of his fame. There were cyclopædists then, as there are now, who were ready and willing to note down every little incident in an author's life, and to give it just such coloring as he wished, for a consideration. In other words, he could have purchased a biography as he could a garment-quite as cheap-but the day he died not a line had he left in reference to himself. All his biographers express their wonder, as well they may, at this, contrasting, as it does so remarkably, with the voluminous memoirs left by fourth-rate authors, whose works will scarcely survive the dissolution of their bodies in the grave.*

Owing to this modesty on the part of Molière, we should know as little about his private life to-day as we do of that of Shakespeare, were it not that in the time of the former the printing press was in pretty general use, especially in France, and authors were allowed more companionship with the great than they were in England. But if Molière neglected to record his own aspirations and successes, he did not forget the world with which he was surrounded. Even in college, he carefully studied the characters of all with whom he had intercourse, at the same time availing himself of every suggestion that a man of genius could turn to practical account. Thus, for example, it was his conferences with Gassendi that inspired him with a desire to translate Lucretius and Plautus. Although he was not successful in either task, there is abundant evidence in his writings that he profited largely by each. Nor was he a whit less modest, on leaving college, than he was in entering it. Since he did not like the drudgery of a valetde-chambre-tapissier at the age of fourteen, it is not strange that he did not like it at nineteen, after he had cultivated the acquaintance of the greatest philosophers, poets, and historians of ancient and modern times. When called upon to take his father's place, however, he did not object. Though much against his will, he accompanied Louis XIII. to Narbonne in 1641. The king

"Il y a dans l'existence de Molière," says Bazin, "qui a beaucoup écrit, et que son métier a longtemps tenu en vue, cette double singularité qu'il n'a pas laissé une seule ligne de sa maine, que nul de ses contemporains, de ses amis, n'a rien recueilli, rien communiqué au public de sa personne,' &c.— Notes Historiques sur la vie de Molière, p. 3.

had the perception to see that he was entirely out of his sphere, and he had the good-nature to tell the young poet that he appreciated his disposition to be obedientwilling to gratify his sovereign as much as possible, even in an uncongenial office, he was at liberty to devote himself to more agreeable pursuits. Another king would have gone further and given him a congenial position at court; but Louis XIII. was but an indifferent judge of the capabilities of those around him. At all events, young Pocquelin found himself at liberty soon after his return from Narbonne. Nor was he slow in availing himself of it, for soon after we find him studying law at Orleans, where he was admitted in due time to the bar. His friends thought now that he was fully devoted to the law. Most probably he thought so himself for a while; but he soon grew tired of its dry technicalities. Some say that the want of clients was the chief cause of his disgust. Be this as it may, he returned to Paris in 1645. He soon formed a society of young men who met two or three times a week for the purpose of acting plays for amusement. In a short time they amused others as well as themselves; large audiences came to see them; this naturally suggested the idea of emolument; the question was duly discussed in all its bearings; and the result was the formation of a permanent company, with Molière at its head.

This gave great scandal to the poet's friends; for the profession of an actor was declared infamous by the law. Public opinion held it pretty much in the same light, with the exception that eminence was held to retrieve the character of the actor, and entitle him to the esteem of, at least, the middle ranks of society. It does not seem that young Pocquelin anticipated any such distinction as this; but he was anxious to conciliate the prejudices of his friends in any way in his power. It was with this view that he dropped the family name, to save it from degradation, and assumed that of Molière. This is the name by which he has since been known to the world, and which will be illustrious as long as the highest order of literature is admired; whereas, Pocquelin is saved from obscurity only by the shadow cast upon it by the assumed appellation.

Among the company thus formed, and which styled itself L'Illustre Théâtre, were several whom Molière was destined to render famous; including Madeleine Béjart and her two brothers, Mademoiselle Duparc, &c. Its success at