but admit that æsthetically it is poor and almost commonplace. The clumsiness by which the meeting is contrived has been noticed by Rosenkranz.* Clavigo is seeking Carlos; he orders the servant who lights the way not to pass through the street where the Beaumarchais family resides, yet the servant actually leads him there, because it is the shorter route. The whole tone of this fifth act is not in harmony with what precedes. The act is grafted on it does not grow out of the subject.

As a stage play the interest is great: the situations are effective; the dramatic collision perfect; the plot is clearly and rapidly evolved; the language vigorous, passionate and pointed. But it must not be tried by any high standard. Merck, anxious about his friend's reputation, would not consent to judge the play according to the theatrestandard, but exclaimed, 'Such trash as this you must not write again; others can do that!' Goethe says, that in this Merck was wrong, and for the first time did him an injury. 'We should not in all things transcend the notions which men have already formed; it is right that much should be done in accordance with the common way of thinking. Had I written a dozen such pieces (and it would have been easy to do so with a little stimulus), three or four of them would perhaps have kept their place upon the stage.'

This can scarcely be accepted as conclusive reasoning. Merck might have replied, Perhaps so; but you have genius fit for higher things than stage-plays.' Nevertheless, as before hinted, I think Goethe was right in his course, although the reasons he alleges are unsatisfactory. Clavigo, like the other trifles he composed at this period, must be regarded as the sketches with which an artist fills

VOL. I.

*Goethe und Seine Werke, p. 185.

24

his portfolio, not the works which are to brighten galleries. The impulse to create was imperious; if trifles were demanded, he created trifles. His immense activity was forced to expend itself on minor works, because he dimly felt himself unripe for greater works.

CHAPTER VIII.

THE LITERARY LION.

ANNA SYBILLA MÜNCH was not a little flattered by the hómage of Clavigo, and smiled more tenderly on her admirer. Hopes of a marriage rose not only in her breast, but in the breasts of his parents, who, having lost by marriage their daughter, Cornelia, greatly wished to see a daughter-in-law in their house. They talked over the matter; seem to have alluded to it also to Anna herself; and frequently joked their son at table on the expected event. It was thought that he might first make his long-talked-of journey to Italy, and marry on his return. At no time prone to marriage, he had not in this instance the impulse of passion. He admired Anna, but he felt no passion for her; and even Italy, so long desired, was now less attractive to him than Germany, where he was beginning to feel himself a man of consequence, and where the notable men of the day eagerly sought his acquaintance.

Among these men we must note Klopstock, Lavater, Basedow, Jacobi and the Stolbergs. Correspondence led to personal intercourse. Klopstock arrived in Frankfurt in this October 1774, just before Werther appeared. Goethe saw him, read the fragments of Faust to him, and discussed skating with him. But the great religious poet was too far removed from the strivings of his young

rival to conceive that attachment for him which he felt for men like the Stolbergs, or to inspire Goethe with any keen sympathy.

In June, Lavater also came to Frankfurt. This was a few months before Klopstock's visit. He had commenced a correspondence with Goethe on the occasion of the Briefe des Pastors. Those were great days of correspondence. Letters were written to be read in circles, and were shown about like the last new poem. Lavater pestered his friends for their portraits and for ideal portraits (according to their conception) of our Saviour, all of which were destined for the work on Physiognomy on which Lavater was then engaged. The artist who took Goethe's portrait sent Lavater the portrait of Bahrdt instead, to see what he would make of it; the physiognomist was not taken in; he stoutly denied the possibility of such a resemblance. Yet when he saw the actual Goethe he was not satisfied. He gazed in astonishment, exclaiming Bist's? Art thou he?' Ich bin's. I am he,' was the answer; and the two fell on each other's necks. Still the physiognomist was dissatisfied. 'I answered him with my native and acquired Realism, that as God had willed to make me what I was, he, Lavater, must even so accept me.'

6

The first surprise over, they began to converse on the weightiest topics. Their sympathy was much greater than appears in Goethe's narrative, written many years after the real characters of both had developed themselves: Goethe's into what we shall subsequently see; Lavater's into that superstitious dogmatism and priestly sophistication which exasperated and alienated so many.

Lavater forms a curious figure in the history of those days a compound of the intolerant priest, and the factitious sentimentalist. He had fine talents, and a streak of genius, but he was ruined by vanity and hypocrisy. Born

in Zurich 1741, he was eight years Goethe's senior. In his autobiographic sketch* he has represented himself indicating as a child the part he was to play as a man. Like many other children, he formed for himself a peculiar and intimate relation with God, which made him look upon his playfellows with scorn and pity, because they did not share his need and use of God.' He prayed for wonders, and the wonders came. God corrected his school exercises. God concealed his many faults, and brought to light his virtuous deeds. In fact, Lavater was a born hypocrite; and Goethe rightly named him from the beginning the friend of Lies, who stooped to the basest flatteries to gain influence.' To this flattering cringing softness he united the spirit of priestly domination. His first works made a great sensation. In 1769 he translated Bonnet's Palingénésie, adding notes in a strain of religious sentimentalism then very acceptable. At a time when the critics were rehabilitating Homer and the early singers, it was natural that the religious world should attempt a restoration of the early Apostolic spirit. At a time when belief in poetic inspiration was a first article of the creed, belief in prophetic inspiration found eager followers. I have already touched on the sentimental extravagance of the time; and for those whom a reasonable repugnance will keep from Lavater's letters and writings, one sentence may be quoted sufficiently significant. To the lovely Countess Branconi he wrote: 'O toi chéri pour la vie, l'âme de mon âme! Ton mouchoir, tes cheveux, sont pour moi ce que mes jarretières sont pour toi!' &c., which from a priest to a married woman is somewhat unctuous, but which is surpassed by what he allowed to be addressed by an admirer to himself,

* See Gessner's Biographie Lavaters.