Doctor Faustus

(play)

The Tragical History of the Life and Death

of Doctor Faustus, commonly referred to
simply as Doctor Faustus, is an
Elizabethan tragedy by Christopher
Marlowe, based on German stories about
the title character Faust. It was written
sometime between 1589 and 1592, and
may have been performed between 1592
and Marlowe's death in 1593. Two
different versions of the play were
published in the Jacobean era several
years later.[2]
 The Tragical History of the Life and
Death of Doctor Faustus

Frontispiece to a 1620 printing of Doctor

Faustus showing Faustus conjuring
Mephistophilis. The spelling "Histoy" is
agreed to be a typographical error.[1]

Written by Christopher Marlowe

Characters Doctor Faustus

Chorus
Wagner
Good Angel
Bad Angel
Valdes
Cornelius
Three scholars
Lucifer
Mephistophilis
Robin
Belzebub
Seven Deadly Sins
Pope Adrian VI
Raymond, King of
Hungary
Bruno
Two Cardinals
Archbishop of Rheims
Friars
Vintner
 Martino
Frederick
Benvolio
Charles V
Duke of Saxony
Two soldiers
Horse courser
Carter
Hostess of a tavern
Duke and Duchess of
Vanholt
Servant

Old man

Mute Darius

Alexander the Great

Alexander's Paramour
 Helen of Troy
Devils

Piper
Date premiered c. 1592

Original language Early Modern English

Genre Tragedy

Setting 16th century Europe

The powerful effect of early productions of

the play is indicated by the legends that
quickly accrued around them—that actual
devils once appeared on the stage during
a performance, "to the great amazement
of both the actors and spectators", a sight
that was said to have driven some
spectators mad.[3]

Performance
The Admiral's Men performed Doctor
Faustus 24 times in the three years
between October 1594 and October 1597.
On 22 November 1602, the diary of Philip
Henslowe recorded a £4 payment to
Samuel Rowley and William Bird for
additions to the play, which suggests a
revival soon after that date.[3]

The powerful effect of the early

productions is indicated by the legends
that quickly accrued around them. In
Histriomastix, his 1632 polemic against
the drama, William Prynne records the tale
that actual devils once appeared on the
stage during a performance of Faustus, "to
the great amazement of both the actors
and spectators". Some people were
allegedly driven mad, "distracted with that
fearful sight". John Aubrey recorded a
related legend, that Edward Alleyn, lead
actor of The Admiral's Men, devoted his
later years to charitable endeavours, like
the founding of Dulwich College, in direct
response to this incident.[3]

Text
The play may have been entered into the
Stationers' Register on 18 December 1592,
though the records are confused and
appear to indicate a conflict over the rights
to the play. A subsequent Stationers'
Register entry, dated 7 January 1601,
assigns the play to the bookseller Thomas
Bushnell, the publisher of the 1604 first
edition. Bushnell transferred his rights to
the play to John Wright on 13 September
1610.[4]

The two versions E…

Two versions of the play exist:

1. The 1604 quarto, printed by Valentine
Simmes for Thomas Law; this is
usually called the A text. The title
page attributes the play to "Ch. Marl.".
A second edition (A2) of first version
was printed by George Eld for John
Wright in 1609. It is merely a direct
reprint of the 1604 text. The text is
short for an English Renaissance
play, only 1485 lines long.
2. The 1616 quarto, published by John
Wright, the enlarged and altered text;
usually called the B text. This second
text was reprinted in 1619, 1620,
1624, 1631, and as late as 1663.
Additions and alterations were made
 by the minor playwright and actor
Samuel Rowley and by William Borne
(or Birde), and possibly by Marlowe
himself.[5]

The 1604 version was once believed to be

closer to the play as originally performed
in Marlowe's lifetime, simply because it
was older. By the 1940s, after influential
studies by Leo Kirschbaum[6] and W. W.
Greg,[7] the 1604 version came to be
regarded as an abbreviation and the 1616
version as Marlowe's original fuller
version. Kirschbaum and Greg considered
the A-text a "bad quarto", and thought that
the B-text was linked to Marlowe himself.
Since then scholarship has swung the
other way, most scholars now considering
the A-text more authoritative, even if
"abbreviated and corrupt", according to
Charles Nicholl.[8]

The 1616 version omits 36 lines but adds

676 new lines, making it roughly one third
longer than the 1604 version. Among the
lines shared by both versions, there are
some small but significant changes in
wording; for example, "Never too late, if
Faustus can repent" in the 1604 text
becomes "Never too late, if Faustus will
repent" in the 1616 text, a change that
offers a very different possibility for
Faustus's hope and repentance.

Another difference between texts A and B

is the name of the devil summoned by
Faustus. Text A states the name is
generally "Mephistopheles",[9] while the
version of text B commonly states
"Mephostophilis".[10] The name of the devil
is in each case a reference to
Mephistopheles in Faustbuch, the source
work, which appeared in English
translation in about 1588.[11][12]

The relationship between the texts is

uncertain and many modern editions print
both. As an Elizabethan playwright,
Marlowe had nothing to do with the
publication and had no control over the
play in performance, so it was possible for
scenes to be dropped or shortened, or for
new scenes to be added, so that the
resulting publications may be modified
versions of the original script.[13]

Comic scenes E…

In the past, it was assumed that the comic

scenes were additions by other writers.
However, most scholars today consider
the comic interludes an integral part of the
play, regardless of their author, and so they
continue to be included in print.[14][15] Their
tone shows the change in Faustus's
ambitions, suggesting Marlowe did at
least oversee the composition of them.
The clown is seen as the archetype for
comic relief.

Sources
Doctor Faustus is based on an older tale; it
is believed to be the first dramatisation of
the Faust legend.[11] Some scholars[16]
believe that Marlowe developed the story
from a popular 1592 translation,
commonly called The English Faust
Book.[17] There is thought to have been an
earlier, lost[18] German edition of 1587, the
Historia von D. Johann Fausten, which
itself may have been influenced by even
earlier, equally ill-preserved pamphlets in
Latin (such as those that likely inspired
Jacob Bidermann's treatment of the
damnation of the doctor of Paris,
Cenodoxus (1602)).

Several soothsayers or necromancers of

the late fifteenth century adopted the
name Faustus, a reference to the Latin for
"favoured" or "auspicious"; typical was
Georgius Faustus Helmstetensis, calling
himself astrologer and chiromancer, who
was expelled from the town of Ingolstadt
for such practices. Subsequent
commentators have identified this
individual as the prototypical Faustus of
the legend.[19]

Whatever the inspiration, the development

of Marlowe's play is very faithful to the
Faust Book, especially in the way it mixes
comedy with tragedy.[20]

However, Marlowe also introduced some

changes to make it more original. He
made four main additions:

Faustus's soliloquy, in Act 1, on the

vanity of human science
Good and Bad Angels
The substitution of a Pageant of Devils
for the seven deadly sins. He also
emphasised Faustus' intellectual
aspirations and curiosity, and minimised
the vices in the character, to lend a
Renaissance aura to the story.
The name Bruno in the rival Pope
scenes recalls that of Giordano Bruno
who was tried for heresy by the
Inquisition and burnt at the stake in
1600. This reference indicates that
Marlowe recognised the cosmic
machinery of the Faust story as a
reflection of terrestrial power and
authority, by which dissidents were
 tortured and executed in the name of
obedience and conformity.

Structure
The play is in blank verse and prose in
thirteen scenes (1604) or twenty scenes
(1616).

Blank verse is largely reserved for the main

scenes; prose is used in the comic scenes.
Modern texts divide the play into five acts;
act 5 being the shortest. As in many
Elizabethan plays, there is a chorus (which
functions as a narrator), that does not
interact with the other characters but
rather provides an introduction and
conclusion to the play and, at the
beginning of some Acts, introduces events
that have unfolded.

Along with its history and language style,

scholars have critiqued and analysed the
structure of the play. Leonard H. Frey
wrote a document entitled In the Opening
and Close of Doctor Faustus, which mainly
focuses on Faustus's opening and closing
soliloquies. He stresses the importance of
the soliloquies in the play, saying: "the
soliloquy, perhaps more than any other
dramatic device, involved the audience in
an imaginative concern with the
happenings on stage".[21] By having Doctor
Faustus deliver these soliloquies at the
beginning and end of the play, the focus is
drawn to his inner thoughts and feelings
about succumbing to the devil.

The soliloquies also have parallel

concepts. In the introductory soliloquy,
Faustus begins by pondering the fate of
his life and what he wants his career to be.
He ends his soliloquy with the solution: he
will give his soul to the devil. Similarly in
the closing soliloquy, Faustus begins
pondering, and finally comes to terms with
the fate he created for himself. Frey also
explains: "The whole pattern of this final
soliloquy is thus a grim parody of the
opening one, where decision is reached
after, not prior to, the survey".[21]

Synopsis

Faustus learns necromancy E…

In the prologue, the Chorus introduces the

reader to Faustus and his story. He is
described as being "base of stock";
however, his intelligence and scholarship
eventually earns him the degree of a
Doctor at the University of Wittenberg.
During this opening, the reader also gets a
first clue to the source of Faustus's
downfall. Faustus's tale is likened to that
of Icarus, who flew too close to the sun
and fell to his death when the sun melted
his waxen wings. This is a hint to
Faustus's end as well as bringing to the
reader's attention the idea of hubris
(excessive pride), which is represented in
the Icarus story and ultimately Faustus'.

Faustus comments that he has mastered

every subject he has studied. He
depreciates Logic as merely being a tool
for arguing; Medicine as being unvalued
unless it allowed raising the dead and
immortality; Law as being mercenary and
beneath him; and Divinity as useless
because he feels that all humans commit
sin, and thus to have sins punishable by
death complicates the logic of Divinity. He
dismisses it as "What doctrine call you
this? Que sera, sera" (What will be, shall
be).

Faustus instructs his servant Wagner to

summon Valdes and Cornelius, a famous
witchcrafter and a famous magician,
respectively. Two angels, called the Good
Angel and the Bad Angel, appear to
Faustus and dispense their own
perspectives of his interest in magic and
necromancy. Though Faustus seems
momentarily dissuaded, he is apparently
won over by the Bad Angel, proclaiming,
"How am I glutted with conceit of this"
("conceit" meaning the possibilities magic
offers to him). Valdes and Cornnelius
declare that if Faustus devotes himself to
magic, great things are indeed possible
with someone of Faustus' learning and
intelligence.

Faustus' absence is noted by two scholars

who are less accomplished than Faustus
himself. They request that Wagner reveal
Faustus' present location, a request which
Wagner at first haughtily denies, then
bombastically reveals. The two scholars
worry about Faustus being corrupted by
the art of Magic and leave to inform the
rector of the university.

That night, Faustus begins his attempt to

summon a devil in the presence of Lucifer
and other devils (although Faustus is
unaware of their presence). After he
creates a magic circle and speaks an
incantation through which he revokes his
baptism, a demon (a representative of the
devil himself) named Mephistophilis
appears before him, but Faustus is unable
to tolerate the hideous looks of the demon
and commands it to change its
appearance. Faustus, seeing the
obedience of the demon in changing its
form, takes pride in his skill. He tries to
bind the demon to his service, but is
unable to because Mephistophilis already
serves Lucifer, who is also called the
Prince of Devils. Mephistophilis also
reveals that it was not Faustus' power that
summoned him but rather his abjuration of
scriptures that results in the Devil coming
in the hope of claiming Faustus' soul.

Mephistophilis introduces the history of

Lucifer and the other devils while indirectly
telling Faustus that Hell has no
circumference nor limit and is more of a
state of mind than a physical location.
Faustus' inquiries into the nature of hell
lead to Mephistophilis saying: "Oh,
Faustus, leave these frivolous demands,
which strikes a terror to my fainting soul".

Pact with Lucifer E…

Using Mephistophilis as a messenger,

Faustus strikes a deal with Lucifer: he is to
be allotted 24 years of life on Earth, during
which time he will have Mephistophilis as
his personal servant and the ability to use
magic; however, at the end he will give his
body and soul over to Lucifer as payment
and spend the rest of time as one damned
to Hell. This deal is to be sealed in the
form of a contract written in Faustus' own
blood. After cutting his arm, the wound is
divinely healed and the Latin words Homo,
fuge! ("Man, flee!") then appear upon it.[22]
Despite the dramatic nature of this divine
intervention, Faustus disregards the
inscription with the assertion that he is
already damned by his actions thus far
and therefore left with no place to which
he could flee. Mephistophilis brings coals
to break the wound open again, and thus
Faustus is able to take his oath written in
his own blood.

Wasting his skills E…

Faustus begins by asking Mephistophilis a
series of science-related questions.
However, the demon seems to be quite
evasive and finishes with a Latin phrase,
Per inoequalem motum respectu totes
("through unequal motion with respect to
the whole thing"). This sentence has not
the slightest scientific value, thus giving
the impression that Mephistophilis is not
trustworthy.

Faustus then asks who made the world, a

question which Mephistophilis refuses to
answer (Mephistophilis knows that God
made the world). When Faustus
announces his intention to renounce
magic and repent, Mephistophilis storms
away. The good and evil angels return to
Faustus: the Good Angel urges him to
repent and recant his oath to Lucifer, but
the Evil Angel sneers that Faustus will
never repent. This is the largest fault of
Faustus throughout the play: he is blind to
his own salvation and remains set on his
soul's damnation.

Lucifer, accompanied by Beelzebub and

Mephistophilis, appears to Faustus and
frightens him into obedience to their pact.
Lucifer then, as an entertainment, brings to
Faustus the personification of the seven
deadly sins. Faustus fails to see them as
warnings and ignores their implication.

From this point until the end of the play,

although he gains great fame for his
powers, Dr Faustus does nothing
worthwhile, having begun his pact with the
attitude that he would be able to do
anything. Instead, he merely uses his
temporary powers for practical jokes and
frivolous demonstrations to notables:

He journeys to Rome, acquires

invisibility, and baffles the Pope by
speaking and snatching food;
He visits the German emperor Charles V
and at his request conjures up
Alexander and his paramour. A knight
heckles him so he gives him cuckold's
horns, which he later, at the emperor's
bidding, removes;
He sets off on foot for Wittenberg, and
sells his horse to a 'horse courser' for 40
dollars, enjoining him never to ride the
horse into water. The horse courser
nevertheless does just this, and the
horse vanishes. He returns to Faustus to
get his money back, wakes him up, and
pulls his leg off. Faustus demands
another 40 dollars (and then gets his leg
back);
 He is summoned by the Duke of Vanholt,
and at the Duchess's request magics up
a bunch of grapes, even though it is
January;
He magics up Helen of Troy for the
benefit of some scholars. Later, he asks
Mephistophelis to give her to him as his
lover, and when he does this Faustus
swears eternal love.

Finally, with his allotted 24 years mostly

expired and realising that he has given up
his soul for no good reason, Faustus
appears to scholars and warns them that
he is damned and will not be long on the
Earth. He gives a speech about how he is
damned and eventually seems to repent
for his deeds.

Damnation E…

At the end of the play, on the eleventh hour,

Mephistophilis comes to collect Faustus'
soul and Faustus is dragged off the stage
to Hell by Mephistophilis and other devils
even though Dr. Faustus tries to repent
and beg for mercy from those devils. In the
later 'B text' of the play, there is a
subsequent scene [V.iii] where the three
scholars discover his remains strewn
about the stage: they state that Faustus
was damned, one scholar declaring that
the devils have torn him asunder, but they
determine, because of Faustus' learning, to
have him properly buried and mourned.[23]
Faustus says himself in the A text 'What
are thou, Faustus, but a man condemned
to die'

The Calvinist/anti-Calvinist
controversy
The theological implications of Doctor
Faustus have been the subject of
considerable debate throughout the last
century. Among the most complicated
points of contention is whether the play
supports or challenges the Calvinist
doctrine of absolute predestination, which
dominated the lectures and writings of
many English scholars in the latter half of
the sixteenth century. According to Calvin,
predestination meant that God, acting of
his own free will, elects some people to be
saved and others to be damned—thus, the
individual has no control over his own
ultimate fate. This doctrine was the source
of great controversy because it was seen
by the so-called anti-Calvinists to limit
man's free will in regard to faith and
salvation, and to present a dilemma in
terms of theodicy.
At the time Doctor Faustus was
performed, this doctrine was on the rise in
England, and under the direction of Puritan
theologians at Cambridge and Oxford had
come to be considered the orthodox
position of the Church of England.[24]
Nevertheless, it remained the source of
vigorous and, at times, heated debate
between Calvinist scholars, such as
William Whitaker and William Perkins, and
anti-Calvinists, such as William Barrett and
Peter Baro.[25] The dispute between these
Cambridge intellectuals had quite nearly
reached its zenith by the time Marlowe
was a student there in the 1580s, and
likely would have influenced him deeply, as
it did many of his fellow students.[26]

Concerning the fate of Faustus, the

Calvinist concludes that his damnation
was inevitable. His rejection of God and
subsequent inability to repent are taken as
evidence that he never really belonged to
the elect, but rather had been predestined
from the very beginning for reprobation.[27]
In his Chiefe Points of Christian Religion,
Theodore Beza, the successor to John
Calvin, describes the category of sinner
into which Faustus would most likely have
been cast:
To conclude, they which are most
miserable of all, those climb a degree
higher, that their fall might be more
grievous: for they are raised so high
by some gift of grace, that they are
little moved with some taste of the
heavenly gift: so that for the time they
seem to have received the seed...But
this is plain, that the spirit of adoption,
which we have said to be only proper
unto them which are never cast forth,
but are written in the secret of God's
people, is never communicated to
them, for were they of the elect they
should remain still with the elect. All
these therefore (because of necessity,
 and yet willingly, as they which are
under the slavery of sin, return to their
vomit, and fall away from faith) are
plucked up by the roots, to be cast
into the fire.[28]

For the Calvinist, Faustus represents the

worst kind of sinner, having tasted the
heavenly gift and rejected it. His
damnation is justified and deserved
because he was never truly adopted
among the elect. According to this view,
the play demonstrates Calvin's "three-
tiered concept of causation," in which the
damnation of Faustus is first willed by
God, then by Satan, and finally, by
himself.[29] As Calvin himself explains it in
his Institutes of Christian Religion:

We see therefore that it is no

absurdity, that one self act be
ascribed to God, to Satan, and to man:
but the diversity in the end and
manner of doing, causeth that therein
appeareth the justice of God to be
without fault, and also the wickedness
of Satan and man, bewrayeth itself to
their reproach.[30]

The anti-Calvinist view, however, finds

such thinking repugnant, and prefers to
interpret Doctor Faustus as a criticism of
such doctrines. One of the greatest critics
of Calvinism in Marlowe's day was Peter
Baro, who argued that such teachings
fostered despair among believers, rather
than repentance among sinners. He
claimed, in fact, that Calvinism created a
theodical dilemma:

What shall we say then? That this

question so long debated of the
Philosophers, most wise men, and yet
undetermined, cannot even of Divines,
and men endued with heavenly
wisdom, be discussed and decided?
And that God hath in this case laid a
crosse upon learned men, wherein
 they might perpetually torment
themselves? I cannot so think.[31]

Baro recognised the threat of despair

which faced the Protestant church if it did
not come to an agreement of how to
understand the fundamentals. For him, the
Calvinists were overcomplicating the
issues of faith and repentance, and
thereby causing great and unnecessary
confusion among struggling believers.
Faustus himself confesses a similar
sentiment regarding predestination:

"The reward of sin is death."

That's hard.
 ..."If we say that we have no sin,
We deceive ourselves, and
there's no truth in us."
Why then belike we must sin,
And so consequently die.
Ay, we must die an everlasting
death.
What doctrine call you this? Che
sera, sera,
"What will be, shall be"?
Divinity, adieu![32]

Quotations
Faustus includes a well-known speech
addressed to the summoned shade of
Helen of Troy, in Act V, scene I. The
following is from the Gutenberg project e-
text of the 1604 quarto (with footnotes
removed).

Faustus

Was this the face that launch'd a

thousand ships,
And burnt the topless towers of
Ilium--
Sweet Helen, make me immortal
with a kiss.--
''[kisses her]''
Her lips suck forth my soul: see,
where it flies!--
Come, Helen, come, give me my
soul again.
Here will I dwell, for heaven is
in these lips,
And all is dross that is not
Helena.
I will be Paris, and for love of
thee,
Instead of Troy, shall
Wertenberg be sack'd;
And I will combat with weak
Menelaus,
And wear thy colours on my
plumed crest;
Yea, I will wound Achilles in the
heel,
And then return to Helen for a
kiss.
O, thou art fairer than the
evening air
Clad in the beauty of a thousand
stars;
Brighter art thou than flaming
Jupiter
When he appear'd to hapless
 Semele;
More lovely than the monarch of
the sky
In wanton Arethusa's azur'd
arms;
And none but thou shalt be my
paramour!

Themes and motifs

"Ravished" by magic (1.1.112), Faustus
turns to the dark arts when law, logic,
science, and theology fail to satisfy him.
According to Charles Nicholl this places
the play firmly in the Elizabethan period
when the problem of magic ("liberation or
damnation?") was a matter of debate, and
when Renaissance occultism aimed at a
furthering of science. Nicholl, who
connects Faustus as a "studious artisan"
(1.1.56) to the "hands-on experience"
promoted by Paracelsus, sees in the
former a follower of the latter, a "magician
as technologist".[8]

Mephistophilis
Mephistophilis is a demon whom Faustus
conjures up while first using magic.
Readers initially feel sympathy for the
demon when he attempts to explain to
Faustus the consequences of abjuring God
and Heaven. Mephistophilis gives Faustus
a description of Hell and the continuous
horrors it possesses; he wants Faustus to
know what he is getting himself into
before going through with the bargain:

Think’st thou that I who saw the

face of God
And tasted the eternal joy of
heaven
Am not tormented with ten
thousand hells
In being deprived of everlasting
bliss?
 O Faustus, leave these frivolous
demands
Which strikes a terror to my
fainting soul! [33]

However, Faustus believes that

supernatural powers are worth a lifetime in
Hell:

Say he (Faustus) surrender up to

him (Lucifer) his soul
So he will spare him four and
twenty years,
Letting him live in all
voluptuousness
 Having thee (Mephistophilis)
ever to attend on me [34]

Some scholars argue that Mephistophilis

depicts the sorrow that comes with
separation from God. Mephistophilis is
foreshadowing the pain Faustus would
have to endure, should he go through with
his plan.[35] In this facet, Faustus can be
likened to Icarus, whose insatiable
ambition was the source of his misery and
the cause of his plight.

Adaptations
The first television adaptation was
broadcast in 1947 by the BBC starring
David King-Wood as Faustus and Hugh
Griffith as Mephistopheles. In 1958,
another BBC television version starred
William Squire as Faustus in an adaptation
by Ronald Eyre intended for schools. In
1961, the BBC adapted the play for
television as a two-episode production
starring Alan Dobie as Faustus; this
production was also meant for use in
schools.[36]

The play was adapted for the screen in

1967 by Richard Burton and Nevill Coghill,
who based the film on an Oxford University
Dramatic Society production in which
Burton starred opposite Elizabeth Taylor
as Helen of Troy.

On 24 December 1995, BBC Radio 3

broadcast an adaptation of the play with
Stephen Moore as Faustus, Philip Voss as
Mephistopheles and Maurice Denham as
the Old Man. A second adaptation was
broadcast on BBC Radio 3 on 23
September 2007, this time with Paterson
Joseph as Faustus, Ray Fearon as
Mephistopheles, Toby Jones as Wagner,
Janet McTeer as the Evil Angel and Anton
Lesser as the Emperor.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
broadcast a full radio adaptation of the
play with Kenneth Welsh as Faustus and
Eric Peterson as Mephistopheles and later
released it on audio cassette (ISBN 978-0-
660-18526-2) in 2001 as part of its "Great
Plays of the Millennium" series.

Two live performances in London have

been videotaped and released on DVD: one
at the Greenwich Theatre in 2010 and one
at the Globe Theatre in 2011 starring Paul
Hilton as Faustus and Arthur Darvill as
Mephistopheles.

Critical history
Doctor Faustus has raised much
controversy due to its alleged interaction
with the demonic realm.[37] Before
Marlowe, there were few authors who
ventured into this kind of writing. After his
play, other authors began to expand on
their views of the spiritual world.[38]

See also
Solamen miseris socios habuisse
doloris, a line from the play commonly
translated as "misery loves company"

Notes
1. "CLASSIC POETRY for Christopher
 Marlowe's Deathday: The Survival of
"Doctor Faustus" " .
2. Logan, Terence P.; Denzell S. Smith,
eds. (1973). The Predecessors of
Shakespeare: A Survey and
Bibliography of Recent Studies in
English Renaissance Drama. Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press.
p. 14. "No Elizabethan play outside
the Shakespeare canon has raised
more controversy than Doctor
Faustus. There is no agreement
concerning the nature of the text and
the date of composition... and the
centrality of the Faust legend in the
history of Western world precludes
 any definitive agreement on the
interpretation of the play..."
3. Chambers, Vol. 3, pp. 423–4.
4. Chambers, Vol. 3, p. 422.
5. Bevington and Rasmussen 72-73.
. Kirschbaum, Leo (1943). "Marlowe's
Faustus: A Reconsideration". The
Review of English Studies. 19 (75):
225–41. doi:10.1093/res/os-
XIX.75.225 . JSTOR 509485 .
7. Greg, W. W. (1950). Marlowe's Doctor
Faustus 1604-1616: Parallel Texts.
Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-
0198124023.
 . Nicholl, Charles (8 March 1990).
" 'Faustus' and the Politics of Magic" .
London Review of Books. pp. 18–19.
Retrieved 11 May 2015.
9. Kendell, Monica (2003). Doctor
Faustus the A text (A text ed.). United
Kingdom: Longman. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-
582-81780-7.
10. Bevington and Rasmussen xi.
11. Christian, Paul (1952). The History
and Practice of Magic. 1. Nichols,
Ross (trans). London: Forge Press.
p. 428. OCLC 560512683 . "The name
has many forms: Marlowe writes
Mephistophilis..."
12. Jones, John Henry (1994). The
English Faust Book, a critical edition.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-521-42087-7.
13. Bellinger, Martha Fletcher (1927). A
Short History of the Theatre . New
York: Holt. pp. 207–13. Retrieved
14 January 2017.
14. Tromly, Frederic (1998). "Damnation
as tantalization". Playing with desire:
Christopher Marlowe and the art of
tantalization. University of Toronto
Press. p. 135. ISBN 978-0-8020-4355-
9.
15. Cantor, Paul A (2004). "The contract
from hell". In Heffernan, William C.;
Kleinig, John (eds.). Private and
public corruption. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield. p. 98.
ISBN 978-0-7425-3492-6.
1 . Leo Ruickbie, Faustus: The Life and
Times of a Renaissance Magician
(The History Press, 2009), p. 15
17. The History of the damnable life, and
deserved death of Doctor Iohn
Faustus by P.F., Gent,
1 . Lohelin, James N. (2016). Marlowe:
Doctor Faustus . The Shakespeare
Handbooks: Shakespeare's
 Contemporaries. London: Palgrave.
p. 3. ISBN 9781137426352.
19. Marlowe, Christopher (2007). Keefer,
Michael (ed.). The Tragical History of
Doctor Faustus: A Critical Edition of
the 1604 Version. Peterborough,
Ontario: Broadview Press. pp. 67–8.
ISBN 9781551115146.
LCCN 2008378689 .
20. Manoukian, M. (n.d.)."The necessity
of tragedy: How what goethe played
with is still entirely relevant."
Retrieved from
https://www.emptymirrorbooks.com/
literature/the-necessity-of-tragedy-
 how-what-goethe-played-with-is-still-
entirely-relevant
21. Frey, Leonard H. (December 1963).
"Antithetical Balance in the Opening
and Close of Doctor Faustus".
Modern Language Quarterly. 24 (4):
350–353. doi:10.1215/00267929-24-
4-350 . ISSN 0026-7929 .
22. Marlowe, Christopher (1994). Dr.
Faustus . New York: Dover. ISBN 978-
0486282084. OCLC 30033205 .
23. Bevington and Rasmussen 46.
24. Milward, Peter (1977). Religious
Controversies of the Elizabethan Age:
A Survey of Printed Sources. Lincoln:
 University of Nebraska Press. p. 157.
ISBN 978-0803209237.
OCLC 3176110 .
25. p. 157-163. Milward.
2 . Pinciss, G. M. (Spring 1993).
"Marlowe's Cambridge Years and the
Writing of Doctor Faustus". SEL:
Studies in English Literature 1500–
1900. 33 (2): 249–264.
doi:10.2307/450998 . eISSN 1522-
9270 . ISSN 0039-3657 .
JSTOR 450998 .
27. Honderich, Pauline (1973). "John
Calvin and Doctor Faustus". The
Modern Language Review. 68 (1): 1–
 13. doi:10.2307/3726198 .
JSTOR 3726198 .
2 . 5.5. Beza, Theodore. "A Brief
Declaration of the Chief Points of
Christian Religion Set Forth in a
Table." 1575. Early English Books
Online. 10 2 2007.
http://eebo.chadwyck.com .
29. Stachniewski, John (1991). The
Persecutory Imagination: English
Puritanism and the Literature of
Religious Despair . Oxford: Clarendon
Press. pp. 292 . ISBN 978-
0198117810. OCLC 22345662 .
30. Calvin, John (1762) [1536]. The
Institution of the Christian Religion: In
Four Books . Translated by Norton,
Thomas. Glasgow: John Bryce,
Archibald McLean, Alexander Irvine.
p. 132.
31. p. 510. Hyperius, Andreas. "A Special
Treatise of God's Providence With an
Appendix by Peter Baro." 1588. Early
English Books Online. 10 2 2007.
http://eebo.chadwyck.com .
32. 1.1.44–50.
33. (Marlowe 14)
34. (Marlowe 15)
35. Snyder, Susan (July 1966).
"Marlowe's 'Doctor Fausus' as an
Inverted Saint's Life". Studies in
Philology. 63 (4): 565–577.
JSTOR 4173538 .
3 . Deats, Sara Munson, ed. (2012).
Doctor Faustus: A Critical Guide .
London: Bloomsbury. p. 69.
ISBN 9781441188571.
37. Hamlin, William M. (2001). "Casting
Doubt in Marlowe's 'Doctor Faustus' ".
SEL: Studies in English Literature
1500–1900. 41 (2): 257–75.
doi:10.2307/1556188 .
JSTOR 1556188 .
3 . Hamlin 258.

References
Chambers, E. K. The Elizabethan Stage.
4 Volumes, Oxford, Clarendon Press,
1923.
Logan, Terence P., and Denzell S. Smith,
eds. The Predecessors of Shakespeare:
A Survey and Bibliography of Recent
Studies in English Renaissance Drama.
Lincoln, NE, University of Nebraska
Press, 1973.
Marlowe, Christopher (1962). Bevington,
David; Rasmussen, Eric (eds.). Doctor
Faustus, A- and B-texts (1604, 1616) .
 Manchester: U of Manchester P. pp. 72–
73. ISBN 9780719016431.

External links

Doctor Faustus
at Wikipedia's sister projects

Media
from
Wikimedia
Commons
Quotations
from
Wikiquote
 Texts from
Wikisource
Data from
Wikidata

The Tragical History of Doctor

Faustus public domain audiobook at
LibriVox
1616 quarto online
The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus
From the Quarto of 1604 by Christopher
Marlowe at Project Gutenberg
The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus
From the Quarto of 1616 by Christopher
Marlowe at Project Gutenberg
 Louis Ule, A Concordance to the Works
of Christopher Marlowe , Georg Olms
Verlag, Hildesheim-New York, 1979,
pp. 101–184.
Doctor Faustus at the Internet
Broadway Database

Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Doctor_Faustus_(play)&oldid=1008863621"

Last edited 10 days ago by BrayLockBoy

Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless

otherwise noted.