If one may hazard a guess at the reasons that convinced the older school of playwrights of their error, there are two by which they must have been struck--the artistic possibilities of the real suggested by the _Comedie Humaine_, and the prescience--one might say the intuition --it exhibited of things that were destined to reveal themselves more prominently in the latter half of the nineteenth century. And in this respect Balzac in no wise contributed to what he foresaw and, so to speak, prophesied--the growing stress of the struggle for life in domains political, social, financial, industrial, the coming of uncrowned kings greater in puissance than monarchs of yore, the reign of not one despot but many, the generalization of intrigue, the replacement of ancient disorders by others of equal or increased virulence and harder to remedy, hundred-headed hydras to combat, most difficult of herculean tasks. The reflection of all this in the _Comedy_ was calculated to impress at its hour, and the hour arrived. Men looked at the counterfeit presentment and wondered why no one had recognized these things sooner. From that moment, the reputation of the _Comedie Humaine_ was made. Perhaps, after all, in such connection, the one or two of Balzac's plays that went so resolutely off the old lines--the _Resources of Quinola_ and _Mercadet_,--may have served, in remembrance, despite their insignificance beside the novels, which were the true drama, to awaken the attention of professional dramatists, especially as one after another story of the _Comedy_ was dramatized. But it was the fund of observation and the leaven of satire which startled, aroused, and ultimately set the stage agog. Not even the lighter forms of composition were left unaffected. Labiche, in the vaudeville style, with his _Voyage de Monsieur Perrichon_ and _La Cagnotte_, gave his audience, behind his puppets, the touch of present reality, the sensation of existent follies.