History of Histories of German Literature, 1835-1914 9780773564442

Citation preview

A History of Histories of German literature, 1835-1914

Histories of German literature were published in the hundreds throughout the nineteenth century, and all adhered more or less closely to the paradigm established early in the century by Heinsius, Koberstein, and others. As the century progressed, however, the "standard" format was modified as new methods and styles of presentation were adopted in order to reach an ever wider public or to satisfy the requirements of special interest groups. While the basic outline remained virtually the same, the format varied from pure text to mainly illustration, and from a single sheet to multiple volumes. Most of those who produced histories of German literature were schoolteachers rather than professors, and their aim in writing these works - frequently directed at the general public as much, if not more than, at schoolchildren - was nothing if not didactic. In the present work the author surveys the extent of this somewhat amorphous genre, traces its development in form and function, and points out the general biases (primarily religious and political) that lie behind such factors as the choice of writers discussed and their evaluation or the designation of literary periods. The work also covers foreign histories of German literature (European and North American), and in these chapters conclusions are drawn about the characteristic (i.e., national) features of these works and how they differ both from German and from other foreign works. Michael S. Batts is an emeritus professor of German at the University of British Columbia.

This page intentionally left blank

A HISTORY OF HISTORIES OF GERMAN LITERATURE, 1835-1914 M I C H A E L S. BATTS

McGill-Queen's University Press Montreal & Kingston • London • Buffalo

© McGill-Queen's University Press 1993 ISBN 0-7735-1140-7 Legal deposit third quarter 1993 Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Batts, Michael S., 1929A history of histories of German literature, 1835-1914 Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7735-1140-7 1. German literature - History and criticism - theory, etc. 2. German literature - History and criticism. 3. Criticism Germany - History. 4. Criticism - History. I Title. PT47.B38 1993 830.9

C93-090219-X

Contents

Acknowledgments Introduction

vii

ix

1 From Gervinus to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century 1 2 From the Middle of the Nineteenth Century to Scherer (1883) 34 3 The End of the Nineteenth Century and the Beginning of the Twentieth Century 58 4 Titles, Periodization, and the Literary Canon

82

5 The Most Successful Histories of German Literature and Translations into Other Languages 6 Foreign Histories of German Literature: French 7 Foreign Histories of German Literature: English-language Areas (UK, USA) 129 8 Foreign Histories of German Literature: Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland 151 9 An Overview 10 Conclusion 11 Bibliography Index

288

176 213 217

95

112

This page intentionally left blank

Acknowledgments

I have received substantial financial assistance towards the costs of research for this work from the Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung, the Killam Foundation, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Of the numerous institutions where research was carried out, the most useful and the most helpful were the British Library, the State and University Library in Gottingen, and the Austrian National Library. Of the many colleagues who have assisted me in various ways, I would like to single out for special thanks Dr Waltraud Fritsch-R6/Jler and Dr Murray Hall. This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian Federation for the Humanities, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction

The definition of a history of German literature remains in this work the same as it was in my earlier work, A History of Histories of German Literature: Prolegomena (1987), that is, "a work that presents in a systematic and chronological fashion the entire record of German creative literature from the earliest times to the present." The form in which this record is presented, whether in a series of articles or in book form, whether in discursive prose or in a series of questions and answers, is immaterial; the only essential is the completeness of the coverage. Partial histories, for example of medieval or modern literature, have quite different priorities and although these may be important for the history of "Literaturgeschichtsschreibung" in general, for example, the works of Hettner on the eighteenth century or R.M. Meyer on the nineteenth century, they are not discussed here, except in very rare instances, that is, when the broader context of literary history is also described. Completeness of coverage is not only for my purpose the primary defining quality, it is also something that can be defined. If one were to extend the definition to include partial histories, it would be impossible both to define partial and to cope with the vast amount of works under this rubric. That such varied forms of literary history can exist reflects the uncertain nature of the genre, which is in effect a mixture of genres rather than a pure genre. On the one hand, the history of literature is a sub-genre of the wider genre of historical writing and derives at least some of its authority from that genre, along with the idea that written history is itself a literary genre. On the other hand, histories of literature record facts; they record - in varying forms - who wrote what, where, and when. To some extent, therefore, they are, like dictionaries, sources of reference (in

x

Introduction

German "Sachbiicher," perhaps, rather than "Nachschlagewerke"); they are certainly primarily used as such. Their authors, too, like lexicographers, make use of their predecessors for the same reason, i.e., as sources for the vast volume of material which no single person could survey unaided. Finally, a literary historian is expected also to be a literary critic and to evaluate the aesthetic and similar qualities of the works that form part of the historical record. This last point might seem to eliminate such works as tabular histories or vade mecums from the above definition, but even a simple table of authors, dates, and works must reflect the critical decision of the compiler to include this work and exclude that one, in other words, to exercise critical judgment. Histories of literature therefore constitute a genre that is somewhat amorphous, insofar as it is based partly on objective reportage (historical facts) and partly on the subjective criteria of literary aesthetics. The amorphous nature of the genre is then reflected in the wide variety of forms that are devised to appeal to different audiences and satisfy different demands. However, these forms share the basic function of literary history, namely, the provision of information, whether this information be fact or opinion. In this they set themselves apart from literature proper, no matter what literary pretensions some of their authors may possess. This definition of literary histories and their function is based on the works themselves and not derived from any literary or literary historical theory. To theorize about these works and their purpose is of course a legitimate activity, but it is not one that can legitimately be undertaken without reference to the works themselves. One, if not the main, purpose of this work is to supply the necessary basic material for further research. The definition given above does not of course establish any form of paradigm against which any or all histories of literature might be measured. There is no received standard form, and in the chapters that follow there is no intention either of claiming that there is or of proposing a form that might be acceptable as such. My aim is rather to show how such works have developed and what forms they have taken in the period under review. The only paradigm at any given point is therefore the form of the immediately preceding work. Only to this extent can it be said that literary histories resemble the literature about which they are written, for, as writers react to and attempt to come to terms with the writers who precede them, so historians of literature attempt in their works to supersede or supplant the literary histories that precede theirs. From what has been said, it will be evident that this work is descriptive rather than critical. For this reason, and not because they have been discussed in critical literature, the "great" works of literary history receive no special attention. My interest is in all literary histories that

xi Introduction have been put before the public, no matter how broad or narrow that public might be. In many ways the "Fu/Jvolk" among literary historians are in fact more interesting (if not more influential) than those who receive critical approval. There is of course a large body of critical literature on "Literaturgeschichtsschreibung" in general, but this is concerned primarily with literary criticism rather than with histories of literature, except, of course, for such figures as Gervinus, Vilmar, Scherer, etc. It is assumed that the reader of this work will be familiar with this literature, but no reference will be made to it, since the vast majority of the works discussed here have received no critical attention at all. For the same reasons, it is not my intention to judge the qualities of the works discussed, either as regards their factual accuracy or errors, or the appropriateness or otherwise of their historical "philosophy," or the opinions expressed about individual writers or works. The fact that a given history contains factual errors or expresses particular views is important, not whether or not the author should have known the facts, not whether or not that view is to be applauded or deplored; and certainly not why such a view is expressed at that time and place. Where an historian provides the reader of a literary history with some indication of the underlying philosophy, such information has been taken into consideration on the grounds that it was directly available to the reader, but ideas expressed by any historian outside the context of the particular literary historical work have not been considered, since there are no grounds for assuming that any reader of a literary history would be familiar with, or even have access to, these sources. Obviously, there are - aside from (or in addition to) such sources - social, political, economic, and other reasons why a given author writes a given work at a particular time and place, but to determine with any degree of reliability the reasons underlying the innumerable and infinitely varied opinions of literary historians is hardly a task for an individual, even given the restriction in the present volume to the period from the 1830s to the eve of the First World War (1914). I must assume in the following that the reader will be familiar with the general background to European intellectual history in the nineteenth century. My main interest, then, aside from recording in pragmatic fashion the manner in which histories of German literature developed through the nineteenth century, lies in the kinds of opinions expressed by their authors, in, to put it in the simplest terms, their biases (in the original sense of that word, i.e., inclination or predisposition towards). To record the varying opinions of hundreds of authors on all possible topics would of course not be possible and would probably not in any case result in any definable general trend. Consideration is therefore limited to the

xii Introduction

major factors that determine the author's attitude towards the task of writing a literary history, that is, the attitude towards society, religion, nationalism, etc. Again, it must be stressed that the determination of these biases, whatever form they may take, is done as objectively as possible. It is not my intention to criticize or make invidious comparisons. Nor, it must be said, have I wished to discuss past or present views on "Literaturgeschichtsschreibung" per se. Secondary literature has been rigorously excluded on the grounds given above, and I have been equally rigorous in refraining from asides, polemics, etc hi footnotes. The only significant recent works that impinge on the area surveyed in the present work, Klaus Weimar's Geschichte der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft and Jurgen Fohrmann's Das Projekt der deutschen Literaturgeschichte, were published in 1989 and not received until after my work was substantially complete. Only in the last few pages do I risk a few personal observations about the role of histories of literature in general.

A History of Histories of German Literature, 1835-1914

This page intentionally left blank

1 From Gervinus to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century

The setting of period divisions in the history of German literary historical writings is no less dubious a procedure than it is in the history of literature itself. The main justification for beginning the present volume at this point is the apparent consensus around 1835/1836 that "Germanistik" had "arrived." The year 1835 saw the publication of the first volume of Gervinus's history of German literature, a work that was quite different from anything that had appeared before and which set a standard for the future. In the same year, Oskar Wolff began to publish his encyclopedia of German literature, while in the following year Hoffmann von Fallersleben published the first comprehensive bibliography of German philology. Other works that appeared at this time are Gutzkow's Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur (1836), Schaefer's Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1836), Marbach's Uber moderne Literatur (1836-38), the first volume of Goetzinger's Die deutsche Sprache und ihre Literatur (1836), and the second, expanded edition of Menzel's Die deutsche Literatur (1836 - originally 1828). It seems appropriate, therefore, before looking further ahead, to glance briefly at the kind of reference sources that were now becoming available to those writing histories of literature. As was shown in the Prolegomena, some literary historical works were in fact less histories than simple accumulations of material. The number of tabular representations of the historical record was relatively small (Prolegomena, 2,134ff), but the number of collections of literature, primarily of poetry (whether or not these had any historical commentary) had become very large. Although many of these collections were intended simply for the reading pleasure of the general public, others

2

Histories of German Literature

were specifically directed towards schools, where the reading of German literature for other than purely pragmatic reasons was rapidly gaining ground. On the more academic level, there were numerous editions of older, primarily Old and Middle High German, texts, and scholarly journals had come into existence in order to provide an outlet for contributions to the new discipline. The best known of these journals, after those of the Romantic period, was perhaps von der Hagen's Germania (1836); the Zeitschrift fiir deutsches Altertum and the Archivfur das Studium der neueren Sprachen followed in 1841 and 1846 respectively. Hoffmann's Die deutsche Philologie im Aufrifi. Ein Leitfaden zu Vorlesungen (1836), with its approximately two thousand entries, presents a comprehensive summary, a convincing demonstration that the discipline was indeed flourishing, whatever might be said about the quality of some of the works listed. Hoffmann himself argues that, despite 150 years of literary historical work, "em genaues Bild von unserer Nationallitteratur in alien ihren Richtungen und Beziehungen" (xxvi) has not yet been drawn. The main reasons for this are the great wealth of material and the lack of preparation (language skills and knowledge of sources) of the would-be historians. Far too many theories, though they may well impress unsuspecting readers, are based on inadequate foundations. Hoffmann, although he makes some critical observations in the preface, does not provide any commentary on the works that he lists; he contents himself with arranging them in a systematic manner. Altogether there are thirty-three works under the heading "Allgemeine deutsche Litteraturgeschichte," from Morhof s Unterricht to Dilschneider's Umrifi, and ten histories of limited periods of German literature. Wolffs Encyclopddie der deutschen Nationalliteratur is a far less impressive work, being a curious mixture of biographical dictionary and chrestomathy. Authors are listed in alphabetical order throughout the seven volumes (plus supplement); there are no subject entries. For each author there is normally a biography, a list of works, a characterization of these works, and some selections. For Kotzebue, for example, there is approximately half a page of biography, a list of seventy-nine works, one page of commentary, and five pages of passages from his work. This can hardly be considered a literary historical work, and in a sense it is also incomplete, as older works (Old and Middle High German) receive scant attention. It is, however, characteristic of its time in the greater degree of attention paid to modern authors and in the strictly pragmatic approach. The intention was presumably to supplant Jordens, whose work had been the standard reference work to this time. There, in the Lexikon deutscher Dichter und Prosaisten (5 volumes plus supplement, 1806-11), much space had been given to bio-bibliographical details, plot summaries, and critical opinions, but none to excerpts from authors' works.

3

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

The question of the degree to which recent, especially living, authors should be included in literary historical works had been raised by historians before but not decided either way. In part the unwillingness (or willingesss) to comment on contemporary figures was related to the audience for which a given work was intended. These two factors contemporary literature and the intended audience - now take on greater significance, for on the one hand, more works are written for specific audiences and on the other, more are devoted primarily, if not exclusively, to recent or contemporary literature. Major figures writing on contemporary literature at this time are Gutzkow, Heine, Jung, Marggraff, Menzel, and Prutz, to mention only a few. It is clear that this greater variety of literary historical works is the result of the development of "political literature" and the generally broader interest in literature as a whole, an interest that dates largely from the time of the Wars of Liberation. This interest was, however, not concentrated, as among the Romantics, in the earlier period, for in addition to the particular interest in contemporary literature just noted, several histories of literature restricted their survey to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, commencing, for example, with the beginning of the eighteenth century (Hillebrand), with Klopstock (Gelzer), or with Haller (Kletke, Kurz, Saupe). On occasion the survey of modern literature is preceded by a brief synopsis of the earlier period. Since it has been assumed on the basis of preliminary study that many literary histories are strongly influenced by, if not largely dependent on, their predecessors, these were discussed in the Prolegomena as far as possible in chronological sequence. For three main reasons this is no longer feasible, even if desirable, after about 1835. In the first place, the scope of literary histories is frequently much larger, so that they no longer appear in one volume but in several volumes, perhaps spread over many years. The first obvious example of this is Gervinus's work which appeared in five volumes between 1835 and 1842. While such a work must be treated as a whole, it is evident that other works published during those seven years might have been influenced in part or in whole by Gervinus. Secondly, the same work may appear in numerous editions over a long period of time. To the extent that later editions reflect changes in the author's approach or judgments, they must be considered either with the original edition or at the appropriate later date - but it is not always clear which edition of any given work was used by subsequent authors. Finally, the sheer volume of literary histories and the lack of individuality of many of them make it imperative to group together as many as possible in order to be able to concentrate on those that show signs of individuality or exemplary character. In the period from 1835 to mid-century (1851), a large number of

4 Histories of German Literature literary histories appeared, most of which refer to Gervinus in approving, if not laudatory, terms, without, however, showing any strong tendency to follow his lead, in particular with regard to his political posture. Several authors suggest that Gervinus's history is a marvellous work, but ...; and usually the argument follows that it is not suitable for the particular audience which this author has in mind. Of the approximately forty works examined for this period, only a very few merit individual attention, while the remainder may be subsumed for the most part under the following headings: traditionally styled works for a general audience, works for schools, for school and home, foreign works, works that cover a limited segment of literary history, and historia litteraria. Apart from these categories there is the familiar tabular presentation, a form continued by Eitner in his Synchronistische Tabellen zur vergleichenden Ubersicht der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur (1848); and at least one oddity in the shape of Boas's Literaturgeschichte im Salon (1846). This work can be classed as an offshoot of the "literary letters" category mentioned in the Prolegomena (92). In this case the ladies' request for instruction in literary historical matters is built into a conversational framework, a salon, for which individuals prepare and then present detailed accounts of certain poets. There are brief comments on the intervening literary developments, and the whole is placed in the context of polite conversation. With the exception of the examples of historia litteraria, works within the groupings just mentioned are spread throughout the period under discussion, and there is no significance in the order in which the groups are treated here. The works in historia litter aria, however, appear only towards the end of the period; these are, however, discussed before Gervinus, because they are less influenced, if at all, by developments in German literary history proper. Gervinus's work is at the centre of this chapter, and those literary histories that rise above the purely stereotypical and appeared after Gervinus are discussed individually in the latter part of the chapter. Foreign works, the definition of which is by no means unproblematical, become more numerous during this period and are discussed in chapters 6-8. Naturally enough, there is a wide variety among school histories as well, some covering the whole period and others only a part, some offering sample texts and others nothing but historical notes. They are of course also intended for different types of schools, perhaps the most surprising fact being the frequency with which such works are produced from now on for girls' schools. The following is a representative selection for the period covered in this chapter: J.W. Schaefer, Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1836) 133p.

5

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

J.G. Beilhack, Kurze Ubersicht der sprachlichen und literarischen Denkmdler des deutschen Volkes, nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklungsfolge mit Sprachproben von Ulfila bis Gottsched sammt Erkldrung derselben. Zundchstftir die oberen Classen der bayerischen Gymnasien (1837) 214p. F.W. Reimnitz, Leitfaden zu einem \vissenschaftlichen Unterrichte in der deutschen Grammatik und Literatur fur die obersten Gymnasial- und Realklassen und zum Selbstunterricht (1838) [only Old and Middle High German] 344p. G.H.F. and T.F. Scholl, Deutsche Literaturgeschichte in Biographien und Proben aus alien Jahrhunderten, zur Selbstbelehrung und zum Gebrauche in hoheren Unterrichtsanstalten (1841) 606p. K.G. Helbig, Grundrifl der Geschichte derpoetischen Literatur der Deutschen (1843) 45p. H. Kletke, Handbuch der Geschichte der neueren deutschen Literatur. Biographien, Charakteristiken und Proben. Zum Gebrauchfiir Lehrer und Lehrerinnen in den oberen Klassen hoherer Tochterschulen, wie auch zum Selbststudium (1845) 2 vols. 1192p. F. Biese, Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur fur Gymnasien und hohere Bildungsanstalten (1846-48) 2 vols. 270, 839p. EJ. Saupe, Handbuch der poetischen Literatur der Deutschen von Holler bis aufdie neueste Zeit. Fur den hohern Schulunterricht und die hausliche Fortbildung des \veiblichen Geschlechts (1848) 592p. Otto Lange, Grundrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ein Leitfaden fur Schulen (1851) 102p. The titles of these works speak for themselves, but it is worth noting that with the exception of Kletke, who does not give his profession, all the authors are schoolteachers. It is also evident that the terms employed, such as "Grundri/V "Ubersicht," or "Leitfaden," give no indication of the size of the work. With the exceptions of Biese and Kletke, all are single-volume works, varying in length between fifty and six hundred pages. Kletke's work is roughly equally divided between volumes for the periods from Haller to Goethe (552p.) and from Goethe to the present 640p.), while Biese begins succinctly (volume one to 1600 has only 270 pages) but then expands volume two (seventeenth century on) to 839 pages. Of these works, that by Schaefer may conveniently serve as an example, if only because he was one of the earlier and more successful. His Grundrifi went through twelve editions by 1877 and was supplemented in 1842 by a larger Handbuch... which had a second edition in 1855. In the preface to the first edition of the Grundrifi, Schaefer argues that the

6

Histories of German Literature

history of literature cannot be written in telegram style ("Lapidarstil"), as can political history, where political events form a coherent chain. As a literary historian, he must present a "zusammenhangende Darstellung" (iii-iv), which means a process of selection and ordering, especially in regard to biographical and bibliographical material. A division into periods is also essential, but Schaefer insists that the boundaries are not exact and other divisions could equally well be made. He also stresses the necessity of taking the term "schone Literatur" in a broad sense in order to include at certain periods works other than belles-lettres but characteristic for that period. He argues in fact for presenting what is characteristic for the time, even if not great literature, and for refraining from the excesses of modern criticism: "Die einzelnen Urtheile sind unmaa/Jgeblich. Ich habe mich stets auf dem historischen Standpuncte zu halten gesucht, indem das blo/3 asthetische Urtheil von der Bildungsstufe der neuern Zeit aus gegen die friiheren Perioden ungerecht sein mu/J" (vi). Schaefer's introduction begins with a succinct definition of history, literature, etc., and I cannot do better than quote this in full: Geschichte ist im wissenschaftlichen Sinne die Darstellung dessen, was nach der Stufenfolge der Zeit durch die geistigen Krafte des Menschen zur Erscheinung gelangt ist und auf die Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts eingewirkt hat. Literatur ist die Gesammtheit der in Sprache und Schrift vorhandenen Erzeugnisse des menschlichen Geistes. Die Geschichte der Literatur stellt die Entwicklung des geistigen Lebens dar, wie es sich in den vorhandenen Schriftwerken offenbart, und lehrt diejenigen derselben kennen, in denen sich vorzugsweise dieser Entwicklungsgang kund giebt. Die Geschichte der Deutschen Literatur weis't in der Reihenfolge der in Deutscher Sprache vorhandenen Geisteswerke von der altesten Zeit nationaler Bildung bis auf unsere Tage die Gestaltung des literarischen Lebens des Deutschen Volkes nach, zeigt, wie die Nationalliteratur unter der Einwirkung der Verhaltnisse, unter der Wechselwirkung ihrer Erscheinungen bald gedieh, bald verfiel, bald in nationaler Eigenthumlichkeit hervorglanzte, bald in geistlosen Formen ein armliches Dasein fristete oder unter den Fesseln der Nachahmung hinschmachtete. (1) Schaefer divides German literature into only three broad periods, designated simply as the "altere," "mittlere," and "neue Zeit" (broken at 1100 and 1500). Within these, however, he has several subdivisions, some of which are familiar, for example, in the second and third periods: 1125-1230, 1230-1330, 1330-1440, 1440-1550; 1550-1620, 1620-80,

7 From Gervinus to Mid-Century 1680-1740, 1740-1770, 1770-1790, 1790-1813, 1813-. It must be assumed that the unusually small sections are primarily for the convenience of the teacher who has to cope with the restrictions of the classroom situation. Each section has an introductory passage which sets the historical scene and is followed by passages on the different genres and any aspects peculiar to that particular period, for example, classical studies in the period immediately prior to the Reformation. All the traditional notions are repeated in succinct form, from the character of the German people ("korperliche Tiichtigkeit, hochherzige Gesinnung und reine Sitte waren den Germanen angestammt ... aus dem Gefiihl der Kraft entsprang der Freiheitssinn" [3]), through the crusades as the mainspring of Middle High German literature ("Die Kreuzziige waren die zur That gewordene Poesie des Zeitalters" [11]), to the reawakening of national pride in the Protestant north under Frederick the Great, "wahrend in den katholischen Landern jesuitische Engherzigkeit den Fortschritten der Zeit noch Widerstand zu leisten suchte" (71). In dealing with individual genres within each brief section Schaefer is able to maintain a fairly strict chronological record, but this is at the expense of the individual poets, whose works may be spread over several genres and widely separated sections. There is in any case little room for genuinely critical commentary, so that, despite his claim to provide a "zusammenhangende Darstellung," Schaefer's narrative regularly deteriorates into a series of simple factual statements. As an example, section 3, "Didaktische und lyrische Poesie," in the period 1770-90 attempts in fewer than three pages to describe the work of no less than twenty-five poets, in the course of which the reader is provided not only with names and dates, but also with editions and even the titles of individual poems: "Ganz eigenthiimlich erscheint Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart (1739-94). Sein kraftiges Talent konnte bei einem Leben voll Verimingen und bitterer Leiden (Gefangenschaft zu Hohenasberg 1777-87) sich nicht zur Poesie erheben; einzelne ergreifende Gedichte (der Gefangene, die Furstengruft, der ewige Jude, Kaplied) werden seinen Namen erhalten. S.'s Gedichte, 1787, 2 Bde. 1824, 3 Bde." (92-3). Many of the poets are only cited by name: "An der Grenze dieser und der vorigen Periode stehen Christoph Neander, 1723-1802 (Geistliche Lieder 1766-74) und Balthasar Miinter, 1735-93 (Geistliche Lieder 1772). An diese reiht sich der fromme Lavater (Christliche Lieder 1771, 76. 80)" (93). This work is a "zusammenhangende Darstellung" only in the sense that it is a well organized chronological sequence. There is no trace (neither overt nor implicit) of an overall historical concept. Rather, it is a simple, basic handbook of names and dates, biographical and bibliographical information, and standard opinions. Rarely, even, is the content

8

Histories of German Literature

of any work summarized. For all that, there is very clearly a point of view that the author is intent upon inculcating in the reader. The history of German literature is presented as the chronological record of the manner in which literature struggled against external influences and internal difficulties until it finally achieved the superior status which it now holds. That this is an essentially Protestant achievement is a point which is underlined by both anti-Catholic and anti-French remarks. Although there are, as was stressed above, wide variations in the content (that is, more or less detail in literary histories for schools) the scope and attitudes expressed by Schaefer may be taken as typical for this period. The idea that is to be conveyed along with the information about literature is quite simply a belief in the superior qualities of the German character, the German nation, German literature. While the Protestant nature of the literature is frequently stressed (except by the rare Catholic author of course), more important is the "Sittlichkeit" of truly German literature. The source of "Unsittlichkeit" is normally foreign literature and foreign ideas (specifically French) which tend to undermine the established religion. This is why the Enlightenment is viewed so negatively and why the Romantics are frequently praised for their criticism of rationalism. German literature was one of the many subjects in the school curriculum (in the eyes of some, one of the more important), and it therefore had to contribute to the general aim of education, defined by Hiippe as the "Erweckung und Befestigung nationaler und christlicher Gesinnung ... erst die vollkommene Verschmelzung beider ist fur den einzelnen wie fur ein ganzes Volk die Bedingung der geistigen und sittlichen Freiheit und der schonen Individualitat" (iii-iv). The number of traditionally styled histories of literature in this period is relatively small, but this is largely the result of the number of works listed as having been written for schools, for these are usually also advertised as suitable for home use. This does not mean, however, that, when an audience is not defined, it will be any "better" than "school and home." Kannegiesser's work, for example, Abrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1838), makes no reference to the intended readers, but it must be assumed that these would be students, for it is a short (115 pages), simplistic work which lacks any historical plan and is based primarily on Mundt for the history of the language and on Rosenkranz for the history of "Poesie." The section on "Prosa" is only three pages long and deals with nonliterary prose. The historical periods are briefly characterized as "romantisch" (800-1500: Epos I Phantasie), "gelehrt" (1500-1750: Didaktik I Verstand), and modern (1750-: Roman / Geist). Schaefer's Handbuch (1842) on the other hand, is an extension for a general audience of the Grundrifi discussed above. It is his view that it is possible and indeed desirable to write a history of literature at this date,

9

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

even though not every period and every author has been sufficiently studied. It will simply be necessary to rewrite history as knowledge improves. His definition of the purpose of literary history is as follows: "in den hervorstechenden Erzeugnissen des jedesmaligen Zeitalters den Bildungsgang der Nation nachzuweisen, dieselben nach Inhalt und Form zu charakterisieren, ihrem Verhaltnis zu einander, den Faden, die von dem einen zum andern leiten, nachzuforschen und dies Zusammenwirken geistiger Kra'fte ... in klaren Bildern zu veranschaulichen" (vii-viii). He does not believe, however, in imposing a philosophical concept on history, arguing that the spirit of the age can be derived from the literary and historical material. Although the general historical information that he provides is quite limited, he does spend some time on the philosophical and general intellectual trends. The works themselves are manifest in the idea which provides the key to each period, "welcher durch die in demselben zur Erscheinung kommende Idee Einheit erha'lt und dadurch wieder ein kleineres, in sich abgeschlossenes Ganzes wird" (ix), and it is then this understanding of the periods which, Schaefer claims, should be the basis of aesthetic judgment, i.e., they should be evaluated in terms of their own time: "Die aesthetische Beurtheilung der Objecte ... hat den Ma/Jstab aus den geistigen Zustanden der Zeit zu entnehmen" (xiii). Brederlow's Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1844) belong in this group despite the somewhat misleading subtitle, Ein Lesebuch fur die erwachsene Jugend. Originally these lectures were held in public in order to divert the local population from their sufferings resulting from a disastrous fire; later, the same text was used in a Gymnasium and a girls' school. In their published form, they are put forward to the general public in order to encourage the reading of German literature and to combat the rampant materialism of the age. There is no collection of texts, so that the word Lesebuch is a misnomer. Beyond this, there is little to be said about these two volumes other than that Brederlow is far from original. He offers no historical plan beyond a simple series of traditional period divisions, introduced by historical and cultural background material with particular reference to the modern period of philosophy. He adopts on occasion a distinctly moral tone, and the only slightly unusual feature is his evident political conservatism, which comes through in his discussion of recent political trends in literature, for example, his warning against "das blinde verworrene Geschrei nach unverstandener Freiheit"; the goal of poetry is to inculcate "neben der ungeheuchelten lichten Gottesfurcht, die aufopfernde Liebe zum Vaterlande, die Liebe zu einer freien Verfassung, die Liebe zu seinem Fursten, die Achtung des Gesetzes" etc. (II, 369). Compared with other traditional works, Ettmiiller's Handbuch der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1847) offers a far less balanced treatment

10 Histories of German Literature of older and newer literature, in part the result of his inclusion in the section on medieval literature of Anglo-Saxon, Old Norse, and Middle Dutch. Three hundred of the 470 pages are devoted to the period before 1500; the sixteenth century is dismissed in twenty-four, and the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in thirty-five pages. Only a little over a hundred pages remain for the period from 1748 to the present. Ettmiiller offers no historical grounds for the periodization other than the traditional view that German literature rises and falls with the degree of dependence on foreign models. The first of the two high points in German literature, for example, "erwuchs zunachst aus zwar meist wohlbedachter, aber auch so noch tadelnswerther Nachahmung der Dichtungen des Auslandes" (165), and it is consequently not surprising that it did not last. Each period is preceded by the familiar type of short "Allgemeine Betrachtungen." Although Ettmiiller divides his work into periods, he does not deal with schools and movements within these periods, but solely with genres. His rigid adherence to this scheme and his desire to pack as many names as possible into the limited space result, on the one hand, in the splitting up of a poet's work into several places. As an example, Hagedorn's work appears in six places: "Satyre" on page 353 (one line); his biography on page 370 (in a footnote); "Poet. Erzahl." on page 396 (3 lines); "Weltl. Lyrik" on page 402 (one line); "Poet. Satyre" on page 435 (one line); and "Epigramm" on page 436 (one line). On the other hand, there is a gradual deterioration of the narrative into straightforward lists of names and dates; the last sections are little more than facts and figures and scarcely go beyond 1800. The only other minor general work published in this period is Weber's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, but this is in fact merely an offprint from his work on historia litteraria, discussed below. One of the curiosities of this period is in fact the resurgence in the late 1840s of historia litteraria. In addition to the work of Graesse (Prolegomena, 101), whose Handbuch der allgemeinen Literatur was published between 1845 and 1850, the year 1846 saw the publication of works by Gumposch, Allgemeine Literaturgeschichte, Mundt, Literaturgeschichte, Fuchs, Grundrifi der Geschichte des Schriftenthums der Griechen und Romer und der romanischen und germanischen Volker, and Schwab/Kliipfel, Wegweiser durch die Literatur der Deutschen. Weber's Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte mil Rucksicht auf Cultur, Literatur und Religionswesen, a work of more general history, appeared in 1847. There is no need to enter again into a discussion of the role of historia litteraria in relation to Literaturgeschichte (see Prolegomena, 27 and passim), but some ideas are expressed in these works, that are directly related to the history of German literature. In the first place, the work of Schwab/Kliipfel can be dismissed as

11 From Gervinus to Mid-Century

essentially bibliographical. The authors claim to have produced the first comprehensive listing of prose works in all disciplines for those who wish to build up a standard library or acquire a broad general education the kind of thing that was done at least as far back as the early seventeenth century. The work of Fuchs, which is limited to classical and modern western European literature, does not offer very much in the way of an historical concept or individual interpretations, but it is not without interest, primarily for the definition of the history of literature. "Literaturgeschichte ist ein Theil der Geschichte des menschlichen Geistes," he writes, and its purpose is "die geschichtliche Darstellung dessen, was ein Volk fur die Entwikkelung der schonen Redekiinste gethan hat" (1). However, since the nation ("Volk") includes all classes, then the "Dichtervolk" (viii), i.e., those who succeed with the people, must be included in the discussion along with the "Dichterfursten" (vii). In fact, Fuchs goes as far as to say that the plays of Kotzebue (dismissed or at least inveighed against by most literary historians) are "in einer Geschichte des Schriftenthums in diesem Sinne weit wichtiger als der dem Volke ganz fern stehende und kaum den Gebildeten seiner Zeit verstandliche Hamann" (viii). Such a standpoint is something of a novelty in the context of historia litteraria, although, of course, not far removed from views held (or at least at times propagated) by a writer such as Robert Prutz (for example, in "Unterhaltungsliteratur der Deutschen" in Literarhist. Tb. Ill [1845], 423-54). For the most part Fuchs remains well within the traditional boundaries in his judgments and repeats also such common ideas as "die Deutschen scheinen darzu berufen, die Gesammtbildung Europas in sich aufzunehmen und zu verarbeiten" (193-4). The strangeness of these historia litteraria is only underlined by Gumposch's claim to have written nothing less than "seit Reimmann (1708) wieder der erste Versuch einer solchen Literaturgeschichte" (iii)! Although there is perhaps little significance in the fact that the first copy of this work to be examined was uncut, it seems nevertheless clear that Gumposch did not meet with the expected success. His work completes only the periods up to 1400 (divided at 400 and 900); the last section begins the period from 1400 to 1846 but deals only with modern treatments of classical literature. The real interest of Gumposch's work lies in the theory developed in the preface, for this has particular relevance for the history of German literature in the narrower sense. His broad historical concept is summed up in the somewhat elliptical first sentences, which must certainly confuse any reader who has failed to read the "Vorrede" attentively: "Unter der Erziehung des deutschen Volkes kann man nur dessen Bildung zum letzten Zweck verstehen. Fur alles Endliche ist nun zwar

12

Histories of German Literature

das Unendliche letzter Zweck, aber nicht im Endlichen, da sich die ersten zwei Glieder verneinen. Es bleibt als einzig erreichbares Ziel die Mischung, die Versohnung beider in einem Dritten, in der unendlichen Bewegung, dem Fortschritte" (1). All that Guraposch is really proposing is a form of perfectionism, a belief in an innate drive to ever higher achievement, while always recognizing that the ultimate, being the divine, can never be attained. "Den deutschen Denkern gereicht es zu keiner kleinen Ehre unter den Namen der Geschichtsphilosophie eine eigne Wissenschaft des Fortschrittes gebildet zu haben" (2). Progress is achieved by the productive interrelationship ("Verhaltnis") between nations, in the course of which it is essential that the nations remain unmixed: "In jeder Hinsicht fordert ... der Fortschritt getrennte Glieder, das hei/ft erstens Volkerunterschied und zweitens Anschlu/3 eines lebenden im Fortschritt begriffnen Volkes an ein vergangnes, eben so gesondertes" (4). The variety of nations is natural, while the mixing of nations is not only unnatural but counterproductive. The German nation is as if predestined for progress: "Ein Vorzug des deutschen Volkes besteht in diesem Glauben, denn es ist das Volk der Ideale" (1). Progress is achieved, then, by maintaining the purity of the national ideal and by building on past examples: "Kampf gegen au/Jern und innern Romanismus und Aufnahme des Hellenenthums bilden sonach die zwei Hauptachsen der deutschen Geschichte" (13). Literaturgeschichte is therefore "der Nachweis, wie das deutsche Volk in Schriftwerken sein besonderes Leben bethatigt, gegen Romanentum gewahrt, mil hellenischen Anschauungen durchsauert, mit unverwelklicher Kraft bis auf den heutigen Tag gesteigert hat" (13). Since Gumposch's work is not primarily on literature in the modern sense, his views will not be pursued further, but it is worth noting his enthusiasm for the study of historia litteraria rather than the study of literature, about which he says: "ist aber der Nutzen zweifelhaft, so ist der Schaden um so gewisser" (iv) - especially in schools. For him, Literargeschichte (in the general sense) is the basis of all effective study in any area, enabling those who have studied it to judge and assess, to separate the good from the bad, to acquire a firm basis from which to specialize, and so forth; and: "Eben so machtig wie auf die Wissenschaft wirkt die Literaturgeschichte auf Religiositat, Sittlichkeit und Vaterlandsliebe" (15). Among these late examples of historia litteraria the most substantial is Mundt's three-volume work, and this must be considered here, partly because Mundt was generally very active in literary affairs, publishing, among other things, poetry, criticism, and a continuation of Schlegel's lectures, Geschichte der alien und neuen Literatur - Geschichte der Literatur der Gegenwart (1842), and partly because he attempts in the

13 From Gervinus to Mid-Century theoretical introduction to this work to justify the wider sense of the term Literaturgeschichte as opposed to the now established narrower sense. Mundt sees literature as "ideelle Wirklichkeit," as the identity of the real and the ideal in literary form. Inasmuch as literature expresses truth, it not only relates to all functions of the state but has established an existence independent of it, even challenging the state and certainly presenting, in times of change, ideas that are ahead of their time. Literature is "nicht Dienerin der endlichen Wirklichkeit, sondern Bewegerin und Gestalterin der dem ewigen Geist angehorigen wahren Wirklichkeit" (I, 7). Although Mundt here means literature as a whole, he distinguishes between that produced by the "wissenschaftlicher Geist" and that produced by the "schaffender Geist," i.e., between "scientific" and poetic works. Since, however, it is the function of the study of literature to demonstrate "Geistesbildung in ihrem ganzen Organismus" (6), Mundt argues that it is improper to deal with scientific and poetic literature separately, even though it must be recognized that poetry is different and even superior to the extent that it is beautiful. It is just not the totality: "Die Literatur jedes Volkes ist aber die gestaltete Form der nationalen Geistesbildung iiberhaupt" (10). It might seem on this basis that Mundt's view would conflict with the idea of national literatures, but this is not so; in fact Mundt firmly rejects any idea of Weltliteratur (III, 393) when dealing with the latest developments in European literature. His argument is based on linguistic (Herder) and social grounds. Language is the basis of the personal individuality: "In der Individualitat des Menschen ist somit der eigentliche Ursprung der Sprache" (25). It is the expression of human reason, and literature presupposes a common language which is the expression of a nation: "was die Individuality in der Sprache, das ist die Nationalitat in der Literatur" (I, 30). Literature therefore expresses the Idee in the form of the Nationalgeist: "Der Geist in seiner absoluten Wesenheit ist allerdings nicht nationell, aber seine Offenbarung in den Formen der Wirklichkeit ... kann nur eine nationelle sein" (HI, 394). Moreover, literature is what provides permanence for a nation, as it transcends social boundaries (it is not "aristokratisch") and links past and present. The "new" period of German literature follows the Reformation, and Mundt deals only briefly with literature before that time, but the Reformation is not seen as restricted to Germany. The spirit of Protestantism is oppositional, and as such it has a negative and a positive side, the negative leading to criticism without belief (rationalism and eventually the French revolution), the positive leading to scientific disciplines. The general basis of the "Protestant" modern period is freedom of thought, expressed at first in religious freedom and later in political freedom neither completely achieved. Mundt sees the present time as striving

14

Histories of German Literature

towards a union of these two. Mundt's is a somewhat idiosyncratic work that has aspects of the older historia litteraria, a cultural history of Europe, and a study in comparative literature. The proportion of space devoted to German literature is of course substantial, but he is clearly more interested in the general cultural trends and does not hesitate here to express forcefully his opinion about such movements as Pietism ("den alles auflosenden Schleim des Pietismus" II, 431) and the Herrenhuter (II, 30-35), or about individual philosophers. The last of the examples of historia litteraria to appear at this time could perhaps have been included equally well under school or general works. Weber's Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte is essentially an historical rather than literary-historical work, but the section on German literature was also published separately and intended, like the history itself, for schools. Weber was a schoolteacher and his works seem to have had considerable success to judge by the number of editions in German and translations into other languages. There is little to be said, however, about his history of German literature, for this is a short and simple work in the traditional style with no theoretical basis other than the nationalistic ideology characteristic of the period and a slightly more strongly expressed belief in the bourgeoisie as the class that is responsible for cultural development. More will be said of Weber in chapter five in the discussion of the most popular works. The success of Weber's work, both in Germany and abroad, is particularly interesting, inasmuch as it first appeared five years after the completion of Gervinus's Geschichte der poetischen Nationalliteratur der Deutschen and could just as well have appeared five years or twenty-five years before, as far as both content and form are concerned. This is somehow typical of the singular position occupied by Gervinus in the history of histories of German literature. It is not simply that he was even less of a Germanist than many of his predecessors, turning to literary history not from an interest in literature (although he did, like so many before him, also publish literary works) but in order to use its history as a vehicle for his political ideas. His work did after all go into five editions between 1835 and 1872 and it is frequently referred to as the first real history of German literature, a standpoint that is of course defensible only if one believes that this is the way histories (of literature) should be written. It is strange, though, that very few later historians have learned from Gervinus, despite their protestations of respect for his achievement. Because so much has been said - though perhaps not as much as one would expect - about Gervinus and his works, discussion will be limited as far as possible to an expose of his approach and technique with specific reference to those aspects of his work which can be

15 From Gervinus to Mid-Century considered novel or as carrying forward an existing tradition. The sheer volume of his work and the florid style make analysis of his individual judgments virtually impossible; much more important is his method. Gervinus stresses from the outset that he will look at literary works as an historian and not evaluate them aesthetically, a standpoint which seems refreshingly new, but which, as the reader soon discovers, does not mean that he will refrain from making qualitative judgments. He plans to write, he says, a "darstellendes Kunstwerk" (I, 2), which will be "nichts ... als Geschichte. Ich habe mit der asthetischen Beurteilung der Sachen nichts zu tun" (I, 11). Although Gervinus is never clear about his aesthetic principles, it is evident that he excludes from this term only the discussion of literary works in relation to other works in the same genre or of their place within an author's oeuvre. His sole concern is with their place within the context of his historical system. Along with the aesthetic evaluation, Gervinus also excludes the material bases of literary works. There are no bibliographical references or life histories of authors; there is no discussion of sources. In regard to Gottfried von Strasbourg, for example, he says: "Ich sehe hierbei noch mehr, als irgendwo sonst von den Quellen ab ... Mein Vorsatz ist dasjenige aushebend zu verfolgen, was sich aus dem Ganzen der Nationalgeschichte erlautern und herleiten la/h; die zufalligen Schicksale der Stoffe, wie die gleichgiiltigen Eigenthiimlichkeiten der Dichter lasse ich bei Seite" (I, 345). Individual works are in fact rarely analysed from the perspective of content and form and even more rarely quoted. This is justified partly on the grounds of the historical principles employed, but partly also on the grounds of the prospective audience: "ich will nicht fur die Bearbeiter und gelehrten Kenner ... schreiben ... sondern fur die Nation ... Ich schame mich jetzt fast, da/8 ich in der Verlaugnung der gelehrten Ostentation nicht soweit ging, da/3 ich die Citate gar vermieden hatte" (I, 14). The historical framework which underlies Gervinus's history of German literature rests on the figures of Luther and Lessing. Luther broke the unrestricted rule of the church and emancipated the people from dogma. In the mid-eighteenth century Lessing began the process of emancipation or regeneration in literature. Germany, having reached the peak of achievement "in Kunst, Religion und Wissenschaft" (V, 735) and taken its rightful place as European leader, should now turn its attention to politics. Although he leaves the question of a possible second Golden Age of literature open, it is clear that Gervinus believes such another age unlikely. Rather, it is time for poets to abandon aesthetic ideals and to encourage action on the political front, so that a great political age will come about. Throughout his work Gervinus never loses sight of his goal, which is

16

Histories of German Literature

to persuade the reader to accept his view of history and to act accordingly. Consequently, authors and works are assessed in terms of their contribution to this historical process, that is, of their furtherance or hindrance of it, or indeed their irrelevance to it. At the same time parallels are drawn between then and now in order to emphasize continuity and to stress similarities between historical situations (for example, between the periods immediately following Luther and following the Golden Age). For his purpose Gervinus could not make use of aesthetic criteria, and the discussion of works and authors is therefore based primarily on the material, which is judged in terms of its Deutschheit and of its impact. The specific characteristics of Germanness are never formally defined, but they are clearly the same as in previous literary histories, i.e., strongly Protestant and bourgeois. As an example of his expectation of the role to be played by literature, here is a passage from the second volume prior to a discussion of satire (Brant, etc): "Wir haben diesen Zweig [didaktische Literatur] gleich bei dem ersten Wegwenden unserer Literatur von der Ritterpoesie so bedeutend gefunden und von so fruchtbarer Einwirkung auf die moralische Natur der Nation, da/3 wir von selbst errathen, er werde in einer Zeit, die sich so lebhaft mit ihrer Sittenreinigung beschaftigte, neue Friichte getragen haben" (II, 379). When he needs absolute standards, Gervinus normally goes outside German literature, to the Greeks, to Shakespeare, to Dante, and so forth. These are models with which German authors are constantly compared and contrasted. A similar procedure is employed within German literature, inasmuch as authors are regularly paired off for purposes of comparison. His procedure is essentially to judge each author as good or bad in terms of his historical scheme and then to justify this opinion or to modify it in terms of other authors; on occasion he even discusses what an author ought to have written. This process develops into what one can only describe as a mania for simplistic and contrastive generalizations, that are frequently not simply tedious but bewildering, since they occur at all levels, i.e., with individual authors, periods, or national characteristics. Excepted from this procedure are those authors passed over as entirely irrelevant. The following passages are examples of his treatment of "irrelevant" authors, his personal convictions, and his "comparative" approach: Noch hatte ich einige Dichter aus dieser Zeit... anzufiihren, allein ich glaube es ist genug geschehen, um dieselbe zu charakterisieren ... Allein ich finde sie alle zu werthlos, als da/2 ich mich weiter dabei aufhalten mochte. (I, 474) Allein im Uberspringen von Extrem zu Extrem habe ich nie etwas Gro/Jes erkennen konnen; und zu lange haben wir uns in der neuern Zeit hinrei/ten lassen

17 From Gervinus to Mid-Century von einem Rest jener Freude am Selbstqualen, an Zerrissenheit und Seelenkampf von einem Stolz auf die nur scheinbare Kraft, die in jeder extremen Ansicht und Handlungsweise liegt, und unsere Jugend briitet immer noch lieber im Halbdunkel halbverstandener faustischer Grillen von innerem Ungliick und Jammer, als daft sie nach Maa/? und Ordnung fur ihre verwirrten Seelenzustande suchte. (II, 139-40) Wie Ariost auf der Hohe der kiinstlerischen Ritterepopee, wie Cervantes auf der Spitze der prosaischen Ritterromane, wie Lope de Vega als Meister der eleganteren Volkscomodie, wie Holberg als Hauptvertreter des dramatisirten bauerischen Schwanks oder Charakterlustspiels und Shakespeare als Koryphae der gesammten volksma/Jigeren dramatischen Kunst der neuen Zeit erscheint, so steht als Vollender des Mirakels und Mysteriums, der Allegoric und der Moralitat Calderon ... (II, 365). Die Seiten des picarischen und humoristischen Romans, die formlosen, die keine reine Dichtungsart kannten, die das Epos verloren batten und das Schauspiel erst werden sahen, diese Zeiten entsprechen dem Dichter [Jean Paul - i.e., he does not belong in the present]... Man hat ihn ... ofter und richtiger verglichen ... mil Rabelais ... Mit so viel Anomalien als man Wielands Dichtungen der Ritterpoesie vergleichen kann ... mu/? man Jean Pauls Romane mit den humoristischen, der Ritterdichtung entgegengesetzten Romanen vergleichen ... Beide stehen sich daher in jeder Hinsicht untereinander entgegen. Die ebene, glatte und leere Schreibart Wielands macht zu Jean Pauls springender, vollgepropfter und unebener den vollkommensten Gegensatz; die Romane des Einen sind immer voll strictem Zusammenhange, voll psychologischer Deduction, die des Anderen sind im Bau der Facten und der Charaktere mehr kiihne Skizzen voll gewagter Motive. Der plane Wieland ... der excentrische Jean Paul. Der Eine bewegte sich immer in der trivialen Mitte, der Andere in den Extremen, der Eine auf der Seite des gesunden Menschenverstandes, der Andere auf der des Genies; ein Wassertrinker jener, dieser ein Weintrinker"! (V, 20-22) The essential question, though, is what is new in this work? What does Gervinus's work offer that was not present in previous works? Previous authors had been equally nationalistic, equally Protestant, equally moralistic; they had inveighed as much against the French or promoted as strongly the concept of Deutschheit; they had made comparisons with foreign writers or castigated and praised German writers in accordance with their Germanness; both Luther and Lessing had frequently been seen as turning points, and even a tripartite historical division is not new. What is new here is not the nature of the literary judgments that can usually be paralleled in one form or another, but the manner of their presentation, the way in which they are assessed in terms of an idea. It is not really the literary judgments that count but the historical-political thesis to which all literature has been subordinated. Whereas previous writers of literary history had provided an historical

18

Histories of German Literature

framework or at least some kind of background material from history, they treated the authors as individuals within a purely literary context which was seen as the natural result of the situation created by political and other developments. Gervinus now praises or damns authors categorically on the basis of their contribution to his historical scheme and he does so without reference to purely literary relationships. Whether or not one accepted the historical theory - and by extension the literary judgments - is perhaps less important than the fact that Gervinus established a model, by which a writer of literary history could justify summary and apodictic judgments on the basis of extra-literary criteria. This is not to suggest of course that either Gervinus or those of his successors who used similarly "extra-literary" criteria as a basis for organizing literary history and evaluating literary works were in any way (conscious of) attempting to falsify the historical record. The mere decision to write a history implies a purpose in writing, and the writing itself requires that the material be formally organized. Hitherto the purpose of literary histories and the point of view to be taken by the author in depicting the historical record had been regarded as largely self-evident and expressed, if at all, in a series of simple axiomata. However, beginning, it seems, with the spread of Hegelian ideas about history and the reaction against them, historians of literature also began to look for a concept that would provide not simply a framework but an explanation of the historical record, something that would go beyond the simple notion of cause and effect. Not unnaturally, such a philosophical approach to literary history led to a much broader view of literature, one that saw German literature in the context of world literature. Such works remained largely theoretical and can no more be discussed here than could the pragmatical historiae litterariae that are in a sense their forerunners. One such work, which appeared at the time when Gervinus was writing, is Fortlage's Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der Poesie, given in Dresden in 1837 and published in 1839. Fortlage here proposes a theory that covers the whole of world literature, but of paramount importance to him is the special place of German literature within this scheme. For this reason and because he specifically rejects the theories of Schlegel and Bouterwek, his work will be considered as an example of this genre before the specifically German literary histories are analysed. The early concept of historia litteraria (Fortlage cites Eichhorn, Wachler, and Graesse) was an essential stage of collecting and ordering material, but the basic system was unorganic and disintegrative. Fortlage also rejects the Romantic theory, which he calls organic or pragmatic, because it views literature as an expression only of the "Geist der Epoche" and because following the changing fortunes of literature merely records superficial changes in form, etc. While this is a great improve-

19 From Gervinus to Mid-Century

ment over Eichhorn, the Romantics failed to appreciate the fact that the essence of all literature lies in the unchanging soul of the nation. The first system fails because it is based on preconceived aesthetic principles; the second fails because it sees literature as a reflection of the time and ignores the developmental process. Fortlage's procedure, which he calls empirical, is to deduce by the comparative analysis of earlier literatures the elemental ideas ("Schonheitsideale"), which can then be traced through history, as they appear in this or that nation, in pure or in mixed form. In other words, the concept must first be deduced and then traced in its historical development, and it is therefore essential to ensure that it is empirically derived and not preconceived, as it could otherwise be faulty and lead to false interpretations of history. Given Fortlage's turgid style and the broad generalizations across the whole of world literature, it is not easy to unravel the German thread from his tangled skein, and the following is therefore only a broad outline. Fortlage defines the basic elements of all literature as: 1 epic ("phantasiereich"), e.g., Indian literature; 2 dramatic ("charaktervoll"), e.g., Greek literature; 3 lyric ("ergreifend"), e.g., Hebrew literature. "Schonheit" is defined as essentially a combination of harmony ("das Plastische" or "Dramatische") and expression ("das Musikalische" or "Lyrische") - in other words, the combination of "Greek" and "Hebrew" characteristics, that is typical for modern literature. One or other or a combination of these ideals is appropriate for a given nation, and the success of its literature depends on the extent to which it develops its natural form or is influenced by foreign forms. The Germanic North of Europe is essentially Indian in character with Hebrew and Greek elements, but none of the early epic cycles (Ossian, Edda, Nibelungenlied, King Arthur, Charlemagne) achieves a unity; the "best" is clearly the Nibelungenlied and the "worst" the Arthurian cycle, which is in Fortlage's view "kranklich" and completely antagonistic to the Germanic principle. This Germanic and unmixed national principle spread south and came into conflict with the Roman mixed-national principle that was moving northward. The ground on which the conflict took place was the vassal/Emperor, Emperor/Pope relationship, and eventually the Germanic principle triumphed over the Roman in the Reformation. Characteristic for the development of literature in Europe, and particularly Germany, is the conflict of principles in the process of which old principles are destroyed from within, while new principles are established intellectually in opposition. While some nations succeed in displaying this conflict in literature in particular forms, it was left to German classical literature to depict" the general "Lauf des weltgeschichtlichen Processes" (293-4) in the form of such conflicts of prin-

20

Histories of German Literature

ciples, sometimes between rising and falling sides (e.g., Gotz von Berlichingeri), sometimes in balance (e.g., Tasso). The chief characteristic of modern literature is what Fortlage calls "das moderne Griechentum," a combination of "Liebesenthusiasmus, Philosophic, eine gelauterte Religion und ein verklartes griechisches Leben" (347). This new literary form developed in opposition to the Romantic and was centred in Germany, although it was European in scope, i.e., not limited to national ideals. However, the present situation is such that national interests are beginning to dominate and thereby bring back the genuine Romanticism, not the false Romanticism of the recent Romantic school: "Die Romantik bricht jetzt wirklich herein" (374); "Aus einer Poesie, die nach Idealen kampft, wird eine Poesie, die auf gewisse Zustande Einflu/3 sucht" (373). Fortlage's philosophy of literature, although based on a world view, is primarily an explanation of developments in Europe, a Europe which is essentially Germanic and the essential character of which - in contrast to other races - is the lack of any "Genialitat" other than the ability to absorb the "Genialitat" of others. This "Grundcharakter europaischen Lebens" (375) recalls the references in earlier historians to the "absorbent" quality of the German language. The concept of the basic literary forms as symbolic (South Asia) and plastic (Greek), together with the lyric quality of Hebrew, crops up again in Laube's four-volume Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1839-40), but he is far from denying the Germans a genius of their own. He begins in fact by arguing that Christianity, being international, virtually destroyed the individuality of the German peoples and that Charlemagne did nothing to hinder this: "Daher die gro/te Steppe iiber Karl den Grq/Sen noch Sakula weit hinaus" (11). Following the destruction of the Graeco-Roman world, there is a long (Carolingian) period of "Werden" in which nations struggle to develop their own individual form. This period is followed by one in which the nation which is now born has to develop "die anerkannte nicht die mogliche oder erwunschte Gestalt" (87). Because the "Gestalt" is there, poets are the products of the age, not the producers of it: "Ihnen gegeniiber ist zu sehen was sie fiir eine Welt finden, und was sie daraus machen" (87). The function of history is thus to see how the national "Art" is fulfilled; comparisons with other countries or with Germany today have no point except insofar as they shed light on the situation today. Characteristic for this first highpoint is the emphasis on the individual, as the national feeling is lost; this development reaches its apex in the Arthurian literature (Wolfram). In the search for the self, Gottfried represents the turning point and from then on there is a decline, as there is no centre, no unity. The lack of any central ideal leads to the disinte-

21 From Gervinus to Mid-Century gration of literary forms and eventually to the creation of prose. By 1400 the Middle Ages are dead, but there is no revival until the time of Luther and the Reformation, the ground for which is prepared by the meistersinger. Laube sees the Reformation as only partially successful. As a result of the Counter-Reformation and the political interests of the Pope, a kind of balance of power is brought about. Although the freedom of choice that exists leads to the development of the concept of taste, Laube sees all literature from the Reformation on as essentially prosaic and unsuccessful. The first signs of an upswing occur only in the early eighteenth century and follow the philosophers (Wolff to Kant). Whereas philosophy had been largely in the background in the "Jugendzeit" of German literature (the Middle Ages), Laube now sees it as the essential basis of literature; the literary schools are irrelevant to the historical process. Laube devotes a great deal of space here to tracing the philosophical developments from the materialism of Bacon through Descartes until Kant, his premise being that Christianity is a poetic creation and was a valid basis for medieval literature, but that in the modem age Christianity is no longer the basis and that its position has been taken by philosophy. An interest in philosophy is a feature also of Wihl's work, Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur von ihren ersten Tagen bis aufunsere Tage (1840), but this is not so much a reflection of his belief in a close link between German philosophy and German literature as a belief that an historian of literature must also be a philosopher: "Der Historiker mu/J hier [in analysing the relationship between freedom and necessity] die Rolle des Philosophen ubernehmen" (6), "das Geschaft des Philosophen und des Geschichtschreibers, die immer Hand in Hand gehen sollen" (236). However, there is no systematic application of this principle; the work varies instead between philosophical and moral disquisitions and short, at times starkly cryptic, summaries of major authors and works. On more than one occasion he returns to the problem of writing literary history, as for example, at the beginning of the chapter on "Volks- und Meistergesang," where he notes the necessity not only of periodization, but also of groupings within periods and stresses the fact that, "nur der Standpunkt den er [the historian] diesem [his material] gegeniiber einnimmt, die Aussicht auf eine Abrundung zu einem Bilde gewahren kann" (235). There are two main aspects underlying his portrayal of the development of literature. The first is a belief in the primacy of language in the development of culture; no nation can be without a physiognomy and a language. By physiognomy - which is not further developed - Wihl presumably means the national spirit, that mysterious something, "das Dunkle, das aller Geschichte vorangeht" (6). Both this and language are

22

Histories of German Literature

subject to historical change, that "Nothwendigkeit" against which the individual struggles in the assertion of free will, and it is the balance between these two ("Freiheit und Nothwendigkeit") that the historian must study. In Wihl's view, language is part of the inevitable historical process rather than the result of human endeavour, for he claims that it has developed "nach einem innern, geheimen, ihrem Wesen eingebildeten organischen Gesetze" (14). There is therefore also a strong linguistic interest in the study of literary history. Unlike his immediate predecessors Wihl does not attempt to place German/European literature into its world context; he restricts himself to brief comments on the loss of primeval unity and the attempts to re-establish such a unity through art. He distinguishes two specific approaches to this task, "das Geschaft der Einigung, des Zusammenbindens der zerstreuten Elemente des Nationalbewu/fttseins" (13), which he calls the oriental (Hebrew) and the occidental (Greek). The modern endeavour to achieve a "neutralization" of these two ingredients is "der Faden, der mich durch das Labyrinth der Sprachen und Literaturen fiihrt ... der mich bis zu unserm lieben Deutsch geleitet" (13). The major stages of development - which correspond roughly to pre-Carolingian, Carolingian, late medieval, and post Reformation - are for Wihl the periods of religious intuition, poetic fiction, political reflection, and philosophical speculation. In the first of these, the nation is at one with its god(s), that is, the relationship is real and immediate, while in the second the poetic formulation of myth creates an element of independence. In the third stage, the myths become the object of intellectual enquiry and are therefore at a greater distance from real life. The fourth stage dates from the Reformation and is the period in which the individual is freed from both the worldly and spiritual authorities. The two great figures that embody this development are Luther, who represents freedom of conscience, and Hutten, who represents bourgeois or social/political freedom. A very large part of Wihl's work is devoted to consideration of these and related ideas, in the course of which he casts the usual aspersions on the French language and literature (bastard language, sterility, etc) and devotes rather more space than usual to a castigation of the attitude of the Catholic church. He also inveighs against the dominance of Rome in the sense of Latin language and literature, which are contrary to the nature of Germans, "die wir unserm eigensten Wesen nach, gerade so engverwandt mit den Griechen sind" (237). On the other hand he takes an unusually strong stand against those who complain of the reliance of past poets on French models, arguing that such poets could do no better and that it is quite pointless to criticize them on these grounds, just because we now know better: "Wir mu/Jten erst die Unnatur der Franzosen practisch

23

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

erkannt und iiberwunden haben" (577). The anti-Catholic tendency also crops up in his attack on the Romantics, but there is a philosophical argument involved here as well. The Romantics based themselves far too much on theory, and their poetry is consequently without life, "eine Form, die sich fur ein Wesen ausgeben wollte" (693). But far worse was their attempt to direct the development of literature backward and contrary to the movement of the time: "Es ist Wahn und Vermessenheit, wenn sich Mehrere in der Absicht vereinigen, aus einer blo/f au/tern Betrachtung der Bediirfnisse eine neue Gestalt der Zeit zusammenflicken, den Strom der Geschichte in ein Bett zuriickdrangen wollen, das weit hinter ihr liegt" (656). By turning back to the Middle Ages and encouraging the revival of medieval ideas (Wihl is very sarcastic about the "Deutschtiimelei" of Jahn and others), the Romantics were working against the tide of history and drawing writers and readers away from the present. While Wihl does not favour concentration on parochial or transitory questions of daily concern, he insists on the need for writers to move with, if not ahead of, their time. Literature ist "die geheime, fortschreitende Offenbarung des Weltgeistes im Menschen" (707), and it is the business of writers to be part of this. Although Wihl is critical of recent literature (the writers of Junges Deutschland), he is relatively optimistic about the future. Although, as Rinne says, German literature had become a standard element in the school curriculum, one is bound to ask whether the level of interest either among students or among teachers was such that they would respond with enthusiasm to a work of nearly nine hundred pages on the Inner e Geschichte der Entwickelung der deutschen National-Litteratur (1842-43), a work, moreover, in which literary works themselves are rarely analysed, while the philosophical theory is expressed in an interminable series of long and convoluted sentences. The aim of the work is admittedly clear enough: students should be assisted "zu einem sicheren asthetischen Gefiihl und Geschmacksurteile" (iv); the goal is "nationale, religiose oder Welt- und Geschmacksbildung" (v). In Rinne's view the approach taken in schools is all too often a dry historico-scientific one, whereas what is needed is an appreciation of the "geistige Idee" and its progress through historical "Nothwendigkeit." The basic idea is not unfamiliar, the earliest period being that of myth, the next that of the "Heroenzeit." These are periods of epic literature, while the higher level of lyric is reached with the attainment of "bewu/ftte Sittlichkeit," the willing submission of the individual to the divine law. This can only be achieved with Christianity and can then only be raised to the higher level of drama. Since poetry is able to give "der Idee eine ihr angemessene Au/terlichkeit," it is the best medium through which to

24

Histories of German Literature

study our progress towards "unendliche Subjektivitat," but it is in fact the objectification of what philosophy expresses in theory. The purpose of literary history is therefore to follow the nation's progress to "dem ihm eingebornen Ziel" (11). The first great peak was reached in German literature when the antique and the modern, the Romanic and the Germanic, the heathen and the Christian fused in the later Middle Ages, and the crusades sparked the development of an "ideelles Rittertum," whose actions were subject to the Idee. As the idealism declined, however, towards materialism and pragmatism, as the ideal became hollow and a form only, it produced action but no purpose. The activity of the bourgeoisie then developed its own purpose and a new "Sittlichkeit" began to arise. The growing pressure for freedom both from religious and from political restrictions led eventually to the Reformation. This was at first a period of national strength, but it, too, declined quickly and another infusion from antiquity was needed. At first this contact with classical literature failed to unite with the German spirit, and it was not until the end of the eighteenth century that such a fusion took place and brought about the second great peak. This new "classical" period raised the quality of German literature above that of other nations through the complete union of "Geist" and "Abstraktion." By contrast with the work of Rinne, the literary historical work of Goetzinger, the second part of his two-volume Die deutsche Sprache und ihre Literatur (1844), is closer to the "average" type of literary history literature, but it is of particular interest for the author's attempt to justify his undertaking with a lengthy theoretical introduction. Apart from defining his audience ("fur gebildete Freunde der Literatur, denen es um nahere Einsicht in deren Entwickelung zu thun ist, und um Ubersicht des Besten und Gediegensten" [v]), Goetzinger attempts to define poetry and the qualities that make a poet, to distinguish poetry and the language of poetry from other forms of writing, and to define the nature of national poetry and the appropriate method of treating it historically. Many of the points made are not significant in our context, but the following should be noted. "Poesie" is defined as "eine Kraft der Gestaltung menschlicher Zustande durch Sprache," but the products of poets do not necessarily have the same impact on every reader. The individual reception must of necessity be "sehr wechselnder und wandelbarer Natur"; "Richtigkeit ist immer ein relativer Begriff" (41). Goetzinger accepts, therefore, that judgments of value may reasonably vary from time to time and from one individual to another. National literature is defined by Goetzinger as being "vorzugsweise an die Gestaltung gebunden" (42) in contrast to other forms of literature where the content can be transmitted in varying form. Where creative

25 From Gervinus to Mid-Century literature is concerned, the most important consideration is that of language, for in other forms of literature, foreign materials can be used along with the native or can be translated: "Dichtung und Sprache gehen daher immer Hand in Hand" (48); literature is never entirely translatable, and the idea of a world literature is absurd. The quality of a nation's language determines in large measure the quality of its literature. Having laid down the limits of the term "Nationalliteratur," a term Goetzinger claims is new and made popular by Wachler, he then turns to the concept of history. He gives as the two possible approaches to history the developmental ("Werden") or the existential or systematic ("Vorhandenseyn") - by which he seems to mean a purely historical and pragmatic or an aesthetic approach. The danger of the historical approach lies in the inevitable assumption that the rise and fall of political events will mean that the same process will occur in literature, but this is not necessarily so; this approach also neglects the aesthetic aspects. Emphasis on the aesthetic qualities of literature means of course losing the connection with the historical background as well as the acceptance of a particularly great period of literature as the only true literary epoch. "Ein wahres Verstandnis der Poesie und Literatur," he concludes, "ist ohne geschichtlichen Zusammenhang und ohne Kenntnis der jedesmaligen Zeit nicht moglich ... Eine Geschichte der Literatur kann und soil es daher nicht vermeiden, Blicke zu werfen auf den jedesmaligen Zustand der Nation, der Gesellschaft, der Wissenschaften, der Kiinste, der Kirche, der Sprache" (57). However, the more influential literary works, historically speaking, are not necessarily also the most pleasing aesthetically. An historical survey "wird also das vom Standpunkte der Kritik aus Unbedeutende, Schlechte, Verwerfliche eben sogut beachten miissen, als das Bedeutende, Wahrhaftschone und Unvergangliche" (59). Literary history must be distinguished from political history because, while writers represent the nation, they do not reflect the political state and it is therefore senseless to put literary sections into political histories; in addition great works of the past still live on in the present. Goetzinger's intention is therefore to provide a survey of the development of German literature in its relationship to political, cultural, and other factors, and to concentrate on works, "die einen bleibenden Werth haben" (61). He will proceed first to describe the "Geist und Charakter der verschiedenen Perioden" (61), and subsequently to examine individual works in the context of the various literary genres within each period. His divisions vary slightly from the usual ones and are as follows: 1 (a) to Charlemagne (b) the ninth and tenth centuries (c) the Hohenstaufen (d) the decline and fall of medieval poetry, 2 (a) printed literature before Luther (b) Luther and his century (c) Opitz and his century, 3 (a) Klopstock and Lessing (b) Storm and Stress. The second (and final) part of

26

Histories of German Literature

volume two, planned to cover Goethe, Schiller, and the Romantics, was never published. Despite the detailed introduction Goetzinger makes few extensive connections between the general political and cultural background of each period and its literature, especially in the older period in which he clearly has much less interest (from the beginning to Opitz there are only 149 pages). The introduction to the Hohenstaufen period, for example, is almost entirely devoted to a discussion of the suitability or unsuitability of the different designations for this period. He is not willing to concede that any specific designation is really appropriate, since too little is known: "Eine klare Einsicht in das Ganze dieser wichtigen Periode ist uns bei so liickenhafter Kenntnis nicht gestattet, und an eine wirkliche Geschichte der poetischen Bestrebungen jener Zeit darf nicht gedacht werden" (102). In the period following Minnesang, Goetzinger is equally uncertain about the precise reasons for the literary developments. Minnesang itself had to decline because "ein Zusammenhang des poetischen Schaffens mit dem Volksleben fehlte" (117); it lacked "eine reale Grundlage" (123). In other words Minnesang had been art and not "Naturdichtung," and poetry failed to materialize for the same reasons in the following period: "Der poetische Charakter besteht darin, da/J man einerseits an den alten Formen festhielt ... andererseits alle Form verschwindet" (141). In the period following the invention of printing Goetzinger lays the blame for the lack of literature on the poor quality of the language on the one hand and on the uneducated audience on the other. It was a "prosaic" period primarily because the language was incapable of poetic expression and because the necessary distinction was not made between "Poesie" and "Fachprosa"; literature was confused with polemics etc. Luther is praised of course for his contribution to the development of German prose and Opitz for his attempt to recreate a poetic language. The latter is criticized, however, both for the introduction of foreign verse models and for the introduction of classical mythology, with the result that poetry until Goethe is replete with obscure classical allusions. Throughout the seventeenth century, though, the authors are at the mercy, as it were, of the barbarous language; even Gryphius, "der ein Meister hatte werden konnen, blieb, wie alle Dichter des Jahrhunderts, nur ein Dilettant" (267). Goetzinger dates the revival of German literature, as do so many others, from ca 1740, but, unlike his predecessors, he makes a much more careful analysis of the how and why of this turn of events, even though, as he says himself, "es ist oft schwierig zu entscheiden, was hier Ursache und was Wirkung, ob ein neu sich entfaltendes Leben die Literatur geboren hat, oder ob die Literatur das ganze Leben umgestaltete" (313). Every great period of literature must, according to Goet-

27 From Gervinus to Mid-Century zinger, revolve around a central point: "ein solcher Mittelpunkt kann ein grower Mann seyn, oder ein einzelnes gro/tes Werk, ja sogar ein gro/Jes gewaltiges Ereignis im Leben des Volkes" (315). From the Middle High German period to Klopstock such a central point was lacking. The result: "Zwischen Gellert und dem hohenstaufischen Zeitalter liegt eine gro/Je Kluft, ein leerer Zeitraum, der bei vielen gar nicht mitza/Jhlt, weil in der That nichts geschaffen wurde, was nach Form und Gehalt gleichma^ig befriedigte" (316). During this period the church had obtained a stranglehold on the cultural life of the nation and not only prescribed social patterns but also circumscribed intellectual activities. The revival of literature is therefore primarily associated with the struggle for freedom "vom starren Lutherturn und Calvinismus" (319). The new writers campaigned against the restrictive ideas of the church and eventually achieved a position from which they could criticize the practices of the Church instead of being themselves the objects of criticism. The Enlightenment ideas spread also to Catholic areas and affected even political ideas and the universities. The most important factors in the universities were the new spirit of scientific investigation (particularly in Gottingen) and the shift in interest from Romance to Greek culture. In the first stage, this new spirit, the demand for "Natur" and "Freiheit," led only to sentimentality, but eventually it became more radical and aroused the need to express nature through "Kraft" rather than through form. "Es ist sehr schwer, die Ursachen solcher Erscheinungen ... ganz bestimmt anzugeben; so viel ist gewi/J, da/8 Epochen dieser Art immer geboren werden, wenn bedeutende Talente und kraftige Charaktere zusammentreffen mit einer vorbereiteten und darum empfanglichen Zeit" (458). In this case (unlike the past, when individuals had often enough called for a return to natural poetry) the time was ripe for a radical break with tradition. The two major areas in which Goetzinger sees a specific relationship between the new ideas on the formation of literature are discussed in a passage entitled "Vaterland und Christentum," most of which is devoted to an analysis of the numerous religious sects and divisions. In both areas, Goetzinger argues, opinions were divided; in the former case, for example, between patriotism and "Weltbiirgertum," or in the latter case between "new" religions on the basis of "Vernunft," or "Gefiihl," or "Wollen," and so forth. The most important result was not any significant conclusion, if only because the majority of the population remained unaffected, but the fact that "Religion und Christentum iiberhaupt wieder Gegenstand des Interesses der Weltleute wurde ... so haben wir denn im religiosen Gebiete dieselbe Erscheinung wie im nationalen, wo das Weltbiirgertum auftrat" (474). However, despite the emphasis on the role

28

Histories of German Literature

of religion in relation to literature, Goetzinger does not evidence any strong religious or moral bias. The same cannot be said of "Christian Oeser," the pseudonym of Tobias Gottfried Schroer, whose earlier work was discussed in the Prolegomena (126ff.). His new work does not rise much above the average, but it represents a vast improvement on the earlier work and went into a fourth edition by 1879. His Geschichte der deutschen Poesie (1844), written, according to the subtitle, fur die reifere Jugend beiderlei Geschlechts (in subsequent editions, edited by J.W. Schaefer, fur gebildete Leser\ is distinctly moralistic and nationalistic in tone. He makes it clear from the outset that he feels called upon to counter both the pragmatists of the day, those who would insist on political and social functions, and at the same time, the increasingly and unavoidably prosaic nature of modern life. The ideal is an essential factor in life and nowhere more clearly revealed than in literature. His aim is therefore to provide for those who lack the background to appreciate Gervinus's great work "eine gemein fa/?liche Anleitung zur historischen Kenntnis unserer Poesie" (viii), one that will include in particular those authors and those works that "durch ihren Stoff anziehen, belehren und veredeln" (ix). Although never expressing it in so many words, Schroer has a clear idea in his mind of the true "Natur" of what he calls "dasselbe treue, wackere und sinnige Volk der Deutschen" (x), and his discussion of the different periods is accompanied by comments on the relationship between this "Natur" and (the quality of) contemporary literature. His initial explanation of the rise of Minnesang, for example, does not at first seem much different from that in other works: "So waren es denn die Wunder und die Schonheit des Orients, die Sehnsucht nach der Heimath, die leidtragende Liebe der Pilger und der zuruckgebliebenen Frauen und eine flammende Begeisterung fiir Christus, woraus sich das poetische Leben dieser Zeit erzeugte" (51). However, this is followed by a long passage on the virtues and qualities of German women, culminating in a quotation from Gervinus which includes the statement: "kein Volk kann sich in alter und neuer Zeit mit uns vergleichen" (58). The qualities of the major figures in literature are measured then by the degree to which they write "wie es die Natur ... gegeben" (61), that is to say, by the degree to which "die deutsche Sinnesart" remained "unverfalscht" (60). Walther is praised in this regard and Wolfram castigated for beginning a new trend towards subjectivism, while Gottfried is blamed for introducing a more realistic form ("Freigeisterei") that led eventually to "Gemeinheit" (62). The "didactic" period following Minnesang was naturally of far less value aesthetically in Schroer's view, but it brought one great advantage in that it preached morality to the people as a whole and not only to the nobility. "Das war um so heilsamer, da iiber den britischen und fran-

29

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

zosischen Romanen deutsche Sitte und Sittsamkeit sowohl, als gesundes Denken Gefahr liefen unterzugehen" (124). Here we have the two main factors which condition the development of literature in Schroer's scheme: on the one hand the attitude of the upper classes and on the other the influence of foreign models. Constantly he points out either that those who should have taken the lead failed to do so, or that writers succumbed to foreign and therefore un-German and undesirable influences. In the passage immediately following, for example, on allegory, he refers to the French predilection for this rhetorical form which is unsuited to the German spirit: "Den Deutschen hat dies aber nie zugesagt, und es ist erstaunlich, wie so viele deutsche Dichter dies nicht gemerkt haben und noch immer derlei Malereien zur Qual ihrer Leser zu Markte bringen" (124). The period ofMinnesang ended with the descent into allegory und didacticism: "Doch ist die Erinnerung an jene Zeit der deutschen Treue und Tapferkeit erhebend fiir unser Volk, und wir miissen und sollen auf dieselbe zuriickblicken, so oft wir Gefahr sehen in Weichlichkeit und Laster zu versinken oder in Knechtschaft zu gerathen" (125). The period from the decline of Minnesang to the appearance of Luther is characterized by the failure of both nobles and intellectuals to be true to the German spirit. To preserve German literature there was only "der ehrenhafte deutsche Biirgerstand, von welchem von nun an ... deutsches Volksthum ausgehen sollte" (148). This was a period, "wo nur bei dem Volke und seinem Liede noch Poesie war" (177). The Reformation period is dealt with remarkably briefly and consists largely of a eulogy of Luther and Hutten. Schroer does, however, praise the early attempts at drama (Rinkhart, Ayrer, Heinrich Julius von Braunschweig) and regrets the lack of contemporary editions, since such works contain "Gestalten, die ihrer [gemeiner Leute] Art und Weise und ihrer Natur so gema/3 sind." He rejects the judgment of scholars in regard to such works: "in Dingen des Geschmackes und der Vergniigungen hat das Volk seine Rechte, und die, welche fur dasselbe arbeiten, sollen darauf achten" (219). In a similar manner he criticizes both the aristocracy and the intellectuals in the seventeenth century. If the latter had taken a stand against the "Auslanderei," then the former would never have succumbed. As it was, Opitz's reform failed to re-establish the true German spirit and the period is remarkable rather for the number than for the quality of its poets: "Kennst du Einen, so kennst du alle" (234). It is in respect to the novel, however, that Schroer reveals most explicitly his moral convictions. The novel as a genre is "der Poesie feindlich" (244) and through its early popularity reduced the public for whom "eigentliche Poesie noch Bediirfnis war" (245). Later, in connection with Wieland's contribution to the novel, he argues that its popularity is the result of, among other things, the "Vorliebe der Zeit fur solch breites und

30

Histories of German Literature

gemeines Ausspinnen ... das Zeichen einer Zeit, wo an die Stelle des Vaterlandsinnes und der Begeisterung fur gro/?e Thaten und gro/Je Helden nur die Neigung zum hauslichen Wohlbehagen und solche Empfindungen treten" (343). Very much in the manner of late eighteenth century moralists he claims that this genre leads "zur Verweichlichung und Erschlaffung" (345). Although he is less critical of novelists in the later periods, he can nevertheless not refrain from criticizing the genre as such again: "war durch den Roman [in the Romantic period] wieder der Fortschritt zum Besseren und Besten aufgehalten" (II, 123). Schroer dates the modern poetic reformation from 1773 (Gotz von Berlichingeri), at which time "Poesie" became "Gemeingut des ganzen Volkes" (II, 102). However, the initial success faded; there was no permanent success and this is blamed again largely on the intellectuals and foreign influences. Kant's philosophy, with its emphasis on "das Sittliche" as the basis for "das Schone," had a negative influence on poetry, as did also the theories of the Schlegels, of whom Friedrich in particular sharply attacked for his criticism of Luther. Scott, Byron, and the French Romantics were all a negative influence on writers of the early nineteenth century, with the result that the German Romantics "entweder nichts als gespreizte Formen ohne Inhalt oder bis zum Ungenie/Jbaren wunderliche Schopfungen boten" (II, 241-2), while the poets of Junges Deutschland ("eigentliche Dichter waren au/Jer Heine keine darunter") attacked "in ihren Schriften Sittlichkeit, Christentum und alles Alte und Ehrwiirdige" (II, 376). Schroer has harsh words for the intellectuals in general and the universities in particular (where "das Wichtige wird langweilig, das Ehrwiirdigste trivial" [II, 378]), but his severest condemnation is reserved for those of whom he cannot quote more than a few lines, "um unser Buch nicht zu verunreinen" (II, 380). Schroer begins his concluding remarks with the following statement: "Das ware nun ein Abrj/3 dessen, was unsere Dichter zur Bildung, zum Troste, zur Erheiterung und Ermuthigung, ja zur Einigung im Volksthumlichen, gedacht, empfunden und zur deutschen Harfe gesungen haben ... Verachtung aber verdient kein Dichter ... wenn er nicht etwa sein Lied mil undeutscher Sittenlosigkeit befleckte, oder zur Gemeinheit herabsank oder anerkannte Meister mit frechem Witze lasterte und iiberhaupt das Heilige und Wahre zu entweihen wagte" (II, 422-23). As proper sources of noble inspiration for present-day poets, he therefore suggests, much in the sense of Gervinus: "die Griechen, Gothe, die althochdeutsche Heldendichtung und der Minnesang, die anerkannte Muster unserer Sanger; Natur, Volksthum, deutsche Redlichkeit und Treue, Tapferkeit und Ehre, Gottesdienst im Licht und in der Wahrheit, trautes Familienleben und reine Frauenliebe" (II, 425). A rather strange example of the influence of Gervinus is the short

31 From Gervinus to Mid-Century

Geschichte der prosaischen und poetischen deutschen Nationalliteratur fur die Leser aller Stdnde by Wilhelra Zimmermann (1846), written, as the author says, "fur den nichtgelehrten Kreis und die Jugend insbesondere" (vii). The work is dedicated to Gervinus and is evidently indebted to him for such statements as "Die Geschichte der Nationalliteratur ist keine Aesthetik. Bin anderer Maa/?stab gehort fur den Aesthetiker, ein anderer fur den Nationalliteratur-Geschichtschreiber" (4). Zimmermann rejects categorizations and groupings of writers in favour of treating individuals in the context of their own time, and he emphasizes strongly the position that time will always tell, i.e., writers of merely passing worth will disappear and truly great but overlooked writers will inevitably be recognized in the end. The influence of Gervinus is clearly evident in the generalizations, but Zimmermann cannot refrain from dropping as many names as possible. In the chapter on the seventeenth century, for example, "Die Dammerung der Nacht, vor, in und nach dem dreissigjahrigen Krieg," he devotes fifteen lines to Gerhard, six to Scheffler, and follows these with: "Auch Friedrich von Spec, Heermann, Neander oder Neumann, Neumark, Gottfried Arnold, Knorr von Rosenroth und Louise Henriette von Brandenburg ... dichteten innige, kraftige geistliche Lieder" (138-9). This is a very uneven work, in fact, with a number of "errors" that one would not expect from a devotee of Gervinus. Gottfried, "der ein Monch gewesen sein soil" (61), is treated as part of the literature around King Arthur, for example, and Ossian is accepted as genuine. The most notable bias is Zimmermann's strong antipathy towards humanists and others who undermine German literature and culture by their predilection for Latin and Greek. Although Gervinus's work is lauded - at times fulsomely - by subsequent writers of literary histories, it is far more often Vilmar's work that actually provides a model. The significance of this will be discussed later; for the moment it is important to examine the extent to which Vilmar diverges from the line laid down by Gervinus. In its original form, Vilmar's work consists of lectures held in a non-academic environment for a mixed, primarily non-academic audience; these were published as Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur in 1844 (later editions simply Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur). At the time Vilmar was an amateur - in the strict sense of the word - of German literature, and when he did obtain a university post much later in life, it was as a theologian, not as a literary historian. These facts are adduced in order to account partially at least both for the flowery style and for the lengthy content summaries. Vilmar was attempting to arouse the enthusiasm of his audience for these works while depicting them "in ihrem Entstehen, ihrem Wesen, ihrer Folge nach - und ihrer Wirkung auf einander" (1). The relationship

32 Histories of German Literature between works is intended to lead "zu einem ... deutlichen Bilde ... von der innern Notwendigkeit, mit welcher die eine derselben durch die andere hervorgerufen und bedingt wurde" (2). The historical framework for Vilmar is given by the two classical periods of German literature, the existence of which makes the Germans "das eigentliche Dichtervolk unter den Nationen der Erde" (5), and which also determines the periodization scheme. The first period is that in which the Germanic spirit is in conflict with the spirit of Christianity until the latter has been thoroughly absorbed into the former ("alteste Zeit" from the middle of the fourth to the middle of the twelfth century). The middle period ("alte Zeit" from 1150 to 1624) begins with the first highpoint in German literature, which is then followed by a long decline and the first signs (1517-1624) of recovery. In the third period, from 1624 onward, there is a gradual development from a lowpoint to the second classical period, this time the result of the absorption into the German spirit of foreign influences of all kinds. Within this framework Vilmar employs a circuitous type of reasoning in order to show the "Notwendigkeit" of this developmental process. Essentially he argues that, given this or that situation in literature, it was inevitable that such and such should occur - and it did. Phrases such as, "Es mu/Jte eine Zeit kommen" (330) occur frequently, and a simple example of the procedure is found on page 416: "Der Gebrauch dieser ... Ausdriicke mu/Jte dieselben ... nach und nach abnutzen, und das Verlangen ... nach starkern Reizmitteln erwecken. Das Declamierende ... mu/?te ... zum Schwulste fiihren ... es mu/?te eine Unnatur ... eintreten, die sich dann zuletzt selbst vernichtete. Und dies ist wirklich die Entwicklung ..." Clearly it is impossible not to know what happened subsequently, and it can be argued that this type of reasoning differs little from any which finds the present explained by the past. In Vilmar's case, however, this type of reasoning is closely connected with a generally sententious approach which leads to sweeping generalizations and apodictic statements. By this is meant not so much the type of philosophic comment, "da/? das Steigen und das Fallen ... in der dichterischen Thatigkeit eines ganzen Volkes zunachst eben so als naturgema/te Zustande aufgefa/3t sein wollen wie Bewegung und Ruhe, Einathmen und Ausathmen ..." (39), or: "Es ist eine ganz allgemein zugestandene Wahrheit, da/3 ein Volk, welches sich beharrlich gegen alle fremde Elemente straubt ... allmahlich in sich selbst erstarrt und verknochert" (329-30); but rather the kind of statement related to individual works or literary situations, such as (in relation to Gottfried versus Wolfram): "Geschieht es doch iiberall, da/3 da wo gro/te Geister mit Ernst und Nachdruck auf das Hohere und Ewige hinweisen, Mi/?fallen und Widerspruch um so starker rege werden" (178-9); or (in relation to the troubles of the fourteenth

33

From Gervinus to Mid-Century

century): "In einer solchen Zeit ist kein Raura fur Poesie" (283) and "Die Zeit, in welcher der menschliche Geist sich mil ausschlie/Jlichem Eifer und gliicklichem Erfolg auf die Bewaltigung der Natur ... wirft, ist niemals weder eine sittlich gro/3e noch eine poetisch gro/3e Zeit" (285). In these and many such similar instances, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Vilmar is preaching to his audience, that he is attempting to inculcate ethical and moral principles which are not only the sole basis for great works of literature but also their very content. One of the major characteristics of Vilmar's work is, in other words, his close examination and evaluation of the content of literary works in terms of their moral values. In this he does not of course differ greatly from many of his predecessors, but he does express himself more strongly than most. Equally strongly he inveighs against foreign (which means in this case almost exclusively French) influences in German literature. Here he does not restrict himself to commenting on past attitudes but draws also on the present, as in the case of the Arthurian material which, though it is basically Celtic, may owe much of its immorality to the "franzosischen Leichtfertigkeit, Frivolitat und Lusternheit," for just such material is likely still to appear "in irgend einer der frivolsten Schilderungen der franzosischen Neuzeit" (174-5). In such negative comments Vilmar develops a rhetoric that must surely have had a considerable impact on his audience, as it also seems to have had on his successors in the field. His style, in fact, while it is not a radically new development, is nonetheless at times distinctly florid and echoes of it are to be found in many works throughout the remainder of the century. Herewith, in conclusion, his comparison of the two highpoints of German literature: Jenes Bliitenalter ist eine Waldheide, voll iippigen Graswuches, voll duftiger Waldkrauter, voll wilder Blumen, die vom Felsen herab hangen, aus dichtverwachsenem griinem Gebusch halb heimlich hervorschauen, und die einsame Waldwiese am rauschenden Gebirgsbach hinab in dichtgedrangten Gruppen mit ihren bunten zarten Kopfchen schmiicken; Bienen summen iiber die Heide und verbergen sich in den tiefen blauen Kelchen der Waldglockenblumen; auf den Zweigen singt das Rothkehlchen sein einfaches Lied fiber den Blumen, und aus dem Dickicht schallt der frohliche Gesang der Drossel und der tiefe Schlag der Amsel. Dieses neue Bliitenalter ist ein urbar gemachtes Grundstuck, mit barter Arbeit der Wildnis abgewonnen und zum zierlichen glanzenden Garten umgestaltet; iiber das kunstreiche Gatter nicken fremde, seltsame Straucher mit kostlichen Blumendolden ...

and so on and so forth - complete with "Gewachshaus" and "Goldfische im Marmorbecken" (442-3).

2 From the Middle of the Nineteenth Century to Scherer (1883)

Very many histories of German literature appeared in the third quarter of the nineteenth century, and it is difficult to discern any general trend in approach, even though there are evident changes in format. It is equally difficult to categorize them satisfactorily, and one is forced to fall back, initially at least, on the type of public envisioned by the titles or on the authors' own statements concerning the intended audience. This produces three broad categories: works for a general audience, works for school and home, and works specifically for school use. Approximately one hundred such works were examined for the period 1852 to 1883. There are of course other factors that could be used as a basis for categorization, such as the intent to appeal to a female audience or the desire to provide text collections, and these will make it necessary at times to discuss works across categories rather than solely within these initial limits. The only formal elements that suggest specific categories or cross categories are the already traditional tabular form, the catechism, and the new type of heavily illustrated work that appears around 1880. There seems to be neither rhyme nor reason why several works should appear in the same year, while at other times several years might pass without a new work, but the year 1853 provides at least an interesting point of departure. Eight works of widely different nature, but conveniently representing recognizable types, appeared then, and these are (in alphabetical order): F.J. Giinther, Die deutsche Literatur in ihren Meistern mil einer Auswahl charakteristischer Beispiele fur gebildete Leser H. Holland, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit besonderer

35 From Mid-Century to Scherer

Berucksichtigung der bildenden Kunst T. Homberg, Geschichte der schonen Literatur der Deutschen fiir Frauen A. Kniittel, Geschichte der schonen Literatur der Deutschen mil Beispielen. Fiir hohere Tochterschulen und zum Selbstunterrichte H. Kurz, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mil Proben aus den Werken der vorzuglichsten Dichter (first fascicle 1851, first volume completed and preface 1853) J.W. Schaefer, Tabellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Zum Gebrauch in hoheren Lehranstalten J. Scherr, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur K.J. Schroer, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. EinLehr- und Lesebuch fur Schule und Haus. Of these eight, four may be considered as for general use (Giinther, Holland, Kurz, Scherr). One is for school and home (Kniittel), one for women (Homberg), one in tabular form for schools (Schaefer), and one may be regarded as foreign (Schroer), since it is published in Pest, also a school and home work. Schroer will therefore not be discussed at this point, and Holland's work will be omitted, since only the first volume of his work was published. Of these works, that by Kurz is the most substantial and at the same time the most traditional in outlook, although, like a few authors before him and many after him, he argues that his work has a different approach, one that will satisfy a hitherto unsatisfied requirement. His work is written "fur das gro/Jere Publikum" (v), and he intends to treat each author in such a way that the reader will be able to form his own judgment as to the quality of that author. Each period is prefaced by an analysis in which he proposes, "diejenigen Punkte kraftig hervorzuheben, welche auf die Gestaltung und den Charakter der deutschen Poesie von wesentlichem Einflusse waren" (vii). These introductions are quite long and provide ample detail about the political circumstances of the time. The purpose of the extensive text samples is to enable the reader to be "vom Urtheile des Verfassers unabhangig" (v), but by his selection of texts, it is presumably Kurz's intention to show how German literature is "ihrem unverkennbaren Charakter nach durchaus volksthiimlich ... wie keine andere" (vii). For each author Kurz provides then essentially bio-bibliographical information, a characterization, and sample texts. Something of a novelty is the inclusion of portraits of major authors. Scherr's work is also written for a general public and is "therefore" uncluttered by bibliographical and other details, but his emphasizes the need for an historian to make his own judgments about literature rather than relying, as so many in his view do, on such sources as Gervinus and Hillebrand. He claims to have been influenced neither by

36

Histories of German Literature

"voriibergehenden Parteizwecken und Parteistimmungen" nor by the "Heuchelei" which is the reason, "da/3 sogenannte Literaturgeschichten, in welchen das aus Gervinus und Hillebrand Ausgeschriebene rait etwelchem frommen Augenaufschlag und mit den plump gezeichneten Arabesken orthodoxer Salbung verquickt und verbramt wurde, neuestens so reichlich Lob erndteten" (x). This is a more popular type of work, for it is brief (a little over two hundred pages) and skims very quickly over the earlier and linguistically more difficult periods. Indeed it appeared first as part of an encyclopedia of popular education, the "Bildungshalle im Sinne und Geiste unserer Zeit." The style, though, is precisely what Kurz would reject, for it consists of broad generalizations about literary developments and the qualities of individual authors with a minimum of facts and no original sources. There are portraits of fifty major authors. Given the chronology as we know it, Scherr could not have had the work of Homberg in mind when he inveighed against those who re-hashed Gervinus and Hillebrand; Homberg, however, openly admits that she has carried out "kein selbstandiges Quell ens tudium" (vii), and lists her favoured sources in the preface; she also quotes liberally from the two mentioned above. The reason for citing this work is not as an example of lack of independence, but as a work written for a specific audience, namely, for women. Reference has already been made above to literary historical works for a female audience, an audience that ranged from the individual to the school or the cultured salon; but the works previously mentioned were written by men, and did not in any case take the traditional form of a work for a general audience. In the case of works written for school use, the attitude of the author to the audience is clearly determined by the teacher to pupil relationship, and it is therefore unimportant whether the author is male or female. In the case of works written for an adult female audience, the question arises as to whether the more appropriate comparison is with other works written by women or with works written for women by men. In the following the audience will be considered the more significant element. In this instance it seems that the selection of works and the organization of the material are dependent on existing histories of literature, and that the general format differs in no way from similar works for a mixed audience. What indications there are of a feminine approach suggest that the authoress has adopted a point of view that is equally dependent on the works of her male counterparts, which is to say, she assumes the traditional posture of sensibility and strict morality. She urges her readers, for example, to read the battle scenes in the Nibelungenlied "ohne weibliches Vorurteil" (93); Gottfried's Tristan is too shocking to discuss; Wieland and his followers (especially Heinse) are condemned as immoral, as is also the modern tendency to introduce politics into literature. If there is

37 From Mid-Century to Scherer any indication of independence in this work, it lies in the rejection of a literature that has been "herabgewiirdigt, fortan das Organ der politischen Zeittendenzen zu sein" (593) or the vehicle for that matter of any tendency. "Tendenzdichtung" is simply rejected as unworthy, and in this Homberg is clearly following the line that literature must remain idealistic and pure - the implication being that for women at least anything else is unthinkable. Knuttel's work, although of the school and home variety, is also written with women in mind, for he subtitles his work Fur hohere Tochterschulen und zum Selbstunterrichte, and claims to have written it to replace the now outdated work of Nosselt (1833, written "fiir das weibliche Geschlecht, besonders fiir hohere Tochterschulen"). The one unusual feature of Kniittel's work is his division of literary history into only two basic parts: "Dichtung ohne Einflu/3 der Gelehrsamkeit" up to 1624, and "Deutsche Dichtung in den Handen der gelehrten Bildung" thereafter. Otherwise he adheres very largely to traditional views on those works he has selected with his female audience in mind, with considerable emphasis on the moral aspects of literature. His description of Gottfried's Tristan, for example, contains the following: "Die weltliche, nicht die hohere Seite der Weiblichkeit und des Ritterthums stellt er dar ... Der Eindruck bleibt dock, da/3 die Ungenirtheit, womit auch in dieser Artussage von ehrlosen Handlungen und selbstsiichtigem Genusse geredet wird, keineswegs ein gunstiges Licht auf die sittliche Bildung des Ritterstandes wirft, vielmehr geeignet ist, den Unterschied zwischen seinen Sitten und Sittlichkeit recht klar zu zeigen" (38). A strongly Christian attitude is evinced also by Giinther, the only one of this group to take a peculiarly personal stance, and one, moreover, that the author is sure will not find favour with many "Scheinchristen," but that he feels impelled to put forward. Giinther's ideology is made clear from the very beginning, his main thesis being the belief not simply that the Germans have achieved (at times) a fusion of the Germanic and Christian spirit, but that they are divinely destined: "Diesem Volk der Germanen mit seiner ungebrochenen Kraft, mit seinem tiefen Gemuth, mit seiner sittlichen Unverdorbenheit, war in Gottes Rath die Weltherrschaft bestimmt" (2). Earlier civilizations were unable to retain their culture as a result of their "Sittenverderbnis," and only a few remnants of the old world were capable of adopting Christianity. Of these, the Germans were able (destined) to absorb both Christianity as well as the cultural heritage of the Greeks, the Romans, and the Orient. Giinther's major concern is therefore the tracing of German progress towards the ultimate goal which is, broadly speaking, moral leadership in the world; and "sittlich" or "unsittlich" are the terms that are constantly used in the analysis of periods, authors, or individual works.

38

Histories of German Literature

The initial impetus to write this literary history came, he claims, from the publisher, and he was at first not anxious to make his views public, for he felt he could not sweeten them enough to please the general public. His scruples were overcome only by observing the cowardly caution of those who pay only lip service to Christian ideals. His aim is to provide "eine ... fiir den Gebildeten lesbare, wenn auch mehr lehrende als unterhaltende, Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte und eine eingehendere Beurtheilung ihrer hervorragendsten Meister" (iv). Giinther's historical framework is the progress of true, i.e., Protestant, Christianity, and his divisions reflect this. The "modern" periods are named "das Zeitalter der gehemmten Reformation" (seventeenth century), "das Zeitalter der neu versuchten Reformation und der Auklarung," and "das Zeitalter der fortgesetzten Reformation." With this scheme as a basis, it is not surprising to find that the historical background is largely restricted to religious wars, sectarian matters, and the relative morality or immorality of the (various segments of the) populace. Nor is it surprising to find - the Reformation being German and the Germans by nature a "sittliches Volk" - that foreign influences are almost without exception immoral and destructive. The function of a true poet is to instil Christian virtues into the reader: "Ein Dichter darf weder ein Possenrei/Jer, noch ein Verfiihrer, er soil ein Lehrer der Menschen sein, ein Erzieher durch das Schone zum Schonen" (144). Such a "Verfiihrer" was Gottfried von Strasburg "wer also die Bildung seines Geistes, wer sein Talent dazu mi/8braucht, dem Leser den Abscheu gegen die Siinde aus der Seele herauszuschmeicheln ... der ist eben ein Verfiihrer, kein Lehrer ... ein Dichter ist er nicht" (144), and one would hardly expect any other judgment on Gottfried. However, Hartmann von Aue fares little better, for his Armer Heinrich is described as "eine unschone Bearbeitung eines ekelhaften Gegenstandes und eine Herabwiirdigung echter Weiblichkeit" (121), and his Arthurian works are dismissed as nonsensical. Giinther can find the behaviour of the heroes in the Nibelungenlied praiseworthy only after convincing himself that the entire work is pre-Christian, and even then he can find no good in Krimhild, whom he characterizes as "nie der Liebe fahig" and motivated only by "Rachsucht" and "Eitelkeit" (79). And so the author goes on through German literature, assessing the extent to which this or that work contributed to the evangelical cause and finding very little to praise. The first sign of a new phase, after the Reformation had run aground, came with Klopstock, but that promise was not fulfilled, certainly not by the Storm and Stress movement or even by Goethe. Schiller and his influence are seen in a much more positive light: "Es schien anfangs als wollte sie [the nineteenth century] die Entwicklung da fortsetzen, wo Schiller aufgehort hatte, als wollte sie

39 From Mid-Century to Scherer nachholen, was das vorige Jahrhundert in der Nachahmung Klopstocks versaumt hatte. Aber es war nur Schein" (455). Modern literature "hat das deutsche Reformationswerk wenig gefordert, viel gehemrat, noch mehr bekampft" (455). The Romantics and others are therefore rejected, but Giinther is consoled by the thought that the absurdities of Romantic literature and the over-estimation of the value of poetry will teach people "den richtigen Unterschied zwischen Zeitvertreibern, Volksverfuhrern und Volkslehrern, d.i. echten Volksdichtern" (456). He believes that the public is so sated by the quantity and the lack of anything new in recent literature that it will seek and find a new Klopstock, "einen Dichter, der mit gleicher Ursprunglichkeit und Begabung auf Grund des Alterthums, Deutschthums und Christenthums die Begeisterung der edelsten und in Folge davon des ganzen Volkes fur diese Giiter neu erwecken und uns vor Allem von der schrecklich um sich wuchernden Auslanderei oder Weltliteratur erlosen kann" (457). Giinther is longing for a new "Mann des Jahrhunderts" (originally applied to Luther) who will restore to literature its moral purpose and to Germany its moral leadership. These eight works provide, then, some sub-classes that will be useful for further groupings; in addition to the larger general works, there are much shorter general works, works for a female audience (and/or by women), and works of a specifically religious cast. Works for schools are of two kinds, that is, those that are restricted to a school audience (of varying types) and those that also include the general public. And finally there are the formally distinct works, such as tables and catechisms. Among the larger general histories of German literature in the third quarter of the nineteenth century is that produced by Wolfgang Menzel, a literary historian who was mentioned above, but whose earlier work, Die deutsche Literatur (1828, revised 1836), was not analysed, as it did not provide an historical survey but only essays on particular aspects of literature. It was not until 1858 that Menzel produced a comprehensive work in three volumes, Deutsche Dichtung von der dltesten bis auf die neueste Zeit, and this was re-issued in 1875 under the title Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung .... In the preface to this work Menzel assigns earlier "Lehrbucher" to two classes: those that provide merely facts and those that characterize the authors and literary schools, neither of which classes provides sufficient content analysis to enable the reader to understand what it is all about. It is Menzel's intention to provide for the first time the "Inhaltsausziige" which will give the reader "einen deutlichern Begriff von Kunstdenkmalern ... als es alles Gerede dariiber vermochte" (vii). And in addition to the traditional canon, he plans to include areas hitherto neglected, i.e., orally transmitted literature and works by Germans in Latin and French. Menzel then explains his own point of view about literature, the

40

Histories of German Literature

factors on which his own evaluations are based. In summary, these comprise aesthetic quality: "zuerst nach dem poetischen Werthe gefragt werden mu/J" (vii), national spirit, and Christian faith: "Die deutsche Poesie vermag ... sich weder von der Nation, noch vom Christenthum zu irgend einer selbstandigen und dauerhaften Neugestaltung abzulosen" (ix). Nothing is said, however, of any belief in an historical design or in a pattern of development in literary history. Neither here in the preface nor in the body of the book (for example, in the passages preceding the different epochs) is anything said about the why and wherefore of literary trends. Menzel's periodization follows a traditional pattern: "Mittelalter," "Burgerliche Meistersangerei," "Verwilderung im Reformationszeitalter," "Renaissance," and so forth, but these periods are neither justified nor (adequately) described. The introduction to the meistersinger period, for example, consists of fifteen lines of platitudes about the decline of chivalry, the rise of scholasticism, etc. The material is then organized by genre and subject with little or no regard for chronology and interrelationship; the main emphasis is on the content of works and there are many quotations. The chief characteristic is therefore the idiosyncratic nature of many of Menzel's judgments, which appear to be based partly on personal ethics and partly on an innate antipathy towards those considered by the majority to be great figures in literature. Menzel's attitude towards Goethe is too well known to need repeating here, but his treatment of Lessing in this work is on the same plane. Lessing is bitterly attacked for his anti-Christian and pro-Jewish stance. Opitz's contributions to German poetry are belittled as much as possible, and he is accused of introducing "eine nie vorher bekannte Schweifwedelei" (303) into literature. He was, Menzel concludes, "ein oberflachlicher, seelenloser Modemensch" (305). Here and elsewhere Menzel emphasizes not just the errors of poets that were influenced by foreign models, but also the basic immorality of these foreign, especially French, models. This is nowhere more evident than in the medieval period. He objects to the subjectivity in the Minnesang, "die Anma/Jung des eitlen Ich" (313), and says of the Arthurian works: "die alterthumliche deutsche Sitte hat sich hier vollstandig in welsche Unsitte verkehrt" (345). Throughout his work, Menzel's aim is to emphasize the truly Christian qualities of German "Volksthiimlichkeit" and to demonstrate when and how these qualities appeared in literary works. This is why he spends so much time on clerical works in the Middle Ages and deplores the lack of respect which these receive from literary historians. The moral qualities seem at times to outweigh both the aesthetic and nationalistic factors, as when he argues in relation to Hutten: "In seiner patriotischen Erziirnung

41

From Mid-Century to Scherer

vermissen wir das sittliche Moment" (121). Although the introduction of folk (oral) and Latin material into a history of German literature is a novelty, Menzel nevertheless follows an already traditional line of moral as well as literary evaluation. Five years after Menzel's work appeared, Roquette published an extensive but rather ordinary Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (two volumes 1862, 1863), written for the educated layman and intended to give him "eine anschauliche Ubersicht der Hauptepochen" (II, v). However, the material on the nineteenth century is very sketchy and does not go beyond 1830, "dem Anfangspunkt einer neuen Periode, die wir noch nicht ubersehen, oder vorurtheilsfrei betrachten konnen" (II, vi). The earlier periods are dealt with in a strictly traditional manner, and there is rarely any deviation from accepted judgments. There is mild criticism of the high esteem in which medieval literature is held: "die gelehrte Forschung ... geht ... in der Werthschatzung derselben haufig iiber das Maass hinaus, indem sie das philologische Interesse an die Stelle des asthetischen Urtheils setzt" (II, 176). And where the rise of bourgeois literature in the cities during the Renaissance and Reformation is concerned, he points out that these cities lie chiefly in the North, where the character of the people tends in any case more towards "Reflexion" and "Verstand" than towards "Gemiit." There is very little historical background material in this work and no theoretical framework; Roquette merely passes from one traditional epoch to another with a minimum of explanation. The individual authors are treated in the usual fashion with some plot summary, but no quotations or sample passages. Before passing on to the next group of larger works, mention must be made of the Geschichte der deutschen Literatur by Wilhelm Wackernagel. The publishing history of this work is complex, but the essential facts are that the first fascicle appeared in 1848, the first part was complete (with title page) in 1851, and the work remained incomplete on the author's death in 1869. Those parts of this heavily scholarly work that were published cover the period up to the Thirty Years' War, and they were subsequently reissued under the title Geschichte der deutschen Literatur bis zum dreissigjdhrigen Krieg. According to the author's own statement, it seems that the work would have ended with Ruckert. Wackernagel's history is based on the familiar tripartite division into Old, Middle, and New High German, and these periods are defined in political, social, and linguistic, as well as in literary terms, e.g., "Zeit der Mundarten ... der Geistlichen / der Hofsprache ... der Edeln / der Schriftsprache ... der Biirgerlichen" (32-33). Aside from the very strong emphasis on the Reformation, the most remarkable feature of this work is the concept, sketched primarily in the "Vorwort" (29-30) and in the "Einleitung" to the modern period (362-5),

42

Histories of German Literature

of Germany's role as world leader. Essentially, Wackernagel argues that Germany's literature developed more slowly than that of other Germanic (European) peoples, but for that reason is "reicher und mannigfaltiger" (30). Driven also by "dem Drange nach au/3en" (363), it absorbed influences from the past and from foreign literatures and is now "auf dem Weg, und vielleicht schon nah am Ende des Wegs, eine WELTLITERATUR zu werden" (363). After the Classical period any further development was unthinkable, and the confusion of the following decades cannot disguise "die Gewi/3heit der nun mehr anbrechenden Weltliteratur" (364-5). By this, Wackernagel seems to mean a German literature that is not simply of world-class quality, but dominant in the world. A group of fairly substantial general works does not appear until several years after Roquette's work (1863). These are Menge's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1877, 444p.), Gortzitza's Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur (1878, 540p.), and in 1880 Weitbrecht's Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung (454p.) and Sehrwald's Deutsche Dichter undDenker (2 vols., 1076p.). None of these shows any originality, and they vary only in detail. Menge's work was originally designed for school use, while Gortzitza's was intended primarily for girls' schools and still has girls primarily in mind: "Fiir Madchen, dann fur Freunde der Litteraturgeschichte uberhaupt bestimmt, wirft sie alien gelehrten Ballast so viel als moglich iiber Bord" (v). He makes only a very brief survey, therefore, of the earlier periods (twenty pages on the literature before 1720!). Menge defines the aim of literary history as follows: "Die Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur hat demnach die Aufgabe, eine Bekanntschaft mit den wichtigsten Schriften des deutschen Volkes zu vermitteln, insofern sich in deren Form und Inhalt das geistige Leben abspiegelt und erkennen la/3t" (1). He provides both the familiar trite introductions to each period and the standard characterizations, having emphasized in the preface that he lays no claim to originality and intends to allow his sources to speak for themselves as much as possible. His guiding lights are Vilmar (medieval) and Gottschall (modern). Gortzitza is equally modest and hopes only that his work will prove to be a not unintelligent compilation. After a very brief introduction to each period, he lists poets and schools primarily by genre. A particular feature of his work are the lists of titles and first lines of the best poems of poets discussed. Weitbrecht is a perfectly straightforward work in the standard format. He has some plot summaries but rarely uses quotations. Sehrwald is somewhat more nationalistic than most, noting in his preface that "die Gabe des Gesanges seit uraltesten Zeiten in einem besonderen Grade unserm Volke innewohnt." He asks (rhetorically): "Warum kommen unsern Erklarern Dante's und Shakespeare's die keiner

43

From Mid-Century to Scherer

fremden Nation gleich?" and claims, "so weit sich die Goethe'sche Iphigenia von den Euripideischen unterscheidet, so weit ragt unsere Literatur an hoherern edlerem Gehalt iiberhaupt iiber die anderen Nationen hervor" (5). He also brings up the "mission" of the Germans: "Kein Volk aber scheint so berufen gewesen zu sein, das Christentum in sich aufzunehmen" (12), but perhaps the most interesting feature of his work is his survey of possible periodization schemes, and his decision to lay emphasis on political rather than religious turning points or literary "Bliiteperioden." The four modern periods (post-Reformation) are described as "Kirchliche Befreiung" (to 1618), "Erstarrung des Nationalen Lebens" (1618-1740), "Poetisch-philosophischer Aufschwung" (1740-1813), and "Poetisch-nationaler Aufschwung" (from 1813). Brief general works similar to Scherr's, are those by Merseburger (1860), Kurz (1860), and Sanders (1879), approximately 250, 300, and 150 pages respectively. Kurz's work is simply an extract or precis of his larger work discussed above, while Merseburger's work seems to have been written specifically as a short guide: "es ist fur solche bestimmt, die auf die leichteste Weise die Hauptmomente der deutschen, besonders neueren, Literaturgeschichte kennen lernen wollen, ohne sich in ein griindliches Studium zu vertiefen" (iv). Merseburger's work is of some interest, if only because it went through several editions and, according to the author, was used in schools across Europe and translated into Swedish (see chapter 5). There is little to explain this popularity, for the work does not differ noticeably from others of the same type. It merely offers the familiar periodization, and within these periods, brief introductions to the character of the period, followed by biographical notes and characterizations of the writers. There are many quotations from secondary sources and only a few sample texts. It is therefore a neat and compact but essentially characterless work, one minor point of interest being Merseburger's suggestion that, since so many literary histories have already been written, one could easily write "eine eigene Geschichte der deutschen Literaturgeschichte" (iv). Sanders' work is even briefer and, since there is no introduction, it is impossible to know for what purpose it is written. In fact it is a quite primitive summary of facts and general characterizations. Periods are described in only a few lines each, and within each period there are divisions by schools, with a paragraph or two for each writer. Even at this time, Sanders adheres to the tradition of ending with Goethe, unlike Merseburger, who brings the lists of authors and works right up to date. However, Sanders' work was extended to cover the nineteenth century when it was re-issued by Dumcke in 1905. After the work of Homberg in 1853 there are few works for a general female audience, and none of these rises above the ordinary; Hoefer's

44

Histories of German Literature

Deutsche Literaturgeschichte fiir Frauen und Jungfrauen (1876) is the most substantial. It is his aim, "ohne lange historische, philosophische und asthetische Deductionen, die einzelnen Perioden zu charakterisieren, die Ubergange zu verdeutlichen, die fortschreitende Entwickelung darzulegen" (vi). His main source is Koberstein, and he claims that, while his work is written primarily for women, this has not influenced him in the writing of it! As in the case of several other works around this time, Hoefer concentrates on modern literature and sharply reduces the survey of literature before the eighteenth century, in this case to a mere thirty pages. The other works for or by women - aside, that is, from those intended strictly for educational institutions (see below) - are of the school-and-home variety. Elisabeth Maier's Leitfaden (1852) is a short and very primitive and unoriginal work. Klotilde von der Horst's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur ... (1869) is equally simplistic in its literary historical part, but is intended primarily to supply a substantial collection of texts (ca 1200 pages in three volumes). Her definition of literary history is sufficient evidence of the simplistic approach: "Die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur macht uns also bekannt mit dem Gang, den unsere Sprache in ihrer Entwickelung genommen, mit den Werken, welche die Deutschen auf dem Gebiete der Poesie und Prosa hervorgebracht, und mit den Schriftstellern dieser Werke" (1). The few pages of introduction to each traditional period offer no new insights and there are indications, at least in the early period, of lack of familiarity with the texts, for example, in the errors in the plot summary of Tristan und Isolde. Turning now to those general works with a predominantly religious cast (as with Giinther), the next is Eichendorffs Geschichte der poetischen Literatur Deutschlands (1857). This begins with a relatively short and even succinct expression of the theory which underlies the work as a whole. Eichendorff bases himself initially on the quality of the German character which he sees as wholly wrapped up in thought rather than with a desire for action. For this reason, and because new ideas must always be explored, the Germans have sought out and absorbed ideas from everywhere: "Wir sind die geistigen Erben fast aller gebildeten Nationen" (12). Concentration on thought, on the inner life, leads to inwardness and a consequent individualism, a vast variety of ideas: "Universalitat und individuelle Mannigfaltigkeit" are the result. The literature of the Germans shows a bewildering variety, and an analytical survey of German literature in its entirety therefore becomes extremely difficult. In order to expose the "klares, organisches Bild" (14), it is essential to find the single unifying factor that will provide a key to the whole.

45 From Mid-Century to Scherer Eichendorff surveys the various approaches to literary history, and rejects first the aesthetic approach on the grounds that these values are relative to the author's time and cannot be adequately judged from the historian's present; he rejects also the chronological-geographical approach as being based on divisions which are extraneous to the spirit of literature, which is not to be confined either in chronological or spatial bounds (he is referring here to the traditional periodization and local divisions used by so many authors). Even the so-called national standpoint (the conformity or non-conformity to a supposed national character) has to be rejected on the ground that the chief national characteristic of the Germans is precisely their individualism; they have never been a centralized nation or one committed to a unifying intellectual or social principle, but rather a nation of individual searchers for the truth: "Die totale Verschiedenheit [ist] das Charakteristische und Nationale" (24), and this in effect is the root cause of the continual struggles and disputes that have characterized German history. Eichendorff argues that the religious standpoint is the only true guide to literary development, for all people experience religious impulses and these can only adequately be expressed in poetry. The history of poetry therefore records "das bestandig pulsierende Entfernen und wieder Zuriickkehren zu jenem religiosen Zentrum" (25). Poetry, like religion, partakes equally of "Gefiihl, Phantasie und Verstand" (26), and where these are in a state of imbalance, i.e., where one is dominant, then there is dissonance and onesidedness. It is the task of the historian to trace through time the way in which literature sometimes fulfills, sometimes fails at its task, which is essentially "die sinnliche Darstellung des Ewigen und immer und iiberall Bedeutenden, welches auch jederzeit das Schone ist, das verhiillt das Irdische durchschimmert" (26). The history of literature therefore falls into three very broad periods, namely, the Middle Ages, the Reformation period, and the modern Age of Romanticism. In the Middle Ages there took place that fusion of Germanic "Heldentum" with Christianity, whose succinct expression is knighthood, "auf dem die christliche Poesie des Mittelalters ruht" (42). This is true Romantic poetry, "Poesie des Unendlichen, die das Irdische nur als Vorbereitung und Symbol des Ewigen darzustellen suchte" (41). The Reformation is the culminating point of tendencies that had long been at work undermining the medieval Romantic spirit. It produced not merely a new attitude towards religion but a complete break with the past. Writers therefore turned back to pre-Christian, classical models and created forms that divorced them from the populace. Klopstock is the highpoint and end of this tradition, for, though he uses Christian material, his form is classical and the approach subjective; the Messias never became a

46

Histories of German Literature

popular work despite its initial success. The "revolutionare Emanzipation der Subjektivitat" (93) led in time to the philosophers of the eighteenth century who all treated what are in effect religious problems in an intellectual manner; the subject rather than God had become the centre of the universe, and the culmination of this tendency was Fichte. Throughout the whole of the eighteenth century there is therefore a continuous succession of literary, religious, and philosophical sects, until the ideas coalesce - or nearly - in the figures of Goethe and Schiller. Neither of these quite succeeds in uniting the two sides: "Schiller suchte das Christentum ohne Christus, den Frieden zwischen dem Sinnlichen und Unsichtbaren ohne eine hohere Vermittelung, einzig und allein durch die selbstandige sittliche Freiheit, zu welcher die Kunst den Menschen erziehen sollte, die aber auf diesem einseitigen Wege notwendig von dem ewig unbefriedigenden Konflikt zwischen Ideal und Wirklichkeit befangen bleiben mu/?te. - Fiir Goethe dagegen war dieser Konflikt nicht vorhanden. Die Natur mit ihren mannigfachen Gebilden war ihm die ganze Offenbarung und der Dichter nur der Spiegel der Weltseele ... Beide Dichter hatten ... die gro/3e Aufgabe fast bis zur Losung gefiihrt; es fehlte nur noch die Stimme, die es wagte das Zauberwort auszusprechen, um die hohere Vermittelung beider Ansichten zur Erscheinung zu bringen" (241). The "Zauberwort" was spoken by those dissatisfied with the dichotomy, by the Romantics, "ein neues Geschlecht ... es verlangte nach einem wesentlicheren Inhalte ... So wurde es auf das Positive wieder hingefuhrt. Goethes Wirklichkeit und Schillers Ideal hatten fur dasselbe nur Bedeutung in bezug auf ein Drittes iiber ihnen, wo beide bereits versohnt und eins sind: auf die Menschwerdung Christi, des gottlichen Vermittlers von Natur und Freiheit" (242). The Romantics therefore became the new "Ritter des Christentums," but they did not hold sway for very long. While they fought earnestly against the forces of rationalism, they often did so without a firm faith in the new philosophy; they fought for the form rather than for the principle. This was the root cause of the Romantic irony which enabled the opponents of Romanticism, and not just the Romantics themselves, to undermine the new unity of people, church, and state. All the old ideas poured back again, with the result that the post-Romantic period is one of complete chaos: "Es ist eine blo/te Ubergangsperiode, alles noch im Kreisen und Garen begriffen, und wir mu/ften eigentlich hier schlie/ten; denn es ist ganz unmoglich, ein Chaos zu umschreiben" (409). The only general tendency that Eichendorff perceives is the old Protestant trait: "man kann diese Literatur im ganzen als ... eine restaurierte Poesie des Verstandes bezeichnen" (409). This history of German literature has at least a coherent and consistent theory behind it, whatever one may think of the analyses of individual

47

From Mid-Century to Scherer

works and writers, of the anti-French attitude, or of other personal idiosyncracies. Moreover, the distribution of the material in the various periods and genres is well balanced, at least until the Romantic period. Here Eichendorff, himself of course closely involved with many of the writers that he describes, abandons the panoramic approach and deals instead systematically with each individual writer. He abandons the historical framework in favour of a series of cameo portraits, and the only relation to the wider context is provided by the occasional generalizations about poetry per se, generalizations of the same kind (i.e., what poetry is and so forth) that occur throughout the work. In Eichendorff s work the religious concept provides the basis for an historical scheme, for a view of the development of literature as a whole. With Lindemann, although he wishes his work to be considered alongside that of Eichendorff and others, we return to a work in which the religious viewpoint is primarily the justification for literary judgments. Lindemann accepts the traditional periodization (the Classical period is given as stretching from Klopstock "bis zum gro/?en Weltkrieg" [471]), and the description of historical background and individual authors is equally traditional in format. The moral and/or Catholic emphasis is, however, very strong. Of the Tristan legend he writes: "Wenn irgendwo in der schonen Poesie Gift liegt, dann hier; und wie der Held endlich dem vergifteten Speer erliegt ... so sind unter Abfassung des vergifteten Liedes zwei Sanger gestorben, Meister Gottfried und Karl Immermann" (131). Of Hutten he writes: "Sein Name ist wie Scheidewasser, sein Auftreten ist Scandal, sein kurzes Leben Unstetigkeit und Unsitte" (332-3). In his survey of the sixteenth century Lindemann argues that German prose, the Kirchenlied, and the Volkslied had all developed before Luther; he praises Murner and condemns Hutten. In the seventeenth century, "da/3 vor all dem literarisch aufgewirbelten Staub der Opitzianer und Deutschgenossenschaftlichen die Poesie gerade zu ihnen [the Catholics] sich gefliichtet hatte, das beweisen uns drei Sterne ... Spee, Balde und Angelus Silesius" (389). Needless to say, Goethe was "ein Heide mitten im Christenthum" (600). The works discussed hitherto in this chapter have been considered as written for a general audience, and the distinctions between them - with the exception of those for women - are primarily matters of scope extensive or brief - and of attitude, by which is meant essentially religious bias. There is one type of general work, however, that appears for the first time around 1880, where the distinguishing feature is formal. This is the heavily illustrated book for the home, the coffee-table literary history that was to prove so immediately and lastingly successful. There had of course been some illustrations in earlier works, the most frequent being portraits of great writers. Brenning had even included some addi-

48

Histories of German Literature

tional illustrative material. But in the new form the idea is not simply to provide a modicum of decoration or supplement the text by aiding the reader to understand the character of a poet through the inclusion of a portrait, but rather to present the historical record visually. The first work in this style and the classic work of its kind is Konig's Deutsche Literaturgeschichte (1879). Dedicated to the German home (v), this work contains innumerable coloured and black and white illustrations of manuscripts, autographs, title pages, letters, portraits, homes of writers, death masks, and so forth. Particularly in the early period, where manuscript facsimiles may be accompanied by transcriptions and translations, it is not always easy to find the text. Naturally enough, this text is very brief and contains little more than biographical details and very general comments on the individual authors. There is very little in the way of historical outline. It is noteworthy, however, that Konig, perhaps because of the nature of recent events, brings his work quite up to date and concludes with poets who laud the German victory in the Franco-Prussian war. A second work, along very similar lines, is Leixner's Illustrierte Geschichte des deutschen Schriftthums in volksthumlicher Darstellung (1880-81), the title of which is presumably intended to appeal to precisely the same audience as that envisaged by Konig. The origin of this work is obscure; apparently the publisher had planned it for several years and had obtained contributions from various writers, before the whole thing was turned over to Leixner. Whatever the original nature of the work may have been, Leixner lays great emphasis on ethical criteria in his evaluations and defends himself in the preface against critics of his approach. His response to them is as follows: "die historische Tatsache, da/9 krankhafte und unsittliche Verhaltnisse im Volksleben eine kranke und frivole Literaturstromung erzeugen, welche wieder die Unsittlichkeit fordert; die Uberzeugung, da/8 die hochsten Schopfungen unsrer Literatur den Einklang von Schonheit und hochster, edelster Sittlichkeit zeigen; die Thatsache, da/3 unser Volk viel mehr als ein anders eine Befriedigung seiner ethischen Bediirfnisse verlangt - diese Umstande mochten wohl geniigend die Berechtigung meiner Anschauungen darlegen. Wer die Litteratur im Zusammenhange mit dem nationalen Leben darstellt, kann sich von diesem Standpunkte nicht entfernen, falls er volksthiimlich bleibenwill" (v-vi). The "Volkstiimlichkeit" of Leixner's work consists first of all in a simple style, lengthy content summaries, and masses of illustrative material. Beyond this he provides biographies of the writers and characterizations of them and their works, and also a good deal of historical background. This is, however, background material, not the delineation of any historical scheme, and it provides essentially evidence of the

49

From Mid-Century to Scherer

reasons for the moral condition of the populace at any given time. Thus, for example, in the middle of chapter nine (of the second edition) the running head "Geschichtlicher Uberblick" is followed by "Sittliche Verhaltnisse" (chapter on late medieval to Renaissance). The morality or otherwise of individual authors and works takes up a considerable part of the criticism, whether it be of Gottfried, who is not "unsittlich," since he had "den Untergang der Liebenden im Auge ... also damit die Strafe" (I, 111), or Kotzebue: "Kotzebue hat mit den gelesenen Romanschriftstellern im Bund geradezu entsittlichend auf einen gro/fen Theil des deutschen Publikums gewirkt und sein Empfinden verweichlicht, sein moralisches Urtheil verdorben" (II, 327). The first edition of Leixner's work ends with a sharp attack on the inclination of the public to neglect its own writers and batten on to the translations of inferior and immoral foreign works, and with a call: "wir miissen endlich einmal das 'geistige Deutschland' so frei machen, wie es das politische geworden ist" (491). In the second edition this passage is reduced to a few lines, of which the chief content is: "Besonders stark wird es empfunden [in the period 1870-80], da/3 sich ein innerlich wiirdeloses Schrifttum ausbreitet und herrscht, dem jeder deutsche Geist, jedes sittliche Gefiihl mangelt" (1075). In the survey of the following period (added to the second edition), Leixner sees, however, a revival after 1880: "Der ethische Drang der deutschen Volksseele, den wir schon oft im Laufe der Geschichte als den Retter aus Versumpfungen wirksam gefunden haben, begann sich allerorts zu regen, auch in der Dichtung" (1077). It is clear from the closing passage that this is the result of a return, at least in some fields, "an gesunde Vorbilder der heimischen Dichtung" (2nd ed., 1102). His concluding passage is now (1892) a fervent declaration of his belief in a new socio-economic order! Konig and Leixner are the two major works in this field. There was also a short work of the school-and-home variety by Hentschel, Illustrierte deutsche Literaturkunde in Bildern und Skizzen (1882), but this is far less comprehensive and less pictorial. In a rather different vein, but also a very successful work, is Konnecke's Bilderatlas zur Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur (1887). This is mentioned here, since it derives from the same kind of impetus, but it is not a history of literature; it provides only illustrative material and relevant factual information and will therefore not be included with literary histories in the next period. Hentschel's work includes the words "fur Schule und Haus" in the title, but there is no indication of the type of school or kind of usage envisaged, nor of the general public which is addressed. It is in fact evident that the titles of so-called school and home works are not a sufficient guide either to their scope or to their intended public. Several

50

Histories of German Literature

are quite short, varying between 70 and 170 pages, and some of these, for example, Gredy (1856) and Strzemcha (1877), each of approximately 125 pages, are designed primarily for school use (in the latter case for Austrian schools). The reference to home use or "Selbstunterricht" must be construed as an attempt to encourage additional sales outside the school system; they remain school books. Others, though they may refer to schools, are directed primarily, it seems, at a wider public. Huhn, for example, writes "fiir das allgemein gebildete Publikum und fur Mittelund Hochschulen" (v). If by "Hochschulen" Huhn here means universities, this is one of the very rare examples of the inclusion of these institutions within the orbit of literary histories at this time, but he adds: "iiberhaupt fur Alle, welche Lust und Liebe zu unserer Literatur besitzen und sie genau kennen lernen wollen, ohne jedoch Zeit und Absicht zu haben tiefer zu den speziellen Quellen hinabzusteigen" (v). In 1862 Oltrogge's work is also clearly directed at a wider public: "es ... mochte nur gebildeten Laien ein Mittel sein, sich leicht auf dem Gebiete unserer Literatur zu orientieren ... Schiller, auch Lehrer hoherer Klassen nicht gelehrter Schulen, und die gebildete Frauenwelt habe ich zunachst dabei im Auge gehabt" (v). One of the vaguest definitions is that provided by Gerstenberg (1868), who writes "fiir die Jugend, die Schule und die gro/fere Masse des Volkes" (iv). Huhn and Hahn attempt, it seems, to cater specifically for a dual public insofar as the more technical material is segregated. In the former work, the general discussion of each group of writers is followed by a bio-bibliographical section (in smaller print), in which details are provided for those writers. Occasionally, as in the case of "Kirchenlieder," a list of those contributing to a particular genre is provided. In the latter case, the basic material to be learned is set in larger type, while the details suitable for those at "Gymnasien," "Realschulen," and "hohere Tochterschulen" and for autodidacts are set in smaller type. Hahn deliberately refrains from providing any scholarly apparatus. The school and home works in this period vary as much, then, in the definition of their audience as they do in size. The shortest have been mentioned; the remainder vary between two hundred and a little over six hundred pages, with the exception of Wernick, whose eleven hundred pages include a large quantity of texts. The only curious fact noted was the smaller number of such works in the 1870s as compared with the numbers in the preceding decades and in the early 1880s. The chief characteristics of these works as a group are on the one hand their lack of originality - sometimes openly admitted in the preface - and on the other, their claim to provide nevertheless something - formally, if not substantially - different. Buchner, for example, claims that literature must be seen in the context both of art and of foreign literatures; Wernick

51 From Mid-Century to Scherer writes his literary history "... mit Hinblick auf die gleichzeitigen Kunstbestrebungen" (title); and Strzemcha promises not only "ein kraftiges Hervortreten der heimischen Dichter" but to pay particular attention to "den literarischen Leistungen der Gegenwart" (I). Recent literature variously defined - tends in fact to receive more weight in these works relative to older literature. The general tendency is towards a reduction in the amount of space allotted to the medieval period, especially to Old High German literature. Beyond this there are the usual religious or moral considerations. Gredy's work, for example, is strongly Catholic. His guiding principles are "Kiirze, leichte Verstandlichkeit, Religion und Sittlichkeit" and he therefore takes "die Religion ... als Mittelpunkt und Richterin" (iii) in his judgments. On the other hand, there is little evidence of nationalistic feelings. Turning now to works designed specifically for schools, reference must first be made to those works that are non-discursive, that is to say, which are in tabular or similarly abbreviated form, for although not all such works are openly intended, as Schaefer's is, "zum Gebrauch in hoheren Lehranstalten," it is evident that this is where the audience is primarily to be found. At this time there are two main types of work, for alongside the already traditional tabular representations of German literary history, there are now catechisms, which are designed (sometimes in the form of question and answer) to prepare students for examinations. The tables are of interest inasmuch as some at least - for example, T.F. Scholl's Zeittafeln der vaterlandischen Literatur (1852) - attempt to place German literature in a wider (European) context. Other tabular works in this period are those by Bruck (1855), L. Schmidt (1863), K. Schmidt (1865), Kramer (1869), and Fricke (1870). The question and answer type of work (Mobius, 1856 and Bohm, 1880) seems not to have met with any success, and to have been replaced later by "Repetitorien." Naturally enough, such works are unlikely to show any originality, being in the main factually oriented, but it is hardly to be expected that any works specifically designed for schools could be original, if only because it is essential to reduce the volume of material to a manageable (and inexpensive) size. The length of school works nevertheless varies considerably, but for the most part they are short, and there is the occasional reference to the (limited) number of hours that might be expected to be devoted to German literature in the school system. In some cases it is emphasized that the work has derived directly from classroom experience in this or that type of school, but the type of school audience envisaged by the authors of these works is not something that can be discussed in detail here. There is certainly a bewildering variety of terminology, from which one can only deduce a few salient points. First and foremost is the fact that the term "hohere Schule" crops up with monotonous

52

Histories of German Literature

regularity, making it evident that the historians (most of them teachers, of course) have only secondary schools in mind (and then usually just the upper levels). Secondly, there is a marked trend towards works for girls' schools in the 1850s and 1860s, something that is far less common later. References to "Volkschulen," "Mittelschulen," and "Biirgerschulen" begin to appear around 1870, and there seems also to be an increasing awareness at this time that teachers or those preparing to become teachers also need this kind of knowledge - again with frequent reference to female teachers. As no attempt has been made to establish just how many works were written for schools at this time and what variant editions there were (by school type and/or class level), the fact that the majority of those examined were written in part, if not wholly, for girls' schools need not be taken either as characteristic of the genre as a whole or as typical for this particular period. It is of interest to note, however, the attitude of the authors to their female audience. Rarely is there any hint of a belief that the education of girls should be the same as or equal to that of boys; the general attitude may be summed up by Schoppner's remark (1854): "Eine Frau soil gebildet, nicht gelehrt sein" (v). Reuter (1861) stresses that in the teaching of literary history (for girls, but similar remarks are also made generally in the school context), "alles zu vermeiden ist, was dem religiosen und sittlichen Zartgefiihl zu nahe treten konnte" (iv). It is hardly surprising that Vilmar is the model most frequently cited by these authors. Aside from the evident intention of avoiding anything even faintly immoral, or at least of so designating such material, which would presumably then not be read, the most obvious characteristic of these works is their sectarian tendentiousness, something which is of course in part allied to the question of morality. The tendentiousness shows up less in the works of Protestant authors, presumably because almost the entire tradition of literary historical writing so far has been in the hands of Protestants for whom it had become a self-evident truth that since the Reformation German literature came primarily from the Protestant part of Germany. While this view of literature is not attacked in histories of literature for a general audience, Catholic writers of school works clearly feel that it is essential to use literary history as a means to criticize both Protestantism and Protestant historians of literature. (There is only one history of Catholic literature, as opposed to a Catholic history of literature and that is Briihl's Geschichte der katholischen Literatur Deutschlands ... (1854) covering the period from the seventeenth century.) The Reformation, "jene beklagenswerthe Auflehnung gegen die Auctoritat der Kirche" (Reuter, 12), is seen by Protestants as producing, largely through Luther's efforts, the modern German (literary) language,

53 From Mid-Century to Scherer the new genre of the Kirchenlied, and so forth. The Catholic viewpoint is that the language had already developed before Luther, that Kirchenlieder existed before Luther, and Protestant hymns are mostly "Bearbeitungen, Umschreibungen und Ubersetzungen" (Piitz [1855], 31), etc. Moreover, the Reformation introduced the pernicious idea that everything is subject to rational enquiry, a belief that led to the Enlightenment, and later to the unchristian literature of such writers as Lessing, Goethe, and Schiller, and, after an unsuccessful attempt by the Romantics to restore the true religion, to the excesses of the Jungdeutschen and others. Given the limited space available in these works for schools, this theory is not worked out in detail, but there are many instances of judgments on individual writers that exemplify the strength and values of Catholic literature as the morality of Protestant literature declines. Murner is seen of course as greater than Hutten, who is sharply condemned. In the seventeenth century there are considerable discrepancies in the poets named and the space allotted to them by Protestants or Catholics. Dietlein (1859), for example, mentions several (including minor) Protestant poets, but neither Spec nor Scheffler; Piitz (a Catholic) does not mention Hutten and gives Spec and Scheffler equal space with the only two Protestant writers mentioned, Gerhardt and Dach; Schoppner gives five lines to the only Protestant, Gerhardt, and a whole page to Spec and Scheffler, after stressing that Luther's contribution to the development of modern German and to hymns has been absurdly exaggerated. The general aim of the Catholic historians is to discredit the role of the Reformation in the history of literature and to concentrate on the negative effects of Protestantism, linking it with unchristian, immoral, and even revolutionary tendencies from Hutten until the post-Romantic period. They complain also of the bias of Protestant literary historians, in particular for their treatment of the Reformation and its (literary) consequences, "ein Verhaltnis ... welches in den meisten Lehrbuchern der Literaturgeschichte nicht nur einseitig, sondern auch gehassig dargestellt worden ist" (Schoppner, 348). The same author warns specifically against Nosselt, Kletke, and Homberg, and complains of the "grobsten, namentlich durch Gervinus aufgekommenen, Vorurtheilen und Entstellungen" (vii). Brugier claims he had to write a literary history for use in his particular school, that is, for "Schulerinnen von 13-15, hochstens 16 Jahren," because the existing ones were unacceptable: "Die Einen waren ... zu gelehrt, die Anderen zu unchristlich, die Dritten confessionell verletzend" (ix). The Protestant histories of literature are by contrast rather less tendentious than had been the case a few decades earlier and, apart from the selection and judgment of individuals, suggest bias only in asides.

54

Histories of German Literature

The more interesting part of these school works is frequently the introductory matter, for it is here that the authors provide not so much an expose of their (literary-) historical philosophy, but an explanation of the function of literary history in schools. The nature of the history of literature, defined by Brugier (1865), for example, simply as "uns mil den schonsten deutschen Dichtungen, sowie mit ihren Verfassern bekannt [zu] machen" (1), is of lesser importance. Here is Otto Schulze's standpoint (1854): "Wahre Christen und treue Staatsbiirger heranzubilden ist das gro/te, schone Ziel aller Erziehung ..." "Die Gro/3thaten der Altvordern sollen ernste Weeks timmen sein zu gleichem Patriotismus, und die Schriftwerke deutschen Geistes und deutscher Sitte die kraftige Mahnung zu deutscher Einheit und Nationalitat. Daher mu/Jte die Unterweisung in der Geschichte unserer deutschen National-Literatur einen wesentlichen Bestandtheil der Jugenderziehung bilden ..." (iii). Perhaps surprising on the other hand is the absence of any strongly nationalistic views. This is presumably the result in part of the changing political situation in Germany, but in part also of the different, namely, more local, perspective of school works. "Kristentum und Nazionalitat" (Vernaleken [1850], v) are the basis of the school curriculum, but the priorities of the school are in some cases sectarian first rather than simply religious, and the "nationalism" may be Swiss (Gerstenberg [1868]), Austrian (Zeynek [1868]), or even simply regional. There is of course reference in these works, too, to "Volkstumlichkeit" as a virtue in literature - "Die deutsche Literatur stellt uns dar, wie sich das Werden, Bliihen, Hinwelken und Wiederaufbliihen der deutschen Volkstumlichkeit in seinen Schriftwerken auspragt" (Schram [1881], 3) - but this can naturally be viewed as an Austrian or Bavarian characteristic. There is occasionally some reference to regional literature as a category (Heinisch [1867]), but for the most part there is a tendency only in regard to literature of the recent past to emphasize writers of local and/or sectarian relevance, e.g., Austrian (Schram, Zeynek) or Catholic (Schoppner) or to categorize them by their origin, e.g., Oltrogge, who lists and briefly characterizes lyric poets under the headings Austria, Prussia, etc. By and large, however, the nationalistic outbursts of earlier histories of literature for a general audience are conspicuously absent. One of the more nationalistic works, though, is that by Kluge, and a very brief analysis of this work - which (because of its nationalism?) went into very many editions (more than fifty by the 1930s) - will serve to exemplify the genre as a whole, although it must be stressed that Kluge's work was later revised and aimed less at schools and more at a general public. Kluge defines "Nationalliteratur" as that part of literature in general that possesses "ein eigenthumlich deutsches Geprage" (Koberstein's phrase again), i.e., reflects German "Anschauung, Gesinnung, Sitte" (1).

55 From Mid-Century to Scherer For the most part this means "Poesie," and he intends to provide an overview that will concentrate on the most important works only, and not merely provide long lists of names and dates. He cites various sources, but claims to have gone back to original texts and to have made use of the most recent scholarship. The periodization is the traditional one, with the seventh period dating from Klopstock, and within these periods there are brief introductions, giving the salient events and "causes," followed by short paragraphs on major writers and works. Editions and commentaries are listed in footnotes. The most recent poets, i.e., from the post-Romantic period, are listed in an "Anhang" and number only thirteen, of whom the youngest is Oskar von Redwitz (born 1823). The judgments on individual writers are brief and unspecific with a strong tendency towards moral judgment. More will be said of Kluge, however, in chapter 5. The year 1883 again produced several works on German literary history, in addition to Bahder's Die deutsche Philologie im Aufrift. Of these, Scherer's work will be discussed in the following chapter. Minor works are those by Hentschel & Linke (school), Hoffbauer (school), Luz, Matz (vademecums), and A.F.W. Schmidt (school); Brenning's illustrated work was mentioned above. Pfalz's work is a fairly substantial (358 pages) but unoriginal work for schools. It seems more appropriate, therefore, to end this chapter with a brief comment on a substantial general work which was written at the same time as that by Scherer, and which represents on the one hand the traditional type of literary history, but on the other hand a new kind of relationship. Hirsch's three-volume Geschichte der deutschen Literatur is part of a series entitled "Geschichte der Weltliteratur in Einzeldarstellungen," and it may be taken as a representative of this new concept of world literature. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the exponents of historia litteraria had surveyed all the disciplines in all countries from the beginning of time to the present, but literature itself, belles-lettres, had received short shrift from them. At the time of the Romantics the term "Weltliteratur" had been used, and the concept had aroused some interest, not all of it by any means favourable, at a time of growing nationalism. Now, towards the end of the century, the term is revived in a rather different sense. Collective works begin to appear in considerable numbers, works that attempt a systematic survey of the literature of the world, country by country. It cannot be any part of this study to examine such a development, but it is something that must be considered in relationship to the other works assessed. The primary definition of a history of literature as laid down in the introduction was a work that surveyed the whole of German literature on a chronological basis. No limitation was placed on the form of presenta-

56

Histories of German Literature

tion, so that introductions to poetics and series of articles have been discussed. On the other hand it was also laid down that partial histories should be excluded, for example, those dealing with medieval literature or those beginning - as so many do in the nineteenth century - with the eighteenth century, on the grounds that such partial histories do not reflect the same kind of historical perspective, if indeed any perspective at all. A similar kind of argument can be made against a history of German literature that is part of a history of world literature, for the German literature may not be viewed sui generis but within a broader perspective. If such histories of German literature are discussed here, it is for the following two reasons. In the first place most historians of German literature have shown their awareness of other literatures by frequent reference to the classics, to French literature, and so forth. Some have even included separate chapters on contemporaneous developments in foreign literatures. The second reason is the fact that most of the collections produced at the end of the nineteenth century are not written from a world perspective. The literature of each country is normally treated quite separately and very few links are made with other literatures, beyond, that is, what is normal. There are in fact very few works on world literature in which the countries are not viewed as distinct and separate entities. However, this type of work flourished more freely in countries other than Germany, and further examples will be discussed in the chapters on foreign histories of literature. In the "Vorwort" to his work, Hirsch makes no reference at all to world literature or even to the literature of any particular country. He does, however, have something to say about histories of German literature, and this is the other reason why it seems appropriate to end this chapter with his work. He was not anxious, he claims, to take on the task, but was encouraged to do so by the failings of recent publications: "Der alte deutsche Erbfehler, die organische Entwickelung des geistigen Lebens durch abstrakte Doktrin in kritische Schranken zu bannen; die hartnackige Ignorierung der Thatsache, dass die Poesie nur diejenigen Gesetze anerkannt, die sie sich selber gegeben; die verderbliche Neigung endlich, die litterarische Produktion nach dem Standpunkt einer religiosen oder politischen Partei zu beurteilen; alle diese Wahrnehmungen ... mussten den sehnlichen Wunsch nach einer freien kunstlerischen Behandlung des grossen Gegenstandes erwecken" (I, v). He also believes that the time is ripe for a change, the time of the old-fashioned "Form lose zusammenhangender Litteraturbiographien" (I, vi) is past. On the other hand he rejects the modern fashion of producing a "litterarisches Bilderbuch mit begleitendem Text" (I, vii); the best way to the understanding of literature is by allowing the works to speak for themselves,

57 From Mid-Century to Scherer i.e., through quotations. His own philosophy is summed up as follows: "bei jeder dichterischen Personlickeit den tiefinnerlichen Zusammenhang der Natur des Einzelnen mit der Geschichte der Geistesentwickelung seines Volkes erkennbar zu machen ... in alien poetischen Erscheinungen die innige Beziehung zu deutschem Volkstum, zu deutscher Sprache und Sitte nachzuweisen" (I, vi). An additional novelty in his work is the inclusion of more Latin works than the traditional standard examples of Waltharius, Ruodlieb, and Hrotsvith. In the periodization, in the authors and works discussed, and in the literary judgments expressed, Hirsch varies little from his immediate predecessors, but he does make an attempt to place literature more clearly in its cultural context. He does this by reference to the political and social situation, by citing scientific and philosophical developments, but also by discussing rather more than usual works of popular interest, not just the Volkslied, but popular plays (including marionettes), broadsides, and so forth. His work is not entirely without personal prejudice, and this shows itself primarily in a somewhat anti-clerical attitude. On the other hand, the constant reference to the Volk and Volkstum are not really indicative of a closeness to the populace, for, except in specifically patriotic situations such as that of the Wars of Liberation, where the entire nation is involved, Hirsch seems to refer to the bourgeoisie when he uses the term Volk, if he does not simply mean that the person or aspect in question is representative somehow of the best of the nation. Note, for example, his statement: "Goethe stammt aus dem Volke, aus dem deutschen Biirgertum" (III, 30), a statement which is immediately followed by a description of the "Wohlhabenheit" of the Goethe household. Perhaps this is also a reflection of Hirsch's lack of historical perspective, for (despite the breadth of the material that is presented) the volume of quotation, the separation by genres, and the general approach produce an almost complete lack of historical development.

3 The End of the Nineteenth Century and the Beginning of the Twentieth Century

The extent to which Wilhelm Scherer was responsible - or not responsible - for what is usually called the positivistic school of literary history, is still in dispute. In general, however, it seems to be accepted as axiomatic that his own work was based on the positivistic principle. In Wilpert's Sachworterbuch this method is defined as "die positivistische Literaturgeschichte, die nur auf Tatsachenforschung unter Verzicht auf Spekulation und Metaphysik abzielt und nach naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden der strengen Kausalitat, nahezu Naturgesetzlichkeit arbeitet. Ihr representatives Werk ist W. Scherers "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur" (1883)." For someone who reads this traditional, rather simplistic view of Scherer, studying his history of German literature comes as something of a shock, for it is nothing if not lacking in "facts and figures." In fact one has a very strong sense of deja vu. The major novelty of Scherer's work lies in the historical framework that he constructs for German literary history. This is commonly known as the "Dreiwellentheorie" or "Dreikammtheorie," and it posits three peaks in German literature around 600, 1200, and 1800, separated by troughs in the tenth and sixteenth centuries. The inability of the Germans to overcome their tendency to exaggerate everything, "die verhangnisvolle Einseitigkeit, die uns so leicht entstellt" (720), is blamed for the alternation between periods of avid creativity and periods of crass materialism. Although not fully developed, an underlying correspondence is also assumed between female influence at times of creativity, while the influence of the masses is stressed at low points, for example, in regard to the sixteenth century: "In den Stadten ... kamen die Plebejer ans Regiment und gaben daher auch in der Poesie den Ton an ... vor allem das

59 The Turn of the Century

Drama, das die Massen am meisten beherrschte, trat starker hervor" (244). Scherer's perspective is therefore cyclic; his preconceived values lead him to posit peaks at 600-year intervals, and these peaks require that the periods midway between them are low points, while the intervening periods are times of rise or decline. His scheme thus provides a theoretical framework for designating some authors as "classical" and others as "Bahnbrecher" or as "Epigonen." This had been done before, of course, but without the aid of a theoretical concept. At the level of the individual periods and authors or works, the reader has no evidence that the judgments are based (if they are) on "Tatsachenforschung ... nach naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden," for here one finds for the most part the same introductory passages on the cultural background, the same thumbnail sketches of individuals or works, the same comparisons or contrasts with other poets. Biographical details are conspicuous by their absence, and the few bibliographical details are banished to an appendix. There is, for example, almost no discussion of Gottfried von Strasburg's background, his sources, or the transmission of his work. Scherer says only: "Er lehnt sich an eine franzosische Ouelle an, der er in jedem wesentlichen Zuge folgt, auch wo er besser gethan hatte, sie zu verlassen. Das Gedicht selbst, das er benutzte, ist uns verloren; nur verwandte abgekiirzte Fassungen stehen zu Gebote" (166-67) - ("Tatsachenforschung ... nach naturwissenschaftlichen Methoden"?). In the case of Lohenstein, Scherer indulges, as so often, in extensive comparisons in the manner of Gervinus: "Jener [Hofmannswaldau] zeichnete sich in Gedichten, dieser [Lohenstein] hauptsachlich in Tragodien und Romanen aus. Jener fuhrte die sentimentale Richtung ins Frivole, dieser die Tragische ins Gra/3liche hinuber. Jener gehort zur Schule des Ovid, dieser zur Schule des Seneca," and so forth (362). But the reader learns nothing about the type of poetry produced by Lohenstein, nor about its content, style, etc. His novel is dismissed as containing all manner of disparate items, stirred up "zu einem ungenie/Sbaren Brei" (379), and of his dramas the reader learns nothing, neither titles, nor content, nor sources, only that they are, like those of Hallmann, full of "Hinrichtungen, Kerkerscenen, Geistererscheinungen, Foltergreuel" (389). In case it should be assumed that this is a special case, an example of Scherer's antipathy towards this particular author, the example of Hagedorn may also be cited. Here there is no antipathy, but also no better or clearer description of Hagedorn's work. Aside from a paragraph of comparison with Haller, much in the style cited above, there are almost two pages of descriptive comment, from which one learns a few facts en passant about Hagedorn's position in life: for example, that he enjoyed

60

Histories of German Literature

"im Vaterhause die franzosische, in London die englische Bildung" (375); that he spent three years at the university in Jena; and that he lived in comfortable circumstances, occupying a position in a mercantile company that left him ample time for himself. A few titles and types of work produced by Hagedorn are cited, but for the most part Scherer restricts himself to generalities and above all to numerous references to external literary sources (Hagedorn's debt to Besser, Gottsched, Brockes, Pietsch, Giinther, his uses of Horace, Lafontaine, etc, his influence on Gellert, and so on). The reader is left with at best a hazy impression of the types and relative quality of the works published by Hagedorn, and of his position in relation to his predecessors and successors, but there are almost no specific details. Scherer's work adheres in other words quite closely to the traditional paradigm despite the "innovation" of a cyclical historical framework. The use of such a traditional form is understandable, given the desire to oust existing works, in particular Vilmar, from popular favour, but it raises the question as to the extent to which Scherer's history of literature may be considered to differ from those of his predecessors. The quality of the style, the nature of the judgments on individual authors and works, the balance achieved in the depiction of epochs or genres - these are matters of interest, but not of importance here. Of greater interest for us is the historical and social framework that is laid out or implied. A cyclical framework is, of course, not entirely new; a cyclical view of literary history had already appeared in the seventeenth century with Ortlob's work, although in a rather different form. The question was already raised then (Prolegomena, 33ff ), however, as to whether the cycles were also to be viewed as valid for the future. Scherer's assumption of a highpoint around 1800 requires him to view contemporary literature as inevitably inferior as it heads into the "trough"; a renewed highpoint would not logically recur until the year 2400. Scherer avoids any discussion of this issue, preferring to limit the peak around 1800 to the Classical period and in this way to justify ending his work with the death of Goethe. He gives the impression that what follows is already a rapid decline. Scherer also refrains from any discussion of the future status of literature. "Der Geschmack der niederen Stande" gave German literature in the Renaissance/Reformation period "einen plebejischen Stempel" (329); in the previous peak period the aristocracy had given the lead. After the nobility had briefly re-entered the literary field in the seventeenth century, it was left to academic writers to educate "die Generationen, deren nationaler Ehrgeiz die litterarischen Gro/Jthaten des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts vollbrachte" (330). The literary public created in the Classical period was a fusion of "Adel" and "Biirgertum," and has remained

61 The Turn of the Century

so. By drawing a direct parallel between the causes of the decline of literature in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and current tendencies, "ubermateriell zu werden und ... jenen Machten zu verfallen, die einst im vierzehnten und fiinfzehnten Jahrhundert nicht zum Heil unserer Bildung und unseres Charakters die deutsche Welt regierten" (720), Scherer implies that the decline of literature in the nineteenth century is again the result of its falling into the hands of the "lower" classes. From these and similar comments - not to mention the ending of the survey with the death of Goethe - it becomes clear that the desire to create a "popular" work meant in effect a work for the (upper) middle class. The extent of the influence Scherer's work had on subsequent authors of literary histories is by no means easy to determine, but it is noteworthy - though perhaps quite coincidental - that no substantial history of German literature appeared in Germany for several years after 1883. The number of works that deserve mention at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth is in fact quite small, the vast majority being very brief compilations specifically for use in schools or in the home. A complicating factor is the new trend towards multiple authorship, one of the many reasons why this study goes no further than the first World War. Some works by two authors will be mentioned briefly, but in subsequent decades there is an increasing number of works by several, rather than just two authors. One of the briefest literary historical works at this time deserves mention, though, if only for its relationship with, but lack of any reference to, Scherer. This is Conrad Beyer's essay on "Geist und Inhalt der deutschen poetischen Literatur," which served as an historical introduction to Adolf Hinrichsen's Das literarische Deutschland (1887), an alphabetically arranged bio-bibliographical listing of contemporary authors. Beyer begins by claiming that "eine historisch-philosophische Beleuchtung" of the entire history of German literature is essential for an understanding of its present situation and function. His aim is not merely to describe the development, but to explain it "psychologisch und philosophisch" (iii); also to delineate future prospects. The framework of Beyer's study is provided by Scherer's concept of the three literary peaks and also by the traditional view of the transition from myth through epic to lyric and "die Vereinigung des subjektiven und des objektiven Elements zur Poesie der Handlung: zum Drama" (iv). In his extremely concise survey of the earlier periods of German literature, Beyer follows a traditional pattern, concluding that the basis of the third peak, the Classical period, was "die gewollte und erlangte Verbindung mit dem Griechentume" (viii). Noteworthy is only his emphasis, in contrast to others, on the qualities of seventeenth-century literature which represents "in seiner Summe ein imponierendes Zeugnis fur den

62

Histories of German Literature

poetischen Ertrag des Jahrhunderts" (ix). In dealing with the nineteenth century Beyer takes a rather different standpoint. Unlike most literary historians, he shows the greatest approval for those writers who are politically active. The poets of "Junges Deutschland," for example, are highly praised; they are "urdeutsch und urpraktisch" and no longer "blo/3e Denker und Traumer" (xiv - influence of Gervinus?). Later political poets are lauded for their refusal to be silenced and for their insistence on displaying their "Unzufriedenheit mit den herrschenden Gesellschaftszustanden" (xv). The highpoint of this trend is reached with the impetus provided by the events of 1870 which united "alle Richtungen und Schulen des literarischen Deutschlands ... in dem neuen, dem echten, dem germanischen Deutschnationalismus" (xix). The concluding paragraphs, in which Beyer surveys current literary trends and prospects for the future, are liberally sprinkled with adjectives such as "nationaldeutsch" and "nationaldramatisch." He ascribes partly to the present and partly to the immediate future a trend whereby all genres of literature serve the practical and political needs of the nation as a whole. The novel, for example, will have "ein sittliches Motiv und ein wahrhaft sittliches Ziel, welches allein gegen die Laszivitat und Frivolitat fremder Nationen zu schiitzen vermag" (xx). Beyer feels that genuine German originality has come into its own in the new period inaugurated by the establishment of the German Empire. He fully expects the disputes between rival political factions to subside in the near future, and looks forward to a fourth flowering of German literature. Beyer's work constitutes an introduction to a survey - in this case an encyclopedic survey - of contemporary literature and, as such, is reminiscent of the short historical introductions to text collections or poetics of previous centuries. There are, however, very many individual works that offer little more than Beyer (with or without texts) around the turn of the century. The number of brief histories of German literature for school or "school-and-home" use is in fact legion at this time. Unfortunately, though, they offer little, if anything, in the way of improvement over their predecessors; there are at best fewer factual errors than before. Naturally enough, content and style vary somewhat, depending on the intended audience and locality, but the following works may be considered as "typical" for their time; they are aimed at an unsophisticated audience but are not designed for specific school courses. The first work, for example, Ferdinand Schultz's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1889), was produced on the basis of the author's teaching experience but was given "eine vollere Form ... Durch dieselbe glaubte ich zugleich den Inhalt einem weiteren Leserkreise zuganglich zu machen" (x). The "Vorwort" is of some interest, inasmuch as Schultz discusses both the relationship between learning (dates, facts, etc.) and

63 The Turn of the Century appreciating literature, and the relationship of literary history to general history. His belief that literary history can be fruitfully studied only in conjunction with history leads him to argue that the two should ideally be taught in schools by the same person. These and similar considerations lead Schultz to provide first a "Merktafel" with basic dates, names, etc., and subsequently to introduce each period with a passage on the "Zeitrichtung." The period divisions themselves are curious (and presumably influenced by Scherer): 500-800 Bliitezeitalter des Volksgesanges und der Stammessage 800-1100 Erste Zwischenzeit 1100-1250 Bliitezeit ritterlichen Sanges 1250-1740 Zweite Zwischenzeit [!] 1740-1830 Bliitezeitalter klassischer Dichtung 1830Nachbliite The text follows the traditional pattern, though with less bio-bibliographical data, few plot summaries, and no quotations. Although Schultz cites authors of very recent date, the "Sturm und Drang" of 1830-1850 is dealt with in only four pages and the last few pages, from 1850 on, consist almost entirely of names and dates. Names and dates of some "standard authors" are conspicuously lacking in Heilmann's Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur (1893), presumably on account of his avowed intent to concentrate on "Sichtung, Beschrankung und Vereinfachung des Lehrstoffes" and to restrict himself to those works that possess "volkstiimliches Geprage" (3). Only in this way will schoolchildren acquire "Verstandnis fur deutsche Eigenart und deutsches Volkstum" (4). Even given these restrictions and the brevity of the work (llOp., "Poetik" 111-40), it is nevertheless surprising to find no reference at all to Murner, Spec, Lohenstein, Giinther, or Kotzebue. One wonders why Heilmann found it necessary to quote in the introduction such a long list of authorities consulted (some of them identifiable only with difficulty). By contrast with Heilmann, Smolle, in his Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1901), manages to mention within 144 pages all the writers just cited as missing in Heilmann, but it must be admitted that his work consists for the most part of little more than names and dates. His work ends, after a five-page list of "dichtende Frauen" (138-43), with a comment that is nothing if not platitudinous: "Es ist ein eigenthumliches Gesetz im Entwicklungsgange der neueren deutschen Literatur, da/3 fast nach jedem Menschenalter eine Bewegung auftritt, die mit den bisherigen Zielen und Richtungen des geistigen Schaffens bricht und neue, anders geartete Grundsatze der poetischen Produktion aufstellt" (143).

64

Histories of German Literature

Mager's Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur hohere Lehranstalten undzum Selbststudium (1903) covers the whole of German literature in 220 pages and in a very simplistic, traditional manner. "Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte schildert die Entwicklung der geistigen Bildung unseres Volkes von den altesten Zeiten an, legt die Beziehungen dar, in denen das geistige Leben zu anderen gro/ten historischen Ereignissen steht und macht mit den Werken und dem Leben ihrer Verfasser bekannt" (1). Each period has a few lines of introduction, followed by numbered paragraphs on individual writers (by genre). Austrian writers of the recent past (the author is a "k. k. Professor" in Vienna) receive special attention (175-204), and there are seven pages on female writers. Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte by Graef (1904) is the shortest of this group (129 pages), but it gives no indication of the intended audience. It is written in a very simple style with a minimum of dates, titles, plot summaries, and the like. The numerous errors ("Manassische Handschrift," Hans Holz [for Hans Folz], Reimmund, etc) suggest a lack of familiarity with the writers and works discussed. In contrast to Mager, Austrian writers are allowed only one page and a half; recent female writers are listed without comment in one paragraph. Sittenberger's work, Einfuhrung in die deutsche Literatur mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der neueren Zeit (1909), is rather longer (297 pages) and has a more clearly defined audience, namely, the home and "Mittelschulen." He writes in his "Vorwort": "Es war meine Absicht, im knappsten Rahmen dennoch eine moglichst liickenlose und organische Darstellung der Entwicklung unserer Literatur zu geben, auf den Zusammenhang der Dichtung mit dem gesamten Geistesleben des Volkes hinzuweisen und zu zeigen, wie die geistigen Stromungen aufeinander einwirkten, einander verstarkten oder ablosten" (iii-iv). He therefore passes over bio-bibliographical details in favour of a flowing recapitulation of the salient features and figures of German literary history (plot summaries of major works are relegated to an appendix, 256-97). Although the traditional pattern is followed, the chapter headings in the earlier periods are not related to literary schools, e.g., "Das XVII. Jahrhundert," but the periods following the Classical era are designated as "Abkehr von der Kunst der Klassiker" (Romanticism and Junges Deutschland) and "Die Dichtung der Epigonen." A degree of bias towards Austria is indicated by the two sections which deal with early and late nineteenth century Austrian writers (203-32; 251-55), but it can hardly be claimed that modern literature has received that special attention implied by the title. Perhaps to soften the effect of the chapter titles cited above, Sittenberger concludes his work with a paragraph expressing the opinion that there are signs that literature is returning to its true path. The works described here are representative of the numerous short

65 The Turn of the Century

works written for school or home use during this period, and compared with earlier works of a similar nature and scope, they show an improvement only to the extent that errors are fewer in number and the format and style simpler. There is a greater emphasis on continuous description without interruption by text samples and the like. If anything, though, they are even more derivative than earlier works, although their sources are not always cited. There is some freedom in the periodization (at least in broad terms), but no attempt is made to provide a coherent historical framework; where Scherer's scheme is adopted, this usually occurs without comment or explanation. The only variations in the traditional arrangement are the result of personal or local interest; thus there are works where the author takes a firmly moral stance, works for Catholics, for girls' schools, for an Austrian audience, and so forth. As one example of a literary history with a more particular bias than the "Austrian" histories just noted, mention may be made of Hasse's Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1906), which is "fiir die katholische Jugend bestimmt; aber es wird ihm niemand den Vorwurf konfessioneller Exklusivitat machen konnen. Die Leistungen akatholischer Dichter der verschiedenen Perioden finden gerechte Wurdigung" ("Vorrede" by Otto Willmann, [iii]). What is "gerecht" or "ungerecht" is of course a matter of opinion, and Hasse's views may only seem unusual by comparison with the (majority of) Protestant historians. It is very evident, however, that in addition to a certain confessional disparity (e.g., Luther has been put forward "mit Unrecht" [121] as the founder of modern German; the Protestant school drama was - unlike the Catholic - tendentious and gave a distorted picture of Catholic doctrine and institutions [132]), there is a strong tendency to assess works and writers on the basis of their contribution to the Christian faith. Thus Goethe "steht ... nicht nur gleichgiiltig, sondern ... [dem Christentum] feindselig gegeniiber" (233) and "auf christlichem Boden steht Schiller ... nicht." Schiller's poetry lacks "die positiv glaubige Inspiration und die voile Harmonic, die nur das Christentum gewahren kann" (256). In his conclusion Hasse returns to the argument that any hope for German literature in the future (the present he sees as solely concerned with "Erweiterung, Steigerung, Erhohung und Vertiefung des Gefiihls- und Empfindungslebens") can lie only in the "Erstarkung einer ausgesprochen christlichen Dichtung, die auf dem ubernaturlichen Glauben ... aufbaut und an der Abhangigkeit des Menschen von Gott... festhalt" (392). An example from the "other side" in the same year (1906) is Botticher's Deutsche Literaturgeschichte. He claims to be "von jeder Art von Tendenz oder Parteinahme frei ... wenn man nicht das Eintreten fur unsere gro/ten nationalen Lebenselemente, fur religios-sittliche Weltanschauung und fiir alle menschlichen Ideale als solche ansehen will" (viii).

66

Histories of German Literature

He sees Wolfram von Eschenbach as "einen Vorlaufer der Reformation" and Gottfried von Strasburg as a representative of the other side of medieval philosophy, "der ziigellose Lebensgenu/3, der, wie heute, seine einzige Schranke im offentlichen Skandal sieht" (38). Even the periodization is placed "unter den Gesichtspunkt der religiosen Entwicklung" so that the modern period (after Romanticism) is entitled "Die deutsche Literatur unter den Einflussen antichristlicher Weltanschauung." Aside from such variations in the tenor of the text, these works adhere to a virtually standardized and simplistic representation of German literary history, a form that has by now become completely stagnant. To what extent these works satisfied a genuine need, is very difficult to say, since many of them were written to meet the requirements of school curricula and were therefore reprinted regularly for a captive audience. The works mentioned here, however, were not used officially as school texts, as far as one can tell, and it is therefore worth noting that Smolle (1901), Graef (1904), and Sittenberger (1909) were apparently not reprinted. Schultz (1899) and Mager (1903) had second editions before 1913 (1912 and 1906 respectively). Mager had a third edition in 1913; Schultz had a third edition in 1914 and a fourth in 1923. In both cases the later editions were edited by Karl Reuschel. By contrast Max Koch's little work (see also Vogt & Koch below), Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, which appeared in 1893 as number 31 of the Sammlung Goschen, had reached its seventh edition by 1911; an eighth (and last?) appeared in two volumes (31, 783) in 1920. Most surprisingly, Heilmann's work had a tenth (eleventh) edition by 1920 (reprinted 1924), having increased over the years to only 188 pages. These figures have little meaning without evidence as to the size of the editions, etc, and the war and subsequent inflation no doubt also played a role. However, they do suggest a relatively greater interest in the type of work represented by the Sammlung Goschen. Turning to more substantial works, it is interesting to find that an author such as Storck, in the foreword to his Deutsche Literaturgeschichte (1898), still claims to provide in his work something that has never yet been provided in previous works; the larger histories, he claims, frighten off lay readers by their size, while the short "Leitfaden" are too dry and simplistic ("schulma/3ig"). He will therefore attempt "mit tunlichster Kiirze und gewissenhafter Griindlichkeit eine lebendige Darstellung zu verbinden" (vii). The most important thing in his view is to be able to learn from literary history "den Zusammenhang, den inneren Entwicklungsgang der einzelnen Erscheinungen" (vii), and he therefore proposes to devote a much greater proportion of his work to this aspect. Needless to say, Storck's work remains within the long since familiar tradition of dividing literary history into Old, Middle, and New High

67 The Turn of the Century

German, and within these divisions (preceded as a whole by an "Uberblick"), there are the accepted periods, each of which is prefaced by the usual "Allgemeine Charakteristik." The individual sections consist primarily of bio-bibliographical details and evaluations. Very few passages are directly cited, and these only in the medieval period; plot summaries are also very few in number. As an example, the ninth book, "Die Romantik," begins with two pages of "Allgemeine Charakteristik," followed by four pages on irony, Fichte's philosophy, Catholicism, etc. Critics and poets are then discussed one by one, beginning with the Schlegels, Novalis, Tieck, Gorres, the second Romantic school, and so forth. Also covered are the patriotic poets and the "Ubergangszeit." The clearest indication of Storck's intellectual standpoint is to be found in his treatment of the most recent period, which he entitles "Die deutsche Literatur als Ausdruck des modernen Lebens." He argues first that a far greater variety is characteristic of the modern period(s) in contrast to the unity of attitude that existed in earlier centuries, and secondly that a great change (and not for the better) has come about through the preoccupation of writers with political and social matters. An interest in real life leads to Realism, but the strongly materialist bent of modern society has led to Naturalism, which is clearly a tendency Storck dislikes. The bluntest expression of his disapproval is to be found at the beginning of the chapter on literature since 1870 - "Im Zeichen des Materialismus" - where he regrets the lack of any upswing in national feeling after the war years; there was only "eine Erschlaffung aller sittlichen religiosen und nationalen Krafte; es kam die kranke Zeit der Grunderjahre." He continues: "Dem innersten Wesen der deutschen Volksseele aber ist der Materialismus fremd. Das Volk des Genusses sind die Franzosen" (452-53); and he couples this with an attack on the Jewish influence in literature. Not surprisingly, Storck concludes his work with a statement very similar to that quoted above from Hasse: "Nur eine Dichtung, welche in ihrem innersten Kern christlich und deutsch ist, kann eine neue Bliitezeit der deutschen Nationalliteratur heraufbringen" (480). "Christlich und deutsch" (and also Protestant), is Howald, who, in his Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1903), claims that a new work is needed, as the existing ones are too detailed, too scholarly, too expensive, and so forth. His is the largest single-volume work around this time (906 pages), and it is written for the general public: "Fur das Volk, die Familie, das Haus schrieben wir, fur das christliche Haus - und behielten lebhaft auch die Schule im Auge" (vi). Howald is more concerned than most historians with the morality of the works he discusses, and this explains, for example, the fact that Gottfried is given only one seventh of the space (1.5p.) devoted to Wolfram (llp.)> while not even the subjects of Lohenstein's plays are cited, merely a few

68

Histories of German Literature

examples of his style in order to demonstrate the absurdity of poetry at the time, designated in general as "unsaglich gemein und schlupfrig, womoglich noch schlechter als die der Welschen" (287). Characteristic of Howald's standpoint is the following introductory comment on Wieland: "Wieland hat im christlichen Hause nichts zu suchen, und ein Hausvater hat ihm gegeniiber nur dafiir zu sorgen, da/3, wo eine seiner Erzahlungen im Kreise seiner Tochter oder Sohne auftauchen sollte, sie sofort ohne viel Aufhebens wieder verschwinde" (395). Of Spee Howald writes: "gern melden wir hier einmal von einem Jesuiten etwas Erfreuliches" (301), and this Catholic background is clearly contrasted with the advantages of a Protestant upbringing: "Wie in so manchem andern deutschen Dichter lebt auch in Geibel der Segen des evangelischen Pfarrhauses fort" (794). These and similar remarks about individual poets are sometimes accompanied by exhortations to the reader, which are not only intended to persuade him/her of the Tightness of Howald's literary judgment but also to suggest that any reader who does not agree is in the gravest danger. Howald provides numerous illustrations (his work is almost a "Bilderbuch"), quotations, and plot summaries, but the general historical background is meagre, consisting almost exclusively of one or two pages of introduction to each period. It is not surprising, therefore, that Howald also attacks the Naturalists, but he makes no attempt at all to deal with recent literature, contenting himself with a recommendation to Bartels. When it is a question of aesthetic evaluation, Howald has one sure guide, if only in a negative sense: "Was unsittlich wirkt, ist unasthetisch," (vi), and reference has often been made in these chapters to the emphasis among German literary historians on the morality ("Sittlichkeit") or otherwise of works under discussion. The historian's evaluation is often dependent on what he sees as the moral or immoral tendencies of a given work, its possible beneficial or corruptive influence on readers. On one of the rare occasions, however, when morality is actually mentioned in the title of a literary history, the text is, if anything, less stringent in its assessments than many of its predecessors. The full title of Schnedermann's very brief work is Die deutsche Nationalliteratur. Ihr innerer Gang im Zusammenhang mit der Sittengeschichte dargestellt (1899). Although one would assume from this a survey of German literature from a moral standpoint, what is offered is an incomplete and in fact quite selective survey (based on Vilmar, Joseph Hillebrand, and others) that is of interest primarily for its selection. The first two chapters (all the chapters are on average only ten pages in length) are devoted to Old and Middle High German literature, and in the latter Schnedermann discusses only the Nibelungenlied, Kudrun, Wolfram von Eschenbach, and Walther von der Vogelweide. The four-

69 The Turn of the Century

teenth and fifteenth centuries are passed over, and the next two chapters are devoted to Luther, Hans Sachs, and Fischart. From here Schnedermann moves to Opitz, whose Buck von der deutschen Poeterei he views as the boundary marker between the old and the new (literary world): "Die Zeit vorher und die nachher [sind] wie zwei Welten verschieden" (39). This chapter is not devoted entirely to Opitz, however, but includes a discussion of the Volkslied and various seventeenth-century poets. Schnedermann's approach is most clearly expressed in the following chapter, entitled "Die Sittenschilderer des 17. Jahrhunderts," in which he discusses writers who depicted and satirized the morals of the time, Gerhardt, Logau, Grimmelshausen, and so forth. However, here as well as in other chapters, there is passing reference to some of the more familiar figures from standard literary histories (and the familiar criticism). This is in particular true of the subsequent chapter, "Von Hans Rosenbliit bis Gottsched," where the author passes rapidly from the "erfreuliches Sittenbild" (65) of a whole city involved in a liturgical drama through the "Sittenverfall" of the sixteenth century (66) to the Gottschedian reform "ein wenig erquicklicher Gang der Geschichte" (73). Schnedermann rejects the idea of applying mechanical laws to history ("Er mu/Jte nicht kommen, der Aufschwung" [74]), of assuming that there is inevitable alternation from one extreme to another or from highpoint to lowpoint and back again. Implicitly he is criticizing here both the tendency of historians, such as Vilmar, to argue ex post facto that such and such a change was inevitable, and the general run of historians, culminating in Scherer, who argue for an inevitable and, so to speak, systolic-diastolic progression in history. Schnedermann's procedure, apart from his particular interest in satirists and others who lay bare the mores of their time, is therefore to portray developments across the usual period divisions, thereby stressing the continuity - for all his insistence on the watershed of the Opitzian reform. Thus the chapter on Opitz goes back to the Volkslied and looks forward to the poets of the Wars of Liberation and the Romantic period; the chapter on drama begins with the liturgical drama and ends with Gottsched (and Bach!). The final chapter before the discussion of major individual writers begins by tracing the development of the German language from as far back as the fourteenth-century mystics. From this point of view, then, and aside from the question of "Sittengeschichte," Schnedermann offers an interesting contrast to the historically sharp periodization prevalent in contemporary literary histories. Scherer's theory of the rise and fall of German literature throughout the centuries is the basis also of the literary history published by Bartels, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, in 1901. Bartels claims in fact that he had come to the same conclusion, before he had even read Scherer. In

70

Histories of German Literature

his presentation of the periodization and elsewhere, Bartels refers to the "Gesetzma/Jigkeit" or "Notwendigkeit" of the historical development, without, however, explaining - any more than others had done before him - what is to be understood by the term necessity in relation to history. His own concept sees periods from the beginning to 900 (highpoint in 600) - "vom ganzen Volke getragene Dichtung"; from 900 to 1500 (highpoint in 1200) - "Standespoesie"; and 1500 to the present (highpoint in 1800) - "Individualpoesie." In the introduction to the literature after the Classical period Bartels posits a decline with the Romantics, but not a sharp one. On the other hand, "da/3 ein gro/ter Sumpf heute ... vorhanden ist, durfte nicht zu bestreiten sein" (II, 551). The current low level is compared with the second Silesian school, but at the same time Bartels raises the possibility that German literature is not necessarily on its way to a new nadir, as the Germans are now "ein modernes Kulturvolk" (II, 551) and the old law may no longer apply. The basic premise of Bartels' work is the necessity of restricting discussion to those writers that still have something to say to the contemporary reader, and to place these writers firmly in their context. The major outcome of this approach is a sharp reduction in the space devoted to early literature and a corresponding increase in the space for recent writers. The two volumes are divided in the first edition at 1800; in the third and following editions the Romantics are included in volume 1. In order to achieve his stated aim, Bartels provides an introduction to each "book" (e.g., Book 1 on the period to 1500, Book 2 on the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries), and describes in this the literary development. In the first editions this is entitled "Ubersicht," in later ones "Entwicklung." The introduction is followed by analyses of individual writers and works. From the fifth edition on, each section closes with a description of the "Fortwirkung" of the writers of that period. As an example, Book 5 on the Romantics consists in the fifth/sixth editions of seventy-six pages on "Die Entwicklung" (I, 550-626); ninety-eight pages on individual writers: Holderlin, the Schlegels, Tieck, Novalis, Kleist, Hoffmann, Das Haus Brentano, Eichendorff, "Dichter der Befreiungskriege," Uhland, Chamisso, Wilhelm Miiller, and Hoffmann von Fallersleben (I, 626-724); and ninety-two pages on "Die Fortwirkung" (I, 724-32). The final section is primarily an explanation of which writers are still readable today and why; there is also some information about their reception in the intervening period. This approach differs considerably from the traditional form, which at most separated an introductory survey of the political and social background from the general literary historical section. There is some novelty in the introduction of what is effectively a brief analysis of the history of the reception of the various writers, but inevitably there is a degree of repetition, as some

71 The Turn of the Century writers are mentioned in each of the three parts. What is most remarkable in Bartels1 work, however, is the ideological thrust. There had been works before which lauded the qualities of the German people, their character and their literature, but none that had been quite so adulatory or that related character so firmly to race and tribe: "neben der Rasse ist der Stamm das wichtigste Moment bei der Betrachtung deutschen Wesens und Lebens, deutscher Literatur" (7). In his introduction, Bartels develops a concept of Germanic qualities, formed in part by the landscape of their origin but now - apparently - no longer conditioned by it. "Das germanische Urwesen" is different from (superior to) that of other peoples and in its essence indestructible, no matter how often it succumbs temporarily to this or that external influence. In the first volume, this theory produces the not unfamiliar description of German literature favourably contrasted with others, chiefly French, but it takes on quite a different character in the second volume. The Jews (writers and others) are portrayed as deliberately attempting to suppress or destroy the native genius, to replace it with an alien culture. The frequent anti-Semitic outbursts cover everything and everyone, from Heine and Borne to industrialists and the feminist movement. Jewry is seen as the enemy within, striving to muzzle the strong, suborn the weak, and generally poison the wellsprings of German culture. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Heimatkunst movement is seen as an important new development, one that, together with the indomitable native spirit of the Germans, will keep German literature on the right road. The reduction in the space allotted to earlier literature is taken still further by Beyer-Boppard, in his Einfiihrung in die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mil besonderer Berucksichtigung der neueren Zeit (1905), for here the entire history of German literature prior to 1725 is surveyed in only 87 of the 443 pages of text. The bulk of the work deals with the period after 1830 and up to the author's own time, but this does not mean that Beyer-Boppard dismisses earlier literature lightly. On the contrary, he praises not only Middle High German literature, but also under Scherer's influence - "die hochst beachthenswerten Uberreste einer gehaltvollen Urliteratur ... die beredten Zeugnisse einer vorhanden gewesenen ersten Bliiteperiode unserer poetischen Literatur im 6. und 7. Jahrhundert" (18). At the other extreme he also devotes some space to the future, in a section entitled "Ausblick in eine neue Bliiteperiode." In between these two poles his selection of writers and judgments on them shows little originality, while his debt to others is fairly obvious. See, for example, his Vilmarian description of the "Geist der 6. Periode": "Sie waren es [Klopstock, Lessing, Wieland, Herder], welche ... das allmahlich urbar gemachte Waldgrundstiick deutscher Poesie in einen prachtigen Park umwandelten, iiber dessen kunstvolles Formenstaket exotische,

72

Histories of German Literature

rasch akklimatisierte Blumengestrauche heruberrankten ..." (130). But the main characteristic of Beyer-Boppard's work is his nationalism. It is his intention to create a work "in popularer Weise ... zur Pflege deutsch-patriotischen Shines" (vi), and adjectives such as "deutschnational" and "deutsch-originell" occur with monotonous regularity, wherever a writer is discussed, of whose works Beyer-Boppard approves. In this same year (1905), one of the largest but strangest works on German literature began to appear, and it deserves to be mentioned, if only on account of its singularity. The Einfuhrung in die deutsche Literatur, as conceived and realized by Johannes Meyer, appeared in six substantial volumes, the first five in the years 1905 to 1909, and the sixth, apparently, after the death of Meyer, and with a modified title, in 1913. Meyer contends that it is more important to read the literary works before learning about the life of the authors or the historical background. He therefore provides first texts with commentary, followed by biographical information and an evaluation of the author. The writers selected are few in number, as Meyer also considers it essential to limit the selection to those writers whose works may still be appreciated in the present. The literary historical overview that follows discussion of the individual writers ("Riickblick") is very brief in the first three volumes and lacking in the last three. What is interesting here, then, is the procedure rather than the periodization, evaluation, and the like. Meyer makes no pretence to originality, in fact, basing himself directly on the work of Liiben & Nacke and quoting at length from Bartels and others. His analysis of Gottfried's Tristan, for example, provides (after a few lines of comparison with Wolfram): first an explanation of difficult words in the Tristan passage in Liiben & Nacke, a content summary, and an outline of the plot structure; then a brief description of earlier versions and a lengthy analysis of Gottfried's work (style, characterization, meaning), a discussion of facts and theories about Gottfried's life, and finally a "Wiirdigung," which includes reference to transmission and reception, but consists largely of quotations from other literary historians. Gottfried's Tristan is the last of only five works treated in the period 1100-1500 (with the Nibelungenlied, Gudrun, Armer Heinrich, Parzival). The "Riickblick" on the period occupies only pages 629 to 653 and this includes a three-page plot summary of Reineke Fuchs and five pages from Hagen's Norika. It is therefore debatable whether the sub-title of Meyer's work, Zugleich eine Geschichte der deutschen Literatur ..., can be justified. While the number of major writers discussed and the (relative) amount of space devoted to them is perhaps not relevant, the absence of so many recognized figures and of any historical concept clearly is. In the earlier

73 The Turn of the Century

periods Meyer repeats the well worn cliches and even extends them: "so tief wie die deutsche Literatur am Anfange des 18. Jahrhunderts stand, hat noch niemals die Literatur eines Volkes gestanden, das schon gro/tere Zeiten gesehen hat" (II, 755). But already in the third volume even these cliches are abandoned. The "Riickblick" consists here almost entirely of a list of the followers of Klopstock, Wieland, and Lessing. Some of the Klopstockianer are described as members of the "Hainbund," but the only information about this group is to be found in the chapter on Voss. Similarly, in the second volume the chapter on Giinther had contained a four-page passage on the literary situation at the beginning of the eighteenth century. In the succeeding volumes there is virtually no attempt at establishing either the relationship between individual writers or the general context within which they wrote. With Engel's two-volume Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1906) we again have a work where the author insists categorically on the superiority of German language and literature in comparison with those of other nations, particularly the French. "Die deutsche Literatur ist die erste unter den Literaturen der Volker" is the first sentence of Engel's "Einleitung" (1), and the theme is echoed in varying forms throughout the work: "Unter den neueren Sprachen gibt es schwerlich eine reichere als die deutsche" (18), and the language is continually developing, unlike English and the Romance languages that are "in ihren Formen erstarrt" (19); "Das deutsche Volkslied ist das reichste in der Welt" (171). Individual German writers are contrasted favourably with their "equivalents" in other countries or are lauded for their quality under circumstances that are less favourable than those abroad. At times Engel seems indeed to waver between the desire simply to praise German achievements and the desire to explain why they were not greater: "Man stelle sich einmal vor, da/3 Schriftsteller wie Luther, Hutten, Murner, Sachs und Fischart in einer deutschen Stadt beisammen gelebt und gewirkt hatten, wie das in London Spenser, Marlowe, Ben Jonson, Bacon, Sidney, Shakespeare beschieden war, und man mu/J zur Anerkennung der Tatsache kommen, da/3 im Fehlen eines gro/ten geistigen Mittelpunktes ... der wahre Grund fur das Scheitern so vieler Hoffnungen ... zu suchen ist" (193). To this point Engel returns again and again. Apart from the markedly patriotic tone of Engel's work, the most interesting facet is the rejection of the traditional cause and effect approach to literary history. In the first place, Engel argues that great writers are born, not made by circumstances, and in the second he claims that historians are not capable of understanding the processes of artistic creation. Shakespeare would have been Shakespeare no matter when or where born; why a Shakespeare is born is inexplicable, as is also the process by which his works are created. The only concession that Engel

74

Histories of German Literature

makes is to accept that Shakespeare could not have attained his full potential without the existence of a large capital city with a thriving theatre. Given this attitude, it is not surprising that Engel does not see the purpose of literary history as the organization and description of the literary record within an historical framework. He inveighs in fact both against those who assume a great deal of knowledge on the part of the reader and present only their "besondere Auffassung von der Entwicklung dieser Literatur," and against those who supply for the inexperienced reader "die selbstbewu/ften Meinungen des Verfassers" and thereby encourage the "Nachsprechen von Urteilen" (vii). The chief purpose of a literary history in Engel's view consists "in der Anregung und Wegeweisung fur den Leser zum eigenen Genu/3 der Literaturwerke" (vii). For his part, he therefore assumes on the part of the reader a basic knowledge of the most famous works, and plans to provide a factual introduction rather than aesthetic judgments, leaving the works to speak for themselves. By the same token, he claims not to be concerned with matters of morality or with what any given writer could or should have written. He nevertheless assumes that history actually plays the role of critic, for in the "Schlu/toetrachtung" (II, 1159) he writes: "die Literaturgeschichte ist das Literaturgericht," claiming that good works will be recognized in time and poor ones forgotten, no matter how good or bad their initial reception. It is now all the more important to separate the "edit" from the "unecht" in literature, as it has become more widely accessible to the masses; but it is evident from Engel's own comments that his work is not written for these masses, but for those educated people who seek "edelste Geistesbildung und innere Erhebung." One of the larger works to appear in the early twentieth century was Biese's three-volume Deutsche Literaturgeschichte (1907-11), with close to 2,000 pages. This is not a profound scholarly work, but one intended on the contrary for popular consumption, it being Biese's claim that every work hitherto had neglected that element of "Volkstumlichkeit" that was needed to appeal to the "Wi/?begierige" among the general public, and especially to youth. The concept of "Volkstumlichkeit" is not explained, and must therefore be assumed to mean the absence of scholarly detail and an assumption of little or no background knowledge on the part of the reader in respect of literature or of history. Biese begins by discussing the term Literaturgeschichte, but does little to advance understanding of the term. He argues only that Literaturgeschichte is part of Geistesgeschichte, and that the literature of every nation forms part of world literature, so that Literaturgeschichte must of necessity be written philosophically, that is to say, the individual must be

75 The Turn of the Century

seen in the context of the development of his national literature and the latter in the context of world literature. In brief the aim of Literaturgeschichte is to portray "das Ewig-Dauernde." For this purpose only those works or writers of permanent significance should be considered, and these must be seen contextually; biographical details and dates are of little importance when it comes to showing "welche inneren Zusammenhange bestehen" between Literaturgeschichte and Geistesgeschichte. The role of the literary historian is therefore the difficult one of combining the comparative and historical-psychological approaches with that innate understanding which he derives from his own nationality. Biese nevertheless provides some dates and biographical details, plot summaries, and the like; and he does not deviate much from established views. However, he does not employ the traditional periodization scheme, perhaps as a result of his "comparative" approach. The salient feature of his work is in fact the attempt to show on the one hand, the continuity of the German literary tradition against the background of political developments, and on the other, the concomitant trends in European literature (and sometimes politics). In the chapter on "Vorlaufer des Realismus," for example, he begins with an analysis of the political events of 1848, and follows this up with a discussion of Darwin, new trends in philosophy, and so forth. The chapter on the "Literarrevolution der achtziger Jahre" is introduced with a discussion of Zola, Ibsen, Tolstoy, and others. To some extent literary developments are seen as directly related to the socio-political scene, - for example, during the Elizabethan era in England or the Golden Age in Spain. In the nineteenth century in particular Biese relates trends in German literature closely to the events of 1830,1848,1870, and 1888. It is in his discussion of the latter part of the nineteenth century that Biese's own views come through most clearly, primarily his antipathy towards Naturalism and the Socialist movement and his commitment to the older, humanistic Bildungsideal: "Man mii/he es aber aufs tiefste beklagen, wenn die auf der Verbindung des christlichen Germanentums und des klassischen Altertums beruhenden Bildungselemente, die bisher das geistige Leben der europaischen Menschheit nahrten und auf einen gemeinsamen Grundton stimmten, ihre Geltung verlieren sollten" (II, 476). It is with evident relief that he turns to "idealistische und besonnene Stromungen" in the most recent period of literature, introduced by the movement of Heimatkunst and Avenarius's Kunstwart. Although Biese admits that the Heimatkunst movement has not been successful everywhere, he favours its influence and concludes by looking forward hopefully to continued progress in German literature despite its many "Verirrungen" and in particular to the possibility of a new genius of the stature of Luther, Goethe, or Bismarck.

76

Histories of German Literature

Biese's work is the last large undertaking by a single individual before the First World War, in a period when the by now traditional form was beginning to break down into a variety of forms. Works covered the whole period briefly or at length, with or without illustrations, in tabular, note, or even in pictorial form. Alongside the histories of German literature were German histories of world literature that naturally gave ample space to German literature. Two examples at this period are the works by Busse and Mauser (both in two volumes and both in 1910). The former is noteworthy for the attempt to deal with European literature in the modern period as a whole, rather than country by country. The latter is remarkable for his comments on the racial distinctions between north and south: "So vollzog sich denn durch die Reformation die Trennung in ein altund ein neukonfessionelles Gebiet, ein von Rom, der einstigen Kapitale des welterobernden Germanentums abhangiges mit germanischer Bevolkerung und mischrassiger Masse und ein freies, im wesentlichen rein germanisches" (II, 132). And there were now partial histories (medieval, classical, nineteenth century) and studies of individual writers. This increased level of specialization led to general works of multiple authorship. The earliest example noted of dual authorship is the work of Liiben & Nacke, back in the 1860s; later examples are the works of Botticher & Kinzel and Brunner & Stockel. In the case of school works, the partnership seems more often than not to be a genuine case of joint authorship, but as German philology came to be divided into "altere" and "neuere" - the dividing point varies at first between 1500 and 1624 - so, too, literary histories came to be written by two separate authors, the one responsible for the older and the other for the modern period (a split after the end of the classical period, such as that in Holtz & Deetjen [1911], is unusual). This process begins effectively in the 1890s. Once this step had been taken, it was not long before "collective" histories of literature were compiled, where each author was responsible for only one period or one genre. The following are just two examples of dual authorship. The two-part history of literature that forms part of the massive collection of literature known as Kiirschner's Deutsche National-Literatur, volume 163 (1892-93), is intended both to accompany the set and to be read separately as "etwas Fertiges und Einheitliches ... eine lesbare und leicht verstandliche Literaturgeschichte" (163:1, ii). However, the two volumes have different authors and are (if for no other reason) quite distinct in their outlook, whatever their relation may be to the DNL. Of the two authors, Golther, who deals with the period to 1500, is the less idiosyncratic. His basic tenet is that an historical survey is necessary because "die Einzelerscheinung ... nur als Teil einer gro/ten Gesamtentwicklung im Zusammenhang recht verstanden

77 The Turn of the Century

werden kann" (i), but he offers no general historical framework. Medieval German literature is seen by Golther as a product of the native tradition, Old French sources, and Latin (primarily church) literature, and he finds Old French literature of such importance that he devotes over seventy pages to a short review of it. Perhaps the most striking feature of his work is the unusual degree of emphasis that is placed here on the dependence of German on French models; he refers several times to Middle High German literature as "Ubersetzungsliteratur." On the other hand, the general political and cultural background is sketched in very lightly, even in the case of the decline of literature in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, when the bourgeoisie, which was incapable of appreciating "den Geist ... die vollendete Form ... ihr gewahltes vornehmes Wesen" (335) of Middle High German literature, took up poetry but failed, because it lacked any "gemeinsamen kiinstlerischen politischen oder sozialen Mittelpunkt" (337). By contrast, Borinski leaves no doubt in the reader's mind about his position in regard to literary history. To begin with, he provides an introduction on literary history in which he explains its development from Gelehrtengeschichte, and pours scorn on those who have subjugated literary history to a theory, in particular to the determinist (milieu) theory. Borinski himself seems to be much closer to the earliest historians by his emphasis on the overriding significance of the individual personality, the impact and inter-relationships of leading individuals, and on the impossibility of explaining how they appear at any given time. He rejects the idea of cause and effect most clearly in regard to the eighteenth century: "Daft sie [the forces unleashed by the Reformation] nun gerade zu dieser Zeit in Aktion traten und gerade in so abgeschlossenen und vollendeten Erscheinungen, das ... kann freilich nicht erklart werden" (143). For Borinski, the entire history of modern Germany and German literature - with the exception of course of those negative traits - is the outcome of the great "humanistisch-reformatorische Bewegung" (143) that was the creation primarily of one man, Luther. Not unexpectedly, the development that began with that event and reached its apogee in the late eighteenth century is seen by him as declining sharply under the Romantics. He has nothing but distaste for them and their successors who are, he claims, still active in his own time: "Die deutsche Literatur der uns gegenwartig beschaftigenden Epoche [Romantik] bildet den Ausgang fur die entgegengesetztesten Richtungen sozialen, politischen und religiosen Wahns" (344). "Der realistische Geist, der mit dem "jungen Deutschland" um 1830 einsetzt, beherrscht, zum au/tersten Extrem gediehen, noch immer unsere Zeit" (349). A second work of dual authorship, but one which is completely different, is the Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur by Friedrich Vogt & Max

78

Histories of German Literature

Koch (1897). This work continues the tradition of heavily illustrated works for popular consumption. The authors see in literary history "einen Teil der allgemeinen Geschichte eines Volkes; ihn zu veranschaulichen, die nationale Entwickelung in den gro/3en Stromungen wie in den einzelnen Erscheinungen des litterarischen Lebens rait alien ihren wechselnden Bedingungen darzustellen, soil die Aufgabe der Litteraturgeschichte sein" (v). They propose to display in their work the "gesicherten Ergebnisse der germanistischen und allgemeinen litteraturgeschichtlichen Forschung" (v) and to evaluate literature not on the basis of fixed aesthetic principles but with due regard for "dichterischer Individuality, nationaler Eigenart und der geistigen Verfassung eines Zeitalters" (v). In comparison with Golther & Borinski, this work is divided at a later date; the second part begins with Opitz rather than at 1500, and the shift in emphasis is clear from the page numbers: Golther/Borinski - pre-1500 434p. (52.5%) : post-1500 393p. (47.5%) Vogt/Koch

- pre-1600 320p. (42.5%) : post-1600 433p. (57.5%)

With these one might compare Howald (above) who devotes a full 70% of his work to the period after 1600. The style of Vogt & Koch's work is the familiar combination of introductory historical background material, bio-bibliographical information, plot summaries, excerpts and general commentary, supplemented in this case by a vast amount of (partly coloured) illustrative material. The most recent period, from the Wars of Liberation to Wagner, is dealt with quite briefly, and there is some suggestion of anti-semitism in the comments on Heine; Wagner receives a good deal of attention. "Die jiingste Dichtung" is dismissed in only six pages. Further heavily illustrated works that should be mentioned here (though by one author rather than two) are those by J.G. Vogt (1897-99), Howald (1903), Arnold (1906), and Salzer (1912). Vogt's Illustrierte Geschichte der Deutschen Literatur actually contains very few illustrations, and these are black and white and almost exclusively portraits of writers. The reason for this is presumably Vogt's intention of writing a literary history for "Unbemittelte" and making literature "auch dem Armsten zuganglich" ([5]). The bulk of this two-volume work consists of plot summaries and excerpts, and there is virtually no historical background. Howald's work is not specifically designated as an illustrated history of literature and was therefore discussed above. Arnold's Illustrirte Deutsche Literaturgeschichte resembles that of Howald or Vogt & Koch in its combination of brief introductions to the periods, plot summaries or quotations, and frequent (black and white) illustrations. Aside from the background material, there

79 The Turn of the Century

is rarely any attempt to place the authors (who are dealt with individually and usually within genres) into their historical context. By contrast with these, Salzer's massive three-volume Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur enters into considerable detail about the historical, political, social, and cultural background to the different periods. The illustrative material is intended not merely to enhance the knowledge and understanding of the literary texts, but also to document the development of writing, manuscript illumination, book illustration, etc. Salzer does not propose any specific historical model for literary history, but he makes his aesthetic and moral position quite clear. His aim is "im Sinne echt wissenschaftlicher r Vertiefung und historisch-genetischer Methode die einzelnen Werke aus ihren Voraussetzungen zu erklaren" (xii); the basis for his evaluation is "christlich-katholisch," but he claims not to be one-sided in his judgments, although he has been more liberal than customary in the number of Catholic poets included. Other specific aspects which distinguish this work are the greater emphasis on works in Latin through the eighteenth century; the insistence on the necessity for the historian to record "alles was fur irgendeine Zeitepoche einmal von Bedeutung gewesen, dann aber verschwunden ist" (xii); and the relatively large number of quite minor Austrian writers. Salzer's judgments do not vary greatly from those of his predecessors, but he does generalize more often in explanation of his judgments. Something more will be said of Salzer as an Austrian historian in chapter eight. Given the large volume and disparate nature of the histories of German literature published around the turn of the nineteenth to the twentieth century, it is not surprising that no very clear trend can be seen in their development. There are, however, some significant changes that occur sufficiently often to warrant comment. These concern both the content and the structure of the works as well as what might be termed the authorial position. In the periodization there is a general acceptance of Scherer's scheme, although little is said (not surprisingly) about the first peak around 600; the "Bliitezeiten" of the Hohenstaufen and Weimar periods had in any case long since become axiomatic. As for the periodization between these peaks, there is perhaps greater freedom than before, but above all there is no acceptance of the idea that German literature (or literary history) should end with Goethe's death. On the contrary, one of the more notable features of literary histories at this time is the continuation of the literary historical record up to the present. The treatment of contemporary literature will be discussed below. For the moment it is enough to recall that at the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century, and even well into the middle of the nineteenth

80

Histories of German Literature

century, the discussion of recent literature had been considered undesirable, if not simply anathema (see Koberstein, for example, cited in Prolegomena, 125). What belongs or does not belong in a literary history is, however, now discussed from a rather different perspective. The growing interest in recent literature, as well as the natural increase in the volume to be covered, leads to a reduction of the earlier emphasis on medieval literature, even though this is still viewed qualitatively as a peak. A greater emphasis is now placed on what is still directly "accessible." There is a tendency, in fact, a Darwinist tendency, one might say, to limit the historical record to those works that have survived "the test of time" to the extent that they are still meaningful in the contemporary situation. This tendency leads to (among other things) a greater interest in the subsequent reception ("Nachwirkung") of older works. A related trend is the rejection of the idea of causality in literature, a refusal to accept that the literature of any epoch can be explained by circumstances or by the literature of the preceding epoch. The most extreme case is the refusal to accept that anyone can "explain" literature at all, the belief that it is essentially inexplicable. The general trend, however, is simply to reject the rationalist and latterly deterministic approach, partly of course on the grounds that it is foreign and therefore un-German, in this case not only French, but also Russian; to which is added the equally un-German Jewish influence. Partly there is also the feeling of a return to the older (and more German, because more individualistic) tradition of Storm and Stress. The treatment of contemporary literature has a quite different purpose now, for it is clearly the result of a widely held antipathy towards, rather than sympathy with, recent literary trends. Almost without exception the authors of literary histories in this period are strongly critical of the Naturalist and related tendencies in literature. They criticize the subject matter, the plots, the language; they claim that literature has descended into the gutter and that by its choice of subject it can only encourage, if not induce, vicious and even criminal behaviour. Those few that see any glimmer of hope for the future of literature find it in the apparent re-awakening of interest in religious writing, or in the folkloristic renewal represented by the Heimatbewegung. This attention to contemporary literature represents a radical change, and is evidently the result of strong feelings towards new literary trends; it would presumably not have been paid to the same extent to literature, had it continued in more traditional paths. One interesting facet of this reaction is the frequency with which historians now look to and even attempt to predict future trends in literature. Such predictions range from pious hopes for the future to a fervent belief in a coming fourth "Bliitezeit." Of far greater significance, however, is the root cause of the

81 The Turn of the Century disapproval of modern literature, the underlying moral stance of the historians. This is not a new feature, of course, and evidence has frequently been cited for the religious or moral bias of historians in the evaluation of literature. Whereas previously, however, individual works, but rarely the the authors themselves, had been criticized for their immorality, historians now see the immoral nature of recent literature as symptomatic of a moral crisis in the nation. Not this or that writer, but writers in general and with them the public at large have succumbed to the general malaise. Although some of the blame for this deterioration is attributed, as in the past, to pernicious foreign influences, in particular to the French, but now also to the Russians, and even to some extent to the Jews, the general tendency is to blame everything on materialism, on the individual greed for material goods, which has replaced the common will for the good of the nation. The achievement of nationhood, coinciding with rapid industrial development - such is the usual conclusion - has not been good for the people. The moral fibre of the people has been weakened, and the character of recent literature is symptomatic of its corruption. The corrupt literature is therefore contrasted with the few healthy elements that still remain, and the pages of the literary history used as a pulpit from which to urge the reader to be mindful of the dangers of materialism, to return to the true spirit of German Christianity (or Christian Germanness). "Fur das Volk, die Familie, das Haus schrieben wir, fur das christliche Haus" (vi), says Howald (1903), and speaks in this way for many literary historians of his time.

4 Titles, Periodization, and the Literary Canon

Something has been said in the preceding chapters about the differences in approach, ideology, etc. of the numerous histories of German literature, and it is precisely the wide variety of these works, the variation not only in format and style, but also in intention, that makes any detailed comparative analysis virtually impossible. There is in effect, aside from the adherence to the genre per se, no common denominator by which to measure them all. There are of course many individual aspects of these works that deserve to be investigated: their list of sources, for example, their treatment of contemporary writers, of female writers, or of local "dialect" writers, and so on, but these and similar topics, being too closely bound for the most part to specific periods or localities, would not contribute much to an understanding of the historical development of the genre as a whole. In this chapter, therefore, an attempt will be made to isolate and analyse a limited number of what might be described as quantifiable aspects. These are the titles given to histories of German literature, the structure of the works, and above all the extent to which they conform to the so-called literary canon. The titles need no further comment. By structure is meant the manner in which the chronological record of literary history is divided into periods and how these periods are designated. The literary canon has come to mean a "standard" list of writers that one may expect to find discussed in any general history of literature, and it may therefore be deduced, one assumes, from an analysis of the indexes of literary histories. To analyse the complete indexes to all the literary histories listed in the bibliography, or even to those discussed in the preceding chapters - not to mention those works that have no index! - would obviously be too large an undertaking. Discus-

83

Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon

sion of this aspect will therefore be restricted to a selection of works over a limited period of time, with some reference to earlier and later works. The point has been made before that German literature is unique, at least within Western Europe, as being referred to as "national literature" ("deutsche Nationalliteratur"), rather than simply as German literature. However, this is not the term most frequently used. It was apparently created by Leonhard Meister in 1777, when he entitled his work Beitrdge zur Geschichte der teutschen Sprache und Nationalliteratur. Meister, a Swiss, presumably intended his readers to understand from this term that he would be dealing with the literature of the German-speaking nations, much in the same way that the empire was referred to as "das heilige romische Reich deutscher Nationen." The term does not seem to have become popular, however, until it was used by Wachler in 1818, that is, in the period of strident patriotism that accompanied and followed the Napoleonic wars. The term was common in the 1840s, rather less common in the 1850s, and rare thereafter. The creation of the Second Empire did not lead to a revival of the term, which was nevertheless in use at least until 1909 hi the sub-title of Epstein's Was mu(3 der Unteroffizier von der Literatur wissen? Bilder aus der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Since this work may seem too specific in its audience, it should be noted that a general work for schools by Kretschmer used the term in 1907, and it survived in the title of Kluge's work into the 1930s. It is also worth noting that the term is used originally by a Swiss, later by German and Austrian (Strzemcha) historians, and in one publication in the USA (Hattstadt). The now familiar term "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur," occasionally "der schonen Literatur der Deutschen" or "der deutschen Poesie [und Prosa]," becomes common in the 1850s and has remained so. However, the term "deutsche Literaturgeschichte," which occurs only rarely before 1868, begins to compete with other terms in the 1870s, and comes to dominate by the turn of the century. "Deutsche Literaturgeschichte" (in various combinations) outnumbers "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur" by four to one in the period 1898 to 1908. Other terms, such as "Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung" or "deutsche Literaturkunde" (the latter possibly indicating something other than a discursive history) are rare; occasionally there are combinations, such as Die deutsche Dichtung; Grundrifl der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (Heinemann). Least used is the term "deutsches Schrifttum." In summary, then, and leaving aside the numerous alternative but rarely repeated titles, the term "Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur11 is overtaken in mid-nineteenth century by "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur," and the latter phrase is in turn overtaken at the end of the century by the phrase "deutsche Literaturgeschichte." It is doubtful

84

Histories of German Literature

whether these changes represent any conscious development in the approach to literary history, but it seems likely that the introduction of the term "Literaturgeschichte" is linked with the general development of historical studies in the latter half of the century, an approximation, in other words, to the concept of "deutsche Geschichte." Equally, there seems to be little significance in the supplementary terms applied to these histories of literature. By far the most popular are "Leitfaden" and "Handbuch" (rarely "Handbiichlein"), closely followed by "Abri/3" (frequently "kurzes Abri/3"). Rather less frequent is the word "Grundri/?," and behind this come with approximately equal frequency "Ubersicht" and "Grundziige." Rarely used terms are "Lehrbuch," "Hilfsbuch," "Umri/?," "Wegweiser," etc, along with the various terms applied to special categories, such as "Tabellen" and "Katechismen." There is no discernible change in the relative frequency of these terms through the nineteenth century. The only point that needs to be made is that the titles give no certain indication of the size or type of work, i.e., an "Abri/J" or an "Ubersicht" may be just as long or detailed as a "Grundri/3" or "Handbuch." Just as the specific names given to histories of literature, such as "Wegweiser11 or "Abri/3," may give little or no indication of the precise nature of the work, so, too, the manner in which the historical record is divided chronologically may give little or no indication of the author's view concerning the relative status of the periods or their relationship one to another. The work may be broken down into chapters as much for convenience as for the conveyance of an historical concept, a concept which may be implicit in the text but not explicit in any titles. In the following, therefore, the periodization will be considered in two stages, first the actual dates used in dividing the historical record, and secondly the designations by which the divisions are identified. The simplest division of all is evidently that into ancient and modern, or rather into medieval and modem. This is rare, but it does occur, for example with Menge (1877), who divides the historical record at the year 1500, or Kniittel, who makes the break at 1624. In the former case one must assume that the year 1500 is intended only as an approximation, whereas in the latter case - and these are the cases which are of primary interest - the date refers to a specific event. Probably the next simplest type of division is the linguistically oriented division into Old High German, Middle High German, and New High German, sometimes termed "altere" or "alteste Zeit," "alte Zeit," and "neue(re) Zeit." This occurs with minor variations a number of times. The dates for these divisions are not always given, but those that occur most frequently are 1100 and 1150 or mid-twelfth century for the break between Old and Middle High German, and 1500 (1517, 1525, 1550) for the break

85 Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon between Middle and New High German. The alternatives to the break at 1500-1550 are 1600 or, more frequently, 1624, but these later dates are rare after about 1870. A fairly common form of general periodization is therefore a division into three parts (with or without sub-divisions): up to the middle of the twelfth century; from then until Luther; and from Luther to the present. The earlier boundary marker is rarely defined except by date; the latter division is sometimes designated by Luther or simply by the Reformation. An alternative marker for the beginning of the third period or for the beginning of a fourth period is rare, but there is an occasional division between 1725 and 1750. Schroer, for example (1830), divides first at Luther and then at 1732, while Viehoff (1857) divides at mid-twelfth century, at 1525, and at 1725. After the major divisions into two or three (rarely four) periods, the number of divisions or sub-divisions varies between five and ten, by far the most common division being at first into seven periods, and in the latter part of the nineteenth century into eight periods. The sub-divisions in the older period, that is, before about 1500, are relatively few and for the most part non-specific. The dates which occur most frequently are 768, later 800 (Charlemagne), and 1137 (end of the Saxon and beginning of the Hohenstaufen emperors), later more frequently 1150 or 1100. At the other end of the scale there is no doubt that by far the most frequently cited date is 1748. In the earliest works of the nineteenth century 1740 occurs, e.g. Heydenreich (1831) and Nosselt (1833), but by mid-century a division at 1748 is almost inevitable. Well behind the date of 1748, with approximately equal frequency, are the years 1720 and 1770. It is difficult to establish any clear development in the designations for literary periods, since, while the same or similar boundary dates may appear frequently as boundary markers for divisions or sub-divisions, the other endmarkers may be dissimilar and the periods thus quite different in length and content. In general it can be said that there is agreement on the approximate boundaries for the Middle High German period and on the existence of a Classical (Weimar) period; that these two periods represent highpoints; and that the seventeenth century represents a lowpoint. The main variations are therefore on either side of the nadir of the seventeenth century. On the one hand the decline must be marked from the Middle High German period, and on the other hand the upswing towards the Classical period must be indicated. The period before Middle High German is rarely divided. Early on, the terms bardic and Gothic are used, but these disappear in favour of "heidnisch" and "geistlich," which make a better contrast with the "ritterlich" or "hofisch" of the Middle High German literature. Occasionally the term "frankisch" or even "alemannisch" is applied to the period before MHG. The MHG period itself is frequently designated as

86 Histories of German Literature the Swabian period or the period of the minnesinger, sometimes also as the Hohenstaufen period. Occasionally a more patriotic adjective can be used, e.g., "national" or "deutsch-romantisch," or the period is designated as the first Classical period or "Bliitezeit." The only general agreement about the long period from the decline (usually so named) from the highpoint of MHG literature to the nadir of the seventeenth century is in regard to the meistersinger and the dominance of bourgeois writers. The second most frequently used term is "popular," i.e., the period of "Volksliteratur" (in various forms). Less common are terms that describe the literature of the period as didactic. The problem with creating a period division at this time derives from the desire to establish the Reformation as the turning point, even though this falls in the middle of the meistersinger period. The (sub-) divisions before the Reformation (variously 1500, 1517, 1519, 1523, 1534, if not Luther or the Reformation) therefore vary greatly and include dates for the founding of universities or the invention of printing. There is rare unanimity among literary historians about the seventeenth century, characterized as it is by "widerstrebende Meinungen," "Unpoesie," "Auslanderei und Barbarei," "geistige Fremdherrschaft," and so forth. Less directly pejorative terms are social designations, such as "Gelehrten- und Hofpoesie," but these are not necessarily used in conjunction with the earlier "Ritterdichtung" etc. The beginning of the period is easily defined by Opitz or the Thirty Years' War; the end of it and the beginning of the new Classical period cause some problems, as historians evidently feel that Klopstock's Messias was too great a work to be viewed simply as a starting point. The reaction against the Silesian schools ("water" poets) is therefore often included in the "Opitzian" period, while a (sub-) division is introduced in the 1720s or 1730s with titles that indicate a regeneration, e.g., "Wiedererhebung." The period of Weimar classicism is accepted by all literary historians, although they may not agree on precisely when it began and ended. By and large they see the Classical period as ending with Goethe, and many, though they may discuss the Romantics, go no further than this. Since some historians also avoid any discussion of recent or contemporary literature, an analysis of the periodization for the nineteenth century cannot be done systematically. Where more recent periods are discussed, the organization tends to be rather different, i.e., based primarily on schools and other groupings. The Romantics are treated as a group, of course, as are also the poets of the Wars of Liberation and those writers under the rubric of Junges Deutschland. The next group is generally that of the "Swabian" poets, and from then on, possibly by analogy, possibly as a result of growing regionalism, some historians group writers by locality. Lyric poets, for example, may be sub-divided into Bavarian,

87

Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon

Austrian, Prussian, and so forth. Noteworthy in this connection is both the large number of female writers discussed in the modern period, and the fact that these are treated separately, i.e., not by locality with their male counterparts. By the end of the century it was of course no longer possible to ignore the fact that literature, even good literature, had not ceased with the death of Goethe, and all historians now try to bring the record more or less up to date. Goethe's death is still in many instances the dividing point, but there is a noticeable tendency from about the turn of the century to use either 1830 or 1848 as the dividing line between "Classical" and "modern." The more recent literature is then divided, if at all, at 1870 and/or at 1885. There is therefore some indication that political events begin to play a larger role at this time in the periodization process. On the other hand, there is also a marked tendency away from a division into large, tendentiously designated periods towards a much more specific structure, one based on simple and narrow literary groupings. There are still those who polemicize in the periodization and describe the early eighteenth century, for example, as "eine Zeit der Vorbereitung und des Kampfes gegen das Franzosentum" (Vogtlin), but for the most part simpler formulations are used, such as "Reformationszeitalter" or "Klassik und Romantik"; or, where large periods are not used, as in the case of Biese, simple chapter headings: "Die Zeit der Friihromantik," "Die jiingere Romantik," "Heinrich von Kleist," "Die Befreiungskriege," etc. As an example of the persistence of the more polemic titles, one might note that Kluge still uses such a period designation as "Die Poesie in den Handen der Gelehrten oder Periode der Nachahmung. 1624-1748" up to the First World War, and the title remained in reprints into the 1930s. Which writers and which works are discussed within these period divisions, is something that has been touched upon on occasion and will be discussed in further detail later. There is nevertheless one aspect of this process of selection which can provide a kind of objective criterion for the development of the genre, and that is the extent to which "all" literary histories adhere or do not adhere to a so-called literary canon. The term "canon" in the modern era is associated with those books of the bible that have been designated by the church authorities as genuine. In the Concise Oxford Dictionary (1985) the definition reads: "collection or list of sacred books etc. accepted as genuine." The term is applied in literature also to those works of a given author that are considered as genuine, but it is more often applied now to a list of writers/works, constituting the permanent core of a given literature, in essence a received, standard list of best books; as Wilpert puts it in his Sachworterbuch der Literatur (Stuttgart: Kroner, 6th ed. 1979): "e[ine] als

88

Histories of German Literature

allgemeingultig und dauernd verbindlich gedachte Auswahl vorbildlicher dichterischer oder rednerischer Leistungen, K[atalog] raustergiiltiger Autoren" (261). Wilpert's definition is somewhat cautious, and an examination of the "canon" in literary histories of the late nineteenth century will perhaps justify this caution. The discussion of the literary canon has to be based initially, for strictly pragmatic reasons, on a sampling of works within a restricted period. The period chosen was roughly the third quarter of the nineteenth century, and out of this period nine works were selected as being representative for the time. They are (in chronological order): Huhn, Eugen (1852) Schulze, Otto [Wegweiser] (1854) Wernick, Friedrich [Ubersicht] (1856) Oltrogge, Carl (1862) Seinecke, Ferdinand (1866) Kluge, Hermann (1869) Strzemcha (1877) Sehrwald, Friedrich (1880) Egelhaaf, Gottlob (1881) On the basis of the indexes to each work, a composite index was created (excluding titles and subjects), and the names were verified as far as possible. This was not an easy task, since in numerous instances there were discrepancies not only between works, but within individual works. An author listed in an index might, for example, not appear on the page cited or might appear there with a different name. A basic problem was the listing of surnames with no given names (in some cases multiple page references were made to different writers of the same name), and the casual attitude towards spelling, e.g., Franck, Frank, Francke. Most, but by no means all, the names were identified by reference to the texts and to the usual reference sources. The majority of the unidentifiable names (no attempt was made to identify names clearly cited as non-literary) are of non-literary or quasi-literary figures. As an example I quote Huhn: "Wir haben an Schonlein, Fuchs, Pfeuffer, Langenbeck, Chelius, Stromeyer, Textor, Dieffenbach u. A. ausgezeichnete Arzte und Chirurgen" (619); "Au/fer diesen konnten wir noch eine ganze Reihe Poeten untergeordneteren Ranges erwahnen, wie W. Waiblinger, H. Kurz [forty more names, some without initials], es ware aber damit nichts gewonnen, denn ... fur die Literaturgeschichte sind sie ohne Werth" (606). The complete index comprised approximately 2500 entries, of which twenty to twenty-five percent, based on the entries under the letter A, were estimated to be of only indirect relevance, for example, sources of

89 Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon German works (Alberich von Besanc/m, Aesop), patrons (Ludwig of Anhalt), or foreign writers (Addison, Aeschylus). There remained, therefore, approximately two thousand writers whose writings were considered of sufficient interest to be named in a history of literature. To analyse the entire corpus would have been too large an undertaking, and the following analysis is therefore restricted to the letter M. This group was chosen solely because it was in the middle of the alphabet and of average length. Had it occurred to me that it would include both Meyer and Miiller, I might have chosen otherwise. Of the total of 168 names under M, twenty-seven were rejected as foreign: Macfarlan, Machiavelli, Macpherson, Magnin, Malherbe, Mandeville, Margarethe von Navarra, Maria von Burgund, Marino, Marlowe, Martial, Mauvillon, Mazarin, Mehul, Mendoza, Michelangelo, Milford, Millanello, Millenet, Milton, Moliere, Montesquieu, Morus, Moscheles, Moschos, Moses, Murillo. Included in this list are the following names which could appear elsewhere in the indexes and were consequently cross-checked: Martell (Pochhammer), Melissus (Schede), Mereau (Brentano), Mises (Fechner), Mnioch (Schmidt), Morungen (Heinrich von), Moscherosch (Sittewald), Munch-Bellinghausen (Halm). The 141 German names were distributed over time as in table 1. Table 1 Writers by Date of Birth Century pre-1400 1400-1499 1500-1599 1600-1699 1700-1799 1800-

Writers 5 5

6 9 73 43

The names listed under M and the number of pages per work are displayed in table 2. The figures in the final column in this table have little significance per se, for they would have to be divided by A-Z over M in order to obtain an indication of the average space devoted to each name. However, they do indicate the relative amount of space per name in each of the works, e.g., Wernick gives almost twice as much space to each name as Huhn or Schulze and these in turn twice as much as Strzemcha. While there are obvious reasons for some of the variation, e.g., the

90 Histories of German Literature Table 2 Works in Chronological Order Author

Names (M)

Huhn Schulze Wernick Oltrogge Seinecke Kluge Strzemcha Sehrwald Egelhaaf

Text pages

75 35 77

621 292 1107

54 23

549 156

45 56 14 27

627 268 166 122

Pp./name, 8.28 8.34 14.38 13.93 4.79 11.86 4.52 10.17 6.78

inclusion or not of plot summaries, and in the case of Wernick lengthy sample texts, it is evident that the number of names mentioned is related to some extent, not unnaturally, to the length of the text. They are re-ordered in table 3. Table 3 Works in Order of Size Pages

122 156 166 268 292 549 621 627 1107

No. of names

27 23 14 56 35 54 75 45 77

Pages/name 4.52 6.78 11.86 4.79 8.34 10.17 8.28 13.93 14.38

Author Strzemcha Egelhaaf Kluge Seinecke Schulze Sehrwald Huhn Oltrogge Wernick

The only anomaly in this table is Kluge, and this must be ascribed in part to chance. A cross-check with the letter A showed that the average number of names under that letter is slightly less than that under M for all works except Kluge, where there are forty percent more entries (twenty) than under M (fourteen). Since there is an obvious predilection for the eighteenth century - a little over half of those named were born in that century - further com-

91

Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon

ment is now restricted to this period. Of those writers born between 1700 and 1799, only five (Matthisson, Miller, Miiller (Wilhelm), Milliner, and Musaus) are named in all nine works, three are named in eight, two in seven, four in six, three in five, four in four, seven in three, thirteen in two, and thirty-two in only one. This means that out of a total of seventy-three names in this period, almost half (44%) are mentioned by only one of the historians. The eighteenth century cannot be considered to be anomalous here, since out of the total 141 names for all periods only eight occur in all the works cited and sixty-two in only one of them (also 44%). Outside of the eighteenth century the only names in all works are Murner, Moscherosch, and Miinch-Bellinghausen. This, not unnaturally, raises the question of the supposed canon of standard works. Why do so few names occur in all or most of these literary histories? And who are these "writers" that find favour with only a very few or even just one of the historians? Leaving aside the possibility that any one of the indexes may be at fault, i.e., have omissions, and the possibly unrepresentative nature of the letter M for this particular period, it seems evident that there are, to us, some strange discrepancies, such as can only partly be explained by changes in taste. Musaus's name is not unexpected, and one would also expect to see Miller (author of Siegwari) and even Matthisson, who is no longer considered to be of great significance, well represented as late as the end of the nineteenth century. But it seems strange that Moritz is cited in only four of the indexes, the same number of times as Manso or Massmann, and Morungen only three times, the same number of times as Sophie Mereau. More interesting, though, are those individuals whose names occur only once, for here it proved difficult in some cases even to identify the persons concerned. In the first place there is some indication that the number of unique references is in part related to the length of the work. The following are the relationships between unique references and page numbers (in order of the size of the work): 12:1107, 6:621, 3:549, 2:268, 1:627, 1:292. There could of course be special interests involved, but this seems to the case in only one instance, namely, with Wernick, who makes a particular point of relating literature to art. The indexes also include, naturally enough, the names of individuals peripheral to the writers and their works, for example, A.G.D. Moltke, a friend of Klopstock, or Mieding, on whose death Goethe wrote a poem. Non-writers are included, such as composers (Methfessel, Meyerbeer, Mozart) and artists (Magnus, Merz), but also writers in other disciplines, such as theology (Johann Friedrich Meyer) or law (Mittermaier). There is some suggestion, therefore, that even though these works are quite limited in scope and not intended for an erudite audience, their authors are main-

92 Histories of German Literature taining the older and broader definition of literature, which included works on history, philosophy, theology, etc. The analysis of these nine works is based on a single letter of the alphabet, but a comparison with other letters produces a similar result. There is a very limited number of writers who appear in all of them, and a wide degree of variation in the names that occur in only a few or in one of them. Before drawing any conclusions from these statistics a look at earlier and later works may prove instructive. In the 133-page work by Schaefer (1836), there are thirty names under the letter M, every one of which appears in one or more of the nine discussed (1852-81), although only seven are in all nine and four in only one. Given the variety and size of the later works, this is not surprising; surprising is only the large number of names in Schaefer's short work. The situation is quite different, however, if the thirty names from Schaefer are sought in later works, viz., Erich Schulze (1912, 371p.), Kluge, 43rd. ed. (1911, 305p.), and Vogtlin (1912, 259p.). Of the thirty names, more than half have disappeared, including Melissus and Moritz. The only names from the earlier work that appear in all three of the later works are: Moscherosch, Maler Miiller, Wilhelm Miiller, and Murner. Two of them list Matthisson, Melancthon, Mendelssohn, Miller, Moser, and Musaus; Milliner appears in only one. The names that have been added are not, however, entirely those of more recent writers (e.g., Thomas Mann, Miegel, Morike, Miinchhausen). They include Maximilian I (1), Michaelis (1), Morungen (3), and Mylius (1), along with early nineteenth-century writers such as Mahlmann (1), Meinhold (1), or Meyr (2). There is therefore a considerable discrepancy also between these three recent works. The overlap is shown in table 4. It is also very clear from the number of writers cited that the space devoted to each has increased considerably. The relative proportions are: Schaefer 30:133, Schulze 29:371, Kluge 20:305, Vogtlin 11:259. The discrepancies between these later works can to a certain extent be accounted for. Given that they are all three relatively short and intended primarily for schools, it is not surprising that the earlier period is so meagrely represented. The fact that Vogtlin is Swiss accounts for the presence of Manuel (fifteenth century) and Marti (nineteenth century), both of them Swiss. The appearance in Kluge of Mahlmann, Michaelis, etc is presumably explained by tradition; they have been carried over despite revisions and additions over the many decades during which Kluge has been reprinted. As a final example, one can compare the entries under the letter M in two works one hundred years apart. In Schultz's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur of 1889 there are twenty-two entries. In the Geschichte der deutschen Literatur by Saalfeld/Kreidt/Rothe in 1989 -

93

Titles, Periodization, the Literary Canon

Table 4 Overlap Between Three "Typical" Works All three works Mann Megerle Morike Morungen Moscherosch Mosen Miiller (Maler) Muller (Wilhelm) Miinch-Bellinghausen Murner

—

Two works (S/K/V) Matthisson (S/K) Melancthon (S/V) Mendelssohn(S/K) Meyr (S/K) Miller (S/K) Moser (S/K) Miinchhausen (S/K) Musaus (S/K)

—

One work Mahlmann (K) Manuel (V) Marti (V) Matthesius (S) Maximilian I (S) Meinhold (S) Meissner (K) Meyer (R.M.) (S) Michaelis (K) Miegel (S) Moltke (S) Mommsen (S) Morhof(S) Muller (Joh.v.) (S) Milliner (K) Minister (K)

in the foreword to which one can read: "Audi der literarische Kanon hat seine Tucke" (11) - nine of these names are missing: Matthisson, Megerle, Heinrich Meyer (error for C.F. Meyer?), Miller, Mommsen, Mosenthal, Gustav Moser, Johannes von Muller, and Wilhelm Muller. Mommsen and Johannes von Muller are historians, of course, but the others are literary figures in the general sense. Once again, consistent with what has been said above, those that have been added in the later work are not entirely from the recent past - Mechthild von Magdeburg and Melancthon, for example - and the number of writers has not increased in proportion to the size of the work: approximately forty-five entries in the later work (732p.) as opposed to twenty-two in the earlier one (278p.). In view of the wide variety in histories of literature, their varying length, audience, and purpose, it is hardly to be expected that there would be either a large core of material covered by all of them, or a clear line of development in the size and shape of whatever core could be identified. Three points nevetherless emerge from a survey of the contents of these works, of which only a fraction has been presented here as a sample. The first point is simply that the canon - if by this is understood the core of literary works treated by all historians - is quite narrow. It consists of little more than the Hildebrandslied, Hartmann, Wolfram, Gottfried, Walther, the Nibelungenlied, Hans Sachs, Luther, and a handful of

94

Histories of German Literature

writers from the Enlightenment, the Classical, and the Romantic periods. Beyond this there is a wide variety in the writers and works cited, and the second conclusion is that this variety is not solely a function of the period at which the historian is writing; that is to say, the rarely cited names are not simply those of writers more or less contemporaneous with the historian. This is only one aspect, and one for which there are obvious reasons. There are also special grounds, chiefly religious or local bias, for including this or that writer. But there is no apparent reason for the inclusion or exclusion of many names from the period between the two "Bliiteperioden." Finally, it is evident that there is a general trend throughout the century towards a greater degree of selectivity and a reduction in the number of "para-literary" figures (historians, theologians, etc). Early in the century historians include a greater variety and attempt to list a greater number of writers, even though there may be no space in which to discuss them. This tradition persists to some degree through the third quarter of the century but has largely disappeared by the turn of the twentieth century, as historians begin to concentrate on what is still "relevant" or has "stood the test of time." Kluge and others notwithstanding, the canon increases slightly in size, while the number of peripheral figures is decreasing. One final note on this topic. For the purpose of this discussion it has been assumed - for obvious reasons - that the literary "canon" is represented, if not determined, by what appears in histories of literature. But this is not the only possible definition. It could, for example, be argued that many literary histories were themselves derivative of such things as school curriculum guides and that these constituted in nuce a literary canon. Alternatively, the canon might be defined as those works on which modern writers based themselves ("mustergiiltige Autoren"), or those which readers and/or libraries felt ("in duty") bound to purchase. Given contemporary developments in the writing of literary history, a radical re-definition of the term literary canon is probably essential, but it would be anachronistic to apply such criteria to the period before 1914.

5 The Most Successful Histories of German Literature and Translations into Other Languages

The degree of success of any publication cannot be easily established, and the older the work the more difficult the task becomes. For the most part no information is available about the number of copies printed of older literary histories, and if it were, one would not necessarily know how many copies were sold or how many of the sold copies were read. This is a particular problem for works such as literary histories, which are often purchased for library use rather than for home reading. These and similar factors preclude a detailed analysis of the varying degree of success achieved by works published in the past, and the discussion in the following is therefore limited to those works that must be assumed to have been unusually successful on the strength of three factors, viz., the number of editions, the length of time over which they were reprinted, and their use in countries outside Germany. Some comments must also be made about the question of authorship and editions. While the number of editions is taken as a basic indicator of success, print-runs of editions may vary widely; only very occasionally do editions of German works list with an edition (or impression) the total number of copies printed. The dates given for editions in the various reference sources may also vary, depending - for example, in the case of works issued in fascicles - on whether the date of the first fascicle is used or the date of completion of the (first) volume. In the case of multi-volume works, the later volumes may not appear until the first volume has already been re-issued in a second or third edition. In general, therefore, dates and editions cited here are, for the first edition, the date of completion of the first volume, and for the latest edition, the highest edition number of any volume in the set. In some cases, of

96 Histories of German Literature course, a work was re-issued after the author's death. Such posthumous editions - for example, in the case of Vilmar - have been included, provided that no substantial additions or alterations were made to the original text. Finally it must be noted that a few authors produced more than one history of German literature, but these have not been added together and viewed as a whole. Individual works, not the sum total of the individual authors' works, are here under discussion. Excluded from this discussion are all works that achieved fewer than ten editions or remained in print for less than thirty years. Further criteria will be introduced below, but since the number of works that meet these general criteria is not large, the entire list is presented in table 5. Table 5 "Successful" Works Author Koberstein Pischon Gervinus Schaefer Helbig Vilmar Hiippe Weber Lange Schoppner Mobius Gude Dietlein Hahn Liiben Reuter Brugier Lindemann Oberrrmller

Original title Grundri/? Leitfaden Gesch.d.dt.

Dg.

Grundri/3 Grundri/? Vorll. Gesch.d.dt. Nlit. Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Grundri/? Kl.Litt.fc Katech. Erll. Leitfaden Gesch.d.poet Lit. Einf. Gesch.d.poet L./Lit.kunde Gesch.d.dt. Nlit. Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Leitfaden

First ed.

Last ed.

No. ofeds.

1827 1830 1835

1872 1887 1871

5 15 5

1836 1843 1844 1846

1877 1875 1911 1894

12 7 27 4

1847

1880

11

1851 1854 1856 1858 1859 1860

1886 1911 1896 1906 1909 1910

11 7 7 12 14 16

1860 1861

1918 1929

11 23

1865

1911

12

1866

1915

10

1868

1913

8

97 Popular and Translated Works Table 5 continued Kluge Stohn Netoliczka Dietlein Strzemcha Konig Weber (Hugo) Egelhaaf Hentschel Horn Kriiger Scherer Schultz (F.) Wychgram Heilmann B6tticher/K Kummer Lehmann Klee Vogt/ Koch Bartels Wiesner Engel Biese Engel

Gesch.d.dt. Nlit. Lehrbuch Gesch.d.dt.L Wiederholungsb. Gesch.d.dt. Nlit. Dt.Litg. Dt.Spr.u. Dg. Grundziige Ill.dtL.kunde Hilfsbuch Dt.Lit.kunde Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Hilfsbuch Gesch.d.dt. Nlit. Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Leitfaden Ubersicht Grundziige Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Dt.Lit.kunde Gesch.d.dt. Lit. Dt.Litg. Kurzgef.

1869

1937

58

1869 1873 1874

1914 1911 1919

8 9 20

1877

1910

8

1878 1879

1930 1941

37 40

1881 1882

1913 1920

22 13

1882 1882

1908 1912

12 13

1883

1927

16

1889.

1922

4

1892 1893

1938 1924

27 11

1894

1921

30

1894 1894 1895 1897

1921 1927 1922 1938

16 11 22 5

1900

1943

19

1903 1906

1936 1929

13 37

1907 1909

1931 1929

25 37

Some of the works in table 5 must be eliminated for the following reasons. In the first place, those textbooks produced for the captive school audience are excluded. The use of any given textbook over a long period of time may, of course, be indicative of its value, but this value is assessed primarily in terms of the function of the work as a pedagogical

98

Histories of German Literature

tool. Those school texts that are successful also tend to be adapted over the years to changing curriculum requirements, often by a succession of authors. As an example one might cite the work of Rack! and Ebner. Josef Rackl and Eduard Ebner produced their history of German literature for schools in 1907, and it went through several editions before being revised by Karl Hunger in 1920. After further editions, Rackl-Ebner-Hunger was revised in 1950 by Leo Krell and Leonhard Fiedler, and the work was still listed under their names in the seventeenth edition (1981) of the Verzeichnis lieferbarer Bticher. On the above grounds, works by the following are omitted from further discussion (again in chronological order): Lange, Schoppner, Dietlein (1859), Liiben, Obermiiller, Stohn, Netolizcka, Dietlein (1874), Hugo Weber, Horn, Kriiger, Wychgram, Kummer, Lehmann, Wiesner. Also eliminated are catechisms and the like (Helbig, Mobius, Gude), along with the heavily illustrated works of Konig, Hentschel, and Vogt & Koch, where the appeal is primarily through the illustrations and not through the text. F. Schultz will not be considered, since the later editions are revised and edited by Reuschel. The remaining works can be divided roughly into three groups. The largest group consists of small, single-volume works with a maximum of four hundred pages. The intermediate group consists of larger works, varying in size from approximately five hundred to one thousand pages. The third group of large, multi-volume works is very small. The work of Koberstein (bracketed in the table) is unique in that it begins as a small work in group one, and ends as one of the largest works in group three. It will consequently be omitted from the statistical analysis. In table 6 the page numbers, which are given for the first and last editions, do not include the prelims (on average ca. ten pages): The small works average 20 editions over approximately 42 years, and this does not vary greatly from the average for the medium-size works 18 editions over 53 years - but their number is too small to be statistically significant. The same applies to the large works where one, Gervinus, has few editions (five) spread over thirty-six years during the nineteenth century, while the remaining works are all from the twentieth century. These average close to one edition per year (twenty-six in twenty-nine years). In addition there were translations or various adaptations abroad of the works shown in table 7. Several other works, not listed among the more successful, were also the basis for foreign editions; these are included below in the general discussion of translated works. Several facts emerge from these tables and from an analysis of the intermediate editions. In the first place the smaller works show a marked tendency to increase in size with each succeeding edition, whereas the

99 Popular and Translated Works Table 6 Successful works by size Small Author (Koberstein) Pischon Schaefer Huppe Weber Hahn Reuter Brugier Kluge Strzem-

cha Egelhaaf Heilmann Botticher Klee Engel

Medium Eds/pp

(299) 1:118 15:303 1:133 12:198 1:276 4:283 1:112 11:250 1:349 16:363 1:72 23:356 1:298 12:745 1:166 58:334 1:122 8:180# 1:156 22:205 1:142 11:188 1:171 30:216 1:175 22:192 1:370 36:378+

Author (Koberstein) Vilmar

Large

Eds/pp (3:535) 1:659

Author (Koberstein) Gervinus

27:808*

Lindemann Scherer

1:702 10:1376 1:793 16:843

Eds/pp (5:2837) 1:3120 5:3594

Bartels Engel Biese

1:1362 19:851 1:1189 36:1142 1:2008 25:2195

* Includes continuation by Stern; 1912 reprint has 456p. — # ed. by Ginzel; previous ed. by Egelhaaf (7) 221p. — + 37th (last) ed. is expanded version.

medium-sized and large works remain in general the same. Secondly, there are very few medium-sized works and these appear only in the Table 7

100 Histories of German Literature

Table 7 Author

Date

Klee

1909

Kluge

1880

-

1888

-

1906

Koberstein

1834

Scherer

1886

Vilmar

1858

Weber

1853

-

1865

-

1867 1870

Language (translator) relationship English (Priest) "based on" French (Philippi) "d'apres ... Kluge" English (Lublin) "based on the work of Italian (Cantalamessa) from the 30th ed. French (Marmier) "traduit par" English (Conybeare) from the 3rd ed. English (Metcalfe) "based on" Italian (Eisner) "recato in idioma italiano" Hungarian (?) from the llth ed. French (Lauth) Swedish (Olsson) from the 13th ed.

1840s to 1880s. Large-scale works, with the exception of Gervinus, do not appear until the turn of the twentieth century. It is worth noting, however, that the greatly enlarged fifth edition of Koberstein, the fifth and final edition of Gervinus, and the large work by Kurz (not listed here, as it achieved only seven editions over twenty-odd years), all appeared for the last time in the 1870s. From this it would seem, then, that there was a steady market throughout the nineteenth century for compact works of around two hundred pages for personal and/or school use and only a very limited market (academics and libraries) for compendious works, and one that seems to cease in the 1870s. Towards the end of the century, however, presumably as a result of the increase in the size of the educated middle class, a substantial market developed for fairly comprehensive one to three-volume works. At the lower end of the scale was Kluge - originally a small work, but expanded to over three hundred pages - and at the upper end, Biese's three-volume, but still relatively compact work (ca. 2000 pages). Taking all factors into consideration, therefore, the works listed in table 8 (in chronological order) seem to have been the most popular histories of German literature published prior

101 Popular and Translated Works

to the First World War (pages given are for the first edition). The first thing made evident by tables 5/7 is the fact that the most popular short works in Germany also found the widest dissemination abroad, Weber (1847) in the period from 1853 to 1870 and Kluge (1869) from 1880 to 1906. Kluge can in fact be fairly designated as the most successful of all works in terms of sales and dissemination. The success of these two works is the result, in part at least, of their conciseness, and it appears that there was only room for one work of this type, i.e., for a short, conveniently organized, and largely factual work that could be used in schools and/or as a simple reference work. Weber's work was gradually superseded by that of Kluge, and the latter's work remained unchanged in style and format until the First World War. Although it may have had its competitors in the twentieth century - Engel, for example - it actually retained its format until shortly before the second World War. Table 8 The Most Popular Works

Date

Author

Pages

1844 1847 1869 1883 1900 1906 1907 1909

Vilmar Weber Kluge Scherer Bartels Engel Biese Engel

659 112 166 793 1362 1189 2008 370

Editions

27 11 58 16 19 37 25 37

Years

Transl.

67 33 68 44 43 23 24 20

one four three one —

The other works on this list are totally different from Kluge and have only a limited degree of commonality. Of the authors two - Vilmar and Scherer - were professors, the one of theology, the other of "Germanistik." Weber, Kluge and Biese were teachers at a "Gymnasium"; Bartels was a professional writer and Engel both a writer and a civil servant (with a position in parliament not unlike that of Dickens). They all wrote their history of literature with a general public in mind: that is, neither for a specific kind of school nor for a specific class of the population. Kluge adheres to the traditional outline of the seven basic periods of German literature, but the others take a different approach, either towards large and less specifically designated periods (Vilmar, Bartels, and in part also Engel), or towards smaller sections

102 Histories of German Literature devoted to groups or individuals (Scherer, Biese, Engel). Vilmar and Scherer end their work with the death of Goethe. With the exception of Biese, none of these authors provides much in the way of plot summaries, although this is in part, presumably, the result of the limited space available to Weber and Kluge. Where there are plot summaries, these are mostly in the older period. Quotations are provided, however, more frequently. Again Weber and Kluge have little space for them, Bartels supplies many, as do also Engel (in his larger work) and Biese. Vilmar and Scherer refrain from quotations. Only Engel and Biese supply illustrations. Vilmar's highly successful work is a relatively lengthy one that concentrates on major works and provides only limited plot summaries and no quotations. The emphasis is on the broad sweep of development, described in flowery and persuasive, at times fulsomely florid, terms. This style clearly appealed to many, and his work remained unchallenged for several decades; the shorter more factual works of Weber and Kluge were no competition. Scherer adopted a similar approach but was unable to supplant Vilmar. He, too, concentrates on major writers and provides neither plot summaries nor quotations, but his style, even though he was writing for a general public, is more erudite than rhetorical. With the beginning of the twentieth century there are therefore three new works which also attempt in a sense to oust the still popular Vilmar. They, however, unlike Vilmar and Scherer, bring the record up to date, and that must constitute at least part of their appeal, although there are still works, such as Bieber's Der Weg der deutschen Dichtung (Berlin 1925), that conclude with Goethe. For the rest, they are all strongly bourgeois, that is, they make a clear appeal to the middle classes, for, whatever may be said about popular style ("Volkstiimlichkeit") or "die Gebildeten," the authors refer repeatedly to the qualities of this class and make clear to their readers their adherence to it. There is considerably less emphasis than formally on the moral virtues of literature and the study of literary history, or on the innate "Sittlichkeit" of the German nation, its language and literature, but a firmly moral stance is still taken on occasion. Leaving aside Engel's shorter work, which to some degree apparently replaced Kluge with its short quotations, pithily formulated evaluations, and retrospective summations, the main differences between these works and the grounds for their success must lie primarily in their style. Both Bartels and Engel were writers themselves and produced much more readable texts than did many of their predecessors or contemporaries. The schoolteacher Biese wrote clearly and convincingly, without rhetorical flourishes, and his work consequently appealed more to the better educated; it became, according to the Neue deutsche Biographic, "das Lieblingsbuch der Gebildeten." Style, then, is the source of their appeal,

103 Popular and Translated Works

and under this I would include both the enthusiastically persuasive nature of the text and the patriotic fervour displayed by the authors. All are patriotic, of course, Engel being the most fervent. Accompanying this is a strong element of bourgeois anti-semitism in Bartels and of anti-socialism in Biese. These qualities, too, had their appeal. There is no reason why the discussion of any one particular poet should be considered typical of any given historian's approach, but I shall conclude this chapter nevertheless with a brief comparison of the varying ways in which one writer, Giinther, is portrayed in these four works. In Vilmar's work (1901, 311) he is given fifteen lines in 778 pages (.045% of the total space), in Bartels (1909, 254) nineteen lines in 1561 pages (.035%), in Engel (1908, 274-6) 53 lines in 1132 pages (.13%), and in Biese's work (1909, 451-6) 118 lines in 1968 pages (.18%) - excluding quotations. The biographical details vary widely. Vilmar sets the tone of his analysis by calling Giinther a "liederliches Genie," a phrase which is hardly softened by the subsequent statement that he was "von seinem Vater versto/ten"; his concluding sentence reports that the poet "unterlag dem Trunke und dem Elende schon im Jahre 1723." There are no other details. Bartels provides even less in the way of a biography, since we have only Giinther's dates and the statement that he "durch eigene Schuld, aber auch durch die Harte seiner Mitmenschen in dem rohen Studentenleben seiner Zeit verkam." There is no mention, therefore, of his father's role. Engel provides numerous details about Giinther's life, but concentrates on his subjective experiences ("betrogene Liebe ... Armut" and so forth), rather than on places, dates, etc. He calls the father's behaviour "wahnsinnige Grausamkeit," however, and exonerates the son as far as possible, arguing that he was "schwerlich viel lasterhafter ... als andere." Biese is the only one to provide factual details, such as the places where the poet studied, but he makes a moral judgment by claiming that Giinther was "in seinem sittlichen Willen haltlos" and that "Trunksucht" and numerous love affairs brought him, "mit seinem unversohnlich harten Vater zerfalien," to an early grave. There is no other comment on his father's behaviour, which is explained as the result of the son's inability to complete his studies. Specific references to Giinther's position in relation to other writers are few. Vilmar notes his "Hoffmannswaldauischen Redensarten," and Bartels cites Gellert's dismay at the recollection of his enthusiasm for Giinther in his youth. Engel quotes Goethe at length as well as Mencke briefly. Twice he relates Giinther to Flemming, and in conclusion he notes his reception by Gottsched. Only Biese, who also cites Goethe briefly, contrasts Giinther with his predecessors Lohenstein, Besser, and Konig. Neither Vilmar nor Bartels provide samples of Giinther's work;

104

Histories of German Literature

Engel quotes him ten times and Biese fifteen times. The four historians are no closer in their estimate of Giinther's qualities as a poet. Vilmar refers to his "Warme und Lebendigkeit" (although this reads as though these characteristics are the direct result of the relationship with his father), and calls his poems "wahrer und frischer" than works on similar topics at the time. He is good, essentially, despite his weaknesses. Bartels finds no fault at all with Gunther's work, describing him as "ein echter Lyriker, durch und durch 'Individualpoet'," and placing him, on account of his "Unmittelbarkeit und Kraft," not only above his German but also above his English and French counterparts. Engel, too, stresses Gunther's individuality and the personal nature of his poetry; he had no successors. But he also stresses that, beautiful as much of his poetry is, it is marred almost everywhere by lapses into "Plattheit und Roheit." This view is shared by Biese who finds "Echtheit und Urspriinglichkeit" in his work, but "voile Reinheit und Reife" in only a few stanzas. Vilmar does not generalize at all about Giinther, merely placing him between Christian Gryphius and Christian Wernicke and suggesting a degree of reluctance to praise him by the opening phrase, "Am wahrsten ist, trotz ...". Bartels, who makes no negative comments at all, sees Giinther as "den Be we is ... da/3 der deutsche Genius unvorhergesehen 'entspringt' und der allgemeinen Entwicklung voranschreitet." He suggests that Gunther's contemporaries and those who came after him were not capable of appreciating him. Engel claims that those who came after Giinther, even Gottsched, did appreciate his worth, but he does not make further generalizations. Biese, on the other hand, sees in Gunther "den kraftigen Fliigelschlag des Genius," the first of the modern poets. In his concluding paragraph Biese then generalizes: "Wie im Jahreslauf so konnen wir im Fortschritt jener gewaltigen Lebensstromungen, die von Zeit zu Zeit durch die Menschheit ziehen, um eine gro/te Kultur- und Kunstbliite zu erzeugen, einzelne Stufen gleich den Jahreszeiten unterscheiden." Gunther bloomed too early and was destroyed by the frost etc. "Als Goethe auf den Plan trat... leuchtete schon die voile Fruhlingssonne iiber der Welt der deutschen Dichtung." The works excerpted here vary in length, but they were all in print and selling well at the same time, that is, in the decade prior to the First World War. Clearly, the opinions expressed about Gunther vary widely, as does the style of presentation, but they have one thing in common and that is an evident desire to convince the reader - with or without the evidence of samples of the writer's work - of the Tightness of the views expressed by the historian, and to associate the reader with the historian in his general attitude to life and literature. These qualities do not seem to have met with the same response outside Germany, at least not to the

105 Popular and Translated Works extent that they appealed to translators, whatever their reception may have been among those who could read German. There is only one quite early translation of Vilmar into English, for example, in 1858, and one of Scherer into English in 1886. For whatever reasons, translators favoured the shorter works, as can be seen from the table above, but it is not always the most popular works that found a translator. In the following, an attempt will be made to survey the extent of translations country by country and to assess the degree to which these translations adapt the original to the foreign environment. Before looking at translations of "regular" histories of German literature, something should be said of the English versions of Menzel's Die deutsche Literatur (1828). This work was mentioned above but not discussed in any detail, because the several chapters are not a chronological survey of German literature but a series of essays on specific aspects of that literature, beginning, for example, with mass literature, nationality, the influence of scholasticism, and the influence of foreign literature. Under the heading "Schone Literatur - Dichtkunst" Menzel discusses, among other things, Gallomania, Graecomania, Herder and Goethe, and poetic philistinism. It is strange that this substantial three-volume work should have been translated into English twice in the same year: by Thomas Gordon (London 1840) and by C.C. Felton (Boston 1840). While the translations vary considerably in their style, they are both complete and fairly accurate, and, since there are numerous passages on the quality of German literature at various periods in its history and on the national character of the Germans, the French, and others in relation to literature, these translations are assumed to have had some direct relevance to the reception of German literature in these countries, as well as some influence on those who subsequently translated literary works or histories of literature. The first German literary history translated into English does not appear until after the middle of the nineteenth century, and even then it is not a close translation. Metcalfe's History of German Literature appeared in 1858 and is based on the German work of Vilmar (sub-title), presumably on the sixth edition, since he notes the existence of this edition in his preface, even though he does not state that this is his source. Metcalfe's reasons for not making a close translation are rather curious. Although he admires Vilmar and praises his work, "with all its excellences ... anything approaching to a faithful translation from the German is distasteful to English readers. The idioms of the two languages cannot be made to correspond. The ways of thought, too, of the two nations are as diverse as the poles asunder" (vi). Metcalfe then inveighs against both the propensity of German academics for that excess of profundity that renders them so obscure and the tortuous quality of the language

106

Histories of German Literature

normally employed by German writers. According to him, he has had to use violent measures to crush the original formless raw material, thus enabling him to extract the ore from it and re-fashion it for English readers. As might be expected, then, Metcalfe's version is shorter than Vilmar's original work by an estimated twenty to twenty-five percent. The arrangement and order have been retained, however, and there are minor additions, primarily in the form of biographical notes. Although a number of German works were translated into other languages in the 1860s and 1870s, there was no further translation of a German literary history into English before Conybeare's version of Scherer in 1886. The basis of this translation is the third edition, but the translator provides no clue as to the particular purpose or method in translating. The only external difference lies in slight changes in paragraphing and the provision of marginal (hanging) sub-headings. In the passage that was checked closely, no distinct bias was noted, but the translation is neither complete nor precise in its rendering of the German. Sometimes, it seems, the lack of precision derives simply from a desire to shorten the text. For example, in the passage on Arthurian literature in general and Hartmann von Aue in particular, Scherer calls Kei "vorlaut, hamisch, spott- und tadelsiichtig, gro/3sprecherisch." These adjectives are rendered into English as "impudent, malicious, boastful," so that, apart from anything else, Kei's function as a "Tadler" is eliminated. Scherer notes minor deviations by Hartmann from his source, "welche einem bestimmten Ideal seines Lebens und ma/?voller Bildung entsprechen und dadurch den Ubersetzer characterisieren." The translator refers to "the differences [which], such as they are, seem to spring from greater refinement and better taste," thereby implying a cultural superiority which is not (at least not here!) implied by Scherer (161-2/153-4). Apart from this, omissions in the English version are quite frequent. In the forty lines following this passage (a continuation of the comparison between Hartmann and Chretien) Conybeare omits an example of Chretien's use of similes, an explanation of the type of religious ceremonies described by Chretien, a comparison of Hartman with Gellert, a short sentence on Chretien's portrayal of women, and a longer sentence in which the attitudes of the Frenchman and the German towards the depiction of "Sittlichkeit" are compared. Ten lines in all are omitted. It is true that the translator follows the text fairly closely, omitting only passages that could be considered ornamental or supplementary rather than essential, but he does occasionally mislead the reader in this way, or by rendering, for example, the phrase "peinliches Aufsehen" as "painful sensation." The two remaining translations into English, those by Lublin and Priest, are much less significant and are in fact "based on" rather than faithfully translated from the works of Kluge and Klee respectively.

107 Popular and Translated Works Lublin does not even state which edition of Kluge has been used; one can only surmise that it was probably the tenth. At all events, though the sequence of the text is the same, the text itself is considerably reduced in length by the omission of details, especially technical details such as the discussion of prosody in connection with Opitz and his Buck von der deutschen Poeterey. Aside from this, the translator attempts to avoid the frequent text breaks of the original (which is in numbered and titled paragraphs) and to tone down some of the sharper epithets. He omits, for example, the sentence about Opitz: "So verstand es Opitz bei seinem weiten Gewissen und bei seiner gro/ten Fiigsamkeit den verschiedensten Herren zu dienen," and reduces the later phrase "Schmeichelei und Kriecherei" to the slightly politer sounding "sycophancy" (82, 84/65, 67). Priest's version of Klee, also based presumably on the tenth edition (1908), follows the original quite closely, incorporating the German notes into the text and providing in its footnotes little more than translations of the titles and quotations cited in the text. There are occasional omissions or abbreviations; for example, in respect to the Nibelungenlied, where the reference to the "Wortlaut des urspriinglichen Textes" is followed in the original by a subordinate clause - "in das gar manche storende oder mindestens uberfliissige matte Strophe eingeflickt wurde" - which does not appear in the translation; nor does the descriptive passage on the qualities of the poem which appears in the original prior to the plot summary. Priest occasionally shifts the emphasis, as in reference to the "englische Komodianten," where the original suggests that German drama "verwilderte, da seit dem Ende des Jahrhunderts die englischen Schauspielertruppen meist gerade die schlechtesten Stiicke und die besseren in erbarmlichen Bearbeitungen in Deutschland einfiihrten" (58). This is simplified by Priest to: "they presented plays of varying merit, which they had brought with them" (85). Heine, not unexpectedly perhaps, fares better with Priest who takes the opportunity of criticizing the Germans: "The time has even yet not come when Heine's countrymen at large overlook his faults as a man and accept his poetry for what it is. No other country in Europe is so obsessed by prejudice and so blind" (272). The first translation of a German literary history into French is that by Marmier (1834) of the second edition of Koberstein's Grundrifi (1830). In the introduction Marmier expresses his regret that the dominance of French in European polite society led to a situation where the French disdained to take note of other languages and literatures, and he welcomes what he sees as a newly developing awareness of other cultures and of the value of studying them. He shows some knowledge of recent works on German literary history, citing among others Wachler, Bouterwek, Horn, Winter, and Pischon, but he rejects them as unsuitable

108 Histories of German Literature on various grounds. His purpose is to provide a brief introduction to German literature "aux gyranases at aux jeunes gens" (ix), and it is for this reason that he selects Koberstein. He does note, however, the absence in Koberstein of any treatment of the most recent writers, and he therefore gives a brief overview of the contemporary literary scene at the end of the introduction. Since he is translating Koberstein for this kind of readership, Marmier also omits the notes and technical apparatus as pointless; the works cited by Koberstein would in any case not be available in France. And presumably for the same reason (that is, on account of the readership) he adheres largely to Koberstein's order, varying only to the extent of incorporating sub-titles into the narrative, and follows the original quite closely. In the sections that were compared there were minor omissions, very few errors, and only the occasional indication of a "biased" choice of phrase, for example, the use of "imitations" as a translation of the German "Nachbildungen" or "Bearbeitungen franzosischer Vorbilder" (49-50/41-42). Henry and Apffel's version of Heinsius, "d'apres la cinquieme edition," is by contrast anything but a close translation. The period divisions are retained, but within these divisions sub-divisions may be ignored or the title absorbed into the text, so that there is a smoother flow of narrative than in the original. The text is not broken into short paragraphs, and the at times very extensive notes provided by Heinsius are omitted. As far as the text itself is concerned, this is modified to some extent, for example, by the reduction of such a pointed period title as "Das Zeitalter widerstrebender Meinungen" to the simpler "Periode saxonne." This type of simplification is found frequently in the body of text, particularly in regard to the biographical details. Beyond this there are clear indications of a pro-French bias announced, so to speak, in the introduction, where the authors write: "Parmi les influences etrangeres ... nous n'omettrons pas de signaler la part glorieuse que la France a le droit de revendiquer"; after listing several examples of this positive influence they conclude: "dans cet echange de devoirs mutuels entre le protege et le protecteur ... 1'esprit frangais ... conquiert le droit de bourgeoisie" (10). Two simple examples of the authors' method are provided by the explanation for the rise of German literature in the Middle High German period and again in the eighteenth century. According to Heinsius, the main causes of the first were the development of the Swabian dialect, the crusades, and the increasing prosperity. These are retained in the French as "Le triomphe du dialecte souabe," "les croisades," and "1'aisance qui se repandit" (389). However, the details are much abbreviated by Henry/Apffel, in particular with regard to the crusades, designated by Heinsius as "diese fur ein Phantom unternommenen Kriege" (35), but by Henry/Apffel simply as

109 Popular and Translated Works

"ces pieuses expeditions" (38). Heinsius mentions the French and Italians in connection with the crusades but stresses only the great influence of the cities of Italy and the East. According to Henry/Apffel, "L'Allemagne y fut entrainee, malgre lui en quelque sorte, a la suite de France. Les guerriers allemands ... se melaient... avec les croises franc.ais et italiens, peuples beaucoup plus avances dans la civilisation" (38). These comments are not in the original. A similar shift in emphasis is to be found in the explanation of the origin of the modern Classical period which, according to Heinsius, "erhebt die Deutschen in jeder Beziehung zu dem ersten Rang unter den Volkern Europas" (462). Somewhat less enthusiastic is the version in Henry/Apffel: "apres etre longtemps restee en arriere des litteratures frangaise, italienne, espagnole et anglaise, elle s'est elevee enfin a leur niveau" (267). The Germans were able to reach this level in part through the positive influence of the Huguenot families that arrived in Germany after the revocation of the edict of Nantes: "elles exercerent sur les lettres germaniques une influence qu'on n'a pas jusqu'ici appreciee suffisamment" (268-9). In the preface to Philippi's translation of Kluge, Crousle refers to the growth of interest in foreign literatures, but he also admits that it is rare to find anyone with a thorough knowledge of the literary history of their nearest neighbour, Germany. Having said that, Crousle then launches into a tirade against the Germans for their chauvinism and their superiority complex, "leurs preventions a la suprematie de 1'esprit, preventions qui n'ont jamais etc reconnu que d'eux seuls" (ii-iii). In particular he feels that German literature has now exhausted itself: "La periode vraiment feconde de sa litterature parait close" (iii). There is nevertheless a sufficient body of fine literature in German for Crousle to welcome this version of Kluge, one that he claims is neither an original work nor a translation, since the translator "s'est empare du manuel du docteur Kluge ... Elle 1'a en partie analyse, en partie traduit; elle s'en est quelquefois separee en suivant d'autres documents" (v). In fact, however, the translation seems to be not only a close but also an accurate version of the original. Like most translators, Philippi freely adapts the paragraphing of the original, but the order of the material is maintained. She, too, omits the footnotes of the original, but on occasion part of one may be incorporated into the text, for example, in the case of the lengthy note on Schleiermacher's life and works (in connection with Friedrich Schlegel). Here Philippi reduces the note to one line added to Schleiermacher's name in the text. She does the same thing with the ten-line note on the origin and nature of the "Novelle" in connection with Tieck, adding to the word "Nouvelles" in the text only: "genre emprunte precisement par 1'ecole romantique a 1'Italie et a 1'Espagne et qui se distingue par sa brievete" (265). Otherwise the text follows the original

110

Histories of German Literature

closely with only occasional abbreviations or additions, some of which result from the different readership, for example, the comparison of Opitz with Malherbe or the omission of explanatory comments on de Stael. The translations into French, particularly in the absence (unavailability) of the version of Weber by Lauth are insufficient as a basis for generalizations. The only possible comments are that there is a general change in style to a more fluent text; that there is little sign of any deviation from the original for a specific audience; and that there are indications of bias. There are more translations into Italian than into French, the first, however, being not from a German, but from a French source. Loeve-Veimars1 work was translated into Italian by Piazza as early as 1829. This was followed in 1853 by Eisner's translation of Weber. The translator does not give his source, but a comparison with the first edition of Weber (1847) shows an exact correspondence in paragraphing and titles; and the passages compared showed no deviation from the original. The remaining translated works in Italian are from a much later period and could not all be located. Moreover, of those that could be found, not all provided satisfactory evidence as to the edition on which the translation was based. The first of these later works is the translation of Otto Lange by Paganini (1878). There is no reference in the preface to the edition from which the translation was made, but it must have met with some success, since it was revised and republished in a third edition by Minutti in 1899. However, according to the title-page, this is "completamente rifatta," and, whatever resemblance it might have to earlier editions, it bears no resemblance at all to the early edition of Lange. It seems that Minutti's version is largely his own work. The version of Kluge by Cantalamessa (1906) seems on the other hand to be a very close rendering of the original (30th edition). The translator follows this text very carefully, omitting only the copious notes and adding on his own behalf only an occasional explanatory note, concerning, for example, the meaning of the "Bahrprobe" in the summary of the plot of the Nibelungenlied. Much the same can be said of the translations of Storck by Lesca, and of Vogt and Koch by Balsamo-Crivelli. Consequently the only comment that can be made about translations into Italian is that they appear surprisingly early, and that in later years they include unusually substantial works where translations are concerned (Storck has nearly 600 pages and Vogt & Koch two volumes). The number of translations into languages other than those discussed so far is quite small, and the type of work translated is the same. The one exception is the translation into Hungarian and Polish of Scherr's Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur. Weber is translated into Hungarian and

Ill Popular and Translated Works Swedish, and Merseburger and Jantzen into Swedish. One Hungarian work states on the title-page that it is based on Piitz and Gredy (Henrik Schiller), one Polish work (Osterloff) is based on Kluge, Kriiger, and others, and Vymazal's work in Czech is based on Kluge, Kurz and others. While the dependency, if noted on the title-page, is presumably greater than if the sources were merely cited as such in prefatory comments, these cannot be considered as translations. Accuracy or inaccuracy in translation is not in itself of great significance, as errors may be committed unintentionally. More important are those aspects that suggest deliberate deviation from the original. In the first instance, then, it is evident that most, if not all, of the translators involved intend to reduce the length of the original, even though they tackle relatively short works. There are two reasons for this. On the one hand there is much, supposedly, in the original that would be pointless in a non-German situation. Bibliographical and similar references, for example, are omitted on the grounds that the works cited would not be available to foreign readers. On the other hand there is the intention of making the text more readable by simplifying in one or both of two ways: by omitting details and by smoothing out the text - and by the latter is meant the use of a more discursive style, without many of the paragraph breaks, sub-headings, etc of the original. These deviations from the original, whether in form or in content, are related to the audience for which the translations are intended, and which comprise for the most part schools or young people generally. For this reason they may be considered pragmatic. Beyond this, however, there are variations that may be considered in part or wholly tendentious. Partly tendentious are those additions that relate German to domestic literature, since such comparisons inevitably imply a qualitative relationship, even when this is not explicitly stated. Wholly tendentious and naturally less common are the omission of critical comments about the translator's own country, the softening of criticisms to bring them more into line with the translator's own views, and the direct rejection or criticism of the original text or insertion into it of the translator's opinion. Tendentious deviations of these kinds are not to be found in all translations, although I must admit that none of the translations has been compared word for word with the original. However, sufficient examples have been quoted above to show that they did occur, and that the foreign reader would not always be aware that the opinions expressed in the translation were at variance with those to be found in the original.

6 Foreign Histories of German Literature: French

Having looked at the more popular German works and at those that attained a degree of success abroad through translation, it is necessary at this point to examine those works that were deliberately created with a non-German public in mind. In the Prolegomena, these were included in the general discussion, partly because they were so few, partly also because the political and cultural climate through the eighteenth century was far more "European" or at least less national(istic) in outlook. The increasing number of such works, their diverse purposes, and the likelihood that they increasingly reflect a different point of view, make a separation at this point not only convenient but desirable. First, however, there is the problem of defining and categorizing "foreign" works. Leaving aside the straight translations dealt with in the previous chapter, there are primarily two categories of "foreign" works. On the one hand there are those works written in a language other than German and intended for a public that is not German. These may be of two kinds, namely, those written in a foreign language by foreigners of that tongue and those written by native Germans in a foreign language. The second category comprises those works written in German but published in a foreign country for the benefit of foreigners rather than of Germans. Again the author himself may be of foreign or of German origin. These are not, of course, the only possible variations on the theme of "foreign" histories of German literature, but they will cover the majority of cases, especially in the earlier stages. And they do not necessarily make the task of assigning any given work to a particular category easier. The first group is relatively simple, as it is highly unlikely that a work would be written in a foreign language for Germans; in most cases the foreign

113 Works in French work is by a foreigner, rarely by a German. An exception might be a work written in a foreign language for emigrants of German origin rather than for natives of that country. The second group mainly comprises those works with a pedagogical aim, i.e., designed for the teaching of German literature and literary history to those who have already proficient enough to read German. Such works, needless to say, are often composed in a very simple style. Problem cases here are works published in, for example, Hungary during the period of the Austro-Hungarian empire, where the author might expect the work to be used within Hungary in schools or universities, but also to be sold outside this area. These and other questions can be discussed further only in the context of specific examples. For the present it is enough to recall briefly the foreign works discussed in the Prolegomena before passing on to those that appeared in the nineteenth century. Since German histories of German literature do not appear before the end of the eighteenth century, it is hardly surprising that so few works were published at this time outside Germany. Those that did appear were mainly in French and were not monographic works, but journal articles or parts of books, for example, the anonymous articles in the Journal etranger (1761) and the Journal encyclopedique (1780), and the prefaces to the samples of German poetry by Huber (1766) and to the edition of Gessner (1774). The major exception was Bertola's Idea della bella poesia alemanna (1779; 2nd ed. under the title Idea della bella letteratura alemanna (1784), the only substantial and independent history of German literature in a foreign language, and at a surprisingly early date. The absence of foreign histories of German literature does not necessarily reflect a lack of interest in the topic; nor is it necessarily the result of a lack of German works that might have provided a point of departure. The situation in countries other than Germany was quite similar in regard to the general concept of literary history; this was just not an accepted genre as yet. The French had shown a far greater interest than the British in German literature in the eighteenth century, but, not unnaturally, their interest, too, flagged during the period of the Revolution and the subsequent wars with the German states, to revive only in the period following the publication of de StaeTs famous work on Germany (1810). Like so many works about Germany and its culture in the early decades of the nineteenth century, that work was not of course a history of literature. There were translations of German literature and works of a general nature by such writers as Xavier Marmier, Saint-Marc Girardin, Jean Jacques Ampere, and Abel Francois Villemain, but very few works specifically devoted to the history of German literature. Such as there are (or seem by their titles to be) provide a good example of the problems of categoriza-

114 Histories of German Literature tion. Of the works examined, one, published in French in Belgium, is an adaptation of Heinsius; one work was published in Moscow; and one was published in Switzerland for a French audience. Moreover, the majority, despite their general titles, are limited to quite specific topics or audiences; these will therefore be dealt with first. Hennequin's Cours de litterature ancienne et moderne (1821-22), the first in chronological order, is a "Poetique universelle" intended to replace what were, in his view, the quite inadequate textbooks available for school use. The little space remaining for German literature is given over to modern works. There are occasional notes on historical development or the place of this or that author in history, but for the most part Hennequin provides only a set of examples to illustrate the different genres that have flourished through the centuries in different countries. The work of Noel, Lemons allemandes de litterature et de morale (1828), is somewhat similar, though evidently intended for a different (university?) audience. Here there is no historical background at all, merely a set of texts (nothing earlier than the late seventeenth century), preceded by a few lines defining the genre. Although the work has Stoeber's name on the title page, it seems that the words "traduites par" refer only to the sample texts; this is not a version of Stoeber's German work (1826). Of slightly greater interest are the university lectures of Christian Miiller, of which only two parts were published in 1826 under the title De la litterature allemande. Miiller is presumably a native of Germany, since he says: "Chez nous en allemagne ..." (10). The first part is a "Discours preliminaire" and the second a lecture on Classicism and Romanticism. In the introductory lecture Miiller does not discuss literary history as such, but he does describe in some detail the nature and extent of German literature and the justness of its claim to fame. In the course of this apologia he repeats several familiar cliches, in particular the lack of support for literature from the ruling classes, and the German propensity for absorbing the essence of the literary traditions of other languages. The great virtue of the German character is the drive for liberty, and it is this drive that leads Germans to reject restrictive rules in literature and to create great literature without the advantage of a social or political centre. The German republican spirit also extends to criticism, so that not even the greatest writers escape reproach: "Les Allemands n'aiment pas les reputations inebranlables" (23). In all of this Miiller keeps his audience clearly in mind. He draws comparisons with French literature and cites copiously from (germanophile) French critics such as Villers and de Stae'l. In particular he stresses the falsification of German literature - and the consequent misunderstandings - when German works are translated into a Frenchly elegant style. His plan in the succeeding lectures, in which he intends to

115 Works in French work systematically through the four periods 360-768, 768-1137, 1137-1517, and 1517-1825, is to introduce each epoch with "coups d'oeil des progres ou des obstacles de la culture nationale et la litterature en general" (13), to include numerous examples in French translation, and to conclude each epoch by citing parallels with the literature of Italy, Spain, France, England, and Scandinavia. A whole series of university lectures by Eichhoff appeared in 1838 under the title Cours de litterature allemande, but this title is misleading, as the material covered in the twenty-six lessons (winter semester 1836-37) comprises the background to the Germanic peoples, brief comments on Gothic, Scandinavian, and other Germanic literatures, and a discussion of German literature up to and including the minnesinger. In the last lecture Eichhoff announces his intention of dealing with Middle High German epic works in the following semester. Eichhoff is therefore not concerned at all with literature after the end of the fourteenth century; he does no more than place Middle High German literature briefly into the general context of literary history by describing it as a golden age "placee entre deux ages steriles," and followed in particular by "une longue inertie, une longue corruption de bon gout, qui ne s'arrete qu'a 1'entree de notre siecle" (225)! The only remarkable feature of Eichhoff s approach to the literature of the Middle High German period is the considerable detail provided in lectures eighteen and nineteen on the political history from the early twelfth to the early fourteenth century. Only at the end of each of these lessons is there brief reference to the cultural situation: first to the development of chivalry, and then to the decline of chivalric values and their adoption in modified form by the meistersinger whose works satisfy "beaucoup plus le coeur que le bon gout" (244). In his Ecrivains et poetes de I'Allemagne (1846), Henri Blaze restricts himself to a few major authors after a lengthy and somewhat incoherent survey of the development of the Lied. The work is in fact in two distinct parts, the first of which is entitled "De la poesie lyrique en Allemagne" (from the beginnnings to Dingelstedt), while the second repeats the general title and has articles on Jean Paul, Immermann, and other figures from the early nineteenth century. One work which must be mentioned again here, even though it has already been discussed in the previous chapter, is the French version by Henry and Apffel of Heinsius's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. That this Histoire de la litterature allemande d'apres la cinquieme edition de Heinsius has a specifically French orientation is immediately clear from the introduction, which stresses heavily the "French" contribution to the development of German literature from the time of the Franks until the present. More will be said of this below. The only other point of interest

116 Histories of German Literature in this introduction is the distinction drawn between bibliography ("un simple nomenclature de ces ouvrages"), criticism ("en apprecier le merite et le caractere"), and history - "en montrer 1'origine et les destinees" of literature (1), the last being part of the general history of civilization. The works considered within literary history are naturally the belles-lettres, which express the nation as a whole (unlike the literature of particular disciplines); a study of 'Torigine, le progres et les destinees des lettres" provides us with "une image complete de la vie morale d'une nation" (2). The first major original French work devoted strictly to the history of German literature therefore seems to be the Resume de I'histoire de la litterature allemande by Loeve-Veimars (1826), and that this work had at least some success is suggested by the existence of an Italian translation by Antonio Piazza, Storia della bella letteratura allemanna (1829). However, no other French editions could be located, and the work is not listed in the catalogue of the Bibliotheque Nationale. Although entitled Resume, this is not a very brief work, being close to five hundred pages in length (but duodecimo). However, it is not at all original and, in the early periods, borders at times on the incoherent. Some idea of Loeve-Veimars' knowledge of literary historical sources is provided by the list in the preface, which comprises Schiller, Goldast, Eckhard, Eschenbourg, Bodmer, Koch, Ersch, Schlegel, Bouterwek, and Meissner. The periodization is based on Bouterwek, and the author confesses to having leaned on him heavily for "la plupart des considerations generates qui ouvrent les deux premieres periodes" (v-vi) - the periods are to the end of the thirteenth century, from then to the end of the sixteenth century, to the middle of the eighteenth century, the latter half of the eighteenth century, and from 1800 on. Loeve-Veimars thus seems to imply that Bouterwek is the source only for the introductions to the periods, which are brief political and cultural comments as a preliminary to a description (without chronological or other relationships) of individual writers, arranged by genre. However, a comparison of the analyses of individual writers makes it quite evident that much of the information is derived from Bouterwek, not only prior to the seventeenth century. Other sources cited by Loeve-Veimars have not been checked, but there is little in this work that could not be found in Bouterwek, while in many instances passages have been taken over directly, even in the modem period. What the author has attempted is a reduction of the original, a concentration on major writers and works. This results in some confusion in the medieval period, whereas in the later periods the selection process seems more successful - for example, the elimination of Canitz and Giinther, and the retention of Haller and Hagedorn. But any sense of history is lost. The result is a routine series of characteriza-

117 Works in French

tions within arbitrary chronological and genre divisions. In the same year in which Loeve-Veimars' work appeared, Daniel Ehrenfried Stoeber (not to be confused with [Daniel] August [Ehrenfried] Stoeber) published his Kurze Charakteristik der schonen Literatur der Deutschen, a borderline case as an example of histories of German literature in France, for this work appeared in Strasburg and is directed at German schools in Alsatia, although in his preface Stoeber claims to write for "den Gebildeten iiberhaupt, besonders aber fur Jiinglinge" (xi). The work itself is quite unoriginal and heavily dependent on Poelitz and Horn, among others. Stoeber divides German literary history into the usual seven periods, and makes little attempt either to justify these or provide historical background. He represents, in fact, the older tradition that provides simplistic characterizations of individuals in systematic order within period divisions. Nowhere is this tradition more evident than in his discussion of what is meant by "der gute Geschmack" and how this is essential to literary criticism: "Die Vergleichung und Beurtheilung der vorhandenen Hervorbringungen des menschlichen Geistes muss uns die Bedingungen an die Hand geben, die zur Bildung eigentmimlicher und gehaltvoller Kunstwerke erforderlich sind" (5-6). August Stoeber's Geschichte der schonen Literatur der Deutschen (1843) is also intended for schools in Alsatia and is no improvement over his namesakes's (father's?) work, which he cites, along with numerous other sources. He claims to follow Pischon's outline but to be nevertheless independent in his judgments. Of interest is his claim that a French version of his work is in preparation by Adjolphe] Dupuy, but no such work could be verified. Peschier's work, ten years later (1836) than that of Ehrenfried Stoeber, Histoire de la litterature allemande depuis les temps les plus recules jusqu'a nos jours, is rather more substantial (three volumes) and is characterized by the introduction, entitled "France et Allemagne." This is a lengthy "analysis" and comparison (sixty-one pages!) of the French and German characters, an analysis which is intended to explain the nature of German literature, and how and why it differs from the French. Much of this is familiar terrain, although there is a remarkable freeness in the criticism of the French attitude towards literature. The main interest lies here in the general philosophy that European intellectual life is dominated by two conflicting (or complementary?) principles of order and stability on the one hand, and progressivity and movement on the other; and in the reasons why the Germans, who stand for change, are the people least like the French, who represent stability. The basic reason for this in Peschier's view is the climate, which forces the inhabitants of Germany to "rentrer en eux-memes" (6). Everything else follows from this, the intellectualism, Protestantism, introspection, and so forth.

118

Histories of German Literature

Given this beginning, it is not surprising to find that much of the remainder of the work is devoted to comparisons between French and German literature, comparisons that lead to generalizations and simplifications rather than to analyses of specific examples. The result is an absence of historical perspective and an almost complete absence of discussions of individual poets. The description of Middle High German literature, for example, is extremely vague, with highly romanticized notions about the courts of love, the crusades, etc., emphasis being on a general comparison of the spirit of the troubadours and the spirit of the minnesinger, as reflecting their respective nations. There are no details of names, dates, or works, and from the few "facts" that are adduced, one is led to suspect that this may be as much the result of ignorance as of design, for some of the plot summaries are based upon general or French sources rather than on the German works. The plot summary of Gottfried's Tristan, for example, bears no resemblance to Gottfried's version. The only historical concept in this work lies in the idea that the Germans reacted to historical events as they were bound to, given their particular character. Peschier does not see their character as creating these events (for example, the Reformation), but rather as responding to external stimuli. His work is of interest then partly for this view and partly because he relates German literature constantly to French and sometimes to classical or other languages, while literature itself is related to other forms of art, predominantly architecture. With the work of Amable Tastu, Tableau de la litterature allemande (1843, edition cited 1858), we have another formal survey of German literature, but one so simplistic as to give the impression that the author had no firsthand knowledge of medieval works, and derived much of the knowledge of modern works from secondary sources such as Wilhelm Miiller's collection of seventeenth century authors. Konrad von Wiirzburg, for example, is cited as a great minnesinger, who produced among many other works "la meilleure ode de ce temps" (17), i.e., Die goldene Schmiede, while Gottfried von Strasburg is mentioned only as a predecessor of Konrad, living around 1250. Prior to Opitz names and facts are confused, while after Opitz the selection of authors is somewhat inconsistent, and the bulk of the material consists of translated samples from the works of standard authors. A good example of Tastu's approach is found on page sixty-nine. In the first paragraph the author speaks of the great increase in the number of poets after Opitz and up to the end of the century, but there was no improvement in quality, and these poets consequently "meriteraient peu d'etre signalees, si ce n'est pour ne point laisser une lacune dans le tableau de la litterature allemande." The next paragraph then begins with: "Avant de parler d'Hoffmanswaldau ..."; but Tastu never does return to him.

119 Works in French

The ratio of text to translated passages is approximately one to three, and what little there is in the way of historical background or explanation is on a par with the examples quoted above. Tastu adopts the traditional pattern, merely a few paragraphs of historical background as an introduction to the periods ("Litterature ancienne / nouvelle / moderne" divided at 1523 and the 1720s and subdivided in each case into three parts), but these passages are almost a reductio ad absurdum of the standard pattern found in German works. The following will serve as a typical example, the introduction (in toto) to the period 1765 to 1800: Cette periode presente une nouvelle regeneration de la 1 literature allemande, parvenue alors a son apogee. L'ardeur pour 1'elude des arts et des sciences que Frederic II avail excilee dans le nord, s'etail repandue, avec plus de lenteur, il esl vrai, dans le midi de I'Allemagne, lorsque 1'avenemenl de Joseph II au Irone imperiale, en 1765, vinl lui imprimer une nouvelle impulsion. Les pelils princes de Brunswick, Golha, Weimar, Hanovre, animes du meme zele, se faisaienl honneur d'altirer a leur cour lous les hommes eminenls du pays; la noblesse elle-meme, non conlente de prendre un vif inlerel a celle vie inlellecluelle el lilteraire, se melait parfois a ces nouveaux meistersaenger. II en resulla que plus le desir du mieux se repandail dans loules les classes, plus une litteralure fondee sur la cullure el la genie de la langue nalionale devail s'elablir rapidemenl. (14) The number of French works on German literature in the second half of the nineteenth century is not large, but the various types of work show the same or similar tendencies to those in Germany. There are the works for school use (Bossert, Cart, Parmentier), the text collection with historical introductions (Lefevre-Deumier), the partial histories (Bossert, Joret), and so forth. One noteworthy feature is the number of works covering the literatures of the world, of which the history of German literature then forms a part, but a part that is wholly independent of the other parts. The general tendency of these works - which are predominantly from the 1890s - is to be discursive and to turn into a series of lengthy essays on a limited number of major authors with a corresponding neglect of (in the eyes of the historian) lesser authors. Several of the works examined consequently resemble more a collection of essays than an historical survey, and for this reason the only substantial attempt at such an historical survey is placed here, while the other works will be dealt with quite briefly. The work of Guillaume Heinrich, Histoire de la litterature allemande, is the first large scale work in French on the whole range of German literature (three volumes of ca. five hundred pages each). Significantly, or perhaps purely coincidentally, it was published in the years 1870 (1869?) to 1873, and, while the author claims not to have been influenced by political events in his literary evaluation, the third volume, published

120 Histories of German Literature after the Franco-Prussian war, has several passages that are directly related to the political situation. In the main, however, this is a very unhistorical work; the author's main concern is the quality of German literature and its relationship to European literature in general and French literature in particular. There are only perfunctory references to social and political developments, passing comment only on the effects of the Renaissance and the Reformation, and no more than passing mention of the Peasants' War, the Thirty Years' War, or the Seven Years' War. The only date to which Heinrich returns again and again is 1813. The basic pattern is a brief indication of the literary movements, followed by individual analyses of authors and works. The biographies are brief, but the synopses and sample passages take up a great deal of space. Although Heinrich includes many quite minor figures, with little apparent appreciation of the difference in quality between them and the major figures of their time, it is evident that he is relying at times, as he says in his preface, "sur les autorites les plus sures lorsque je n'ai pu juger par moi-meme" (I, x). This criticism seems to apply even in the case of such a major subject as Romanticism, defined essentially as a "culte du passe, tout litteraire en apparence [qui] devint une protestation centre 1'abaissement de 1'Allemagne humiliee par Napoleon" (III, 189). Heinrich is primarily concerned, in fact, with distinguishing German Romanticism from the very different French Romanticism. The tenets of the German movement are described in only the vaguest manner primarily the interest in the past, but above all the relationship between Romanticism and nationalism. As precursors of the movement Heinrich cites Goethe and Musaus before turning to individual poets of the period. To illustrate the treatment of individual poets, one may cite the passage on religious poets of the seventeenth century (I, 485-503). After two pages of introduction, Heinrich devotes one page to Heermann and three to Gerhardt, and then lists as worthy of mention ten poets in twenty-four lines (Franck, Dilherr, Gesenius, Neander, Albinus, Rodigast, Louise-Henriette de Brandebourg, Anne-Sophie de Hesse-Darmstadt, Ludaemilia Elisabeth de Schwarzbourg, and Keymann). This is followed by a little over eleven pages on the Catholic poets Spec, Balde, and Scheffler. Briefly mentioned at the end are Knorr de Rosenroth and Quirinus Kuhlmann. Of the four and a half pages devoted to Spec, two and a half are passages from his works (in French with German in the footnotes). Heinrich goes his own way on two occasions. On the first occasion he spends considerable time on the Reformation from a purely religious standpoint, discussing the aims of Luther and others, and the developments not only in Germany but in Europe as a whole. On the second occasion he turns to a discussion of recent and contemporary literature in

121 Works in French Germany, concluding with a glance into the future. This section, the entire second half of the third volume, is introduced by the familiar plaint that more recent literature is strictly beyond the ken of the historian: "L'age de 1'histoire litteraire definitive est termine; c'est 1'age contemporain qui commence" (III, 313) - Heinrich is referring here (in 1873) to the period following the Romantics! He therefore deals one by one with a number of authors between 1830 and 1848, spending most of the time on Heine, before turning finally to general observations on the literature of the present, i.e., after 1848, and here he looks at German literature in the wider European context, for example, in the case of the novel. "Le roman allemand moderne est loin de s'etre eleve a la hauteur du roman anglais ... La vie de famille y est aussi depeinte sous des couleurs telles que la plupart des romans anglais sont un aliment pour 1'imagination ... Mais si la famille anglaise n'a pas cette grace qui resulte en France d'une cordialite plus apparente, ou en Italic, de cette sorte de naif enfantillage ... Le roman allemand a procede tour a tour du roman anglais et du roman franc,ais" (428-31). Somewhat surprising perhaps is his conclusion: "L'esprit le plus original peut-etre parmi tous les romanciers contemporains ... est Hacklaender" (III, 492). Aside, however, from the literary views in this section, there is a curious agglomeration of ideas, the most significant of which is the belief that Germany's fecundity in intellectual matters, in literature and science, is the result of its numerous smaller centres of culture. This is in contrast to France, where the growth of one large centre has deprived the provinces of culture and led at the same time to stultifying artificiality in Paris. The major problem (and danger) in Germany lies currently in the development of lines of thought divorced from religious faith, for Heinrich believes that "1'avenir intellectuel [in Europe] appartiendra necessairement aux nations les plus fideles a la noble doctrine [Christianity] qui a abrite leur berceau" (III, 547). This is not unexpected, however, since Heinrich is clearly opposed to the "school" historian who tailors his narration to an idea or a theory. "L'historien n'est qu'un rapporteur" is his viewpoint, and, although he denies in literature "ni l'influence de la race et du climat, ni celle du siecle," he claims that the great writers are more than this: "j'estime trop les creations de la pensee humaine pour n'y voir que les simples produits des circonstances et du temps" (xi). Consequently, while the literary relationships are stressed, there is no attempt to trace causal relationships, none, that is, beyond the definition of turning points; the most apt example is the first sentence of the book entitled "La premiere phase de 1'age classique" - chapter 1, Klopstock: "II y a, dans 1'histoire litteraire de tous les peuples, un moment solennel; c'est celui ou un homme de genie fixe la langue et ouvre a la litterature nationale sa veritable voie" (II, 1).

122 Histories of German Literature There are few works in French on German literature in the two decades before Heinrich, and only one author attempts to cover the whole range of German literature. The intention of Chasles, in Etudes sur I'Allemagne ancienne et moderne (1854), is succinctly stated in his preface: "Determiner nettement le caractere intellectuel de rAllemagne proprement dite, chercher 1'essence de sa vie intime et la nature speciale de son developpement; voila le but de ce livre" (ii). This leads to some rather curious designations for the various periods, e.g., "Mouvement sensualiste du XVIe siecle," and to an emphasis on the "genie lyrique" of the Germans, which is rooted in the nature of their language. However, Chasles skims exceedingly lightly over such characteristic (?) periods as Middle High German literature (three pages), and provides only the glibbest of generalizations about authors in the later periods, except where he selects this or that author for extended comment - for example, Wieland, Goethe, Jean Paul. The examples he chooses, both the authors and the texts, may be intended to display the intellectual qualities of the German nation, but neither in this work nor in the Etudes sur rAllemagne au XIXe siecle does Chasles provide anything approaching a sense of history. The most interesting part of this work is the lengthy introduction on the genius of the German language, and this will be considered below in another context (chapter 9). Mention should also be made here of a work written in French and published in Belgium. The Histoire de la poesie. L'Allemagne dans sa litterature nationale ... by Ferdinand Loise (1873) is almost contemporaneous with Heinrich's work but lacking in comparable depth, and he does not deal with modern literature, by which he means literature since Opitz. However, he does make general comments both in the introduction and in the course of the work on modern writers and works, and this justifies his inclusion here. Along with comparative references to French and German literature, rather than Belgian and German, there are lengthy passages on the character of the Germans, the influence of climate, etc, plus comments on the nature of the Reformation and the differences between North and South in Germany. The periods (Old High German, Middle High German, etc) are introduced by the usual summaries of historical happenings or influences, much of which is concerned with religion, though the work is not overly pro- or anti-sectarian: "Toute poesie ... est un acte de foi" (351). Loise does, however, on occasion voice his disapproval of ungermanic (French) influences, for example, in his reference to Gottfried von Strasburg: "Lisez tous les poetes de I'Allemagne, en dehors de 1'ecole anti-germanique de Gotfrid de Strasbourg, il n'en est aucun qui cherche a exciter vos sympathies en vous peignant 1'inconstance ou 1'infidelite conjugale" (17-18). And later: "En desertant la grande voie des traditions nationales ... les plus nobles esprits du

123 Works in French

treizieme siecle, comrae Gotfrid de Strasbourg, avaient donne a 1'Allemagne un funeste exeraple" (249). While Loise's work is virtually contemporary with Heinrich's, that of the Abbe Clavequin-Rosselot (Cros de Vour) must be assumed to have been published some years later (than the first volume at least), but the latter shows no sign of knowing either Heinrich or any of his predecessors, with the exception of de Stae'l and Bossert. (He does also recommend Apffel in a footnote.) As regards Bossert, it seems that Clavequin-Rosselot knew the Cours de litterature (1870-73) rather than the later Histoire abregee (1881/91). The Bibliotheque nationale gives 1876 as the date of the second edition of Clavequin-Rosselot's Histoire critique de la litterature allemande (the edition used here; there is no indication that changes were made from the first edition), but the work could as well have dated from fifty years earlier. Directed at young people, "pour servir a la preparation des examens," literary history is simplistically defined as the portrayal of "la vie des auteurs ... et le jugement critique de leurs principaux ouvrages" (i). There is much discussion of German character (as compared with the French): "en examinant le caractere allemand nous obtiendrons celui de sa litterature" (iv); and moralizing about life and literature in general: "II est une puissance tutelaire donnee par la Providence divine pour conduire les peuples a la civilisation" (42). When it comes to the depiction of the historical development, however, and to the relationships between writers and schools, there is considerable confusion, and it is perhaps significant that in the edition used, the pages of the preface are numbered 7 and 8, followed by the introduction with roman numerals (i-xvi) and by the body of the text, beginning with page 1. The last page of the index is numbered 303 and is followed by page 328 (containing errata!). The author apparently intended to describe the overall development of literature and exemplify the development of the language, before dealing with individual writers within periods divided at 748, 1150, 1534, 1751, and after the Classical period. But the reader is confused by his moving back and forth, for example, from Erasmus to Bodmer and Breitinger and back then to poets of the seventeenth century. It is difficult to know what sources, if any, he used apart from those mentioned above, and one wonders even then how he could confuse the "Minnesanger" with the "Meistersinger," claim a knowledge of Latin, Greek, etc for Wolfram von Eschenbach, and come up with a plot summary of Gottfried's Tristan that includes the statement: "II va done chanter sous le faux nom de Tantris a sa cour [to obtain the cure for his wound] et obtient plus tard, la main de la jeune Iseult sa fille. Cependant Mark veut rompre les liens de ce mariage" (62). In general, however, despite such errors Clavequin-Rosselot shows some admiration for Germans and for their

124

Histories of German Literature

literature, although he has very decided (decidedly negative) views on Luther and the Reformation, for example: "ce n'est guere dans Luther qu'elle [language] trouve a se polir, a s'enrichir de pensees et d'expressions nobles, car le reformateur etait un modele de grossierete dans ses lettres, dans ses discussions, ou ne dominait que 1'orgeuil. Par lui et en lui toutes les passions humaines prirent leur essor avec la plus grande licence ..." (75). Mention was made towards the end of chapter two of the development in the last quarter of the nineteenth century of (usually multi-volume) surveys of the literatures of the world. Among the French works that include German as part of such a survey, Bougeault's Litterature alle mande (1876 = Histoire des litteratures etrangeres, I, 5-377) is the most interesting. However, the interest lies less in the portrayal of literary history than in the accompanying remarks on Germans and on their Protestant religion. Most of the description of literary events and figures follows traditional lines, with material divided by genre and larded with plot summaries and quotations. There is a long discussion of the Reformation, though, and of its basis in the German character, followed by criticism of present-day Protestant actions against Catholics. The most succinct expression of Bougeault's attitude occurs in the conclusion, which is concerned solely with Germany's (new) relations with Europe, especially with France. Bougeault admits the greatness of individual German intellectuals, but argues that as a people the Germans are unforgiving and nurture a hatred of France. In particular, he claims, the German cult of Protestantism, carried to the extreme through the late eighteenth and early nineteenth-century philosophers, has led to a form of atheistic authoritarianism that is hostile towards Catholicism and a danger to Europe. The King of Germany wants to be both Emperor and Pope - "reve insense d'un soldat couronne qui aspire a la tiare: le moyen age n'a pu raccomplir; Napoleon s'y est brise; ce n'est pas la Prusse qui le realisera, surtout au nom du protestantisme parvenu a la decrepitude" (377). By contrast, Hallberg, in his Histoire des litteratures etrangeres - I. Litteratures scandinave - allemand - hollandaise (1879), is very restrained, though he, too, is concerned with the moral qualities of literature: "Nous avons voulu etre impartial avant tout ... mais, dans certains cas oii 1'impartialite ressemblerait au scepticisme, nous avons cru pouvoir prendre parti pour ou contre les ecrivains et les doctrines" (iv); he, too, sees German philosophers as having undermined established religion: "ils ont plus contribue a miner la religion revelee et les institutions d'ordre divin que des Frangais avec leur philosophic aggressif" (205). Otherwise this work shows little originality despite the author's claim in the preface: "il y a partout des parties de cet ouvrage pour lesquelles nous revendi-

125 Works in French quons une certaine originalite" (i). Perhaps the treatment of the seventeenth century might be considered original, since the writers cited after Opitz comprise (in all fields) Zincgref, Loewenhalt, Scultetus, Schwarz, Fleming, Olearius, Logau, Neander, Lohenstein, Hofmannswaldau, Schirmer, Ziegler, Canitz, Wernike, Weise, Leibniz, Francke, Thomasius, Neukirch, Konig, Postel, Gryphius, Lauremberg, Rachel, Schupp, Moscherosch, Grimmelshausen, Buchholtz, and Megerle. There is no mention, however, of Spec, Scheffel, Gerhardt, Giinther, or Bohme. In another survey of world literature, Demogeot, in his lengthy Histoire des litteratures etrangeres: - literatures septentrionales: Angleterre-Allemagne (1880, German on pp. 221-348), feels it is neither possible nor desirable to attempt a history of German literature, "meme abrege." His intention is therefore "faire a connaitre a nos lecteurs la periode dominatrice de cette litterature" (221). Since by this he means the period after Gottsched, his work must be considered a partial history. On the other hand, Dietz's work, Les litteratures etrangeres (1892?), does cover the whole period, but the biographical and other notes, and in particular the introductory comments to the several periods are so brief as to provide no real historical basis. They are essentially just notes to the selected texts. Chuquet's Litterature allemande (1909), is also one of a series entitled "Histoire des litteratures," but there is certainly no attempt to place German literature into a world context; even references to French literature are very limited. The work is divided into chapters for each century (except for the 10/11th and 14/15th centuries), chapters that consequently vary greatly in length, though not as much as one might expect, as Chuquet fills up the "less important" periods with many minor figures. This is a very basic, pragmatic type of literary history with only minimal reference to the political or social background. There are, for example, just a few lines on the Thirty Years' War and on Frederick the Great. Of the Thirty Years' War Chuquet writes: "La guerre de Trente Ans (1618-1648) acheve d'etablir en Allemagne la domination de 1'esprit franchise" (132). There is no trace of an historical concept, and the only indication of a specifically French point of view is to be found in the emphasis on Middle High German literature as simple (and inferior) versions of French works. Turning back again to works specifically on German literature, as opposed to the literatures of the world, there is a relatively short (166p.) Tableau de la litterature allemande by Albert Lange (1885), apparently intended for a general audience. This is somewhat uneven in its coverage but otherwise a straightforward survey with few signs of bias. German literature is frequently related to French, and a good deal of emphasis is placed on the recurrent influence of the latter. The author's main concern

126 Histories of German Literature is to persuade his readers to abandon the traditional disdain of things German ("ce dedain nous a ete funeste" [165]) and to make a serious effort to understand the Germans through their literature. There are also three histories of German literature that were published - apparently for school use - towards the end of the nineteenth century, in addition to J. Philippi's translation and adaptation of the tenth edition of Kluge. Bossert's Histoire abregee de la litterature allemande was reprinted in book form in 1891 from La grande encyclopedic (1886-1902). Parmentier's Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1894) is written specifically for students in deliberately simple German. And Cart's Precis d'histoire de la litterature allemande (1898) is the work of a Lycee teacher, part of the "Nouvelle collection a 1'usage des classes." None of these texts shows any originality, but it is worth noting that they also show no dependence on each other. While they are clearly dependent on earlier (German) sources, only Cart provides a list of both German and French authors of German literary history. The simplest is Parmentier; the most "scholarly" is Cart, who provides footnote references to various authorities. Similar to these, but more extensive and on a higher level, are the lectures delivered by Bossert at the Sorbonne and published in three volumes (1870-73). These do not, however, constitute a complete overview of German literary history, but rather a detailed appreciation of its two "classical" periods. The volumes are entitled La litterature allemand au moyen age ..., Goethe et ses precurseurs ..., and Goethe et Schiller.... They seem to have been quite successful, since the first two volumes reached a third edition and the third volume a fourth edition (1893, 1891, 1895). The general introduction to the lecture series had been published separately under the title Des caracteres generaux de la litterature allemande. All three school works follow the traditional pattern of a brief introduction to each period, followed by an analysis of individual authors or works and plot summaries or quotations. The period divisions vary considerably, however, even though the characterizations, i.e., the nature of the changes and the reasons for these, remain much the same. The most detailed in this regard is Bossert, who provides descriptive titles along with dates and dynastic or historical turning points, for example: "Quatrieme periode: La Reforme. Depuis 1'avenement de la maison d'Autriche jusqu'au commencement de la Guerre de trente ans (1493-1618)" (105). While these three works are described by their authors as short, they are in fact relatively substantial (between 360 and 560 pages), and may therefore fairly represent in France at this time what has been called the school-and-home type of history of German literature. These, rather

127 Works in French than the massive work of Heinrich or those works included in histories of world literature, will have been the primary sources for the French concept of German literature. The remaining works of these last years of the nineteenth century deal primarily with analyses of certain poets and neglect the historical approach entirely. There are therefore titles such as: Profils et types de la litterature allemand (Combes) or Celebrites allemandes (Lefevre-Deumier). Bossert did, however, also produce a more extensive Histoire de la litterature allemande (1901), in which he surveys the whole of German literature right up to the present ("c'etait peut-etre une temerite" [ix]) and which in fact concentrates heavily on the modern period; the periods before the Classical (1740) are dealt with in 274 pages. In theory Bossert proposes that all literary works should be examined first in themselves, then in relation to the writer's biography and circumstances, and then in the context of what preceded and followed them: "On arrive ainsi a etablir les liens qui forment les ecoles, et les liens qui unissent les ecoles entre elles. Enfin, par-dessus les ecoles ... on suivra le mouvement general de la litterature" (ix). In practice one does not see this historical development displayed to any great degree. The several periods are simply introduced by two or three pages of historical background, but there are also brief historical introductions to the individual schools or genres, and to the groups of philosophers and historians. Bossert's main thesis seems to be twofold. On the one hand the Germans, unlike the French, are a nation of translators, and on the other they have a resistance to the influence of the southern races. The imitation of foreign models, sometimes successful (MHG), sometimes not (seventeenth century), and the rejection of the classical spirit until the eighteenth century delayed the development of a truly original literature. A contributing factor to the slowness of this development was, according to Bossert (cf. Heinrich above) the lack of a single major cultural centre, such as existed in France with Paris. The final French work to be noted is Walter Thomas's Litterature allemande, copyrighted by the Librairie Larousse in 1913. This brief work (the text ends on page 132) gives no indication of the audience to which it is addressed, but it is presumably intended for a general one. As such, it is not remarkable, except perhaps for the absence of any overt criticism of Protestantism and for the inclusion of writers not only in the fields of history and philosophy, but also in the social and natural sciences. On the other hand the literary historical background information is very meagre, and the basis for the inclusion or omission of individual writers obscure. Wilhelm Miiller and Platen are included among the Romantics, for example, but there is no mention of Eichendorff. Whatever the virtues or shortcomings of these French histories of

128

Histories of German Literature

German literature, there is clearly a strong belief that the French as a nation are wrong to disdain German culture, and would do well to study their nearest neighbours. More will be said of the general attitude of French historians inchapter nine. For the moment it is enough to note that the whole approach to the historical development of literature in Germany is conditioned by the relationship with France. It is seen almost exclusively in terms of the antithesis France :Germany.

7 Foreign Histories of German Literature: English Language Areas (UK, USA)

Interest in German literature among the British has been well documented for the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. A growth in interest that began during the third quarter of the eighteenth century culminated at the end of that century in a flood of translations and adaptations, primarily of Gothic novels and popular plays (especially Kotzebue), much of it being introduced into Britain via France or French translations. A sharp reaction set in at the turn of the century, typified perhaps by the failure of the periodical The German Museum which first appeared in 1800 (2 volumes), but which ceased already with the third volume in 1801. A second period of more serious interest in German literature began after the end of the Napoleonic wars, and this was strongly encouraged, if not initiated, by de StaeTs work De VAllemagne, which appeared in London in both English and French in 1813. This time the literary contact was more direct and involved some of the major British literary figures of the day. Many studies have been devoted to British-German relations at this time, both in general and with reference to particular individuals, but this question lies outside our purview, for, although there was a considerable quantity of translation and reviewing, the number of works on German literary history is quite small. The first work to deal systematically with German literature is the series of articles in the German Museum, entitled "An historical account of the rise and progress of German literature," and totalling in the three volumes approximately two hundred pages. The first thing to stress about this work, however, is that literature is used here in the wider sense; along with belles-lettres, the author - who is presumably the Reverend Peter Will, judging by the initials P.W. after two of the articles

130

Histories of German Literature

- includes the literature of all other "disciplines." Moreover, much space is devoted to a description and discussion of German manners and customs of the Germans, something which the author considers sufficiently important to make him disregard "the pitiful sneers which some would-be critics have most illiberally bestowed upon this method" (I, 365). Political matters receive far less attention. Consequently, no very detailed account of literature as such is offered, and certainly no attempt to account for its development beyond vaguely relating it to the mores of the time. The coverage, if one can call it that, is very uneven, and it is impossible, from the paucity of the material, to discern what sources the author has used. In Old High German, for example, only Hrabanus Maurus, Otfried, Williram, Notker and the Annolied are mentioned; only Williram receives detailed appraisal. Middle High German literature fares just as badly, the names being few and the details minimal. Will discusses only Heinrich von Veldeke (author of the Eneit and of Herzog Ernst), Wolfram von Eschenbach (whose works include one on the Trojan war), Walther von der Vogelweide, Reinmar der Alte, Reinmar von Zweter, Heinrich von Ofterdingen, Tauler, and Hugo von Trimberg. According to the author, "these authors are the only poets of the thirteenth century, so fertile in poetical geniuses, whose works have been rendered more generally known by the patriotic exertions of some public-spirited literati." He then lists a round dozen names, and notes that they and "many more whose names are not known lay unprinted, and unread, in the libraries of different cloisters and towns" (II, 4). From the end of the Middle High German period until Opitz, few names are mentioned, but the author provides a (tabular) chronology for the years 360-1517, and defines the later periods as 1400-1519, 1519-1619, 1619-1716. The description of the "state of the fine arts and belles lettres" in Germany during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries suffers, as so frequently happens when more recent times are considered, from the desire to include as many names as possible; discussion is either limited or non-existent. The period immediately prior to Opitz was the lowest ebb of German literature, and Opitz was its saviour. From this point on, the writers of the seventeenth and eighteenth century up to the author's own time are summarily treated by genre, so that the same writer may be mentioned, albeit perfunctorily, three or four times in as many pages. The introductory paragraphs here deal with works on poetic theory (from Opitz to J.A. Schlegel), and this is followed by a single paragraph, reviewing the "development" of German literature, which merely records the lapse from the first Silesian to the second Silesian school and the recovery initiated by Gottsched and Bodmer and continuing up to

131 English language Areas (UK, USA)

Goethe. The genres are haphazardly arranged, beginning with fables, tales, idylls, epigrams, and so on, and ending with the drama. Here is a brief sample from the passage on drama: "Lessing was the first dramatic writer that enriched the German literature with comedies that satisfy every reasonable demand that sound criticism can make. Joh. I. Engel's (born 1711) dramas are equal in merit to the best of Lessing's pieces. Gothe [sic] greatly excells in skilful exposition; in a correct delineation of characters, and in a judicious disposition of the sceness [sic]" (III, 504). Although it is evident from remarks about "our" language and "our" literature that the author is of German origin, this work is presumably characteristic for the state of British knowledge of German literature and the attitude towards it around the turn of the century. The journal contains a substantial quantity of translations, mostly of recent or contemporary literature, and numerous articles on individual authors, including some from earlier periods (e.g., Ulrich von Hutten). But there is clearly very little concept either of the extent or the range of German literature of the past. Nor is there anything beyond the faintest vestiges of an historical concept. The second substantial study seems to be that published - again as a series of articles - in the Monthly Magazine in the years 1818 to 1824. The author of these articles (entitled "The German Student") is not named, but the re-appearance of most of them verbatim in William Taylor's three-volume work Historic survey of German poetry interspersed with various translations (1828-30), justifies the assumption that he was the author of most, if not all, of the articles. The possibility that a few may derive from another hand is suggested by the incorrect numbering of some of the later parts. For convenience, the publication in book form will be cited in the following. Regrettably, Taylor's work adds little, if anything, to our understanding of the progress of the genre of literary history, but it provides something in the way of light relief from the sober repetitions of well-worn cliches found in the majority of such works, for Taylor seems to have inherited or adopted from his reading a flowery style that puts forth more than the occasional "Stilbliite." Added to this is a strong inclination towards divagation, in particular on moral matters but most of all on the subject of the Reformation. Of his knowledge of older literature I shall say nothing beyond recording his claims that Ovid was the first High German poet and "invented German hexameters" (I, 4), that Charlemagne was "probably" responsible for the compilation of the Edda, (I, 9), and Otfried "probably" the author not only of the Ludwigslied but also of the Georgslied (since it "so much resembles the other productions of this author" - I, 105). The treatment of Middle High German poets is on the same level and the following is a

132

Histories of German Literature

typical passage: 25. Godfred, of Strasburg, is classed by Oberlin among erotic poets, in his dissertation De Poetis Alsatiae eroticis medii aevi, Argentatori, 1786; but he is better known by his epic exertions. 26, 27. Ulrich of Lichtenstein wrote merry poems in a dactylic metre, of which he seems to have been the inventor; and was imitated in this new metre by Heinrich von Rugge. (1,135) Taylor attributes the decline of literature after the time of the Swabians to the distance of the Viennese court from Provence, the cessation of the crusades, and the switch from a "west-gothic" dialect to an "east-gothic" dialect. The newly-founded universities did nothing for vernacular literature; nor did the meistersinger, of whom Taylor entertains very curious ideas. Hans Sachs is discussed in connection with the Reformation rather than with the meistersinger and his life and works are summed up as follows: Hans Sachs, a shoe-maker, born at Nuremberg in 1494, became a Protestant, edited his poems in 1558, and died in 1576. He understood neither Latin nor Greek; but, as his verses, which fill three folio volumes, had a very popular turn, and favoured the new doctrine, they were received with noisy approbation. They consist of hymns, songs, allegories, comic tales, and farces; and attained a second edition in 1570. Hans Sachs, whose proper name was Loutzdorffer, may be compared with our Pierce the ploughman, who, in like manner, lent, by his satirical verses, an efficacious assistance to Wickliffe. (I, 168-69) Such and similar cryptic characterizations of sixteenth- and seventeenthcentury poets follow a lengthy diatribe on the benefits and evils (predominantly the latter) that derived from the Protestant Reformation. The epoch of Opitz, in Taylor's view, was a "long period of intellectual silence and darkness" which lasted until "the German people could crawl out of the mire of the Reformation" (I, 177) into the light, i.e., the revival of literature in the eighteenth century, a revival that was initiated by Gottsched: "As soon as Gottsched's rules for writing German correctly had made their appearance, every body began to write German ... and, as if for this again nothing but a directory was wanting, poets began to blossom by the dozen, and to fill the local periodic publications with offerings on the altars of the Muses" (I, 178). From the eighteenth century on there is virtually no reference to events other than literary; the individual characterizations are very much longer and supplemented by translated passages, but the style remains the same. There is a good deal of direct criticism in addition to the biographical details, plot summaries, and the like, and it is here that Taylor indulges

133 English language Areas (UK, USA)

most in his personal observations, for example on the suitability of a translation of Nathan der Weise for inculcating Christian virtues in oriental peoples (I, 506), on the values of translating (II, 63), or the desirability of matrimony (II, 103-4). One can certainly not argue with Thomas Carlyle's verdict: "We believe, it is impossible for the most assiduous reader to gather from these three Volumes any portraiture of the national mind of Germany, not to say in its successive phases and the historical sequence of these, but in any one phase or condition" (from the review in no. 105 of the Edinburgh Review (1831) - reprinted as "Historic survey of German poetry" in Miscellaneous essays 1,2, 307-43 [quotation p. 320] vol. 4 of the Household or "People's" edition). Carlyle himself showed a rather higher level of understanding, at least of medieval German literature, in his plan for a history of German literature, ca 1829, by which time he had already published a number of articles on the subject. Unfortunately the plan did not come to fruition and the material gathered in 1830 and 1831 was either published in essay form, used as a basis for lectures (in 1837), or left in manuscript. The general outline foresaw part 1 as covering the period through the minnesinger, 2 the period to Gottsched, Bodmer and Breitinger, and 3 and 4 the pre-classical and classical periods. Since so little of Carlyle's history of German literature was published, and this in fragmentary form, the literary-historical material will not be discussed, beyond noting his dependence on Bouterwek and others, whom he seems to have used judiciously (his "State of German literature" [1827] has as its point of departure comments on Horn's Die Poesie und Beredsamkeit and Umrisse). More interesting are Carlyle's comments on the nature and purpose of histories of national literatures with specific reference to his own. Because Taylor fails to live up to his title Historic survey ..., Carlyle provides both a definition of literary history and a succinct analysis of the stages of development of German literature in the review of Taylor's work cited above. The task of writing a history "of any national Poetry" Carlyle sees as "one of the most arduous enterprises any writer could engage in," since "Poetry ... may be called the music of his [Man's] whole manner of being ... Thus the History of a nation's Poetry is the essence of its History, political, economic, scientific, religious." Only through familiarity with all aspects of culture will the historian be able to discern "its successive stages of growth," "the grand spiritual tendency of each period," and "how one epoch naturally evolved itself from the other" (314-15). Carlyle admits that this is an ideal rarely even attempted, much less achieved. Similarly, in the introduction to his own work (cited here from Shine), Carlyle argues that a national literature is "the truest emblem of the

134

Histories of German Literature

national spirit and manner of existence" (6). In literature (which includes art) "lies the only complete record of both What it [the nation] has felt and thought, and of How it has felt and thought ... The Historian who should picture for us, in any measure, the true significance of a national Literature, would bring the essential life of the nation far nearer us than he who treated merely of its material operations ..." (7). From this point Carlyle goes on to discuss the value of a whole series of national literary histories as a basis for enhanced understanding between nations, and the possibility that the literature of all countries might be "harmonized ... into one World-Literature" (8). Carlyle states that the essential task of the literary historian is firstly "to decipher and pourtray the spiritual form of the nation at each successive period" and secondly to show not just "that such and such was the spiritual aspect of affairs, but how it came to be so" (8). Having said that, Carlyle disdains any such aspiration for his own work which he describes as "only some Series of light, far-off Historical Sketches" (10). To what extent this deprecatio is to be taken purely as a formal topos cannot be determined, given the incomplete nature of his projected (4 volume?) work, but he does claim here and elsewhere that neither the materials for a literary history of Germany nor a public competent to receive such a work are present in Britain. It seems likely that Carlyle's history of literature would have adhered to the outline contained in the review of Taylor. There he sees the first stage as a struggle to escape the bonds of paganism and a gradual advance to "a blaze of true though simple Poetry" in the Swabian Era. The period of chivalry was succeeded "as was natural [by], a period of Inquiry, a Didactic period" (317). "The Spirit of Inquiry translates itself into Deeds" also, and these are "the first assertion of intellectual right" in the Reformation. With Luther the didactic tendency reached its apogee; "now we must see it assume a prosaic character" (317/8), a period that lasted for generation after generation. "Nevertheless from every moral death there is a new birth," a revival in this case in the middle of the eighteenth century, and here Carlyle, like others before him, finds the why and wherefore elusive. He stresses, however, that it was achieved without the aid of court or king. Carlyle concludes - and here he seems to be more in tune with older literary historians in Germany than with those of his own day - that, whereas the earlier periods of German literature had had their counterpart in other countries, the newer literature "has an interest such as belongs to no other." By this he means that before all other countries Germany seems to have found a new creative inspiration, a new spirit that will lead it and others out of the desert of "Scepticism, Frivolity, Sensuality" (319). In 1835 a rather different series of articles on German literature

135 English language Areas (UK, USA)

appeared in the Athenaeum. The author in this instance was a German, none other than O.L.B. Wolff, whose numerous selections of literary gems for school and home went through so many editions from the 1840s until towards the end of the nineteenth century. This is a rare instance of a work specifically written by a German in a foreign language, rather than translated from a German original. The seven essays were entitled "Literature of the nineteenth century. Germany" and formed part of a series on the nineteenth century (in the 1830s!), preceded by essays on American literature and followed by some on the "Othoman" (Turkish) literature. The German articles were subsequently republished in 1837 in book form under the title: Historical sketch of modern German literature (1785-1835). Wolff did survey the early history of German literature in the introductory essay (pages 1 to 13 in the reprint), but this survey, whether by design or necessity, is so brief as to require very little comment. Wolff sees medieval literature as part of a general European phenomenon and in this sense less specifically German, though not for this reason less inspired. It was an unusual period in that literature flourished among high and low; at no other time has literature in Germany been supported by the rulers. With the passing of chivalry poetry fell into the hands of artisans who did nothing for it with their "mechanical mode of verse-making" (202c; reprint, 4), but who developed thereby an inclination for knowledge which prepared them for the Reformation, which was a turning point, as the language now became easy and flexible in the hands of Luther and his followers. However, this period produced no great poetry and neither did the one following the Thirty Years' War, when poetry passed from the people into the hands of unimaginative intellectuals. From the time of Opitz one school after another springs up, but not until the second Saxon school (Bremer Beitrage) are there any signs of an improvement. Literature began a new existence with Klopstock, as a result of the greater feeling of unity, and so forth, under the aegis of Frederick the Great, "the first regeneration of German national literature" (10), 1721-1765. The great era of modern German literature dates from 1765, and despite his emphasis on the classical period, Wolff is surprisingly positive about the achievements of the Romantics. After this very brief introduction, however, he devotes his further essays exclusively to the literature of the period from Klopstock on, divided into poets, historians, and orators. One work which requires only brief notice is Thimm's study of The literature of Germany, from its earliest period to the present time, historically developed (1844), a work which in no way lives up to its title. Although the preface (unpaged) repeats the claim of the title and lists all the varied aspects from which literary figures will be considered

136

Hi stories of German Literature

- "In addition to the above-mentioned biographical memoirs, and the other literary topics, the author has endeavoured to exhibit a concise estimate of the characteristics of each writer's genius, talents, and personal influence, and to discuss incidentally the manner and degree, in which his intellectual qualities were operated upon by external contemporaneous causes" - the literature before 1700 is dismissed in only thirteen pages, and the remainder of the work is almost entirely lacking in historical perspective. This does not mean that the author finds the early period without interest; he eulogizes the Middle High German period in general, and refers to the Nibelungenlied in particular as "the grandest production of the middle ages, - it is indeed popular all over the world" (5). However, his selection of authors and works is strange, his explanation of the historical development simplistic, and the description of the seventeenth century in particular very cursory. There are only four authors worth mentioning after Opitz ("Hoffmanswaldau, Lohenstein, Gunther, and Wernecke") and "not one of the four is worthy of being called a poet" (14). For Thimm, modern literature begins with the dispute between Gottsched and Bodmer (Breitinger is not mentioned) at a time when Frederick II "raised the national mind and character to a height, which indeed cannot fail to astonish every one" (19). The Swiss school and its adherents who "turned more to the English for the formation of their literary taste and character ... obtained a splendid victory over her antagonist" (19-20). And that is as much as Thimm supplies in the way of introduction to a series of thumbnail sketches of German authors beginning with Rabener, Gellert, Kastner, I.E. and J.A. Schlegel, and Zacharia. Apart from occasional short paragraphs on schools, groups, or genres of writing, the remainder of the work consists only of such sketches with their brief biographical notes and generalizations about the nature and quality of the works. Neither bibliographical details nor quotations are provided, but there are quite frequent references to the opinions of other critics. Thimm is in fact remarkable primarily for his knowledge and use of secondary literature, and the inclusion not only of a good "list of important works on German literature" (297-8), but also of a list of current periodicals (288-96), both of which are omitted in the second edition. The last English work to be noted in the first half of the century is Joseph Gost(w)ick's German literature (1849), part of a series entitled "Chambers' Instructive and Entertaining Library." Given the type of series that one would expect from the title, this is a surprisingly substantial work, comprising 318 pages and covering literature from the earliest times to the present, although reference to the most recent literature is quite sketchy. However, Gostick does make an interesting attempt at the

137 English language Areas (UK, USA)

close of his survey to describe at least quantitatively the current state of German letters. He does this by analysing the Leipzig Fair catalogues and discussing the various categories and what they represent. He concludes, "that any attempt to characterise the literature of the present time would be hopeless" (315) on account of the vast quantity and range of published materials. He turns instead to a statistical analysis of the contribution made by individual states to literature, and then of the various professions to which these authors belonged. He finds the life stories of these authors so similar that he puts forward a model biography which "might serve for many authors" (317), a rather curious sociological perspective. In his preface Gostick states that his work is "intended to be chiefly descriptive," and for that reason there are many "specimens of authors" (v), but he also admits "that the general bias of a writer [i.e., historian] must in some degree be apparent" (vi). In Gostick's case the bias is primarily one of qualitative assessment, although it is difficult to gauge to what extent his judgments are based on knowledge of the texts or on guesswork. The issue is confused by his reference to "the secondary sources to whom this little book is indebted" (10); only Jacob Grimm, Wilhelm Wackernagel, Georg Gottfried Gervinus, and Gustav Schwab are named, a meaningless assortment of authorities of whom only Gervinus had produced a complete history of German literature. Be that as it may, Gostick adheres in outline at least to the traditional seven divisions but extends the first to 1150 with subsequent divisions at 1300, 1517, 1624,1720, and 1770. In the earlier periods there is a generous amount of description of the political and social events (he is strongly pro-Luther) and their impact upon literature, and the judgments are simplistic but not out of the ordinary. Beginning with the seventeenth century, however, Gostick becomes very forthright in his assessment of the quality of poets and their poetry. Opitz, for example, is "an accomplished sycophant" and guilty of "pitiable cowardice" (92-93), while his poems "which gained such honours are really inferior to the average quality of verses found in the provincial newspapers of the present day" (93). Lohenstein is condemned of course and "Johann Klay, Christian Hoffmann, Johann Hallmann, and Christian Weise" are passed over, as "their productions have no literary merits" (97). Klopstock's poetry is "so tedious, that it may be safely said few persons have read through The Messiah'" (112). In later editions such comments are toned down to some extent (see below). When it comes to the Classical period of German literature (1770-1848), Gostick prefaces his description of it with an explanation of why "the rapid growth of this literature, especially its poetry, has been

138

Histories of German Literature

regarded with exaggerated admiration" (154), an attitude "of which we find some remains in the present day" (155). Gostick's own opinion may be summed up briefly (further details are given below): Lessing, Kant, Goethe and others only seemed great, because they were so much better than the very poor writers in the four preceding centuries. The only American to attempt a brief survey of German literature before mid-century had also cavilled at the reputation of Goethe. In his Address ... on the Character and Influence of German Literature (1839), Everett records "with some surprise that I have seen him [Goethe] recently described in the writings of Carlyle as a sort of second Luther; the apostle, - as it were - of a new moral and religious dispensation"; whereas, in fact, all Goethe's works "seem to have been written and published merely as works of art, and with an exclusive view to poetical and literary effect" (45). Everett clearly prefers Schiller. Very little more need be said at this point of Everett's work, as it is concerned primarily with "the new school of polite Literature" (8) and makes only passing reference to the "shadowy personages" (9) of the medieval period, to the impact of Luther and the Reformation, and (with some enthusiasm) to the "vast results that are effected ... by the influence of a single great and wise man" (11) - Frederick the Great. The histories of German literature published in English speaking countries in the second half of the nineteenth century vary widely in their form, but seem in part at least to reflect the enhanced standing of the German language in schools and professional institutions. Thimm, for example, writing in 1866, notes: "during the last ten years it has become a branch of study in every good school and Institution, and the German Language being admitted for Government examinations, the study of its literature has become a necessity" (Preface to 2nd edition). Reid's simple little survey is entitled^ handy manual of German literature for schools, civil service competitions, and university local examinations (London/Edinburgh 1879), and Aloys Weiss, in the introduction to the revised edition of M.E. Phillips, remarks: "Since July 1892, Papers on German Literature have been set at the examinations for army candidates" (x). The work of Lodemann, Grundrift der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Boston, 1874), is intended for pupils who are being introduced to German language and literature at school: "Dieses [surveying literary history] ist die natiirlichste, und wie mir scheint, anziehendste Methode, die Lernenden in die deutsche Literatur einzufuhren" (iii). These works are naturally purely derivative and notable only for their sometimes obscure simplifications. The following sentence from Mrs. Mody's Outlines of German literature (London 1889) will serve as an example: "Rudolf von Ems was also the writer of 'Wilhelm von Dourlens' (or Orlienz), a semi-fabulous history of a

139 English language Areas (UK, USA) Brabant prince. Similar legendary tales were: - A poem on the 'Emperor Heraclius;1 Hartmann von der Aue's 'Der Arme Heinrich,' a tale which shows us how terrible the plague of leprosy then was in Europe; Conrad von Wiirzburg's tale of the Emperor 'Otto the Red;' 'Herzog Ernst,' of uncertain authorship, containing the adventures of two historical personages combined into one; and the jesting romance 'Salomon und Morolf,' originated by Williram's paraphrase of the Song of Solomon, which supplied the minstrels with a new theme in the history of that king ..." (19). Of the slightly longer works, that by Selss appears to have been the most successful, as his A critical outline of the literature of Germany (London 1865) was revised and updated through at least five editions to 1896. It seems to have been well received as a preparation for "competitive examinations" (preface). The changes in the original text from edition to edition are minimal, but an effort is made to extend the coverage of recent authors with each successive edition. The period divisions are at 1150, 1534, 1760, and 1805, and Selss simply brings the record up to date by adding a few names at the end without changing the periodization. While Selss adheres fairly closely to traditional evaluations, there are frequent references to English and French literature, and these will be discussed in chapter 9. The reprint in 1972 is of the 1865 edition. Evans's Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (New York 1869) is presumably intended for American university students (there is no prefatory comment), and is a very simplistic and derivative survey with no historical background. Apart from the occasionally odd phraseology, the most notable feature is the strange periodization. Evans posits three larger periods, 1 to the end of the twelfth century, 2 from 1200 to 1639, and 3 from 1639 to the present. These are further broken down: for example, 1639-1750; 1750-1800; 1800-1868. However, the text itself is not divided at all; there are no chapters, no paragraphs, etc, and the table of contents, on which these divisions are based, does not correspond entirely to statements in the text. The arbitrariness of the divisions is only emphasized by a statement such as: "Fur die Literaturgeschichte Deutschlands war 1768, was 1789 fur die politische Geschichte Frankreichs war" (154). The Students' manual of German literature by Nicholson (1882) is a relatively substantial work (209p.) that goes little beyond Goethe (only seven pages for the literature after his death) and is based, according to the author, on Kurz, Vilmar, R. Konig, Jul. Schmidt, and Roquette. The divisions are the traditional ones, but there is virtually no attempt to provide an historical framework, either as a background to the literary groupings or in order to link them one to another. For the most part Nicholson is content to recount simple facts - names, dates, titles, plots

140

Histories of German Literature

- and to express his own views only in the form of ironic "one-liners," such as that on Brockes: "Brockes endeavoured, in spite of an inherent inability, to give a faithful picture of Nature in his verse; his piety and sincere love for the works of God deserved a better fate" (140). M.E. Phillips' work, "written without visible religious or political bias" (Weiss, xii) (London 1895), seems relatively independent and concentrates on major authors and works in a simple but well organized manner (A Handbook of German Literature, 4th edition 1914). A short sketch of German literature for schools by the similarly named V[ivian]. Phillipps (1895), a schoolteacher in Melbourne, is even less detailed, while Cop's Kurzer Leitfaden der deutschen Dichtung (1907) is formulated in deliberately simple German and lacks any historical background. Lublin's Primer of German Literature (London 1888) and Metcalfe's History of German Literature (London 1858) are derived respectively from Kluge and Vilmar and were discussed in chapter 5. Wells's Modern German literature (Boston 1895) must be mentioned here, as it does contain, despite its title, a survey of older literature. However, this is so brief in comparison with the remainder that the work is better considered as a partial history, beginning with Klopstock and concentrating on Goethe and Schiller. Wells seems to have been under the influence of Scherer's cyclic theory. The works discussed in this chapter were published in the United Kingdom and the United States, and in the following it would be appropriate to make a distinction between the works published in these two countries. In fact more of the literary histories mentioned here appeared in the United States, although this does not necessarily mean either that they were written in English or that their authors were native-born Americans. Two of the few works of any substance were in fact both written by Germans; the one was published in England and the other in the United States. It is noteworthy that, as far as could be ascertained, all the authors of the works in the USA were college or university teachers. The relationship between the two works published in London by Solling is rather puzzling, since at the end of his A Review of the literary history of Germany, from the earliest period to the beginning of the nineteenth century (London 1859), following a synopsis of the major writers from the seventeenth century to Klopstock, he promises to continue his history of literature at a later date, covering "that host of literary stars ... in the second part of my review" (152). However, in his Diutiska, an historical and critical survey of the literature of Germany from the earliest period to the death of Gothe (London, 1863), he first covers the same ground as before, and then provides an "alphabetical list of writers from the Reformation to Klopstock" (125-45), before finally concentrating his attention - after an introductory essay on the Classical

141 English language Areas (UK, USA)

period - on a few major figures: Klopstock, Lessing, Wieland, Herder, Jean Paul, Goethe, and Schiller; no other authors are discussed. By far the greater part of this latter portion consists of plot summaries, sample texts, translations, and selections from critics. Soiling's work is in general quite primitive, and the simplicity of the opinions is underlined by the quaintly rhetorical style. The second work is certainly a slight improvement over the first, but errors still abound. For example, in the first work he has only the following to say about Gottfried's Tristan: "Gottfried von Strassburg, a man of unquestionable genius, draws, in his two celebrated poems "Tristan" and "Isolt," a physiological tableau, perhaps unequalled for graphic description and truth, but evincing at the same time a cynicism of immodesty which baffles all description, and has not been equalled even by certain writers of the modern school. We must, therefore, abstain from entering into its details" (90); whereas in the second work he provides a detailed "plot summary" and more commentary. However, this includes, among other oddities, the statement that Isolde is "thrown into boiling water, in order to test her innocence, an ordeal through which the latter, owing to the use of some chemical means, passes satisfactorily" (65). Soiling puts foward no theory about literature and shows little bias other than a fervent belief in the significance of the Reformation, but he is interesting as an example of an historian who is pleading for understanding of his own (foreign) literature and at times of his own country. He constantly uses the words "we" and "our" - by which he means German(s), and he pleads the cause of Germany, as for example, in his introduction to the Classical period, when he argues: "We wanted the right man for the occasion, and found him in Frederick of Prussia. Bold enough to beard Austria, that antiquated state, which, to do it justice, has at all times been the consistent enemy of progress, always and everywhere, Prussia's king, in appealing to the martial spirit of his countrymen, came forward also as the defender of civil and religious liberty; and thus proved a benefactor not only to his own country, but to Europe in general" {Diutiska, 145-6). Naturally some space is also given to the productive influence of English (rather than French) literature on the development of German literature. The remaining British works to the end of the nineteenth century have already been named, and it therefore only remains to comment on the most successful of all English-language works, A History of German Literature by J.G. Robertson. First published in 1902 and revised and enlarged most recently in a fifth edition by Edna Purdie in 1966, it was translated into German in 1968. (He also published a shorter Outlines of the history of German Literature in 1911.) A greater contrast in histories of literature than those of Soiling and Robertson is difficult to imagine.

142

Histories of German Literature

Robertson's work is essentially pragmatic and straightforward, accurate in its detail; the historical record is recounted smoothly and sequentially with only limited reference to historical, political, or social change. Each author is dealt with primarily in a literary context; plot summaries are frequently supplied and quotations occasionally. There is no attempt at periodization, but there is nevertheless - apart from the traditional view that literature since the classical Blutezeit has experienced a steady decline - an underlying intellectual theory. This theory is expressed in the introduction, where Robertson first portrays the concomitant but dissimilar, i.e., synchronically uneven, development of English, French, and German literature (with passing reference to the rest of Europe). He then proceeds to construct national types for France and Germany, omitting England, since "English literature ... is the result of too complicated an evolution to form as sharp an antithesis to either French or German literature as do these two to each other" (xxv). French and German literature represent quintessentially the two poles of European literature, the Latin and the Teutonic, the southern and the northern, the romantic and the classical. The difference in character explains therefore the German predilection for the lyric, their subjectivity in prose, their individualism in the drama: "The fundamental differences between French and German literature might be summed up by saying that the former is the supreme example of a social literature, while the latter is a literature of individualism" (xxvii). These and similar ideas (eliminated from later editions) had of course been voiced before, though perhaps less clearly and concisely. More to the point, however, is the degree to which they condition evaluation of the literary historical record. In this case it must be admitted that the theory does not obtrude greatly on the presentation of the work, although there are occasions when it is used to support a particular viewpoint. The treatment of Gottfried is one such case, for he argues ex nihilo: "We may possibly be doing Gottfried's lost model an injustice in giving to the German poet credit for those elements in Tristan which entitle it to be regarded as great poetry; but the warmth and sincerity of the German epic are foreign to the French temperament ... Gottfried's conception of love is essentially Germanic" (105). Turning now to works in the USA, it is first necessary to mention that a much revised (toned down) version of Gostick's German literature (described above) was published by him (now Gostwick) and Robert Harrison in 1873 under the title Outlines of German literature. This is an expanded work (nearly six hundred pages), and includes a section on the literature of the period 1830-70 as well as comments on various topics related to literature. Gostwick's work is cited by Hosmer in the preface to his Short history of German literature (St. Louis, 1879; revised

143 English language Areas (UK, USA) edition, 1892) as an example of the type of "book of reference" which is "from its minuteness, quite unreadable"; one "obtains no satisfactory general view" (v). Hosmer's aim is to confine himself strictly to belles-lettres (Gostwick/Harrison and others include philosophy, history, etc) and to concentrate "upon 'epoch-making' men and books, the effort being made to consider these with care" (vi). His main source has been the four-volume, nine hundred-page history of German literature by Heinrich Kurz, whose "estimates and discussions, - sometimes translated word for word, sometimes abridged and modified, - have often been used" (vii). Predictably, Hosmer discusses a limited number of authors and works at length, and passes over not only minor writers but whole periods: "The two hundred years from the death of Luther to the middle of the eighteenth century are a time of night, not absolutely rayless, but full of gloom most oppressive" (245); he turns therefore to history "for want of a literature to consider" (206; rev. ed., 200) and describes the Thirty Years' War at length. The novelty of Hosmer's work lies, however, not in the degree of selectivity or in the passages on history but in the introduction of local colour in the form of personal anecdotes. Not only does he recount the progress of the Thirty Years' War, he also tells of his visit to battle sites and to an art gallery to see a picture of the death of Wallenstein. He visits the haunts of poets long since dead, and tells of personal meetings with famous men of letters. This then is a rambling work that consists primarily of descriptive passages on literary tendencies - none of them original - and historical background, plot summaries, quotations, together with interpolations on all kinds of topics, from the "Kaisergruft" in the cathedral at Speyer to the position of Jews in Germany or the character of German syntax. It is perhaps true that through these asides "a grateful relief might be obtained" (vii) from the dullness of literary historical facts, but, although the chapter headings provide a sequence from "The beginnings" to "The modern era," the net result is little sense of historical development and none at all of any historical concept. Hosmer's idiosyncracies are a far cry from the erudition of Bayard Taylor, whose Cornell University lectures were published in the same year (1879) under the title [Studies in] German Literature. But it would be unfair to expect a formal historical record from Taylor, as these were individual lectures and only published by colleagues after his death. Taylor's work is intended to cover only "those works which give a distinct, characteristic stamp to each literary period" (68), and they are remarkable for the frank and forthright assessments of the quality of works and authors. While one may be amused at the judgments, there is an appealing air of candour about statements such as the following on the

144

Histories of German Literature

poetry that followed the highpoint of medieval literature: "We can hardly wonder that courtly patronage was withheld, when the minstrels had come to be bores, both in their numbers and in the quality of their songs. The largesse bestowed on a few lucky ones tempted great numbers of poor, ambitious, half-educated nobles to adopt the profession, and Germany began to resound with the strains of hungry, pretentious, and not even elegant mediocrity" (136). Taylor refers specifically to Hugo von Montfort and Oswald von Wolkenstein, and then continues, "Even the Theuerdank of the Emperor Maximilian ... is too stupid to be read by any healthy person now-a-days" (138). The other major characteristic of his work is the constant reference to English literature, as in the following typical passage: "Add to such stuff as this [Schwulst] the mechanical jingle of Siegmund von Birken - whom Southey seems to have imitated in his "Falls of Lodore," - the tiresome melodies of Christian Gryphius ... and the blood-and-thunder tragedies of Lohenstein, and we cannot help feeling that the only use of this second Silesian school was to create such a disgust with the system, that a reaction must inevitably follow. So, in England, the bombast and nonsense of the aristocratic writers, of exactly the same period, was followed by the revival of Queen Anne's time" (192). The same kind of approach is basic to Hedge's Hours with German Classics (1886). His is again a series of individual chapters rather than a systematic survey, although it is interesting to find, for example, that in treating the eighteenth century he devotes nineteen pages to Mendelssohn, twenty-eight to Lessing and seventeen to Nicolai. He prefaces his work with an analysis of the German mind and comparisons of the German and English intellect, the German and English language, etc. The Germans are in his view predominantly idealistic, given to studying things from within, so that imagination predominates in their work (therefore, for example, the Mdrchen). They have great gifts for philosophic criticism, they have a cosmopolitan breadth of view and consequently a generous appreciation of the merit of foreign literatures. The chief defect of their literature lies in its want of rhetorical force, but this is in large part a result of the inadequacies of the language, which he describes nonetheless in very positive terms. Wilkinson's Classic German course in English (1887) is one of a curiously named "After-school series," which were presumably works written for adult audiences anxious to improve their minds. His survey of literature is even shorter, occupying only seventeen pages as an introduction to a series of chapters on the great figures in German literature from Luther to Heine. The most interesting feature of his work is his insistence on the fact that the Germans are the most prolific of all nations in belles-lettres, but that literature of high quality is very limited. When

145 English language Areas (UK, USA)

considering the historical development, which in his view culminated in a very short period of excellence between Klopstock and Heine, Wilkinson attempts to characterize the Germans and their literature, frequently using English literature as a reference point, for example: "Unlike the French, and like the English, German literature inclines as naturally to assume the form of verse as it does the form of prose" (14). Two minor works are those by Wenckebach and Moore. The former, a teacher at Wellesley College, published in 1890 the first part of a Deutsche Literaturgeschichte aufkulturgeschichtlicher Grundlage. This, however, carries the reader only to 1100, and the remaining parts were never published, although this part was reprinted in 1899 and 1905. What little there is provides a fairly detailed survey of Old High German literature with numerous paragraphs on the cultural and political background, the nature of the German character, and so forth. Moore's History of German Literature appeared originally in an unpaged (!) edition in 1894 and covered the period from Middle High German to the present in a matter of eighty pages. It included at that time a note, stating that the portions from section three on (post-Luther) were "required reading in the course of the Bay View Reading Circle." In later editions (the sixth has been used from 1907), it is referred to as "an elementary work for the class room, and also for those who desire to inform themselves in regard to the great men and the important works of German literature" (Preface). The chronological table actually lists writers up to 1905 and these occur in the text, e.g., Hauptmann. However he concentrates on major figures and works, passing, for example, from Luther to Gottsched with just a brief summary of the social conditions in seventeenth-century Germany, as a result of which "it is evident to every one, no literature could be produced." Two other school works of this period are those by Bernhardt and Keller. The former entitled his work Hauptfakta aus der Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur. A short history of the poetical literature of Germany ... for school and home (1892); the text is in German. The latter's work, Bilder aus der deutschen Literatur (1895) "does not pretend to contain a complete and chronological narrative of German literary history" (3), and is basically a chronological series of brief notes (names, dates, etc) and plot summaries, written in a level of German that might be read by students at sight. While the main purpose of this work is to provide reading material (many poems are quoted at length), it is nevertheless a better work than that of Bernhardt who is very dependent on a few secondary sources (Scherer, Bayard Taylor, Gostwick & Harrison, and Hedge in English, with occasional references to German works), but who can still describe Gottfred's Tristan simply as a poem "welches auch der Sage vom Konig Artus angehort und die Liebe des Gralsritters

146

Histories of German Literature

Tristan zu Isolde besingt" (11) or dismiss Hans Sachs in just four lines. Keller does, however, attempt to make some connections between literary history and general political developments. Thus the decline of the feudal aristocracy, the rise of the bourgeoisie, religious wars, and so on, led to a period of four hundred years (1300-1720) which produced "nicht eine einzige deutsche Dichtung, welche an poetischem Werte den Werken der vorangegangenen ersten Bliitezeit gleich gewesen ware" (45). He explains the nature of lyric poetry in the modern period from the beginning of the nineteenth century to 1870 as follows: "Aber nicht nur die politischen Zustande vor 1871, sondern auch die kirchlichen und sozialen Zustande waren fur einen gro/ten Teil des Volkes unbefriedigend. Und die lyrische Poesie dieser Periode ist ein Spiegel der Empfindungen, welche durch die verschiedenen Ursachen der Unzufriedenheit hervorgerufen wurden" (227). Another work directed specifically at schools, though also for private study, is Hattstadt's Handbuch der deutschen Nationalliteratur (1906). This was written in order to provide both an historical overview and text samples for Protestant schools, and it is therefore very selective: "Als kirchliche Anstalten bedurften sie eines Lehrbuches, das in keiner Weise dem Unglauben das Wort redete und insonderheit frei war von jenen gottfeindlichen, materialistischen Anschauungen, die sich leider in so vielen ... Lesebiichern breit machen" (iii). This standpoint presumably also explains such things as the author's, diatribe (albeit brief) against the "Aufklarer"; it is not clear whether the absence of any excerpts from novels or modern drama is a result of this attitude, or is based solely on a preference for complete rather than fragmentary texts. At all events, the texts take up the bulk of the space, and the historical overview is restricted to very brief characterizations of the several periods. There is some biographical information and commentary on the individual writers from whom selections are taken. By contrast with Hattstadt, Stroebe directs her Geschichte der deutschen Literatur specifically at college students, and the work seems to have had some success, for the original, privately circulated version (Vassar College, 1910) was printed in 1912 and reprinted until 1930. Aside from the introductory outline, which is in parallel German and English versions, the entire text is in a simple style of German capable of being understood (edition used 1913) by "Freshmen entering college with German as Major, also in the third year by those who begin German in college and in the fourth year in the High School by those who study it there" (iii). The author lays considerable stress on political and social developments, and concentrates then on a limited number of writers, something many claim to do, though they cannot refrain from at least listing others. Stroebe does not succumb to this temptation and in her

147 English language Areas (UK, USA) discussion of the sixteenth century, for example, includes only Luther, Hutten, "Volkslieder" and "Volksbiicher," the drama in general, and Hans Sachs; as representative of the seventeenth century, she deals only with Opitz and Grimmelshausen. By contrast, the treatment of recent literature is more extensive than in most works of this nature, and also in a sense more objective. The treatment of Naturalism, for example, is very matter-of-fact and lacks the kind of antipathy shown so often by historians to this period. The most interesting English-language work in the late nineteenth century is unquestionably that of Kuno Francke, born in Germany in 1855 and Professor of German at Harvard. Entitled Social forces in German literature; A study in the history of civilization (1896 - later editions were entitled A history of German literature as determined by social forces), this work purports to be "an honest attempt, to analyze the social, religious, and moral forces which determined the growth of German literature as a whole" (vi). (Some of Francke's minor works were translated into German, and he also produced three volumes in German on Die Kulturwerte der deutschen Literatur in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung [1910-28].) This "honest attempt" is based on the conviction that "all literary development is determined by the incessant conflict of two elemental human tendencies: the tendency toward personal freedom and the tendency toward collective organization" (vi). It is when these two forces are evenly balanced (in an individual or in society) that truly great works of literature are produced. Francke sees the flowering of Middle High German literature as an era of collectivism, though there are signs that the great writers of the time had an inkling of something beyond this. The move towards individualism begins then in the middle of the thirteenth century and culminates in the Reformation. This movement fails, however, and in the reactionary period that follows (through the Thirty Years' War into the eighteenth century), there are only sporadic attempts at asserting individual freedom. Individualism breaks forth in the middle of the eighteenth century, based on the best ideas of Humanism and the Reformation, and reaches its apogee in the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but in the great writers of this time, too, there are indications of a perception of something beyond pure individualism. It is left then to the nineteenth century to strive for the "new, collectivistic ideal," while retaining the individualistic values of the eighteenth century. Within this framework the literary evaluations show no deviation from the norm, although it is clear that Francke has both a predilection for certain writers and a highly developed patriotic sense. He is liberal in his praise of the qualities of the German nation and of individual poets but somewhat prejudiced, it seems, against those poets who tend to consort

148

Histories of German Literature

with the aristocracy. The most interesting part of his work, though, is that which deals with the nineteenth century, for it is here that he expresses his political convictions most clearly, while passing over many major authors almost without comment. Francke's last chapter is entitled: "The era of national reconstruction and the growth of the collectivistic ideal," and it concludes with an analysis of works by Goethe (Faust II) and Hegel, "the true representatives of German culture in the era of the Restoration" (544). Francke sees German society as progressing after 1830 in three stages: In the first stage (1830-40), "a period of waiting and doubt," "it is apparent that the individualism of the eighteenth century is about to lock arms with the collectivism of the nineteenth in order to march in common with it against the citadel of Holy Alliance feudalism" (545). In the second stage, (1840-48) all segments of the population, excepting the representatives of "monarchy, officialdom, militarism, priestcraft" (546), coalesce to produce the revolution of 1848. What happens thereafter is not analysed, but Francke concludes that the effects of the revolution have been severely and unfairly underestimated following the success of 1870: "the time will come when 1848 will have taken its place in German history by the side of 1813 and 1870 as one of the supreme moments of the nineteenth century" (546-7). Little is actually said about the literature of the nineteenth century, but in an epilogue Francke turns to "a brief consideration of the moral ideas which underlie the life-work of the greatest poet of our own time, and with a suggestion of the spirit which is at work in the most recent literary movement" (548). He is referring here to Wagner, to whom "German literature owes the most emphatic proclamation of the artistic ideal of the future, the ideal of pantheistic collectivism" (548). Following an analysis of this concept and passing references (names only) to a large number of "able writers," Francke concludes "that literature in the decades preceding or immediately following the Franco-German war had ceased to be a motive power of highest national importance" (554). The new writers he discusses briefly Sudermann and Hauptmann - are representative of a new era of "Sturm und Drang," but with a difference. In the eighteenth century the poets had fought for individual freedom; now these poets "are essentially collectivists ... backed by a strong popular opinion, they are in sympathy with a wonderfully compact and steadily increasing political party" (558-9). Francke is clearly not happy with the present social order in Germany, but believes that the country is "inevitably drifting toward the same final goal of a new corporate consciousness" (556), and it is his conviction not only that this goal will be the culminating point of centuries of oscillation between individualism and collectivism, but also that the writers have a major role to play in bringing about

149 English language Areas (UK, USA)

this new era, this evidently socialist era. The only other works noted in North America prior to the First World War are those by Coar, Heller, Horning, Thomas, and Horwath. Of these, Coar's Studies in German literature in the nineteenth century (1903) (although it must be excluded from discussion here), is very interesting for its comments on the German character and the purpose in writing literary history. Horning, the only Canadian in this field, may be omitted, as his work, Syllabus of lectures on the outline of German literature (1909) is simply a list of those authors and works that should be studied by university students. Heller, by contrast, in his Studies in modern German literature (1905), considers the writing of literary history as a whole to be a futile exercise, and he therefore focusses his attention on those topics that have the greatest actuality for people outside Germany (vii), namely, Sudermann, Hauptmann, and female writers. Towards the end of the period another standard type of work appears in the shape of Thomas's A History of German Literature (1909), one of a series of "Short Histories of the Literatures of the World" (vol. 14) (although with four hundred pages, it is not that short). It contains the usual disclaimer in regard to the selection process, and the views expressed are the traditional ones, e.g., that "The two centuries that immediately preceded the invention of printing were for Germany a period of literary decadence ... nothing of any great literary importance was written in the German language" (113). Aside from the at times rather bluntly expressed opinions, the main feature of Thomas's work is his abandonment of the standard formal periodization in favour of short chapters with simple descriptive headings, e.g., "The Young Goethe and the 'Storm and Stress'," "The Great Days of Weimar," "The Rise of the Romantic School and the War against Napoleon." Finally, there is Horwath's German Student's manual of the literature, land, and people of Germany (1908), which at first glance promises to be different, but which in fact offers a little less background detail than many more traditionally titled works. Although Horwath claims to "show how German thought and character have developed under the influence of other nations" (3), and to make the student "acquainted with the essentials underlying the study of a people which is today at the height of intellectual life and culture" (4), he only provides the usual kind of introductory paragraph on the historical background to any given period. The period of Frederick the Great, for example, the eighth of eleven, is introduced in only nineteen lines, which stress the influence of Rationalism and the contribution of the monarch (directly or indirectly) to the development of German literature. More noteworthy are Horwath's lengthy plot summaries, which contrast with the very brief notes on individual writers (heavily weighted towards the Classical period). Of Gottfried,

150

Histories of German Literature

Horwath writes, for example, only: "the author of the famous epic poem Tristan und Isolde, was a man of genius, but lacked simplicity and originality, [four lines of biography] His epic ... was borrowed from a French source and represents the irresitible force of love" (52). The plot summary then occupies a full page of smaller print. In the second half of the century Soiling and Francke alone are distinctly original, the one demonstrating lamentable ignorance and a desire to use the survey of German literature to defend his own country to English readers, the other using literary history as a vehicle for putting forward what is in essence a political rather than an historical programme. Perhaps a degree of originality could also be claimed for Hosmer, but this is at the personal rather than at the intellectual level. The remaining works offer little historical theory or aesthetic evaluation, and only Robertson in the early twentieth century rises in any way above the norm. Generally speaking, the histories published in the UK and the USA are basically pragmatic works, produced by school or college/university teachers and evidently aimed primarily at this type of readership. More will be said below of the peculiarly national outlook of these authors below. For the moment it is surprising to note how much reference is made in these works to philosophical and historical writings, given the gradual omission of these aspects from German works of a similar nature.

8 Foreign Histories of German Literature: Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland

Hitherto, it seemed apropriate to look at "German" works as a whole and postpone - rather than avoid - the difficult question of of the definition of nation states in the nineteenth century. Germany did not exist as a single political entity in the modern sense until the creation of the Second Empire in 1870, and the countries bordering on Germany to the east and south were equally ill defined for most, if not all, of that time. In particular, the varying fortunes of the Austrian or Austro-Hungarian empire and the widespread use of German in Austria, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary, etc make it difficult to classify individual works on German literature as specifically Austrian, Czech, etc. For example, Strzemcha's Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Zum Gebrauche an osterreichischen Schulen was published in Briinn (Brno) in 1877. Two years later and in the same city Vymazal published his Dejiny nemecke ndrodni literatury. Since German was in any case the "national" language of Austria and one of the official languages of Switzerland, there could also be histories of German literature restricted to those countries. While distinctions are not easy, the attempt will nevertheless be made to identify and survey briefly those works that might justifiably (if in modern terms) be considered as Austrian, Czech, etc. The limitation of the survey to those countries on the southern and eastern periphery of modern Germany (with a glance at Scandinavia) is strictly pragmatic. Only in these countries was a sufficient number of works published prior to 1914 to permit at least tentative generalizations. However, not every author of a literary history of Germany has been investigated in order to discover whether he or she is a native of the country where publication took place. Unless obvious grounds existed for thinking otherwise, it has

152

Histories of German Literature

been assumed that the author of a work published in Austria was Austrian, and so on. There is also no particular reason for the order in which the various countries are discussed. The widespread knowledge of German in some of these countries means that "German" texts, i.e., those from outside, could and certainly would have been in use (and texts written in German and published in one of these countries may also have been used in another). This is probably the main reason why so few works on the history of German literature were published in Scandinavian countries, i.e., the knowledge of German was such that "native" German works would be used. However, Sweden seems to occupy a special position in this regard, for of the four histories of German literature noted as published there, three are translations from the German, namely, Frank (i.e., Merseburger), Jantzen, and Weber (already mentioned in chapter 5). The only other history was written by a German, Heinz Hungerland. After producing in 1906 a brief work for schools, entitled Das wissenschaftliche Studium der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. Ein Wegweiser fur Studierende, his Deutsche Stamm-, Sprach- und Literaturgeschichte was published simultaneously in Stockholm and Leipzig in 1913. Hungerland's work, not mentioned earlier, is remarkable only for its curious combination of linguistic, literary, and "anthropological" comment. He notes in his "Vorwort": "Das Werkchen will also zugleich auch ein Mahnwort an die studierende Jugend der germanischen Volker sein[,] mehr und mehr rassenbewu/Jt ihre ganze geistige Welt auf germanischem Grundwall aufzubauen" (1). And much of the text is devoted to a depiction of the various (positive) qualities of the different German "Stamme" and the reflection of these qualities in literature. With four official languages, Switzerland is also a special case, and there are separate histories of Swiss literature in German even before 1914, although these will not be discussed, since they must be considered as "regional" histories. Baechthold (1892) deals exclusively with Swiss literature in German; Jenny & Rassel (1910) treat German and non-German literature separately. Wilhelm Goetz's Kurze Geschichte der deutsch-schweizerischen Dichtung (1885) covers only the period since Bodmer and Breitinger, and is interesting solely for the sub-title which reads: Eine Wegeleitung zu asthetischer und nationaler Bildung unserer Jugend. Aside from these there are few histories of German literature by Swiss authors and little recognition in German works of the special contribution made by Swiss writers. Baechthold himself concludes: "sprachlich und literarisch ... ist sie [Switzerland] in ihrem deutschen Teile eine gute alte Provinz Deutschlands geblieben. Von einer Nationalliteratur der Schweiz wurde zwar auch schon gesprochen. Indes tont das Wort patriotischer als wahr ... Einen nationalen Charakter kann

153 Works in Neighbouring Countries ... unsere Literatur im allgemeinen nicht tragen. Dagegen weist eine Reihe von literarischen Erzeugnissen eine bestimmte schweizerische Eigenart auf' (2-3). However, Baechthold stresses very strongly the high proportion of Swiss among the leading writers from the Old High German period to the present, and Wackernagel, himself the author of a history of German literature, had published some time earlier a brief work under the title Die Verdienste der Schweizer urn die deutsche Literatur (1833). Wackernagel's history of German literature seems to be the first by a Swiss in the nineteenth century, but it remained incomplete (see above), and it has no particular Swiss quality beyond the occasional emphasis on the Swiss contribution to this or that genre at any given period. Gerstenberg's Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1868), briefly mentioned earlier (50-54), was the next Swiss work to appear; it is directed at a completely different audience from that envisaged by Wackernagel. Gerstenberg wants to see literature introduced into the "Volksschule" and writes, as he says, "fur die Jugend, die Schule und die gro/3ere Masse des Volkes" (iv), and presumably this audience partially accounts the strongly moral tone. Beyond brief comments on "Schweizerlieder" and Ruefs Wilhelm Tell in the Renaissance-Reformation period, there is little recognition of Swiss writers until more recent times. Most of those cited by Baechthold from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, for example, are missing. Under the nineteenth century, Gerstenberg has a separate chapter (17) for "Dichter und Schriftsteller der deutschen Schweiz," where he lists the writers by genre or as "literarische Frauen." This chapter is followed by one on "Deutschlands weibliche literarische Welt." Zehender's Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1871), intended for use in schools, was published in three parts with alternate blank pages for notes. After defining both literature and national literature, he claims "die Literaturgeschichte ist die Geschichte aller bedeutenden Geisteswerke, vorziiglich poetischen Inhalts," and the purpose is to learn about the history and quality of the German language as compared with other languages, and about "die Entwicklung des geistigen Lebens der deutschen Nation" and "den Lebensgang der bedeutendsten Geister des deutschen Volkes" (8). His work is highly selective as regards literary works, and the treatment quite simplistic. Virtually no historical background material is provided, but Zehender does include some non-literary figures, e.g., historians, a section on female authors (from Karsch on), and a relatively short passage on Swiss writers (in smaller print). Though hardly critical or informative, this list is quite long and includes some rather obscure names in the early part of the nineteenth century and twenty-one names from the current generation,

154

Histories of German Literature

beginning with Keller. While there is no indication of tendentiousness in reference to Swiss writers, he demonstrates a distinctly Protestant-moral tendency, for example, in his treatment of Gottfried (seven lines compared with Wolfram's one and a half pages; Gottfried's work "steht also an geistigem Gehalt tief unter Parcival" [38]) or of Spee, "der zwar au/terlich jenem katholischen Orden, innerlich aber mehr der protestantischen Kirche angehorte" (54). Howald's literary history, which is notable primarily for its illustrations and strongly religious bent, was discussed above (67-8). There is no indication of a peculiarly Swiss approach in the general historical outline, but Howald makes a great deal, relatively speaking, of those Swiss writers that he does portray. In the Reformation period, for example, Niklaus Manuel is discussed at greater length than either Hutten or Murner, while the usual juxtaposition of Haller and Hagedorn is heavily weighted in favour of the former. His work and his life are described in detail: "Als Dichter und Denker, als Forscher und Lehrer, als Patriot und Menschenfreund ist Haller ein wahrhaft gro/Jer Mann" (350). After the ten pages on Haller, Howald begins his portrayal of Hagedorn with a long passage from Haller on Hagedorn, to which he adds in a little over one page, "noch einige Detailstriche" (353). In the more recent period Howald pays special attention to the depiction of "schweizerische Volksnatur" (844) in prose writers after Keller, and, like so many other historians of the period (perhaps in this case under the influence of Bartels), discusses also other writers under their locality. Nothing is said in Vogtlin's Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung (1910) about emphasizing Swiss writers. He aims to provide an outline which will relieve teachers of the need to lecture on the literary historical development and thereby pass over "gewisse ode Strecken mit automobilistischer Schnelligkeit" (vi). There are no divisions by locality with the exception of a short section on "Wiener Dramatiker," and the index lists almost none of the writers cited by Baechthold from the seventeenth to eighteenth centuries. Of the forty-seven writers from this period noted by Baechthold, only Bodmer, Breitinger, Gessner, Haller, and Lavater are included by Vogtlin. These would appear in virtually every history of literature, and the brevity of the text probably accounts for the absence of other names. The only Swiss aspect of this work, therefore, aside from the stress on the Swissness of such writers as Gotthelf or Spitteler, is the inclusion at the end of the work of a list of eighteen contemporary writers, including Vogtlin himself, author of poetry, novellas, and at least one novel. Not one of these eighteen appears in the 1911 edition of Kluge's slightly longer Deutsche National-Literatur, and only three of them, Jakob Christoph Heer, Walther Siegfried, and Ernst Zahn, are mentioned in the third volume (675p.) of Biese's very detailed and very

155

Works in Neighbouring Countries

popular Deutsche Literaturgeschichte, also of 1911. By contrast with Vogtlin, Pott notes in the "Vorwort" to his Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1914): "Ein besonderes und langeres Kapitel ist den grossen Schweizern gewidmet," but this is hardly justified by the text. Of the eighty-six pages (there are also ca. 130 pages of excerpts), fewer than four (73-7) are devoted to "Die grossen Schweizer Erzahler," and here we find a commentary only on Gotthelf, Keller, Meyer, along with short notes on Zahn, Heer, Huggenberger, and the uncommented names of Bosshart, Lienert, Schaffner, Widmann, and Spitteler. Other Swiss are of course mentioned elsewhere - for example, Haller and Bodmer (24). This work follows the traditional pattern in regard to the description of individual writers (without any historical background), but it is not clear what readership is envisaged. Pott claims to have designed his book for "das Ausland" (5) and to have written it in a simple and direct style, since experience had taught him that texts written "fur Deutsche" were too difficult. On the other hand, he hopes his work will find "Freunde in der deutschen Schweiz" and be used for private study. It is therefore apparently not primarily intended for use in schools, despite the simplistic approach and the inclusion of sample texts. In general, then, it has to be said that there is no strongly "Swiss" character to these works (a further work by Krauss, 1889, was not available). In format and style they adhere largely to the traditional standards, and the main difference lies solely in the inclusion of a larger number of Swiss writers from the nineteenth century. These are treated quite summarily for the most part, however, and no attempt is made to compare or contrast them with their "German" counterparts. The only other feature which might be considered as peculiar to these works is the strongly moral (Protestant) bias. This is evident, for example, in the treatment of Gottfried as compared with Wolfram, the latter being discussed approvingly and at great length, the former criticized sharply and/or dismissed briefly. In addition to the comments noted above, one may cite here Gerstenberg, who condemns Gottfried, blames such works as his for the decline in the value of the word "minne" and concludes: "em eigentliches Verdienst um sittliche Zustande hat sich Meister Gottfried mit seinem Tristan und Isolde folglich nicht erworben" (38). The special relationship that existed for so many centuries between Germany and Italy also seems to be reflected in the Italian to be discussed. It was already noted at the beginning of chapter six that the second monograph on the history of German literature in any language was in Italian (by Dei' Giorgio-Bertola, 1779), preceded only by Leonhard Meister's Beitrdge (1777). It was followed in 1818 by Ridolfi's Prospetto generate della letteratura tedesca, an admittedly very general

156 Histories of German Literature (but nevertheless for its time substantial) work (371p.), which also includes, however, writers on law, philosophy, etc (almost half the text). In his preface the author, who was professor of German language and literature at the university of Padua, stresses the high qualities of German culture and the importance, especially for young people, of learning both foreign languages and history; translations are not enough. He himself quotes literary works only rarely, as he concentrates on a general overview of the development of German literature and relates it to European culture (classical antiquity as well as modern literature). He describes, for example, the origins and nature of Minnesang, but neither lists the poets of the period nor quotes examples. This makes it difficult to establish to what extent Ridolfi's work is original; however, while it is true that he makes frequent reference to his sources, such as Sulzer and Flogel, his copious notes, the number of authorities cited, and the writers' names mentioned in the text make it evident that he had extensive knowledge (though not necessarily at firsthand) at least of more recent literature. In the short chapter (86-91) on occasional (popular) and satirical poetry ("Poesia famigliare e satirica"), he notes the difficulties in translating adequately from German ("Non altrimenti la lingua tedesca ha i suoi proprii e particolari idiotismi che appunto per essere suoi proprii difficilmente si possono tollerare tradotti alia lettera in altra lingua" [86]); he names Abt, Bodmer, Canitz, Gellert, Gleim, Hagedorn, Haller, Jacobi, Lessing, Lichtwer, Liscow, Pfeffel, Rabener, Rost, and Wieland; and he quotes a passage from Sulzer on the state of satire in Germany as compared with the rest of Europe. In the notes to this section he provides a literal translation of fables by Lessing and Lichtwer. The next Italian work after Ridolfi is Antonia Piazza's translation of the French history of German literature by Loeve-Veimars (1829), the only example I have come across of a translation from a "second" into a "third" language. This was followed in 1843 by Heinze's Breve storia della letteratura tedesca, but the title of this work is misleading (the heading preceding the main body of the text is "Cenni storici della letteratura tedesca"). It contains in fact nothing more than a description of the different Germanic tribes and their dialects: the development of the language as a background to the study of literature. Only occasional reference is made to Old or Middle High German texts, and the thirty-two pages provide no indication of the scope or nature of German literature. After Ridolfi and Heinze comes a longer gap until the 1870s when, as with other languages, there is a concentration of works. The first in Italy is Claus's Grundri($ der deutschen Literatur mit italienischen Noten (1871), but this, as well the works by Parender (1878), Bianchi (1879), Linders (1895), and Almagia (1901), were unfortunately not available to me.

157

Works in Neighbouring Countries

The Grundrifl der deutschen Literatur (1879) by Motti is, as its title suggests, in German, and is a very primitive little work, containing only fifty-four pages of text. Only the briefest of notes are provided on writers, for example: "Der bedeutendste Dichter des ritterlichen Epos ist Heinrich von Veldeke, der in seiner bald nach 1184 vollendeten Emit nach franzosischem Vorbild die Aeneassage so bearbeitete, dass er sie ganz und gar im Geist und Wesen des mittelalterlichen Ritterthums versetzte. Ihm folgten: Hartmann von Aue, ein beliebter, milder Dichter; Wolfram von Eschenbach, der ernsteste, tiefsinnigste deutscheste aller dieser Dichter, Gottfried von Strassburg, eine durch und durch poetische Natur und Meister in der Form wie kein zweiter" (14). Despite the brevity of his text and the need to economize on details, Motti nevertheless ends with two pages listing writers in other fields, from natural science to literary history. The Geschichte der deutschen Literatur nebst Metrik der deutschen Sprache fur italienische und deutsche Schulen by Paolina Schiff (1885) is a relatively long but rather odd work. It consists of an introduction on the origin and language of the Germanic tribes (1-15); "Erste Keime deutscher Dichtung" - from the beginning to Klopstock (16-59); "Zwischenepilog" (59-66); "Klassische Vollendung der deutschen Dichtung" (66-175); "Poetik" (179-85); "Metrik" (187-233); sample texts (235-44). There is an index of the numbered paragraphs and also an alphabetical index which is far from alphabetical. The text is in German and many of the words are glossed in footnotes, but no technical or bibliographical notes are given. The German itself is a little strange and the punctuation inaccurate. In the early period (that is, before the Classical period), there is no coherent order, and the individual writers receive scant comment. Gottfried, for example, is described as follows: "Dem germanischen Elemente wenig zugeneigt, zeigt sich uns Gottfried von Stra/fourg, c. 1210. Mutwillig, reizend, anmutig in Form und Sprache, kehrte er mehr die franzosische als deutsche Geschmacksrichtung heraus; er bildete aber keine Epoche, er war ein Kind seiner Zeit als die Bliite der Ritterpoesie mehr dem Verfall entgegenging. Seine schonste aber unvollendete Dichtung ist das Epos: Tristan und Isolde" (32). Of Brant she says only: "Die Satyre machte sich im sechzehnten Jahrhunderte wieder durch den Stra/3burger Sebastian Brant (gestorben 1521) kraftvoll geltend. Sein Narrenschiff ist ebenso humoristisch als eingreifend; der Spott ist scharf aber mit sittlichem Endzweck gefiihrt, die Sprache mit Kunst verwendet" (41). The strangest part of the work is the "Zwischenepilog," in which Schiff attempts to summarize and account for the almost total barrenness of German literature from the end of the Middle Ages to Klopstock. She begins as follows: "Seit Jahrhunderten war die deutsche Poesie auf der

158

Histories of German Literature

Stufe der Mittelma/fcgkeit geblieben, aus der nur hie und da eine hoher aufflammende Erapfindung und Gedankenau/terung hervorbrach" (59). She argues essentially that it was the Germans' antipathy "gegen die Welschen" (66) and their inability to absorb more than just the superficialities of Humanism and the Renaissance that prevented a rebirth of literature until the middle of the eighteenth century. However, it is not clear why a rebirth occurred at that point. The greater part of her work is devoted then to the Classical period and later, for - as she stresses in the preface - she wishes to give more detailed information about modern writers. The introduction to the Romantics will provide sufficient indication of the quality of the work: Eine besondere Stromung hatte sich gegen das Ende des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts geltend gemacht: Der Romanticismus. Wie es schon der Name ansagt hatte er Bezug auf die romanischen Verhaltnisse, d.h. auf die Zeit die dem Verfall der Romerwelt folgte, an welche sich die Roheit der barbarischen Horden und die auftauchende hierarchische Verzweigung anschlo/J; deren Lichtseite aber durch die Reste romischer Gro/fe, der Poesie primitiver Volkerschaften und der Christuslehre gebildet wurde. Diese Verhaltnisse zogen sich bis ins Mittelalter hinein, wo das immer mehr entkraftete deutsche Volk seine frische Urtumlichkeit verliert und sich ein Culturelement entwickelt welches die Hexenprozesse sowie die Folter, als Instrumente der Gerechtigkeit moglich macht. Die traurige Zeit welche der Poesie die Heimat benahm die nur hie und da, an unbeachteter Stelle, im Volkslied, eine Zuflucht fand. - Diese Ader friiherer Jahrhunderte pulsirte in unser modernes Zeitalter hinein, trotz den Prinzipien der Gegenwart; de/?wegen war die romantische Schule auf geschichtlichem Felde kein neues sondern ein altfortlebendes Element. (142)

Bertolami's Sinossi di storia letteraria inglese, francese e tedesca must be mentioned here since, although the only edition located dates from 1919 and makes no reference to an earlier edition, the catalogue of the National Library in Florence lists a!909 edition. However, mention alone is adequate, as the survey of German literature comprises only twenty pages (83-103), most of them devoted to the Classical period. Tomei's Storia della letteratura tedesca (1913) is a rather more extensive, but very ordinary work. He divides German literary history into periods by the crusades, the Reformation, and 1848, and within these periods sub-divides primarily by genres and schools. Background information is minimal - just fourteen lines, for example, on the second Silesian school - and there are no plot summaries or quotations. The standard format for each writer consists of biographical data (sometimes just dates) and a brief descriptive evaluation. The space devoted to Gottfried von Strasburg, for example, totals just eighteen lines, and to Wolfram, eleven lines. The evaluation of Gottfried, following details of his

159

Works in Neighbouring Countries

life, the sources of his work etc, is almost entirely related to Wolfram: "Gottfried is no less original than Wolfram. If Wolfram introduces into chivalric poetry a great profundity of thought, Gottfried has at his disposal two powerful elements of poetry: the feeling for nature and the motions of the human mind. He puts aside the ancient courtliness and substitutes for it passion. The style, which in Wolfram is frequently obscure and sometimes incomprehensible, is in Gottfried crystal clear. The former is continually tormented by doubts about the destiny of mankind, the latter has the serene conviction in the healthy enjoyment of life as comprising the destiny of man. ["Gottfried non e meno originale di Wolfram. Se Wolfram introduce nel poema cavalleresco una grande profondita di pensiero, Gottfried ha a sua disposizione due potentissimi elementi di poesia: il sentimento della natura e i moti deH'anima umana; egli mette da parte 1'antica cortesia e vi sostituisce la passione. Lo stile che in Wolfram e spesso oscuro e talvolta incomprensibile, in Gottfried e di una chiarezza cristallina; il primo e continuamente tormentato da dubbi sul destine dell'umanita, 1'altro ha la serena convinzione che nei sani godimenti della vita sia racchiuso il destino deiruomo"] (29). Brant and Murner are not mentioned, but in his treatment of the sixteenth century, the author comments on such minor religious figures as Spengler, Speratus, and Weisse. Thirty-one lines are devoted to Giinther, of which eighteen are quoted from Goethe. All in all this is a very uneven work, though not untypically so. The attitude towards Austrian literature among German authors of literary histories differs little from that towards Swiss-German literature. It is summed up succinctly by Engel, when he writes: "Eine besondere osterreichische Nationalliteratur mit scharf unterscheidenden Merkmalen gibt es nicht ... Dennoch empfiehlt es sich, fur einige Zeitabschnitte die osterreichischen Dichter auszusondern, weil sie bei aller Deutschheit doch so eigene Tone anschlagen, da/8 sie nicht in der gro/3en Menge nur so mitzugehen verdienen" (791). Perhaps the Austrians themselves are partly to blame for this attitude, for there was no complete history of "Austrian" literature prior to 1914. Toscano del Banner's grandiosely titled Die deutsche Nationalliteratur der gesammten Lander (sowohl der heutigen wie der jeweilig dazu gehorenden) der osterreichischen Monarchic von den altesten Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart (1849) did not progress beyond 1300, which is hardly surprising in view of his incoherence in displaying everything "was nur irgend auf das Interesse eines Gebildeten der Nation Anspruch machen kann" (5). On the other hand, the number of Austrian histories of German literature, i.e., those published in what is now Austria, the majority of them in Vienna, is relatively large. Many are intended for use hi schools and are consequently quite short, but precisely because they are for schools, they may

160

Histories of German Literature

be expected to lay greater emphasis on Austrian writers. As Strzemcha puts it: "Der sehr bedeutende Antheil, den Osterreicher an den literarischen Bestrebungen des deutschen Volkes genommen hat, bildet ein nicht unwesentliches Element zur Forderung des Patriotismus" ([i]). Although "national" formulations similar to those found in German works are used, including the term "Nationalliteratur," some historians stress that they will pay particular attention to Austrian writers. In Mager's work, for example, "[sind] die osterreichischen Dichter einer besonders eingehenden Darstellung unterzogen" ("Vorwort"). This does not necessarily mean that Austrian writers are treated separately. Some historians segregate them, others do not, or do so only in the more recent periods. The general tendency is to argue (possibly after some reference to medieval literature in Austria) that Austrian literature failed to develop under Joseph II, when there was a literary revival in Germany; that Austria played a considerable role in the Romantic period, for example, by welcoming such a figure as A.W. Schlegel to Vienna; but that a distinctively Austrian literature did not develop until later. Specific reference is frequently made to Denis and others in the middle and end of the eighteenth century, to the development of the Burgtheater and the Viennese "Possen," and to those political poets in Austria who are the counterpart to the liberation poets in Germany. Although some individual writers are cited from the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the majority of historians treat Austrian literature separately only after the Napoleonic Wars or the death of Goethe. "Seit 1820 trat in Osterreich eine eigene Dichterschule hervor" (Schillerwein, 118). Hasse may serve initially as an example. He first distinguishes between German and Austrian writers in the sections headed "Nachklassik und Nachromantik" and there refers back to Abraham a Santa Clara, Denis, Blumauer, Alxinger, Sonnenfels, Ayrenhoff, Collin, Pyrker, Pichler, Stranitzky, Prehauser, Kurz-Bernardon, and Marinelli, before dealing with major figures, such as Grillparzer and Deinhardstein. In the period 1830-1900, "Die Zeit der unausgesohnten Gegensatze," there are no separate sub-sections for Austrians, but Austrian writers are sometimes grouped together within the various sections - for example, Grim, Beck, etc, under political poets. In the later sections writers may be grouped by locality or by genre. The precise definition of an "Austrian" writer does not exercise these historians greatly; they do not, for example, discuss the question of nationality, even though the origin of each writer and whether he or she was born in Austria, Bohemia, or Hungary is scrupulously noted. Some exceptions are, however, consciously made. Hebbel, for example, and sometimes even Laube, are considered to have lived and worked long enough in Austria to form part of Austrian literary history, and reference

161

Works in Neighbouring Countries

is occasionally made in the specifically Austrian context to "visitors," such as Schlegel. On the other hand there is rarely any mention of writers that use a local Austrian dialect, and this is rather surprising, since Austrian historians of German literature frequently adopt the same model as that used by German historians, and categorize writers of more recent times - that is, since the Wars of Liberation or the death of Goethe rather by locality than by genre or school. Whether or not this results from the existence of locally based schools in earlier periods (from the Silesian through the Gottinger to the Swabians), it is remarkable that many lyric poets, for example, are grouped as Austrian, Bavarian, Prussian, and so forth. While this may be a convenient and even a meaningful method, it is odd to find that female writers, though strongly represented in literary histories of the late nineteenth century, are placed in a separate, non-localized category, also by Austrians. This categorization by locality therefore raises the question of the extent to which the Austrian historians differ from those of their German counterparts who also have a separate category for Austrian writers. This question can only be answered by an analysis of the writers cited in the various works. The list of Austrian writers culled from the "Austrian" sections of ten works (by Schillerwein, Zeynek, Egger, Strzemcha Tupetz, Kummer, Smolle, Mager, Sittenberger, and Bauer) from 1863 to 1912 and cross-checked against the indexes (since some Austrians would in some cases be in non-Austrian sections), comprised 140 names. The birthplaces of these writers were not always given, but those that were, were widely scattered between Poland and Italy and included several from Germany. Since the degree to which recent or contemporary writers are included varies from one historian to another, a comparison of the coverage of Austrian writers in Austrian as opposed to German works is only valid if based as far as possible on writers from an earlier period, i.e., the first half of the nineteenth century for histories from the 1860s on. The only writers that appear in all ten of the Austrian works are: Zedlitz (1790-), Vogl (1802-), Seidl (1804-), Griin (1806-), and Halm (1806-). Three of these (Zedlitz, Griin, and Halm) appear in all five of the German works selected for comparison (Oltrogge, Seinecke, Sehrwald, Egelhaaf, and Schultz), while Vogl appears in four and Seidl in only three. Of the writers who appear in nine of the ten Austrian works, namely, Raimund (1790-), Ebert (1801-), Bauernfeld (1802-), Feuchtersleben (1806-), and Beck (1817-), only Beck appears in all five of the German works, Raimund is in four, and Ebert, Bauernfeld, and Feuchtersleben in only three. A less well-known writer such as Castelli is included in six of the ten Austrian works but appears in only one of the five German works. There is clear evidence, therefore, that Austrian historians of German

162 Histories of German Literature literature include many writers because they are Austrians, even though they may neither segregate them from the "Germans" nor make any attempt to define the distinguishing characteristics of "Austrian" as opposed to "German" literature. The tendency is most marked in the school works, and it becomes more pronounced in the early twentieth century. The last work by Kummer & Stejskal before 1914, the second edition of their Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (1912), has 298 pages of text. They devote eight lines to Vogl, nine to Seidl, and seventy-one to Griin. By contrast, Schulze's rather longer (German) work, Die deutsche Literatur, also of 1912, ignores both Vogl and Seidl and gives only ten lines in 371 pages to Griin. Vogtlin's (Swiss) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung (1910) also ignores Vogl and Seidl and gives Griin only five lines in 259 pages. There are more works from Hungary than from some of the countries discussed here, but the number has to be reduced for the following analysis. Two works that appear in the bibliography have not been seen. Ivany's Leitfaden, reviewed in Germania (1872), could not be identified, and Schack's Hungarian work (1893), which was apparently only privately circulated as a "printed manuscript," was not found. The works given as Hungarian under Scherr and Weber are of course translations, in the one case of a history of world literature and in the other of a history of the world. The work under Sime's name is given as a translation from the English, but no English work by this author could be identified, only a history of Germany. If a copy could have been found, it would have been treated as an original work. Finally, the work that appears in bibliographies under Brugier's name is so far removed from anything published by him that it deserves to be treated as an independent work. Brugier would certainly not have claimed it as his own, and it is listed in the bibliography under "anonymous." The works listed as Hungarian derive almost exclusively from the second half of the nineteenth century. The only work earlier than this is Tobias Gottfried Schroer's Kurze Geschichte ..., published in Pressburg in 1830 and discussed in the Prolegomena (126ff). The first work under discussion is therefore that of Karl Julius Schroer, son of the above, whose position provides an excellent example of the kind of problem raised at the beginning of this chapter. He refers to himself and his readers as "Wir Deutsche Osterreich's" (10) and points out that his father was responsible for developing the study of German language and literature in Pressburg (earlier Hungarian Pozsony, now Bratislava in Czechoslovakia), while he himself teaches at the university in Pest (as "Suppl. Professor"), where also his Geschichte der deutschen Literatur appeared in 1850. The sub-title reads Ein Lehrbuch als Grundlage zu Vortrdgen fiir die hoheren Schulen Osterreichs eingerichtet, but this is changed in

163

Works in Neighbouring Countries

the second edition (1853 - identical except for the addition of an unpaged table of contents) to Ein Lehr- und Lesebuch fur Schule und Haus. In both editions, the three hundred pages of text are followed by 190 pages of selected texts. Schroer evidently directs his work at non-native speakers of German, and it is equally clear that he is a pan-Germanist in his approach. That is, he sees the literature of the German-speaking peoples not only as a single body of literature, but as a superior one: "Die deutsche Literatur steht in demselben Grade erhaben da tiber die Literaturen aller Volker, als die Literatur in Deutschland iiberhaupt vielmehr eigentliches Leben der Nation ist, als irgend anderswo" (10) - "Nation" in the sense of a single people, no matter how divided or separated politically. It is consequently his intention, "die Glorie des deutschen Volkes in ihrer Entwickelung darzulegen" (6) and "der einrei/tenden Barbarei mit den hochsten Friichten deutscher Kultur entgegenzutreten" (7). Within these parameters he follows a traditional pattern, basing himself largely on Gervinus, supplemented by Koberstein, Jacob Grimm, and Wackernagel. Like Gervinus, he ends his work with the death of Goethe: "Mit diesem Puncte schlie/3t noch immer die Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur" (288). The dividing points in the chronological record are for Schroer the year 1137, the middle of the fourteenth century, and the Reformation. Thereafter there is a steady progress to the culminating point of the Classical period, in the course of which Schroer rejects the idea that progress is determined primarily by individuals: "Es ist eine kleinliche Anschauungsweise die Richtung ganzer Zeiten wie von dem Entschlu/3 und Willen eines Einzelnen abhangig darzustellen" (194). On the other hand he does not seem able to accept any further progress after Goethe: "Styl besitzt immer nur der Meister, die Schiller verfallen immer in Manier und tauschen sich damit tiber den Wert ihrer Leistung. Es braucht nur noch hinzuzukommen, da/? von der Manier Theorien abgeleitet werden, so sind wir schon im Nu an einem ganz anderen Ende angelangt als der Meister zum Ziel gesteckt hat" (260). The tendentious qualities of Karl Julius Schroer's work resemble those of his father. There is the same chauvinism, the same antipathy towards things French ("geistreiche Oberflachlichkeit, Declamation und Frivolitat sind dem franzosischen Charakter hinreichend zum Inhalt des Lebens ... elegante Formen fur alle Laster und Schwachen" [119]), and the same condemnation of those who adopt un-German i.e., immoral (though not necessarily French) attitudes. Of the Romantics, whose basic tenet he describes as "Die Willkiir der unbedingten Personlichkeit, das schrankenlose und nicksichtslose Walten des Egoismus" (260), he writes: "Ein Grauen wandelt uns an, wenn wir einen Einblick thun in manche Lebensverhaltnisse (namentlich was die Ehen anlangt) einiger Anhanger

164 Histories of German Literature dieser Schule" (262). With specific reference possibly to Hungary he later complains: "Es hat auch zugleich [i.e., with the spread of literacy] das leidliche oberflachliche Bucherverschlingen mit dera Verbrauch des Kaffees um sich gegriffen, ein Zeichen der Blasirtheit" (276). Aside perhaps from this last point, this work shows little indication of any emphasis on the German literature of Hungary or of Austria in the wider sense. There is, for example, no chapter devoted to "Austrian" literature, and this is presumably a reflection of his insistence on the unity and unifying quality of the literature of the German nation(s). Although it is difficult to compare works written at different times and for different audiences, it is worth noting that Schroer refers to Beck, Collin, Ebert, Grillparzer, Grim, Halm, Lenau, Seidl, Vogl, and Zedlitz, but not to Ayrenhoff, Bauernfeld, Castelli, Hammer-Purgstall, Leitner, Pyrker (an Hungarian), Raimund, Stelzhamer, etc, all of whom can be considered as active before the death of Goethe (see above). The remaining Hungarian works are fairly evenly spread over the forty-five years between 1863 and 1909, but they vary widely in their form and content. In the first place, more of them are written in Hungarian than in German, even though they may contain exemplary samples from difficult German texts. The exceptions are five anonymous works (1864, 1874, 1894, 1901, 1909) and the work of Schuster resp., Vajda & Schuster (despite the title in Hungarian). The most remarkable feature of these works is their brevity. Ten have one hundred pages or less; six have between one hundred and two hundred pages; beyond this there are only the works by Szemak with 220 pages and Heinrich with his shorter 250-page work and his (incomplete) major work in two volumes (ca. 1100 pages to the end of the eighteenth century). Obviously, no convincing portrayal of the historical development of German literature can be expected in the space of twenty or thirty pages, and it is quite evident that the aim of the authors of the very short works is to provide a chronological list of writers, works, and dates as a basis for school work, possibly also as a guide for the teacher, not only to what has been written, but also to what should be avoided in the classroom. One or two-line characterizations of writers occur in many works (even in longer ones, of course), but in some of these works from Hungary the characterizing epithets may even be reduced to a single word. "Joh. Nepomuk Vogl, Kath., ein Wiener, 1802-1866 schrieb Balladen und Romanzen" (Anon., 1894, 35) is perhaps a reasonable characterization, given Yogi's relatively minor status and the brevity of the text, but comments such as the following are surely directed at the teacher: Dahn, Felix, glaubensfrei, zum Pantheismus geneigt

...

165

Works in Neighbouring Countries

Hebbel, hat sich von aller positiven Religion losgesagt (Anon., 1894, 91)

Female writers fare no better in this work, for example: Lewald, Fanny, freisinnige emancipierte Frau. Otto Luise, auch emancipiert. Pichler, K., zu sentimental (55).

A similar style is found in the anonymous Auszug ... (1874). The astonishing thing about these brief works is the large number of relatively minor writers who are named at least. As early as 1864, for example, paragraph sixteen of the anonymous Nemet olvasomdnyok lists in less than one small page no fewer than sixty writers, variously categorized as Young Germans, Swabians, lyric poets, dramatists, etc. The anonymous Abrifl ... (1909,115p.) provides names and some information about fourteen Austrian writers in the space of less than two pages (77-78). To a large extent this style, since it almost always concerns more recent writers, is merely the reductio ad absurdum of the frequently noted tendency to provide only simple factual comments about these writers and to refrain from evaluation. One can assume, on the other hand, especially in the light of the examples quoted above, that at least some of the shorter works were intended as a skeleton outline on which teachers might base lectures, rather than as a vade -mecum for students. In the works intended for students, whether the text is in Hungarian or German, there are few quotations but frequent and lengthy plot summaries. Szemak has, for example, numerous plot summaries and no quotations; Schuster has brief historical introductions to each period, plot summaries, and occasional quotations. Szemak's work is perhaps closest to the typical kind of work produced in Germany, but there is unfortunately no introduction to indicate whether or not it is intended for a specific audience. The period divisions are a little unusual, in that after the OHG period (350-1150), there are divisions only at 1624 and 1832. The lengthy period from 1150 to 1624 is sub-divided at 1190 and 1300, the whole period from 1300 to 1624 being viewed as one of "Verfall." The usual kind of historical background is supplied, together with plot summaries but no quotations; and there is a relatively long list of Austrian writers, twenty-seven in all, including those in small print. While it was noted above that Karl Julius Schroer laid no special emphasis on Austrian writers, the same cannot be said of even minor works later in the century. Using as a basis the massive history of

166

Histories of German Literature

German literature by the Austrian Salzer (1907-12), with its deliberate emphasis on Austrian writers, one finds thirty-four Austrians mentioned in the chapter covering the period 1798-1830 (1564-1619). Twelve of these appear in Szemak's 220-page work, where there is also a special section on later Austrian writers. The anonymous work of 1894, with its meagre forty-three pages, also includes a section on Austrian writers and cites seven of those in Salzer. Seven also appear in Albrecht (1889). There is a clear intention, therefore, of stressing Austrian writers in these works, even where there is no separate section for them. Meleg's twenty-three page work, for example, includes as minor a figure as Karl Beck along with Lenau. Direct reference to the Hungarian situation nevertheless remains rare and is largely restricted to comparisons, which can obviously not be done at all in the very brief works. An example is Schuster, who writes: "Von Interesse ist fur uns Ungarn, da/3 der beriihmte Fiirst Gabriel Bethlen ihn [Opitz] als Professor ... an die von ihm gestiftete hohe Schule zu Gyula fehervar in Siebenbiirgen berief" (93). In Vajda & Schuster reference is made to Burger's influence on Kisfaludy, and his work is compared with that of Arany. In other cases reference is made to available translations into Hungarian. The comments on Hungarian histories of German literature also largely apply to those works here designated as Czech, and the definition of what is or is not to be considered under this rubric is equally dubious, the only terms used in these works being "osterreichisch" and later "deutsch-bohmisch." All the works listed are for school use, and they are (with one exception) quite short, varying from 32 to 154 pages. The exception is the earliest work, by Bratranek (1850), with 284 pages. Unlike the works from Hungary, however, all but one of those listed as Czech are in the German language. There are ten works altogether between 1850 (Bratranek) and 1914 (Jezek & Ka.ik), and the only work in Czech in this period is that by Vymazal (1879). A Czech version of Jezek's work was published in 1915; the undated work by Hajkova, Prehled nemecke literatury, is in German despite its title and must have been published after the First World War, since reference is made in it to works about that war. Also from 1915 and therefore too late for discussion here is a work by Cerny, probably classifiable rather as Austrian, since the author taught at a "Gymnasium" in Vienna and his work was published both in Vienna and in Prague. Works by Baudis, Herbig, Kubelka, and Spatzal were not considered, since it was assumed, in the absence of bibliographical evidence to the contrary, that their (unavailable) first editions, for example of Herbig (5th ed. 1926), did not antedate 1914. Of the ten works, two are incomplete. Pelleter's Leitfaden (1870) ends at 1520, and it is not clear from the foreword whether or not he intended

167 Works in Neighbouring Countries to produce a second volume, while Hock's work (1910) ends abruptly at 1794. His title-page carries the phrase "Erster Teil. Fiir die V. und VI. Klasse," but no second part could be located at this date, only a complete edition from 1921. We are left, then, with eight works, none of them translations, all of them for schools of one kind or another (from "fur den ersten Unterricht" to "fur das ... Militarinstitut"), and varying in length (excluding Bratranek) from 22 to 154 pages. Four of the eight have no special section on Austrian writers, and of these the anonymous work of 1866 is very short (56p.), and the others do make some reference to Austrian authors. In the introduction to his Handbuch der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1850) Bratranek claims that his is "eine [sic] erste dieses Gebiet umgreifende Erscheinung ... welche ... aus Osterreich iiberhaupt hervorgeht" (ii). He addresses himself primarily to teachers and students at "Gymnasien," divides literary history into linguistic periods (Old, Middle, and High German), but builds everything around the two "classical" periods (Middle High German and Weimar). In so doing, he largely adopts the traditional format of brief background introductions followed by short passages on individual writers grouped by genre or school, but the general framework is somewhat idiosyncratic and the passages on individuals are general rather than specific - that is, few works are cited and there are few biographical details and no quotations. As an example one may cite the introduction to the third period "der neueren deutschen Literatur, in welcher wir mitten inne leben" (194), a period which begins for Bratranek after the first Austro-Prussian war (War of the Austrian Succession 1740-48). In this introduction (194ff) Bratranek argues that "jede Literatur Ausdruck des offentlichen Lebens ihrer Zeit ist und .. ihre Bliithe den Zustand der Wirklichkeit in verklarter Weise abspiegelt" (194). What now distinguishes the new classical period from the earlier (romantic) one is "einerseits die Stellung des Schriftstellers, anderseits die Bedeutung der Zeitschriften" (195). By the former Bratranek means the acceptance of literary activity as "eine vollig berechtigte Wirksamkeit" (195); the latter are the means by which ideas are spread and reputations made or marred. "Sie sind im Gebiete der Literatur dieselbe Potenz, wie die bis zum Eisenbahnwesen und der Telegraphic gesteigerten Verkehrsmittel des Lebens" (197). Both these factors combine in the trend "nach einer Weltliteratur" (198), and what makes modern German literature "classical" is precisely its absorption of influences from all over the world and its spreading influence on the world. In sharp contrast to Bratranek's work is Scheinpflug's Kurze Literaturgeschichte der Deutschen fur den ersten Unterricht (1865), for here there is a rather high proportion of bio-bibliographical detail to critical

168 Histories of German Literature evaluation. For example, five and a half lines of biography are given for Giinther, followed by: "In seinen Gedichten iibertraf er an Gemiith und Phantasie die raeisten seiner Zeitgenossen" (181). Seventeen lines of biography for Kotzebue are followed by only twelve lines of bibliographical information and critical comment. The distribution is also somewhat uneven, if one compares these two examples with the sixteen lines for Zacharia. No evident political or religious bias is discernible in this work, but Scheinpflug does give special attention, albeit briefly, to Austrian writers, naming or commenting on twenty such towards the end (46-50). There is no indication, however, of a special commitment to Czech/Austrian writers in the anonymous Kurzer Abrifi der deutschen Literatur of 1866, a work which lacks both preface/introduction and index. That it would deal with few writers, given the limitations of space, is not surprising, but the coverage is nevertheless uneven. Twenty lines only, for example, are devoted to a description of Minnesang, in the course of which only Walther von der Vogelweide is named. By contrast, the author comments on Cramer, Ebert, Giseke, J.A. Schlegel, and Arnold Schmidt, in the passage leading up to Klopstock. The work also shows a certain bias, which manifests itself in some of the evaluations, particularly of poets of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, where the basis of judgment seems to be moral rather than literary critical. In fact, this work, which ends abruptly with Immermann - classed with Heine and Platen as "Gegner der Romantik" - is characterized by a generally negative tone. Here is the author's evaluation of Klopstock's Messias: "aller Handlung baar, schreitet das Epos in lyrischen Ergiissen, Reden und idyllischen Scenen miihsam vorwarts und verliert sich in Regionen, die fiti die menschliche Phantasie zu weit und eitel Wiiste sind" (20). Even more primitive than this anonymous work is Witek's Kurzgefafite Geschichte der deutschen Literatur ... far die dsterreichische Schuljugend (1877), in which the twenty-two pages of literary history ("Die Geschichte, welche das innere geistige Leben des deutschen Volkes darstellt und uns mit den Schriftstellern und ihren Werken bekannt macht, hei/?t die Literaturgeschichte" [1]) are followed by summaries of some major works from the Nibelungenlied to Wilhelm Tell. The text itself is too brief to require comment; it is noteworthy only that Witek ends his work with two pages headed "dsterreichische Sanger der jiingsten Vergangenheit" (21-2): Zedlitz, Grim, Lenau, Pyrker, Castelli, Grillparzer, Deinhardstein, Seidl, Stelzhamer, Pichler. Vymazal, too, ends his work, Dejiny nemecke ndrodni literatury (1879) with brief comments on Austrian writers, twenty-nine in all, from Karoline Pichler (1769- ) to Robert Hamerling (1832- ), and these

169

Works in Neighbouring Countries

writers are for the most part not found in Kluge's work, at least not in the original edition (1869). According to the title-page of Vymazal's work, he based himself on Kluge, Kurz, and others, but he provides no information about the editions used (or the "others"), and one can only assume, therefore, that his work is largely derivative and eclectically compiled. Kluge seems to have provided at least the basic outline, although the text is much abbreviated. The Early New High German period, for example, from 1300 to 1500, takes up six and a half pages in Kluge. The corresponding section in Vymazal is structured in almost identical fashion, but occupies only five and a half pages in much larger type. Generally speaking, the amount of text per writer or work is reduced by about one half. The style remains the same, however, with brief introductory passages and numbered paragraphs on individuals. The passage on Gunther reads as follows: "He brought about his early death by loose living. Gunther was a talented poet, full of genuine and deep feelings. His poems reflect the struggle between his virtue and his passion. The most famous poem is that written to commemorate the peace with the emperor in 1718" (47) [Nezrizenym zivotem pripavil si predcasny hrob. Giinter jest nadany basnik, piny opravdoveho a hlubokeho citu. V pisnich jeho obrazi se zapas jeho mravni prirody s naruzivostmi. Nejvice znama byla baser! jeho na oslavu mini mezi cisarem a Portou r. 1718"]. There is also some resemblance to Kluge's work in Schram's Deutsche Literaturgeschichte nebst einer mnemotechnischen Anleitung zur leichten Aneignung literarhistorischer Zahlen (1881). For example, the list of factors that contributed to the "Verfall der Dichtkunst" (1300-1500) is much the same, as is also the general approach and layout. As the title indicates, this work is intended for schools, and the author therefore declares his intention of concentrating on major works and of not dealing with contemporary writers, with the exception of Austrians. The background introductions are very brief and the individual writers characterized for the most part in a few lines at best. Grimmelshausen's life and work, for example, are summarized in six lines, followed by a seventeen-line summary of Simplicissimus. Moscherosch, Schupp, and Abraham a Sancta Clara also receive six lines each. Groschl, too, announces his intention of restricting himself to major figures and not dealing with contemporary writers in his Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur (1899), although in his case the school audience is the "Hauptmann Funk'sche Militar-Institut," where the author was an officer. Like Schram, however, he does make room for Austrian writers of the present and gives them a relatively large proportion of the available space in fact. The last ten pages (82-92) are devoted entirely to Austrian writers with sections on contemporaries of the Clas-

170

Histories of German Literature

sical writers (eighteenth century), older poets (early nineteenth century), Grillparzer, Lenau, Grim, Hamerling, and recent poets. The youngest one mentioned is Peter Rosegger (1843- ). Aside from the dependence on Kluge (the passage on Gottfried von Strasburg, for example, is taken almost word for word from there), the only interesting point of this work is perhaps the author's (professional?) enthusiasm for the poets of the Wars of Liberation. He, too, has several pages of summaries (93-110) and concludes with a brief survey of poetics (111-15). Jezek & Kasik's Leitfadenn (1914) appears in one version of thirty-six pages, prefixed to their Deutsches Lesebuch, separately paged. Here some minor Austrian writers (e.g., Vogl, Seidl) are mentioned, and towards the end, whilst discussing the period after 1880, the authors note (after Liliencron and Nietzsche): "an der Spitze der modernen Dichter 6sterreichs steht der Prager Arzt Hugo Salus" (35). In another version, appended without separate title-page to their Kommentar zu dem deutschen Lesebuch und Leitfaden, also in 1914, the literary historical survey covers pages 50 to 140 and has more detail but does not cover more writers. The authors are in fact genuinely selective, mentioning, for example, only Walther as an example of Minnesang and Wolfram as a writer of courtly epics. The Lesebuch itself is designed for "Lehranstalten mit bohmischer Unterrichtssprache" and has notes in Czech. The number of histories of German literature published in Poland prior to the First World War is similar to that in Czechoslovakia, and the problem of definition remains the same. Before examining these, however, it seems appropriate (geographically, if for no other reason) to consider a work published in Vilnius at the surprisingly early date of 1819. The Geschichte des Ursprungs und Fortgangs der deutschen Litteratur bis auf die neuesten Zeiten was conceived by its author, Haustein, for Liebhaber der deutschen Sprache und Litteratur und besonders zum Gebrauch bey offentlichen Vorlesungen auf den russisch-Kaiserlichen Universitdten - this at a time when such studies were struggling for recognition at German universities. Haustein cites a few German sources for the early periods of German literature (Meister, Koch, Horn, Herzog, Adelung, Jordens, Kiittner, Nasser, Sulzer are those discussed in this work), and follows the traditional period divisions (Carolingian, Franconian, divisions at 1137, 1346, 1523, 1625, 1751). These have the familar designations, including the "Zeitalter widerstrebender Meinungen" for the period 1625-1751. Beyond this Haustein does not seem to have used his sources judiciously. Each section consists of a very brief introduction followed by notes on individual writers without any indication of interrelationships. In the MHG period, for example, he notes that Heinrich von Veldeke introduced chivalric poetry into Germany, and follows this with notes on the

171 Works in Neighbouring Countries

nine major writers/works, viz., Wolfram, Heinrich von Ofterdingen, Walther, Konrad von Wiirzburg, Hugo von Trimberg, Konig Artus (anonymous work!), Flore, Wartburgkrieg, Tyrol, plus the Sachsenspiegel and the Schwabenspiegel. In the later periods, which take up the bulk of the work (1625-1751, pp. 52-103; 1757 [sic] on, pp. 103-305), the treatment is similar, but Haustein is clearly more at home with these works and shows some evidence of genuine acquaintance with them. The only noteworthy outward difference between works from Poland and other countries is the number of Polish works in which German literature is included as part of a history of the literatures of the world. Thirteen works altogether were registered between 1865 and 1914, of which five were in German and eight in Polish. Only one of these is a translation, i.e., the Polish version of Scherr's Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur. However, two of the authors, Missona and Osterloff, published works both in Polish and in German and some of the material is therefore the same. Aside from Scherr, there are three histories of world literature, the one by Chmielowski, with the German section by Swiecicki, and the others by Gostomski and by Lange. Taking the German-language works first, that by Zipper, the Kurzer Abrifi ... der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1886), was intended at first for "osterreichische Mittelschulen" and then in the second edition for "Schiller osterreichisch-ungarischer Lehranstalten." It appeared both in Vienna and Zlocow and claimed to give particular consideration to "Schiller nicht-deutscher Nationalitat" (iii). This is a very basic school book which must, however, have met with some success, since the second edition, where the orthography adheres precisely to "die vom h. k. k. Ministerium fiir C. u. U. approbierten Regeln" (v), is expanded to more than twice the length. In the second edition the author defines the task of literary history as not simply to describe the development, but to show why "die Literatur gerade diese und keine andere Entwicklung genommen" (1-2). Heller's Kurzer Abrifi der deutschen Liter aturgeschichte (ca. 1900) is intended both for schools and private use, but it is quite short (106p.) and simplistic. The author restricts himself to major writers and provides no plot summaries except for a few in the early period. Little background material is provided in this early period and none at all after the seventeenth century, but he does bring the record up to date with a final section on modern literature, preceded by a special section on Austrian writers from the seventeenth to the nineteenth century. The following is an example of his style: "In der weltlichen Lyrik finden wir bei dem Schlesier Giinther, welcher infolge seines Leichtsinnes sehr ungliicklich war und friihzeitig, kaum 28 Jahre alt, starb, die Darstellung von Selbsterlebtem und ein tiefes Gefiihl. Er ist der Vorbote einer besseren Zeit" (29).

172 Histories of German Literature The Deutsche Literaturkunde by Osterloff (1905), written for girls' schools as a supplement to his Lehrgang der deutschen Sprache, is longer but equally simplistic. He provides only generalities, with occasional details in smaller type for more advanced class levels, and in the depiction of individual writers, restricts himself almost entirely to facts the writer's life, summaries of content, etc. In many cases the writers are simply named without comment. The only sign of a personal stance is his antipathy towards Hegel and his disapproval of the introduction (primarily by the "Jungdeutschen") of materialism and politics into literature. Ella Mensch's Deutsche Literaturgeschichte (1907) was also written for schools, and the sub-title lists eight types of institution for which it is suitable. It is in fact a very simple vade-mecum, volume 5 in the series "Goldene Schiilerbibliothek, Wie werde ich versetzt?" The fifty-five pages contain nothing more than the simplest of platitudes, the second Silesian school, for example, being described (in toto) as follows: "Die zweite schlesische Dichterschule hat ihre bekanntesten Tra'ger in Christian Hofmann von Hofmannswaldau und Daniel Kaspar von Lohenstein, die in glatter und gewandter Formensprache ihr Vorbild Opitz iibertreffen, aber durch innere Haltlosigkeit und durch Anlehnung an den sii/Hichen italienischen Poeten Marino (Marinismus) die Poesie in schwiilstige Sinnlichkeit hineinfiihren und in ihren Leistungen durchaus gekiinstelt und ungesund beriihren" (23). The definition of literature in Missona's Deutsche Literatur in historischer Entwicklung ... mit Erkldrungen in polnischer Sprache (1907) is very simple: "die Werke, in welchen das Volk (durch die Dichter) seine Gefiihle und Bestrebungen in Sprache oder Schrift ausdriickt" (5), and the depiction of these writers is even simpler. The "telegraphic" style enables him to dispose of Hans Sachs, for example, in two sentences: "Hans Sachs war Schuhmacher und Meistersanger in Niirnberg (1494-1576). Er hatte eine geringe Bildung, aber beschaftigte sich viel mit Literatur" (25). Missona does, however, include a short section on female writers, and he brings the record up to date in later editions by naming writers and works almost up to the time of publication. As an example of Polish works that include German literature within a survey of world literature, we may take Gostomski's Historia literatury powszechnej w zarysie (1898), for this allots approximately 250 pages to German literature, although the coverage is split between the sections on medieval, Renaissance and Reformation, Rationalism and Enlightenment, Romanticism, and contemporary, each of which is prefaced by a brief outline of the general intellectual background. The text is straightforwardly descriptive, without quotations or illustrations, etc, and the cove-

173

Works in Neighbouring Countries

rage reasonable. In the Middle High German period, for example, Gostomski begins with Konrad, Lamprecht, and Heinrich von Veldeke and comments on Herzog Ernst as an example of popular epics, before treating the Nibelungenlied and later heroic epics, Hartmann, Wolfram, and Gottfried. He then deals with the later courtly epics, popular epics, and didactic literature, before moving on to a general discussion of the background to Minnesang and individual poets from Kiirenberg to Lichtenstein, Neidhart, Tannhauser, etc. As an example of his style, here is his evaluation from a later section of Gunther: "In his joyous bacchic and love songs, in his sentimental cry about the sorrows of life, aside from some signs of poor taste and a degree of roughness, the general verdict according to Goethe is [Goethe quotation]. He is one of the most honest lyric writers, very well able to express himself directly, but he was not able to achieve the highest poetic harmony on account of his short and disturbed life" (302) ["W jego wesol piesniach milosnych i bachicznych, oraz w rzewnych skargach na rozne niedole zycia, pomimo trafiaj^cych sis objawow szorstkosci i zlego smaku, panuje, wedle slow Goethe'go [quotation]. Jest to jeden z najszczerszych i najbardziej bezposrednich lirykow niemieckich, ktory jednak nie zdolal osia_gna.c wyzszej harmonii poetyckiej, wskutek nazbyt krotkiego i mocno zama.conego zywota"]. Also part of a history of world literature (Krotki zarys literatury powszechnej), part 3, is Lange's Literatury ludow giermanskich (1908), a very short work which begins only with Humanism but brings the record right up to the time of writing. This is, however, essentially just a factual record of periods, writers, and works. Realism, for example, is described as having "developed from the decline of the ideals of Romanticism and from so-called positivism in science. The trend to understanding the truth of life is then directed towards a closer look at the details of life, and from this perspective there develops a tendency for detailed description and the portrayal of social conditions" (45-6) [Realizm wyniknal z rozkladu idealow romantycznych i t. zw. pozytywizmu w nauce. Da,znosc do uchwycenia prawdy zywej skierowala pisarzy do badania szczegolow zyciowych]. The author then cites numerous writers, among them Gottfried Keller, who "wrote poems and novellas ("Seven Legends", "Zurich Novellas", "People of Seldwyla") and novels ("Green Heinrich", "Martin Salander")" (46). A fairly substantial work in Polish is Szabrariski's Rys historyi litera tury niemieckiej do potowy osmnastego wieku (1876), but the only volume located ends with the seventeenth century, and it is not clear whether or not a second volume was planned; none was found. This volume had 220 pages, however, and no index, which suggests an expected continuation. Szabrariski provides little background material, concentrating instead on an analysis of individual works. Brant's

174 Histories of German Literature Narrenschiff, f, for example, takes up close to four pages, with references to translations, Gailer von Kaysersberg, a comparison with Hugo von Trimberg's Rentier, sample passages, and commentary. His conclusion is: "Amidst the simplicity and crudeness, the nobility of thought prevailing in this work is inviting" (105) ["Pocia.gaja.ca. jest szlachetnosc uczuc, panuja_ca w tym poemacie wsrod prostoty i nieokrzesania"]. Far less substantial, but at least complete until the death of Goethe, is the four volume set by Osterloff, who published not only this work and the one in German mentioned above, but also a text collection, Biblioteka autorow niemieckich ... (1909). The four volumes of his Zarys his tor ii literatury niemieckiej (1903-4) total only 381 pages in sexagesimo (and then not in small print), so that very little space is allotted to individual writers. Gottfried von Strasburg, for example, is dispatched in thirty-six lines, of which thirty-four are a summary of the plot. The only evaluative comment here is: "This work is a colourful portrayal of romantic love and the life of chivalry" (43-4) ["Utwor jest barwnym obrazem romantycznej mitosci i zycia rycerskiego"]. Brant and his Narrenschiff are dismissed in fifteen lines (cf Missona above). However, by far the shortest work from Poland (15 pages) is the anonymous Grundrifl der deutschen Literatur bis zur zweiten Blutezeit (1904), published by the Ursuline order and presumably intended for use in their school in Krakow. Each of the traditional seven periods (divided 800, 1150, 1300, 1500, 1624, 1748) is described in only a few lines, and very few writers are named, mostly without comment. Much of the space is taken up instead with plot summaries of the Nibelungenlied, Gudrun, Minna von Barnhelm, Nathan der Weise, and Oberon. As might be expected, there are indications of moral judgment, e.g., as regards Lessing's Nathan'. "Gegen diese Geschichte als Allegoric lassen sich natiirlich viele Einwendungen machen; vor allem diese, wie kann ein schwacher, betriigerischer Vater den lieben Gott representieren!" (12). It is difficult to draw any precise conclusions from this analysis of "foreign" histories of literature, since they vary so widely in language and style, in format, and in the degree of their originality or dependence on German sources. Any comparison is also complicated by political relationships and the varying degree to which the German language was used by an indigenous population. However, a number of common, if not universal, characteristics can be detected. In the first place these foreign works are primarily for schools and they are on average quite short. They are very traditional in their approach and at times extremely simplistic in the application of this approach. Almost nowhere is there any indication of originality, either in concept or in presentation; rather, they seem to be heavily dependent on standard German models, such as Kluge. Presumably with school users in mind, the German used in these works is quite

175 Works in Neighbouring Countries simple, and, as with direct translations, little, if any, reference is made to native source materials, editions, critical literature, etc; but there is rather more insistence than in comparable German works on basic bio-bibliographical data, chronology, etc and on plot summaries. One fairly general characteristic of foreign works is the unevenness of their coverage. What is included in or excluded from a literary history is naturally a matter of judgment, but, given the relatively high degree of dependency on German models, it seems unlikely that the foreign historians were consciously making different selections. It is much more probable that the uneven coverage results from a desire to reduce the volume of material, but without that degree of familiarity with it that would permit a judicious selection. Major authors may thus be dropped, while minor ones are retained. In some cases the emphasis on minor as opposed to major writers may of course result from a desire to emphasize local talent in those areas where German is a native language. References to the "local" situation remain, however, very limited. Occasionally translations of German works or the influence of German works on native writers are mentioned, but only very rarely is the historical background related to local conditions, as it is, for example, in the Einfuhrung ... of Kummer & Stejskal, where the Napoleonic Wars are described from the Austrian standpoint: "Alle Augen wandten sich hoffnungsvoll nach Osterreich als dem letzten Rettungsanker im allgemeinen Verderben"; and the Austrian patriotic poets are given pride of place: "Die osterreichische Kriegslyrik vom Jahre 1809 ... bildet die Vorlauferin der deutschen Freiheitslyrik von 1813" (quoted from the 6th edition, 1904: 227, 228).

9 An Overview

Despite the vast number of histories of German literature that were published prior to the First World War, and despite the great variety in almost every aspect of their content, an attempt must be made at this juncture to summarize what development there might be in the more significant aspects of these works. The summary will be limited, however, to the period after 1700 and will concentrate primarily on the late eighteenth to the early twentieth century. It must be clear, though, that there is no steady progression in the form and content of these works, but that at best a general trend can be perceived, for some historians naturally cling to older forms long after new ones have been introduced. Every published work presupposes a public prepared to read that work, and the anticipated or intended readership is - or should be - the most important factor in determining the nature of any work, no matter what the author's motive may be for writing. Until the end of the eighteenth century the readership for literary histories was evidently to be found among the best educated of the population, among academics, clerics, and the professions, that relatively large body of literati who not only read widely but also frequently indulged in publication themselves. This was a limited circle, though larger than it had been in the seventeenth century, and it was unnecessary for the writer to define the audience. It was the audience to which the growing number of literary and critical or scholarly journals catered, and it is not surprising that most of the earliest literary historical surveys appeared in such journals. The approach to the subject, whatever other interests may have played a role, was primarily academic and antiquarian. The first major change occurred around the turn of the eighteenth to

177 An Overview

the nineteenth century, when public lectures on German literature were delivered in those cities where a large enough audience could be drawn together. At the same, time the first works of reference began to appear, summarizing the data which had been accumulated over several decades of antiquarian activity. In their published form the lectures still appealed primarily to more academic readers, but around the same time the publication of literary historical or critical works specifically for women is evidence of the broadening of interest and probably also reflects the public (social) situation of the lecture hall as well as the growing emancipation of women in the literary field. One cannot know the size or the constitution in detail of the audiences for these lectures, but that the lectures met a need is clear from the number and variety of topics covered in lecture series at the time. A.W. Schlegel's announcement for the first series of Berlin lectures expresses the hope, "auch geistreiche Zuhorerinnen zu finden," and a letter from Caroline Schlegel reports "fast lauter Adeliche ... worunter sehr viel Damen sind" (Denkmdler [1884], viii). The last major work based on public lectures is that of Vilmar (1845); his audience for the lectures (1843-44) was relatively large, i.e., in excess of 200, and consisted (inevitably under the circumstances) of members of the middle class, at least half of them women (see Wilhelm Hopf, August Vilmar, I, 343). The second major development took place in the early years of the nineteenth century with the publication of works written especially for schools. For the most part the authors were themselves engaged in school teaching, but there is no indication that their works are textbooks in the modern sense of the word. On the contrary, it is usually stressed that the work grew out of the author's teaching experience, but that it is also intended for the general public. Even Heinsius says: "ich wollte zwei Klassen dienen, Lehrern und Schiilern (zu letztern auch die Autodidakten gerechnet)" (v). It should be noted that the term lecture also occurs in the titles of some school or general works, but in these cases the texts are intended as a basis for lectures; such works are not the published texts of lectures, for example, Rinne's Innere Geschichte ... Fur den Vortrag und zum Selbststudium. The attempt to reach a double audience makes it difficult to classify histories of this type as primarily intended for schools or primarily intended for the general public. It is also beyond the scope of this study to examine the large and difficult question of the teaching programmes of German secondary schools at this period, but it seems clear that German (language and) literature was not yet sufficiently accepted for regular curricula and standard texts to have been created. More important is the underlying assumption on the part of the authors of literary histories at this time that there was also a public outside the school with a desire for self-instruction in a subject

178 Histories of German Literature taught at the "Gymnasium." As one example of the expectations of historians at this time, Winter may be cited, who, in the introduction to the second, revised edition of his work, comments in some detail on "die beiden einzigen praktischen Schulbucher" (iii), by Koberstein and Heinsius, and claims that his own work has been widely accepted in Germany and has also found favour abroad. No evidence of this latter claim has been sought, but his work is not among those known to have been translated. Works written for school use become more specific as time passes and the subject becomes a generally accepted part of the curriculum, at least in schools at the secondary level. The phrase "as a basis for lectures," which occurs in some works in the early part of the century, implies that the teacher had to develop his own teaching plan in this field. Soon, however, there are also works written for girls' schools, and, as the century progresses, works are created to meet the specific needs of different types of schools, different age groups, and local interests. These and other such works for very specific groups are primarily "factual" in nature and may not have been included in the survey, although they may be of considerable interest from the point of view of social history. The most notable, in fact surprising, lacuna is the complete absence, apparently, of any literary history written specifically with university students in mind. Many works not directed at a specific school group nevertheless include schools in the intended audience, and one of the most frequently encountered sub-titles (in various forms) is "fiir hohere Lehranstalten und zum Selbststudium" - in the simplest form - "fiir Schule und Haus." In addition, those authors writing advisedly for a general audience sometimes record the desire to see their work in the hands of young people. Stoeber, for example, writes "weniger fiir den Gelehrten als fiir den Gebildeten iiberhaupt, besonders aber fur Jiinglinge" (1826, xi). The following sub-titles exemplify the varying breadth or specificity of audiences: "fur die reifere Jugend beiderlei Geschlechts" (Schroer, 1844), "... fiir Laien" (Schwab, 1846), "fur gebildete Leser" (Giinther, 1853), "... fur Gymnasien, Handels- und Realschulen" (Korner, 1865), "... fur Frauen und Jungfrauen" (Hoefer, 1876), "... fiir Praparanden-, Mittel- und hohere Tochterschulen" (Becker 1886), "... fiir den IV. Jahrgang der osterreichischen Lehrer- und Lehrerinnen-Bildungsanstalten" (Tupetz 1890),"... fiir das Einjahrig-Freiwilligen Examen" (Buurmann, 1904). The frequent mention of young people as part of the intended audience (if not the primary part), must be related to the professional background of the authors of literary histories. The great majority of these, from the end of the eighteenth century on, are teachers in schools, primarily of course in secondary schools ("Oberschulen," "Gymnasien," etc). A few

179 An Overview

are university professors, but these do not generally hold official chairs of "Germanistik," - for example, Wachler (history), Vilmar (theology), or Rosenkranz (philosophy). It should be remembered, however, that professors were free to lecture (and did lecture) on topics other than their nominal field; and that the tradition of polymathia was far from dead, at least until the middle of the century. A second noteworthy feature in regard to literary historians in the nineteenth century is the inter-relationship of literary history and creative writing. While there are few historians who are still recognized as writers in literary histories today, the exceptions being A.W. Schlegel, Laube, Eichendorff, and possibly Roquette, many of them, from Bouterwek (e.g., Miszellaneen 1793,1794, and Gedichte, 1802) to Bartels (e.g., his historical novels Die Dithmarscher, 1898 and Dietrich Sebrandt, 1899), were known in their own day (also) as writers of belles-lettres. Even Gervinus planned a career as a writer for some time. To what degree the success of any given work can be related to the author's profession, literary talents, or scholarship is not a topic for discussion here; something has already been said in chapter 5 about the qualities of the apparently more successful works. As works written for schools become gradually narrower in outlook and lead to more and more "reference" works in the form of tables, summaries, and practical aids for the purpose of passing examinations, the scope and size of works for the general public increases. The term "general public," however, presents some difficulty, and not solely because many works can only be assumed, from lack of any authorial comment to the contrary, to have been written for such an audience. When Franz Horn (1822) claims that he would be satisfied "wenn meine lieben Landsleute ihr [his literary historyj einiges Gehor geben" (PuBt 6), it is probably justifiable to believe that he did not anticipate that his work would be read by the populace at large, despite his suggestion that "die wahrhaftigste und geniigendste Literaturgeschichte gewisserma/ten nur von dem ganzen Volke geschrieben werden kann, und taglich, handelnd geschrieben wird" (PuB, 6). Where some definition of the intended audience is provided, it is often vague rather than specific and not always accepted by later writers. At most, it seems, some kind of distinction must be assumed to exist between "das gebildete Publikum" and "das breite Publikum" to the extent that the former is a limited and the latter an unlimited audience; the public for the school-and-home variety of work is also presumably the broader audience. The definition of the general public as understood by authors of literary histories would hardly be of interest, had not author after author during the latter part of the century, stressed the fact that, despite the innumerable works that have been published in the field, none, for this or

180

Histories of German Literature

that reason, is suitable for the general audience. And this is not because each author wishes to bring the literary historical record up to date, and presumably also not because all the preceding works have gone out of print and been lost from sight. Brugier writes of his predecessors in 1865: "Die Einen waren aber zu gelehrt, die Andern zu unchristlich, die Dritten confessionell verletzend" (ix). Forty to fifty years and some scores of works later, Howald (1903) complains that the available works are too detailed, too scholarly, too expensive, etc. Bartels writes: "So zahlreich und zum Teil wertvoll die Werke dieser Art sind, die wir besitzen; ich vermi/fte seit langem eins, das iibersichtliche Behandlung des gewaltigen Stoffes mit leichter Lesbarkeit vereinte" (v [3rd. ed., 1905]). Biese claims (1907): none of the recent works "hat sich ... ganz in die Liicke gestellt, die ich mit der meinigen auszufiillen versuchte" (v); and Heinemann (1910) points to the superfluity of large works and school works, "nicht an kleinen, das Wichtige auswahlenden Fiihrern" (iii). There are several factors underlying the reiterated refrain of "this is the first work of its kind," not the least of which is the apparent misunderstanding concerning the aims of earlier authors (or their failure to reach the intended audience). Gervinus, for example, wrote his work for the public at large, "nicht fur eine besondere Klasse, sondern ... fur die Nation" (I, 14), but he is cited over and over again by later historians as having written for an academic audience. Already before Gervinus had completed his work, Laube (1840) had referred to it as being "nur den Gelehrten dienstbar" (IV, 79). Even Scherer's work, criticized in its own time as catering too much to popular taste, "wendet sich," according to Biese (1907), "in Wahrheit doch zunachst an die Fachmanner" (v). It becomes evident that there is no consensus about the audience implied by terms such as "die Laien," "die Gebildeten," or "das deutsche Haus," and this is a confusion that can not be explained by changes in the quality of education through the nineteenth century. At the beginning of the century the "general public" apparently means those of the middle class who passed through a "hohere Schule" and possibly even university, the members, in fact of what is frequently referred to as the Bildungsburgertum. By the end of the century, with increased standards of education and a much wider diffusion of literature, the general public must be considered to be larger and to include readers lower on the social scale. Scherer, for example, clearly wanted to write a work for the "masses," not one for academics or even the educated, but, while it may be argued that subsequent authors must discount Scherer's suitability for the general public in order to justify their own work, there are nevertheless clear signs in some of these later works that the audience is still limited; they are certainly not written for the proletarian public for which the socialists were demanding a better education. Engel (1906), for

181 An Overview

example, writes for "die Nichtwissenden, und das sind, mit Ausnahme der Fachgelehrten, in hoherem oder niederem Grade die meisten Leser" (vii). However, he then goes on to say of histories of literature: "Da diese nur fur Gebildete geschrieben sind, so darf rait Recht die Kenntnis einiger klassischer Werke unserer Literatur vorausgesetzt werden." And further down the same page he writes: "Es gibt ... immer noch hundertausende hochgebildeter Deutscher, die von der Beschaftigung mit Literatur ... edelste Geistesbildung und innere Erhebung begehren. Vornehmlich fiir solche Leser ist dies Werk bestimmt." In other words, Engel is thinking of a relatively well educated public. Biese, too, directs his work "nicht in erster Linie an die Wissenden, sondern an die Wi/toegierigen, und stets hatte ich auch die Jugend im Auge" (v). But he makes no further comment about the prerequisite degree of "Bildung"; nor does he attempt to explain the "Volkstumlichkeit" which is supposed to make his work so different from others. From the size of the work and the authorial comments about the German Burgertum it is clear that Biese's audience is the middle class, of whom, however (to judge by the plot summaries, etc), he does not expect much in the way of prior knowledge, rather less in fact than Engel. The inclusion of quotations, plot summaries, etc reflects not only the anticipated level of knowledge on the part of the reader, but also the attitude of the author towards the readership. The late eighteenth-century type of bio-bibliographical work had generally devoted much of the space to quotations from the authors discussed, and it can be assumed that the works were not only unfamiliar, but also in many cases unavailable to the readers. Passages are therefore quoted as samples of a writer's work rather than as evidence for a particular view of his work. Gervinus, on the other hand, quotes very little, since his primary purpose is to demonstrate the contribution of each writer to the historical progress as he sees it. The writer's work, subordinated to the "Idee," can only be viewed as a whole, and quotations from individual works would not enhance such an approach. In his introduction Gervinus even expresses his regret at not having eliminated every quotation. Vilmar too refrains almost entirely from quotation, although he provides some plot summaries. Quotations can be used in various ways in histories of literature, but their use is rarely without risk. As simple text samples, they allow critics to argue that other passages would have been more apposite or characteristic. When used to support arguments in favour of a particular judgment, they are open to different interpretations or to the claim that other quotations could be selected to support a different view. Quotations chosen to encourage a reader to take up the original may have the opposite effect, just as plot summaries can deter the reader from reading the

182

Histories of German Literature

whole work. Too many quotations interrupt the flow of the argument, but their total absence may arouse in the reader a suspicion that the historian does not know the works well enough to be able to quote from them. Many of those who write for the general public reject the omission of original texts as, on the one hand, encouraging the acceptance of ready-made judgments ("ferner durfte man besorgt sein, da/3 durch Urteile, wie man sie iiber Litteraturwerke abzugeben pflegte, leichtfertiges Urteilen und naseweises Absprechen befordert werde" - Schultz [1889], vi), and on the other hand, discouraging the public from reading the works for themselves. There is therefore a strong tendency through the century to provide plot summaries, to quote extensively, and to "let the writers speak for themselves." Kurz, writing in 1853, may be taken as representing a common attitude at the time. The public, he argues, does not want to have all the details of historical research rehearsed to it; it is satisfied with the results of the research: "aber es verlangt auch zugleich, da/3 ihm diese Ergebnisse in einer ... Darstellung gegeben werden, welche ... den Leser so viel als moglich von dem Urtheile des Verfassers unabhangig macht ... da/3 ihm solche Stellen aus seinen Schriften mitgeteilt werden, welche am Geeignetsten erscheinen, seine Eigenthiimlichkeit anschaulich hervortreten zu lassen" (v-vii). A combination of this approach together with the older tradition of citing past critics is found in Seinecke, who suggests in the foreword to his Lehrbuch (1866) that both passages from literary works and "treffende(n) Urtheile(n) alterer und neuerer Zeit" are needed, since "dem gro/Jeren Publikum, welches nur wenige derartige Werke liest und lesen kann ... viel des Guten und Besten, was iiber unsere Literatur geau/tert ist, zuganglich gemacht wird" (vi). These two quotations represent different approaches and suggest at the same time others; they also suggest the historian's dilemma, when deciding whether or not to include quotations. At the one end of the scale is the approach which, in theory at least, provides ample textual evidence and enables the reader to judge for himself the nature and quality of a writer's work. The quotations must be characteristic or "typical" of the writer; that is to say, they must display both the individual qualities that have been discussed and the writer's relationship to predecessors and successors, i.e., his place in history. In the middle of the scale are those works that provide plot summaries and sample passages, along with biographical and bibliographical information and standard evaluations. The purpose in this case is to provide samples as reading matter, not as characterizing quotations. The judgments may be simple summaries of traditional views or direct quotations from critics. At the opposite end of the scale, the historian's aim is to persuade the reader to accept his

183 An Overview particular view of the historical process per se, and for this purpose quotations are not necessary. Most school works and some of the simpler works for school and home use take the middle course. Whether the approach is by design or results from a lack of ability on the author's part, the ostensible function of such works is to provide the reader with basic information - including plot summaries and quotations - without prejudicing his or her judgment. That the reader's judgment is influenced, goes without saying, but the general impression is of a textbook. In school books the tendency throughout the nineteenth century is towards separating text samples from the historical survey. In works for home use, the tendency towards the end of the century is to increase the volume of informative matter and to reduce the text, resulting in the heavily illustrated coffee-table books that have been described above. The first type of work, where the historian provides quotations which enable the reader to form an independent judgment, i.e., where the writer is allowed "to speak for himself," is more often called for than encountered. In such works the historian lays less emphasis on the historical process - or ignores it entirely - and concentrates on the characterization of individual writers. While the quotations may contribute, therefore, to an understanding of a given writer, they do little to exemplify his role in the history of literature. To some extent this style continues the earliest tradition, where the reader was furnished with sample texts that enabled judgments to be made about past poets on the basis of his or her own, fully developed, but contemporary "Geschmack." The third type of work, at the opposite end of the scale to those just mentioned (and where quotations are rarely employed) is of greater interest. The historian's goal is here to convince the reader of the validity of his view of the historical process, and the characterization of writers as individuals must therefore be subordinated to their role in this process, the description of which could only be inhibited by literary quotations. This approach requires quite a different style, essentially a rhetorical style, rather than a descriptive or informative one, for the reader must be persuaded to accept what are in fact generalizations and simplifications, and to accept the historical process as a whole and not to consider writers as individuals. To convince the reader, the historian must make clear and forthright statements, use forceful language with trenchant and "memorable" phrases, and make telling connections. "Purple" passages, positive comments on the class to which the reader belongs, and the association of the reader with the author through references to the present or the use of "we" are additional devices to gain support. There are few examples of this type of work; they vary greatly in size and can include also those works that claim to omit quotations, etc in

184 Histories of German Literature order to force the readers to read for themselves. The first major example is Gervinus, and his work provides ample evidence of the kind of style described. Gervinus never hesitates to express his opinion of a writer, of a school, or even of a century, simply and forcefully. The strength of the language and the reduction of the judgments to a minimum both give the impression of personal knowledge and commitment and enable the reader to grasp the point quickly. Wherever possible, Gervinus reduces a writer to a single, supposedly "essential" characteristic and lends further authority to this process by drawing analogies both within and outside German literature. The very frequency and variety of these analogies impresses the reader (to whom many of the analogs may be unfamiliar), and the logical weakness of the argument passes unnoticed. In essence Gervinus reduces (or attempts to reduce) every writer to one of two types (see chapter one). Reference has also been made to the labelling of writers and the persistence of certain epithets over a long period of time, two classic examples being Lohenstein's "stilted" style ("auf Stelzen gehen") and Goethe's description of Giinther: "so zerrann ihm sein Talent wie sein Leben." Here, therefore, are just two examples from Gervinus and Vilmar demonstrating the "rhetorical" technique which stresses emotional appeal to the reader with a minimum of literary critical "facts"; first Gervinus: Wenn Einer aus der Masse dieser Satiriker angefiihrt werden sollte, so mii^te es Balthasar Schupp aus Gie/?en sein (1610-61), der in Hamburg zuletzt als Pastor stand, einer der ausgezeichnetesten Manner der Zeit, der zwischen den Andrea und Moscherosch, und den Thomasius und Wei/te eine natiirliche Briicke bildet. Uns diirfte er hier allerdings insofern angehen, als nicht gerade alle poetische Form aus seinen kleinen satirischen Schriftchen gewichen ist, in denen er als ein riistiger Vorfechter gegen alle scholastische Weisheit, Schulzwang, Erschwerung des Unterrichts und Pedanterie auftritt, mit einem in der damaligen Zeit ausgezeichnet praktischen Sinne, der ihn alien geistlichen Prunk, wie alle gelehrte Eitelkeit zu verleugnen lehrte. Er scheute sich nicht Mensch zu sein, und kein Engel sein zu wollen; er scheute sich nicht zu reden mit dem Volke und zu denken mit den Weisen, und er machte sich aus dem Spottnamen des Lucianischen Speivogels eine Ehre und sagte nur den Leuten, wer Lucian eigentlich war. Vieles, was er unter dem Namen Antenor in gelegentlichen Flugschriften schrieb, erinnert an Lucian's Formen und Manier, und ist nur meist bitterer und sarkastischer gehalten. Er gebraucht die Form des Gesprachs, des Discurses, die auch in diesem Jahrhundert hochst beliebt war. In seinem Regentenspiel erzahlt er einen Traum ganz in Moscherosch's Art, und der Name des Berathenen in diesem Stiicke, Philanderson, schlie/ft sich unmittelbar an diesen an. Auch sonst gebraucht er die Vision zur Einkleidung seiner Abhandlung; er nannte auch z.B. seinen geduldigen Hiob mehr eine poetische oder oratorische, als theologische Schrift, obwohl sie nichts ist als Predigt in einem einkleidenden

185 An Overview Rahmen. Kaum wiirde man aus seinen Schriften eine einzige, die ehrbare Hure, der Sache und Handlung nach eigentlich als auf poetisches Gebiet gehorig betrachten. Die Satire verlauft bei ihm offenbar mehr in die Predigt. Man warf ihm vor, daft er in seinen Predigten Pickelharingspossen anbrachte und daft er sie mit Anekdoten ausfiillte, was die allgemeine Manier der Darstellung ist in diesen empirischen Zeiten. Man nannte ihn wie den Abraham a Sta Clara, einen Fabelhans, und wirklich lassen sich seine Predigten mit denen des Paters vergleichen; seine Abhandlung vom Wortlein Nichts z.B. hat ihres Gleichen bei diesem. Wir hatten das Burleske von den Fastenpredigern ausgehen sehen in allem Anfang, hier geht es dahin zuriick. Was Schupp unter den Protestanten in dieser Hinsicht ist, das ist Abraham unter den Katholiken, und ganz so wie sich spatere protestantische Satiriker, wie Riemer, Lehms u.A. zu Schupp verhalten, so verhalten sich die katholischen wie z.B. der Jesuit Kallenbach zu Abraham. Welch ein erschreckender Unterschied stellt sich aber, wenn man dies vergleicht, zwischen der protestantischen und katholischen Bildung in der Nation dar! Wir haben bei diesem Pater Abraham (Ulrich Megerle, 1642-1709) die Curiositatenwuth auf ihrer Spitze, und nur die Liebhaber von Curiositaten konnen diesen Carrikaturschriftsteller noch einmal anpreisen. Was ehemals in Naivetat und Unschuld gut sein konnte, ist nicht auch in den Zeiten Abraham's gut gewesen. Die Schnurren seiner Predigten und Schriften in Verbindung mit finsteren katholischen Schrecknissen, seine anekdotischen Possen gemischt mit dunklen Legenden, seine Aufklarung neben seinem Aberglauben, seine Derbheiten neben seinen hofischen Schmeicheleien, seine Volksmanier in Erzahlung, Wortspiel, Sprichwort und Schwank verbunden mit seinen lateinischen Brocken, seine Belesenheit in rohen deutschen Poeten vereint mit der in den Kirchenvatern, seine Kunst epigrammatische Wirkungen durch Spannung und Tauschung der Erwartung hervorzubringen, seine ganze burleske Manier angewandt auf lauter Kleinigkeiten, und nirgends von einer Erkenntnis der Grundfehler seines Volkes oder seiner Wiener Gemeinde oder seiner Zeit ausgehend - Alles macht einen so ungeschlachten Wust aus, da/8 man gro/te Freude an aller Art Schnurrpfeifereien haben mu/J, um nur diesen zu Gefallen, fiir die diese Werke allerdings eine gro/3e Fundgrube sind, sie durchzublattern ... Alles hat seine Zeit ... so ist doch des Historikers Neigung stets auf den Fortschritt gestellt, und er kann, wo so offenbare Riickschritte sind, nie wiinschen, da/8 man der Curiositat halber auf solche Schmierereien weiter hinweise, wie die des Pater Abraham ohne Ausnahme sind. (1853, III, 395-97). A suitable example from Vilmar is the short passage on Lohenstein, which reads as follows: Doch Hofmannswaldau wurde noch bei weitem iiberboten durch Lohenstein, einen jiingeren und phantasievolleren Zeitgeno/?en, der in seinen Poesieen das Exclamieren, das bis zum Unsinn ausschweifende Haufen von Bezeichnungen, das bis zu formlicher Wei/Jbinderei gebrachte Buntmalen durch grelle Epitheta der auch die Unsauberkeit und Schliipfrigkeit bis zu einem Grade getrieben hat, der uns jetzt Gottlob vollig unbegreiflich, ja unmoglich diinkt. Heut zu Tage mii/ten sich doch solche Auswiirfe der Literatur, wenigstens in Deutschland, in

186

Histories of German Literature

die finsteren Winkel nichtswurdiger Leihbibliothekare verkriechen; damals wurde alles, was man in Frankreich freilich am hellen Tage that, hier am hellen Tage geschrieben, verkauft, gelesen, und als der Gipfel der Poesie, als sogenannte galante Poesie iiber alles Maa/J gepriesen. Dabei ist es merkwiirdig, daft Hofmannswaldau sowohl als Lohenstein im wirklichen Leben au/terst ehrbare, ernste Manner waren, die von den Abscheulichkeiten ihrer Poesien sich vollig unberiihrt zeigten; iibrigens ergriff dieses Gift damals blo/3 die hoheren Stande, nicht das Volk, welches gerade nach dem drei/frgjahrigen Kriege bis zur franzosischen Revolution vielleicht die beste, ehrbarste, frommste Zeit seines ganzen bisherigen Daseins erlebt hat... (1847, 424).

The primary purpose of all types of literary history, whether short or long, whether consisting only of commentary or primarily of illustrations, is to inform the reader, to impart knowledge and understanding both of individual writers and works, and of the literary historical process. Underlying this general aim, however, are other aims that are related to each historian's understanding of the function of literary history and of literature itself. Enough has been said in the course of the survey so far about the evident religious or political bias of individual authors of literary histories; here the attempt must be made to summarize changes in attitude towards the function of literary history itself. It has been pointed out that literary histories developed in part from the older field of historia litteraria; in the early stages they were presented similarly, that is, the chronological recitation of events was arranged according to an appropriate system - which normally meant an arrangement primarily by genres. Literary history within this system meant essentially the record of those writers who had contributed to the development of a previously established genre. In the second edition of his work, Winter argues forcefully for a division within cultural periods by genre as late as 1829 - with the result that each writer's oeuvre is divided between the various genres and not discussed as a whole. Such an approach subordinated the writer to the genre, and the separation of literary history from historia litteraria is clearly based in part on the recognition that literary quality, in aesthetic terms, is not incremental and that the works of great individuals must be viewed as a whole and in the context of their own time. Early definitions of the function of the literary historian were quoted in the Prolegomena from Meister (58) and from Plant (72), and the conclusion drawn that, while mainly antiquarian and academic interests underlay at that time the writing of literary history, these were informed to some degree by a desire to promote the claim of German literature to an equal place in the context of European literature. The rediscovery of medieval literature and the political situation at the turn of the eighteenth to the nineteenth century led then to a much greater

187 An Overview

emphasis on the quality of German literature (and the German language) and its function as a unifying element in the struggle of the German nation for both intellectual and political independence. Literary history therefore came to be viewed as recording the development of the German people through its literature. The history of German literature "stellt den Gang dar, den das deutsche Volk ... in dem ihm eigenthiimlichen litterarischen Leben ... verfolgt hat" (Koberstein [1827], 1); its purpose is, "den Bildungsgang der Nation nachzuweisen" (Schaefer, Handbuch [1842], vii). This development or process was seen as the result of the conflicts between the innate qualities of the German people and the internal and external influences to which they were subject. The internal forces are primarily political and social, the external forces, with a few major exceptions such as the Thirty Years' War, predominantly literary. To quote Koberstein again, literary history records the influences, "welche die jedesmaligen politischen Verhaltnisse des Vaterlandes, dessen sittlicher Zustand, die Litteratur frefmder Volker und die gelehrte Bildung der neuen Welt... ausgeiibt haben" (1). Perhaps the most familiar exemplification of this concept is the correlation of the decline of courtly poetry after the interregnum period with the moral decline ("sittlicher Verfall") of the aristocracy. The relationship is essentially one of cause and effect. Other historians were not satisfied with this pragmatic approach and sought instead a philosophical principle, an idea that would account not simply for the type of change but for the fact that change had to take place. Instead of a development that was the result of natural but haphazard events, the events were to be the necessary adjuncts to an inevitable process, to a development that was preordained. In the 1830s and 1840s, even where there is no direct reference to an underlying philosophy, such as that of Goetzinger or of Rinne, there is an implicit assumption of an "inner necessity" in the path followed by German literature, "jener innere und notwendige Zusammenhang der literarischen Erscheinungen" (Vilmar [1844], 2). Similar phrases are found in numerous literary histories throughout the nineteenth century, but only very rarely is any attempt made to explain the supposedly underlying principle; for most historians it was simply a matter of faith (in the general and patriotic rather than religious sense). Those few writers who did provide a "philosophy of literary history" did so in a purely idiosyncratic manner, and there is no natural sequence among them. The basic idea of a national spirit which developed under the influence of internal and external forces led instead in a quite different direction, one that was perhaps inevitable, given the coincidence of the end of the Classical period with the growth of interest in writing literary histories. German literary development was seen, quite simply, as

188 Histories of German Literature culminating in the Classical era, as having reached at this stage its ultimate and inevitable conclusion. Gervinus was of course the leading proponent of this idea, and his work was very influential, whether or not the underlying political view was accepted. The historical principle enunciated by Gervinus was in any case largely ignored. He argued not merely that German literature had reached its end: "ist... zu einem Ziele gekommen, von wo aus man mit Erfolg ein Ganzes iiberblicken ... und die gro/?ten Belehrungen ziehen kann." He argued that it had to have reached this point before it could be historically relevant: "zu einem Ruhepuncte miissen die Begebenheiten gefiihrt haben, wenn sie lehrreich werden sollen" (8). If the attainment of this goal was accepted as inevitable, then the way was open to a re-interpretation of the developmental process, a process previously seen as a struggle for the preservation of the German spirit in the face of difficulties at home and influences from abroad. Gervinus and even Vilmar describe this process as a struggle rather that a natural development: "ich mu/Jte sie [German literature] durch andere Perioden verfolgen, wo sie bald unter dem Drucke des Monchtums ein unwiirdiges Joch duldete, bald unter der Zugellosigkeit des Ritterthums die gefahrliche Richtung einschlug, bald von dem heimischen Gewerbsstand in Fesseln gelegt und oft von eindringenden Fremdlingen unterjocht ward, bis sie von allgemeiner Aufklarung unterstiitzt sich in Ma/3igung freirang, ihr eigener Herr ward und schnell die zuletzt getragne Unterwerfung mit rachenden Eroberungen vergalt" (Gervinus, I, 1). "In diesem [geistigen] Kampf haben wir bald gesiegt und den starken Fu/J auf des Feindes Nacken gesetzt, bald haben wir Schrammen und Narben ... davon getragen, ja wir sind in die Gefangenschaft des Gegners geraten und haben in schmahlicher Botma/fcgkeit Sklavenketten geschleppt" (Vilmar, 4-5). But since the development was inevitable, the influences had to be an essential part of it, and the process therefore a positive rather than a negative one. The German spirit came to be perceived as possessing qualities that enabled it to absorb everything that was good and (in time) to resist or divest itself again of what was not appropriate. It is this "absorbent" characteristic that enabled the German nation to achieve what no other nation had achieved or could achieve, namely, a second "classical" era of literature. The first had occurred after the spirit of Christianity had been fully absorbed, the second after the absorption of the spirit of classical antiquity. This concept had developed by Vilmar's time and finds its most succinct expression in Eichendorff s phrase: "Wir sind die geistigen Erben fast aller gebildeten Nationen" (12). While this concept of the special quality of the German spirit could lead to a belief in Germany's superior position among the intellectual countries of Europe (or even the world), the second Classical Period

189 An Overview posed a problem for later literary historians who could not totally ignore the literature that was created after the Classical epoch. There had always been a tendency to avoid discussion of living (and even recent) writers, and justification was sought for this in the inability of the historian to find an adequate perspective, in the fragmentary state of a living writer's oeuvre, or simply in order to avoid controversial matters, particularly in school books. To this was now added for most historians the problem of having to follow the sublime with the "ridiculous," i.e., the Classical period with the Romantics and, even worse, with the Junges Deutschland. The somewhat iconoclastic Winter objects to Koberstein's omission of the most recent period and claims, "meine Literargeschichte ist die erste in Deutschland, welche den achten Zeitraum ... als eine neue Epoche einfiihrt, die ... 1813 beginnt" (Winter [2d. ed. 1829], iv). He also argues against the whole concept of "classical" periods on the grounds that the term can only properly be applied to the great literary ages of nations that have ceased to exist, intellectually and linguistically, if not physically. There is nevertheless a general tendency through mid-century to terminate the historical record with Goethe. In the latter half of the century more and more writers and works are added to the record, although there still remains a tendency for that record to degenerate into a simple listing of names, dates, works, etc in the most recent years. At the same time the amount of space devoted to the older periods (OHG and MHG) decreases both absolutely and relatively. This does not result solely from the increasing volume of modern literary works or from increased interest in them as opposed to works of the earlier eras. There is a definite shift towards the end of the century in the attitude to the literature of the past as a whole, a shift away from the examination of what was significant in, and to, the past in favour of those works that still had some appeal to the modern audience. One could say, in fact, that the idea of restricting the selection of literature to what was still "relevant" to present-day readers began about one hundred years ago. The record was to be confined to "die wirklichen Heroen" (Pfalz viii). In Bartels' work, "Nur was wirklich lebt oder aus irgend einem Grunde zu leben verdient, hat seine einfiihrende Charakteristik gefunden" (vi). Biese (1907) is determined, "nicht an Totes die Aufmerksamkeit zu vergeuden" (vi). Where there is more detailed analysis of recent literature, this seems to have been sparked as often as not by the desire to condemn it. This applies first to the inclusion of Junges Deutschland and more particularly to those late nineteenth and early twentieth-century works that almost without exception attack the Naturalist movement. Finally, with the condemnation of recent or contemporary literature goes the tendency at the turn of the twentieth century to attempt to discern signs of (and to

190 Histories of German Literature forecast) a brighter future for literature: "Wir stehen zweifellos vor einer begluckenden und hoch zu preisenden Bliiteperiode der Zukunft" (Beyer [1887], xx); "Gott helfe Ihnen [die guten Krafte] zura Siege, dann wird sie auch eine neue herrliche Bliithe haben, die deutsche Nationalliteratur" (Schnedermann [1899], 136). The other major aspect of the concept of literary history that requires some comment is the definition of the literature that was to be included as part of that history. During the seventeenth and for most of the eighteenth century, the definition of literature is not a problem - which does not mean that there was unanimity about what constituted good literature. There may have been general agreement that beyond the level of mere correctness a certain quality could be discerned only by those who possessed the necessary "Geschmack," but this quality, being indefinable, could lead to varying judgments. The volume of known literature was, however, relatively small and increased only slowly; many historians derived their information in any case from secondary sources. Those interested in literary history were, moreover, of the same class as the writers they discussed and they therefore naturally knew what literature was - or should be; when they viewed the literature of the past - for example, Meistergesang - they did so from a purely academic standpoint, based in almost all cases on contemporary aesthetic considerations. This was the historians' primary concern, and if they condemned plebeian literature, it was for its quality rather than its origin. A relationship is, of course, seen between social class and literature but only to the extent that the upper classes can be blamed for neglecting literature or leading it astray, while the lower classes are praised for attempting to keep literature alive, even though the results are "inevitably" unacceptable from a literary standpoint. From the end of the eighteenth century on, however, the social class plays little, if any, role in what rapidly becomes the essential criterion for literature, namely, its Germanness. When the definition of literary history becomes the record of the development of the German spirit (Geist), then it naturally follows that the stuff of which this history is made is that literature which is genuinely representative of the national spirit. Koberstein (1827) defines it as "diejenigen schriftlichen Werke, welche auf kiinstlerischem Wege hervorgebracht, sowohl ihrer Form, wie ihrem innern Wesen nach ein eigenthumlich deutsches Geprage an sich tragen" (1). Herzog (1831) defines it as "jene Schriftwerke, die erzeugt und hervorgegangen aus dem Geiste der Nation, dem innern Wesen, den Vorstellungen, Ansichten, Gefiihlen und Bestrebungen, wie der Form, der Sprache und Darstellungsweise nach, nationell, und von den Geisteserzeugnissen anderer Volker wesentlich verschieden sind; in denen sich das eigenthumliche geistige Leben eines Volkes am treuesten und klarsten ausspricht" (v).

191 An Overview

Vilmar refers to the "Inhalt der deutschen National!iterator (oder der deutschen Literatur im engeren Sinne)" (1). The weakness of such a definition lies of course in the circular nature of the argument that develops: the spirit of the nation is best expressed in its literature; the only true literature is that which expresses the spirit of the nation. Inevitably, the idea that the spirit of the German nation is best exemplified in its literary works, results in an increasing tendency to define a priori the nature of the German character, and then to evaluate literature and construct the historical development based on the degree to which the literary works at any given period do or do not conform to the historian's concept of that character. It has already been shown that historians begin to claim for the German nature the ability to absorb good influences and shake off bad ones. Other qualities, such as loyalty ("Treue"), morality ("Sittlichkeit"), respect for women, etc, are repeatedly adduced by historians, sometimes only in passing, sometimes in introductory essays. Vilmar, for example, lists "die Tapferkeit und die Treue, die Freigebigkeit und die Dankbarkeit, die Keuschheit und die Familienliebe [as] die altesten und echtesten Ziige des deutschen Charakters" (6). Eichendorff prefaces his chapter on "Das alte nationale Heidentum" with comments on the major traits of the German peoples, which he gives as a love of freedom, bravery, loyalty, honour, respect for women (especially the sanctity of marriage), and a love of nature. Loise, who considers himself of Germanic origin, describes "le genie allemand" as "essentiellement reveur, meditatif, melancolique, idealiste, fantastique et sentimentale" (16). The Swiss, Christian Miiller, writes: "L'amour de la patrie at de I'independance, 1'enthousiasme pour la religion, la loyaute de coeur, la profondeur de sentiment et 1'imagination la plus hardie, ces qualites du caractere national, originates des forets de la Germanic, ont donne le type a la litterature nationale des Allemands" (16-17). If these character traits gave rise to and were also exemplified in the literature that was truly German, then it followed that the study of this literature would inculcate or enhance such character traits in the reader. Patriotism therefore required the study of German literature and this study in turn enhanced the sense of patriotism. Naturally enough, the German character is variously defined, though never of course negatively. But the point is rather why than how it is so defined, to what end? It was noted earlier that the definition of the German character was required as a basis for the selection and evaluation of the literature that belonged in a history of German, i.e., German national, literature, but it also provided the (or a) justification for the writing of literary history at all. History had, after all, as Gervinus put it, to be "lehrreich," "eine Belehrung." The purpose was pedagogical, whether or not the authors were school teachers and whether or not the

192

Histories of German Literature

works were written for schools. "Die Wichtigkeit Deutscher Literatur," Heinsius writes, "ergibt sich theils aus dem hohen Alterthum und den reichen Eigenthiimlichkeiten der Sprache und Schriftwerke selbst, theils aus dem durch mannliche Kraft, Klarheit des Verstandes, Natursinn, Liebe und christliche Milde stark bezeichneten Charakter des Volkes, der sich in Sprache und Rede, wie im Leben und Thatkraft ... unverkennbar abdruckt" (2). In other words, the significance of German literature lies in the national virtues that it displays. Not many of the literary historians express themselves as directly as Heinsius, but even where there is no indication at all either of the purpose of the work or of the readership for which it was intended, the manner of presentation is sufficient to make the author's standpoint clear, as has been shown in the past chapters. In the following, a number of definitions of literature are cited from histories of literature at various dates in the nineteenth century: Koberstein (1821): "diejenigen schriftlichen Werke, welche auf kiinstlerischem Wege hervorgebracht, sowohl ihrer Form, wie ihrem innern Wesen nach ein eigenthiimlich deutsches Geprage an sich tragen" (1); Herzog (1831): "jene Schriftwerke, die erzeugt und hervorgegangen aus dem Geiste der Nation, dem innern Wesen, den Vorstellungen, Ansichten, Gefuhlen und Bestrebungen, wie der Form, der Sprache und Darstellungsweise nach, nationell, und von den Geisteserscheinungen anderer Volker wesentlich verschieden sind; in denen sich das eigenthumliche geistige Leben eines Volkes am treuesten und klarsten ausspricht" (v); Rinne (1842): "Die Nationalliteratur eines Volkes ... ist ... der feinste und bestimmteste Ausflu/?, zugleich Abdruck der geistigen Thatigkeit desselben"

(i);

Goetzinger (1844): "Ist nun die Nationalliteratur vorzugsweise an die Gestaltung gebunden,... so gehort sie zweitens auch in strengerem Sinne einem bestimmten Volke an, ist Ausdruck des Nationalgeists und Ansprache an eine besondere Nation; wenigstens soil sie dies seyn" (II, 42); Biese (1846): "Die Nationalliteratur als einem bestimmten Volke angehorig erha'lt durch die engere Beziehung zur Sprache des einzelnen Volkes eine nahere Beschrankung. Da sie der Ausdruck des nationalen Geistes ist, so pragt sie sich vorziiglich in solchen Werken aus, in welchen die individuelle Auffassungsweise am lebendigsten wirksam ist ... Grundlage aller Nationalliteratur ist daher das dichterische Schaffen. In den Dichtern gewinnt das Volksbewu/ftseyn zuerst einen festen Mittelpunkt" (1-2); Huhn (1852): "in denjenigen literarischen Produkten und Kunstwerken, worin sich auf die treueste und eigenste Art deutsche Gesinnung und Sitte, Geist und Leben abspiegeln" (1);

193 An Overview

Seinecke (1866): "diejenigen Schriftsteller unsers Volkes, welche, hervorgegangen aus deutschem Geistes- und Gemiithsleben, unser eigenstes Denken, Fiihlen und Wollen in kiinstlerischer (schoner) Form ausdriicken" (1); Lindemann (1866): "Literatur ist die in die au/?ere Erscheinung getretene geistige Entwicklung der Volker ... Es sind die dichterischen Geistesprodukte der Nation"

(i);

Kluge (1869): "die deutsche Nationalliterator ... umfa/Jt ... nur diejenigen literarischen Kunstwerke, welche ein eigenthumliches deutsches Geprage tragen, d.h. die unserm deutschen Volke eigenthiimliche Anschauung, Gesinnung, Sitte abspiegeln" (1); Storck (1898): "Die Geschichte der Litteratur eines Volkes ist die Geschichte seines geistigen Lebens, insofern dasselbe im Werke lebendig geworden ist ... Andererseits sind auch nicht alle schriftlich niedergelegten Geisteserzeugnisse zur National-Literatur zu rechnen, sondern nur jene, die die ganze Nation, das ganze Volk zu ergreifen vermogen - die dichterischen Werke" (ix).

Two quite different elements are involved in these definitions, and they reflect in some degree the historian's uncertainty about the function of literature. It is defined on the one hand as that which best expresses the spirit of the nation and on the other as that which appeals to the nation as a whole. This can (and does) create a dilemma for the historian who on the one hand may wish to reject as un-German a poet who is generally accepted by the people at large, and on the other hand must necessarily discuss (good) poets whose reputation was restricted to a small circle. However, nineteenth-century historians avoid, by and large, the kind of social distinctions made in the eighteenth century (for example, by Adelung, who claimed that "Aufklarung and "Geschmack" were only to be found in the middle classes (Umstdndliches Lehrgebdude, 48). However, the variation in stress reinforces the notion of literary history as instructive, as it is evidently the historian's function to determine what does express the spirit of the nation and what is or should be accepted by the nation. Further evidence of this is provided by the occasional references to what should not be included in literary history. Determining the kind of literature that is to be discussed in literary histories leads then to a description of the function of literary history vis-a-vis the reader. Rinne argues: "So gefa/8t fiihrt das Studium der Nationalliteratur zur Erkenntnis des Werthes des Personlichen und des Nationalen als zur Vermittlung zum Schonen und Religiosen" (I, 6). Hiippe sees "Nationalitat und Christenthum" as the twin goals of education, "Darum mu/J der Erziehung jedes Mittel ... willkommen sein; und

194

Histories of German Literature

welches andere konnte dieses - au/ter einem griindlichen Religionsunterricht - fur den Deutschen sein, als die ernste, tief eindringende Beschaftigung mit der deutschen Geschichte und vor allem mil der deutschen Literatur" (iv). Biese (1846), on the other hand, is far more general in his estimation: "Da nun die deutsche Literaturgeschichte den Charakter unsers Volks an Seele und Geist am bestimmtesten abspiegelt ... so werden gerade hier unserer Jugend die fur Herz und Kopf reichsten Bildungselemente dargeboten" (v). Rather more patriotic in Winter's sense is Otto Schulze (Wegweiser, 1854), whose educational goals are "Religiositat" and "Vaterlandsliebe": "nationaler Sinn durch eine nationale Erziehung geweckt und gefordert ... geschieht ... durch eine ernste und wiirdige Beschaftigung mit der Geschichte des deutschen Vaterlandes und der deutschen Literatur ... die Schriftwerke deutschen Geistes und deutscher Sitte [sollen] die kraftige Mahnung zu deutscher Einheit und Nationalitat [sein]" (iii). Seinecke bases his evaluation of national literature on aesthetic, historical, and "ethisch-religiose" principles and concludes: "Die Jugend unsers Volks ... soil in die Geschichte unserer Literatur ... eingefiihrt werden ... um Geist und Sinn an dem Besten und Edelsten, was der deutsche Volksgeist im Laufe vieler Jahrhunderte hervorgebracht hat, zu kraftigen und zu erheben" (2). In this context he also cites Gelzer (briefly) as well as Goetzinger and Prutz. The essential aim of many authors of literary histories is therefore not simply the depiction of the virtues of German literature but the inculcation of those virtues in the reader. Since German literature is only one among the literatures of Europe or the world and is in competition, so to speak, with them, its qualities are measured against those of other literatures. While the general tendency is to prize the qualities of German literature above those of other literatures, it is also necessary to stress that the weaknesses in German literature are the result of foreign influences and therefore un-German. This nationalistic or chauvinistic trend by no means unique to Germany or German literary historians - has been touched upon frequently; in the following is an attempt to trace briefly the development of the concept of the superiority of the German language and its literature from its beginnings to the turn of the twentieth century. A belief in the superiority of German literature is preceded by a belief in the high qualities of the German language and the outstanding virtues of the German race, something that dates from the time of the Humanists, in particular from the early sixteenth century. The scholarly arguments about the nature and origin of the German race and its language need not concern us here, although it must be noted that German historians were by no means the only ones to develop this idea and that in the beginning at least there were conflicting views. On the one hand there was the desire to trace the German race back to a primeval source, not only in

195 An Overview biblical times but in a biblical region, and on the other hand there was the desire to claim that the German race was original to the area in which it now resided. An additional element of confusion was introduced by the conflicting demands of local as opposed to national or racial patriotism. Be that as it may, the idea slowly developed that the Germans were descendants of a son of Noah and that they, unlike others, had maintained the purity of their race and the purity of their language. Naturally enough, the humanists' view was that the past purity of the language had been lost to some extent and that it was necessary not only to preserve but to re-establish the qualities of the language. The interest of humanist scholars in the German language was not merely a sop to the patriotically minded, but a genuine belief in the qualities of the language and the need to restore it. Reference was already made in the Prolegomena (26ff) to the endeavours of Beatus Rhenanus and others in regard to the re-discovery of early German literature; here one need only cite Tschudi: "vnser tiitsch, so ein ehrliche spraach ist..., so doch aller ander spraachen die unser nit ansehend" (109). While Latin necessarily remained the vehicle for scholarly argument, both the secular direction of the new learning, coupled with the Protestant emphasis on the use of the vernacular, and the growing antipathy to foreign influences provided strong reasons for the study, codification, and use of the vernacular. The German language had to be as good as (if not better than) all other languages. A major concern among apologists of the German language was therefore its antiquity, for this was a time when antiquity was virtually synonymous with quality. The Germans were fortunate in having the evidence of Tacitus for the existence of a literary language at a very early date ("Celebrant carminibus antiquis, quod unum apud illos memoriae et annalium genus est" (Germania, ch. 2), and the evidence of Charlemagne's biographer, Einhard, in the Vita Karoli Magni, for that monarch's efforts to collect existing literary works and to codify the language ("Item barabara et antiquissima carmina, quibus veterum regum actus et bella canebantur, scripsit memoriaeque mandavit. Inchoavit et grammaticam patrii sermonis" (ch. 29 [p. 100]). Given this and similar evidence, together with rudimentary attempts to compare European languages, it was not long before the German language was viewed as the most ancient of European languages. The idea that the German race was native to Europe or was descended from the Trojans, Gauls, etc, was dropped in favour of the descent from biblical origins. By the middle of the seventeenth century, the position was regularly maintained that German was an "original" language ("Ursprache"), not perhaps coeval with Hebrew, but certainly superior to Greek or Latin, not to mention more recent languages such as French. Zesen writes, for example, in

196 Histories of German Literature 1643: "Ich halte dafiir/ da/J sie zugleich damahls sey aufkoramen/ als die Kinder zu Babilon des Noha Nachkomlinge/ wie Moses beschreibet/ den ungeheurn Turn .. zu bauen angefangen" (12). "Di/3 kann ich zwar zugeben, da/3 die Deutsche Spraache ... die vornehmste und erste under den andern Spraachen sey und mit der Hebraischen nach der Babilonischen Verwirrung/ zugleich im Gange und Schwange gewesen und eher fortgepflanzet worden als andere" (14). Harsdorffer writes: "Unde autem Graeci & Latini alia artes primitus hausere, quam ab Hebraeis & Celtis" (Spec. phiL, 184) - and by Celts, means the Germans. And Hanmann says much the same thing, adding, "da/3 wie sonsten die Hebreer mit den Deutschen wegen der Grammatik oder Spraach-Kunst verbrudert sind" (118). Finally Birken, who lauds the qualities of German, may be cited; he concludes: "Zumal ja die Teutsch auch eine von den uralten HauptSprachen und ja so alt als das Latein ist" (para. 22,):( ):(xi recto). All these theories are then summed up by Schottel as follows in his Ausfuhrliche Arbeit (1663): Nach dem nun als die einige allgemeine Sprache [Hebrew] zertrennet/ und die Menschen iiber die ganze Welt her zerstreuet worden/ ist Ascenas ... in Europen gezogen/ sich daselbst niedergelassen/ die Lander ausgetheilet/ dieselbe gebauet/ und also ein Vater aller Celtischen Volker geworden ... und dieser Ascenas (wie gesagt) ist ein Altvater der Teutschen/ hat mit sich die alte Celtische oder Teutsche Sprache von Babel gebracht. (34) Ist also diese uhralte Sprache bey den freyen Teutschen vornemlich nach dem Grunde geblieben/ auch ihren Nahmen von den Teutschen/ als dem vomehmsten Haubtgeschlechte der Celten/ hernachmahls behalten. (35) Gleich wie sich alle Ding mit der Zeit darin enderet/ da/? es entweder untergehet und aufhoret/ oder zu wehrender hochster Vollkommenheit/ durch vielerhand abwechselen und Enderungen gerahten mu/?/ also hat auch in der bestimmten Zeit eine jede Sprache ihren Wachsthum Abgang/ und hochsten Stand des vollkommenen Wesens zu gewarten. (40) Dem alien nach wird gewi/Jlich folgen/ da/?/ gleich wie das jtzige Teutschland annoch dasselbe Teutschland ist/ welches vor etzlichen tausend Jahren gewesen/ ... Also ist gleichfals unsere itzige Teutsche Sprache/ eben dieselbe uhralte weltweite Teutsche Sprache ... (48)

Additionally, there was some interest in tracing the origin of literature (poetry or song) along with that of the language. Hence the attempts of the meistersinger to trace their history back through their ancestors, the "Gemeriten, vnnd Japhiten" (Spangenberg), to the Hebrews (the idea of song as being of divine origin, of David as the first "minstrel," etc had been current for centuries). But the major impetus in the seventeenth

197 An Overview

century was towards protecting and purifying the language, and demonstrating its infinite capacity for literary expression. The underlying notion was that the quality of the language and writer's ability to use it were related to the rise and fall of the nation as a whole. A nation that gave up its own language would inevitably lose its freedom as well. Since antiquity and quality were virtually synonymous, as was noted above, it is not surprising that some attempts were made to compare German literature with other literatures. Morhof, for example, gives as a reason for introducing other literatures into his survey, the desire to discover, "ob etwa bey ihnen dieselbe [poetry] eher als bey den Deutschen entsprungen" (88); and there is little doubt that the repeated emphasis on the existence of German(ic) poetry at a very early date (the evidence provided by Tacitus and Einhard) was intended to demonstrate the German claim to priority also in this area. The fact that German was an "unvermischte Stammessprache" gave countenance to this claim and meant also that German was capable of infinite development, unlike a bastard language such as French, which was only capable of finite development: after reaching a certain "classical" level it necessarily became sterile. This belief in the superiority of the German language preceded then the discovery of the virtues of German literature, especially early German literature, but the two became inextricably linked with one another and with the concept of race through the writings of Herder, Rousseau, and others. The character of the German race was expressed in its language and in its literature; the character of the German language or of German literature was the same as that of the German race. Mertens (1779) writes, for example: "Uberhaupt sind die Deutschen in der lyrischen Poesie alien Nationen iiberlegen. Dies ist zugleich ein Vorzug unsrer Sprache" (197-8). One of the reasons for the superlative quality of the German language for this (and other) genres lay in its capacity to absorb influences from other languages without losing its own integrity. The attitude shifted, in other words, from a fear of adulteration by other languages to the idea that, as an "Ursprache," German was capable of absorbing and making its own what was good in other languages. German was after all: "wortreicher als die Ebreische/ in der Verdopplung fugsamer als die Griechische/ in den Sinndeutungen machtiger als die Lateinische/ in der Ausrede prachtiger als die Spanische/ in der Verfassung richtiger als die Welsche" (Harsdorffer, Gesprdchspiele, 1,15). One particular and important aspect of this concept is already found in Jerusalem's comment to the effect that: "Unsre besten Schriften verlieren zu sehr in den Ubersetzungen; und unsre Sprache bleibt als Originalsprache immer zu schwer, in ihrer Vollkommenheit erlernt zu werden" (28). This general idea is later developed to the point where it is argued

198 Histories of German Literature that any foreign work can be completely and adequately translated into German, but no German work can be properly rendered into another language. This is what Horn calls the "Genialitat" of the German language, its ability, "den Genius jeder andern cultivierten Sprache in sich aufzunehmen" (G.u.K,, 17), and it was an idea that was fully exploited by the Romantics, who among other things, made a great deal of the facility of German for translating foreign works. Despite scientific (and literary!) evidence to the contrary, this idea was reinforced by ardent patriotism during the Wars of Liberation and verified by the unique phenomenon of a second flowering of German literature, something that no other nation had experienced. From that time on the belief appears in one form or another in many literary histories; it recurs persistently in fact for the next hundred years. Politz may serve as an example for the early nineteenth century (1825): Die teutsche Sprache ist kein Mischling aus anderen Sprachen; sie ist eben so urspriinglich und selbstandig wie das teutsche Volk ... eine der ausgebildetsten und vollendetsten Sprachen des Erdbodens und ubertrifft in vielfachen Beziehungen alle u'brige, sowohl untergangene als noch bestehende Sprachen. (1-2) Als Ursprache steht daher die teutsche Sprache ... hoher, als die abgeleiteten und die Mischlingssprachen ... auf gleicher Stufe mit der griechischen und romischen. (7-8) Es ist ein hoher Vorzug der teutschen Sprache vor vielen andern gebildeten Sprachen, daft sie dieselben an innerer Reinheit und sittlicher Wiirde ubertrifft... dieser sittliche Charakter liegt urspriinglich im teutschen Nationalcharakter. (21-22) That the Germans as a race are unmixed and their language unadulterated; that both the German character and the German language are capable of absorbing all that is of lasting value from others without losing anything of their own identity; that, having absorbed the true spirit of Christianity and of classical antiquity as well as influences from other nations, the Germans are preordained to play the dominant role in European culture - these are ideas that permeate literary histories throughout the nineteenth century. Ultimately they derive from the idea of the Ursprachey and they are fostered by the need to respond to foreign (in particular French) denigration of the German language and the German spirit, and by the need to create some concept that would draw the various German regions together. Like many other ideas that are inspired less by an academic search for truth than by patriotism, they acquire axiomatic status through constant repetition. From Adam Miiller ("Alles, was die andern haben, ist nur etwas und bleibend das ihre, in so fern es

199 An Overview

sich vereinigt rait dem, was Deutschland war, 1st und seyn wird"), through Eichendorff ("Wir sind die geistigen Erben aller gebildeten Nationen") or Giinther ("Diesem Volk der Germanen ... war in Gottes Rath die Weltherrschaft bestimmt"), to the end of the century there are many and varied examples. Thus Engel, in the early twentieth century (1906) can begin his work with the bald statement: "Die deutsche Literatur ist die erste unter den Literaturen der Volker" (1) and then repeat the various axioms discussed above, for example: Kein Volk auf Erden hat sich die gro/Jten Meisterwerke aller Zeiten und Lander durch wertvolle Kunstschopfungen so angeeignet wie das deutsche. Nicht die Englander noch gar die Franzosen besitzen irgendeine Ubersetzung von so klassischer Form wie Vossens Odysee. (7) Unter den neueren Sprachen ist die deutsche die bilderreichste ... wahrend das Franzosische und Englische, ebenso das Italienische und Spanische langst in ihren Form en erstarrt sind ... ist das Deutsche in immerwahrendem Flu/?. (19)

That a history of German literature written for Germans should laud the qualities of that literature or even decry that of neighbouring countries, especially those with whom hostilities had been exchanged, is hardly surprising, although the extent (and sometimes crass expression) of this cultural chauvinism may be unusual. What is remarkable in the German situation - though understandable in the historical context - is the persistence of a concept of divinely ordained cultural leadership that is derived from the perceived qualities of the race and its culture. Nationals of other countries, however, have been and are interested in the literature of Germany and themselves produce histories of German literature. The extent and general nature of these works have been considered above (translations in chapter five and original foreign works in chapters six to eight) and at this point it is necessary to consider to what degree foreign works are independent. It is inconceivable that non-German authors would accept the chauvinistic attitude described so far in this chapter, so the question to be asked is: do they replace it with something else? To what extent do foreign historians develop an approach to German literature that is not only different but definable as characteristic of a particular nation? Unfortunately, the number of works available from most countries is too small to permit valid generalizations, and, although some reference will be made to the various countries discussed above, detailed comment will of necessity be restricted to France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. In considering the general approach of foreign historians of German literature and the extent to which such an approach differs from that deduced from German works, it is possible to distinguish three levels of

200

Histories of German Literature

what might be termed immediacy. First of all there is the basic question of source materials. To what extent are foreign works indebted to German works or to predecessors in their own country? Secondly, there is the question of method. A German historian writing for a German audience has certain expectations, can rely on a certain body of knowledge or on specific responses. How do foreign works differ in this regard? And finally there is the historians's own perspective. How does he or she interpret German literature and its background as a whole? Are there features common to foreign works or to works of a given nation? These questions (and others) are naturally interrelated, but an attempt will be made in the following to separate at least the "practical" matters, such as method, from more philosophical and subjective ideas. No literary historian that I can recall has had the temerity to claim that the historical record as presented is based upon personal examination of every single writer and work mentioned. This is as true for German historians as it is for the foreign ones. While some stress that their evaluations and judgments are based on their own reading, it is evident that all, to a greater or lesser degree, take over facts and figures, names, titles, dates, plot summaries, biographical information, and critical opinions from their predecessors (not necessarily, of course, from literary historians). The first question that arises therefore concerns the sources of foreign histories. The earlier historians naturally had fewer sources from which to choose, but the use of sources during the first half of the nineteenth century can nevertheless only be described as haphazard, if not injudicious. Loeve-Veimars, for example, in 1826, quotes as predecessors Schilter, Goldast, Eckhard, Eschenbourg, Bodmer, Koch, Ersch, Schlegel, Bouterwek and Meissner. Of these, only Bouterwek can be considered as having produced a history of literature; Koch's work is bibliographical. By this time, however, several substantial works were available. Peschier, who follows a few years later (1836), cites as predecessors only a few French names: Benjamin Constant, Loeve-Veimars, Ampere, Saint-Marc Girardin, Chasles, Marmier, and Barante (these are mostly quite late). Much the same thing may be said of those writing in English at this period. Neither Will (1800-01) nor William Taylor (1828) in England, nor Everett (1839) in the USA cite relevant sources. Only in the 1840s is some attempt made to cite sources and at the same time to comment on them. Thimm, for example, in 1844, lists numerous German works right up to 1843 and notes that of these, only Menzel's work has been translated. This he rejects as biased, while the others, according to him, are not worth translating for an English audience. His list omits Meister, Schmid, Manso, and Nasser. Gostick (1849), for his part, claims to be independent in his judgments and treats literary historians as a

201 An Overview

sub-category of historians at the end of his work. The passage on literary history and criticism (276ff.) includes Herder, Goethe, Schiller, Horn, Solger and his school of aesthetics, the Grimms and their school, Uhland, Gorres, Menzel, and others, such as Hagen, Lachmann, Graff, Graesse "peculiarly national in their interest, and too numerous to be specified" (282). Graffs dictionary is cited as an example of the philological school, and Gervinus and Vilmar are discussed and quoted. In the chapter on "scientific" literature in the second edition (by Gostwick & Harrison), Gervinus and Vilmar are commented on, but the following are listed without comment: Wachler, Koberstein, Wackernagel, Goedeke, Kurz, Hillebrand, Hettner, Gottschall, Prutz, Jul. Schmidt. Passing reference is made in both editions to some English commentators. The earliest Italian work is that by Ridolfi (1818), and he mentions only Bielfeld, Bertola, and de Stae'l in the preface, along with the French work by Huber, which is presumably the translation of Gessner that contained an essay on literary history. To judge from the notes, Ridolfi is heavily dependent on Sulzer, Eschenburg, and Flogel. A few years later Loeve-Veimars was translated into Italian, but, although the translator provides a lengthy introduction, there is no effort to improve on the original author's meagre list of sources. The only "foreign" work in the German language at this time is Tobias Gottfrid Schroer's brief history (Pressburg 1830), calculated to satisfy "dem Bediirfnissen der deutschen Jugend in Ungern" [sic!] ("Vorrede"). This work, whatever the shortcomings of the text, does at least have lists of text collections, histories of language and of literature, biographies, and bibliographies. The "Systematische Werke" cited under "Quellen" range from the Briefe die deutsche Sprache betreffend (1771-75) to Heinsius. The literary histories, apart from Heinsius, are those by Meister, Manso, Koch, A.H. Miiller, Horn, Eichhorn, Brun, Vetterlein a reasonable selection from an historical point of view, but one that lacks several more recent works. By the 1860s, there is more interest in listing sources and in commenting on them, although little is said about the extent to which the sources have been used. Selss (1865) refers simply to "German sources" and "the principal English authorities," particularly Carlyle on Schiller, Lewes on Goethe, Max Miiller's German Classics, and Metcalfe's version of Vilmar. In the USA, Evans (1869) cites no English works but numerous German ones, and these are briefly reviewed: Koch, Bouterwek, Gervinus (to be supplemented by Cholevius), Vilmar, Koberstein, Goedeke (Grundrip), Wackernagel, Ettmiiller, Schaefer (Tabellen), Rosenkranz, Horn (Poesie und Beredsamkeit); for the eighteenth century he cites the literary comments by the historian Schlosser and by Hettner; for the nineteenth century Jul. Schmidt and Gottschall; Kurz's

202 Histories of German Literature three-volume work is cited in a footnote as an excellent reference work. This fairly full list is in sharp contrast to the haphazard listing by Soiling in England, who supposedly bases himself on Vilmar in 1859 (Review), and in his later Diutiska (1863) lists only Vilmar, Jul. Schmidt, Menzel, Gervinus, Koberstein, Findel, Bernays, Max Miiller, Kurz, and Politz. Kurz seems to have found considerable favour with literary historians, for he is cited more than most - for example, by Heinrich (1888) and Cart (1898) in France, both of whom list some French works and numerous German ones. In the USA, Wilkinson (1887) cites only Hedge, Hosmer, and the English version of Scherer, while Bernhardt (1892) also cites Scherer along with Bayard Taylor, Gostwick & Harrison, and Hedge. Wells cites only Gervinus, Scherer, and Jul. Schmidt. Coar, who deals exclusively with the nineteenth century, mentions Francke in addition to works on the later period. Calvin Thomas provides a fairly detailed list of authorities, including some quite old ones. Osterloff (1905) bases himself on the "exemplary" works of Kriiger and Kluge, and cites in addition Konig, Pfalz, Wychgram, Gottschall, Hahn, and [Walter] Thomas. Missona (1907) cites some Polish works along with Vogt & Koch, Khull, Wychgram, Biese, Kummer & Stejskal, and Bartels. The number and type of sources cited must clearly depend to some extent on the audience for which the literary history is intended and that other sources may have been used but not cited. Hallberg, for example, writes that he has used various sources but will not cite them unless he is quoting verbatim. But it is also clear that, with the exception of a few standard works like those by Vilmar and Scherer, or Hettner on the eighteenth and Jul. Schmidt on the nineteenth century, the collection of "authorities" cited can certainly not be described as either detailed or systematic; many are cited by only one of the foreign works. A typical example might be the list provided by M.E. Phillips, which consists only of Metcalfe's translation of Vilmar, Lublin's version of Kluge and the following literary histories: Baechthold (Swiss literature), Ettmuller, Goedeke, Gotzinger (Deutsche Dichter, 1875). Only one particular tendency is observable, and that is the tendency of American historians to cite more domestic and fewer German sources than their counterparts in Britain and France. None of the works cites a literary history in a "third" language. The format of foreign histories of German literature differs very little from that of German works, even though they are on average considerably shorter. There are the same or similar period divisions, the same or similar (perhaps scantier) historical background information, the same or similar capsule comments on authors and works, the familiar deterioration of the narrative in the most recent period into uncritical lists of writers and titles. One aspect which is presumably related to the audi-

203 An Overview

ence for which foreign works are written, is the inclusion of philosophers and historians in the literary historical record, something which is considerably reduced in German literary histories after the middle of the nineteenth century. Where differences do emerge, these are primarily in the style of presentation - the directness of commentary and the penchant for polemical or personal divagation; above all in the method of evaluation. But these are matters that are related closely to the nationality of the historian and must therefore be treated in that context. Given the limited number of histories of German literature published in the countries bordering on Germany in the east - or the limited number uncovered in preparing this study - there is no possibility of distilling from the works that have been discussed in chapter 8 anything that could be considered a general trend, one that is characteristic of - or at least specific to - any one of these countries. This is not because German literature was an esoteric subject; quite the reverse, for sufficient knowledge of German can be assumed in some areas to allow works in German to be used rather than works in other languages. On the other hand, there would also be populations where local feeling would militate against the study of German literature per se. Finally, it must be stressed that the populations involved (that is, the numbers of students and adults constituting the potential market) would be so small as to inhibit publishers from venturing into the field. This is certainly less true of countries to the west of Germany. The contiguity with France and the long-standing linguistic, cultural, economic, and political relationships with France and England, together with their larger populations, created a relatively high level of interest and larger markets. This interest carried over into the USA, since the vast majority of immigrants were from western Europe and included a very substantial number of German origin. An attempt can therefore be made to establish certain features common to the literary historians of each of these three countries, but distinguishable one from another. In the course of this attempt, the main emphasis will naturally be on those works written by "native" literary historians (whether in their own language or German); the interests of native-born Germans living abroad must be supposed to be related in part at least to their country of origin. The basis for any foreign literary history has been defined as the assumption that literature in the German language is foreign to the reader, who has, however, some knowledge of the language and literature of the country for which the work is being written. From this perspective it is not surprising to find on the one hand more outspoken criticism of German authors and on the other frequent references, by way of comparison, to native authors. There would after all be little purpose in

204

Histories of German Literature

comparing one previously unknown author with another; far better to compare the unknown with a known quantity. To take the former point first, however, the foreign historian has fewer inhibitions, fewer qualms about expressing negative opinions in regard to German authors, opinions that might well offend German readers if expressed by a German historian. Thus the American Bayard Taylor can refer to the "not even elegant mediocrity" of the later Minnesdnger (136), whose "vanity and arrogance increased in proportion as their performance became contemptible" (138 - quoted in extenso in chapter 7). In England, Gostick called Opitz sycophantic and cowardly and his poetry "inferior to the average quality of verses found in the provincial newspapers of the present day" (93). And Goethe's Wilhelm Meister is described by the American Wilkinson as: "a tissue of smoothly, suavely, harmoniously woven German prose, constituting a dull, slow, prolix, low, groveling, fleshly, ill-schemed, loose-jointed, invertebrate, dim, beclouded, enigmatical, self-complacently autobiographical novel" (196-7). These and similar crassly expressed judgments are not comparative, that is, not related in any way to foreign counterparts. But where German historians compared one German author with another - rarely with foreign authors - foreign historians use their own literary figures for comparison. Thus Peschier calls Herder "ce Fenelon de rAllemagne" (II, 134) and claims "Werther est de la meme famille que Rene, de Chateaubriand; qtiAdolphe, de B. Constant; que Childe Harold, de Byron. Ces ecrivains se rassemblent" (II, 151). Bougeault says of Lohenstein's plays that they "nous rapellent les efforts impuissants de Scudery" (122), and calls Heine "ce Voltaire allemand" (345). Sometimes the association is less a comparison than a simple point of reference. Wells, for example, says of Hans Sachs that in his best work "one finds something of the characteristic charm of the Canterbury Tales" or of Friedrich Gerstacker that he was "the first German to suggest the kind of story we associate with the name of Mayne Reid" (2/381); and he points out that Fontane "should be particularly interesting to us for his popularization of English ballad poetry" (2/387). A more specific kind of comparison is the following evaluation by Selss of Gellert: "His style as a fabulist resembles rather that of Gay than that of Lafontaine; it is clear and simple almost to excess. He has not the wit and drollery of the French poet" (80). Bayard Taylor compares Hans Sachs with Crabbe on account of his "careful, nice observation and sturdy good sense," but continues: "Crabbe was much his inferior in grace and variety of expression" (161). Of Fischart he writes: "The first thing which strikes us in Fischart is his style, which reminds us of Rabelais, and sometimes ofRichter"(171).

205 An Overview

Such comparisons may extend to a whole period, as when Taylor writes disparagingly of Birken, Gryphius, and Lohenstein (quoted in chapter 7), and argues that the only effect "was to create such a disgust with the system, that a reaction must inevitably follow. So, in England, the bombast and nonsense of the aristocratic writers, of exactly the same period, was followed by the revival of Queen Anne's time" (192). Here there is already an evaluative element in the comparison - the one was as bad as the other! - and it is clear that direct comparisons can be either favourable or not, depending on the known status of the native author with whom the German is compared. The American Everett firmly rejects, for example, comparisons between Schiller and Shakespeare: "He might be assimilated with much more justice to Milton ... In Schiller the philosophical element maintains its ascendancy over that of the imagination ... In this respect and indeed in all others he resembles Byron much more ... The tragedies of Byron give a better idea perhaps than any others in our language of the manner of Schiller" (27-28). In this case - quite apart from the wrong impression which the reader might gain of the nature of Schiller's work - the intent is clearly to downgrade Schiller, who is to be compared not with Shakespeare or with the somewhat lesser figure of Milton, but (only) with Byron. The essence of the contrastive method in foreign literary histories is explained by Gostick in the course of his description of the sixth period of German literature, when he argues: "the estimation of poetry depends so much upon national and individual tastes, that we can only explain our judgment of poetical works by reference to some well-known models. Thus if we regard as models of true poetry, according to the decision of English taste, such productions as Milton's 'Comus,' Goldsmith's 'Deserted Village,1 and Gray's 'Elegy,' we may fairly state that few specimens of German poetry can be classed with these and similar English poems" (113-14). Gostick's criteria are therefore not theoretical or abstract; instead he uses as benchmarks those works that have been accepted into the English literary canon, and presumably this approach is what he had in mind with "the general bias of a writer" (vi) on literary history. It is rare indeed that such a term as "bias" is used by a literary historian, but evidence of bias has been provided often enough. German literary historians display what might be termed personal bias in the adherence to certain aesthetic tenets or their preferential treatment of certain authors on the basis of their confession. Their national bias appears primarily in their estimation of the relative quality of German literature within the European and world contexts, and only occasionally in direct contrast with foreign literature. The national bias of foreign literary historians is naturally more directly contrastive, since they may assume a knowledge among their readers of the literary history of their

206 Histories of German Literature own country. The basis of this contrastive method lies in the acceptance of stereotypes, the belief that a nation, its people, language, and literature, can be simply circumscribed and reduced to a kind of formula. This approach is not necessarily prejudicial in itself, as it also presupposes a self-stereotype, but it is naturally unlikely that the self-image will be less than positive. We therefore find in these works comparisons of the German and English intellect, languages, writers, and so forth. Reference has already been made to Taylor's use of this approach in the quotations above and also to Hedge's prefatory comparison of the Germans and the English. The following quotations are equally characteristic and could be multiplied almost indefinitely: "the natural tendency of a German author is to express himself in accordance with an intellectual system ... while the English author, if he be honest, is more concerned for the thing he expresses, and its effect" (Taylor, 202). "The Germans think deeply, they think boldly, but they do not think clearly" (Wilkinson, 19). "He [Fischart] was the forerunner of a class of American poets who are now attempting to make everything in the world comical for us" (Taylor, 272). For the reader, however, there had to be a general framework within which to view German literature, for, as Selss put it, "without some such general observations, without a clue to the prevailing tendencies of German writers, it is greatly to be feared the student will not see his way through the mass of detail which must be gone through" (15). For this reason he analyses the character of both English and French writers and compares them with Germans, for "the characteristics of a literature can only in part be explained from political or social causes; the main cause must be sought in the bent of the popular mind" (20). In other words, the necessary framework for an understanding of German literature is a description of the German character - and this includes also the language that they speak. But this, too, can only be (and was regularly) done on a comparative or contrastive basis. Peschier begins his work by comparing at length the character of the Germans and the French. He concludes (among other things): "Les Francais ont peut-etre plus d'etendue et de souplesse dans 1'esprit, les Allemands plus de profondeur ... Les Allemands se distinguent entre tous les peuples par leur bonhomie, leur candeur et leur ingenuite; la morale est d'un grand poids a leurs yeux ... Si je voulais peindre d'un mot ce qui caracterise les Allemands, je dirais qu'ils ont de I'dme" (25-26). The earliest English critic, Thomas Carlyle, analysed the German character in detail. The Germans, he argued (again I quote from Shine), were of greater "antiquity and unmixed descent" (14) in comparison with other European races. "A national character ... cannot grow up except in Time; and the older it is, the more fixed it will be, and generally the

207 An Overview

better perfected, and in its kind the worthier" (15). The main characteristics of the Germanic race according to Carlyle are bravery, a deep meditative temper, hospitableness, noble devotion to women, etc (15-18). According to Selss the German character is "earnest, meditative, inclined to be stern; it is less desirous to please, and less fond of display than the French," and so forth (20), as a result of which German literature inclines to be abstract, theoretical, and lacking in style, "to which the natural tendency of the language contributes its share" (21). Gostwick & Harrison write: "Among the more ordinary traits of the Germans may be noticed circumspection, caution, perseverance, and patience" (6). Loise calls the Germans "instinctivement religieux" (340), and Lefevre-Deumier says of them: "Les Allemands produisent sans avoir 1'air d'arranger. Un des traits les plus marquants de la physionomie germanique, c'est la reverie ... qui amene la reflexion ... Cest 1'investigation aidee de rimagination" (iii); they are always attempting to plumb the depths, "de la cette teinte mystique" (v). Such distinctions are frequently made and are sometimes - not unexpectedly - made dependent on the climate. Peschier therefore compares the Nibelungenlied with the Illiad for reasons quite unlike those that underlie German comparisons. His conclusion is: "On peut encore retrouver la cause de ces differences caracteristiques entre les epopees des deux nations, dans cet amour du sol natal qui distinguait les Grecs, et dans 1'absence de ce meme sentiment chez les peuplades d'origine germanique ... dans 1'aspect sombre et lugubre des contrees septentrionales, et dans 1'eclat et la fecondite du sol sous le ciel serein et brillant de la Grece" (I. 280). Loise carries this distinction further and differentiates between the German of the north: "il se retire en lui-meme, et prend des habitudes d'energie dans une lutte perpetuelle contre la nature," and the German of the south: "sans cesser d'etre un homme du Nord, serieux et reflechi, [il] a des elans passionnes et se ressent du voisinage d'un ciel plus chaud" (2). More important in this context, though, is the reference to the character of the language, something about which British historians in particular have much to say. Carlyle is one of the more appreciative, for he writes first of its age: "an antiquity far higher than that of any living dialect ... the German language, like the German People, is of an antiquity we have no measure for" (23-24); and then of its quality. It has "unbounded power of composition; hardly rivalled even by English in its best days, far surpassing the English we now write; scarcely surpassed by Greek itself ... as a medium of Court-conversation, German is inferior to French; in emphasis and brevity ... it is inferior to English ... It is an earnest language; founded on deep Seriousness ... a sincere language ... it seems the language of honest, deep-thinking, deep-loving men; we

208

Histories of German Literature

might say, a truly Christian language" (32-33). Chasles also compares English and German (as well, of course, as French and German) in his essay, "Du genie de la langue allemande," which introduces his Etudes sur I'Allemagne (3-33); and he provides not merely numerous examples, but risks a look into the future of the language, a language whose vital principle he describes as: "la synthese, 1'analogie, la composition, la fecondite incommensurable et harmonique" (25). Others are less complimentary. Hedge, for example, claims on the one hand: "For many purposes it is the best of modern dialects. Copious and flexible beyond any of the Latin family; indefinitely capable of compounds by simple agglutination; expressive of nice shades of meaning and philosophical distinctions which have no exponent in English" (7); but he argues on the other hand that the language lacks rhetorical force. It is "an apt instrument of transcendental speculation" (7), but in oratory it "fails by reason of its polysyllabic character, its involved periods, its clumsy syntax" (7). Also "unquestionably the German is inferior to the English, as the English is to the Italian, in sonorousness" (9). Hosmer, too, complains of the obscurity of the German style, which is "less effective than the French" (573). He analyses some characteristic examples and concludes: "The kind of obscurity which has just been considered lies in the genius of the language" (578). Such obscurity of language (he allows some writers are less obscure than others) is not caused by external factors such as the "want of the pressure of a great national life" (as argued by M. Arnold), for this too is an effect, not a cause; the cause "lies in the vary nature of the German himself" (587). And Hosmer goes on to quote Freiligrath "Deutschland ist Hamlet." The main point, however, is the degree to which German literature is determined by the German character and the nature of their language. Hosmer's argument that German is suited to philosophical speculation has just been quoted. Others have been quoted who argue for the Germans' natural inclination towards introspection, religiosity, etc. Selss claims that the Germans are predestined to write lyric poetry: "the lyrical element is the largest in the poetry of Germany, just as the comic vein distinguishes that of France, and as the didactic predominates in that of England" (21). It is in other words a relatively simple matter to deduce from the German character and the nature of their language not simply the style, but the content and even the "natural" development of the literature. In this connection it is not important to consider whether the German character really may be so described, or, if it may, whether the description is accurate. Significant is only the use made of this character analysis in literary history, for it is evident that foreign historians judge German literature on this basis, just as German historians had used their analysis of the German character to justify both their definition of truly

209 An Overview

German literature and the pre-eminent position that it should hold. The position of French historians is coloured by the long-standing feud over the relative qualities of the French and German languages, the chronological priority and the interdependence of their literatures, etc. German historians had argued that French literature was at best frivolous and superficial, at worst obscene and morally corruptive. French historians are consequently at pains not only to use the contrastive method to enhance the image of their own literature, but also to stress the positive influence that French literature and culture had had on the German. This varies from the dependence of Middle High German literature on French models to the cultural revival in eighteenth-century Germany on the basis of French cultural influences. Henry & Apffel have been quoted above; herewith a comment by Bossert on medieval authors: L'originalite de ces ecrivains, lorsqu'ils en ont une, est toute dans le style. Pour le fond des sujets, ils emploient un proces uniforme: ils font choix d'un auteur frangais, qu'ils suivent pas a pas ... Ils se permettent rarement d'ajouter ou de retrancher; c'est a peine s'ils osent intervenir 1'ordre des episodes. La popularite des aventures chevaleresques, 1'interet presque historique qui s'y attachait, leur faisaient un devoir d'etre avant tout exacts et complets; il faut ajouter qu'ils acceptent ce devoir avec une resignation qui fait trop souvent douter de leur genie.... Leur faculte d'invention s'exerce uniquement sur le detail. (42-43)

A similar attitude is evinced by Chuquet, who writes of Gottfried von Strasburg: "S'il y a dans 1'oeuvre allemande une fine psychologic, le merite en revient d'abord a Thomas" (35). The negative comments by French historians about Germany and its literature are primarily the result of religious differences. German historians, almost exclusively Protestants, stressed the cultural as well as religious significance of the Reformation and often criticized the Catholic church and Catholic writers from a sectarian point of view. The response of French historians is to defend the Catholic faith and to denigrate German Protestant writers, or even to attack Germany as a Protestant state. Bougeault, for example, writes: Le protestantisme d6rive done evidemment d'un instinct germanique ... et au moment ou nous ecrivons en presence de I'hegemonie prussienne qui vient de s'etendre en Allemagne, aux depens de 1'Autriche et de la France, tous les efforts du nouvel empire sont tournes centre 1'Eglise catholique, pour faire du protestantisme un instrument de domination. (101; see also the quotation in chapter 6)

Things are much easier for British historians, for the United Kingdom had no common border with Germany, had been allied with German states, and was sympathetic towards the Protestant cause. Perhaps more

210 Histories of German Literature important, though, was the largely positive attitude among German literary historians towards the influence of English literature on German literature. The main concern of British historians was therefore the relative status of the two literatures, and in particular what seemed to some of them to be the inappropriately high esteem in which German literature was held. Gostick is the most obvious example of this attitude. He concludes on the basis of his comparative evaluation that German literature lacks the quality of the English, for the great literature of Germany that finally emerged was great only in comparison with the very inferior literature that preceded it. At the beginning of the chapter on the period 1770-1848, Gostick describes the relative situations of English and German literature through the ages in order to explain why later writers were overrated: "Kant was therefore esteemed as 'a modern Aristotle,' Jacobi was styled 'the German Plato,' and not only Goethe, but even Jean Paul Richter also, was compared with Shakspeare! In this enthusiastic style of estimation there was gross exaggeration ... Goethe was great, not in comparison with Shakespeare, but only when compared with the poetical writers of Germany in the seventeenth century" (156). Gostick explains this phenomenon thus: "The exaggerated estimate which has thus been easily explained, was received by some English authors who had a partial acquaintance with German literature, and has been maintained by their influence to the present day. The charm of novelty, a natural tendency to put a high value on subjects to which we have devoted considerable study, and a disposition to admit, without due examination, the assertions of foreign critics, have probably been the cause of the too favourable estimate of modern German literature" (156-57). This attitude is implicit rather than explicit in other writers; for example, in Selss, who writes of Goethe that much of his fame was due to his charismatic personality: "At present, when the generation of those who knew him personally is dying out, Goethe's fame must rest exclusively on his merits as a writer. These merits are high enough to secure him a lasting place in the memory of future ages." Later, after critical comments on Goethe's plays and novels, Selss writes: "Still they offer a sufficient harvest of beauty and originality to place his name in the front rank of the master minds of all nations and ages." The situation for American historians is naturally somewhat different. By separating from the British crown, the colonies separated in a sense from English literature, though not from the English language, and also from Germany as represented by the British royal family. A contrastive method is therefore difficult in literary history, because American historians would prefer not to use English literature as a point of reference and because little American literature was available. The quality of German literature is assessed instead very much in terms of political and social

211 An Overview

forces. This is to be found as early as Everett, who rejoices that he lives in a country "where the liberty of the people is not dependent on the faith of princes" (52) and who calls the literature of Europe "the reflection of a society in many respects corrupted and degraded, bowed down by oppression; animated by a spirit unfriendly to liberty and equal rights" (54-55). By contrast, the social order in the USA is "an embodiment of the principles of equal rights and democratic liberty" (56). Much later in the century Hosmer writes of Germany that there are now "some opportunities for the citizen, though, as yet, not such opportunities as lie open to the freeborn Englishman and American" (534). He admits that things have improved greatly, that the older despotic rulers have disappeared, to be replaced by a ruler admired by the people (!), but "the nation is not, indeed, free in the American sense" (576). With this phrase "not free in the American sense," Hosmer contrasts the lack of democracy in Germany with the freedom of a democratic republic in the USA. The republican ideal plays a considerable role in the American depiction of German literature, Klopstock being praised, for example, for his support of the American revolution, while regret is expressed at Goethe's lack of response to both the French and the American revolutions. But the word that crops up most frequently in connection with writers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries is the word democratic. As the quality of German literature is affected in general by the absence of democratic institutions, so the assessment of individual writers is linked to their political and social situation. Wells refers to "the connection between political and literary life, which is noticeable throughout the whole course of German literature" (392) and writes of Freytag, for example: "of all the novelists who dealt with social problems during this period none saw more deeply or wrote more justly of the democratic deprivation of the German people" ([2nd ed.], 375). Coar writes openly in his introduction that he is attempting "to trace the elements of democratic thought in some characteristic forms of this [i.e., nineteenth-century] literature" and "to measure the development of the German nation by ideals of American democracy" (vii). In a section entitled "Three democratic phases of Poetic Realism" he writes: "The democracy of Ludwig was, however, not the democracy of Wagner; nor was the democracy of Wagner that of Hebbel" (227). A tendency exists, therefore, among American literary historians to contrast the American and German political systems rather than their respective literatures, and, while this tendency may owe something to the paucity of American works or authors as a basis for comparison, this is surely not the only or even the main reason. In this sense they are closer to their counterparts in Germany who used literary history as a vehicle for putting across a message that was patriotic and (therefore) political.

212

Histories of German Literature

The most blatant political message in the USA is that put across by Francke (see chapter 7), but he has not been discussed here, since he is too closely connected with Germany. British literary historians pay little attention to the political situation as a rule, and concentrate instead on qualitative comparisons that are intended to illuminate German literature, but at the same time to display it as in no way superior but rather inferior to the English. For French historians the situation is much more complicated, since political, religious, and cultural relationships and differences are involved. To a considerable extent theirs is an attitude that combines defence with counter-attack. French literature and Catholicism are defended and opposition offered to the German literary historians' claims for the superiority of their language and literature, the attempt to usurp the French cultural and social leadership that had been established in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. While I have no intention of claiming that all literary historians of a given country employ a common approach or necessarily evidence the same or a similar bias, there are sufficient indicators to justify the generalizations made above. What emerges in this analysis is not entirely unexpected, of course, as there is no reason to suppose that foreign literary historians are any less biased than their German counterparts. It is also not surprising that the attitude of foreign historians should be partly determined by their own cultural background. Perhaps the most significant feature of the inevitably contrastive approach is the degree to which the attitude of foreign historians is influenced in turn by German attitudes to their (the foreign) literature. In other words, the approach of the foreign literary historians can be considered in some degree as not merely subjective, but also reactive.

10 Conclusion

Prior to the outbreak of the First World War, several hundred histories of German literature had been published; if one included all the various school editions and foreign works, the figure would probably be close to one thousand. The preceding survey, while it was not selective in the sense of concentrating on the "better" or more successful works, could naturally only scratch the surface of what is a very large and relatively unexplored field. My purpose has been to describe rather than to explain, to record what types of works existed, for whom they were written, how the material was presented, and what types of bias (in the most general sense of the word) can be discerned. The why and wherefore of the general development of literary histories was beyond the scope of this work, as was also any investigation into the particular motives of individual historians. These topics need to be studied, along with such specific questions as, for example, the so-called literary canon, the treatment of contemporary writers, or the attitudes towards female writers (who are relatively well represented towards the end of the nineteenth century but then largely vanish from the scene). At this juncture I shall not comment on these and similar questions, or even attempt a summary of the preceding chapters. Instead, I shall risk a few personal observations about the nature of literary history. A great deal has been written about the meaning of history, but in general usage there are two basic meanings. As a discipline history means, as the Concise Oxford Dictionary puts it, "the study of past events, esp. human affairs." The publication of a book may be considered an event, but it differs from the normal event, which, while it may continue to influence the course of human affairs, ceases to be an event,

214

Histories of German Literature

once it has happened. The book continues to exist and retains its "eventfulness" for as long as there are readers who read it. Each book is therefore part of the history of literature, but has in addition - and this is the secondary meaning of the word - its own history, which is primarily the record of its reception by readers since the time of its publication. The main problem in the writing of history is notoriously the conflict between subjectivity and objectivity. The historian's view of the past, whether based on "complete" records or not, is inevitably coloured by the present, by his or her cultural perspective. In general, however, it is assumed that all factors are taken into consideration, that losses as well as gains, failures as well as successes, the poor as well as the rich and famous, all form part of the historical record. Since not everything can be included in the narrative record, a selection must be made on the basis of "relevance": what contributed more (or less) to the sequence of events, to the progress of human affairs. Some such relatively pragmatic attitude towards history underlay the tradition of historia litteraria which, in the field of polite literature (as opposed to the literature of other disciplines), was essentially the record of good and bad participants in the progress of accepted literary genres up to the time of writing. If the number of bad writers was small, this was the result, in part at least, of their simply having vanished from sight. Their works were no longer accessible. The earliest writers on literary history per se were of course concerned with quality; their judgments, which naturally could differ, were based on that elusive quality of taste ("Geschmack") which they all assumed they possessed. But, as more and more works were discovered from the past and the volume of contemporary writing increased, works came to be included or excluded primarily on the grounds of quality, as determined by aesthetic considerations in combination with religious, political, and other biases. Some attempt was made to account for the variations in quality over time, usually on the basis of the political and social background. In combination with the personal situation (biography) of the writer, literary works came to be seen primarily in terms of their supposed relationships with other literary works; "a" begat "b" and "b" begat "c," and so forth. Although some - but by no means all, probably not even the majority - of the literary histories in the nineteenth century provide an historical (background) introduction to the literature of each period, they are in essence a chronologically sequential series of evaluations of the "best" works that were produced at any given period. The primary justification for the creation of a given work is the literary tradition in which it is situated, and the lack of any absolute aesthetic criteria leads to simplification and stereotyping, as writers are compared one with another. They are compared and contrasted and thus evaluated rela-

215

Conclusion

live to one another, rather than in terms of their own situation. While this, the common type of work throughout the nineteenth century, may be a record of "best books," or even of changing literary values, it is clearly not history, since the basis is a perception of quality as determined by the historian rather than the contribution of literary works to "human affairs." Writers write to be read, and literature is therefore anything and everything that people read. Consequently, the history of literature ought to deal with those works that had the greatest impact on the greatest number of people. There is a problem with this definition, however, and it lies not so much in the determination of the relative impact or the relative status of the readers (e.g., whether they were members of an influential or "insignificant" class) as in the calculation of the numbers of people influenced at any given time. For, if literature is what people read, then the history of literature should logically consider works not merely at the time of their publication, but also throughout their entire life-span. It is one of the major weaknesses, in fact, of the traditional style of literary history that works are treated in chronological sequence of publication date, regardless of the fact that they may not have been "received" by the readership until a later date, if indeed at all. What I am suggesting is that the form of history of German literature as developed in the nineteenth century is a double distortion of history. On the one hand the selection of works on subjective grounds of "quality" conceals the fact that other, "inferior," works may at the time have had a far greater impact (the fact that a "great" work went unread in its day is of course normally noted). On the other hand nothing is said of those works from the past that are still being read in conjunction with the new works. Writers are presumably influenced not only by those who immediately preceded them, but also by earlier writers whose works are still available, and even by a knowledge of what is currently popular among the reading public. They respond, in other words, to the literary climate of the time (I am not denying that their response may be an attempt to "epater les bourgeois" rather than to conform), and that is the product of the activity of the "literary establishment" as a whole. Ideally, then, one would want to base literary history on the books in print at any given time, rather than solely on those works published at that time and adjudged best by historian-critics. In particular one would want to include not only (perhaps not even primarily) these best books, but rather those adjudged best by the reading public of the time, and that means not only "literature" in the traditional sense of the word, but also those literary works that are segregated from "literature proper" under categories such as "Gebrauchsliteratur" or "Trivialliteratur." Literary historians of the twentieth century, in particular since 1945, have moved to some extent in this direction, but the nineteenth-century ideals remain

216

Histories of German Literature

strongly influential. It seems essential, however, if literary histories are to retain (regain?) their credibility that their proponents reassert the distinction between history and criticism.

11 Bibliography

The following list comprises all works cited in this volume and those cited in the Prolegomena, together with a number of directly related primary sources (including a few which seemed relevant but could not be located). Names are cited as far as possible in the form established by the Library of Congress, and spellings may therefore vary slightly from those used in the text. German umlaut-letters are treated as ae, oe, and ue. The format is as follows: author (with dates, where these could easily be ascertained); title (as fully as possible from the first edition; only rarely are later changes in title mentioned in the notes); place of publication as it appears in the book; publisher (surname only except with very common names); date of publication (where the work appeared over a long period of time, the initial date is that of the completion of the first volume); language code of three letters; country code of two letters for histories of German literature only; notes. Articles are treated in the same way, except that place and publisher are replaced by journal title and volume plus pages. Translations are appended in brackets to the titles of works in languages other than English, French, and German. The notes consist of series titles, the number of later editions, cross references, and the like. The word "unidentified" means that the existence of a work could not be satisfactorily verified in standard reference works. "Unseen" means that the work could be verified, but that no copy has been examined.

218

Histories of German Literature

Abrahams, Nicolai Christian Levin (1798-?) Omrids of den tyske Literaturs Historic (Outline of German literary history) no place: Bing & S., 1852 DAN DE unseen Adelung, Johann Christoph (1732-1806) Alteste Geschichte der Deutschen, ihrer Sprache und Litteratur bis zur Volkerwanderung Leipzig: Goschen, 1806 GERRepr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1971 Adelung, Johann Christoph "Chronologisches Verzeichnis der Dichter und Gedichte aus dem Schwabischen Zeitpuncte" Magazinjur die deutsche Sprache, E: 3, 3-92 1784 GER Adelung, Johann Christoph Umstdndliches Lehrgebdude der deutschen Sprache ... (2 vols.) Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1782-3 GER Repr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1971 Albrecht, Janos A nemet irodalom rovid vdzlata. A legregibb idoktol ajelen korig (Outline of the history of German literature. From the oldest times to the present) Budapest: Stampfel, 1901 HUN HU Tudomanyos zsebkonyvtar, 83 Albrecht, Janos Nemet nyelvtan. Kozep-es polgdri iskoldk szdmdra (German grammar. For middle and high schools) Budapest: Stampfel, 1889 HUN Editions to 1924 (8) [Akademie, Bayerische, der Wissenschaften] Allgemeine deutsche Biographie Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1875-1912 GER

Almagia, Ortensia Disegno storico della letteratura tedesca (Outline history of German literature) Padova: Societa coop, tip., 1901 ITA IT unseen Andersen, Einer & Georg Christensen Den tyske Litteraturs Historic i tyske Laesestykker om typiske Vaerker og Forfattere (The history of German literature and German excerpts from typical works and authors) no place: Gjellerup, 1911 DAN DE unseen Andrae, Jakob Karl (7-1890) Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte fur hd'here Mddchenschulen und Lehrerinnen-Bildungsanstalten Kreuznach: Voigtlander, 1888 GER GE Teil E, Anhang 1: Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung - see Sevin - editions to 1901 (5) Anonymous Abrift der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur hohere Lehranstalten von einem Mitglied des Institutes B.M. V. als Handschrift Budapest: Institut der englischen Fraulein, 1909 GERHU Anonymous "Anekdoten zur Lebensgeschichte des beruhmten Historiographs Johann Georg von Eckhart" Historisch-diplomatisches Magazin, I, 130-681781 GER Anonymous Auszug der ungarischen Literaturgeschichte fur hohere Tochterschulen Temeszvar: Diozesan, 1874 GER HU 63-126: "Gedrangter Auszug der Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Poesie"

219

Bibliography

Anonymous Ausziige aus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Budapest: Stephaneum, 1901 GERHU Anonymous Briefs eines Engenders iiber den gegenwartigen Zustand der deutschen Literatur. Aus dent Englischen Halle: Michaelis & Bispink, 1792 GER Anonymous Briefe iiber den gegenwdrtigen Zustand der Litteratur und des Buchhandels in Osterreich Zurich: Orell, 1788 GER Anonymous "Die ci-devant Literaturbewegung diesseits der Elbe" Deutsches Literaturblatt 45-54 1840-42 GER Anonymous Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: Verlag Kunst und Wissenschaft, 1873-98 GER GE Miniatur-Bibliothek 5/8, 35/38 unseen Anonymous Deutsche Literaturgeschichte No place: no publ., 1900? GER HU unidentified - reported by Szasz (no. 807) Anonymous Deutschlands Schriftsteller, alphabetisch geordnet und aus ihren Schriften freymiithig beurtheilt Wien: Sammer, 1790 GER Anonymous Entwurf' literarisch-bibliographischer Vorlesungen. Filr das k.k. Militarkadetenhaus Wien: Heubner, 1776 GER

Anonymous Essai sur la Poesie Allemande Journal etranger, m, 95-148 1761, September FREFR Anonymous Gedanken iiber die Litteraturgeschichte iiberhaupt und die bequemste Einrichtung derselben fur Schulen Magazin fur Schulen und die Erziehung uberhaupt 1768-9 GER Anonymous Grundrifi der deutschen Literatur bis zur zweiten Blutezeit Krakau:Czas, 1904 GERPO Anonymous Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte als Leitfaden beim Vortrage aufGymnasien Oppeln: Weilshauser, 1827 GERGE Anonymous Handbuch der neuen deutschen LiteraturJurJunglinge (2 vols.) Schleswig: Christiani, 1803 GERGE Anonymous "Hauptperioden in der Geschichte der Dichtkunst" Gothaisches Magazin, I, 21 ff., 199ff. 1776 GER Anonymous Kortfattet omrids of den tyske litteraturs historic (A brief outline of the history of German literature) Bergen: Giertsen, 1873 NOR NO unseen Anonymous KurzerAbrifi der deutschen Literatur Leitomischl: Jos. Berger, 1866 GERCZ Anonymous

220

Histories of German Literature

Kurzer Abrifl der Rhetorik und deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Nach G. Brugier. Nebst kleinem Anhang von Gedichten Veszprem: Dioecesan, 1894 GER HU 13-56 "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur" Anonymous Kurzes Repetitorium der deutschen Literaturgeschichte nebst einigen Anmerkungen uberMetrik, Aufsatzlehre und Dichtungsarten Berlin: Albertus, 1917 GER GE Blum's [Maximilian] Repetitorien Nr. 1 Anonymous "Lettre ecrit de Paris sur la poesie allemande" Journal encyclopedique ou universel,7,2:3ll-25 1780 FREFR Anonymous Literarisch-philologische Vorlesungen zum Gebrauch des k.u.k. Cadettenkorps in WienerischNeustadt Wien: no publ., 1876 GER AU also Dresden: Walter, 1876 Anonymous Nemet olvasomdnyok. Az irok rovid eletrajzaival es a nemet irodalomtortenet vdzlatdval... (German reader. With brief biographies of the authors and an outline of German literary history) Pest: Heckenast, 1864 HUN HU 1-25: "Ubersicht der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur" Anonymous Des Schlesischen Helicons auserlesene Gedichte... nebst einer Vorrede von Vortrefligkeit der neueren Deutschen Poeten Breslau/Liegnitz: Rohrlach, 1699-1700 GER By J.W. von Hohberg?

Anonymous Der Teutschen Sprach EhrenKrantz neben einem Namenbuch Strasburg: Mttlben, 1644 GER Anonymous Uber Deutschlands Litteratur und Buchhandel, alien Gelehrten und Buchhdndlern ans Herz gelegt Dortmund: Mallinckrodt, 1800 GER Anonymous "Versuch einer Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst" Leipziger Musenalmanach aufs Jahr 1777, 1-521777 GERGE Apffel, ? See Henry, P. Armatus, Baptist Rettung der edlen Teutschen Hauptsprache wider alle deroselben muhtwilligen Verderber und alamodisirende Auffschneider Hamburg: Heinrich Werner, 1742 GER Arnd, Carl (1673-1721) Systema literarium idque historicopragmaticum, complectens praecipua scientiae literariae momenta ... Leipzig/Rostock: Garmann, 1714 LAT Arnold, August (1789-1860?) Grundrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Gymnasialprogramm, Konigsberg in der Neumark) Schwedt: Jansen, 1831 GERGE Arnold, £. Illustrierte deutsche Literaturgeschichte Berlin: Ullstein, 1908 GER GE also Berlin: Imprimatur, 1906 erw. 1910, later ed. 1912 Aventinus, i.e. Johannes Turmair (1477-1534)

221 Bibliography Bayerische Chronik, ed. Matthias Lexer (Samtliche Werke, 4-5) Munchen: C. Kaiser, 1882-86 GER Aventinus Johannes Aventini... chronica Frankfurt: "Raben et al.", 1566 LAT Bach, Nicol Deutsches LesebuchfUr Gymnasien [u. Realschulen] Leipzig: Einhorn, 1841-43 GER GE editions to 1863 (6) ed. Koberstein Bachmann, Julius Literaturkunde. Eine Vorstufe zu Dr. K. Heilmanns Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Fur den Gebrauch in Praparandenanstalten Breslau: Hirt, 1904 GER GE editions to 1921 (11) Bacon, Francis, Viscount St. Albans (1651-1626) De dignitate et augmentis scientiarum (Opera, I) London: Griffin, 1638 LAT Baechthold, Jakob (1848-97) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur in der Schweiz Frauenfeld: Huber, 1892 GERCHrepr. 1919 Baechthold, Jakob Vier kritische Gedichte (Bodmer and Mtiller) Heilbronn: Henninger, 1883 GERGE Bahder, Karl (1856-1932) Die deutsche Philologie im Grundrifl Paderbora: Schoningh, 1883 GER Baillet, Adrien (1649-1706) Jugemens des scavants sur les principaux ouvrages des auteurs Paris: C. Moette, 1685-86

FRE Banner, Joseph Georg Toscano del (1822-51) Die deutsche Nationalliteratur der gesammten Lander der... osterreichischen Monarchic, ... historisch-chronologisch dargestellt (vol. 1 only) Wien: Jaspel, Hugel & Manz, 1849 GER AU left and right title pages vary; only Das Mittelalter publ. Bartels, Adolf (1862-1945) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Leipzig Avenarius, 1900-01 GER GE editions to 1943 (19) Bartels, Adolf Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Leipzig: Avenarius, 1906 GERGE2ded. 1909 Bartels, Adolf Hauptwerke der deutschen Literaturgeschichte (vols. 1-3 = Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, grofie Ausgabe) Leipzig: Haessel, 1924-28 GER GE expansion of his Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Barthel, Johann Franz Ludwig Karl Die classische Periods der deutschen Nationalliteratur im 18. Jahrhundert... (also later under the title Geschichte der deutschen Literatur) Leipzig: Findel, 1857 GER GE = second edition ed. J.G. Findel Bartmann, Josef Kleins Anschauungsbehelfen in Erdkunde, Geschichte und Literatur Wien: Deuticke, 1911 GERAU Baudis, Hans Wenzel Abrifi der Literaturkunde fiir offentliche Handelsschulen

222

Histories of German Literature

Prag: Haase, no date GER 2nd ed. 1924,4th ed. 1929 Bauer, Friedrich Grundzuge der neuhochdeutschen Grammatik Nordlingen: Beck, 1850 GER 18th ed. by Konrad Duden 1881 - see Greiner, L.D. Bauer, Friedrich Hilfsbuch far den Unterricht in der Litteraturkunde far hohere Madchenschulen Tauberbischofsheim: Lang, 1882-4 GERGE Bauer, Friedrich & Franz Jelinek & Franz Streinz Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte far tisterreichische Mittelschulen Wien: Schulbiicherverlag, 1900 GER AU editions (in parts) to 1921 Bauer, Friedrich. See also Schiller, Karl Baumann, Ludwig Adolph (17347-1802) Kurzer Entwurf einer Historic der Gelehrsamkeit zum Gebrauch der Jugend auf Schulen Brandenburg: Halle, 1762 GER Becker, H[ermann] Literaturkundliches Handbuch (Teil I: Litteraturkunde) Frankfurt: Knauer, 1885 GERGE Becker, Hjermann] Litteraturkunde far Praparanden-, Mittel- und hohere Tochterschulen Frankfurt: Knauer, 1886 GERGE 2nd ed. 1896 Beer, Taco Hajo de Letterkundige geschiedenis von Duitschland (Literary history of Germany) Arnhem: Rinkes 1879 DUTNE Beilhack, Johann Georg (1802-64)

Kurze Ubersicht der sprachlichen und literarischen Denkmdler des deutschen Volkes nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklungsfolge ...Zunachstfardie oberen Classen der bayerischen Gymnasien Munchen: Lindauer, 1837 GERGE 2nd ed. 1843 Benecken, F.B. See Breitenbauch, Georg August Berger, J.G. De antiquis Germanorum carminibus (Diss. Wittenberg) 1735 LAT - unseen Berger, J.G. Priscus Germanus hand illiteratus (Diss. Wittenberg) 1722 LAT - unseen Berlepsch, Hermann Alexander (18147-83) Concordanz der poetischen National-Literatur der Deutschen Erfurt: Hennings & Hopf, 1847-50 GER GE Also Leipzig: Lehmann, 1859 Bernhard, Johann Adam (1688-1771) Kurtzgefaste Curieuse Historic derer Gelehrten ... Frankfurt: Johann Maximilian von Sand, 1718 GER Bernhardt, Wilhelm (1834-1909) Hauptfakta aus der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. A short history of the poetical literature of Germany from the oldest times to the present with notes indicating further lines of research. For school and home. New York: American Book Co., 1892 GER US editions to 1894 (4) Berthelt, August & J.C. Jaeckel & KG. Petermann [Grofles] Handbuch far Schiller zum Gebrauch bei dem Unterricht

223 Bibliography in Burgerschulen und hoheren Unterrichtsanstalten Leipzig: Klinkhardt, 1845 GER See Burkhardt, Johann Gottlob Ernst Bertola, Aurelio de' Giorgi (1753-98) Idea della bella letteratura alemanna (Outline of German polite literature - 2 vols.) Lucca: Francesco Bonsignori, 1784 ETA IT Bertola, Aurelio de' Giorgi Idea della bella poesia alemanna (Outline of the poetic literature of Germany) Napoli: Raimundi, 1779 ITAIT Bertolami, Mariano Sinossi di storia letteraria inglese, francese, e tedesca (Outline of the history of English, French, and German literature) Messina: d'Amico, 1909 HAH Bertram, Johann Friedrich (1699-1741) Anfangslehren der Historie der Gelahrtheit Braunschweig: no publ., 1730 GER Bertram, Johann Friedrich Einleitung in die so genante schone Wissenschaften oder litteras humaniores Braunschweig: Renger, 1726 GER Bertram, Philipp Ernst (1726-77) Entwurfeiner Geschichte der Gelahrheit... Halle: Gebauer, 1764 GER Beyer, Conrad or Konrad. See Beyer-Boppard, Konrad; see also Hinrichsen, Adolf Beyer-Boppard, Konrad (1834-71906)

Einfuhrung in die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur unter besonderer Berucksichtigung der neuesten Zeit Langensalza: H. Beyer, 1905 GERGE Bianchi, Luigi Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Roma: Palotta, 1879 GER IT unseen Bieber, Hugo Der Weg der deutschen Dichtung von den Anfangen bis zu Goethe Berlin: Wegweiser Verlag, 1925 GER Bielfeld, Jacob Friedrich von, Baron (1717-70) Progres des allemans dans les sciences, les belles-lettres et les arts Amsterdam: Changuion, 1752 FREFR Biese, (Karl Julius) Alfred (1856-1930) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte (3 vols.) Milnchen: Beck, 1907-11 GER GE editions to 1931 (25) Biese, Franz (1803-95) Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur fur Gymnasien und hohere Bildungsanstalten Berlin: Reimer, 1846-48 GERGE Birken, Sigmund von (1626-81) Teutsche Rede-Bind und Dicht-Kunst... Niirnberg: Riegel, 1679 GER Blankenburg, Christian Friedrich von (1744-96) Litterarische Zusatze zu Johann Georg Sulzers allgemeiner Theorie der schdnen Kunste und Wisssenschaften (3 vols) Leipzig: Weidmann, 1786-87 GER

224

Histories of German Literature

Blankenburg, Christian Friedrich von "Uber deutsche Sprache und Litteratur" Magazin for die deutsche Sprache, 2:2, 3-50 1784 GER Blankenburg, Christian Friedrich von Versuch Uber den Roman Leipzig/Liegnitz: Siegert, 1774 GER Blankenburg, Christian Friedrich von. See also Sulzer, Johann Georg Blaze de Bury, Ange Henri de. See Bury, Ange Henri Blaze de Block, F.A. (1821-?) Einfohrung in die Literatur. 12 Vortrage zur ersten Orientierung in unserer poetischen NationalLiteratur bis aufLessing Dresden: Ehlermann, 1878 GER GE unseen - reviewed Archiv 62 (1879): 112-13 Blum, [Maximilian?] See Anonymous, Kurzes Repetitorium Blumauer, Johann Alois (1755-98) Beobachtungen iiber Osterreichs Aufkldrung und Litteratur Wien: Kurzbeck, 1782 GER - Repr. Wien: Geyer, 1970 Boas, Eduard (1815-53) Literaturgeschichte im Salon Leipzig: Tauchnitz, 1846 GER GE = Schriften 3 Bodmer, Johann Jakob (1698-1783) Charakter der Deutschen Gedichte Zurich: Orell, 1734 GER CH also in Vier kritische Gedichte, ed. J. Baechthold (Heilbronn: Henninger, 1883) Bodmer, Johann Jakob "Die Hauptepochen der deutschen Sprache seit Karl dem GroBen"

Schweitzerisches Museum: II: 118-33,274-80, 356-63,433-41 1784 GER Bodmer, Johann Jakob Gedichte in gereimten Versen, 2nd ed. Zurich: Orell, 1754 GER CH Charakter ... p. 17-60 Bodmer, Johann Jakob "Die sechs Zeitpunkte der Geschichte deutscher Poesie" Schweitzerisches Museum, IH: 233-43 1786 GERCH Boebel, L. Tabellarische Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte... als Leitfaden beim Unterrichte (Programm Gleiwitz) Gleiwitz: Neumann, 1829-45 GERGE Bodiker, Johann (1641-95) (Neu-vermehrte) Grundsdtze der teutschen Sprache Berlin: Meyer & Zimmermann, 1701 GER also Berlin: Nicolai, 1723-29 Botticher, Gotthold (1850-1919) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Hamburg: SchloeBmann, 1906 GER GE SchloeBmanns Bucherei fur das christliche Haus, 7/8 Botticher, Gotthold & Karl Kinzel Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur mit einem Abrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Sprache undMetrik Halle: Waisenhaus, 1894 GER GE editions to 1921 (30) Bohm, H. Fragen aus dem Gebiete der vaterlandischen Literatur mit angedeuteten Antworten zur Orientierung iiber das Nothwendigste Berlin: Oehmigke, 1880

225

Bibliography

GER GE editions to 1904 (5) ed. Otto Stiller Bohtz, August Wilhelm (1799-1880) Geschichte der neuern deutschen Poesie. Vorlesungen Gottingen: Kubler, 1832 GERGE Borbein, Otto Literaturgeschichtliches Hand- und Lesebuch zum Lesewerk von Porger-Lemp. Fur die Oberstufe des Lyzeums und der hoheren Mddchenschule Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1914 GER GE editions to 1929 (6) Borinski, Carl (1861-1922) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur: Seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters Stuttgart: Union, 1892-93 GER GE DNL vol. 163, 2 - first part by Wolfgang Golther (163,1) Bossert, Adolphe (1832-1922) Des caracteres generaux de la litterature allemande Paris: Franck, 1868 FRE Introduction to Cours de litterature Bossert, Adolphe Cours de litterature fait a la Sorbonne (3 vols.) Paris: Hachette, 1870-73 FRE FRI La litterature allemande au moyen age (1870, 3rd ed. 1893), n Goethe, ses precurseurs et ses contemporains (1872, 3rd ed. 1891), m Goethe et Schiller (1873, 4th ed. 1895) Bossert, Adolphe Histoire abregee de la litterature allemande depuis les origines jusqu'en 1870. Avec un choix de morceaux traduits, des notices et des analyses Paris: Hachette, 1881 FRE FR also 1891

Bossert, Adolphe Histoire de la litterature allemande Paris: Hachette, 1901 FRE FR editions to 1921(5) Bougeault, Alfred (1817-?) Histoire des literatures etrangeres (3 vols.) Paris: Plon, 1876 FREFR Bougine, Karl Joseph (1735-97) Handbuch der allgemeinen Litteraturgeschichte nach Neumanns Grundrifi Zurich: Orell, Gessner, FuBli, 1789-92 GER Bouterwek, Friedrich (1766-1828) Geschichte der Poesie und Beredsamkeit seit dem Ende des dreizehnten Jahrhunderts (3 vols.) Gottingen; Rower, 1812-19 GER GE Geschichte der Kunste und Wissenschaften (12 vols. 1801-19), 9-11 Bratranek, Franz Thomas (1815-84) Handbuch der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Brunn: Buschak & Irrgang, 1850 GERCZ Brederlow, Christian Georg Friedrich Vorlesungen iiber die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ein Lesebuch fur die erwachsene Jugend(2 vols.) Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1844 GERGE Bredow, Gabriel Gottfried (1773-1814) FiinfTabellen zurLitterdrgeschichte Altona: Hammerich, 1801 GER GE 3rd ed. 1810 Bredow, Gabriel Gottfried Literargeschichte in drei Tabellen Altona: Hammerich, 1801

226

Histories of German Literature

GER GE 3rd ed. 1810 - also Drei Tabellen ... - extract from his Weltgeschichte... Bredow, Gabriel Gottfried Weltgeschichte in Tabellen nebst einer tabellarischen Ubersicht der Litteraturgeschichte Altona: Hammerich, 1801 GER GE editions to 1821 (5) Breitenbauch, Georg August (1731-1817) "Geschichte der deutschen Poesie" Voriibungen zur Akademie fur Jiinglinge (G.F. Palm & F.B. Benecken) ffl, 340-49 Leipzig: Weidmann, 1793 GERGE Breitinger, Johann Jakob (1701-76) Critische Dichtkunst Zurich: Orell, 1740 GER Repr. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1966 (ed. Wolfgang Bender) Brenning, Emil (1837-1915) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Lahr: Schauenburg, 1883 GERGE 2nd ed. 1903 Brodbeck, Adolf (1853-?) Knospen undBluthen Ttlbingen: Fues, 1877 GER unseen Brodbeck, Adolf Die Poesie aller Volker in Form ganz kurzer Ubersichten Efilingen: Lung, 1890 GER Brogsitter, Anakletus Grundrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur die Oberklassen hoherer Lehranstalten Munster: Aschendorff, 1902 GERGE Bruck, M.R. Chronologische Tabelle der deutschen Literatur Leipzig: Weigel, 1855

GER GE also published in Amsterdam Brucker, Johann Jakob (1696-1770) Bildersaal heutiges Tages lebender und durch Geldhrtheit beruhmter Schriftsteller... Augsburg: Haid, 1741-55 GER Brucker, Johann Jakob Ehrentempel der teutschen Gelehrsamkeit... aus dem 15. bis 17. Jahrhundert Augsburg: Haid, 1747 GER Bruhl, Johann August Moriz (1819/20-77) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Mainz: Wirth, 1851 GERGE 2nd ed. 1853 Bruhl, Johann August Moriz Geschichte der katholischen Literatur Deutschlands vom 17. Jahrhundert bis zur Gegenwart in kritisch-bibliographischen Umrissen. Ein vervollstdndigender Beitrag zur National-Litteraturgeschichte Leipzig: Httbner, 1854 GERGE 2nd ed. 1861 Brummer, Franz (1836-1923) Deutsches Dichter-Lexikon. Biographische und bibliographische Mitteilungen fiber deutsche Dichter aller Zeiten. ... Eichstatt: Kriill, 1875-77 GER Brummer, Franz Lexikon der deutschen Dichter und Prosaisten von den dltesten Zeiten bis zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts (2 vols.) Leipzig: Reclam, 1884 GER a volume also on the 19th century Brugier, Gustav (1829-?) Abrifl der Geschichte der deutschen

227 Bibliography National-Literatur Freiburg: Herder, 1895 GER GE editions to 1900 (3) - see also Hamann, E.M. Brugier, Gustav Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Fur Schule und Selbstbelehrung Freiburg: Herder, 1865 GER GE editions to 1911 (12) title varies Brugier, Gustav. See also Anonymous, KurzerAbrifi; Haman, Elisabeth Margarethe; Kramer, Fr. Brun, Gottfried Handbuch der deutschen Literatur Wien: Stahel, 1788 GERAU Brun, Gottfried Versuch einer Geschichte der Deutschen Dichtkunst, Dichter und Dichterwerke Danzig: J.E.F. Miiller, 1782 GERGE Bruni, Leonardo (Aretino) (1369-1444) Dialogus de tribus vatibus florentinis (1401 - ed. Karl Wotke) Prag: Tempsky, 1889 LAT Brunner, August & Hermann Stockel Deutsche Litteraturgeschichte fur hohere Lehranstalten Bamberg: Buchner, 1899 GER GE editions to 1910 (3) Bruns, Paul Jakob (1743-1814) Allgemeine Litterdrgeschichte zum Behuf akademischer Vorlesungen Helmstedt: Fleckeisen, 1804 GER Buchner, August (1591-1661) Anleitung zur deutschen Poeterey ... Wittenberg: Wenden, 1665 GER Buchner, August August Buchners Kurtzer

Weg-Weiser zur Deutschen Tichtkunst (ed. Georg Gozen) Jena: Sengenwalden, 1663 GER Buchner, Wilhelm Joseph (1827-1900) Lehrbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur, nebst einem Abrifi der deutschen Kunstgeschichte als Anhang. Fur hohere Lehranstalten und den Selbstunterricht Mainz: Euler, 1852 GER GE editions to 1871 (3) Burger, Gottfried August (1747-94) Uber Anweisung zur deutschen Sprache und Schreibart auf deutschen Universitdten Gottingen: Dieterich, 1787 GER Busching, Johann Gustav Gottlieb (1783-1829). See Hagen, Friedrich Heinrich von der Burkhardt, Johann Gottlob Ernst Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Leipzig: Klinkhardt, 1865 GER GE Kommentar zum ...Handbuch ... von August Berthelt (vol. 11-12)-3rd ed. 1876 Burkhardt, Johann Gottlob Ernst Leitfadenfur den Unterricht in der Literaturgeschichte fur Schulen Leipzig: Klinkhardt, 1874 GER GE summary to accompany his Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Burley, Walter (ca. 1275-1345) Das Buoch von dem Leben und Sitten der heydnischen Maister Augsburg: Anton Sorg, 1490 GER Burley, Walter De vita et moribus philosophorum (Koln: Zel, 1470, etc.) Niirnberg: Koberger, 1472 LAT

228

Histories of German Literature

Bury, Ange Henri Blaze de, Baron (1813-88) Ecrivains etpoetes de I'allemagne Paris: Levy, 1846-51 FREFR Busse, Carl (1872-1918) Geschichte der Weltliteratur (2 vols.) Bielefeld/Leipzig: Velhagen & Klasing, 1910-13 GERGE Buurmann, Ulrich Die Entwicklung der deutschen Literatur in ihren Hauptmomenten Leipzig: Renger, 1904 GER GE [Buurmanns kurze] Repetitorien filr das Einjahrig-Freiwilligen Examen... editions to 1929 (14) Canitz, Fried rich Ludwig Rudolph von (1654-99) Des Freyherrn von Canitz Gedichte ... nebst dessen Leben und einer Untersuchung von dem guten Geschmack (ed. Johann Ulrich K6nig) Leipzig/Berlin: Haude, 1727 GER Carlyle, Thomas (1795-1881) Carlyle's unfinished History of German Literature (ed. Hill Shine) Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky Press, 1951 ENGUK Carlyle, Thomas "Historic survey of German poetry" (review of William Taylor) Edinburgh Review or Critical Journal 105: 151-80 1831, March ENG Reprinted in Household edition, vol. 14: 307-43 Carlyle, Thomas Works (Household Edition) Boston: Estes & Lauriat, 1886 ENG Cart, L. William Precis d'histoire de la litterature

allemande, avec notes biographiques et tableaux synchroniques Paris: Klincksieck, 1898 FRE FR = Nouvelle collection a 1'usage des classes: seconde serie, iv Cerny, Johann (1877-?) Die deutsche Dichtung. Grundzilge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur hdhere Schulen Wien: Tempsky, 1914 GERAU Chasles, (Victor Euphemion) Philarete (1798-1873) Etudes sur I'Allemagne auXIXe siecle Paris: Amyot, 1856 FRE Chasles, (Victor Euphemion) Philarete Etudes sur I'Allemagne ancienne et moderne (2 vols.) Paris: Amyot, 1854-61 FRE Chmielowski, Piotr (1848-1904) & Edward Grabowski Obraz literatury powszechnej \v streszczeniach i przyktadach (Picture of the general literature of the world in summaries and excerpts - 2 vols) Warszawa: Paprocki, 1894-96 POLPO Cholevius, Johannes Karl Leo (1814-78) Geschichte der deutschen Poesie nach ihren antiken Elementen (2 vols.) Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1854-56 GER GE Reprint Darmstadt: WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft, 1968 Christensen, Georg. See Andersen, Einer Chuquet, Arthur Maxime (1853-?) Litterature allemande Paris: Colin, 1909

229 Bibliography FREFR Clajus, Johannes (1535-92) Grammatica Germanicae linguae Leipzig: Johannes Rhamka, 1578 LAT Repr. Friedrich Weidling, Strassburg: Teubner, 1894 Clarmundus, Adolphus (= Joh. Christ. Rudiger, fl. 1700) Vitae clarissimorum in re literariae viromm. Das ist: LebensBeschreibung etlicher Hauptgelehrten/ so von der Literatur profess gemacht... Wittenberg: Christian Gottlieb Ludwig, 1704-09 (-14) GER First edition 1703 Claus, Nicola Grundrifl der deutschen Literatur mil italienischen Noten Milano: Valentiner e Mues, 1871 GER&ITA IT unseen Clavequin-Rosselot, Abbe Francois-Emile (1851-?) Histoire critique de la litterature allemande depuis les temps les plus recules jusqu'a nos jours pour servir a la preparation des examens Paris: Delagrave, 1876 FRE FR later edition no date unseen Coar, John Firman (1863-1939) Studies in German literature in the nineteenth century New York: Macmillan, 1903 ENGUS Colerus, Christophorus (16027-1658) Dissertationes de antiqua et nova Germanorum poesi, et utriusque vindicibus Breslau, 1639 LAT - unseen Combes, Ernst (1852-?) Profils et types de la litterature allemande Paris: Fischbacker, 1888 FREFR also 1896

Conrad, Hirsaugiensis (ca. 1070-1150) Dialogus super auctores sive Didascalon (ed. G. Schepss) Wurzburg: Stuber, 1889 LAT - Also ed. R.B.C. Huygens (Bruxelles: Latomus, 1955) Cop, A. E. Kurzer Leitfaden der deutschen Dichtung London: Bell, 1907 GER UK Cornelius, Karl Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte, in Fragen und Antworten mitAngabe des Inhalts und des Grundgedankens der Dichtungen Paderbom: Schoningh, 1907 GER GE editions to 1919 (3) Cramer, [Johann] Friedrich (1802-59) Uber das Wesen und die Behandlung der deutschen Literaturgeschichte aufGymnasien und fiber Schillers Maria Stuart ins Besondere Stralsund: Loftier, 1838 GER Crinito, Pietro (1475-1507) De poetis latinis libri V Florence: Philipp Junta, 1505 LAT Cros de Vour, F.E. [pseud.]. See Clavequin-Rosselot, Abbe Fran9ois-Emile Cyranka, L. Wiederholungsbiichlein fur den Unterricht in der deutschen Literaturkunde, nebst einem Abrifi derPoetik undMetrik Breslau: Hirt, 1896 GERGE Dahler, Johann Georg (1760-1832) Handbuch zum Gebrauch bey Vorlesungen fiber die Geschichte

230

Histories of German Literature

der Literatur und der Kunst Jena: Akademische Buchhandlung, 1788 GER Damm, Hermann Leitfaden zur deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur mehrklassige Burgerschulen Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1877 GER GE title varies - editions by various editors to 1937 Damm, Hermann Leitfaden zur deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur katholische Schulen Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1891 GER GE editions by various editors to 1935 Dangschat, Martin Das Wissensnotigste aus der deutschen Metrik, Poetik und Literaturgeschichte. Filr Seminaristen undLehrer, sowie zum Gebrauch beim Selbstunterricht... Kottbus: Differt, 1882 GERGE Deetjen, W. See Holtz, Johannes Deile, Gotthold Kurze Uberblick tiber die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Fur den Schulgebrauch Dessau: Dunnhaupt, 1906 GERGE Deile, Gotthold Wiederholungsfragen aus der deutschen Literatur mit angefugten Antworten, ein Hilfsmittel fur Unterricht und Studium Dessau: Dunnhaupt, 1905 GER GE editions to 1921 (5) Demogeot, Jacques Claude (1808-94) Histoire des litteratures etrangeres considerees dans leurs rapports avec le developpement de la

litterature fran$aise (2 vols.) Paris: Hachette, 1880 FRE FR vol. 2: Angleterre, Allemagne - editions to 1914 (6) Denis, Michael (1729-1800) Einleitung in die Bilcherkunde (2 vols.) Wien: Trattnern, 1777-78 GER Detlev, Gottfried [pseud.]. See Dreyer, Johann Peter Ludwig Dielitz, Theodor & J.E. Heinrichs Handbuch der deutschen Literatur Jur die oberen Klassen hoherer Lehranstalten. Eine nach den Gattungen geordnete Sammlung poetischer und prosaischer Musterstucke nebst einem Abrifi der Metrik, Poetik, Rhetorik und Literaturgeschichte Berlin: Reimer, 1863 GER GE editions to 1888 (4) Diercks, Gustav (1852-1934) Literatur-Tafeln. Synchronistische Darstellung der Weltliteratur in ihren hervorragendsten Vertretern Dresden: Pierson, 1878 GERGE Dietlein, Woldemar Einleitung in die deutsche Dichtung. Ein Hilfsbuchfur Freunde der Poesie, sowie insbesondere Jur Volksschullehrer und die Oberklassen hoherer Schulanstalten Braunschweig: Bruhn, 1868 GER GE editions to 1878 (3) Dietlein, Woldemar Leitfaden zur deutschen Litteraturgeschichte. Mit Berucksichtigung der poetischen Gattungen und Formen. Fur hohere Tochter- und Burgerschulen Quedlinburg: Franke, 1859 GER GE editions to 1909 (14) Dietlein, Woldemar Wiederholungsbuch Jur den

231 Bibliography Unterricht in der Litteraturkunde an mehrklassigen Volks- und Biirgerschulen Wittenberg: Herrose, 1874 GER GE editions to 1919 (20) Dietz, Hermann (1845-?) Les litteratures etrangeres (2 vols.) Paris: Colin, 1892 FREFRvol. 1: Angleterre-Allemagne - editions to 1919(8) Dilschneider, Johann Josef Die deutsche Sprache in Proben aus alien Jahrhunderten von Ulphilas bis Go'the, nebst einem Worterbuche, zum Gebrauch in den oberen Klassen der Gymnasien Koln: Peter Schmitz, 1826 GER Dilschneider, Johann Josef Umrifi der Geschichte des deutschen Schriftenthums far Schulen Koln: Renard, 1836 GERGE Dobbert, Theodor Kurzgefaftte deutsche Literaturgeschichte in leichtverstdndlicher Sprache zum Gebrauch in russischen Lehranstalten (2 vols.) Riga: Kymmel, 1909 GER RU unseen Docen, Bernhard Josef (1782-1828) Miscellaneen zur Geschichte der teutschen Literatur (2 vols) Munchen: Scherer, 1807 GER Do ring, Reinhold Die Gattungen der Dichtkunst als ein Leitfadenfar den literarhistorischen Unterricht in den oberen Klassen hoherer Lehranstalten Brieg: Gebhardt, 186? GER GE 2nd ed. 1866 - editions to 1879(4)

Draheim, H. See Gutjahr, Emil Dreyer, Johann Peter Ludwig (1843-86) [pseud. Detlev, Gottfried] Abrift der Literatur-Geschichte. Ein Leitfadenfar den Unterricht in der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur mit Biographien, Inhaltsangaben und Proben Leipzig: Krttger, 1877 GERGE 2nd ed. 1879 Droese, August Einfahrung in die deutsche Literatur von ihren ersten Anfdngen bis zur Gegenwart. Biographien und Proben Langensalza: GreBler, 1868 GER GE editions to 1882 (7) Dusch, Johann Jakob (1725-87) Briefe zur Bildung des Geschmacks an einenjungen Herrn von Stande (6 parts) Leipzig: I.E. Meyer, 1764-73 GER Dyck, Johann Gottfried (1750-1815) & Georg Schaz Charaktere der vornehmsten Dichter aller Nationen (8 vols.) Leipzig: Dyk, 1782-1808 GER = Nachtra'ge zu Sulzer, "Allgemeine Theorie ..." Ebeling, Christoph Daniel (1741-1817) "Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst" Hannoversches Magazin 1767: 81-120; 1768: 81-118, 353-84, 401-58, 529-52,1767-68 GER GE based on introduction in Huber, q.v. Eberhard, Johann August (1739-1809) Theorie der schonen Wissenschaften Halle: Waisenhaus, 1783 GER Ebner, Eduard. See Rackl, Josef Eckhart, Johann Georg von

232

Histories of German Literature

(1674-1730) Commentarii de rebus Franciae orientalis et Episcopatus Wirceburgensis Wurzburg: Engmann, 1729 LAT Eckhart, Johann Georg von Historia studii etymologici linguae Germanicae ... Hannover: Foerster, 1711 LAT Eckhart, Johann Georg von. See also Anonymous, Anekdoten... Egelhaaf, Gottlob Friedrich Wilhelm (1848-1934) Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Ein Hilfsbuch fiir Schulen und zum Privatgebrauch Heilbronn: Henninger, 1881 GER GE editions to 1913 (22) Egenolf, Johann Augustin, The Younger (1683-1729) Historic der Deutschen Sprache (2 vols.) Leipzig: Johann Friedrich Braun, 1716-20 GER Egger, von Mollwald, Alois (1829-1904) Deutsches Lehr- und Lesebuch fiir Obergymnasium/hohere Lehranstalten (2 vols.) Wien: Beck, 1868-70 GER AU various parts and editions to 1885 (8) Eichendorff, Joseph Karl Benedikt, Freiherr von (1788-1857) Geschichte der poetischen Literatur Deutschlands Paderbom/Leipzig: Schb'ningh, 1857 GER GE 3rd ed. 1866, re-edited Wilhelm Kosch 1906 Eichhoff, Frederic Gustave (1799-1875)

Cours de litterature allemande Paris: Ange, 1838 FREFR Eichhorn, Johann Gottfried (1752-1827) Allgemeine Geschichte der Cultur und Literatur des neuern Europa (2 vols.) Gottingen: Rosenbusch, 1796-99 GERGE Eichhorn, Johann Gottfried Geschichte der Litteratur von ihrem Anfang bis aufdie neuesten Zeiten (4 vols.) Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1805-12 GERGE 2nd ed. 1828 Eichhorn, Johann Gottfried Litterdrgeschichte der drey letzten Jahrhunderte (3 vols.) G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1814 GERGE Eitner, Karl (1805-84) Synchronistische Tabellen zur vergleichenden Ubersicht der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur. Zum Gebrauch beim Unterricht in hohern Lehranstalten und fiir Freunde der Literatur Breslau: Kern, 1848 GER GE first fascicle 1842, supplement 1856 Engel, Eduard (1851-1939) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den Anfangen bis in die Gegenwart (2 vols.) Leipzig: Freytag, 1906 GER GE editions to 1922 (37) Engel, Eduard Kurgefafite deutsche Literaturgeschichte. Ein Volksbuch Leipzig: Freytag, 1909 GER GE editions to 1929 (37) Epstein, Ludwig Was mufi der Unterojfizier von der

233

Bibliography

Literatur wissen? Bilder aus der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur Oldenburg: Stalling, 1909 GER GE Unteroffizier-Bibliothek, 10 also as vol. 9 of Jung-Deutschland-Bucher, 1914 unseen Ernst, ? Grundlinien zu einer Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Alte und mittlere Zeit (Gymnasial-Programm Gilstrow) Gustrow: no publ., 1859 GER GE rev. Archiv 28 (1860), 321-2 Ersch, Johann Samuel (1766-1818) Handbuch der deutschen Literatur seit derMitte des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts bis aufdie neueste Zeit Amsterdam: Kunst- und Industriecomptoir, 1812 GER Eschenburg, Johann Joachim (1743-1820) Beispielsammlung zur Theorie und Literatur der schonen Wissenschaften (8 vols.) Berlin/Stettin: Nicolai, 1788-95 GER Eschenburg, Johann Joachim Entwurf einer Theorie und Literatur der schonen Redekunste Berlin/Stettin: Nicolai, 1783 GER Eskuche, Gustav (1865-?) Deutsche Sprachlehre und Literaturgeschichte fur hohere Lehranstalten Munster: Scho'ningh, 1905 GER GE various sections - unseen Esser, Nicola Wiederholungen aus der deutschen Litteraturgeschichte Jur Oberklassen hoherer

Unterrichtsanstalten und zur Vorbereitung aufdie Prufungfur das Schulamt und Jur Mittelschulen, sowie zum Privatstudium Limburg: Verlag der Marienstiftung, 1890 GER GE editions to 1898 (5) unseen Ettmiiller, Ernst Moritz Ludwig (1802-77) Handbuch der deutschen Literaturgeschichte von den dltesten bis aufdie neuesten Zeiten, mil Einschlufi der angelsachsischen, altskandinavischen und mittelniederlandischen Schriftwerke Leipzig: Verlagsbureau, 1847 GERGE Eusebius, Pamphili (ca. 260-340) Historia ecclesia, with English translation by Kirsopp Lake London: Heinemann, 1953-57 LAT Evans, Edward Paysan (1831-1917?) Abriss der deutschen Literaturgeschichte New York: Leypoldt & Holt, 1869 GER US 2nd ed. 187? Everett, Alexander Hill (1790-1847) An address to the literary societies of Dartmouth college on the character and influence of German literature Boston, MA: Devereux, 1839 ENGUS Eyring, Jeremias Nicolaus (1739-1803) Synopsis historiae literariae ... Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1783 LAT - unseen Fabricius, Johann Andreas (1696-1769) Abrifi einer allgemeinen Historie der Gelehrsamkeit (3 vols.)

234

Histories of German Literature

Leipzig: Weidmann, 1752-54 GER Fath, Jacob (1863-?) Wegweiser zur deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Bibliographischer Grundrififur Vorlesungen und zum Selbststudium Wtirzburg: Stahel, 1899 GER GE incomplete - to 1100 only Feind, Bartholdus, The Younger (1678-1721) Earth Feindes Lt. deutsche Gedichte ... sammt einer Vorrede von dem Temperament und Gemuhts-Beschaffenheit eines Poeten... Stade: Brummer, 1708 GER Felgentreu, R. Das Wesen der deutschen Poesie in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwickelung. Ein Beitrag zum Verstfindnis unserer Nationalliteratur in 6 Vortragen Leipzig: Siegismund & Volkening, 1882 GERGE Fiedler, Leonhard. See Rackl, Josef Fiedler, Rudolf Deutsche Poetik nebst einem kurzen Abrifi derLiteratur Osterreichs und der neuen deutschen Dichtung als Einleitung zur Lekture Reichenberg: J. Mtiller, 190? GERAU2nded. 1904 Findel, Gottfried Joseph Gabriel (1828-1905) Die classische Periods der deutschen Nationalliteratur im 18. Jahrhundert. Ein Handbuchfur Schule und Haus Leipzig: Findel, 1857 GER GE 2nd ed. of Barthel - later edition (1873) includes earlier and later literature Fischer, Emil Zur deutschen Literatur. Ein

Hilfsbuchjur den Unterricht in Seminaren und hoheren Schulen sowiefur die Fortbildung des Lehrers Breslau: Dulfer, 1903 GER GE editions to 1915 (5) Fischer, Josef Lehrbuchjur den Unterricht in der Geschichte der deutschen National-Litteratur. Zum Gebrauch an hoheren Lehranstalten und zum Selbstunterrichte Langensalza: Schulbuchhandlung, 1879 GER GE editions to 1901 (4) Flacius, Matthias, Illyricus (1520-75) Catalogus testium veritatis, qui ante nostram aetatem reclamarunt Papae Basel: Oporinus, 1556 LAT Flacius, Matthias, Illyricus Otfridi evangeliorum liber Basel: no publ., 1571 GER Flaischlen, Casar (1864-1920) Graphische Litteratur-Tafel. Die deutsche Litteratur und der Einflufi fremder Litteraturen auf ihren Verlaufvom Beginn einer schriftlichen Uberlieferung an bis heute in graphischer Darstellung Stuttgart: Goschen, 1890 GER GE Behr, n.d. (1890?) & Berlin/Stuttgart 1892 Flogel, Carl Friedrich (1729-88) Geschichte der komischen Litteratur (4 vols.) Liegnitz: Siegert, 1784-87 GER Flogel, Carl Friedrich Kritische Geschichte des gegenwdrtigen Zustandes der schonen Litteratur in Deutschland Jauer: no publ., 1771 GER

235

Bibliography

Forster, Karl August (1784-1841) Abrifi der allgemeinen Literaturgeschichte Dresden: Hilscher, 1828-31 GER also in Allgemeine deutsche Taschenbibliothek, 5 Fohrmann, Jiirgen Das Projekt der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Entstehen und Scheitern einer nationalen Poesiegeschichtsschreibung zwischen Humanismus und Deutschem Reich Stuttgart: Metzler, 1989 GER Folz, Hans (15th century) Die Meisterlieder des Hans Folz (ed. August L. Mayer [1908]) Zurich: Weidmann, 1970 repr. GER Deutsche Texte des Mittelalters, 12 Foresti, Jacopo Filippo, da Bergamo (1434-1520) Supplementum chronicarum Venezia: Bemardinus Benalius, 1483 LAT Fortlage, Arnold Rudolf Karl (1806-81) Vorlesungen uber die Geschichte der Poesie Stuttgart/Ttibingen: Cotta, 1839 GER lectures held 1837 Francke, Kuno (1855-1930) A history of German literature as determined by social forces New York: Holt, 1901 ENG US 4th and succeeding editions of his Social forces... Francke, Kuno Die Kulturwerte der deutschen Literatur in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung (3 vols.) Berlin: Weidmann, 1910-28 GER GE 2nd ed. vols. 1-2 1925 Francke, Kuno Social forces in German literature.

A study in the history of civilization New York: Holt, 1896 ENG US from 4th ed. as A history of German literature ... - editions to 1913(10) Frank, Paul [=Carl Wilhelm Merseburger] (1816-85) Handbttchlein der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: Merseburger, 1860 GER GE editions to 1879 (6) Frank, Paul Kort handbok i tyska litteraturhistorien ojversattning efterandra upplagan afJ.G.C. (A short handbook of German literary history) Stockholm: P.G. Berg, 1866 SWE SW source Frank Freher, Marquard (1565-1614) Germanicarum rerum scriptores aliquot insignes, hactenus incogniti (3 vols) Frankfurt: Wechelus, 1600-11 LAT Freund, Wilhelm (1806-84) Sechs Tafeln zur griechischen, romischen, deutschen. englischen, franzosischen und italienischen Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: Violet, 1875-77 GER GE German in vol. 3 editions to 1887(3) Fricke, Wilhelm (1839-?) Tabellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur und Kunst, nach der Anschauungsmethode Leipzig: Klinkhardt, 1870 GERGE Friedrich, II (1712-86) De la litterature allemande; des defauts qu'onpeut lui reprocher; quelles en sont les causes; etpar quel moyens on peut les corriger Berlin: Decker, 1780 FRE Friedrich, II

236

Histories of German Literature

See also Meister, Leonhard & Jerusalem, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm & Tralles, Balthasar Ludwig Fuchs, August (1818-47) Grundrifi der Geschichte des Schriftenthums der Griechen und Romer und der Romanischen und Germanischen Vdlker Halle: Schwetschke, 1846 GER GE also as KurzerAbrifi ... Gaab, Johann Friedrich (1761-1832) Entwurfzu seinen Vorlesungen tiber die Literaturgeschichte Tubingen: Cotta, 1794 GER Garve, (J.) Christian (1742-98) "Ober den Einflufi einiger besondern Umstande auf die Bildung unsrer Sprache und Litteratur. Eine Vorlesung Litterarische Chronik, I: 88-111 1785 GER Gebauer, August (1792-1852?) Deutscher Dichtersaal von Luther bis aufunsere Zeiten (4 vols.) Leipzig: Klein, 1827-34 GERGE Gebhardt, Erich Was mufl man von der deutschen Literatur \vissen? Berlin: Steinitz, 1903 GER GE unseen Gedicke, Friedrich (1754-1803) "Ober das Studium der Litterarhistorie..." Berlinische Monatsschrift, I: 277-97 1783 GER Geerling, Karl Franz Ambrosius (1836-?) Deutsche Litteratur-Geschichte. Materialien und Leitfaden jur mittlere und hohere Lehr-Anstalten und zum Selbststudium

Wiesbaden: Gestewitz, 1882 GERGE Gelzer, Johann Heinrich (1813-89) Die deutsche poetische Literatur seit Klopstock und Lessing Leipzig: Weidmann, 1841 GERGE Gelzer, Johann Heinrich Die neuere deutsche NationalLiteratur nach ihren ethischen und religidsen Gesichtspunkten. Zur inneren Geschichte des deutschen Protestantismus Leipzig: Weidmann, 1841 GER GE editions to 1858 (3) Gerstenberg, Karl von Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den dltesten Zeiten bis auf die Gegen\vart. Mit besonderer Berucksichtigung sch\veizerischer Dichter. Fur das Volk und die Schule (Franz Karl Louis Heinrich Georg von Gerstenberg) Zurich: Lohbauer, 1868 GERCH2nded. 1875 Gervinus, Georg Gottfried (1805-71) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung (5 vols. = Historische Schriften 2-6) Leipzig: Engelmann, 1835-42 GER GE Vol. 1 orig. Gesch. der poet. National-Literatur - editions to 1871 (5) Gervinus, Georg Gottfried Handbuch der Geschichte der poetischen National-Literatur der Deutschen Leipzig: Engelmann, 1842 GER GE editions to 1849 (4) Gervinus, Georg Gottfried "Prinzipien einer deutschen Literaturgeschichtsschreibung" Heidelberger Jahrbucher, 26:12, 1833,1194-1239 GER Gervinus, Georg Gottfried

237 Bibliography Schriften zur Literatur Berlin: Aufbau, 1962 GER Gessner, Konrad (1516-65) Bibliotheca universalis, sive catalogus omnium scriptorum locupletissimus, in tribus linguis, Latino, Graeca, &Hebraica Zurich: Froschauer, 1545 LAT - Repr. Osnabruck: Zeller, 1966 Gessner, Salomon (1730-88) Oeuvres choisis ... precedees d'une notice raisonnee de la vie et des ouvrages de M. Gessner Zurich/Paris: Libraires associes, 1774 FRE - see Herissant, Louis Theodore Giraldi, Lilio Gregorio (1478/9-1552) Dialogi duo de poetis nostrorum temporum (ed. Karl Wotke) Berlin: Weidmann, 1894 LAT - Originally Florence 1551, Basel 1580 Giraldi, Lilio Gregorio Historia poetarum tarn graecorum quant latinorum dialogi X Basel: no publ., 1545 LAT Glasenapp, Karl Friedrich (1847-1915) KurzerAbrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung mil notiger Berucksichtigung der \vichtigsten Prosaliteratur Riga: Kymmel, 1888 GERRU Goedeke, Karl (1814-87) ElfBucher deutscher Dichtung von Sebastian Brant bis aufdie Gegenwart Leipzig: Hahn, 1849 GER Goedeke, Karl Grundrifi zur Geschichte der

deutschen Dichtung Hannover: Ehlermann, 1857GER Goetz, Wilhclm Die deutsche Dichtung in ihren lebensvollsten Erscheinungen. Eine Darstellung zum Uberblick vornehmlich fur Gymnasiasten Aarau: Sauerlander, 1878 GERCH Goetz, Wilhelm Kurze Geschichte der deutsch-schweizerischen Dichtung seit Bodmer und Breitinger. Eine Wegeleitung zu asthetischer und nationaler Bildung unserer Jugend Aarau: Sauerlander, 1885 GER Goetz, Wilhelm KurzerAbrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur fur hohere Burger- und Tochterschulen Aarau: Sauerlander, 1876 GERCH Gotzinger, Maximilian Wilhelm (1799-1856) Deutsche Dichter. Erldutert. Fur Freunde der Dichtkunst iiberhaupt und fur Lehrer der deutschen Sprache insbesondere (2 vols.) Leipzig: Hartknoch, 1831 GER editions to 1877(5) Gotzinger, Maximilian Wilhelm Die deutsche Sprache und ihre Literatur (2 vols) Stuttgart: Hoffmann, 1836-44 GER GE Repr: Hildesheim: Olms, 1977 Goldast, Melchior (1578-1635) Alamannicarum rerum scriptores aliquot vestuti... Frankfurt: Richter, 1606 LAT Goldast, Melchior Paraeneticorum veterum pars I Insulae: loannes Ludovici Brem, 1604

238

Histories of German Literature

LAT Golther, Wolfgang (1863-?) & Karl Borinski Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Stuttgart: Union, 1892-93 GER GE DNL 163 (medieval); second part by Karl Borinski q.v. Gortzitza, Wilhelm Orlando Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur Jur Freunde derselben. Zugleich ein Wegweiser fur die Lektiire aufdem Gebiete des Lyrischen und Lyrisch-Epischen Lyck:Wiebe, 1878 GER GE Bibliothek der konigl. Poly-Schule Stuttgart, 93 Gostick, Joseph (later Joseph Gostwick) (1814-87) German literature Edinburgh: Chambers, 1849 ENG UK Chambers' Instructive and Entertaining Library, 1 Gostomski, Walery (1854-1915) Historia literatury powszechnej w zarysie (Brief history of world literature-2 vols.) Warszawa: Gebethner & Wolff, 1898 POLPO Gostwick, Joseph & Robert Harrison Outlines of German literature London: Williams & Norgate, 1873 ENG UK 2nd ed. 1883 - same as US edition Gostwick, Joseph & Robert Harrison Outlines of German literature Boston, MA: Schonhoff & Moller, 1873 ENG US 2nd ed. 189? - also New York: Holt - same as UK edition Gottfried, von Strasburg (13th century) Tristan und Isolde (ed. Friedrich Ranke)

Zurich/Berlin: Weidmann, 1930 GER Gottschall, Rudolf (1823-1909) Die deutsche Nationalliteratur in der ersten Halfte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (2 vols.) Breslau: Trewendt & Gravier, 1855 GER Gottsched, Johann Christoph (1700-66) Abhandlung von dem Flore der deutschen Poesie zu Kaiser Friedrichs des Ersten Zeiten Leipzig: 1746 GER unseen Gottsched, Johann Christoph Beytrage zur critischen Historie der deutschen Sprache, Poesie und Beredsamkeit Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1732-44 GER Gottsched, Johann Christoph Der Deutschen Schaubiihne nach den Regeln und Muster der Alten Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1745 GER Gottsched, Johann Christoph N&thiger Vorrat zur Geschichte der deutschen dramatischen Dichtkunst ... (2 vols.) Leipzig: Teubner, 1757-65 GER Gottsched, Johann Christoph Schriften zur Theorie und Praxis aujklarender Literatur (ed. Uwe K. Ketelsen) Reinbek: Rowohlt, 1970 GER Grabener, Christian Gottfried (1714-78) De libra heroico Heldenbuch vocato Dresden: Litteris Harpeterianis, 1744-47 LAT Grabowski, Edward (1849-1912). See Chmielowski, Piotr

239

Bibliography

Graef, Hermann (1880-?) Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte Bonn:Georgi, 1904 GERGE Graesse, Johann Georg Theodor (1814-85) Handbuch der allgemeinen Literaturgeschichte (3 vols) Dresden/Leipzig: Arnold, 1844-50 GER based on his Lehrbuch Graesse, Johann Georg Theodor Lehrbuch einer allgemeinen Literargeschichte aller bekannten Volker der Welt von der altesten bis aufdie neueste Zeit (3 vols.) Dresden/Leipzig: Arnold, 1837-59 GER Graesse, Johann Georg Theodor Leitfaden der allgemeinen Literaturgeschichte. Zum Gebrauch fur hohere Burger- und Realschulen Leipzig: Baensch, 1854 GER Grau, Christ. Gottl. Die unmafigebliche - neu angegebene/ Hoch-Teutsche Grund- undHohe Landes- Unterrichtung Herbom: no publ., 1695 GER Grauenhorst, Christoph Katechismus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Bin Lehrbuch zum Selbstunterricht Berlin: Frobel-Oberlin, 1897 GERGE Gredy, Friedrich Melchior Geschichte der deutschen Literatur fur h6here Lehranstalten, zum Privat- und Selbstunterricht Mainz: Kirchheim, 1856 GER GE editions to 1884 (7) Greiner, L.D. Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte in ihren Grundziigen. Zum Gebrauch an hoheren Bildungsanstalten und zu Selbstbelehrungjur Gebildete

Nordlingen: Beck, 1882 GER GE 3rd ed. otGrundrift Greiner, L.D. Grundrifl der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Ausfuhrung von #1-7 in Bauers neuhochdeutscher Grammatik no place: priv.publ., 1871 GER GE 2nd ed. Schw. Hall: Staib, 1879 - 3rd ed. as Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte Griepenkerl, Wolfgang Robert (1810-68) Der Kunstgenius der deutschen Literatur des letzten Jahrhunderts in seiner geschichtlich organischen Entwickelung Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1846 GER part 1 only published Grimm, Jakob (1785-1863) Kleinere Schriften Hildesheim: Olms, 1965-66 GER Grimm, Jakob Uber den altdeutschen Meistergesang Gottingen: Dieterich, 1811 GER Grimm, Wilhelm (1786-1859) Die deutsche Heldensage Gottingen: Dieterich, 1829 GER GroschI, Ludwig Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur, ausgearbeitet fur das Hauptmann Funk^sche Militarinstitut Prag:priv. publ., 1899 GERCZ Grofimann, Karl Handbuch zur Einfiihrung in die deutsche Dichtung. Fur die oberen Klassen mittlerer und hoherer Volksschulen Wolfenbiittel: ZwiBler, 1876 GER GE 2nd ed. 1877 2 parts in 1 vol., part 1 originally privately

240

Histories of German Literature

published earlier Gruber, Johann Gottfried (1774-1851) Poetische Anthologie der Deutschen for Frauenzimmer nebst Poetik und Biographic derDichter (2 vols.) Rudolstadt: Hof-, Buch- und Kunsthandlung, 1808-09 GER unseen Gruppe, Otto Friedrich (1804-76) Leben und Werke deutscher Dichter. Geschichte der deutschen Poesie in den drei letzten Jahrhunderten (5 vols.) Miinchen: Bruckmann, 1864-70 GER GE 2nd ed. Leipzig: Brandstetter, 1872 in 5 vols. Gude, Carl Heinrich Friedrich (1814-98) Erlduterungen deutscher Dichtungen nebst Themen zu schriftlichen Aufsdtzen in Umrissen und Ausfuhrungen Leipzig: Brandstetter, 1858 GER GE various series and editions to 1906 (12) Guden, Karl Friedrich Armin Chronologische Tabellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und National-Literatur Leipzig: Fleischer, 1831 GERGE Gueintz, Christian (1592-1630) Deutscher Sprachlehre Entwurf Coethen: no publ., 1641 GERRepr. Hildesheim: Olms, 1978 Giinther, Friedrich Joachim Die deutsche Literatur in ihren Meistern mit einer Auswahl charakteristischer Beispiele fttr gebildete Leser Halberstadt: Frantz, 1853 GERGE Gumposch, Victor Philipp (1817-53) Allgemeine Literaturgeschichte der Deutschen. Leitfaden zu

akademischen Vorlesungen Augsburg: Rieger, 1846 GERGE Gundling, Nicolaus Hieronymus (1671-1729) Collegium historico-literarium, oder ausjuhrliche Discourse iiber alle vornehmsten Wissenschaften Bremen: Saurmann, 1738-42 GER Gundling, Nicolaus Hieronymus Vollstdndige Historic der Gelahrheit Frankfurt/Leipzig: Hermann et al., 1734-36 GER Gutjahr, Emil A. & H. Draheim & O. Kiintzel & Robert Riemann Weichers deutsche Literaturgeschichte fiir hohere Schulen und zum privaten Studium Leipzig: Dieterich, 1907 GER GE editions to 1928 (6) Gutschky, Wilhelm Die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur seit Goethes Tode in Fragen und Ant\vorten Hildesheim: Borgmeyer, 1914 GERGE Gutzkow, Karl Ferdinand (1811-78) Beitrdge zur Geschichte der neuesten Literatur Stuttgart: Balz, 1839 GER Hadewieg, Johann Heinrich (1623-71) Wol-gegrilndete Teutsche Versekunst Bremen: Villers, 1660 GER Haehnel, Emil & R Patzig & A. Oihvald Durch die Auen deutscher Dichtung. Literaturheft fur Volksund Fortbildungsschulen Leipzig: Hirt, 1909

241

Bibliography

GERGE Haehnel, Karl (1858-?) Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Als Leitfaden for den Unterricht zundchst im Anschlufi an das deutsche Lesebuch fur dsterreichische Gymnasien von Kummer und Stejskal Wien:Manz, 1888 GER AU editions to 1902 (3) Hagen, Friedrich Heinrich von der (1780-1856) and Johann Georg Biisching Literarischer Grundrifi zur Geschichte der deutschen Poesie von der dltesten Zeit bis in das sechzehnte Jahrhundert Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1812 GER Hahn, Peter Literaturkun defur Mittelschulen und verwandte Anstalten Elberfeld: Faflbender, 1913 GERGE 2nd ed. 1919 Hahn, Werner (1816-90) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte in Tabellen. Handbuchftlr den Schulgebrauch Berlin: Hertz, 1869 GER GE editions to 1896 (4) Hahn, Werner Geschichte der poetischen Literatur der Deutschen. Ein Buch fur Schule undHaus Berlin: Hertz, 1860 GER GE editions to 1910 (16) Hajkova, Emma Prehled nemecke literatury (Survey of German literature) Prag: Nakladem Usbredm skoly delnicke v Praze, no date CZE CZ unidentified 1st ed. - ca. 1920? Hallberg, (Louis) Eugene (1838-?) Histoire des literatures etrangeres (2 vols.) Paris: Lemerre, 1879-80

FRE FR vol. 1. deuxieme partie: litterature allemande Hamann, Elisabeth Margarethe (1853-1931) Abrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Zum Gebrauche an hoheren Unterrichtsansalten und zur Selbstbelehrung Freiburg: Herder, 1895 GER GE editions to 1918 (7) based on Brugier Hamberger, Julius Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Prosa und Poesie zum Gebrauche in hoheren Unterrichtsanstalten Miinchen: Finsterlin, 1847 GERGE 2nd ed. 1866 Hanmann, Enoch. See Opitz Happel, Eberhard Werner (1647-90) Der insulanische Mandorell Hamburg/Frankfurt: Hertel & Weyrauchs, 1682 GER Harrison, Robert. See Gostwick, Joseph Harsdorffer, Georg Philipp (1607-58) Poetischer Trichter/ Die teutsche Dicht- und Reimkunst/ ohne Behuf der lateinischen Sprache/ in VI Stunden einzugiessen Nilmberg: Endter, 1647 GER Harsdorffer, Georg Philipp Specimen philologiae Germanicae, continens Disquisitiones XII. De linguae nostrae vernaculae historia, methodo & dignitate ... Niimberg: Endter, 1646 LAT Harsdorffer, Georg Philipp Frauenzimmer-Gesprdchspiele Nilmberg: Endter, 1641-(9) GER Hart, Julius (1859-1930)

242

Histories of German Literature

Geschichte der Weltliteratur und des Theaters alter Zeiten und Volker(2 vols.) Berlin: Pauli, 1894-96 GER GE Hausschatz des Wissens, Abteilung X, Band 15, 16 Hasse, Augustin Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Zum Gebrauche an hdheren Lehranstalten und zum Selbstunterricht Innsbruck: priv.pub., 1906 GER AU 2nd ed. Graz: Styria, 1916 Hasse, Maria Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Innsbruck: Tyrolia 1923 GER AU 3rd edition of Hasse, Augustin Hattstadt, Otto (Frederick) (1862-?) Handbuch der deutschen Nationalliteratur von ihren ersten Anfangen bis zur Gegen\vart. Zum Gebrauchftir den Unterricht in den oberen Klassen hoherer Lehranstalten, sowie zum Selbstunterricht St. Louis, MO: Concordia, 1906 GER US editions to 1927 (3) Hauser, Otto (1876-?) Weltgeschichte der Literatur (2 vols.) Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1910 GERGE Haustein, Benjamin Friedrich Geschichte des Ursprungs und Fortgangs der deutschen Literatur bis aufdie neuesten Zeiten. Nebst Auszugen ... jur Liebhaber d. dt. Spr. u. Litt. u. bes. zum Gebrauch bey offentl. Vorll. aufden russ. -Kaiserlichen Universitaten Wilno: Neumann, 1819 GERRU Hedge, Frederic Henry (1805-90)

Hours with German classics Boston: Roberts, 1886 ENG US editions to 1902 Heerwagen, Friedrich Ferdinand Traugott (1732-1812) Litteraturgeschichte der evangelischen Kirchenlieder aus der alien, mittlern und neuern Zeit Schweinfurth: Riedel, 1792-97 GER Hegewisch, Dietrich Hermann (1746-1812) Allgemeine Ubersicht der deutschen Kulturgeschichte bis zu Maximilian I.... Hamburg: Bohn, 1788 GER also Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1818 Heidegger, Gotthard (1666-1711) Mythoscopia romantica: oder discours von den so benanten romans... Zurich: Gessner, 1698 GER Heidegger, Gotthard. See also Huet, Pierre Daniel Heilmann, Karl (1857-1949) Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur, nebst einem Abrifi der deutschen Poetik. Ein Hilfsbuch Jur Schule und Haus Breslau: Hirt, 1893 GER GE editions to 1924 (11) Heilmann, Karl See also Bachmann, Julius Heine, Heinrich (1797-1856) Zur Geschichte der neueren schdnen Literatur in Deutschland (2 vols.) Paris/Leipzig: Heideloff& Campe, 1833 GER Heinemann, Karl (1857-1927) Die deutsche Dichtung. Grundrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: KrOner, 1910 GER GE editions to 1930 (8) Heinisch, Georg Friedrich

243 Bibliography Grundrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Fur hohere Lehranstalten Bamberg: Buchner, 1867 GERGE Heinrich, Guillaume Alfred (1829-87) Histoire de la litterature allemande (3 vols.) Paris: Franck, 1870-73 FREFR2nd. ed. 1888-91 Heinrich, Gusztav (1845-1922) Egyetemes irodalomtortenet. Szerkeszti Heinrich Gusztav. Harmadik kotet. Keltdk es germdnok. (History of world literature ed. H.G. - Vol. 3 The Celts and the Germans) Budapest: Franklin, 1907 HUN HU Part 4 (399-650) = Germans Heinrich, Gusztav A kelta es germdn irodalom tortenete (A history of the literature of the Celts and the Germans) Budapest: Franklin, 19?? HUN HU Separate edition without series title of Egyetemes... Heinrich, Gusztav A nemet irodalom rovid tortenete (A short history of German literature) Budapest: Lampel, 1889 HUNHU Heinrich, Gusztav A nemet irodalom tortenete (The history of German literature [2 vols.]) Budapest: Magyar Tudomanyos Akademia, 1886-89 HUN HU 2nd ed. of vol. 1 in 1922 Heinrich, Gusztav Nemet tan-es olvasokonyv kozep es felso iskoldk szdmdra (German textbook and reader for middle and high schools)

Budapest: Lampel, 1894 HUN HU editions to 1905 (8) Heinrichs, J.E. See Dielitz, Theodor Heinsius, Otto Friedrich Theodor (1770-1849) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1811 GER GE = Teut, 4 - editions to 1843(6) Heinsius, Otto Friedrich Theodor Teut, oder theoretisch-praktisches Lehrbuch der gesammten Deutschen Sprach\vissenschaft (4 vols., vol. 4 in two parts) Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1807-11 GER various editions of several volumes - 5 = Stoffe (1812) Heinze, Ch.E.G.Ignazio Breve storia della letteratura tedesca (A short history of German literature) Palermo: Francesco, 1843 ITAiT Helbig, Karl Gustav (1808-75) Grundrifi der Geschichte der poetischen Literatur der Deutschen Dresden/Leipzig: Arnold, 1843 GER GE editions to 1875 (7) Heller, Otto (1863-1941) Studies in modern German literature Boston: Ginn, 1905 ENGUS Heller, Sfamuel?] KurzerAbrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte als Repetitorium umd zum Selbstunterricht Lemberg: Kohler, 1900? GER PO editions to 1910 (4) Hennequin, P. Cours de litterature ancienne et moderne, contenant un traite complet et poetique, extraits des meilleurs critiques et

244

Histories of German Literature

commentateurs; enrichi de 700 notices sur lespoetes lesplus celebres de tons les temps ... (4 vols.) Moscou: Semen, 1821-22 FRE Henry, P. & Apffel Histoire de la litterature allemande Bruxelles: Societe beige de librairie, 1839 FRE BE source Heinsius (5th edition) Hense, Josef (1838-1913) Abrift der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Paderborn: Junfermann, 1898 GER GE Gymnasialprogramm 1897/98-2nd ed. 1904 Hentschel, Adolf (1887-?) & Karl Linke Illustrierte deutsche Literaturkunde in Bildern und Skizzenfttr Schule und Haus Leipzig: Peter, 1882 GER GE editions to 1920 (13) Hentschel, Adolf & Karl Linke Kleine Litteraturkunde fur den deutschen Unterricht in den unteren und mittleren Klassen eines sdchsischen Realgymnasiums Leipzig: Teubner, 1883 GER GE editions to 1920 (13) Beigabe zum Schullesebuch Hentschel, Curt (1887-?) & Gustav Ley & R. Meyer & Otto Lyon Handbuch zur Einjuhrung in die deutsche Literatur, mit Proben aus Poesie undProsa Leipzig: Teubner, 1884 GER GE editions to 1906 (3) = Deutsches Lesebuchfur Realschulen und verwandte Anstalten, Teil 5 Herbig, G. Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur bohmische

Bildungsanstalten Ceske Budijovice: no publ., 1926 GER CZ = 5th ed. - 3rd ed. Wien 1921 - 1st ed. ca 1915 Herbst, Wilhelm (1825-82) Die deutsche Dichtung im Befreiungskriege. Mit einem Rilckblick auf'verwandte Dichtungen. Ein Vortrag Mainz: Kunze, 1859 GER Herbst, Wilhelm (1825-82) Hilfsbuch fur die deutsche Literaturgeschichte [zum Gebrauche der obersten Classen der Gymnasien und Realgymnasien] (2 vols.) Gotha: Perthes, 1879 GER GE editions to 1906 (8) Herder, Emil Gottfried von (7-1855) Johann Gottfried von Herder's Lebensbild(2 vols.) Erlangen: Biasing, 1846 GER Herder, Johann Gottfried (1744-1803) Sammtliche Werke (ed. Bernhard Suphan) Berlin: Weidmann, 1877-79 GER Herder, Johann Gottfried "Versuch einer Geschichte der Dichtkunst" (in Lebensbild, ed. E.G. von Herder) Erlangen: Biasing, 1846 GER Herissant, Louis Theodore (1743-1811) "Observations historiques sur la litterature allemande" (Oeuvres choisis deM. Gessner, p. 219-52) Zurich: no publ., 1774 FREFR Herissant, Louis Theodore Observations historiques sur la litterature allemande par un

245 Bibliography Francois. Nouvelle edition (Repr. from introduction to Gessner) No place: no publ., 1781 FRE FR also Regensburg/Paris: Savoye, 1782 Herzog, Karl (1798-1857) Geschichte der deutschen National-Litteratur mit Proben der deutschen Dichtkunst und Beredsamkeit Jena: August Schmid, 1831 GERGE2nded. 1837 Humann, Christoph August (1681-1763) Conspectus reipublicae literariae sive via adhistoriam literariam ... Hannover: Forster, 1718 LAT Heumann, Christoph August. See also Bougine, Karl Joseph Heydenreich, F.F. Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst. Fur die oberen Klassen der Gymnasien Konigsberg: Unzer, 1831 GERGE Hieronymus, Saint (ca. 342-420) De viris illustribus Augsburg: Zainer, 1472? LAT Hillebrand, Joseph (1788-1871) Die deutsche Nationalliteratur seit dem Anfange des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts, besonders seit Lessing, bis aufdie Gegen\vart (3 vols.) Hamburg/Gotha: Perthes, 1845-46 GER GE editions to 1875 (3) Hillebrand, Joseph Lehrbuch der Literar-Asthetik. Oder Theorie und Geschichte der schonen Literatur (2 vols.) Mainz: Kupferberg, 1827 GER Hinrichsen, Adolf (1859-?) Das literarische Deutschland (Mit einer Einleitung von Conrad Beyer)

Berlin: Hinstorff 1887 GERGE 2nd ed. 1891 Hirsch, Franz Wilhelm (1844-1920) Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur von ihren Anfdngen bis aufdie neueste Zeit (3 vols) Leipzig: Wilhelm Friedrich, 1883-4 GER GE Geschichte der Weltliteratur in Einzeldarstellungen, 5 Hock, Stephan (1877-1947) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Jur dsterreichische Mittelschulen Wien: Tempsky, 1910 GER AU editions to 1921 (3) various editions and titles Hoefer, Edmund Franz Andreas (1819-82) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte fur Frauen und Jungfrauen Stuttgart: Kroner, 1876 GERGE 2nd ed. 1885 Hoffbauer, K KurzerAbrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Frankfurt an der Oder: Harnecker 1883 GER GE editions to 1913 (5) Hoffmann, von Fallersleben, August Heinrich (1798-1874) Die deutsche Philologie im Grundrifi. Ein Leitfaden zu Vorlesungen Breslau: Aderholz, 1836 GER Hoffmann, von Fallersleben, August Heinrich Fundgruben fur Geschichte deutscher Sprache und Litteratur (2 vols.) Breslau: Grass, 1830-37 GER Hofmann, von Hofmannswaldau, Christian Deutsche Ubersetzungen und Getichte

246

Histories of German Literature

Breslau: Fellgibel, 1679-82 GER Hofmann, von Hofmannswaldau, Christian. See also Neukirch, Benjamin Hohberg, J.W. von Des Herrn von Hohbergs Beytrag zum Schlesischen Helicon, oder Sammlung auserlesener Gedichte Sorau: Hebold, 1733 GER Holczabek, Felix Deutsche Metrik undPoetik nebst einem Abrift der Literaturgeschichte und einer Sammlung von Beispielen. Bin Hilfsbuchfur den deutschen Unterricht... \viezum Selbstunterrichte Wien: Graeser, 1901 GERAU2nded. 1906 Holczabek, Johann Wilhelm (1843-?) Das Nothwendigste aus der deutschen Literatur. In Verbindung mil einer Sammlung zahlreicher passender Gedichte nebst biographischen Notizen. Filrgehobene Volks- undhohere Tochterschulen sowie zum Selbstunterricht Wien: Dirnbock, 1869 GERAU2nded. 1873 Holland, Hyazinth (1827-1918) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der bildenden Kunst Regensburg: Manz, 1853 GER GE Vol. 1 only published Holtermann, Karl (I860-?) Kurze Geschichte der Weltliteratur Freiburg: Herder, 1912 GERGE Holtz, Johannes & W. Deetjen Grundrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer, 1911 GERGE

Homberg, Tinette (1797-1877) Geschichte der scho'nen Literatur der Deutschen for Frauen Dusseldorf: Scheller, 1853 GERGE Hopf, Wilhelm (1842-1921) August Vilmar. Bin Lebens- und Zeitbild(2 vols.) Marburg: Elwert, 1913 GER Horn, Franz Christoph (1781-1837) Dichtercharaktere und biographische Skizzen vermischter Gattung Berlin: Herbig, 1830 GER Horn, Franz Christoph Geschichte und Kritik der deutschen Poesie und Beredsamkeit Berlin: Unger, 1805 GERGE Horn, Franz Christoph Die Poesie und Beredsamkeit der Deutschen von Luthers Zeit bis zur Gegen\vart (4 vols.) Berlin: Enslin, 1822-29 GERGE Horn, Franz Christoph Die schdne Litteratur Deutschlands •wahrend des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts Berlin: Nicolai, 1812-13 GERGE Horn, Franz Christoph Umrisse zur Geschichte und Kritik der scho'nen Literatur Deutschlands \vahrendderJahre 1790 bis 1818 Berlin: Enslin, 1819 GERGE 2nd ed. 1821 Horn, Gustav Wilhelm Hilfsbuch beim Unterricht in der Litteraturgeschichte. Zum Gebrauch in PrdparandenAnstalten und oberen Klassen der Biirgerschule Langensalza: Schulbuchhandlung,

247 Bibliography

1882 GER GE editions to 1908 (12) Hornburg, Lupold (14th century) The poems of Lupold Hornburg (ed. C.H. Bell & Erwin G. Gudde) Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1945 GER - U. of Cal. Publs. in Mod. Philology, 27:4 Horning, Louis Emerson (1858-?) Syllabus of lectures on the outline of German literature Toronto, ON: Musson, 1909 ENGCA Horst, Klotilde von der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den altesten bis aufdie neuere Zeit, mit Beispielen aus den besten Werken derPoesie undProsa. Zum Gebrauch Jur Schulen und zum Selbstunterricht (3 vols. in 2) Detmold: Helwing, 1869-70 GERGE Horwath, Franklin James German student's manual of the literature, land, and people of Germany New York: American Book Co., 1908 ENG US edition used 1910 Hsmer, James Kendall (1834-1927) Short history of German literature St. Louis, MO: G.I. Jones, 1879 ENG US unnumbered editions to 1910 Hotop, G. Lehrbuch der deutschen Literatur. Fur die Zwecke der Lehrerbildung Halle: Schroedel, 1895 GER GE editions to 1919 (6) Howald, Johann (1854-?) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Konstanz: Hirsch, 1903 GER CH editions to 1912 (3) Hrotsvit, of Gandersheim (9357-975?)

Opera Hrotsvite illustris virginis et monicalis germanae, gente saxonica orte nuper a Conrado Celte inventa Nurnberg: no publ., 1501 LAT - Also ed. Leonard Schurzfleisch (Wittenberg: SchrSdter, 1707) Huber, Michel (1727-1804) Choix de poesies allemandes (4 vols.)

Paris: Humblot, 1766 FREFR Huber, Michel (1727-1804). See also Ebeling, Christoph Daniel Hiippe, Bernhard (1802-?) Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur mit Proben von Ulfila bis Gottsched, nebst einem Glossar. Fur Gymnasien und hohere Lehranstalten Coesfeld: Wittneven, 1846 GER GE editions to 1894 (4) Huet, Pierre Daniel (1630-1721) Traite de I'origine des romans Paris: no publ., 1670 FRE Hugo, von Trimberg (1230-1313) Registrum multorum auctorum (ed. Karl Langosch) Berlin: Ebering, 1942 LAT - Germanische Studien, 235; other edition - Wien: Tempsky, 1888 Hugo, von Trimberg Der Renner (ed. Gustav Ehrismann) Stuttgart: Literarischer Verein, 1908-11 GER B.L.V.S., 247,248, 252,256 Huhn, Eugen H. Th. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von der altesten bis aufdie neueste Zeit Stuttgart: J.B. Muller, 1852 GERGE Hunger, Karl. See Rackl, Josef Hungerland, Heinz (Fried rich

248

Histories of German Literature

Wilhelm) (1873-?) Das •wissenschaftliche Studium der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. Ein Wegweiserjur Studierende Lund: Gleerupska univ. bokhandeln, 1906 GER also Heidelberg: Ficker, 1906 - expanded from article in Skandinavisk m&nadsrevy for undervisning i de tre hufvudspraken (Feb/Mar 1906) Hungerland, Heinz (Friedrich Wilhelm) Deutsche Stamm-, Sprach- und Literaturgeschichte in den Grundzugen Stockholm: Norstedt, 1913 GER SW also Leipzig: Pehrsson? Hunold, Christian Friedrich (1680-1721) Die allerneueste Art hqflich und galant zu schreiben (2 parts, 17??, 1709) Hamburg: Fickweiler, 1710 GER 4th edition Hunold, Christian Friedrich Die allerneueste Art zur reinen und galanten Poesie zu gelangen ... Hamburg: Liebernickel, 1707 GER Hunold, Christian Friedrich Auserlesene und noch nie gedruckte Gedichte unterschiedener beriihmten und geschickten Manner (3 vols.) Halle: Neue Buchhandlung, 1718-21 GR Hunold-Menantes, Christian Friedrich. See Hunold, Christian Friedrich Irenicus, Franciscus (1495-1559?) Germaniae exegeseos volumina duodecim Hagen: Kobergius, 1518 LAT Ivany, St.

Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur den Schulgebrauch Budapest: Lampel, 1871 GER HU unidentified - see Germania, 17 (1872): 490 (no. 437) Jacket, J.C. See Berthelt, August Jantzen, Hermann (71874-?) Den tyska litteraturens historia i grunddragen afdess utveckling of Hermann Jantzen. Bemyndigad tifversattning afN.R. Palmlof (History of German literature and outlines of its development - tr. N.R. Palmlof) Lund: Gleerup, 1908 SWE SW source Jantzen Jantzen, Hermann Deutsche Literaturgeschichte in den Grundzugen ihrer Entwickelung Berlin: Hillger, 1904 GER GE Hillger's illustrierte Volksbucher 18 Jarry de Mancy, Adrien (1796-1862) Atlas historique et chronologique des litteratures anciennes et modernes Paris: Renouard, 1826 FREFR Jarry de Mancy, Adrien Deutsche, historischchronologische Literaturkarte. Ubersicht der deutschen Literatur seit ihrem Ursprunge bis aufunsere Zeiten Weimar: Industrie-Comptoir, 1829 GERGE Jelinek, Franz (1865-?). See Bauer, Friedrich Jenny, [Heinrich] Ernst (1876-?) & Virgile Rassel Geschichte der schweizerischen Literatur Bern: Francke, 1910 GER Jerome, Saint. See Hieronymus

249

Bibliography

Jerusalem, Johann Fried rich Wilhelm (1709-89) Lettre sur la litterature allemande Berlin: Decker, 1781 FRE Jerusalem, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm Uber die teutsche Sprache und Litteratur Berlin: Rottmann: 1781 GER Jerusalem, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm. See also Moser, Justus Jeiek, Jan Ferdinand (187S-?) & Anton Kasik Deutsches Lesebuchjur die oberste Klasse der Realschulen und ihnen gleichgestellten Lehranstalten mil bohmischer Unterrichtssprache Olmutz: Promberger, 1914 GER/CZE CZ includes Leitfaden ... Jeiek, Jan Ferdinand & Anton Kasik Kommentar zu dem deutschen Lesebuche und Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte ... Prag: priv. publ., 1914 GERCZ Jezek, Jan Ferdinand & Anton Kasik Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Jur die oberste Klasse der Real- schulen und ihnen gleichgestellten Lehranstalten mil bohmischer Unterrichtssprache Olmutz: Promberger, 1914 GERCZ Jezek, Jan Ferdinand Nemeckepisem ... (Czech version of Deutsches Lesebuch) 1915 CZE possibly 1914 Joerdens, Karl Heinrich (1751-1835) Denkwurdigkeiten, Charakterzuge undAnekdoten aus dem Leben der vorzilglichsten deutschen Dichter und Prosaisten (2 vols)

Leipzig: Kummer, 1812-13 GER Joerdens, Karl Heinrich Lexikon deutscher Dichter und Prosaisten (6 vols.) Leipzig: Weidmann, 1806-12 GER Joret Charles La litterature allemande au XVIIIme siecle... Aix:Makaire, 1876 FRE Jng, Alexander Briefe fiber die neueste Literatur... Hamburg: Hoffmann & Campe, 1837 Kannegiesser, Karl Friedrich Ludwig (1781-1864) Abrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Bunzlau: Appun, 1838 GERGE Karpeles, Gustav (1848-1909) Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur von ihren Anfangen bis aufdie Gegenwart Berlin: Baumgartel, 1891 GER 2nd ed. 1901 Kasik, Anton. See Jezek, Jan Ferdinand Keller, Isidor (1844-1904) Bilder aus der deutschen Literatur New York: American Book Co., 1895 GER US reprint 1905 Kepner, Johann Friedrich (1745-1820) Entwurfliterarischer Vorlesungen Wien: Horling, 1791 GER - unseen Khull, Ferdinand Geschichte der altdeutschen Dichtung Graz: Leuschner & Lubensky, 1886 GER Kindermann, Balthasar (1636-1706)

250

Histories of German Literature

Der deutsche Poet... Wittenberg: Fincelius, 1664 GER Kinzel, Karl (1849-?). See Botticher, Gotthold Kippenberg, Anton (1874-?) Handbuch der deutschen Literatur. Die deutsche Dichtung nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwickelung in einerAuswahl ihrer vorzuglichsten Erzeugnisse Hannover: Norddeutsche Verlagsanstalt, 1885 GER GE Deutsches Lesebuch fur hb'here Tochterschulen editions to 1907(19) Kippenberg, J. Abrifi der deutschen Literatur. Die deutsche Dichtung nach ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung in einerAuswahl ihrer vorzuglichsten Erzeugnisse vom Anfang bis aufdie Gegen\vart (nach dent Handbuch ... von A. Kippenberg) Hannover: Norddeutsche Verlagsanstalt, 1890 GERGE Kirchner, Friedrich (1848-1900) Synchronisms zur deutschen National-Litteratur. Von der fruhesten Zeit bis 1884 Berlin: Mayer & Mtiller, 1885 GERGE Kiy, Viktor (1837-1902) Abrifl der deutschen Literaturgeschichte von den dltesten Zeiten bis zu Goethes Tod. Ein Leitfadenjurden Unterricht... und eine Einfuhrungfitr das Privatstudium Hannover: C. Meyer, 1902 GERGE Klaj, Johannes (16167-56) Lobrede der Teutschen Poeterey ... Nurnberg: Endter, 1645 GER Klausch, Paul

Hilfsbuchjur den Unterricht in der deutschen Literaturgeschichte an neun- und zehnstujigen Madchenschulen Leipzig: Hirt, 1908 GER GE editions to 1923 (4) title varies Klee, Gotthold Ludwig (1850-1916) Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur hohere Schulen und zum Selbstunterricht Dresden: Bondi, 1895 GER GE editions to 1922 (22) Hepperbein, Florian (1652-1712) Poeseos Germanicae historia (Diss. Wittenberg 1681) Wittenberg 1681 LAT unseen Kletke, Hermann (1818-86) Handbuch zur Geschichte der neueren deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Berlin: Amelang, 1845 GERGE KJober, und Hellscheborn, Carl Ludwig von Von Schlesien, vor und nach dem Jahrl740 Breslau: not known, 1785 GER 2nd ed. pub. W.G. Korn Klopstock, Friedrich Gottlieb (1724-1803) UberSprache und Dichtkunst, Fragmentefon Klopstock (3 vols.) Hamburg: Herold, 1779-81 GER Kluepfcl, Karl. See Schwab, Gustav Benjamin Kluge, Hermann (1832-1914) Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur. Zum Gebrauch an hdheren Unterrichtsanstalten und zum Selbststudium Altenburg: Bonde, 1869 GER GE editions to 1937 (58) Kluge, Hermann

251 Bibliography Storia della letterature tedesca ad use delle scuole superiori e ridotta pe'giovanni studiosi (History of German literature for use in schools and as a review for young students tr. Guido Cantalamessa) Roma: Vogtera, 1906 ITA IT source Kluge (30th ed.) Knuttell, A[ugust] Geschichte der schonen Literatur derDeutschen mit Beispielen. Fur hd'here Tochterschulen und zum Selbstunterrichte Breslau: Grass, Earth, 1853 GERGE Kobel, Oskar Deutsche Dichter. Eine kurze Literaturgeschichte Breslau: Handel, 1906 GER GE editions to 1933 (10) Kobel, Oskar Wiederholungsbuch for die deutsche Literaturgeschichte und Literaturkunde in Form von Fragen undAntworten Breslau: Handel, 1908 GERGE editions to 1918 (3) Koberstein, August (1797-1870) Grundrift zur Geschichte der deutschen National-Litteratur. Zum Gebrauch aufgelehrten Schulen Leipzig: Vogel, 1827 GER GE editions to 1872 (5) as Geschichte der deutschen Literatur - incompl., rev. 6th ed. by Karl Bartsch 1884 Koberstein, August Leitfaden beim Vortrage der Geschichte der deutschen National-Litteratur Jur die Schiiler der oberen Gymnasial-Classen Leipzig: Vogel, 1828 GERGE 2nd ed. 1834 Koberstein, August Manuel de I'histoire de la litterature allemande (tr. X.

Marmier) Paris: Levrault, 1834 FRE FR source Koberstein Koch, Erduin Julius (1764-1834) Compendium der deutschen Literatur-Geschichte von den filtesten Zeiten bis aufdas Jahr 77S7(2vols.) Berlin: KOnigliche Realschulbuchhandlung, 1790 GER Koch, Erduin Julius Grundrift der deutschen Literaturgeschichte von den altesten Zeiten bis aufLessings Tod (2 vols) Berlin: Konigliche Realschulbuchhandlung, 1795-98 GER = 2nd ed. of his Compendium Koch, Erduin Julius Historia poeseos lyricae Germanorum Wittenberg: Tzschiedrich, 1794 LATGE Koch, Max (1855-1931) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Stuttgart: Goschen, 1893 GER GE Sammlung Goschen 31 editions to 1920(8) Koch, Max. See also Vogt, Friedrich Hermann Traugott Konig, Johann Bernhard Joseph (1732-94) Poetische Chrestomathie, oder, Muster der hohern deutschen Poesie Munster: Aschendorff, 1775 GER Konig, Johann Ulrich (1688-1744) "Untersuchung von dem guten Geschmack in der Dicht- und Redekunst" (in Canitz, Gedichte, 227-322) Leipzig/Berlin: Haude, 1727 GER Konig, Oskar Geschichte der deutschen Literatur in zusammenhangender Darstellung Jur hd'here Mddchenschulen und die

252

Histories of German Literature

weibliche Jugend, some Jur jeden, der sich in die geschichtliche Ent•wicklung der poetischen Literatur der Deutschen einfuhren -will Leipzig: Teubner, 1888 GER GE editions to 1909 (6) Konig, Robert (1828-1900) Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Bin Hilfsbuch for Schule und Haus Berlin: Velhagen & Klasing, 1887 GER GE editions to 1912 (6) Konig, Robert Deutsche Litteraturgeschichte Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1878-9 GER GE - editions to 1930 (37) Konnecke, Gustav (1845-1920) Bilderatlas zur Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur. Eine Erganzung zujeder deutschen Literaturgeschichte Marburg: Elwert, 1886 GER GE 2nd ed. 1895 - repr. Graz 1981 Konnecke, Gustav Deutscher Literatur-Atlas Marburg: Elwert, 1909 GERGE2nded. 1912 Korner, Friedrich Deutsches Lesebuchjur Gymnasien, Handels- und Realschulen Pest:Kugler, 1865 GER Korn, J.F. See Anonymous, Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Kramer, Fr. Chronologische Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Bin Anhang zujeder Literaturgeschichte, namentlich zu den Handbuchern von Lindemann undBrugier Freiburg: Herder, 1869 GERGE Krauss, Hermann

Kurzer Abrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung zum Schulgebrauch Genf: Burkhardt, 1889 GERCH Kreidt, Dietrich. See Saalfeld, Lerke von Krell, Leo. See Rackl, Josef Kretschmer, Karl Einjuhrung in die deutsche Literatur. Nebst einer Poetik. Fur hdhere Schulen, Lehrer- und Lehrerinnenbildungsanstalten, Lyzeen und zum Selbstunterricht Habelschwerdt: Franke, 1907 GER GE editions to 1920 (3) Kretschmer, Karl Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur nebst einer Poetik. Fur hdhere Schulen, Lehrer- und Lehrerinnenbildungsanstalten, hdhere Madchenschulen und zum Selbstunterricht Habelschwerdt: Franke, 1907 GERGE Kriebitzsch, Karl Theodor (1819-87) Lehr- und Lesebuch zur Literaturgeschichte, vornehmlich fur Seminarien, hdhere Burger- und Madchenschulen Berlin: Stubenrauch, 1878 GER GE same as Vorschule ... from 4/5th edition (1878) Kriebitzsch, Karl Theodor Vorschule der Literaturgeschichte fur Schulen, vornehmlich hdhere Tdchterschulen und gehobene Burgerschulen Berlin: Stubenrauch, 1868 GER GE editions to 1883 (5) Kromayer, Johann (1576-1643) Deutsche grammatica Weimar: Wiedner, 1618 GER Kriiger, Karl A. (1839-?) Deutsche Litteraturkunde in

253

Bibliography

Charakterbildern und Abrissen. Fur Volks-, Mittel- und Burgerschulen und die entsprechenden Klassen hoherer Lehranstalten Danzig: Axt, 1882 GER GE editions to 1912 (13) Kriiger, Karl A. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur in Einzelbildern und Umrissen Danzig: Axt, 1892 GER GE editions to 1918 (3) Kubelka, Viktor Strucny pichled nemecke literatury. Kurzer Uberblick der deutschen Literatur. Maturitatsfragen Brno: priv. publ., unknown CZE unidentified 1st ed., 4th ed. 1935 Kiihn, Richard. See Wellberger, H. von Kunsberg, P. von Die deutsche Literaturgeschichte. Ein Lehr- und Hilfsbuch in Fragen und Antworten, zum Selbstunterricht und zur Vorbereitung aufPrufungen, mil besonderer Berucksichtigung fur jem der Einjdhrig-Freimlligen Regensburg: Coppenrath, 1882 GERGE Kuntzel, O. See Gutjahr, Emil Kurschner, Josef (1853-1902) Deutsche National-Litteratur Stuttgart: Spemann, 1882GER Kiittner, Karl August Ferdinand (1749-1800) Charaktere teutscher Dichter von Karl dem Groflen bis aufdas Jahr 1780 Berlin: Voss, 1781 GER Kummer, Karl Ferdinand, Edler von (1848-1918) & Karl Stejskal Einjuhrung in die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Wien:Manz, 1893

GER AU editions to 1925 (20) Hilfsbuch fur den deutschen Unterricht, Bd. 3 Kummer, Karl Ferdinand, Edler von & Karl Stejskal Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Zum Unterrichtsgebrauch an Lehrerund Lehrerinnenbildungsanstalten und verwandten Lehranstalten Wien:Manz, 1894 GER AU editions to 1921 (16) Kunisch, Johann Gottlieb (1789-?) Handbuch der deutschen Sprache und Litteratur seit Lessing (3 vols.) Leipzig: Earth, 1822-4 GER GE vol. 3: Die altdeutsche Literatur "seit Lessing" dropped Kurz, Heinrich (1805-73) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit Proben aus den Werken der vorziiglichsten Schriftsteller (3 vols.) Leipzig: Teubner, 1851-59 GER GE editions to 1876 (7) Kurz, Heinrich Handbuch derpoetischen Nationalliteratur der Deutschen von Haller bis aufdie neueste Zeit (3 vols.) Zurich: Meyer und Zeller, 1840-42 GER Kurz, Heinrich Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Leipzig: Teubner, 1860 GER GE editions to 1878 (5) reissued by Max Wedel 1927 as Deutsche Litg. Lambecius, Petrus (1628-80) Prodromus historiae literariae Hamburg: Piper, 1659 LAT Lampel, Leopold & Leo Langer DeutschesLesebuch ...

254

Histories of German Literature

Wien: Holder, 1884 GER various parts and editions Lampel, Leopold. See also Langer, Leo Lancizolle, Ludwig von Chronologisch-bibliographische Ubersicht der deutschen Nationalliteratur im 18ten und 19ten Jahrhundert nach ihren \vichtigsten Erscheinungen. Mit besonderer Riicksicht auf Goethe Berlin: Reimer, 1847 GERGE Lange, A. Krotki zarys literatury powszechnej - Cz^sc III Literatur ludow giermariskich oraz uzupetnienie (A short outline of world history. Part HI The literature of the Germanic peoples, with supplement) Warszawa: Arct, 1908 POL PO Ksiazzki dla wszystkich

392,408,419,470 Lange, Albert (1842-?) Tableau de la litterature allemande Paris: Cerf, 1885 FREFR re-issued 1897 Lange, Otto (1815-79) Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ein Leitfaden fur Schulen Berlin: Nitze, 1851 GER GE editions to 1886 (11) Lange, Otto Letteratura tedesca (German literature - tr. Andrea Paganini) Milano: Hoepli, 1878 FTA IT source Lange Lange, Otto LiteraturgeschichtlichLebensbilder und Charakteristiken. Biographisches Repertorium der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Berlin: Gaertner, 1870 GERGE 2nd ed. 1875 Langer, Leo

Grundrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte im Anschlufie an das deutsche Lesebuch von Leopold Lampel und Leo Langer Wien: Holder, 1910 GER AU editions to 1919 (3) Langer, Leo. See also Lampel, Leopold Laube, Heinrich (1806-84) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (4 vols) Stuttgart: Hallberger, 1839-40 GERGE Lawatz, Heinrich Wilhelm (1748-1825) Handbuch fur Bilcherfreunde und Bibliothekare (7 vols.) Halle: Gebauer, 1788-94 GER Lazius, Wolfgang (1514-65) De gentium aliquot migrationibus sedibus jixis, reliquiis linguarumque initiis et immutationibus ac dialectis libri xii Basel: Oporinus, 1557 LAT LeFevre-Deumier, Jules (1797-1857) Celebrites allemandes. Essais bibliographiques et litteraires Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1894 FRE LeFevre-Deumier, Jules Lecons de litterature allemande. Morceaux choisis des poetes et des prosateurs. Ouvrage precede d'un coup d'oeil sur la litterature allemande depuis Luther jusqu'a nos jours Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1893 FREFR Lehmann, Johann August Otto Ludwig (1802-83) Handbuch der deutschen Literatur. Eine Sammlung ausgewdhlter Stucke deutscher Dichter und Prosaisten, nebst

255 Bibliography literargeschichtlichen und biographischen Notizen Leipzig: Weigel, 1861-62 GERGE Lehmann, Rudolf (1855-1927) Ubersicht tiber die Entwickelung der deutschen Sprache und Literatur. Fur die oberen Klassen hdherer Lehranstalten Berlin: Weidmann, 1894 GER GE editions to 1927 (11) Lehms, Georg Christian (1684-1717) Teutschlands galante Poetinnen mil ihren sinnreichen und netten Proben (2 parts) Frankfurt: Heinscheidt, 1714-15 GER Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1646-1716) "Ermahnung an die Teutsche, ihren Verstand und Sprache besser zu uben" (Deutsche Schriften, ed. W. Schmidt-Kowarzik, I, 3-24) Leipzig: Meiner, 1916GER Leipold, Eugen Deutsche Litteraturgeschichte, in 50 Kreise abgeteilt. nebst einem Anhang ilberMetrik und Poetik. Fur Mittelschulen, Lehrerseminarien so\vie zur Wiederholung fur Schuldienstexpectanten Straubing: Attenhofer, 1893 GER GE unseen Leixner-Grunberg, Otto von (1847-1907) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Leipzig: Spamer, 1880 GER GE editions to 1916 (9) - also as vols. 1-2 of Geschichte der Literatur alter Volker Leixner-Grunberg, Otto von Geschichte der Literatur aller Vdlker(4 vols.)

Leipzig: Spamer, 1897 GERGE Leixner-Grunberg, Otto von Illustrierte Geschichte des deutschen Schriftthums in volksthUmlicher Darstellung Leipzig: Spamer, 1880-81 GERGE Lemcke, Karl [=Carl Manno] (1831-1913) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung neuerer Zeit Leipzig: Seemann, 1871 GER GE part one only published 2nded. 1882 Lemmermayer, Fritz (1857-1932) Kurzes Repetitorium der deutschen Literaturgeschichte LeipzigAVien: Breitenstein, 1894-98 GER GE Breitensteins Repetitorien 63 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim (1729-81) Beytrdge zurHistorie und Aufnahme des Theaters (with C. Mylius) Stuttgart: Mylius, 1750 GER Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim Samtliche Schriften (ed. Karl Lachmann, 3rd ed.) Stuttgart: Goschen, 1886GER originally 1838-40 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim "Zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur, von den Minnesangern bis auf Luther" (in Lachmann's 3rd ed., XVI, 345-69) 1902 GERGE Ley, Gustav. See Hentschel, Curt Leyser, Polycarp (1690-1728) Historia poetarum et poematum medii aevi decent Halle: Novus, 1721 LAT

256

Histories of German Literature

Leyser, Polycarp Meditationes de genuina historia literaria 1714 LAT Liebel, Ignaz (1754-1820) Epistel uber poetische Stumper und Stumperey Wien: Strauss, 1817 GER Liebel, Ignaz Uber Dichter und Dichtkunst unserer Zeit. Zwey Episteln nebst einigen anderen Gedichten Wien: Bauer, 1817 GER Lilienthal, Michael (1686-1750) De historia literaria certae cuiusdam gentis scribenda consultatio Leipzig/Rostock: Russworm, 1710 LAT Lindemann, Wilhelm (1828-79) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den altesten Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart (2 vols.) Freiburg: Herder, 1866 GER GE editions to 1915 (10) Lindemann, Wilhelm. See also Kramer, Fr. Linders, G. La letteratura tedesca dai tempi piu remoti sino ai nostri din, compendia storico (Historical survey of German literature from the earliest times to the present) Triest: Chiopris, 1895 HA IT Linke, K See Hentschel, Adolf Linnig, Franz Vorschule derPoetik und Litteraturgeschichte. Bin Hilfsbuch far den Unterricht im Deutschen fur Lehrer undLernende Paderborn: Schoningh, 1878 GERGE2nded. 1888 Lippert, Rudolph Deutsche Dichtung. Hilfsbuch fur

die Einjuhrung in die \vichtigsten Erscheinungen der deutschen National-Literatur Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer, 1908 GER GE editions to 1922 (5) Lodemann, August (1842-1902) Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Boston, MA: Schoenhof & Moeller, 1874 GER US Loeve-Veimars, (Francois) Adolphe (1801-54) Resume de I'histoire de la litterature allemande Paris: Janet, 1826 FREFR Loeve-Veimars, (Francois) Adolphe Storia della letteratura alemanna (History of German literature - tr. Antonia Piazza) Brescia: Bettoni, 1829 ITA IT source Loeve-Veimars Loewen, Johann Friedrich (1729-71) Geschichte des deutschen Theaters ... (ed. Heinrich Stumcke) Berlin: Frensdorf, 1905 GER = Schriften, IV, Hamburg 1765-66 Loise, Ferdinand (1825-1904) Histoire de la poesie; L'Allemagne dans sa litterature nationale Bruxelles: Vromant, 1873 FREBE2nded. 1875 Loos, Cornelius (1546-95) Illustrium Germaniae scriptorum catalogus ... ab annoMD usque LXXXI Mainz: Behem, 1582 LAT Lotze, Alfred (1882-?) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Bin Buchjur hohere Schulen und das Haus Leipzig: Haupt, 1911

257

Bibliography

GERGE Lublin, Isabel T. Primer of German literature London: Sonnenschein, Lowrey, 1888 ENG UK source Kluge - editions to 1909(5) Ludwig, Karl Heimatskarte der deutschen Literatur mil Orts- und Namenverzeichnis Wien: Freytag & Berndt, 1903 GERAU2nded. 1924 Liiben, August (1804-76) & Carl Nacke (1821-55) Einftihrung in die deutsche Literatur vermittelt durch Erlauterung von Musterstucken ... Fur den Schul- und Selbstgebrauch Leipzig: Brandstetter, 1860? (2) GER GE 2nd ed. also 1864 editions in parts to 1918 (11) Luz, Georg Grundztige zur Einleitung in die deutsche Literatur und ihre Geschichte Mannheim: Bensheimer, 1883 GERGE Luz, Georg Ubersicht des Lehrgangs der Einfuhrung in die deutsche Literatur und ihre Geschichte in der \veiblichen Fortbildungsanstalt zu Biberach UlnrEbner, 1880 GER Lyon, Otto (1853-1912) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: Teubner, 1902 GER GE Parts (Hefte) of Handbuch der deutschen Sprache - editions to 1915(8) Lyon, Otto Litteraturkundefur Lehrer- und Lehrerinnenbildungsanstalten Leipzig: Teubner, 1905 GERGE

Lyon, Otto. See also Hentschel, Curt M.K.C.P.C. Unvorgreifliches Bedenken uber die Schriften derer bekanntesten Poeten hochdeutscher Sprache Ko'nigsberg: unknown, 1681 GER unidentified Martens, Heinrich Richard (1699-1743) Auserlesene Fruchte der deutschen Poesie einiger Ober- und Nieder-Sachsen Halberstadt: Schoppen, 1731 GER Mager, Adolf Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur hohere Lehranstalten und zum Selbststudium Wien: Pichler, 1903 GER AU editions to 1922 (5) Maier, Elisa Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Hannover: Ehlermann, 1852 GER GE editions to 1881 (6) Mair, Franz & Fr. Schneider Handbuchlein zur Wiederholung der Litteraturgeschichte und der Mythologie fur Schiller an Volksund Burgerschulen Wien: Pichler, 1871 GERAU Manno, Carl. See Lemcke, Karl [pseud.] Manso, Johann Kaspar Friedrich (1760-1826) "Kurze tJbersicht der Geschichte der deutschen Poesie" (Charaktere der vornehmsten Dichter aller Nationen, vols. 1-8) Leipzig: Dyck, 1792, 1808 GER GE = Nachtrage zu Sulzer, Allgemeine Theorie... Manso, Johann Kaspar Friedrich Vermischte Abhandlungen und

258

Histories of German Literature

Aufsatze Breslau:Kom, 1821 GER Mantzel, Ernst Johann Friedrich (1699-1768) Der vortrefflichsten Teutschen Poeten verfertigte Meister-Stucke ... (4 vols.) Rostock: Fritsch, 1721-25 GER Marbach, Gotthard Oswald (1810-90) Uber moderne Literatur. In Briefen an eine Dame Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1836-8 GER Mardner, Wilhelm Kleine deutsche Litteraturgeschichte mit Proben aus den Werken der besprochenen Dichter Mainz: Kirchheim, 1884 GERGE Mardner, Wilhelm Litteraturgeschichte Jur hohere Madchenschulen und zum Selbstgebrauch Mainz: Kirchheim, 189? GER GE 2nd ed. 1895 - editions to 1911(6) Marggraff, Hermann (1809-64) Deutschlands Jungste Literatur und Culturepoche. Charakteristiken Leipzig: Engelmann, 1839 GER Mass, Theodor Handbuch der deutschen Literatur. Biographien der Dichter nebst Erlauterungen und Inhaltsangaben Hirer Hauptwerke Weinheim: Ackermann, 1903 GER GE editions to 1914 (3) Massmann, Hans Ferdinand (1797-1874) Das vergangene Jahrzehend der deutschen Literatur Munchen: Lentner, 1827 GER

Matz, Rudolf Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur. Ein Hilfsbuch zum Memorieren und Repetitieren. Fur den Schul- und Privatgebrauch in tabellarischer Ubersicht Langensalza: GreBler, 1883 GERGE Mauvillon, Eleazar (1712-79) Lettres francoises et germaniques London: F. Allemand, 1740 FRE Meiners, Christoph (1747-1810) Geschichte des Ursprungs, Fortgangs und Verfalls der Wissenschaften in Griechenland undRom (2 vols.) Lemgo: Meyer, 1781-82 GER Meiners, Christoph (1747-1810) Grundrift der Theorie und Geschichte der schdnen Wissenschaften Lemgo: Meyer, 1787 GER Meister, Johann Gottlieb Unvorgreiffliche Gedancken von teutschen epigrammatibus in deutlichen Regeln ... nebst einem Vorbericht von dem Esprit der Deutschen Leipzig: Heybey, 1698 GER Meister, Leonhard (1741-1811) Beitrage zur Geschichte der teutschen Sprache und Nationalliteratur Bern: Typographische Gesellschaft, 1777 GER CH Also 2 vols. Heidelberg: Pfahler, 1789 Meister, Leonhard Charakteristik deutscher Dichter (2 vols.) Zurich: FuBli & Steiner, 1785-87 GER Also 2 vols. St. Gallen/Leipzig: Huber, 1789

259

Bibliography

Meister, Leonhard Friedrich des Grofien \vohlthdtige Rilcksicht auch auf Verbesserung teutscher Sprache undLiteratur Zurich: Orell, GeBner, FuM, 1787 GER Meister, Leonhard Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und der Schriftstellerwelt im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Proben ihrer Dichtkunst(2 vols.) Bern: Typographische Gesellschaft, 1796 GER Meister, Leonhard "Hauptepochen der deutschen Sprache seit dem achten Jahrhundert" Schriften der kurfurstl. dt. Ges. in Mannheim, H: 255-306 1787 GER Meister, Leonhard Uber die teutsche Litteratur Zurich: no publ, 1781 GER with reference to Friedrich n Meleg, Gyula A nemet irodalom-tortenet. Rovid rajza es a nemet mondatszerkezet szabdlyai es tdbldzata (German literary history. A short outline and rules and table for German syntax) Budapest: Rozsa, 1881 HUNHU Menge, Hermann (1841-1939) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der modernen Kulturbestrebungen Wolfenbuttel: ZwiBler, 1877 GERGE2nded. 1882 Mensch, Ella (1859-1935) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte. Fur Schuler alter hoherer Lehranstalten, \vie Gymnasien, Seminarien, hoherer Bilrgerschulen, Oberrealschulen, Realschulen, Kadettenschulen, militdrischer Vorbereitungsanstalten und

Privatlehranstalten Kattowitz: Carl Siwinna 1907 GER PO Goldene Schulerbibliothek 52nded. 1913 Menzel, Wolfgang (1798-1873) Deutsche Dichtung von der dltesten bis auf die neueste Zeit (3 vols.) Stuttgart: Krabbe, 1858-59 GERGE2nded. 1875 Menzel, Wolfgang Die deutsche Literatur Stuttgart: Franckh, 1828 GER GE 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Hallberger, 1836 Menzel, Wolfgang German literature (tr. Thomas Gordon - 4 vols.) Oxford/London: Talboys, 1840 ENG UK source Menzel - also 1847 Menzel, Wolfgang German literature (tr. C.C. Felton) Boston, MA: Milliard, Gray, 1840 ENG US source Menzel Merkel, Garlieb (1769-1850) Briefe an ein Frauenzimmer uber die \vichtigsten Producte der sch&nen Literatur in Teutschland (2 vols.) Berlin: Sander, 1800-3 GER Merkl, W[erner] Das deutsche Volk in seiner Literatur. Bilder aus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte und kurzgefafite Metrik und Poetikjur die einjdhrigen Lehrkurse an Biirgerschulen Wien: Tempsky, 1913 GER AU editions to 1923 (4) Merseburger, Carl Wilhelm. See Frank, Paul [pseud.] Mertens, Hieronymus Andreas (7-1799) Hodegetischer Entwurf einer vollstdndigen Geschichte der Gelehrsamkeit (2 vols.) Augsburg: Klett, 1779-80

260

Histories of German Literature

GER Metcalfe, Frederick (1815-85) History of German literature London: Longman, et al., 1858 ENG UK source Vilmar Meusel, Johann Georg (1743-1820) Leitfaden zur Geschichte der Gelehrsamkeit (3 vols.) Leipzig: Fleischer, 1799-1800 GER Meyer, EL Litteraturkunde Hannover: Stephansstift, 1891 GERGE Meyer, HLT.Matth. Einfuhrung in die deutsche Litteratur Hamburg: Meissner, 1890 GERGE Meyer, Johannes (1854-?) Aus der deutschen Literatur. Dichtungen in Poesie und Prosa (6 vols.) Berlin: Gerdes & Hodel, 1905-13 GER GE Einfuhrung... is part 2 Meyer, Johannes Einjuhrung in die deutsche Literatur. Dichtungen in Poesie und Prosa, erldutertfur Schule und House... Zugleich eine Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (2 vols.) Berlin: Gerdes & Hodel, 1906 GER GE based on Luben & Nacke also as part 2 of Aus der deutschen Literatur Meyer, Johannes Illustrierte deutsche Literaturgeschichte Berlin: Gerdes & Hodel, 1905-13 GER GE also as Einfuhrung in die deutsche Literatur Meyer, R. See Hentschel, Curt Meyer, Richard Moritz (1869-

1914) Die deutsche Literatur des 19.

Jahrhunderts Berlin: Bondi, 1900 GER Meyer, Richard Moritz Grundrifi der neueren deutschen Litteraturgeschichte Berlin: Bondi, 1902 GER Minutti, Rodolfo Letteratura tedesca completamente rifatta del manuale delta letteratura tedesca del Dott. Otto Lange, tradotta da A. Paganini (German literature, completely revised version of Otto Lange's Handbook of German Literature translated by A. Paganini) Milano: Hoepli, 1899 ITA IT source Lange = 3rd ed. of Lange/Paganini Missona, Kazimierz Deutsche Literatur in historischer Entwicklungjur polnische Lehranstalten. Dzieje literatury niemieckiej \v rozwoju historycznym dla skot polskich przedstawit Kolomyja: Zyborski, 1907 GER PO Edition used Brzesk: Krauter, n.d. Missona, Kazimierz Dziaje literatury niemieckiej See under Deutsche Literatur Mody, Mrs Outlines of German literature London: Sampson, Low, 1889 ENG UK Mobius, Paul (1825-89) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: J.J. Weber, 1870? GER GE editions to 1896 (7) Mobius, Paul Katechismus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Leipzig: J.J. Weber, 1856 GER GE later Deutsche Literaturgeschichte - editions to 1896 (7), ed. Klee.

261 Bibliography = Webers illustrierte Katechismen 32 Moser, Justus (1720-94) Uber die deutsche Sprache und Literatur. Schreiben an einen Freund... Osnabruck: Schmidt, 1781 GER Also ed. Carl Schueddekopf, Berlin: Behr, 1902 - with reference to Jerusalem Moore, Robert Webber (1862-1942) History of German literature Hamilton, NY: Colgate University Press, 1894 ENG US editions to 1910 (8) Morhof, Daniel Georg (1639-91) Polyhistor literarius philosophicus et practicus Ltibeck: Bockmann, 1688 LAT - 3rd ed. (1747) repr. Aalen: Scientia, 1970 Morhof, Daniel Georg Unterricht von der teutschen Sprache und Poesie Kiel: Reimann, 1682 GER Mosheim, Joannes Laurentius "Cogitationes de studio litterario" Misc. Lips. VI: cxxvi, 63-82 1717 LAT Motti, Pietro (1854-?) Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Piacenza: Porta, 1879 GER IT Miiller, Christian (1786-?) De la litterature allemande. Deux fragmens du cours de litterature allemande donne a Geneve Geneve: Paschoud, 1826 FRECH Miiller, Gottfried Ephraim (1712-52) Versuch einer Critik iiber die deutschen Dichter (also in Versuch Kber die Critik...)

Leipzig: GroB, 1737 GER GE Also in Vier kritische Gedichte, ed. J. Baechthold (Heilbronn: Henninger, 1883) Miiller, Gottfried Ephraim Versuch iiber die Critik aus dem englischen des Herrn Pope. Nebst einem Versuche ... Dresden: Walther, 1745 GERGE Miiller, Max German Classics ENG unidentified Miiller, von Nitterdorf, Adam Heinrich (1779-1829) Vorlesungen iiber die deutsche Wissenschaft und Literatur Dresden: Gartner: 1806 GER 2nd ed. 1807 Miiller, Wilhelm (1794-1827) Bibliothek deutscher Dichter des 17. Jahrhunderts (14 vols.) Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1822-38 GER Mundt, Theodor (1806-61) Allgemeine Literaturgeschichte (3 vols.) Berlin: Simion, 1846 GER Mundt, Theodor Kritische Walder. Blatter zur Beurtheilung der Literatur, Kunst und Wissenschaft unserer Zeit Leipzig: Wolbrecht, 1833 GER Mutzbacher, Carl Grundriflfur den Unterricht in der deutschen Literatur in den oberen Klassen hoherer Lehranstalten und zum Selbststudium Munchen: Beck, 1906 GERGE Mylaeus, Christophorus (7-1570) De scribenda universitatis rerum historia libri quinque (Florence, 1548) Basel: Oporinus, 1551

262

Histories of German Literature

LAT Mylius, Christlob. See Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim Nacke, Karl. See Liiben, August Nadler, Josef (1884-1963) Entwicklung des deutschen Schrifttums Jena: Diederichs, 1914 GERGE Nadler, Josef Literaturgeschichte der deutschen Stamme und Landschaften (2 vols.) Regensburg: Hebbel, 1912GERGE Nagel, Siegfried Robert (1875-1945) Deutscher Literaturatlas Wien: Fromme, 1907 GERAU Nagel, Siegfried Robert Die Hauptwerke der deutschen Literatur im Zusammenhang mit ihrer Gattung erlautert Wien: Deuticke, 1904 GERAU Nagl, Johann VVillibald (1856-1918) & Jakob Zeidler Deutsch-osterreichische Literaturgeschichte. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung in Osterreich-Ungarn (4 vols.) Wien: Fromme, 1899-1937 GERAU Nascher, Eduard (1853-?) Handbuch der Geschichte der Weltliteratur nach den besten Quellen Berlin: Werther, 1898-1900 GERGE Nasser, Johann Adolph (1753-1828) Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der deutschen Poesie (2 vols.) Altona/Leipzig: Kaven, 1798-1800 GERGE Nauclerus, Joannes (14307-1510)

Chronica (Chronicon) Koln: Quentel, 1544 LAT Netoliczka, Eugen (1825-89) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur far mittlere Lehranstalten, besondersjur T&chterschulen Wien: Pichler, 1873 GER AU editions to 1911 (9) Neukirch, Benjamin (1665-1729) Herrn von Hojjmannswaldau und andrer Deutschen auserlesener und biflher ungedruckter Gedichte... Leipzig: Fritsch, 1697 GER Neumeister, Erdmann (1671-1756) Specimen dissertationis historico-criticae de poetis Germanicis hujus seculi praecipuis Leipzig: Luppius, 1695 LAT - Repr. Bern: Francke, 1978 (ed. Franz Heiduk) Neumeister, Erdmann. See also Hunold, Christian Friedrich Nicholson, E. Student's manual of German literature London: Sonnenschein, 1882 ENGUK Nicolai, Christian Friedrich (1733-1811), ed. Sammlung vermischter Schriften zur Beforderung der schdnen Wissenschaften und derfreyen Kttnste (6 vols.) Berlin: Nicolai, 1759-63 GER Noel, Francois Joseph Michel (1755-1841) & Ehrenfried Stoeber Lecons allemandes de litterature et de morale (3 vols.) Hagenau: Koessler, 1828 FRE FR also Paris: Le Normant, 1827 Nosselt, Friedrich August

263

Bibliography

(1781-1850) Lehrbuch der deutschen Literatur for das \veibliche Geschlecht, besondersfar hohere Tdchterschulen (3 vols.) Breslau: Josef Max, 1833 GER GE editions to 1877 (6) Norrenberg, Peter (1847-94) Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur. Bin Handbuch der Geschichte derPoesie aller Vdlker Miinster: Russell, 1882-84 GER GE 2nd. ed. 1899 (Macke) Oberbreyer, Max Abrift der deutschen Literaturgeschichte von Ulfilas bis Uhland. Zum Schulgebrauch Berlin: Stubenrauch, 1876 GERGE Oberlin. See Prox, Johann Heinrich Obermiiller, L. Leitfaden beim Unterricht in der deutschen Literaturgeschichte, zugleich Repetitionsbuch Haarlem: Bohn 1868 GER NE editions to 1913 (8) ed. Karl Credner Oeser, Christian [pseud]. See Schroer, Tobias Gottfried Oetter, Samuel Wilhelm (1720-92) De poetis quibusdam medii aevi, inprimis de Hugone Trienberga Franco, eiusque satyra vulgo Renner dicta Erlangen: Becker, 1747 LAT Ohorn, Anton (1846-1924) Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Ein Leitfaden far die oberen Klassen der hoheren Tdchterschulen, Mittelschulen und verwandter Anstalten Eisenach: Bacmeister, 1874 GER GE editions to 1898 (3) Oldal, Janos A nemet irodalom rovid tortenete

(A short history of German literature) Budapest: Eggenberger, 1897 HUNHU2nded. 1902 Oltrogge, Carl Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung von den altesten Zeiten bis aufdie Gegen\vart... far Schulen und zur Selbstbelehrung Leipzig: Wigand, 1862 GER GE editions to 1874 (3) Oltrogge, Carl Kurze Ubersicht der Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. Aus Wolffs poetischem Hausschatz Leipzig: Wigand, 1871 GERGE Omeis, Magnus Daniel (1646-1708) Grundliche Anleitung zur teutschen accuraten Reim- und Dicht-Kunst Nurnberg: Michahelles & Adolph, 1704 GER Opitz, von Boberfeld, Martin (1597-1639) Aristarchus, sive de contemptu linguae teutonicae ... (ed. Georg Witkowski) Leipzig: Veit, 1888 LAT Opitz, von Boberfeld, Martin Buch von der deutschen Poeterey Breslau: David Miiller, 1624 GER Reprint Tubingen: Niemeyer, 1963 Opitz, von Boberfeld, Martin Incerti poetae teutonic! Rhythmus de sancto Anno Colon. Danzig: Hiinefeld, 1639 LAT Opitz, von Boberfeld, Martin Prosodia germanica oder Buch von der deutschen Poeterey (ed. Enoch Hanmann) Frankfurt: Klein, 1658 GER

264

Histories of German Literature

Opitz, von Boberfeld, Martin Teutsche Gedichte (4 vols., ed. Daniel Wilhelm Triller) Frankfurt: Varrentrapp, 1746 GER Orelli, F. Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Mil Biographien der hervorragendsten Prosaiker und Dichter Halle: Riese, n.d. GER GE Jugendbibliothek deutscher Classiker 1843-49 unseen Ortlob, Carl (1628-78) De variis Germanae poeseos aetatibus exercitatio Wittenberg: Wendt, 1654 LATGE Ortloff, Johann Andreas (1769-1828) Ideal einer Literaturgeschichte; nebst einem Abrifi einer Literaturgeschichte der neueren Zeit Erlangen: Schubert, 1800 GER Olhvakl, A. See Haehnel, Emil Osterloff, Waldemar Biblioteka autorow niemieckich dla srednich zakladow naukowych (Library of German authors for Secondary Schools and research institutes) Warszawa: no publ., 1909 POLPO Osterloff, Waldemar Deutsche Literaturkunde, bearbeitet nach Kluge, Kriiger u.a. Warszawa: Ludwig Fischer, 1905 GER PO source Kluge, Kriiger, and others Osterloff, Waldemar Zarys historiii literatury niemieckiej (Short history of German literature) Warszawa: Arcta, 1903-4

POLPO Padelford, Frederick Morgan (1875-1942) Select translations from Scaliger's poetics New York: Holt, 1905 ENG Yale Studies in English, 26 Palm, G.F. See Breitenbauch, Georg August Pantaleon, Heinrich (1522-95) Prosopographiae heroum atque illustrium virorum totius Germaniae Basel: Brylinger, 1565-66 LAT Parender, Gian Giacomo Storia generate della letteratura tedesca (General history of German literature - 2 vols.) Torino: Loescher, 1878 ITA IT unseen - rev. Arch. 62 (1879),! 14-16 Parmentier, Jacques (1838-?) Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von einem Franzosen Paris: Laisney, 1894 GERFR Parr, Adolf Karl Das \vichtigste aus der deutschen Literatur, Metrik und Poetikfur osterreichische Burgerschulen/fur Handels-... und Fortbildungsschulen Stemberg: Hitschfeld, 1909 GER AU 2nd ed. 1911 - alternate ed. 1912 (Hilfsbiicher fur den deutschen Sprachunterricht H. 2) Parr, Adolph Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte nebst einem Anhang aus der Metrik undPoetik far Biirgerschulen und verwandten Anstalten Wien: Schulbuchverlag, 19?? GER AU editions to 1926 (7) Patzig, R See Haehnel, Emil Pehersdorfer, Anna (1849-?)

265

Bibliography

Das Wichtigste aus der deutschen Literatur zum Gebrauchjur den Unterricht in den dsterreichischen Biirgerschulen und in der Unterklasse der Mittelschulen Linz: Oberosterreichischer Buchverlag, 190? GER AU editions to 1911 (3) Pelleter, A. J. See Pelleter, Johann Anton Pelleter, Johann Anton Geschichte der deutschen Literatur far hd'here Bildungsanstalten Bielitz:nopubl., 1876 GER GE also Leipzig: Siegismund &Volkening, 1876 Pelleter, Johann Anton Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur fir Mittel- und Burgerschulen Prag: Bellmann, 1870 GERCZ Peschier, Adolphe (1805-78) Histoire de la litterature allemande depuis les temps les plus recules jusqu'a nos jours (2 vols.) Paris/Geneve: Cherbuliez, 1836 FREFR Peschwitz, Gottfried von (1631-96) Jiingst-erbauter Hoch-Teutscher Parnasz Jena:Nisius, 1663 GER Petermann, KG. See Berthelt, August Pfalz, Franz Die deutsche Litteraturgeschichte in den Hauptziigen ihrer Entwicklung sowie in ihren Hauptwerken dargestellt und den hoheren Lehranstalten Deutschlands gewidmet(2 vols.) Leipzig: Brandstetter, 1883 GERGE Philippi, J. Histoire de la litterature allemande

d'apres le Dr. Hermann Kluge avec une preface de L. Crousle Paris: Bonhoure, 1880 FRE FR source Kluge Phillipps, Vivian A short sketch of German literature London: no publ., 1895 ENGUK Phillips, Mary Elizabeth (1857-?) A handbook of German literature London: Bell, 1895 ENG UK editions to 1914 (4) Pischon, Friedrich August (1785-1857) Handbuch der deutschen Prosa, in Beispielen von der frilhesten bis zur jetzigen Zeit Berlin: Realschulbuchhandlung, 1818 GERGE Pischon, Friedrich August Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1830 GER GE editions to 1887 (15) Plant, Johann Traugott (1755-94) Chronologischer, biographischer und kritischer Entwurfeiner Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst und Dichter von den altesten Zeiten bis aufs Jahr 1782 Stettin: Kaffke, 1782 GERGE Plant, Johann Traugott Entwurfeiner Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst aufdas Jahr 1782 Stettin/Berlin: Nicolai, 1782 GERGE Pliimicke, Carl Martin (1749-1833) Entwurfeiner Theatergeschichte von Berlin, nebst allgemeinen Bemerkungen iiber den Geschmack, hiesige Schriftsteller und Behandlung der Kunst, in den verschiedenen Epochen

266

Histories of German Literature

Berlin/Stettin: Nicolai, 1781 GER Politz, Karl Heinrich Ludwig (1749-1833) Das Gesammtgebiet der deutschen Sprache, nach Prosa, Dichtkunst und Beredsamkeit theoretisch und practisch dargestellt (4 vols.) Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1825 GERGE Polzl, Ignaz Leitfaden far den deutschen Unterricht an Handelsschulen. 1. Der Sprachunterricht, 2: Einfuhrung in die Literatur Wien: Holder, 1901 GER AU editions to 1921 (8) Pollak, Valentin "Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte" (in Karl Schiller, Handbuch der deutschen Sprache ... 2 vols.) Wien: Hartleben, 1905 GER AU in 2d ed. (ed. Friedrich Bauer & Franz Streinz), H: 308^456 Forger, Gustav & Eleonore Lemp Deutsches Lesebuch Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1909 GER various parts and editions Pott, L. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur in Grundzugen und ausgewahlten Texten GenfAtar, 1914 GERCH Preuss, Johann David Erdmann (1780-1866) Die schonen Redekiinste in Deutschland, von ihrem ersten Anfange bis aufdie neueste Zeit Berlin: Maurer, 1814-16 GERGE Priest, George Madison (1873-1949) A brief history of German literature. Based on Gottfried Klee's

Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte New York: Scribners, 1909 ENG US source Klee, Grundziige Prosch, Franz (1854-?) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung zum Gebrauche an dsterreichischen Lehranstalten undjur das Selbststudium (3 vols.) Wien: Graeser, 1903 GER AU 2nd ed. 1906 = Leitfaden fur den literarhistorischen Unterricht T.2 Prosch, Franz Leitfaden der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Jur dsterreichische Mittelschulen Wien: Graeser, 1909 GERAU2nded. 1914 Prosch, Franz Leitfaden Jur den literarhistorischen Unterricht an osterreichischen Lehranstalten (undjur das Selbststudium) (2 parts) Wien: Graeser, 1889-91 GERAU Prox, Johann Heinrich De poetis alsatiae eroticis medii aevi vulgo von den elsassischen Minnesingern Strasbourg: Lorenz & Schuler, 1786 LAT Prutz, Robert Eduard (1816-72) Die deutsche Literatur der Gegenwart 1848-1858 Leipzig: Voigt & Gtinther, 1859 GER Prutz, Robert Eduard Literarhistorisches Taschenbuch Leipzig: Wigand, 1843-8 GER Prutz, Robert Eduard Vorlesungen fiber die Geschichte des deutschen Theaters Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1847 GER

267

Bibliography

Pudor, Christian Der Teutschen Sprache Grundrichtigkeit und Zierlichkeit Colin an der Spree: no publ., 1672 GER unidentified Pfitz, Wilhelm (1806-77) Grundriji der Geographic und Geschichte derStaaten ... (3 vols. antiquity, M.A., modern) Koln: Baedeker, 1835-42 GER Putz, Wilhelm Ubersicht der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur jur hdhere Lehranstalten Koblenz: Baedeker, 1855 GER GE editions to 1898 (11) originally as Anhang to his Grundrifl der Geographic und Geschichte, Bd. 2, 3 Puschmann, Adam (1532-1600) Grundlicher Bericht des teutschen Meistergesangs (edition of 1571, ed. Richard Jones) Halle: Niemeyer, 1888 GER - Neudrucke dt. Lw., 73 Rackl, Josef (1848-1915) & Eduard Ebner (7-1924) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte jur hdhere Schulen und zum Selbstunterricht Bamberg: Buchner, 1908 GER GE editions by various editors to 1960, e.g., Leo Krell & Leonhard Fiedler 1950 Rambach, Johann Jakob (1737-1818) Versuch einer pragmatischen Litterairhistorie Halle: Gebauer, 1770 GER Rassel, Virgile. See Jenny, [Heinrich] Ernst Rassmann, Friedrich (1772-1831) Deutscher Dichternekrolog oder gedrangte Ubersicht der meisten sowohl alteren als neueren

verstorbenen deutschen Dichter, Romanenschriftsteller... nebst Angabe ihrer Schriften Nordhausen: Happach, 1818 GER Rassmann, Friedrich Gallerie derjetzt lebenden deutschen Dichter, Romanenschriftsteller, Erzahler... Helmstadt: Fleckeisen, 1818-21 GER Rassmann, Friedrich Literarisches Handworterbuch der verstorbenen deutschen Dichter Leipzig: Lauffer, 1826 GER Rassmann, Friedrich Pantheon deutscher jetzt lebender Dichter und in die Belletristik eingreifender Schriftsteller, begleitet mil kurzen biographischen Notizen und der \vichtigsten Literatur Helmstedt: Fleckeisen, 1823 GER Ratich, Wolfgang (1571-1635) Ratichianische Schriften (2 vols., ed. Paul Stolzner) Leipzig: R. Richter, 1892-93 GER Raumer, Friedrich Ludwig Georg von (1781-1873) Handbuch zur Geschichte der Litteratur (4 vols.) Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1864-66 GER Reichard, Elias Caspar (1714-91) Versuch einer Historic der deutschen Sprachkunst Hamburg: Martini, 1747 GER Reid, M.F. A handy manual of German literature for schools Edinburgh/London: no publ., 1879 ENGUK Reimmann, Jakob Friedrich

268

Histories of German Literature

(1668-1743) De poesis germanorum canonica & apocrypha. Bekandte und unbekandte Poesie der Deutschen Leipzig/Goslar: Konig, 1703 GER Reimmann, Jakob Friedrich Die ersten Linien von der historia literaria derer Teutschen nach der Grundlage des bishero aufgerichteten Reimmanianischen Gebaudes... Halle: Renger, 1713 GER Reimmann, Jakob Friedrich Versuch einer Einleitung in die historiam literariam derer Teutschen Halle: Renger, 1708-13 GER Reimnitz, Friedrich Wilhelm (1803-64) Leitfaden zu einem \vissenschaftlichen Unterrichte in der deutschen Grammatik und Literatur. Fur die obersten Gymnasial- und Realklassen und zum Selbstunterrichte Cottbus: Eduard Meyer, 1838 GERGE2nded. 1844 Reinbeck, Georg (1766-1849) Abrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Dichtkunst und ihrer Literatur Essen: Baedeker, 1829 GERGE Reinbeck, Georg Handbuch der Sprach\vissenschaft mil besonderer Riicksicht aufdie deutsche Sprache Essen/Duisburg: Baedeker, 1817-24 GER GE m,i (1824) Die Geschichte der Dichtkunst... Reinhard, Johann Paul (1722-79) Einleitung zu einer allgemeinen Geschichte der Gelehrsamkeit (vol. I, no more published) Erlangen: Palm, 1779

GER Reuter, Wilhelm (1833-98) Geschichte der poetischen Literatur Deutschlands. Nebst einem kurzen Abrifi derPoetik. Bin Leitfaden fur hohere Lehranstalten, zunachstfur hohere Tochterschulen Freiburg: Herder, 1861 GER GE Title varies; superseded by Literaturkunde... Reuter, Wilhelm Literaturkunde, enthaltend Abrifi derPoetik und Geschichte der deutschen Poesie. Fur hohere Lehranstalten, Tdchterschulen und zum Selbstunterrichte Freiburg: Herder, 1861 GER GE editions to 1929 (23) Rhenanus, Beatus (1485-1547) Rerum germanicarum libri tres Basel: Froben, 1531 LAT Ridolfi, Angelo (1752-1825) Prospetto generate delta letteratura tedesca (General survey of German literature) Padova: Crescini, 1818 ITAIT Riedel, Friedrich Just (1742-85) Uber das Publicum. Briefe an einige Glieder desselben Jena: Cuno, 1768 GER - Repr. Wien: Osterreichischer Bundesverlag, 1973 Riedl, Szende (1831-73) A nemet irodalom kezikonyve (Handbook of German literature) Pest: Hartleben, 1866 HUN HU 2nd ed. 1870 - v-cxvii "Geschichte der deutschen Literatur" Riemann, Robert. See Gutjahr, Emil Rinne, Johann Karl Friedrich Innere Geschichte der Entwickelung der deutschen National-Litteratur. Bin methodisches Handbuch fur den

269 Bibliography Vortrag und zum Selbststudium (2 vols.) Leipzig: Hartung, 1842-43 GERGE Rivers, Lord. See Wezel, Johann Karl Robertson, John George (1867-1933) A history of German literature Edinburgh: Blackwood, 1902 ENG UK editions to 1970 Robertson, John George The literature of Germany New York: Holt, 1913 ENG US Home Universal Library of Modern Knowledge ed. Herbert A.L. Fischer Robertson, John George Outlines of the history of German literature New York: Putnam, 1911 ENG US Rohl, Hans Abrifi der deutschen Dichtung, Sprache und Verskunst. Nebst einer Einleitung: Vom Wesen der Dichtkunst und einem Anhang uber die griechische Tragodie und Shakespeare Leipzig: Teubner, 1916 GER editions to 1927(4) Rohl, Hans Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung Leipzig: Teubner, 1914 GER GE editions to 1931 (8) Roffler, C. Leitfaden fur den Unterricht in der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Dresden: Naumann, 1867 GERGE Rolevinck, Werner (1425-1502) Fasciculus temporum antiquorum cronicas complectens Koln: Therhoenen, 1474 LAT Roquette, Otto (1824-96) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung

von den dltesten Denkmdlern bis aufdie neueste Zeit (2 vols.) Stuttgart: Ebner & Neubert, 1862-63 GER GE editions to 1882 (3) Rosenkranz, (Johann) Karl (Friedrich) (1805-79) Geschichte der deutschen Poesie im Mittelalter Halle: Anton & Gelbcke, 1830 GERGE Rosenkranz, (Johann) Karl (Friedrich) Handbuch einer allgemeinen Geschichte der Poesie (3 vols.) Halle: Anton, 1832-33 GER Rosenkranz, (Johann) Karl (Friedrich) Die Poesie und ihre Geschichte. Eine Entwicklung der poetischen Ideale der Volker Koln: Bomtrager, 1855 GER Rosenkranz, (Johann) Karl (Friedrich) Studien (5 vols.) Leipzig: Brauns, 1839-47 GER vol. 1 publ. Berlin: Jonas vols. 2-5 1844-7 Rosenkranz, (Johann) Karl (Friedrich) Zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Konigsberg: Bomtrager, 1836 GER Rothe, Friedrich. See Saalfeld, Lerke von Rotth, Albrecht Christian (1651-1701) Kiirtzliche/ doch deutliche und richtige Einleitung zu den eigentlich so benahmten poetischen Gedichten... Leipzig: Lanck, 1688 GER Rotth, Albrecht Christian

270

Histories of German Literature

(1651-1701) Vollstdndige deutsche Poesie in drey Theilen Leipzig: Lanck, 1688 GER Rotth, Albrecht Christian Vorbereitung zur deutschen Poesie Leipzig: Lanck, 1687 GER Rudolf, von Ems (13th century) Willehalm von Orlens (ed. Victor Junk) Berlin: Weidmann, 1905 GER Deutsche Texte des Mittelalters, 20 Riidiger, Johann Christoph (fl. 1700) See Clarmundus, Adolphus [pseud] Rumpelt, Hermann Berthold (1821-81) Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Zum Gebrauch fur Tochterschulen Breslau: Gosohorsky, 1868 GERGE Saalfeld, Lerke von & Dietrich Kreidt & Friedrich Rothe Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den Anfdngen bis zur Gegen\vart Munchen: Droemer, 1989 GER Sacer, Gottfried Wilhelm (1635-99) Niitzliche Erinnerungen \vegen der deutschen Poeterey Alten-Stettin: Mamphras, 1661 GER Salzer, Anselm (1856-?) Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den dltesten Zeiten bis zur Gegen\vart (3 vols.) Munchen/Berlin: Allgemeine Verlags-Gesellschaft, 1907-12 GER GE first fascicle 1903 - 2nd ed. 1926-32

Sanders, Daniel (Hendel) (1819-97) Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur bis zu Goethes Tod Berlin: Langenscheidt, 1879 GER GE editions to 1886 (3) rev. Jul. Dumcke (Berlin: Langenscheidt, 1906) Saupe, Ernst Julius (1809-71) Handbuch der poetischen Literatur der Deutschen von Holler bis auf die neueste Zeit Leipzig: Wigand, 1848 GERGE Scaliger, Julius Caesar (1484-1558) Poetices libri septem Lyon: Vincentius, 1561 LAT - Repr. Stuttgart: Fromman-Holzboog, 1964 (ed. August Buck) - see also Padelford, Frederick Morgan Schack, Bela (1859?-?) A nemet irodalom tdrtenet rovid vdzlata. Kezirat gyandnt nyomatott (A short outline of German literary history. Printed as manuscript) Pozsony: Stampfel & Karoly, 1893 HUN HU unseen Schaefer, Johann Wilhelm (1809-80) Grundrifi der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Frankfurt: Geisler, 1836 GER GE editions to 1877 (12) Schaefer, Johann Wilhelm Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Bremen: Schunemann, 1842 GER GE Suppl. & commentary to his Grundrifi 2nd ed. 1855 Schaefer, Johann Wilhelm Tabellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Zum Gebrauch in hoheren Lehranstalten Leipzig: G.Mayer, 1853 GERGE 2nd ed. 1869

271 Bibliography Schard, Simon (1535-73) Historicum opus, in quatuor tomos divisum; quorum tomus 1 Germaniae antiquae illustrationem continet Basel: Petri, 1574 LAT Schaz, Georg. See Dyk, Johann Gottfried Schedel, Hartmann (1440-1514) Das Buck der Chroniken (reprint of 1493 edition) Leipzig: Hendel, 1933 GER Schedel, Hartmann Liber chronicarum Numberg: Koberger, 1493 LAT Scheinpflug, Bernard (1811-?) Die Dichtungsarten und ihre Literatur. Fur Mittelschulen Prag: Dominicus, 1864 GER 2nd ed. 1870 Scheinpflug, Bernard Kurze Literaturgeschichte der Deutschen Jur den ersten Unterricht Prag: Dominicus, 1865 GERCZ2nded. 1870 Scherer, Wilhelm (1841-86) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Berlin: Weidmann, 1883 GER GE Weidmann 1927 (16) later editions by various publishers and editors to 1949 Scherer, Wilhelm A history of German literature Oxford: Clarendon, 1886 ENG UK source Scherer - same as US edition - reprinted to 1906 Scherer, Wilhelm A history of German literature (tr. F.C. Conybeare) New York: Scribner, 1886 ENG US source Scherer - same as English edition (editions to 1906 or 1908) Scherr, Ignaz Thomas (1801-70)

& Johann Scherr Freundlicher Wegweiser durch den deutschen Dichterwald fur Gebildete aufier dem Gelehrtenstande, zugleich ein Schulbuch... Winterthur: Steiner, 1842 GER CH unseen Scherr, Johann (1817-86) Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur von den altesten Zeiten bis auf die Gegenwart (2 vols.) Stuttgart: Franckh, 1851 GER from the Neue Encykl. f. Wissenschaften und Kiinste - later title Illustrierte Geschichte der Weltliteratur Scherr, Johann A germdn nepek irodalom tortenete (History of the literature of the German peoples) Budapest: Franklin, 1885 HUN HU source Scherr - separate publication from A vilagirodalom ... Scherr, Johann Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Leipzig: Wigand, 1853? GERGE2nded. 1854 Scherr, Johann Historya powszechna literatury (History of world literature - tr. M. Gliszcyriski) Warszawa: no publ., 1865 POL PO source Scherr Scherr, Johann A vilagirodalom tortenete (A history of world literature - 3 vols.) Budapest: Franklin, 1885 HUN HU source Scherr - 2nd ed. 1891 - Geschichte der deutschen Literatur H, 205-352 Scherr, Johannes. See Scherr, Johann Schiff, Paolina Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Milano: Galli, 1885 ITA IT

272

Histories of German Literature

Schiff, Pauline Die deutschen Schriften des Mittelalters in aesthetischlitterarischer Beziehung Leipzig: Gustav Wolff, 1889 GER Schiller, Henrik (71851-1924) A nemet irodalomtdrtenet vdzlata. Putz es Gredy utdn. Gymnasiumi es magdnhaszndlatra osszedllitotta (Outline of German literary history. Based on Piltz and Gredy. For high schools and private use) Pest: Lampel, 1871 HUN HU source Ptttz, Gredy, etc. Schiller, Karl Einfuhrung in die deutsche Metrik undLiteratur Wien:Hiigel, 1872 GERAU Schiller, Karl Handbuch der deutschen Sprache, Teil 2: Grammatik, Stilistik, Metrik, Poetik, Literaturgeschichte Wien: Hartleben, 1903 GER AU 2nd ed. 1904-5 (by Friedrich Bauer & Franz Streinz) see also Pollak Schillerwein, Wilhelm [=Wilhelm Franz Warhanek] (1825-?) Abrifl der deutschen Literatur fur den ersten Unterricht an Tdchterschulen und Privatlehranstalten Wien: Sallmayer & Comp., 1863 GERAU Schilling, Julie Kurzer Uberblick uber die deutsche Literatur bis zur zweiten Blutezeit. In leichtverstdndlicher Sprache fur russische Schulen Riga:Kymmel, 1905 GER RU editions in various parts (incl. modem) to 1932 (10) - some editions "nichtdeutsche" or "lettische" for "russische" Schilter, Johann (1632-1705) Thesaurus antiquitatum

teutonicarum, ecclesiasticarum, civilium, litterarium (3 vols.) Ulm: Bartholomaus, 1726-28 LAT Schindel, Carl Wilhelm Otto August von (1776-1830) Die deutschen Schriftstellerinnen des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (3 vols.) Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1822-25 GER - Repr. Hildesheim: Ohns, 1978 Schlegel, August Wilhelm (1767-1845) "Gereimte Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung" Zeitgenossen I: iv, 180 1816 GER ref. to lost work Schlegel, August Wilhelm Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Poesie (ed. J. Korner) Berlin: Behr, 1913 GER GE Dt. Litteraturdenkmale ... 3. Folge, 147 Schlegel, August Wilhelm Vorlesungen uber dramatische Kunst und Literatur Leipzig: Weidmann, 1846 GER also Leipzig: Schroder, 1923 originally Heidelberg 1817 Schlegel, August Wilhelm Vorlesungen uber schone Litteratur und Kunst, 7/7(1803-04) Heilbronn: Henninger, 1884 GER Deutsche Litteraturdenkmale ... 17-19 Schlegel, Friedrich (1772-1829) "Epochen der Dichtkunst" Athenaum, ffl: 67-86 1800 GER Schlegel, Friedrich Geschichte der alien und neuen Literatur (2 vols.) Wien: Schaumburg, 1814 GER Kritische Friedrich-Schlegel-Ausgabe, 6 (Miinchen: Schoningh, 1961)

273

Bibliography

Schlosser, Friedrich Christoph (1776-1861) Geschichte des 18. Jahrhunderts (8 vols.) Heidelberg: Mohr, 1823GER - English tr. London: Chapman & Hall, 1843-52 Schmeizel, Martin (1649-1747) Versuch zu einer Historie der Gelehrsamkeit Jena: no publ., 1728 GER Schmid(t), Christian F. (7-1778?) Dissertatio de historia litteraria 1733 LAT unseen Schmid, Christian Heinrich (1746-1800) Anweisung der vornehmsten Bilcher in alien Theilen der Dichtkunst Leipzig: Weygand, 1781 GER Schmid, Christian Heinrich Biographie derDichter (2 vols.) Leipzig: Dyck, 1769-70 GER Schmid, Christian Heinrich Chronologic des deutschen Theaters Leipzig: Dyck, 1775 GER Schmid, Christian Heinrich Litteratur der Poesie Leipzig: Weygand, 1775 GER Schmid, Christian Heinrich Nekrolog oder Nachrichten von dem Leben und den Schriften der vornehmsten verstorbenen teutschen Dichter (2 vols) Berlin: Mylius, 1785 GER Schmid, Christian Heinrich "Skizze einer Geschichte der teutschen Dichtkunst" OllaPotrida 1780-90 GERGE Schmid, Christian Heinrich

"Uber die Hauptperioden in der Geschichte der Dichtkunst" Gothaisches Magazin, I: 21-41; 199-210; 210-24 1776 GERGE Schmidt, ? "Uber die Kenntnisse in der Geschichte unserer Dichtkunst" Wirttemberg. Repertorium der Litteratur, E: 248-67 1782 GER Schmidt, A.F. Wilhelm Hilfsbuchfur den Unterricht in der Weltgeschichte, in der deutschen Nationallitteratur und in der Kirchengeschichte an hoheren Mddchen-, Mittelschulen und verwandten Anstalten Neumunster: Brumby, 1883 GERGE Schmidt, Eugen Deutsche Literaturgeschichte im Auszugefur russische Lehranstalten und zum Selbstunterricht Moskva: Deubner, 1882 GER RU editions to 1905 (4) Schmidt, Julian (1818-86) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur im 19. Jahrhundert Leipzig: Herbig, 1853 GER later editions ... seit Lessings Tod or ... von Leibniz ... Schmidt, Karl (1819-64) Vergleichende Tabellen uber die Literatur- und Staaten-Geschichte der \vichtigsten Kultur-Volker der neueren Welt Leipzig: Fleischer, 1865 GERGE Schmidt, L. Kalendar zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Bremen: Geisler, 1863 GERGE Schnedermann, Franz (1851-?) Die deutsche Nationalliteratur; ihr innerer Gang im Zusammenhang

274

Histories of German Literature

mil der Sittengeschichte Leipzig: Dorffling & Franke, 1899 GERGE Schneider, Fr. See Mair, Franz Schoppner, Alexander (1820-60) [Kleine] Litteraturkunde mil Proben am den Meisterwerken der alten und neuen Litteratur. Zum Unterrichte fur To'chter gebildeter Stande Munchen: Lindauer, 1854 GER GE editions to 1911 (7) Scholl, Gottlob Heinrich Friedrich & Traugott Ferdinand Scholl Deutsche Literaturgeschichte in Biographien und Proben aus alien Jahrhunderten. Zur Selbstbelehrung und zum Gebrauche in hoheren Unterrichtsanstalten (2 vols.) Stuttgart: Ebner & Seubert, 1841 GER GE editions to 1852 (3) Scholl, Traugott Ferdinand (1817-95) Zeittafeln der vaterldndischen Literatur unter Vergleichung mil den gleichlaufenden Regenten, Kunstlern, ausldndischen Schriftstellern und Weltbegebenheiten fur hohere Schulen und zum Privatgebrauch Schwabisch-Hall: Nitzschke, 1852 GERGE Schottelius, Justus Georgius (1612-76) Ausfuhrliche Arbeit von der teutschen HaubtSprache Braunschweig: Zilliger, 1663 GER Schottelius, Justus Georgius Brevis & fundamentalis manuductio ad orthographiam et etymologicam in lingua germanica. Kurtze und grundliche Anleitung... Braunschweig: Zilliger, 1676 GER - Based on Opus de lingua germanica, 1663

Schottelius, Justus Georgius Teutsche Sprachkunst Braunschweig: Zilliger, 1641 GER Schram, Wilhelm (Carl) (1850-1925) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte nebst einer mnemotechnischen Anleitung zur leichten Aneignung literarhistorischer Zahlen Brunn: Epstein, 1881 GERCZ Schroer, Karl Julius (1825-1900) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ein Lehrbuch als Grundlage zu Vortrdgenjur die hoheren Schulen Oesterreichs Pest: Heckenast, 1850 GER HU Republished 1853 sub-title Ein Lehr- und Lesebuch fur Schule und Haus Schroer, Tobias Gottfried (1791-1850) Geschichte der deutschen Poesie in leicht fafilichen Umrissen fur die reifere Jugend beiderlei Geschlechts (2 vols.) Leipzig: Einhorn, 1844 GER GE editions to 1879 (4) Schroer, Tobias Gottfried Christian Oeser's Geschichte der deutschen Poesie in Umrissen und Schilderungen (2 vols.) Leipzig: Brandstetter, 1859 GERGE Schroer, Tobias Gottfried Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Poesie undProsa. Ein Leitfaden zu Vorlesungen und zum Privatunterricht PreBburg: Landes, 1830 GERGE Schubart, Christian Friedrich Daniel (1739-91) "Kritische Skala der vorziiglichsten deutschen Dichter" (in Gesammelte Schriften, VI)

275

Bibliography

Stuttgart: Scheible, 1839 GER Schutze, Karl Deutschlands Dichter und Schriftsteller von den altesten Zeiten bis aufdie Gegenwart... in alphabetischer Folge Berlin: Bach, 1862 GERGE Schultz, Ferdinand (1829-1901) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Dessau: Baumann, 1889 GER GE editions to 1922 (4) Schulz, [Joachim Christoph?] Friedrich (1762-98) Litterarische Reise durch Deutschland Leipzig: Wucherer & Beer, 1786 GER Schulze, Erich (7-1915) Die deutsche Literatur. Die Entwicklung und die Hauptwerke des deutschen Schrifttums in Grundzilgen zu Lehrzwecken und zum Selbstunterricht Berlin: Ernst Hofmann, 1912 GER GE editions to 1940 (4) Schulze, Otto (1851-?) Leitfaden beim Unterricht in der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur; mit Anschlufi an dessen "Wegweiser" Wolfenbuttel: Holle, 1854 GERGE Schulze, Otto Wegweiser durch das Gebiet der deutschen National-Literatur fur Gymnasien und hohere Lehranstalten, some zur Selbstbelehrung Wolfenbuttel: Holle, 1854 GERGE Schumann, Adolf KurzerAbrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Jur hohere Tochterschulen Brandenburg: Wiesike, 1854 GER GE editions to 1882 (8)

Schupp, Johann Balthasar (1610-61) Lehrreiche Schriften (2 vols.) Frankfurt: Zuner & Jung, 1719 GER Schuster, Alfred Nemet irodalomtorteneti tankonyv szemelvenyekkel es szdmos keppel (Handbook of German literature with selected texts and numerous illustrations) Budapest: Atheneum, 1908 GER HU Editions to 1920 (3) Schuster, Alfred. See also Vajda, Gyula Schwab, Gustav Benjamin (1792-1850) & Karl Klupfel Wegweiser durch die Litteratur der Deutschen. Ein Handbuch fur Laien Leipzig: G. Mayer, 1846 GER GE editions to 1870 (4) "Nachtrage" to 1879 Schwahn, Walther Grundziige der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Berlin: Simion, 1910 GERGE Schwarz, Carl W.G. Eduard Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Amsterdam: Binger, 1871 GERNE2nded. 1872 Schwarz, Carl W.G. Eduard Vorschule der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Jur Mittelschulen Amsterdam: Binger, 1872 GERNE2nded. 1877 Schwippert, P.A. Methodik des Unterrichts in der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Zalt-Bommel: Gade, 1872 GER Seehaussen, Richard (1858-?) Litteraturkunde Jur mittlere und hohere Lehranstalten. Nebst einer kurzen Poetik Gutersloh: Bertelsmann, 1893 GER GE editions to 1909 (3) as

276

Histories of German Literature

Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Sehrwald, [Christian] Friedrich (1829-1912) Deutsche Dichter und Denker. Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit Probensammlung (2 vols.) Altenburg: Bonde, 1880-84 GERGE2nded. 1883-4 Seinecke, Ferdinand (1814-?) Lehrbuch der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur Hannover: Schmorl & Seefeld, 1866 GER GE editions to 1890 (4) Selss, Albert Maximilian A critical outline of the literature of Germany London: Longman, Green, etc., 1865 ENG UK editions to 1896 (5) reprint Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1972 Sevin, L[udwig] (1840-?) Kurze Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. Anhang zum Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte von J.C. Andra Leipzig: Voigtlander, 1888 GER GE editions to 1901(5)Anhang 1 ofTeilH Shine, Hill. See Carlyle, Thomas Shtal', O. Ocherle istorii nemetskoi literatury (A brief history of German literature) Moskva: no publ., 1858 RUS RU unseen Si me, James (1843-95) A nemet irodalom tdrtenete (History of German literature, tr. David Angyal) Budapest: Athenaeum, 1882 HUN HU = Torteneti Kezikonyvek 7 (8) - editions to 1900 (3) - source Sime (unidentified) Russian version St. Petersburg 1885 Sittenberger, Hans (1863-1943) Einfuhrung in die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit besonderer

Berucksichtigung der neueren Zeit Wien: Deuticke, 1909 GERAU Smolle, Leo (1848-1920/1921?) Grundzuge der deutschen Literaturgeschichte. Fur hohere Schulen und zum Selbstunterrichte Wien: Braumuller, 1901 GERAU Soiling, Gustav (1813-89) Diutiska, an historical and critical survey of the literature of Germany from the earliest period to the death ofGdthe London: no publ., 1863 ENG UK Soiling, Gustav Review of the literary history of Germany from the earliest period to the beginning of the nineteenth century London: Williams & Norgate, 1859-60 ENG UK Sonnenburg, Ferdinand (1839-?) Grundrifl der Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Mit Proben und Tabellen. Zum Gebrauch in hdheren Lehranstalten Braunschweig: Bruhn, 1878 GERGE Sonnenfeld, Zsigmond Nemet nyelv es irodalmi kezikonyv afelsobb lednyiskoldk szdmdra (Handbook of German language and literature for high schools for girls) Budapest: no publ., 1879 HUNHU Spangenberg, Cyriacus (1528-1604) Von derMusica und den Meistersdngem (1598, ed. Adalbert von Keller) Stuttgart: Literarischer Verein, 1861 GERB.L.V.S.,62 Spangenberg, Wolfhart

277 Bibliography (1570-1637) Bin kurtzer einfaltiger Bericht, vom uhralten Herkommen, Fortpflanzung, Nutz wind rechten Gebrauch des alien Idblichen Teutschen Meister-Gesangs... Numberg: Fuhrmann, no date GER Spatenka, Joseph Tabellen zur neueren deutschen Literaturgeschichte (1724-1832) Wien: Pichler, 1903 GERAU Spatzal, Johann Das deutsche Schrifttum. Einheitliche Darstellung der Stilistik, Poetik und Literaturgeschichte far Burgerschulen und Fortbildungskurse Prag: Staatliche Verlagsanstalt, no date GERCZ2nded. 1934 Stael, De. See Stael-Holstein Stael-Holstein, Anna Louise Germaine (1766-1817) De I'Allemagne (3 vols.) Paris: Nicolle, 1810 FRE edition used Paris: Hachette, 1958 Stael-Holstein, Anna Louise Germaine De la litterature consideree dans ses rapports avec les institutions sociales Paris: Maradan, 1800 FRE edition used Paris: Larousse, 1941 Starowski, Edmund Bilder aus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Wien: Pichler, 1910 GERAU 2nd ed. 1912 Statius, Johann Joachim Wohlgebahnter Weg zu der Teutschen Poesie Bremen: Saurmann, 1716 GER

Stejskal, Karl. See Kummer, Karl Ferdinand Stern, Adolf (1835-1907) Lexikon der deutschen Nationalliteratur... Leipzig: Bibliographisches Institut, 1882 GER Stiehler, Kaspar von (1632-1707) Der Teutschen Sprache Stammbaum Nurnberg: J. Hofmann, 1691 GER Stilgebauer, Eduard Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Berlin: Bong, 1910? GER GE Bibliothek des allgemeinen und praktischen Wissens von Emmanuel Miiller-Baden Stiller, Otto Leitfaden zur Repetition der deutschen Litteraturgeschichte fur hohere Mddchenschulen und Seminarien Berlin: Oehmigke, 1895 GER GE editions to 1905 (3) Stockhausen, Johann Christoph (1725-84) Critischer Entwurf einer auserlesenen Bibliothek fur Liebhaber der Philosophic und schonen Wissenschaften Berlin: Haude, 1752 GER Stockmann, Christoph Gottlieb Auserlesene teutsche Gedichte verschiedener Poeten und Poetinnen nebst seinen eigenen Leipzig: Corner, 1722 GER Stoeber, August (Daniel August Ehrenfried) Geschichte der schonen Literatur der Deutschen fur mittlere Erziehungsanstalten, zunachst des Elsasses Strassburg: Schuler, 1843 GER FR also publ. Heidelberg 1843

278

Histories of German Literature

Stoeber, Daniel Ehrenfried (1779-1835) Kurze Geschichte und Charakteristik der schdnen Literatur der Deutschen Paris/Strassburg: Levrault, 1826 GERFR Stoeber, Ehrenfried (August?). See also Noel, Frar^ois Joseph Michel Stockel, Hermann. See Brunner, August Stohn, Hermann Lehrbuch der deutschen Literatur fttr hohere Tdchterschulen und die reifere \veibliche Jugend Leipzig: Teubner, 1869 GER GE editions to 1914 (8) Stolle, Gottlieb (1673-1744) Discours von dem Nutzen der Historiae etnotitiae literariae 1714 GER unseen Stolle, Gottlieb Kurtze Anleitung zur Historic der Gelahrtheit... (3 vols.) Halle: Neue Buchhandlung, 1718 GER Storck, Karl G.L. (1873-1920) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte Stuttgart: Roth, 1898 GER GE editions to 1926 (10) Storck, Karl G.L. Storia della letteratura tedesca (History of German literature - tr. Giuseppe Lesca) Torino: Loescher, 1908 ITA IT source Storck - based on 4th/5th edition Streinz, Franz. See Bauer, Friedrich and Schiller, Karl Streit, Karl Konrad (1751-1826) Alphabetisches Verzeichnis aller im Jahre 1774 in Schlesien lebender Schriftsteller Breslau: Korn, 1776 GER Strieder, Friedrich Wilhelm

(1739-1815) Grundlage zu einer hessischen Gelehrten- und SchriftstellerGeschichte (21 vols.) Cassel: Luckhardt, 1780GER - Various publishers to 1868 Strobel, Adam Walther (1792-1850) Beitrdge zur deutschen Literatur und Literdrgeschichte, enthaltend kleine Gedichte Sebastian Brandts nebst einer Biographic und Portr. u. Briefe Murners Paris/Strasburg: Levrault, 1827 GER FR unseen Stroebe, Lilian Luise Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Poughkeepsie, NY: Vassar College, 1910 GER US rev. eds. New York: Holt, 1912, 1913 (with Marian Parker Whitney), 1930,1932 Struve, Burkhard Gotthelf (1671-1738) Introductio in notitiam rei litterariae Jena: Bailliar, 1704 LAT Strzemcha, Paul (1844-1941) Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur. Zum Gebrauche an osterreichischen Schulen und zum Selbstunterricht Briinn: Knauthe, 1877 GER AU editions to 1910 (8), ed. Ferdinand Ginzel Stuss, Johann Heinrich (1686-1775) Sammlung auserlesener Gedichte Nordhausen: Grosz, 1734 GER Suetonius, Tranquillus, C. (ca. 75-150) Suetonius, with an English translation by J.C. Rolfe (2 vols.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1959-60

279 Bibliography LAT Sulzer, Johann Georg (1720-79) Allgemeine Theorie der schdnen Ktinste (2 vols.) Leipzig: Weidemann, 1771-74 GER Sulzer, Johann Georg. See also Blankenburg, Christian Friedrich von & Dyck, Johann Gottfried & Manso, Johann Jaspar Friedrich Swiecicki, Julian Adolf (1848-?) Historia literatury pawszechnej \v zarysie (History of world literature in brief) Warszawa: no publ., 189? POL PO in Chmielowski, Piotr Szabraiiski, Antoni Jozef Rys historyi literatury niemieckiej do poiowy osiemnastego wieku (A brief history of German literature to the middle of the eighteenth century) Warszawa: Gebethner & Wolff, 1876 POLPO Szasz, Ferenc Germanistik und Deutschunterricht in Ungarn. Bibliographic der Buchverqffentlichungen (Band 1) Budapest: no publ., 1984 GER/HUN Budapester Beitrage zur Gerrnanistik, 12 Szemak, Istvan A nemet irodalom tortenete (History of German literature) Budapest: Lauffer, 1870-2 HUN HU edition used 1887 (2) Tastu, (Sabine Casimire) Amable (nee Voiart?) (17987-1885) Tableau de la litterature allemande depuis I'etablissement du christianisme jusqu 'a nos jours Tours: Maine, 1843 FRE FR editions to 1869 Taylor, Bayard (1825-78) Studies in German literature New York: Putnam, 1879

ENG US editions to 1891 Taylor, William (1765-1836) "The German student" Monthly Magazine, 1818-24 ENG UK Taylor, William Historic survey of German poetry, interspersed with various translations (3 vols.) London: Treuttel & Wiirtz, 1828-30 ENG UK Thimm, Franz, J.L. (1820-89) The literature of Germany from its earliest period to the present time (ed. William Henry Farn) London/Leipzig: Thimm, no date ENG UK also London: Nutt, 1844 and 2nd ed. London: Thimm, 1866 Thomas, Calvin (1854-1919) A history of German literature London: Heinemann, 1909 ENG UK editions to 1928 reprinted 1970 Thomas, Walter Litterature allemande Paris: Larousse, 1913 FREFR Thomasius, Christian (1655-1728) Deutsche Schriften Stuttgart: Reclam, 1970 GER Tomei, A. Storia della letteratura tedesca, dalle origini ai giomi nostri (History of German literature from the beginnings to our times) Roma: Frank, 1913

iTArr

Tonnelat, Ernest Histoire de la litterature allemande des origines au XVIIe siecle Paris: Payot, 1923 FRE Toscano del Banner, Joseph Georg. See Banner, Joseph Georg Toscano del Tralles, Balthasar Ludwig

280

Histories of German Literature

(1708-91) Schreiben von der deutschen Sprache und Litteratur bei Gelegenheit der zu Berlin im Jahr 1780 in franzdsischer Sprache herausgekommenen vortrefflichen Schrift fiber die deutsche Litteratur Breslau: Rottmann, 1781 GER Traut, Heinrich Theodor (1826-1904) Lehrbuch der deutschen Literaturgeschichte, enthaltend Charakteristiken der Perioden und Gattungen derPoesie undProsa, me auch Angaben der Denkmaler undSchriftsteller... Fur hdhere Schulen, insbesondere Fortbildungsanstalten Halle: Schwetschke, 1871 GERGE Trithemius, Johannes (1462-1516) Cathalogus illustrium virorum germaniam suis ingeniis et lucubrationibus omnifariam exornantium Mainz: Petrus de Friedberg 1496 LAT Trithemius, Johannes De viris illustribus ordinis S. Benedict! No place: no publ., 1575 LAT Tschudi, Aegidius (1505-72) Die uralt \varhafftig Alpisch R}iaetia Basel: no publ., 1538 GER Tupetz, Theodor (71852-?) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur mit besonderer Rucksichtnahme auf das Geistesleben Osterreichs. Lehrbuch fur den IV. Jahrgang der osterreichischen Lehrer- und Lehrerinnen-Bildungsanstalten Wien/Prag/Leipzig: Tempsky, 1890 GER AU editions to 1919 (6) - title

vanes Uhse, Erdmann (1677-1730) Neu-er&ffhetes Musen-Cabinet Leipzig: Groschuff, 1702-04 GER Uhse, Erdmann Der -wohlinformierte Poet Leipzig: Schuster, 1719-26 GER Urban, Erich (1875-?) Tabellen zur Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur Berlin: Schuster & Loffler, 1902 GERGE 2nd ed. 1903 Vajda, Gyula (71843-1909) & Alfred Schuster Nemet irodalomtorteneti olvasokonyv (Reader in German literary history) Budapest: Athenaeum, 1908-10 HUNHU Vernaleken, Friedrich Theodor (1812-1907) Leitfadenjur deutsche Sprach- und Litteraturkunde. Ein Seitenstuck zur Schullekture (2 vols.) St. Gallen: Huber, 1850 GERCH2nded. 1851 Vernaleken, Friedrich Theodor Litteraturbuch. Deutsches Lesebuch nebst den Anfdngen der Litteraturgeschichte und Poetik, Mythologie und Altertumskunde Wien: Braumuller, 1850 GER AU also Bern/St. Gallen: Huber, 1850 - editions to 1873 (8) Vetterlein, Christian Friedrich Rudolf (1759-?) Handbuch der poetischen Litteratur der Deutschen. Das istkurze Nachricht von dem Leben und Schriften deutscher Dichter und Prosaiker Kothen: Aue, 1800 GERGE Viehoff, Heinrich (1804-86) Handbuch der deutschen

281

Bibliography

National-Literatur. Dichter und Prosaiker. Mit biographischen und anderen Erlauterungen. Bin Lesebuchjur obere Classen hdherer Lehranstalten und Freunde der deutschen Literatur Braunschweig: Westermann, 1857 GER GE three parts, various editions to 1903 (26) by Leisering Vignola, Bruno Gli albori della letteratura tedesca (The dawn of German literature) Roma: Soc. edit. Dante Alighieri, 1909 HA Vilmar, August Friedrich Christian (1800-68) Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur Marburg: Elwert, 1844 GER GE Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur from 3rd ed. editions to 1901, re-edited last 1936 by J. Rohr - last unexpanded edition 1911(27) Vincent, de Beauvais (7-1264) Speculum naturale Venezia: Lichtenstein, 1493 LAT Vogtlin, Adolf (1861-?) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. Leitfadenjur den Unterricht in den oberen Klassen der Mittelschulen Zurich: Schulthess, 1910 GER CH editions to 1929 (4) Vogler, Valentin Heinrich (1627-77) Introductio universalis in notitiam cuiuscunque generis bonorum scriptorum Helmstadt: Henning Muller, 1670 LAT Vogt, Friedrich Hermann Traugott (1851-1923) & Max Koch Geschichte der deutschen Literatur von den dltesten Zeiten bis zur

Gegenwart (3 vols.) Leipzig/Wien: Bibliographisches Institut, 1897 GER GE editions to 1938 (5) Vogt, Friedrich Hermann Traugott & Max Koch Storia della letterature tedesca dai tempi piu antichi sino ai giorni nostri (History of German literature from the most ancient times to our day [tr. Gust. Balsamo-Crivelli] 2 vols.) Torino: Unione tip., 1911-14 ITA IT source Vogt & Koch Vogt, Johann Gustav (1843-?) Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen Litteratur mit ausgewdhlten Proben aus den Hauptwerken hervorragender Dichter (2 vols.) Leipzig: Wiest, 1897-99 GERGE Voigt, Ludwig Hilfsbuchlein fur den deutschen Unterricht enthaltend das Wichtigste aus der Literaturgeschichte, Metrik und Poetik Wien: Holder, 1892 GERAU2nded. 1909 Vossius, Gerardus (Johannes) (1577-1649) De quatuor artibuspopularibus ... Amsterdam: Blaeu, 1650 LAT Vossius, Gerardus (Johannes) Poeticarum institutionem libri tres Amsterdam: Elzevir, 1647 LAT Vymazal, Frantisek (1841-1917) Dejiny nemecke ndrodni literatury. Podle Kluge, Kurce ajinych (History of German national literature, based on Kluge, Kurz, and others) Brunn: Winkler, 1879 CZECZ Wachler, Johann Friedrich

282

Histories of German Literature

Ludwig (1767-1838) Freimtithige Worte tiber die allerneueste deutsche Litteratur (3 vols.) Breslau: Holaufer, 1818 GER Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Handbuch der allgemeinen Geschichte der literdrischen Cultur (2 vols.) Marburg: Akademische Buchhandlung, 1804-05 GER Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Lehrbuch der Litteraturgeschichte Leipzig: Earth, 1827 GER Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Uber Werden und Wirken der Literatur... Breslau: Hentze, 1829 GER Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Versuch einer allgemeinen Geschichte der Litteratur fur studierende Jilnglinge und Freunde der Gelehrsamkeit (3 vols.) Lemgo: Meyer, 1793-1801 GER Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Versuch einer allgemeinen Geschichte der teutschen Nationalliteratur (2 vols.) Frankfurt: Hermann, 1818-19 GERGE Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig Vorlesungen uber die Geschichte der teutschen Nationallitteratur (2 vols.) Frankfurt: Hermann, 1818-19 GERGE 2nd ed. 1834

Wackernagel, Carl Heinrich Wilhelm (1808-69) Deutsches Lesebuch Basel: Schweighammer, 1835-43 GER Wackernagel, Carl Heinrich Wilhelm Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Ein Handbuch (3 vols. in 1) Basel: Schweighauser, 1851-53 GER CH = Deutsches Lesebuch 4 2nd ed. in 2 vols 1879-94 Wackernagel, Carl Heinrich Wilhelm Die Verdienste der Schweizer um die deutsche Literatur Basel: Neukirch, 1833 GER Wackernagel, Karl Eduard Philipp (1800-77) Deutsches Lesebuch (4 vols.) Stuttgart: Liesching, 1835-63 GER eds. to 1872-75, complex publishing history Wagenseil, Johann Christoph (1633-1705) Buch von der Meister-Singer holdseligen Kunst (in De civitate Noribergensi Commentatio) Altdorf: Kohlesius, 1697 GER Wagner, von Wagenfels, Hans Jacob Ehren-Ruff Teutschlands ... Wien: Mann, 1691 GER Wahl, Samuel Friedrich Giinther (1760-1834) Versuch einer allgemeinen Geschichte der Litteratur... (2 vols.) Erfurt: Keyser, 1787-88 GER Wahll, Johann Samuel (1641-86) Wegweiser/ Das ist/ Kurtze doch grundliche Einleitung zu der rechten reinen und galanten Teutschen Poesie...

283

Bibliography

Jena: Johann Adolph Mailer, 1709 GER Wald, Samuel Gottlieb (1762-1828) Versuch einer Einleitung in die Geschichte der Kenntnisse, Wissenschaften und schdnen Kunste zu akademischen Vorlesungen Halle: Hendel, 1784-86 GER Walter, von der Vogelweide (ca. 1168-1228) Gedichte (ed. Karl Lachmann/Hugo Kuhn) Berlin: de Gruyter, 1965 GER Warhanek, Wilhelm Franz. See Schillerwein, Wilhelm [pseud.] Weber, Georg (1808-88) Die Geschichte der deutschen Literatur nach ihrer organischen Entwickelung, in einem leicht ilberschaulichen Grundrifl (excerpt from his Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte) Leipzig: Engelmann, 1847 GER GE eds. to 1880 (11), title varies Weber, Georg (1808-88) Histoire de la litterature allemande depuis son origine jusqu'a nos jours (tr. Frederic Lauth) Paris: Librairie Internationale, 1867 FRE FR source Weber Weber, Georg Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte mit Riicksicht aufCultur, Literatur und Religionswesen, fur hohere Schulanstalten und zur Selbstbelehrung Leipzig: Engelmann, 1847 GER GE editions to 1938 (24) Weber, Georg Literar-historisches Lesebuch, enthaltend Proben aus den bedeutendsten Literaturwerken aller Volker und Zeiten ... mit des

Verfassers Lehrbuch der Weltgeschichte undAbrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte in Beziehung gesetzt (3 vols.) Leipzig: Engelmann, 1851-52 GERGE Weber, Giorgio Prospetto storico della letteratura tedesca recato in idioma italiano con alcune annotazioni da Giusto Leopoldo Eisner (Historical survey of German literature ... transl. and notes by G.L. Eisner) Venezia: Cecchini, 1853 ITA IT source Weber Weber, Georg Tyske litteraturen (German literature - tr. B.F. Olsson) Stockholm: Bonnier, 1870 SWE SW source Weber Weber, Georg A vilag tdrtenet tankonyve. Tekintettel a miveltsegre, irodalomra es valldsra. 5 vols. (Handbook of world history with specific reference to culture, literature, and religion) Pest: Heckenast, 1865-69 HUN HU source Weber from 11th edition - History of German literature in vol. 5: 3-153 Weber, Hugo (1832-1904) Deutsche Sprache undDichtung. ... Ein Hilfsbuch Jur den Unterricht in der deutschen Nationalliteratur und ein Ratgeber zur Fortbildung durch Lektilre. Fur hohere Burgerschulen... Leipzig: Klinckhardt, 1879 GER GE editions to 1941 (40) Padagogische Sammelmappe HI, 6 Weddigen, (Friedrich H.) Otto (1851-1940) Geschichte der deutschen Volksdichtung seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters bis aufdie Gegenwart

284

Histories of German Literature

Munchen: Callwey, 1884 GER2nded. 1895 Weguelin, Jakob (1721-91) "Sur la philosophic de ITiistoire, HI: LHistoire litteraire" (in Nouveaux memoires de I'Academie) Berlin: 1755 FRE Weicher (Weichers deutsche Literaturgeschichte). See Gutjahr, E. Weichmann, Christian Friedrich (1717-69) Poesie der Nieder-Sachsen (3 vols.) Hamburg: Schiller & Kissner, 1721-26 GER Weidemann, [KA.?] Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte Hildburghausen: Gadow, 1881 GER GE Abdr. aus Kuhners "Neuer thilringischer Kinderfreund" = Kuhner, Raphael? Weimar, Klaus Geschichte der deutschen Literaturwissenschaft bis zum Ende des 19.Jahrhunderts Munchen: Fink, 1989 GER Weise, Christian (1642-1708) Curiose Gedancken von deutschen Versen... Leipzig: Gleditsch, 1692 GER Weitbrecht, Richard (1851-1911) Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung von den Anfdngen bis zur Gegen\vart Stuttgart: Engelhorn, 1880 GER GE Frauen-Bibliothek. Ein Zyklus von Werken ... 2 Wellberger, H. von & Richard Kiihn Fuhrer durch die deutsche Literaturgeschichte von Beginn bis zurModerne. In alphabetischer

Ordnung allgemein verstdndlich dargestellt Berlin: Globus, 1909 GERGE Wells, Benjamin Willis (1856-1923) Modern German literature Boston, MA: Roberts, 1895 ENG US editions to 1909 Wenckebach, Carla (1853-1902) Deutsche Literaturgeschichte auf kulturhistorischer Grundlage Boston, MA: Heath, 1890 GER US unnumbered editions to 1905 Werner, Heinrich Kurzgefaflte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur zum Gebrauch in hoheren Lehranstalten und zum Selbstunterricht Braunschweig: Westermann, 1914 GERGE 2nd ed. 1916 Wernick, Friedrich (71823-91) Geschichtliche Ubersicht der deutschen Nationalliteratur mit Hinblick auf gleichzeitige Kunstbestrebungen. Ein Handbuch fur den Unterricht in Tochterschulen und zur Selbstbelehrung Gotha: Scheube, 1856 GERGE Wernick, Friedrich Handbuch der Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur Gotha: Scheube, 1857 GER GE also Leipzig: Woller Wernicke, Christian (1661-1725) Uberschriften oder Epigrammata Hamburg: Hertel, 1701 GER Wessely, Rudolf Zur Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Proben literarhistorischer Darstellungen Jur Schule und Haus Leipzig: Teubner, 1905 GERGE

285 Bibliography Wetzel, Johann Caspar (1691-1755) Hymnopoeographia, oder historische Lebensbeschreibung der beriihmtesten Lieder-Dichter (4 vols.) Herrnstadt: Scholzen, 1719-28 GER Wezel, Johann Karl (1747-1819) Briefe von und an Lord Rivers wahrend seines zweyten Aufenthalts in Deutschland Leipzig: no publ., 1782 GER Wezel, Johann Karl Tableau de I'Allemagne et de la litterature allemande Leipzig: no publ., 1782 FRE FR unseen Wieland, Christoph Martin (1733-1813) Geschichte der Gelehrtheit (1757, ed. Ludwig Hirzel) Frauenfeld: Huber, 1877 GER Wiesner, Johann Deutsche Literaturkunde fur osterreichische Gymnasien und verwandte Lehranstalten, zugleich ein Wiederholungsbuch fur die Maturitdtsprufung Wien: Holder, 1903 GER AU editions to 1936 (13) Wiesner, Johann Lehrbuchjur den deutschen Unterricht in den Oberklassen osterreichischer Gymnasien, Realgymnasien und Realschulen (Geschichte der Sprache und Dichtung, Poetik) Wien: Holder, 1909 GERAU Wihl, Ludwig Geschichte der deutschen National-Literatur von ihren ersten Anfdngen bis aufunsere Tage Altona: Karl Aue, 1840 GERGE

Wilkinson, William Cleaver (1833-1920) Classic German course in English New York: Chatauqua, 1887 ENGUS Wilkinson, William Cleaver German classics New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1900 ENG US re-issue of Classic German Course, rev. ed. 1909 Will, Georg Andreas (1727-98) Entwurfeiner vollstdndigen Literar-Geschichte Altdorf: Schupfel, 1781 GER Will, Peter The German museum or monthly repository of the literature of Germany, the North and the Continent in general London: Geisweiler, 1800-01 ENG UK Wilms, E. Kurze Ubersicht der deutschen National-Litteratur Dortmund, 1847-50 GER GE Programmes Wimpheling, Jakob (1450-1528) Epitoma Germanicarum rerum (in Simon Schard, Historicum opus, I) Basel: Petri, 1574 LAT - Also in his works (Strassburg: Prues, 1505) Winter, Hellmuth Literargeschichte der Sprach-, Dicht- und Redekunst der Deutschen zum Leitfaden bei Vortrdgen uber die schone National-Literatur aufgelehrten Schulen und Universitdten Berlin: Kunstbureau, 1821 GERGE 2nd ed. 1829 Wirth, Gustav Leitfaden fur den Unterricht in der Geschichte der deutschen Nationalliteratur jur hohere Lehranstalten

286

Histories of German Literature

Berlin: Wohlgemuth, 1878 GERGE2nded. 1884 Witek, Johann Kurzgefaflte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur. Bin Handbuch fur die dsterreichische Schuljugend Tabor: Nedvidek, 1877 GERCZ Wolff, Christian Friedrich von (1679-1754) Philosophia rationalis sive logica, methodo scientifica perfracta Frankfurt/Leipzig: no publ., 1728 LAT Wolff, Emil Leitfaden zur Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. Nach unterrichtlichen Grundsdtzen in drei Kursen Leipzig: Siegismund & Volkening, 1874 GERGE Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard (1799-1851) Die deutschen Dichter von Gottsched bis zu Goethes Tode Weimar: Voigt, 1846 GER Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard Encyclopadie der deutschen National-Literatur (7 vols.) Leipzig: Wigand, 1835-47 GER Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard Historical sketch of modern German literature Weimar: Voigt, 1837 ENG UK reprinted from The Athenaeum. A Journal of Literature, Science, and the Fine Arts 1835: 202-6,241-4, 298-300, 352-5, 408-11,448-51,491-2 Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard Poetischer Hausschatz des deutschen Volkes... Leipzig: Wigand, 1839 GER

Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard Die schdne LitteraturEuropa's in der neuesten Zeit, dargestellt nach ihren bedeutendsten Erscheinungen Leipzig: Breitkopf & Hartel, 1832 GER Wollheim, da Fonseca, Anton Emmanuel (1810-84) Kurzgefaflte Geschichte der deutschen Literatur Hamburg: Schuberth, 1851 GERGE 2nded. 1853 Wollschlager, C.S. Handbuch der allgemeinen Literaturgeschichte Eisenach: Bacmeister, 1873 GERGE 2nd. ed. 1875 Wychgram, Jakob (1858-1927) Hilfsbuchfur den Unterricht in der deutschen Litteraturgeschichte Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing, 1892 GER GE editions to 1938 (27) - V & K's Sammlung deutscher Schulausgaben Wyss, Friedrich (1832-1918) Die deutsche Poesie der neueren Zeit mit einleitenden Literaturbildern ausfriiheren Perioden. Ein Leitfaden fur die Literaturkunde an Seminarien und anderen hoheren Lehranstalten wie auch zum Selbstunterricht Bem:Dalp 18?? GER CH 2nd ed. 1874, 3rd ed. Deutsche Literaturg. ... 1878 Zacharia, Friedrich Wilhelm (1726-77) Auserlesene Stilcke der besten deutschen Dichter von Martin Opitz bis auf gegenwdrtige Zeiten, mit historischen Anmerkungen (3 vols.) Braunschweig: Waisenhaus, 1766-78 GER - vol. 3 by Eschenburg Zacharia, Friedrich Wilhelm Hinterlassene Schriften (ed. J. J.

287 Bibliography Eschenburg) Braunschweig: Waisenhaus, 1781 GER Zacharia, Fried rich Wilhelm Die Poesie und Germanien. Ein Gedicht Berlin: no publ., 1755 GER Repr. Dt. Literaturdenkmale ...,m, 7 (Berlin 1903) Zehender, Ferdinand (1829-85) Ubersicht der deutschen Literaturgeschichte von den altesten Zeiten bis zur Gegenwart. Zum Gebrauch der Schule Winterthur: Westfehling, 1871 GERCH2nded. 1878 Zehnmark, Ludwig Eduard (1751/3-1814) Handbuch der Litterar-Geschichte (vol. 1, no more published) Breslau: Kom, 1777 GER Zeidler, Jakob. See Nagl, Johann Willibald Zesen, Philip von (1616-89) Hochdeutsche heliconische Hechel Hamburg: Guht, 1668 GER Zesen, Philip von Hochdeutsche Sprachubung Hamburg: no publ., 1643 GER Zeynek, Gustav Ritter von Grundzuge der deutschen Stilistik und Literaturgeschichte. Ein Hilfsbuch beim Sprachunterrichte zundchst an Lehrer-Bildungsanstalten Graz: Leuschner & Lubensky, 1868 GER AU editions to 1910 (8) ed. Meixner Zimmermann, Wilhelm (1807-78) Geschichte der prosaischen und poetischen deutschen Nationalliteraturfur die Leser aller Stande Stuttgart: Verlags-Bureau, 1846

GER GE = Christliche Volks- und Jugendbibliothek, 9 Zipper, Albert (1855-?) Geschichte der deutschen Literatur alsAbrifi und Repetitorium fur Schuler osterreichischungarischer Lehranstalten Wien: Schworella & Heick, 1895? GERAU2nded. 1898 Zipper, Albert KurzerAbrifl zugleich Repetitorium der deutschen Literaturgeschichte fur Osterreichische Mittelschulen (also publ. Wien: Konegen) Ztoczow: Zuckerkandel, 1886 GER PO 2nd ed. as Gesch. d. dt. Lit. alsAbr. u. Repetitorium f. Schuler osterreichisch-ungarischer Lehranstalten Zotov, V. Istoriia vsemirroi literatury IV. Hist. Germanii (History of world literature 4, Germany) St. Petersburg: no publ., 1882 RUS RU unseen Zumkley, Caspar, pseud. See Konig, Johann Bemhard Joseph Zurbonsen, Friedrich (1856-?) Ausjuhrungen aus der deutschen Literatur Paderborn: Schoningh, 19?? GERGE2nded. 1921 Zurbonsen, Friedrich Deutsche Litteraturkunde. Leitfaden fur hohere Schulen. Mit Anmerkungen aus der Poetik Berlin: Nicolai, 1891 GER GE editions to 1910 (7) Zuschlag, Heinrich Anleitung, deutsche Literaturgeschichte zu lernen ... und... zu behalten Berlin-Schoeneberg: Mentor, 1906 GERGEBibliothek... Schulerversetzung ... Bd. 20

Index

Abraham a Sancta Clara - see Megerle, Ulrich Abrifi der deutschen Literaturgeschichte... 164,165 Abt (Abbt), Thomas 156 Addison, Joseph 89 Adelung, Johann Christoph 170,193 Aeschylus 89 Aesop 89 Alberich of Besan^on 89 Albinus, Georg 120 Albrecht, Janos 166 Almagia, Ortensia 156 Alxinger, Johann Baptista von 160 Ampere, Jean Jacques 113, 200 Andreae, Johann Valentin 184 Angelus Silesius - see Scheffler, Johann Anne Sophie von Hesse-Darmstadt 120 Annolied 130 Anonyma - see under title Antenor - see Schupp, Balthasar Anti-semitism 67, 71, 78, 80, 81, 103 Apffel - see Henry, P. Arany, Janos 166 Archivfiir das Studiwn der neueren

Sprachen 2 Ariosto, Ludovico 17 Aristotle 210 Arnold, E. 78-9 Arnold, Gottfried 31 Arnold, Matthew 208 Arthurian literature 19, 20, 31, 33, 37, 38, 40,106,145,171 Athenaeum 135 Ausziige aus der deutschen Literaturgeschichte... 164 Auszug der ungarischen Literaturgeschichte... 164, 165 Avenarius, Ferdinand 74 Ayrenhoff, Cornelius Hermann von 160,164 Ayrer, Jakob 29 Bach, Johann Sebastian 69 Bacon, Francis 21 Baechthold, Jakob 152,153,154, 202 Bahder, Karl 55 Balde, Jakob 47,120 Balsamo-Crivelli, Gust. 110 Banner, Joseph Georg Toscano del 159 Barante, Amable Guillaume 200

289

Index

Bartels, Adolf 68, 70-1, 72, 97, 101-4,154,179,180,189, 202 Baudis, Hans Wenzel 166 Bauer, Friedrich 161 Bauernfeld, Eduard von 161,164 Beck, Karl 160,161,164,166 Becker, Hermann 178 Beilhack, Johann Georg 5 Bernays, Adolphus 202 Bernhardt, Wilhelm 145-6, 202 Bertola, Aurelio de1 Giorgi 113, 155, 201 Bertolami, Mariano 158 Besser, Johann von 60,103 Bethlen, Gabriel, Prince 166 Beyer, Conrad or Konrad - see Beyer-Boppard Beyer-Boppard, Conrad 61-2, 71-2,190 Bianchi, Luigi 156 Bieber, Hugo 102 Bielfeld, Jacob Friedrich von, Baron 201 Biese, (Karl Julius) Alfred 74, 87, 97,100,101-4,154,180,189, 192,194, 202 Biese, Franz 5 Birken, Sigmund von 144,196, 205 Bismarck, Otto Eduard Leopold, Prince 76 Blaze, Henri - see Bury, Ange Henri Blaze de Blumauer, Johann Alois 160 Boas, Eduard 4 Bodmer, Johann Jakob 116, 123, 130,133,136, 152,154,155, 156, 200 Bohme, Jakob 125 Borne, Ludwig 71 Botticher, Gotthold 65-6, 76, 97,99 Bohm, H. 51 Borinski, Carl 77-8 Bossert, Adolphe 119,123,126, 127, 209 Bosshart, Jakob 155 Bougeault, Alfred 124, 204, 209 Bouterwek, Friedrich 18,108,116,

133,179, 200, 201 Brandenburg, Louise Henriette von 31,120 Brant, Sebastian 16,157,159,174 Bratranek, Franz Thomas 166,167 Brederlow, Christian Georg Friedrich 9 Breitinger, Johann Jakob 123,133, 136,152,154 Bremer Beitrage 135 Brenning, Emil 47, 55 Brentano, Clemens 70 Brentano, Sophie 70 Briefe die deutsche Sprache betreffend 201 Brockes, Barthold Heinrich 60,140 Bruck, M.R. 51 Briihl, Johann August Moriz 52 Brugier, Gustav 53, 54, 96, 99, 162,180 Brun, Gottfried 201 Brunner, August 76 Buchholtz, Andreas Heinrich 125 Buchner, Wilhelm Joseph 50 Burger, Gottfried August 166 Bury, Ange Henri Blaze de 115 Busse, Carl 76 Buurmann, Ulrich 178 Byron, George Gordon, Baron 30, 204, 205 Calderon de la Barca, Pedro 17 Calvin, John 27 Canitz, Friedrich Ludwig Rudolf von 116,125,156 Canon, literary 39, 87-94, 205, 213 Cantalamessa, Guido 100,110 Canterbury Tales 204 Carlyle, Thomas 133-4,138, 201, 206, 207 Cart, L. William 119,126, 202 Castelli, Franz Ignaz, 161,164,168 Celtic literature 33 Cerny, Johann 166 Cervantes, Miguel 17 Chamisso, Adalbert von 70 Charlemagne 19, 20, 25, 85,131, 195

290

Index

Chasles, (Victor Euphemion) Philarete 122, 200, 208 Chateaubriand, Francois Rene 204 Chelius (physician) 88 Chmielowski, Piotr 171 Cholevius, Johannes Karl Leo 201 Chretien de Troyes 106 Chuquet, Arthur Maxime 125, 209 Claus, Nicola 156 Clavequin-Rosselot, FrangoisEmile, abbe 123-4 Coar, John Firman 149, 202, 211 Collin, Heinrich Joseph von 160, 164 Combes, Ernst 127 Constant, Benjamin 200, 204 Conybeare, F.C. 100,106 Cop, A.E. 140 Crabbe, George 204 Cramer, Johann Andreas 166 Cros de Vour - see ClavequinRosselot Crousle, L. 109 Cyclical theory of literature 58-60, 69-70,140 Dach, Simon 53 Dahn, Felix 164 Dante Alighieri 16, 42 Darwin, Charles 74, 80 Deetjen, W. 76 Deinhardstein, Johann Ludwig 160, 168 Demogeot, Jacques Claude 125 Denis, Michel 160 Descartes, Rene 21 Deutsche National -Literatur 76 Dickens, Charles 101 Dieffenbach (physician) 88 Dietlein, Woldemar 53, 96, 97-8 Dietz, Hermann 125 Dilherr, Johann Michael 120 Dilschneider, Johann Josef 2 Dingelstedt, Franz 115 Dreikammtheorie - see Cyclical theory Dumcke, Julius 43 Dupuy, Adolphe 117

Ebert, Karl Egon 161,164,168 Ebner, Eduard 98 Eckhart, Johann Georg von 116, 200 Edda 19,131 Edinburgh Review 133 Egelhaaf, Gottlob Friedrich Wilhelm 88-91, 97, 99,161 Egger von Mollwald, Alois 161 Eichendorff, Joseph, Freiherr von 44-47, 70,127,179,191,199 Eichhoff, Fr6deric Gustave 115 Eichhorn, Johann Gottfried 18, 201 Einhard 195,197 Eisner, G.L. 100,110 Eitner, Karl 4 Engel, Eduard 73-4, 97, 99,101-4, 159,199 Engel, Johann I. 131 Epstein, Ludwig 83 Eraclius 139 Erasmus, Desiderius 123 Ersch, Johann Samuel 116, 200 Eschenburg, Johann Joachim 116, 200, 201 Ettmiiller, Ernst Moritz Ludwig 9-10, 201, 202 Euripides 43 Evans, Edward Paysan 139, 201 Everett, Alexander Hill 138, 200, 205, 211 Fechner, Theodor - see Mises Felton, C.C. 105 Fenelon, Francois de Sallignac de la Motte 204 Feuchtersleben, Ernst 161 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb 46, 67 Fiedler, Leonhard 98 Findel, Gottfried Joseph Gabriel 202 Fischart, Johann 69, 73, 204, 206 Flemming, Paul 103,125 Flogel, Carl Friedrich 156, 201 Flore und Blanscheflur 171 Fohrmann, Jorgen xiv Folz, Hans 64 Fontane, Theodor 204

291

Index

Fortlage, Arnold Rudolf Karl 18 Franck(e), Sebastian 120,125 Francke, Kuno 147,150, 202, 211 Frank, Paul (Merseburger) 43, 111, 152 Frederick II (the Great), King of Prussia 7,119,125,135,136, 138,141,149 Freiligrath, Hermann Ferdinand 208 Freytag, Gustav 211 Fricke, Wilhelm 51 Friedrich der Gro/?e - see Frederick II Friedrich von Hardenberg - see Novalis Fuchs (physician) 88 Fuchs, August 10,11 Gay, John 204 Geibel, Emanuel 68 Geiler von Kaysersberg 174 Gellert, Christian Furchtegott 27, 60,103,106,136,156, 204 Gelzer, Johann Heinrich 3,194 Gerhardt, Paul 31, 53, 69,120,125 German language: origin of 194-6; qualities of 195-9, 207-8 German Museum 129 Germania 2,162 Germanic peoples: character of 188-9,191-2, 206-7; origin of 194-5 Germanistik 1 Gerstacker, Friedrich 204 Gerstenberg, Karl von 50, 54,153, 155 Gervinus, Georg Gottfried 3, 4, 14-18, 28, 30, 35, 36, 53, 59, 62, 96,100,137,163,179,180,181, 184-5,188,191, 201, 202 Gesenius (17c. poet) 120 Gessner, Konrad 154 Gessner, Salomon 113, 201 Ginzel, Ferdinand 99 Girardin, Saint-Marc 200 Giseke, Nikolaus Dietrich 168 Gleim, Johann Wilhelm Ludwig

156 Goedeke Karl 201, 202 Gorres, Johann Joseph von, 67, 201 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von 5, 20, 26, 30, 38, 40, 43, 46, 47, 53, 57, 60, 61, 65, 76, 79, 86, 87,102, 103,104,105,120,122,131,138, 139,140,141,148,159,160,161, 163,164,173,174,184,189, 201, 204, 210, 211 Gottingen 27 Goetz, Wilhelm 152-3 Goetzinger, Maximilian Wilhelm 1, 24-8,187,192,194, 202 Goldast, Melchior 116, 200 Goldsmith, Oliver 205 Golther, Wolfgang 76-7, 78 Gordon, Thomas 105 Gortzitza, Wilhelm Orlando 42 Gost(w)ick, Joseph 136-8,142-3, 145, 201, 202, 204, 205, 207, Gostomski, Walery 171,172 Gottfried von Strassburg 15, 20, 28, 31, 32, 36, 37, 38, 44, 47, 49, 59, 66, 67, 72, 93,118,122,123, 132,141,142,145,149,154,155, 157,158,159,170,173,174, 209 Gotthelf, Jeremias 154,155 Gottschall, Rudolf 42, 201, 202 Gottsched, Johann Christoph 60, 69,103, 104, 125, 130, 132, 133, 136,145 Graef, Hermann 64, 66 Graesse, Johann Georg Theodor 10, 18, 201 Graff, Eberhard Gottlieb 201 Grande encyclopedic, La 126 Gray, Thomas 205 Gredy, Friedrich Melchior 50, 51, 111 Greek literature/culture 12,16,19, 20, 22, 27, 30, 31, 37, 61, 207 Grillparzer, Franz 160,164,168, 170 Grimm, Jakob 137,163, 201 Grimm, Wilhelm 201 Grimmelshausen, Johann Jacob 69, 125,147,169

292

Index

Groschl, Ludwig 169-70 Griin, Anastasius 160,161,162, 164,168,170 Grundrifl der deutschen Literatur ... 174 Gryphius, Andreas 26,125, 205 Gryphius, Christian 104,144 Gude, Carl Heinrich Friedrich 96, 98 Gudrun 69, 72, 74 Giinther, Friedrich Joachim 34, 35, 37, 44,178,179 Giinther, Johann Christian 60, 63, 73,103-4,116,125,136,159, 168,169,172,173,184 Gumposch, Victor Philipp 10,1112 Gutzkow, Karl Ferdinand 1, 3 Hacklaender, Friedrich Wilhelm von 121 Hagedorn, Friedrich von 10, 59, 116,154,156 Hagen, Ernst August 72 Hagen, Friedrich Heinrich von der 201 Hahn, Werner 50, 96, 99, 202 Hajkova, Emma 166 Hallberg, (Louis) Eugene 124-5, 202 Haller, Albrecht von 59,116,154, 155,156 Hallmann, Johann 59,137 Halm, Friedrich - see Munch- Bell inghausen Hamann, Johann Georg 11 Hamerling, Robert 169,170 Hamlet 208 Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph von 164 Hanmann, Enoch 196 Harrison, Robert 142-3,145,201, 202, 207 Harsdorffer, Georg Philipp 196, 197 Hartmann von Aue 38, 72, 93,106, 139,157,173 Hasse, Augustin 65, 67,160 Hattstadt, Otto (Frederick) 83,146

Hauptmann, Gerhart 145,148,149 Hauser, Otto 76 Haustein, Benjamin Friedrich 170-1 Hebbel, Christian Friedrich von 160,165, 211 Hebrew literature/culture 19, 20, 22 Hedge, Frederic Henry 144,145, 202, 206, 208 Heer, Jakob Christoph 154,155 Heerman, Johannes 31,120 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 18,148,172 Heilmann, Karl 63, 66, 97, 99 Heimatbewegung 71, 74, 80 Heine, Heinrich 3, 71, 78,107, 121,144,145,168, 204 Heinemann, Karl 83,180 Heinisch, Georg Friedrich 54 Heinrich von Morungen 89, 91-3 Heinrich von Ofterdingen 130,171 Heinrich von Veldeke 130,157, 171,173 Heinrich, Guillaume Alfred 11922,127, 202 Heinrich, Gusztav 164 Heinrich Julius von Braunschweig 29 Heinse, Johann Jakob Wilhelm 36 Heinsius, Otto Friedrich Theodor 108-9,115,177,178,192, 201 Heinze, Ch.E.G. Ignazio 156 Helbig, Karl Gustav 5, 96, 98 Heller, Otto 149 Heller, S. 171 Hennequin, P. 114. Henry, P. 108-9,115,123, 209 Hentschel, Adolf 55, 97-8 Hentschel, Curt 49, 55 Herbig, G. 166 Herder, Johann Gottfried 13, 72, 105,141,197, 201, 204 Herzog, Karl 170,190,192 Herzog Ernst 139,173 Hettner, Hermann xi, 201, 202 Heydenreich, F.F. 85 Hildebrandslied 93 Hillebrand, Joseph 3, 35, 36, 68,

293

Index

201 Hinrichsen, Adolf 61 Hirsch, Franz Wilhelm 55-7 Historia litteraria 4,10-14, 18, 55, 186,214 Histories of literature - authorship of 5, 95,140,151-2, 177-9 - audience for: 3,102,176-80; general 179-81; school and home 8, 49, 50-1, 62-5,127,177-9, 183; schools 4-8, 51-4, 97-8, 111, 126,138-9,140,145-6, 150,153,159-60,162,166-70, 171-3,174,177-8,183; special groups 178; universities 114-15, 138,139,140,143-4,146,149, 178; women 4, 36-7, 43-4, 52, 177 - bias in xiii - categorization of 34, 39,112-14 - contemporary writers in 80, 82, 94,165,189, 213 - content of - see Canon, literary and Literature, definition of - definition of xi, 55-6 - female writers in 63, 64, 72, 87, 149,153,161,172, 213 - "foreign" 199-212; American 83,138,139,140,142-50, 201, 202, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 210-12; Austrian 50, 54, 64, 65, 79, 83, 87,159-70,175 ; Belgian 114,122-3,191, 207; Canadian 149; Czech 166-70; English 129-42, 150, 200, 201, 202, 204 205, 206, 207, 208, 210; French 113-28, 200, 202, 204, 206, 2 208, 209; Hungarian 113,162-6, 201; Italian 155-9, 201; Polish 171-4, 202; Russian 114,170; Swedish 43,152; Swiss 54, 83, 92,114,152-5,162,191 - genre of xi - illustrated 47-50, 68, 78, 98, 183 - lectures on 9,18, 31,114-15 - multiple authorship of 61, 76

- paradigm for xii - partial xi, 76,119,140,177,178 - periodization in 82,184-7 - see also Cyclical theory - popularity of 95-105 - purpose of 186-91,193-4 - quality of xiii - question and answer style 51 - quotations in 15,102,181-4 - regionalism in 54, 72, 86-7, 152,154,160-1,175 - size of 3, 5,49-51, 66, 84, 98-9, 100 - sources of 200 - style of 102, 111 - tabular 1, 51 -titles of 5, 82-4 - translations of 98,100,105-11 - vademecums 55, 98 - variant editions of 3, 66, 95-6 History of literature - definition of 6,190-1, 214-16 Hock, Stephan 167 Hoefer, Edmund Franz Andreas 43-44,178 Holderlin, Friedrich 70 Hoffbauer, K. 55 Hoffmann, E.T.A. 70 Hoffmann von Fallersleben, August Heinrich 2, 70 Hofmann, von Hofmannswaldau, Christian 59,103,119,125,136, 137,172,185-6 Hohberg, J.W. von 17 Holland, Hyazinth 34, 35 Holtz, Johannes 76 Homberg, Tinette 35, 36, 43, 53 Hopf, Wilhelm 177 Horace (Quintus Horatius Flaccus) 60 Horn, Franz Christoph 108,117, 133,170,179,198, 201 Horn, Gustav Wilhelm 97-8 Horning, Louis Emerson 149 Horst, Klotilde von der 44 Horwath, Franklin J. 149-50 Hosmer, James Kendall 142-3, 150, 202, 208, 210

294

Index

Howald, Johann 67-8, 78, 79, 80, 154,180 Hrabanus Maurus 130 Hrotsvith von Gandersheim 57 Huber, Michel 113,201 Hiippe, Bernhard 8, 96, 99,194 Huggenberger, Alfred 155 Hugo von Montfort 144 Hugo von Trimberg 130,171,174 Huhn, Eugen H.T. 50, 88-91, 192-3 Hunger, Karl 98 Hungerland, Heinz (Friedrich Wilhelm) 152 Hutten, Ulrich von 22, 29, 40, 47, 53, 73,131,147,154 Ibsen, Henrik 74 Illiad 207 Immermann, Karl 47,115,168 Indian literature 19, 20 Ivany, St. 162 Jacobi, Friedrich Heinrich 156, 210 Jahn, Friedrich Ludwig 23 Jantzen, Hermann 111, 152 Jean Paul - see Richter, Jean Paul Friedrich Jenny, (Heinrich) Ernst 152 Jerusalem, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm 197-8 Jezek, Jan Ferdinand 166,170 Jordens, Karl Heinrich 2,170 Jonson, Ben 73 Joret, Charles 119 Joseph II, Emperor 119,160 Journal encyclopedique 113 Journal etranger 113 Journals 2,136,167,176 Jung, Alexander 3 Kastner, Abraham Gotthelf 136 Kallenbach 185 Kannegiesser, Karl Friedrich Ludwig 8 Kant, Emmanuel 21, 30,138, 210 Karsch, Anne Luise 153 Kasik, Anton 166,170

Keller, Gottfried 154,155,173 Keller, Isidor 145-6 Keymann (17c. poet) 120 Khull, Ferdinand 202 Kinzel, Karl 76, 97 Kisfaludy, Sandor 166 Klaj, Johannes 137 Klee, Gotthold Ludwig 97, 99-100, 107 Kleist, Heinrich von 70, 87 Kletke, Hermann 3, 5, 53 Klopstock, Friedrich Gottlieb 26, 27, 38, 39, 45,47, 55, 72, 73, 86, 91,121,135,137,140,141,145, 157,168, 211 Kluepfel, Karl 10-11 Kluge, Hermann 54-5, 83, 88-91, 92-3, 97, 99-100,101-2,107, 109-10, 111, 126,140,154,169, 170,175,193, 202 Knorr von Rosenroth, Christian 31, 120 Knuttel, August 35, 37, 84 Koberstein, August 44, 55, 80, 96, 98, 99-100,107-8,163,178,187, 189,190,192, 201, 202 Koch, Erduin Julius 116, 170, 200, 201 Koch, Max 66, 78, 79, 97-8,110, 202 Konig, Johann Ulrich 104,125 Konig, Robert, 48, 97-8,139, 202 Konnecke, Gustav 49 Korner, Friedrich 178 Konrad von Wurzburg 118,139, 171,173 Kotzebue, August Friedrich Ferdinand von 2,11, 49, 63,129, 168 Kramer, Fr. 51 Krauss, Hermann 155 Kreidt, Dietrich 92-3 Krell, Leo 98 Kretschmer, Karl 83 Kriiger, Karl A. 97-8, 111, 202 Kubelka, Viktor 166 Kudrun - see Gudrun Kiirenberg 173

295

Index

Kiirschner, Joseph 76 Kiittner, Karl August Ferdinand 170 Kuhlmann, Quirinus 120 Kummer, Karl Ferdinand 97-8, 161,162,175, 202 Kunstwart, Die 74 Kurz, H. 88 Kurz, Heinrich 3, 35,43,100, 111, 139,143,167,169,182, 201, 202 Kurz-Bernardon (Austrian writer) 160 Kurzer Abri/3 der deutschen Literatur 164,167,168 Kurzer Abrifi der Rhetorik 164, 165, 166 Lachmann, Karl 201 Lafontaine, Jean de 60, 204 Lamprecht, Pfaffe 173 Lange, A. 171,173 Lange, Albert 125-6 Lange, Otto 5, 96, 98,110 Langenbeck (physician) 88 Latin literature/culture 12, 22, 27, 31, 37 Laube, Heinrich 20,160,179,180 Lauremberg, Johann 125 Lauth, Frederic 100,110 Lavater, Johann Kaspar 7,154 LeFevre-Deumier, Jules 119, 127, 207 Lehmann, Rudolf 97-8 Lehms, Georg Christian 185 Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm 125 Leitner, R. von 164 Leixner-Griinberg, Otto von 48 Lenau, Niklaus 164,166,168,170 Lesca, Giuseppe 110 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim 15,17, 26,40, 53, 72, 73,131,133,138, 141,144,156,174 Lewald, Fanny 165 Lewes, G.H. 201 Lichtwer, Magnus Gottfried 156 Lienert, Meinrad 155 Liliencron, Detlev von 170 Lindemann, Wilhelm 47, 96,193

Linders, G. 156 Linke, Karl 55 Liscow, Christian Ludwig 156 Literature: definition of 190-3; origin of 196-7 Literaturgeschichtsschreibung, xi, xiii Lodemann, August 138 Loeve-Veimars, (Francois) Adolphe 110,116,156, 200, 201 Loewenhalt - see Rumpler von Loewenhalt Logau, Friedrich von 69,125 Lohenstein, Daniel Casper von 59, 63, 68,103,125,136,137,144, 172,184,185-6, 204, 205 Loise, Ferdinand 122,191, 207 Lope de Vega 17 Lublin, Isabel T. 100,106,140, 202 Lttben, August 72, 76, 96, 98 Lucian, of Samosata 184 Ludwig, Otto 211 Ludwig, of Anhalt 89 Luther, Martin 15,17, 21, 22, 26, 27, 29, 39, 47, 53, 65, 69, 73, 76, 77, 84, 86, 93,120,134,135,137, 138,144,145,147 Luz, Georg 55 MacFarlan (?) 89 Machiavelli, Niccolo 89 Macpherson (?) 89 Mager, Adolf 64, 66,160,161 Magnin (?) 89 Magnus, Eduard 91 Mahlmann, Siegfried August 92-3 Maier, Elisa 44 Malherbe, Francois de 89,110 Mandeville, Sir John 89 Mann, Thomas 92-3 Manso, Johann Kaspar Friedrich 91, 201 Manuel, Niklas 92,154 Marbach, Gotthard Oswald 1 Margarethe von Navarra 89 Marggraff, Hermann 3 Maria von Burgund 89

296

Index

Marinelli (?) 160 Marino, Gianbattista 89,172 Marlowe, Christopher 73, 89 Marmier, Xavier 100,107-8,113, 200 Martell, Wilhelm 89 Marti, Fritz 92 Martial (Marcus Valerius Martialis) 89 Massmann, Hans Ferdinand 91 Matthisson, Friedrich von 91-3 Matz, Rudolf 55 Mauvillon, Eleazar 89 Maximilian, I, Emperor 92-3,144 Mazarin (?) 89 Mechthild von Magdeburg 93 Megerle, Ulrich 93,125,160,169, 185 Mehul (?) 89 Meinhold, Johannes Wilhelm 92-3 Meissner, August Gottlieb 116, 200 Meister, Leonhard 83,155,170, 186, 200, 201 Melancthon (Schwarzerd), Philipp 92-3 Mel eg, Gyula 166 Melissus - see Schede, Paul Mencke, Johann Burkhard 103 Mendelssohn, Moses 92-3,144 Mendoza (?) 89 Menge, Hermann 42, 84 Mensch, Ella 172 Menzel, Wolfgang 3, 39-41,105, 200, 201, 202 Mereau (Brentano), Sophie 89, 91 Merseburger, Carl Wilhelm - see Frank, Paul Mertens, Hieronymus Andreas 197 Merz (artist) 91 Metcalfe, Frederick 100,105-6, 140, 201, 202 Methfessel (composer) 91 Meyer, Conrad Ferdinand 93,155 Meyer, Heinrich 93 Meyer, Johann Friedrich 91 Meyer, Johannes 72-3 Meyer, Richard Moritz xi Meyerbeer (composer) 91

Meyr, Melchior, 92-3 Michael is, Johann Benjamin 92-3 Michelangelo 89 Mieding (?) 91 Miegel, Agnes 92-3 Milford (?) 89 Millanello (?) 89 Millenet (?) 89 Miller, Johann Martin 91-3 Milton, John 89, 205 Minutti, Rodolfo 110 Mises (Fechner) 89 Missona, Kazimierz 171,172,174, 202 Mittermaier, Karl Johann 91 Mnioch (Schmidt), Marie 89 Mody, Mrs 138 Mobius, Paul 51, 96, 98 Morike, Eduard 92-3 Moeser, Justus 92-3 Moliere 89 Moltke A.G.D. 91 Mommsen, Theodor 93 Montesquieu, Charles 89 Monthly Magazine 131 Moore, Robert Webber 145 Morhof, Daniel Georg 2, 197 Moritz, Karl Philipp 91, 92 Morus (?) 89 Moscheles (?) 89 Moscherosch, Hans Michael 89, 91-3,125,169,184 Mosenthal, Salomon Hermann 93 Moser, Gustav 93 Moses (?) 89 Motti, Pietro 157 Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus 91 Miiller von Nitterdorf, Adam Heinrich 199, 201 Muller, Christian 114-15,191 Muller, Friedrich (Maler) 92-3 Muller, Johannes von 93 Muller, Max 201, 202 Muller, Wilhelm 70, 91-3,118, 127 Milliner, Adolf 91-3 Munch-Bell inghausen, Eligius Franz Joseph 89, 91-3,164

297

Index

Munchhausen, Borries von 92-3 Miinter, Balthasar 7 Mundt, Theodor 8,10; Allg. Litg. 12 Murillo (?) 89 Murner, Thomas 47, 53, 63, 73, 91-3,154,159 Musaus, Johann Karl August 91-3, 120 Mylius, Christlob 92-3 Nacke, Karl 72, 76 Nasser, Johann Adolf 170, 201 "Nationalliteratur" 25, 83,160,191 Neander, Christoph 7, 31,120,125 Neidhart von Reuenthal 173 N£met olvasomdnyok... 164,165 Netoliczka, Eugen 97-8 Neue deutsche Biographic 102 Neukirch, Benjamin 125 Neumark, Georg 31 Nibelungenlied 19, 36, 38, 69, 72, 93,107,110,136,168,173,174, 207 Nicholson, E. 139-40 Nicolai, Christian Friedrich 144 Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm 170 Noel, Francois Joseph Michel 114 Nosselt, Friedrich August 37, 53, 85 Notker Labeo 130 Novalis (Friedrich von Hardenberg) 67, 70 Obermuller, L. 96, 98 Oeser, Christian - see Schroer, Tobias Gottfried Olearius, Adam 125 Olsson, B.F. 100 Oltrogge, Carl 50, 88-91,161 Opitz von Boberfeld, Martin 26, 29, 40, 69, 86,107,110,118,122, 125,130,132,135,136,137,147, 166,172, 204 Oriental literature/culture 20, 37 Ortlob, Carl 60 Ossian 19, 31 Osterloff, Waldemar 111, 171,172,

174, 202 Oswald von Wolkenstein 144 Otfried von Weissenburg 130,131 Otto, Louise 164 Ovid 59,131 Paganini, Nicolo 110 Parender, Gian Giacomo 156 Parmentier, Jacques 119,126 Pelleter, Johann Anton 166-7 Peschier, Adolphe 117-18, 200, 204, 206, 207 Pfalz, Franz 55,189, 202 Pfeffel, Gottlieb Konrad 156 Pfeuffer (physician) 88 Philippi, J. 100,109-10,126 Phillipps, Vivian 140 Phillips, Mary Elizabeth 138,140, 202 Piazza, Antonio 110, 116,156 Pichler, Karoline 160,164,168, 169 Piers Plowman 132 Pietsch, Johann Valentin 60 Pischon, Friedrich August 96, 99, 108,117 Plant, Johann Traugott 186 Platen-Hallermunde, August von 127,168 Plato 210 Politz, Karl Heinrich Ludwig 117, 198, 202 Pochhammer - see Martell, Wilhelm Positivism 58 Postel, Christian Heinrich 125 Pott, L. 155 Prehauser, Gottfried 160 Priest, George Madison 100,106 Prutz, Robert Eduard 3,11,194, 201 Piitz, Wilhelm 53, 111 Purdie, Edna 141 Pyrker, Johann Ladislav 160,164, 168 Rabelais, Francois 17, 205 Rabener, Gottlieb Wilhelm 136,

298

Index

156 Rachel, Joachim 125 Rackl, Josef 98 Raimund, Ferdinand 64,161,164 Rassel, Virgile 152 Redwitz, Oskar von 55 Reid, M.F. 138 Reid, Mayne 204 Reimmann, Jakob Friedrich 11 Reimnitz, Friedrich Wilhelm 5 Reineke Fuchs 72 Reinmar der Alte 130 Reinmar von Zweter 130 Reuschel, Karl 66, 98 Reuter, Wilhelm 52, 96, 99 Rhenanus, Beatus 195 Richter, Jean Paul Friedrich 17, 115,122,141, 205, 210 Ridolfi, Angelo 155, 201 Riemer, Abraham 185 Rinkart, Martin 29 Rinne, Johann Karl Friedrich 23, 177,187,192,193 Robertson, John George 141-2, 150 Rodigast, Samuel 120 Roman literature/culure - see Latin literature Romantics 3, 8,18-19, 20, 23, 26, 39, 45, 46, 53, 55, 64, 67, 77, 86, 135,158, 163,189, 198 Roquette, Otto 41, 139,179 Rosegger, Peter 170 Rosenkranz, Karl 179, 201 Rosenpliit, Hans 69 Rost, Johann Christoph 156 Rothe, Friedrich 92-3 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques 197 Rudolf von Ems 138 Ruckert, Friedrich 41 Ruef, Jakob 153 Rumpler von Loewenhalt, Esaias 125 Ruodlieb 57

Saalfeld, Lerke von 92-3 Sachs, Hans 69, 73, 93,132,146, 147,172, 204

Sachsenspiegel 171 Salomon und Morolf 139 Salus, Hugo 170 Salzer, Anselm 78, 79,166 Sanders, Daniel (Hendel) 43 Saupe, Ernst Julius 3, 5 Schack, Bela 162 Schaefer, Johann Wilhelm 1, 4, 5-9, 28, 35, 51, 92, 96, 99,187, 201 Schaffner, Jakob 155 Schede, Paul 89, 92 Scheffler, Johann (Angelus Silesius) 31, 47, 53,120,125 Scheinpflug, Bernard 167-8 Scherer, Wilhelm 55, 58-61, 63, 65, 69, 71, 97,100,101-2,106,

145,180, 202 Scherr, Johann, 35-6,11,110,162, 171

Schiff, Paolina 157-8 Schiller, Henrik 111 Schiller, Johann Friedrich von 26, 38, 46, 53, 65,138,140,142,168, 201, 205 Schillerwein, Wilhelm 160, 161 Schilter, Johann 116, 200 Schirmer, David 125 Schlegel, August Wilhelm 12-13, 18, 30, 67, 70, 116, 160, 161,177, 179, 200 Schlegel, Caroline 177 Schlegel, Friedrich 30, 67, 70,109 Schlegel, Johann Adolf 130,136, 168 Schlegel, Johann Elias 136 Schleiermacher, Friedrich Ernst Daniel 109 Schlosser, Friedrich Christoph 202 Schmid, Christian Heinrich 201 Schmidt, A.F. Wilhelm 55 Schmidt, Arnold 168 Schmidt, Eugen 51 Schmidt, Julian 139, 201, 202 Schmidt, Marie - see Mnioch, Marie Schmidt, L. 51 Schnedermann, Franz 68-9,190

299

Index

Schonlein (physician) 88 Schoppner, Alexander 52, 53, 54, 96,98 Scholl, Gottlob Heinrich Friedrich 5 Scholl, Traugott Ferdinand 5, 51 Schottel, Justus Georgius 196 Schram, Wilhelm (Carl) 54,169 Schroer, Karl Julius 35,162,165 Schroer, Tobias Gottfried 28-31, 85,162,178,201 Schubart, Christian Friedrich Daniel 7 Schultz, Ferdinand 62-3, 66, 92-3, 97-8,161,181 Schulze, Erich 92-3,162 Schulze, Otto 54, 88-91,194 Schupp, Balthasar 125,169,184, 185 Schuster, Alfred 164,165,166 Schwab, Gustav Benjamin 10-11, 137,178 Schwabenspiegel 171 Schwahn, Walther Schwarz, Sibylle 125 Schwarzburg, Ludamillie Elisabeth von 120 Scott, Sir Walter 30 Scudery, Madeleine de 204 Scultetus, Andreas 125 Sehrwald, (Christian) Friedrich 42-3, 88-91,161 Seidl, Johann Gabriel 161,162, 164,168,170 Seinecke, Ferdinand 88-91,161, 182,193,194 Selss, Albert Maximilian 139, 201, 204, 206, 207, 210 Seneca 59 Shakespeare 16,42, 73, 74, 205, 210 Shine, Hill 133, 206 Sidney, Philipp 73 Siegfried, Walther 154 Sime, James 162 Sittenberger, Hans 64, 66,161 Sittewald - see Moscherosch Suiolle, Leo 63, 66,161

Solger 201 Soiling, Gustav 140-1,150, 202 Sonnenfels, Joseph 160 Southey, Robert 144 Spangenberg, Wolfhart 196 Spatzal, Johann 166 Spec von Langenfeld, Friedrich 31, 47, 53, 63, 68,120,125,154 Spengler, Lazarus 159 Spenser, Edmund 73 Speratus, Paulus 159 Spitteler, Carl 154,155 Stael-Holstein, Anna Louise Germaine 110,113,114,123, 201 Stejskal, Karl 162,175, 202 Stelzhamer, Franz 164,168 Stern, Adolf 99 Stoeber, August (Daniel August Ehrenfried) 117 Stoeber, Daniel Ehrenfried 114, 117,178 Stockel, Hermann 76 Stohn, Hermann 97-8 Storck, Karl G.L. 66,110,193 Stranitzky, Josef Anton 160 Stroebe, Lilian Luise 146-7 Stromeyer (physician) 88 Strzemcha, Paul 50, 51, 83, 88-91, 97, 99,151,160,161 Sudermann, Hermann 148,149 Sulzer, Johann Georg 156, 170, 201 Swiecicki, Julian Adolf 171 Szabrariski, Antoni Jozef 173-4 Szemak, Istvan 164,165,166 Tacitus 195,197 Tannhauser, Der 173 Tastu, Amable 118-19 Tauler, Johannes 130 Taylor, Bayard 143-4,145, 202, 204-5, 206 Taylor, William 131-4, 200 Textor (physician) 88 Thimm, Franz J.L. 135-6,138, 200 Thomas, Calvin 149, 202 Thomas, Walter 127, 202 Thomas of Brittany 209 Thomasius, Christian 125,184

300

Index

Tieck, Johann Ludwig 67, 70,109 Titio - see Brant, Sebastian Tolstoy, Leo Nikolaevich 74 Tomei, A. 158 Toscano del Banner - see Banner, Joseph Georg Toscano del Tschudi, Aegidius 195 Tupetz, Theodor 161,178 Tyrol und Fridebant 111 Uhland, Johann Ludwig 70, 201 Ulrich von Lichtenstein 132,173 Vajda, Gyula 164,166 Vernaleken, Friedrich Theodor 54 Verzeichnis Heferbarer Biicher 98 Vetterlein, Christian Friedrich Rudolf 201 Viehoff, Heinrich 85 Villemain, Abel Francois 113 Villers, Charles Francois Dominique de 114 Vilmar, August Friedrich Christian 31-3, 42, 52, 60, 68, 69, 71, 96, 100,101-4,105,139,140,177, 179,181,185,187,188,191, 201, 202 Vogtlin, Adolf 87, 92-3,154,155, 162 Vogl, Johann Nepomuk 161,162, 164,170 Vogt, Friedrich Hermann Traugott 66, 78, 79, 97-8,110, 202 Vogt, Johann Gustav 78 Voltaire, Francois Marie Arouet de 204 Voss, Johann Heinrich 73 Vymazal, Frantisek 111, 151,166, 168-9 Wachler, Johann Friedrich Ludwig 18, 25, 83,107,153,179, 201 Wackernagel, Carl Heinrich Wilhelm 41-2,137,163, 201 Wagner, Richard 78,148, 211 Waiblinger, Wilhelm 88 Waltharius 57 Walther von der Vogelweide 28,

69, 93,130,166,170,171 Wartburgkrieg 111 Weber, Georg: 10,14, 96, 99, 100,101-2,110-11,152,162 Weber, Hugo 97-8 Weimar, Klaus xiv Weise, Christian 125,137 Weiss, Aloy 138,140 Wei/fe, Christian Felix 159,184 Weitbrecht, Richard 42 Wells, Benjamin Willis 140, 202, 204, 211 Weltliteratur 13, 39, 55, 74, 76, 119,124,133,149,167,171, 172-3 Wenckebach, Carla 145 Wernick, Friedrich 50-1, 88-91 Wernicke, Christian 104,125,136 Widmann, Josef Viktor 155 Wieland, Christoph Martin 17, 30, 36, 68, 72, 73,122,141,156,174 Wiesner, Johann 97-8 Wihl, Ludwig 21 Wilkinson, William Cleaver 144-5, 202, 204, 206 Will, Peter 129-31, 200 Williram von Ebersberg 130, 139 Willmann, Otto 65 Wilpert, Gero von 58, 87 Winter, Hellmuth 108,178,186, 189, 194 Witek, Johann 168 Wolff, Christian Friedrich 21 Wolff, Oskar Ludwig Bernhard 2,135 Wolfram von Eschenbach 20, 28, 32, 66, 68, 69, 72, 93,123,130, 154,155,157,159,170,171,173 Wycliffe, John 132 Wychgram, Jakob 97-8, 202 Zacharia, (Justus) Friedrich Wilhelm 136,166 Zahn, Ernst 154,155 Zedlitz, Joseph Christian von 161, 164,168 Zehender, Ferdinand 153-4 Zeitschrift fur deutsches Altertum

301

Index

und deutsche Literatur 2 Zesen, Philp von 196 Zeynek, Gustav, Ritter von 54, 161 Ziegler und Kliphausen, Heinrich Anselm von 125

Zimmermann, Wilhelm 31 Zincgref, Julius Wilhelm 125 Zipper, Albert 171 Zola, Emile 74