It
presented
an interpretation of the culture that had
developed in Germany within the memory of then living men and
which had yet to be sorted and assimilated by the rest of the world.
developed in Germany within the memory of then living men and
which had yet to be sorted and assimilated by the rest of the world.
Thomas Carlyle
xxii
His Studies before 18 30 xxii
His Progress in the Attempt to Produce
a History of German Literature xxv
III The Actual Manuscript of the History:
Description and Provenience xxx
IV Evaluation of the History xxxi
V Notice concerning Editorial Method . . . . xxxiii
VI Hypothetical Reconstruction of the
Original Volume and a Half That Car-
lyle Is Known to Have Written xxxiv
VII Acknowledgments xxxv
Chapter I Introduction. Of Literature, and its In-
fluences. -- Literary Histories: Design
of the present one 1
Chapter II Antiquity and Integrity of the German
People. German National Characteristics.
The Northern Immigrations and Their
Importance in World History. The
Greatness of the Present German Culture . . 14
Chapter III Traditionary Lore of the Germans. Ger-
man Language, Its Antiquity, Develop-
ments, and Characteristics. German
Popular Proverbs. German Folk-tales. . . . 23
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? viii
CONTENTS
Chapter IV Modern Interest in Medieval Popular
Poetry. The Two Main German Monu-
ments of Long-written Popular Poetry,
Heldenbuch and Nibelungen Lied: Their
Undetermined Antiquity and Authorship.
Account of the Former Monument, with
Stress on Siegfried as a Center of
Northern Tradition 46
Chapter V The Second of the Monuments, The
Nibelungen Lied: Critical Estimate of
Its Unifying Principle of Imaginative
Truth, Its Form and Organization, Its Use
of the Supernatural, and Its Use of Tragic
Forecast. Running Account of Its Plot-
ting and Characters 61
Chapter VI Consideration of Poetry Written by Iden-
tified Author s . Chivalry, which Repre-
sents the Highest Developments of Me-
dieval Europe. From Charlemagne on,
no Dark Age: Variety of Literary Produc-
tions. The Swabian Era: Its Minnesingers;
Characteristics of Minnelieder, or Songs
of Chivalrous Love 68
Editor's Notes 88
Bibliography 145
Index 153
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
SINCE most of what Thomas Carlyle wrote in his unfinished
History of German Literature has remained hitherto unpublish-
ed, the work has of course not had adequate scholarly attention.
Certain basic facts about it, however, are so well known that
they will be only briefly recalled at this point. A proposal for
Carlyle to produce a history of German literature in four vol-
umes became a definite undertaking early in 1830. During the
first half of that year, the project progressed rapidly. But
shortly after midsummer, sudden collapse of the plans for its
publication left Carlyle with a volume and a half of prepared
manuscript on his hands. Under economic pressure he suc-
ceeded in publishing certain parts of the materials as review
articles. Much remained unpublished, however, and the frag-
mentary manuscript was among his accumulated papers at his
death.
The fact that this manuscript has waited so long for publi-
cation has more than one significance. Obviously the lapse of
time has been hard on the work, for much of its primary value
as an informative treatise on early German literature has van-
ished. But in another sense the one hundred and thirty years
have left much that is valuable. The work has retained its worth
as a record of an important British era and of an important
British writer. Therefore, as a historical document, it deser-
ves careful consideration in the cultural milieu of early nine-
teenth-century Britain and in the context of Carlyle's intellect-
ual development.
Some materials to enable a reader to study the work in its
original setting and in its process of development are supplied
in this introduction. The first part discusses Britain's recep-
tion of German literary influences during the early Carlyle per-
iod. The second part examines more briefly Carlyle's interest
in German literature to its culmination in the projected History
of German Literature. And the rest describes and evaluates the
manuscript now published for the first time. With such prepara-
tion, the text and notes will assume clearer meaning.
I: General British Interest in German Literature up to 1830
In order to estimate the significance of Carlyle as an inter-
preter of German literature, one needs to review the gradual
entry of that literature into Britain during a period of four or
five decades before he began his History. Such a review in-
volves recalling the generally favorable conditions that existed
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? X
INTRODUCTION
late in the eighteenth century, noticing some representative
translators and reviewers and periodicals and theaters in the
successive decades, and following England's growth of inter-
est in a few main literary types up through the third decade of
the new century. Carlyle's History, undertaken just as the third
decade ended, was conceived as a part of the widening and deep-
ening process. 1
Cultural relations between Germany and England late in the
eighteenth century of course involved complex political, econom-
ic, religious, and literary conditions in the two countries. The
rise of Prussia and of Frederick the Great to first-rate military
and political significance in Europe and the association between
German and British officials in the wars on two continents dur-
ing mid and late eighteenth century suggest political conditions
favorable to the increase of cultural relations. Commercial con-
nections between the two countries during the late eighteenth cen-
tury occasioned the sending of a number of young Englishmen to
Germany in the interests of trade. Some of the young men--for
example, William Taylor of Norwich--came back profoundly im-
pressed by what they had learned of the developing cultural life
across the North Sea, and ready to carry on the exchange of
thought and art as well as of commodities. At the same time, a
few German residents in London, not primarily literary men,
found means to translate and review German works for readers
of English, and in addition wrote grammars and taught the lan-
guage. Also certain religious developments served as a basis of
communication between the two countries. From the second quar-
ter of the century Moravian influence upon John Wesley had been
marked. And after mid-century, as Wesleyanism became an in-
creasingly important force in British moral and religious and edu-
cational life, the close relationship with German Pietism continued.
Even those meager allusions to political, economic, and re-
ligious connections suggest conditions that were to some degree
favorable for England's interest in Germany's manifold culture.
And in the last half of the century, the intellectual and esthetic
aspects of that culture were undergoing great developments. The
following names--and as many more unmentioned--are words to
conjure with: C. G. Heyne and J. J. Winckelmann in classical
scholarship, Lessing and Herder in criticism, Klopstock and Wie-
land in poetry, Kant in philosophy, Johannes von Muller in history,
1 For full details, consult the works listed in the bibliography
at the end of this volume under the following abbreviations:
Stokoe, Stockley, Wellek's Kant in England, Nicoll (3 vols. ),
Morgan, and Morgan-Hohlfeld. Since each of these works over-
laps others and has an index or is otherwise arranged for ref-
erence, few statements are annotated in this part of the intro-
duction.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xi
and Goethe and Schiller in the whole broad field of letters. Such
men were leading German literature into a position ahead of
English literature in a movement that was still inchoate. For
after mid-century, an increasing number of both German and
English writers were consciously or unconsciously veering away
from neoclassicism, rationalism, and materialistic empiricism.
The fact that those old eighteenth-century developments in art
and thought had found their most thoroughgoing expression in
French models contributed, along with the new political align-
ments, to bring certain minds in the two northern countries
closer together at a number of points, and at the same time to
alienate them further from the fore-established cultural stand-
ards of the early eighteenth century.
Though in the late eighteenth century an increasing number
of British literati knew of the recent cultural tendencies in Ger-
many and felt some kinship with the forces and visions and forms
stirring there, most of these knowers were unable to exercise
sharp discrimination. In the new movement, use and wont had
not yet come to clarify tendencies and classify excellencies. By
the end of the century, works from such writers as Klopstock,
Wieland, Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, and Kant had been trans-
lated into English and reviewed in English periodicals, some of
them frequently. Already, for a number of years, such a dis-
tinguished eighteenth-century periodical as the Monthly Review
and such a voluminous reviewer as William Taylor of Norwich
had prosecuted the task of furnishing English readers with know-
ledge of the new German writings. In the last decade of the cen-
tury, however, Goethe was known in Britain especially for his
Werther and Gotz, and Schiller especially for his Robbers. The
productions of German Sturm und Drang, the horror tales, and
the sentimental and sensational novels and plays and ballads were
naturally in demand for the taste that flourished upon such native
writers as William Beckford, Matthew Lewis, and Henry Macken-
zie. The great year for G. A. Burger's Lenore in English, 1796,
was followed by the great Kotzebue year, 1799. The popularity
of Kotzebue's plays became a rage, manifested in translations
and adaptations for books, in reviews for periodicals, and in
dramatic performances on the London stage. His popularity on
the stage at the end of the century overshadowed even Shakes-
peare's .
Data concerning English translations and periodical reviews
serve to document England's attitudes toward German literature,
decade by decade. The present sketch can do little more than
suggest some main tendencies and changes. The strong end-of-
the-century impulse just mentioned slackened notably by the early
teens of the new century. Only one German writer, August Hein-
rich Lafontaine, attained his widest currency in England during
the first fifteen years of the century. In the second decade, trans-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xii
INTRODUCTION
lations from Kotzebue dropped to one-sixth of the maximum
earlier number. And interest in the Werther and G'6tz aspects
of Goethe and the Robbers aspect of Schiller declined. To some
extent, the change had esthetic grounds. Readers easily recall
Wordsworth's denunciation in 1800 of "frantic novels, sickly
and stupid German Tragedies, and deluges of idle and extrava-
gant stories in verse. " Though Wordsworth's critical judgments
were usually no accurate gauge of popular opinion, the taste for
German tales of terror waned in the new century. Even the sen-
sational English writings of Monk Lewis and Mrs. Radcliffe,
which resembled the German, were to give way to Maria Edge-
worth and Jane Austen. But a more widespread reason than es-
thetic change was at work. Highly charged German literature
had become associated for many minds with the revolutionary
spirit in religion, morals, and politics then abroad in Europe.
And it was frequently considered dangerous or immoral or ab-
surd by an increasing number of critics with conservative align-
ments, as Germany proved compliant to Napoleon's will and as
the Tory war deepened into an all-out defense of Britain. The
severest of all the critical organs were, first, the satirical
Anti-Jacobin Review and, next, the respectable British Critic.
The virulent attacks of the former were especially effective.
While conservative reviewers were denouncing or question-
ing or ridiculing the extremist literary importations from Ger-
many, certain other related developments were taking place.
There were changes even within the group of English defenders
of German literature. Near the end of the century, the advo-
cate and interpreter Taylor of Norwich broke his established
connection with the Monthly Review, which had been the most
important of pro-German periodicals. Though he did not re-
sume that connection until about a decade later, contributions
by him on German literature continued to appear in a number of
other periodicals. The one periodical devoted chiefly to Ger-
man literature--J. Beresford's German Museum--was able to
survive less than two years, 1800-1801. But during its brief
run, aided by such contributors as Peter Will and J. C. Mel-
lish, it included a wide variety of contents: among them, an
early account of Jean Paul Richter, with extracts, and--even
more significant at that date--an essay on the history of German
literature. Similarly, the one theater devoted to German plays
--The German Theatre, Leicester Square--was open for only one
season, 1805-1806. Neither of the two great quarterlies founded
in the first decade of the new century--the Edinburgh Review and
the Quarterly Review--was really interested in Germany until
well into the teens of the century; and that fact is involved both
as cause and result of the declining popularity of German litera-
ture. The new periodicals paid little attention to what then seem-
ed to many readers a passing fad for an outlandish crudity.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xiii
To an unsympathetic view, the Germanists seemed strugglers
in a losing or lost cause. But they were not so. Partly because
of their early work, the cause would be able later to take its sec-
ond impulse. Within certain limits, skillful translators, capable
and energetic reviewers, discriminating judges, and brilliant in-
terpreters had not been wanting at any time. One example from
each of those orders of early Germanists will illustrate. T. O.
Churchill is known now to a few readers for his admirable early
translation (1800) of Herder's greatest work, Ideen. Churchill
incorporated the virtues of a prose translator: he was at once
understanding, faithful, careful, graceful, and clear. William
Taylor of Norwich, who has already been mentioned and who was
a scholar in several fields, was especially at home in much of the
literature that had been published in Germany during the last half
of the eighteenth century. Of the reviewers during the first phase
of German literature in England, he was the steadiest and most
copious. Acording to Professor Morgan, Taylor--though in some
respects mediocre as a critic--probably did more than any other
man before Carlyle to spread knowledge of German literature
among his countrymen (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 51). The London
Templar named Henry Crabb Robinson, though not a philologist
like Taylor, was perhaps equal to either Churchill or Taylor in
mastery of the German language as a means of communication.
And he was superior to either in control of significant develop-
ments of modern German thought and writing, and in exercise
of critical judgment upon those developments. Though his pub-
lished writings were not numerous, they were discriminating.
And furthermore this diarist-friend of poets of two nations ac-
complished much through his long personal contact in literary
circles. He thus helped in several ways to consolidate in Bri-
tain some of the influences from German thought and literature
and to keep them bright for the better years to come.
Different in almost every phase of outlook and ability from
the three kinds of Germanists already mentioned was the poet,
philosopher, and critic Samuel Taylor Coleridge. He wander-
ed lonely through life, from Ottery St. Mary at the beginning to
Highgate at the end, doing for two generations of England's young
intellectuals what he could not do for himself. The wills of
others he freed; he himself remained bound, archangel in ruins,
during what should have been the prime of his life. Some leap
of his British brain had early touched immortal German things --
in Schiller's poetry, Lessing's criticism, Kant's philosophy--
and left its permanent traces in two English-speaking countries.
Perhaps Coleridge alone, of all Britain's first generation of work-
ers in German literature and thought, remains alive in a general
reader's mind today, indelibly associated with transcendental
German thought and the new romantic criticism.
All four of those men, worthy in their respective ways, be-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xiv
INTRODUCTION
longed to the generation that was formed before the Napoleonic
period. By them, during the years of limited currency of Ger-
many's greatest works, mature writings of such giants as Herd-
er and Lessing and Goethe and Richter and Schiller and Kant had
been pointed out as worthy of admiration and cultivation in Bri-
tain. But however industrious and judicious and gifted in various
degrees the advocates of German literature and thought had been,
one want is patent. No general interpreter of the meaning of the
new German culture as a whole had yet arisen to catch the ima-
gination of reading Britain.
And no such general interpretation did come forth until the
end of 1813. Then Madame de Stall's now famous De l'Allemagne
was published by Murray in Albemarle Street. 2 Madame Anne
Louise Germaine de Stael-Holstein was by heredity, association,
and her own achievements a distinguished woman. When this
daughter of Jacques Necker and Susanne Curchod was forbidden
residence in Paris soon after the rise of Napoleon to power, she
visited other lands. She was in Germany for some time in 1803-
1804 and again in 1807-1808. And there she conceived the work
that may justly be considered the first to open the eyes of the
West to an intellectual and artistic culture that had been seen by
many only fleetingly and in unorganized fragments. During so-
journs in Germany, as well as later while elaborating her mater-
ials at Coppet in 1808-1810, she picked the brains of other people
to advance her project. The result was more than merely another
travel book: in many respects it was a splendid work interpreting
--unequally, it is true--a great and unequal contemporary culture.
This epoch-marking book was divided into four large sections:
the country, its people, and their manners and customs and in-
stitutions; its literature and arts; its philosophy and ethics; its
religion and enthusiasms. Of course this one work (in three vol-
umes) could not examine all details or go profoundly into any one
aspect. It was intentionally broad; nevertheless it was frequent-
ly penetrating. Instead of being entirely laudative in attitude, it
preserved something of a critical outlook even in most of its en-
thusiasms.
It presented an interpretation of the culture that had
developed in Germany within the memory of then living men and
which had yet to be sorted and assimilated by the rest of the world.
Most important were her dealings with the literature. Her brief
accounts involved some biographical data and character analysis
as well as indicated the larger intellectual milieu in which the de-
velopments in various genres arose. And the interrelated accounts
of literary figures were sometimes illustrated by selections and
2 It was edited by William Lamb. The English translation,
Germany, was made by Francis Hodgson. Madame de Stall's
preface appears to have been corrected by Sir James Mackin-
tosh. If Smiles' dates are accurate, the book was published
after November 30, 1813 (Smiles, I, 313-15).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xv
running comments. The whole was informal, readable, and in-
teresting. It enabled a reader to understand that the culture
there considered was an organic and living one, with promise
for the present and the future.
There can be no doubt that Madame de Stael's book produced
excitement. The mere fact that Napoleon had attempted to des-
troy the work in 1810 helped predispose English readers and re-
viewers in its favor. Though early nineteenth-century periodicals
frequently appeared several months late--and thus cannot be fig-
ured strictly under the dates they bear--issues dated 1813 and
1814 are known to have contained more than a dozen review ar-
ticles comprising nearly 250 pages on the new book. In addition
to the number of these review articles, certain other features,
which can be merely suggested here, are important: the quality
of the articles, the length of the articles, the prestige of the peri-
odicals in which they appeared, and the social and political and
literary connections of the men who wrote the articles. For ex-
ample, in the earliest months after publication of the book, the
Edinburgh Review and the Quarterly Review carried long articles
on it by Sir James Mackintosh (about 40 pages) and Reginald
Heber (more than 50 pages) respectively. The fact that those
two powerful periodicals -- shapers as well as reflectors of pub-
lic opinion--had at last by early 1814 come around to an attitude
of interested advocacy of this new work was in itself a sign that
interest in German literature had entered its second phase in
Britain.
The second phase of British interest in German writings,
which was first notable in the reviews of Madame de Stael's book,
can be traced on through the next fifteen years, as it deepened,
broadened, and became increasingly thorough. The new political
and military alliance between England and Germany against Na-
poleon, which in 1815 was crowned with victory at Waterloo, con-
tributed to the increasing cultural interest, and brought England
and Germany closer at many points; and the conclusion of peace
ushered in, soon afterward, a new era of international affairs.
In fairly close succession, two important works of romantic
literary criticism by the Schlegel brothers appeared in English:
August Wilhelm Schlegel's Lectures on Dramatic Art and Litera-
ture was translated by John Black inTBl5; and Friedrich Schlegel's
Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, was
translated by John Gibson Lockhart in 1818. The elder Schlegel
had aided Madame de Stael; and she had praised both brothers
in her finished De l'Allemagne. Now their translated lectures
were, in effect, to continue, supplement, and to some extent su-
persede her book in the minds of English readers. These lectures
were widely and well reviewed. William Hazlitt wrote a forty-
page article on the elder Schlegel's Dramatic Literature in the
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xvi
INTRODUCTION
Edinburgh Review (1816). Because of the breadth rather than
profundity of this review, Professor Morgan regards it as a
landmark in the progress of England's interest in German let-
ters. And he characterizes it as one of the first thorough dis-
cussions of German literature to appear in England (Morgan-
Hohlfeld, pp. 57, 106).
As time passed, new periodicals and new periodical writers
arose to join and sometimes excel the older ones. Early issues
of Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, founded in 1817, showed a
friendly attitude toward German literature. And several other
significant new friendly periodicals arose in the next decade: the
London Magazine (1820), the Foreign Quarterly Review (1828), and
the Foreign Review (1828). Among the review writers and trans-
lators whose work appeared in more than one of those periodicals
was the translator of the younger Schlegel, J. G. Lockhart. Lock-
hart was for several years a writer and a moving spirit in Black-
wood's Magazine, and later (1826) he became editor of the Quarterly
Review in London. One important feature, produced partly by his
pen and largely because of his influence, was entitled "Horae Ger-
manicae. " This series of miscellaneous papers on German liter-
ature began in Blackwood's in 1819 and continued irregularly for
about a decade. Among Lockhart's fellow workers and continu-
ators on German subjects in Blackwood's were such writers as
Thomas De Quincey, R. P. Gillies, and Sarah Austin. 3 De Quin-
cey, the oldest of that group, had learned German early in the
first decade of the century. He was particularly interested in
the prose writers, and from the early 1820's he dealt with them
for the London Magazine and for Blackwood's, as well as for a
number of other less important periodicals. Though hostile to
Goethe, De Quincey helped revive the somewhat faded interest
in Herder. His stress on Lessing's prose aided the rising repu-
tation of that critic in the late 1820's. Though the creator of the
Opium Eater took much pride in philosophical attainments and
did not hesitate at German philosophy, he was not one of the few
British writers (such as Coleridge and H. C. Robinson) able to
discuss authoritatively the philosophy of Kant. But for British
understanding of the theretofore almost neglected Richter, De
Quincey provided a true basis in three London Magazine articles,
1821-1824. The third member of this group -- and perhaps the
main actual producer of Blackwood's "Horae Germanicae"--was
Robert Pearse Gillies. To Gillies, who learned German as late
as 1817, Miss Stockley (pp. 299-302) attributes the importation
of A. G. A. Milliner and the German Schicksalsdrama through
3ln designating the authors of particular articles in Blackwood's
and in most of the other periodicals, one ventures on uncertain
ground. In that field, though much has been done, much re-
mains to do.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xvii
the pages of Blackwood's. After helping to found the Foreign
Quarterly Review in 1827, he contributed to this second peri-
odical too a number of articles on German drama. Until his
notices of Heinrich von Kleist and Heinrich Heine in 1828 in the
pages of the Foreign Quarterly, neither of those writers seems
to have been known to British review readers. A fourth of this
group of English periodical writers was Mrs. Sarah Austin.
Since she did much in the third decade of the century to famil-
iarize British readers with Lessing's critical writings and with
various German dramatists, she will be mentioned more specif-
ically on a later page, in connection with drama.
Thus, on the whole, periodical interpretation of German lit-
erature underwent important changes from about the time of
Waterloo. As the materials published by Professor Morgan
show, the average number of references in the periodicals in-
creased from fewer than 40 a year between 1801 and 1815, to
nearly 60 a year between 1816 and 1830. At the same time, and
of still more significance, the articles grew in length from about
three and a half pages each to more than five and a half (Morgan-
Hohlfeld, p. 52: with data on pp. 125-26 recalculated). And,
most significant, the articles developed in solidarity and worth.
Whereas in the early period they frequently were enumerations
of book titles and short announcements of publication, in the lat-
ter period they contained much more critical discussion and trans-
lation. Indeed, in the third decade, Morgan finds what he des-
cribes, with proper caution, as an occasional sincere desire to
understand the real German genius, as well as an occasional clear
realization of the important role which that genius had gradually
assumed (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 57).
A resume of a few stages in the reputation of such a many-
sided writer as Schiller will illuminate some of the changes that
have been mentioned (see especially Ewen, pp. xii, 35-61, 119,
124, 153, and 172 and note). As has been indicated, Schiller's
reputation in Britain until 1795 had been founded chiefly upon his
early drama The Robbers. His best-known prose fiction, The
Ghost-Seer, translated in 1795, quickly influenced such writers
as Mrs. Radcliffe and Matthew Lewis and even the young Cole-
ridge, and at a later date, Byron and Shelley. Though at the turn
of the century the basis for Schiller's later fame had been broad-
ened by the addition of some of his main dramas (for example,
Coleridge's translations from Wallenstein), his reputation, like
that of practically every other German, dropped during the first
decade of the new century. But in the second half of the second
decade, many of his shorter poems became known, and he soon
became the best-liked German lyricist in England. In the years
1821-1822, English readers found useful accounts of him in Tay-
lor of Norwich's Monthly Magazine articles. And, beginning in
the next year, 1823, Carlyle s biography in the London Magazine
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xviii
INTRODUCTION
further increased England's knowledge. Even at the inception
of the biography, Carlyle was able to interpret adequately the
dramas and poems, and to vindicate the moral idealism and ex-
alt the genius of the German poet. But in certain speculative
respects--the esthetic and, especially, the philosophic--Car-
lyle's interpretation of Schiller left much to be desired. In the
same year that Carlyle's biography was published in book form
(1825) Thomas Lovell Beddoes translated considerable part of
Philosophische Briefe in the Oxford Quarterly Magazine. Along
with the speculative writings, Schiller's historical writings were
apparently one of the last phases of his work to gain full recog-
nition and currency in Britain. Not until 1828 did George Moir
finish an adequate translation of the historical works.
That glance at Britain's reception of Schiller's writings could
well be extended to other literary figures. But in order to lead
more directly toward the consideration of English histories of
German literature, this account will notice rather the currency
of three general literary types--lyrics, dramas, and prose fic-
tion-- during the decade and a half after Waterloo.
In those fifteen years, especially 1820-1830, lyrics gained
much recognition through translations, through specific reviews,
and through general articles on different poets. From 1818 on,
as just noticed, Schiller's lyrics were the best known of all. And
about 1820, Goethe's poems, especially the lyrics and ballads,
began to be translated with increasing frequency. Some of the
patriotic lyricist K. T. Korner's pieces appeared in Blackwood's,
the Literary Gazette, and the Monthly Magazine as early as 1818:
and the two-volume Life and Selections, translated by G. F.
Richardson, appeared in 1827"! Among several collections of
lyrics in the third decade, a general anthology called Specimens
of German Lyric Poetry was published in 1821 by Beresford and
and Mellish. And in 1825, as will be noted later, Edgar Taylor's
Lays of the Minnesingers, and several review articles on it,
heightened the still new interest in German medieval literature.
But a number of important contemporary poets obtained little or
no attention in British reviews. As already mentioned, Heinrich
Heine seems to have had his first notice--one page in a review--
in 1828.
The currency of German dramatic writings is traceabl-e through
theatrical performances as well as through the usual literary me-
dia. During the 1820's, adaptations of dramas by Schiller, Goethe,
and Kotzebue were acted on the London stage; but the total number
of them was not large. For a short while, plays by J. F. Kind
surpassed all others in stage presentation. His melodramatic
Der Freischutz in 1824 underwent five adaptations and was traves-
tied or burlesqued in still two other theaters. The reception given
to the drama as literature can be interpreted with somewhat great-
er confidence. As early as 1819, Lockhart seems to have written
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xix
the prose commentary (for Gillies' translation) in an important
article on German drama for Blackwood's Magazine (Macbeth,
pp. 153-54). In addition to giving an introduction to German
drama in general, it dealt especially with Mullner. Indeed, for
the years 1817-1820 Morgan counts in British periodicals some
twenty-five reviews of plays by some ten dramatists, including
Mullner, Kind, and Franz Grillparzer, as well as Schiller and
Goethe. But Mullner passed his sudden and great popularity
about 1820. And as the number of periodical articles on drama
increased after 1820, other dramatists came into notice. E. A.
F. Klingemann seems to have been introduced to British periodi-
cal readers through Gillies' articles in Blackwood's in 1823, and
four years later the same critic wrote again upon Klingemann--
this time with historical perspective--for the Foriegn Quarterly
Review. As already mentioned, the same critic introduced "KTeist
in the latter periodical in 1828 (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 211 corrects
error on p. 61). And he was perhaps the author who repeatedly
devoted space in Blackwood's to Grillparzer. An article in Black-
wood's in 1825, signed S. A. (Sarah Austin? ), was of special
significance with respect to Lessing and drama. That is, it
praised Lessing's part in breaking French influence upon Ger-
man drama, assigned to Lessing the introduction of German do-
mestic tragedy, considered Kotzebue the corrupter of German
drama, found in Schiller compensation for Kotzebue, praised
Goethe, and analyzed Mullner. In periodical criticism after 1825,
Schiller's dramas maintained first place, with chief stress upon
his Wallenstein. And Goethe's Faust (Part I, of course) also rose
in importance as serious critics focused attention on Germany's
most significant dramatic readings of life. Indeed, in 1822,
Goethe's Faust was the subject of Carlyle's first critique on Ger-
man literature, in the short-lived New Edinburgh Review. Mean-
while, translation of whole works or of fragments from the poetic
dramas of both Goethe and Schiller proceeded at various levels,
ranging from F. E. Leveson-Gower and George Soane to George
Moir and Carlyle.
Of all German literary types, prose fiction had the longest
and widest popularity in England (see especially Stockley, Chap-
ter VIII). In the late eighteenth century, translators and review-
ers had ranged over a wide field for their selections. And even
during the generally low ebb of German importations, from 1800
to 1815, as has been noted, Lafontaine's novels of family life
attained considerable popularity. But in the 1820's came the true
high point of English translations from German writers of prose
fiction. They included such authors as Korner, Tieck, E. T. A.
Hoffmann, Musaus, Richter, Schiller, and Goethe. A single year,
1826, brought forth five different collections: by Richard Holcraft,
George Soane, Thomas Roscoe, Gillies, and Edgar Taylor. The
three last named of those collectors provided more or less critical
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? XX
INTRODUCTION
materials to aid the reader. And critical reviews of the vari-
ous collections made still further additions. For example, the
Blackwood's Magazine article on Gillies' collection entered in-
to what Morgan calls a thorough discussion of German narrative
literature (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 63). Along with those develop-
ments, the publication of Carlyle's elaborately introduced Speci-
mens of German Romance in 1827 gave English readers before
the close of the third decade considerable selection from, and
knowledge of, German prose fiction. Indeed by the end of the
decade, as Miss Stockley says (p. 13), the various main types
of German literature--if not widely popular or fully appreciated--
were at least firmly established in English interest.
Notwithstanding the established interest in various aspects
of this foreign influence, the third decade had almost ended be-
fore an English history of German literature appeared. But cer-
tain attempts at historical approach--including attempts to inter-
pret the Middle Ages historically--had been made. Some of them
should be brought into focus as we close this summary account.
Illustrations of Northern Antiquities, 1814, contained much early
material. In addition to analyses of and translations from the
Heldenbuch and the more important Nibelungen Lied, this large
volume by Weber, Jamieson, and Walter Scott gave especial at-
tention to the historical background of those medieval poems and
furnished a variety of antiquarian notes. Although considerable
attention was paid to the Nibelungen Lied a decade later, by Bed-
does in 1824 (Ewen, p. 171) and by Edgar Taylor in 1825, the sur-
veys of periodical criticism suggest that the old poem was not
widely known in England even during the 1820's. The types of
folk tales collected by the Grimm brothers were better known.
When Francis Cohen (renamed Palgrave) reviewed six works,
including the Grimms* Deutsche Sagen and Dobeneck's Heroen-
sagen, in 1820 in the Quarterly Review his allusions to both Ger-
man and Danish stories of Barbarossa indicate a superficial no-
tion of comparative method.
His Studies before 18 30 xxii
His Progress in the Attempt to Produce
a History of German Literature xxv
III The Actual Manuscript of the History:
Description and Provenience xxx
IV Evaluation of the History xxxi
V Notice concerning Editorial Method . . . . xxxiii
VI Hypothetical Reconstruction of the
Original Volume and a Half That Car-
lyle Is Known to Have Written xxxiv
VII Acknowledgments xxxv
Chapter I Introduction. Of Literature, and its In-
fluences. -- Literary Histories: Design
of the present one 1
Chapter II Antiquity and Integrity of the German
People. German National Characteristics.
The Northern Immigrations and Their
Importance in World History. The
Greatness of the Present German Culture . . 14
Chapter III Traditionary Lore of the Germans. Ger-
man Language, Its Antiquity, Develop-
ments, and Characteristics. German
Popular Proverbs. German Folk-tales. . . . 23
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? viii
CONTENTS
Chapter IV Modern Interest in Medieval Popular
Poetry. The Two Main German Monu-
ments of Long-written Popular Poetry,
Heldenbuch and Nibelungen Lied: Their
Undetermined Antiquity and Authorship.
Account of the Former Monument, with
Stress on Siegfried as a Center of
Northern Tradition 46
Chapter V The Second of the Monuments, The
Nibelungen Lied: Critical Estimate of
Its Unifying Principle of Imaginative
Truth, Its Form and Organization, Its Use
of the Supernatural, and Its Use of Tragic
Forecast. Running Account of Its Plot-
ting and Characters 61
Chapter VI Consideration of Poetry Written by Iden-
tified Author s . Chivalry, which Repre-
sents the Highest Developments of Me-
dieval Europe. From Charlemagne on,
no Dark Age: Variety of Literary Produc-
tions. The Swabian Era: Its Minnesingers;
Characteristics of Minnelieder, or Songs
of Chivalrous Love 68
Editor's Notes 88
Bibliography 145
Index 153
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
SINCE most of what Thomas Carlyle wrote in his unfinished
History of German Literature has remained hitherto unpublish-
ed, the work has of course not had adequate scholarly attention.
Certain basic facts about it, however, are so well known that
they will be only briefly recalled at this point. A proposal for
Carlyle to produce a history of German literature in four vol-
umes became a definite undertaking early in 1830. During the
first half of that year, the project progressed rapidly. But
shortly after midsummer, sudden collapse of the plans for its
publication left Carlyle with a volume and a half of prepared
manuscript on his hands. Under economic pressure he suc-
ceeded in publishing certain parts of the materials as review
articles. Much remained unpublished, however, and the frag-
mentary manuscript was among his accumulated papers at his
death.
The fact that this manuscript has waited so long for publi-
cation has more than one significance. Obviously the lapse of
time has been hard on the work, for much of its primary value
as an informative treatise on early German literature has van-
ished. But in another sense the one hundred and thirty years
have left much that is valuable. The work has retained its worth
as a record of an important British era and of an important
British writer. Therefore, as a historical document, it deser-
ves careful consideration in the cultural milieu of early nine-
teenth-century Britain and in the context of Carlyle's intellect-
ual development.
Some materials to enable a reader to study the work in its
original setting and in its process of development are supplied
in this introduction. The first part discusses Britain's recep-
tion of German literary influences during the early Carlyle per-
iod. The second part examines more briefly Carlyle's interest
in German literature to its culmination in the projected History
of German Literature. And the rest describes and evaluates the
manuscript now published for the first time. With such prepara-
tion, the text and notes will assume clearer meaning.
I: General British Interest in German Literature up to 1830
In order to estimate the significance of Carlyle as an inter-
preter of German literature, one needs to review the gradual
entry of that literature into Britain during a period of four or
five decades before he began his History. Such a review in-
volves recalling the generally favorable conditions that existed
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? X
INTRODUCTION
late in the eighteenth century, noticing some representative
translators and reviewers and periodicals and theaters in the
successive decades, and following England's growth of inter-
est in a few main literary types up through the third decade of
the new century. Carlyle's History, undertaken just as the third
decade ended, was conceived as a part of the widening and deep-
ening process. 1
Cultural relations between Germany and England late in the
eighteenth century of course involved complex political, econom-
ic, religious, and literary conditions in the two countries. The
rise of Prussia and of Frederick the Great to first-rate military
and political significance in Europe and the association between
German and British officials in the wars on two continents dur-
ing mid and late eighteenth century suggest political conditions
favorable to the increase of cultural relations. Commercial con-
nections between the two countries during the late eighteenth cen-
tury occasioned the sending of a number of young Englishmen to
Germany in the interests of trade. Some of the young men--for
example, William Taylor of Norwich--came back profoundly im-
pressed by what they had learned of the developing cultural life
across the North Sea, and ready to carry on the exchange of
thought and art as well as of commodities. At the same time, a
few German residents in London, not primarily literary men,
found means to translate and review German works for readers
of English, and in addition wrote grammars and taught the lan-
guage. Also certain religious developments served as a basis of
communication between the two countries. From the second quar-
ter of the century Moravian influence upon John Wesley had been
marked. And after mid-century, as Wesleyanism became an in-
creasingly important force in British moral and religious and edu-
cational life, the close relationship with German Pietism continued.
Even those meager allusions to political, economic, and re-
ligious connections suggest conditions that were to some degree
favorable for England's interest in Germany's manifold culture.
And in the last half of the century, the intellectual and esthetic
aspects of that culture were undergoing great developments. The
following names--and as many more unmentioned--are words to
conjure with: C. G. Heyne and J. J. Winckelmann in classical
scholarship, Lessing and Herder in criticism, Klopstock and Wie-
land in poetry, Kant in philosophy, Johannes von Muller in history,
1 For full details, consult the works listed in the bibliography
at the end of this volume under the following abbreviations:
Stokoe, Stockley, Wellek's Kant in England, Nicoll (3 vols. ),
Morgan, and Morgan-Hohlfeld. Since each of these works over-
laps others and has an index or is otherwise arranged for ref-
erence, few statements are annotated in this part of the intro-
duction.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xi
and Goethe and Schiller in the whole broad field of letters. Such
men were leading German literature into a position ahead of
English literature in a movement that was still inchoate. For
after mid-century, an increasing number of both German and
English writers were consciously or unconsciously veering away
from neoclassicism, rationalism, and materialistic empiricism.
The fact that those old eighteenth-century developments in art
and thought had found their most thoroughgoing expression in
French models contributed, along with the new political align-
ments, to bring certain minds in the two northern countries
closer together at a number of points, and at the same time to
alienate them further from the fore-established cultural stand-
ards of the early eighteenth century.
Though in the late eighteenth century an increasing number
of British literati knew of the recent cultural tendencies in Ger-
many and felt some kinship with the forces and visions and forms
stirring there, most of these knowers were unable to exercise
sharp discrimination. In the new movement, use and wont had
not yet come to clarify tendencies and classify excellencies. By
the end of the century, works from such writers as Klopstock,
Wieland, Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, and Kant had been trans-
lated into English and reviewed in English periodicals, some of
them frequently. Already, for a number of years, such a dis-
tinguished eighteenth-century periodical as the Monthly Review
and such a voluminous reviewer as William Taylor of Norwich
had prosecuted the task of furnishing English readers with know-
ledge of the new German writings. In the last decade of the cen-
tury, however, Goethe was known in Britain especially for his
Werther and Gotz, and Schiller especially for his Robbers. The
productions of German Sturm und Drang, the horror tales, and
the sentimental and sensational novels and plays and ballads were
naturally in demand for the taste that flourished upon such native
writers as William Beckford, Matthew Lewis, and Henry Macken-
zie. The great year for G. A. Burger's Lenore in English, 1796,
was followed by the great Kotzebue year, 1799. The popularity
of Kotzebue's plays became a rage, manifested in translations
and adaptations for books, in reviews for periodicals, and in
dramatic performances on the London stage. His popularity on
the stage at the end of the century overshadowed even Shakes-
peare's .
Data concerning English translations and periodical reviews
serve to document England's attitudes toward German literature,
decade by decade. The present sketch can do little more than
suggest some main tendencies and changes. The strong end-of-
the-century impulse just mentioned slackened notably by the early
teens of the new century. Only one German writer, August Hein-
rich Lafontaine, attained his widest currency in England during
the first fifteen years of the century. In the second decade, trans-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xii
INTRODUCTION
lations from Kotzebue dropped to one-sixth of the maximum
earlier number. And interest in the Werther and G'6tz aspects
of Goethe and the Robbers aspect of Schiller declined. To some
extent, the change had esthetic grounds. Readers easily recall
Wordsworth's denunciation in 1800 of "frantic novels, sickly
and stupid German Tragedies, and deluges of idle and extrava-
gant stories in verse. " Though Wordsworth's critical judgments
were usually no accurate gauge of popular opinion, the taste for
German tales of terror waned in the new century. Even the sen-
sational English writings of Monk Lewis and Mrs. Radcliffe,
which resembled the German, were to give way to Maria Edge-
worth and Jane Austen. But a more widespread reason than es-
thetic change was at work. Highly charged German literature
had become associated for many minds with the revolutionary
spirit in religion, morals, and politics then abroad in Europe.
And it was frequently considered dangerous or immoral or ab-
surd by an increasing number of critics with conservative align-
ments, as Germany proved compliant to Napoleon's will and as
the Tory war deepened into an all-out defense of Britain. The
severest of all the critical organs were, first, the satirical
Anti-Jacobin Review and, next, the respectable British Critic.
The virulent attacks of the former were especially effective.
While conservative reviewers were denouncing or question-
ing or ridiculing the extremist literary importations from Ger-
many, certain other related developments were taking place.
There were changes even within the group of English defenders
of German literature. Near the end of the century, the advo-
cate and interpreter Taylor of Norwich broke his established
connection with the Monthly Review, which had been the most
important of pro-German periodicals. Though he did not re-
sume that connection until about a decade later, contributions
by him on German literature continued to appear in a number of
other periodicals. The one periodical devoted chiefly to Ger-
man literature--J. Beresford's German Museum--was able to
survive less than two years, 1800-1801. But during its brief
run, aided by such contributors as Peter Will and J. C. Mel-
lish, it included a wide variety of contents: among them, an
early account of Jean Paul Richter, with extracts, and--even
more significant at that date--an essay on the history of German
literature. Similarly, the one theater devoted to German plays
--The German Theatre, Leicester Square--was open for only one
season, 1805-1806. Neither of the two great quarterlies founded
in the first decade of the new century--the Edinburgh Review and
the Quarterly Review--was really interested in Germany until
well into the teens of the century; and that fact is involved both
as cause and result of the declining popularity of German litera-
ture. The new periodicals paid little attention to what then seem-
ed to many readers a passing fad for an outlandish crudity.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xiii
To an unsympathetic view, the Germanists seemed strugglers
in a losing or lost cause. But they were not so. Partly because
of their early work, the cause would be able later to take its sec-
ond impulse. Within certain limits, skillful translators, capable
and energetic reviewers, discriminating judges, and brilliant in-
terpreters had not been wanting at any time. One example from
each of those orders of early Germanists will illustrate. T. O.
Churchill is known now to a few readers for his admirable early
translation (1800) of Herder's greatest work, Ideen. Churchill
incorporated the virtues of a prose translator: he was at once
understanding, faithful, careful, graceful, and clear. William
Taylor of Norwich, who has already been mentioned and who was
a scholar in several fields, was especially at home in much of the
literature that had been published in Germany during the last half
of the eighteenth century. Of the reviewers during the first phase
of German literature in England, he was the steadiest and most
copious. Acording to Professor Morgan, Taylor--though in some
respects mediocre as a critic--probably did more than any other
man before Carlyle to spread knowledge of German literature
among his countrymen (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 51). The London
Templar named Henry Crabb Robinson, though not a philologist
like Taylor, was perhaps equal to either Churchill or Taylor in
mastery of the German language as a means of communication.
And he was superior to either in control of significant develop-
ments of modern German thought and writing, and in exercise
of critical judgment upon those developments. Though his pub-
lished writings were not numerous, they were discriminating.
And furthermore this diarist-friend of poets of two nations ac-
complished much through his long personal contact in literary
circles. He thus helped in several ways to consolidate in Bri-
tain some of the influences from German thought and literature
and to keep them bright for the better years to come.
Different in almost every phase of outlook and ability from
the three kinds of Germanists already mentioned was the poet,
philosopher, and critic Samuel Taylor Coleridge. He wander-
ed lonely through life, from Ottery St. Mary at the beginning to
Highgate at the end, doing for two generations of England's young
intellectuals what he could not do for himself. The wills of
others he freed; he himself remained bound, archangel in ruins,
during what should have been the prime of his life. Some leap
of his British brain had early touched immortal German things --
in Schiller's poetry, Lessing's criticism, Kant's philosophy--
and left its permanent traces in two English-speaking countries.
Perhaps Coleridge alone, of all Britain's first generation of work-
ers in German literature and thought, remains alive in a general
reader's mind today, indelibly associated with transcendental
German thought and the new romantic criticism.
All four of those men, worthy in their respective ways, be-
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xiv
INTRODUCTION
longed to the generation that was formed before the Napoleonic
period. By them, during the years of limited currency of Ger-
many's greatest works, mature writings of such giants as Herd-
er and Lessing and Goethe and Richter and Schiller and Kant had
been pointed out as worthy of admiration and cultivation in Bri-
tain. But however industrious and judicious and gifted in various
degrees the advocates of German literature and thought had been,
one want is patent. No general interpreter of the meaning of the
new German culture as a whole had yet arisen to catch the ima-
gination of reading Britain.
And no such general interpretation did come forth until the
end of 1813. Then Madame de Stall's now famous De l'Allemagne
was published by Murray in Albemarle Street. 2 Madame Anne
Louise Germaine de Stael-Holstein was by heredity, association,
and her own achievements a distinguished woman. When this
daughter of Jacques Necker and Susanne Curchod was forbidden
residence in Paris soon after the rise of Napoleon to power, she
visited other lands. She was in Germany for some time in 1803-
1804 and again in 1807-1808. And there she conceived the work
that may justly be considered the first to open the eyes of the
West to an intellectual and artistic culture that had been seen by
many only fleetingly and in unorganized fragments. During so-
journs in Germany, as well as later while elaborating her mater-
ials at Coppet in 1808-1810, she picked the brains of other people
to advance her project. The result was more than merely another
travel book: in many respects it was a splendid work interpreting
--unequally, it is true--a great and unequal contemporary culture.
This epoch-marking book was divided into four large sections:
the country, its people, and their manners and customs and in-
stitutions; its literature and arts; its philosophy and ethics; its
religion and enthusiasms. Of course this one work (in three vol-
umes) could not examine all details or go profoundly into any one
aspect. It was intentionally broad; nevertheless it was frequent-
ly penetrating. Instead of being entirely laudative in attitude, it
preserved something of a critical outlook even in most of its en-
thusiasms.
It presented an interpretation of the culture that had
developed in Germany within the memory of then living men and
which had yet to be sorted and assimilated by the rest of the world.
Most important were her dealings with the literature. Her brief
accounts involved some biographical data and character analysis
as well as indicated the larger intellectual milieu in which the de-
velopments in various genres arose. And the interrelated accounts
of literary figures were sometimes illustrated by selections and
2 It was edited by William Lamb. The English translation,
Germany, was made by Francis Hodgson. Madame de Stall's
preface appears to have been corrected by Sir James Mackin-
tosh. If Smiles' dates are accurate, the book was published
after November 30, 1813 (Smiles, I, 313-15).
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xv
running comments. The whole was informal, readable, and in-
teresting. It enabled a reader to understand that the culture
there considered was an organic and living one, with promise
for the present and the future.
There can be no doubt that Madame de Stael's book produced
excitement. The mere fact that Napoleon had attempted to des-
troy the work in 1810 helped predispose English readers and re-
viewers in its favor. Though early nineteenth-century periodicals
frequently appeared several months late--and thus cannot be fig-
ured strictly under the dates they bear--issues dated 1813 and
1814 are known to have contained more than a dozen review ar-
ticles comprising nearly 250 pages on the new book. In addition
to the number of these review articles, certain other features,
which can be merely suggested here, are important: the quality
of the articles, the length of the articles, the prestige of the peri-
odicals in which they appeared, and the social and political and
literary connections of the men who wrote the articles. For ex-
ample, in the earliest months after publication of the book, the
Edinburgh Review and the Quarterly Review carried long articles
on it by Sir James Mackintosh (about 40 pages) and Reginald
Heber (more than 50 pages) respectively. The fact that those
two powerful periodicals -- shapers as well as reflectors of pub-
lic opinion--had at last by early 1814 come around to an attitude
of interested advocacy of this new work was in itself a sign that
interest in German literature had entered its second phase in
Britain.
The second phase of British interest in German writings,
which was first notable in the reviews of Madame de Stael's book,
can be traced on through the next fifteen years, as it deepened,
broadened, and became increasingly thorough. The new political
and military alliance between England and Germany against Na-
poleon, which in 1815 was crowned with victory at Waterloo, con-
tributed to the increasing cultural interest, and brought England
and Germany closer at many points; and the conclusion of peace
ushered in, soon afterward, a new era of international affairs.
In fairly close succession, two important works of romantic
literary criticism by the Schlegel brothers appeared in English:
August Wilhelm Schlegel's Lectures on Dramatic Art and Litera-
ture was translated by John Black inTBl5; and Friedrich Schlegel's
Lectures on the History of Literature, Ancient and Modern, was
translated by John Gibson Lockhart in 1818. The elder Schlegel
had aided Madame de Stael; and she had praised both brothers
in her finished De l'Allemagne. Now their translated lectures
were, in effect, to continue, supplement, and to some extent su-
persede her book in the minds of English readers. These lectures
were widely and well reviewed. William Hazlitt wrote a forty-
page article on the elder Schlegel's Dramatic Literature in the
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xvi
INTRODUCTION
Edinburgh Review (1816). Because of the breadth rather than
profundity of this review, Professor Morgan regards it as a
landmark in the progress of England's interest in German let-
ters. And he characterizes it as one of the first thorough dis-
cussions of German literature to appear in England (Morgan-
Hohlfeld, pp. 57, 106).
As time passed, new periodicals and new periodical writers
arose to join and sometimes excel the older ones. Early issues
of Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, founded in 1817, showed a
friendly attitude toward German literature. And several other
significant new friendly periodicals arose in the next decade: the
London Magazine (1820), the Foreign Quarterly Review (1828), and
the Foreign Review (1828). Among the review writers and trans-
lators whose work appeared in more than one of those periodicals
was the translator of the younger Schlegel, J. G. Lockhart. Lock-
hart was for several years a writer and a moving spirit in Black-
wood's Magazine, and later (1826) he became editor of the Quarterly
Review in London. One important feature, produced partly by his
pen and largely because of his influence, was entitled "Horae Ger-
manicae. " This series of miscellaneous papers on German liter-
ature began in Blackwood's in 1819 and continued irregularly for
about a decade. Among Lockhart's fellow workers and continu-
ators on German subjects in Blackwood's were such writers as
Thomas De Quincey, R. P. Gillies, and Sarah Austin. 3 De Quin-
cey, the oldest of that group, had learned German early in the
first decade of the century. He was particularly interested in
the prose writers, and from the early 1820's he dealt with them
for the London Magazine and for Blackwood's, as well as for a
number of other less important periodicals. Though hostile to
Goethe, De Quincey helped revive the somewhat faded interest
in Herder. His stress on Lessing's prose aided the rising repu-
tation of that critic in the late 1820's. Though the creator of the
Opium Eater took much pride in philosophical attainments and
did not hesitate at German philosophy, he was not one of the few
British writers (such as Coleridge and H. C. Robinson) able to
discuss authoritatively the philosophy of Kant. But for British
understanding of the theretofore almost neglected Richter, De
Quincey provided a true basis in three London Magazine articles,
1821-1824. The third member of this group -- and perhaps the
main actual producer of Blackwood's "Horae Germanicae"--was
Robert Pearse Gillies. To Gillies, who learned German as late
as 1817, Miss Stockley (pp. 299-302) attributes the importation
of A. G. A. Milliner and the German Schicksalsdrama through
3ln designating the authors of particular articles in Blackwood's
and in most of the other periodicals, one ventures on uncertain
ground. In that field, though much has been done, much re-
mains to do.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xvii
the pages of Blackwood's. After helping to found the Foreign
Quarterly Review in 1827, he contributed to this second peri-
odical too a number of articles on German drama. Until his
notices of Heinrich von Kleist and Heinrich Heine in 1828 in the
pages of the Foreign Quarterly, neither of those writers seems
to have been known to British review readers. A fourth of this
group of English periodical writers was Mrs. Sarah Austin.
Since she did much in the third decade of the century to famil-
iarize British readers with Lessing's critical writings and with
various German dramatists, she will be mentioned more specif-
ically on a later page, in connection with drama.
Thus, on the whole, periodical interpretation of German lit-
erature underwent important changes from about the time of
Waterloo. As the materials published by Professor Morgan
show, the average number of references in the periodicals in-
creased from fewer than 40 a year between 1801 and 1815, to
nearly 60 a year between 1816 and 1830. At the same time, and
of still more significance, the articles grew in length from about
three and a half pages each to more than five and a half (Morgan-
Hohlfeld, p. 52: with data on pp. 125-26 recalculated). And,
most significant, the articles developed in solidarity and worth.
Whereas in the early period they frequently were enumerations
of book titles and short announcements of publication, in the lat-
ter period they contained much more critical discussion and trans-
lation. Indeed, in the third decade, Morgan finds what he des-
cribes, with proper caution, as an occasional sincere desire to
understand the real German genius, as well as an occasional clear
realization of the important role which that genius had gradually
assumed (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 57).
A resume of a few stages in the reputation of such a many-
sided writer as Schiller will illuminate some of the changes that
have been mentioned (see especially Ewen, pp. xii, 35-61, 119,
124, 153, and 172 and note). As has been indicated, Schiller's
reputation in Britain until 1795 had been founded chiefly upon his
early drama The Robbers. His best-known prose fiction, The
Ghost-Seer, translated in 1795, quickly influenced such writers
as Mrs. Radcliffe and Matthew Lewis and even the young Cole-
ridge, and at a later date, Byron and Shelley. Though at the turn
of the century the basis for Schiller's later fame had been broad-
ened by the addition of some of his main dramas (for example,
Coleridge's translations from Wallenstein), his reputation, like
that of practically every other German, dropped during the first
decade of the new century. But in the second half of the second
decade, many of his shorter poems became known, and he soon
became the best-liked German lyricist in England. In the years
1821-1822, English readers found useful accounts of him in Tay-
lor of Norwich's Monthly Magazine articles. And, beginning in
the next year, 1823, Carlyle s biography in the London Magazine
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? xviii
INTRODUCTION
further increased England's knowledge. Even at the inception
of the biography, Carlyle was able to interpret adequately the
dramas and poems, and to vindicate the moral idealism and ex-
alt the genius of the German poet. But in certain speculative
respects--the esthetic and, especially, the philosophic--Car-
lyle's interpretation of Schiller left much to be desired. In the
same year that Carlyle's biography was published in book form
(1825) Thomas Lovell Beddoes translated considerable part of
Philosophische Briefe in the Oxford Quarterly Magazine. Along
with the speculative writings, Schiller's historical writings were
apparently one of the last phases of his work to gain full recog-
nition and currency in Britain. Not until 1828 did George Moir
finish an adequate translation of the historical works.
That glance at Britain's reception of Schiller's writings could
well be extended to other literary figures. But in order to lead
more directly toward the consideration of English histories of
German literature, this account will notice rather the currency
of three general literary types--lyrics, dramas, and prose fic-
tion-- during the decade and a half after Waterloo.
In those fifteen years, especially 1820-1830, lyrics gained
much recognition through translations, through specific reviews,
and through general articles on different poets. From 1818 on,
as just noticed, Schiller's lyrics were the best known of all. And
about 1820, Goethe's poems, especially the lyrics and ballads,
began to be translated with increasing frequency. Some of the
patriotic lyricist K. T. Korner's pieces appeared in Blackwood's,
the Literary Gazette, and the Monthly Magazine as early as 1818:
and the two-volume Life and Selections, translated by G. F.
Richardson, appeared in 1827"! Among several collections of
lyrics in the third decade, a general anthology called Specimens
of German Lyric Poetry was published in 1821 by Beresford and
and Mellish. And in 1825, as will be noted later, Edgar Taylor's
Lays of the Minnesingers, and several review articles on it,
heightened the still new interest in German medieval literature.
But a number of important contemporary poets obtained little or
no attention in British reviews. As already mentioned, Heinrich
Heine seems to have had his first notice--one page in a review--
in 1828.
The currency of German dramatic writings is traceabl-e through
theatrical performances as well as through the usual literary me-
dia. During the 1820's, adaptations of dramas by Schiller, Goethe,
and Kotzebue were acted on the London stage; but the total number
of them was not large. For a short while, plays by J. F. Kind
surpassed all others in stage presentation. His melodramatic
Der Freischutz in 1824 underwent five adaptations and was traves-
tied or burlesqued in still two other theaters. The reception given
to the drama as literature can be interpreted with somewhat great-
er confidence. As early as 1819, Lockhart seems to have written
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? INTRODUCTION
xix
the prose commentary (for Gillies' translation) in an important
article on German drama for Blackwood's Magazine (Macbeth,
pp. 153-54). In addition to giving an introduction to German
drama in general, it dealt especially with Mullner. Indeed, for
the years 1817-1820 Morgan counts in British periodicals some
twenty-five reviews of plays by some ten dramatists, including
Mullner, Kind, and Franz Grillparzer, as well as Schiller and
Goethe. But Mullner passed his sudden and great popularity
about 1820. And as the number of periodical articles on drama
increased after 1820, other dramatists came into notice. E. A.
F. Klingemann seems to have been introduced to British periodi-
cal readers through Gillies' articles in Blackwood's in 1823, and
four years later the same critic wrote again upon Klingemann--
this time with historical perspective--for the Foriegn Quarterly
Review. As already mentioned, the same critic introduced "KTeist
in the latter periodical in 1828 (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 211 corrects
error on p. 61). And he was perhaps the author who repeatedly
devoted space in Blackwood's to Grillparzer. An article in Black-
wood's in 1825, signed S. A. (Sarah Austin? ), was of special
significance with respect to Lessing and drama. That is, it
praised Lessing's part in breaking French influence upon Ger-
man drama, assigned to Lessing the introduction of German do-
mestic tragedy, considered Kotzebue the corrupter of German
drama, found in Schiller compensation for Kotzebue, praised
Goethe, and analyzed Mullner. In periodical criticism after 1825,
Schiller's dramas maintained first place, with chief stress upon
his Wallenstein. And Goethe's Faust (Part I, of course) also rose
in importance as serious critics focused attention on Germany's
most significant dramatic readings of life. Indeed, in 1822,
Goethe's Faust was the subject of Carlyle's first critique on Ger-
man literature, in the short-lived New Edinburgh Review. Mean-
while, translation of whole works or of fragments from the poetic
dramas of both Goethe and Schiller proceeded at various levels,
ranging from F. E. Leveson-Gower and George Soane to George
Moir and Carlyle.
Of all German literary types, prose fiction had the longest
and widest popularity in England (see especially Stockley, Chap-
ter VIII). In the late eighteenth century, translators and review-
ers had ranged over a wide field for their selections. And even
during the generally low ebb of German importations, from 1800
to 1815, as has been noted, Lafontaine's novels of family life
attained considerable popularity. But in the 1820's came the true
high point of English translations from German writers of prose
fiction. They included such authors as Korner, Tieck, E. T. A.
Hoffmann, Musaus, Richter, Schiller, and Goethe. A single year,
1826, brought forth five different collections: by Richard Holcraft,
George Soane, Thomas Roscoe, Gillies, and Edgar Taylor. The
three last named of those collectors provided more or less critical
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-11-14 09:12 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. $b781466 Public Domain, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-google
? XX
INTRODUCTION
materials to aid the reader. And critical reviews of the vari-
ous collections made still further additions. For example, the
Blackwood's Magazine article on Gillies' collection entered in-
to what Morgan calls a thorough discussion of German narrative
literature (Morgan-Hohlfeld, p. 63). Along with those develop-
ments, the publication of Carlyle's elaborately introduced Speci-
mens of German Romance in 1827 gave English readers before
the close of the third decade considerable selection from, and
knowledge of, German prose fiction. Indeed by the end of the
decade, as Miss Stockley says (p. 13), the various main types
of German literature--if not widely popular or fully appreciated--
were at least firmly established in English interest.
Notwithstanding the established interest in various aspects
of this foreign influence, the third decade had almost ended be-
fore an English history of German literature appeared. But cer-
tain attempts at historical approach--including attempts to inter-
pret the Middle Ages historically--had been made. Some of them
should be brought into focus as we close this summary account.
Illustrations of Northern Antiquities, 1814, contained much early
material. In addition to analyses of and translations from the
Heldenbuch and the more important Nibelungen Lied, this large
volume by Weber, Jamieson, and Walter Scott gave especial at-
tention to the historical background of those medieval poems and
furnished a variety of antiquarian notes. Although considerable
attention was paid to the Nibelungen Lied a decade later, by Bed-
does in 1824 (Ewen, p. 171) and by Edgar Taylor in 1825, the sur-
veys of periodical criticism suggest that the old poem was not
widely known in England even during the 1820's. The types of
folk tales collected by the Grimm brothers were better known.
When Francis Cohen (renamed Palgrave) reviewed six works,
including the Grimms* Deutsche Sagen and Dobeneck's Heroen-
sagen, in 1820 in the Quarterly Review his allusions to both Ger-
man and Danish stories of Barbarossa indicate a superficial no-
tion of comparative method.
