his defects, and the genuine modesty which always restrained him from great pretensions*.

Principal Works of Schiller. The Robbers (1781). Fiesco (1783). Cabal and Love (1784). History of the Revolution in the Netherlands (1788). History of the Thirty Years' War (1791). Wallenstein (1798). Maria Stuart (1800). Joan of Arc (1801). The Bride of Messina (1803). William Tell (1804).

There is also a novel by him, translated by Mr. Roscoe, in his "German Novelists," called "The Apparitionist."

The reader will recollect that the above character of Schiller, is only the private estimate formed of him by Professor Schlegel, who entertains a very different opinion on this head from that which is current in Germany and else where. The "Life of Schiller," by Carlyle, may be studied as an opposite view. All, or nearly all, of the works of Schiller may be read in English. Among the translations deserve particularly to be noticed, the "Wallenstein," by Coleridge, truly remarkable for its kindred fire of genius, and the "Camp of Wallenstein," excellently rendered by Lord Francis Egerton. His "Minor Poems" have been often before the public. "Fiesco," the "Minister," "Mary Stuart," the "Robbers," "Don Carlos," and "William Tell," have all been well translated, and some more than once. The "Thirty Years' War," and the "Ghost-seer," are also accessible. Mr. Carlyle has enriched our literature with an admirable "Life of Schiller," full of poetic feeling and refined criticism. It has been translated into German, and is considered by the Germans as the best memoir extant of their poet. It abounds in instructive views of the literature and taste of that region.

CHAPTER VI.

MODERN GERMAN LITERATURE, CONTINUED.

The Romantic School. Augustus William von Schlegel. Frederic Schlegel. Tieck, Wackenroder, and Novalis. Achim von Arnim and Brentano. Schleiermacher, Goöres, and Steffens. Kleist, Fouqué, and Horn. German Humourists of the past Century. Thümmel, Hippel and Lichtenstein. Humourists of the present Century. Richter, Hoffman, and Chamisso. Werner, Müllner, and Grillparzer. Koerner. Modern Lyric Poets. Uhland, Schwab, Rückert, Platen, and Chamisso. Henry Heine, and Boerne.

In the latter part of the last century, a school made its appearance in Germany, which has obtained the appellation of Romantic. The term, which is rather indefinite, does not correspond very distinctly to its character. We are not to imagine that it was opposed to the spirit of the classic ages, which, on the contrary, it joyfully acknowledged and devoutly revered; but it believed that, while this spirit could not be too highly prized, it still ruled too exclusively in the world of art. The new school held, that we moderns are far removed from the state of being in which the classic spirit was born and flourished, and that, therefore, it can no longer have a living existence amongst us.

The Romantic School may be looked upon as a reaction against a preceding extreme. Goethe and Schiller had half disowned Christianity, the latter indirectly, the former by an overt attack. They both looked upon it with indifference, if not with repugnance, as incompatible with their æsthetical theories. At any rate, to whatever extent they may have rejected its form, the fact is undeniable, that its spirit found no place in their works. A grand object of Goethe's endeavours appears to have been, to escape from its influence; and he would seem to have composed many of his works, and more particularly his Roman elegies, and some of his epigrams, to show that he had succeeded. Under

such circumstances a reaction was inevitable. The cold, remote, and artistic theories which he exclusively favoured, could not find access to men of impassioned natures and ardent imaginations, for they were enthusiastically devoted to the Present, from the impressions of which he sought to fly. He wished to be thought a Greek, but they were Christians and could not forget it. They recognised the beauty of the classic world, but regarded it as something foreign and afar off, and looked for creative inspiration and more genial impressions to the works of modern art. They left Greece and Rome for the Christian middle ages. And as soon as they had proclaimed their object, the time assumed the character of a new era. The relics of old German painting were brought out from obscurity, and welcomed with enthusiasm. The Gothic architecture, regarded as a mysterious manifestation of the Catholic spirit, was worshipped in all its remains. The quaint ditties of the Minnesingers were heard on every lip. Not only at home, but abroad, all records of the faith and devotion of the chivalric ages were eagerly sought for, and appropriated to the purposes of the school. Italy saw poetical pilgrims arrive to do homage to its pictorial treasures. The dramas of Calderon were translated, and studied with a religious fervour; Shakspeare also, though his genius, which, if it was not exclusively Christian, like that of his Spanish contemporary, still belonged exclusively to a Christian age, met with unreserved and enthusiastic acknowledgment.

But

Herder and his friends had already wandered, far and wide, amongst the Hebrews, Spaniards, and old English, and had brought manifold treasures back to their German home. they had had no other object than that of discovering genius, wherever and under whatever form it existed. The members of the Romantic School, on the other hand, set out with the end and aim of poetically re-establishing Catholicism. They were devoted to the cause of an hierarchy, and laboured to give a theocratical form to the general government. This has been their main and leading principle. They may have been, to some extent, unconscious of it, at first, and many may have deserted it on fully discovering its tendency, but this does not invalidate the general

statement. However, the Romantic School was not actuated to such an extent by party principles, as to be blind to all which did not further its particular objects. Indeed, it was the first to make generally known the profundity of Goethe's genius; and it was only when he refused to give a Christian character to his productions, that the indignation of Novalis was roused against him,—that Frederic Schlegel called him a German Voltaire,—and that his brother, William, pronounced him a Heathen converted to Mahometanism, a creed for which, strange to say, Goethe is known to have entertained a decided predilection.

The founders and most active members of the Romantic School were the Schlegels, Frederic and William, Tieck and Novalis.

Augustus William von Schlegel was born at Hanover, in the year 1767. At a comparatively early age, he went to Göttingen to study theology, which he in a short time deserted, nominally for philosophy, but in reality for literary pursuits. Göttingen he left to be tutor in a family at Amsterdam, where he resided three years, and then returned to Germany, and settled at Jena. Here, till the year 1799, he was actively engaged in writing for different periodicals, principally for Schiller's "Horen," and the Jena "Literaturzeitung." In 1802, we find him lecturing at Berlin on literature, art, and the spirit of the age. Shortly afterwards he became acquainted with Madame de Stael, in whose company he left Germany, for foreign travel, in 1805. With her, he resided, at intervals, at Copet, and visited Italy, France, Vienna and Stockholm. In 1808, he gave his celebrated lectures, at Vienna, on dramatic art and literature. In 1813, he shared the political character of his time, and acted in the capacity of private secretary to the crown-prince of Sweden, by whom the ancient title of his family was restored to him. After the fall of Napoleon, he returned to Madame de Stael, whose society he frequented till her decease, when he was appointed to the Professorship at Bonn, which he still continues to hold.

William Schlegel is distinguished for critical, rather than creative power. No original work of genius has issued from his mind. He is a master of comprehension and analysis. Few men have combined such immense learning as he possesses, with such a fine

sense of the beautiful, and such a rigorous critical system. He has been entitled, and not unjustly, the first critic of modern times. His classical acquirements are of the first order, and he has written imitations of the ancients, which show that he was fully capable of embodying the spirit of old. With the literature of the middle ages, and particularly with that of our Elizabethan era, he is intimately acquainted. He seems to lose the character of his nation as soon as he passes her boundaries, and to assume that of any other country the literature of which he may examine, criticise, or translate. He is bound by no ties or associations, and acknowledges only a general standard of truth, beauty, and genius. He may be said to have established the critical system which at present obtains in Germany, and which is essentially superior to that which any other country possesses.

As a

His earliest studies he devoted to the classics. Before he was twenty, he wrote an excellent treatise on the geography of the Homeric world. But he soon deserted mere philology, and took an active share in the literary campaigns of the time. He began to make his critical principles known in the periodicals, and commenced his translation of Shakspeare. Of the former, we can only mention here the general nature and bearing. critic, Schlegel has always insisted on a rigorous definition, and an impartial judgment. He views the works of literature in connexion with the time and country which gave them birth. He holds that there are certain internal laws which ought to give its suitable form to a poem, and that, therefore, the construction of the latter can never be regulated by abstract dicta or philosophical conclusions. He compares the cramping of genius by rules, to an attempt to mould a fruit into a different shape from that which Nature has given it. In the works of great authors, he proves that an apparently irregular arrangement is demanded by the nature of the subject, and by the spirit in which it is treated. He demonstrates that every scene in Shakspeare is necessary to the perfection of the whole, which must inevitably be injured by any alteration. He wages incessant war with the narrow-minded commentators, who are always quarrelling with the past because it is not the present. In fine, he can transport himself into all