Logan. Pegnitz- schiifer. "Second Silcsian
- chool.
lourt 1l)OCl}S. PERIOD or DECAY.] His comeclies, although also rude, have more life than his tragedies. In one of them, Peter Srluenz, there are traces of Shakespeare’s Jliclsmmner N2}//it's .l)ream, of which Gryphius appears to have had some knowledge through a third writer. Friedrich von Logan (1601-55) applied the principles of Opitz in epigram. He had a decided talent for terse, emphatic expression, and a considerable number of the vast collection of his epigrams have a keenness of edge which must have made him a dreaded enemy. I-Iis prevailing tone is satirical, and the chief object of his satire is the moral corruption of his time. Joachim Rachel (1618-69) was another satirist who strove by means of polished verses to castigate popular vices ; but he lacked force and invention. There was much more vigour in the Sc7w1'5_r/er_lir:/zte of Hans Wilmsen Lauremberg (1591-1659), who wrote in Pl-att Deutsch ; he, however, can hardly be claimed as a member of the first Silesian school. Philip von Zcscn (1619-89), a writer of some versatility, wrought in the spirit of Opitz by warring against foreign words which had intruded into German,-—-a warfare in which his zeal was not always as wise as it was patriotic. He founded in Hamburg, in imitation of the “Fruit-bearing Society,” an association (the “ Deutschgesinnte Gesellschaft ”) in- spired by his enthusiasm for Teutonic purity of speech. While the admirers of Opitz were striving, with the best intentions, to introduce a correct poetic style, a movement of a very different kind originated among the “Pegnitzsch‘.ifer” of Nureniberg. The members of this society, conscious of the b.:.rrenness of existing poetry, and 11ot feeling in the1n— selves the sources of a higher activity, turned for help to Italian literature. Instead of studying the great Italian poets they attached themselves to Marine and his extrava- gant school; and the chief result was a number of fantastic pastorals, the writers of which seemed to have no other aim than to show how much silly affoctation the German language may be made to express. Their tendency was carried to its utmost development by the second Silesian school, whose leading representatives were H offmannswaldau (1618-79) and Lohenstein (1635-83). Hoffmannswaldau wrote odes, pastorals, and heroic epistles, which are marked by a childish foppery of manner, and whose tone affords startling evidence of the moral laxity of the society to which they were addressed. Lohenstein chiefly cultivated th.e drama, and he has the distinction of having written perhaps the worst plays ever accepted as literature by a modern community. They are so wild and bombastic that, even if presented as burlesques, they would now be condemned as ridiculously extravagant. The lyrics of this pretentious writer are not less crude and unnatural than his plays. As the century advanced, the German courts passed more and more under the influence of France. Pocket editions of Louis XIV. were to be found in all the little capitals, courtiers talked more French than German, and it was unfasliionable not to know, or not to affect to know, con- temporary French literature. It was, therefore, inevitable that some writers should turn away from the path of the second Silesian school, and compete for court favour by imitating the French style. This was done by Canitz (1654-99), Besser (1654-1729), Kéinig (1688-1744), and many other authors of the same class. These “ court poets” took Boileau for their guide, and had, therefore, the nega- tive merit of avoiding the absurdities of Lohenstein and Hoffmannswaldau. But they were, as a rule, tame, cold, and dull. In Canitz alone, who was a Prussian statesman and wrote for his pleasure, is there any evidence of original energy; the others were professional versifiers who pro- duced appropriate odes and sonnets at the bidding of their employers. During the greater part of the 17th century Germany pro- duced few prose works that can now be tolerated. Notwith- GERMANY 531 standing the efforts of the purists, the language became more and more corrupt, and most writers were either arti- W1'ite1's" One of the small 11u1nbe1-°f17"h century. ficial, or pedantic, or coarse. whose power we can still feel was Grimmelshausen, whose S2'mplzcz'ssimus (1659) has qualities bordering upon genius. from his parents during the Thirty Years’ War, he 1s brought up by a hermit; afterwards in the service of a commandant, he makes himself notorious for tricks like those of Tyll Eulenspiegel ; he then becomes a soldier, rises to wealth and rank, but ultimately loses both, passes through many wild adventures, and retires from the world to a desert island, in which he devotes himself to religion. The value of the book consists in its graphic pictures of the horrors of the Thirty Years’ War,——pictures relieved by touches of rough, sometimes of the coarsest, humour. Another writer of great but insufficiently cultivated talent was Moscherosch, author of Gesic/ate I’ILilcmcle7's von Sittewalt (1650), which is partly an imitation of the Suefios of Quevedo. It is made up of a number of visions or dreams, some of which, like passages of Sinzplicisszbnzcs, conveya vivid idea of the sufferings of Germany during her great struggle; in others the writer strikes with effect at popular follies, including the extravagances of the second Silesian school. Sigmund von Birken wrote a history of the house of Austria, which, although one-sided, is not without merit as a plain narrative; and an ecclesiastical history by Gottfried Arnclt has some interest as an attempt to do justice to heretics condemned by the church. A very good book of travels was written by Adam Olearius, describing the adventures of a mission to Persia, of which the author and Paul Fleming were subordinate officials. A Protestant pastor, Balthasar Schupp (1610-61), was the author of several didactic prose works, which, although rough in form, display native wit, and pour wholesome ridicule on the follies and barbarisms of contemporary writers. Against these more or less valuable prose writings we must set piles of enormous romances in the style of D’Urfé and Mademoiselle Scudéry. The favourite authors of these astonishing productions were Buchholtz, who wrote Ilercules mad Valisca, and Ilerczzliscus mzcl IIercula.d2'sIa; Anton Ulrich, duke of Brunswick, whose Octavia was loudly applauded by aristocratic readers; and Von Ziegler, the writer of The Asiatic Banise, an incredibly foolish book which, published in 1688, took Germany by storm, and maintained its popularity for more than a generation. Lohenstein was also the author of a romance, dealing with the fortunes of Arminius and Thusnelda. It is hard to understand the interest which works of this class once excited ; they are barren of every imaginative quality, with no kind of relation to life, and grotesque in style. They were ultimately driven from the field by imitations of Robinson Crusoe, which, notwithstanding the charm of their model, display no more talent than the romances. Various writers imitated S-implz'cissz.'mus, but they succeeded only in reproducing in an exaggerated form its occasional brutalities. Abraham a Sancta Clara (1642-1709), a Vienna priest, whose real name was Megerlin, revealed con- siderable power of satire in his Judas (Zcr Erzsc/telm (“Judas the Arch-Ptogue”), and in pamphlets and sermons; but his naturally rich fancy was wholly uncontrolled, and his humorous passages are marred by a far larger number in which he is pedantic or vulgar. N o progress was made during the 17th century towards State of At the courts the the drama . the formation of a national drama. Italian opera was the favourite entertainment, and the wandering companies of actors represented for the most part barbarous plays of their own devising, in Which Hanswurst was generally the popular character. Occasion- ally a man of some talent found his way into these com- Prose T1111- . . 11181.’- The hero 1s a peasant’s son, who tells 111s own tale. Torn 1,au;cn_ Mosche rosch. Schupp. Ro- 111311069. Abralnu a Sanct:
Clara.