Novalis. The brothers 5 ‘-hlegel. 5-12 of the devout piety which was supposed to regulate the conduct of prince and peasant alike, and which revealed itself i11 splendid architec‘.ure and a gorgeous ritual. With a like purpose the Romanticists pointed to Oriental life, and began the serious study of Sa11sk1‘it and 1’c1‘sim1 poetry. The chief writers whom they opposed to the classical poets both of antiquity and of modern times were Shakespeare and Calderon ; but they also brought to light many medi- zeval authors who had previously been neglected, and stunn- lated the Germans to a systematic study of the whole of their past literature. The Romanticists did not strike out a wholly original path, for there were in the writings of Lessing, Goethe, and 5'chiller——especially of Goethe—elements in full harmony with all that was best in the new tendency. They were guilty of grotesque exaggeration in their descriptions of the superior happiness of medizeval nations and Oriental peoples, and they did much harm by checking the rising appreci- ation of measure and order in literary form which had been encouraged by the great classical writers. In practical life, too, their labours led to results opposed to the progressive tendencies of the age; for in the case of many adherents of the Romantic school, enthusiasm for the Middle Ages soon ceased to be a mere literary fancy,-—they strove to re- produce obsolete medizeval ideas. Large m11nbers of the1n joined the Catholic Church, and became the most vehement opponents of spiritual and political freedom. Still the Romanticists gave prominence to certain vital principles. That we now feel the charm of what was great and beauti- f at in the llirldle Ages, is in part the result of their teach- ing ; and to some extent we owe to them the recognition of deeper elements in the world than reason can formulate, and the conviction that the thought of each age must create for itself a medium of expression adapted to its special nature. The writer known as the prophet of the Romantic school was Frederick von Hardenberg, generally called Novalis (1772-1801). In his unfinished romance, Ileizu-it-/t von (lfterdzhgen, he revealed a mystical and sensitive spirit, penetrated by religious aspiration, and feeling itself ill at ease in the hard rough world. These qualities are still more pathetically expressed in his poems, the best perhaps being those in which he directly utters spiritual emotions. The critical leaders of the school were the brothers August Vilhelm von Schlegel (1767-1845) and Friedrich von Schlegel (1772-1829). It is to -be feared that many English readers have derived their impression of the former mainly from Heine’s malicious caricature. In reality, although destitute of creative power, he was a man of great intellectual distinction. His translations from Shakespeare are masterly, and his rendering of Calderon has also genuine merit. He did much to promote the scientific study of Sanskrit, and his lectures on dramatic art and literature, and on the theory and history of plastic art, contain many fruit- ful suggestions. Friedrich von Schlegel, who was a writer of greater depth and versatility than his brother, caused much scandal by his romance, Lucinda, in which the school appeared for the moment as a powerfully dissolving force in regard to the most sacred of human relations. His most important work, however, is his I[¢'stor_2/ of Ancient and llloclern Literature. Throughout his exposition he is a propagandist of his special ideas ; but the book is of lasting importance as the earliest attempt to present a systematic view of literary development as a whole. The period in which the brothers worked most effectually for their school was between 1796 and 1800, when they lived in Jena, and formed the centre of a brilliant circle which included Fichte, Schelling, Tieck, and Vilhelm von Hum- boldt. Here they edited the Allccmezmz, in which they chastised feeble and pretentious writers, and awoke general interest in mediaeval art and literature, and in the G 1'] R M A N Y [LITEI’.ATl‘-IIE. systems of philosophy that harmonized with their special tendency. The most productive, and for a time the n1ost famous, writer of the Romantic school was Ludwig Tieclc (1773-- 1853). Many of the smaller tales in his 1’/ccmtusus have not yet lost their interest. They are, indeed, as far as pos- sible from representing the real life of mediaevalism, but they have a mystic and fairy-like charm which is not the less powerful because it is purely imaginative. In his later novels he took his themes from modern life, and they dis- play a remarkable talent for keen and searching satire. Most of them, however, are already practically forgotten, for Tiecl: was unable to give form to his ideas, and his imagination was wayward and eccentric. In his lyrical poetry he seldom touches a true note, and his dramas have no high qualities to make 11p for their utter and deliberate lack of plan. Yet his dramatic critici.-m, of which he wrote a great deal in Dresden,—where he lived for many years, the centre of an adoring body of disciples,— is often happy and suggestive ; and his completion of Schlege1's translation of Shakespeare is poetic in feeling, and indicates a rare mastery of language and versification. A writer of less importance, but who exercised considerable influence over Tieck at an early period of his career, was V. H. Wackenroder (1772-98), whose 1’/miztasiuz film)’ die If-zuzst (“ Fancies concerning Art ”') was published by Tieck after the writer’s early death. Both in this book and in his 0ve2;flozoz'n{/.3 from the Ilcart of an 1l2't—lov[11g Frz'cu' he expresses a deep feeling for Christian, especially allegoric, art. He was here i11 full sympathy with the whole Romantic school, which derived intense delight from the spiritual art of the early mediaeval painters, but cared little for the noble beauty of Greek art or of the art of the Renaissance. Among the authors who wrote in the spirit of the Romantic school, and who were for a long time extremely popular, one of the chief was E. T. A. Hoffmann (1776- 1822 . His treatment of ghostly and horrible themes is often very grotesque; but he has flashes of vivid narra- tive which indicate a deep appreciation of some of the more mysterious aspects of lnnnan nature. Clemens Brentano (1777-1812) was one of the most ambitions of the Romanticists, and he had originality both of thought and fancy; but he was too confused, too indifferent to form, to produce more than a passing impression. Of far more enduring excellence tha11 anything he himself wrote was Des If/zaben ll’-umler/corn, a book of popular lyrics which he collected with his brother-in-law, Achim von Arnim. Arnim (1781-1831) revealed imagination and feeling in his ICro7zen2ca'cIzter (“ Guardians of the Crown ") ; and his Cozmtess Dolores gives evidence of great natural power. His works, however, suffer the penalty which attaches to the total neglect of art. De La Motte Fonqué (1777-1843) does not, in the majority of his writings, rise above the level of his fellows; like them, he usually lacks clearness, precision, and genuinely human interest. But in one little book, Umline, he achieved a masterpiece. This charming tale, with its sweetness, pathos, and dream-like beauty, is now above criticism ; it has taken its place as one of the select class of creati-:»n~: which appeal to all the world, and do not depend for their popularity on the tendencies of a particular time. Joseph von Eichendorff (1788-1857) is an adherent of the Romantic school only in some of his tales ; his lyrics com- bine its depth of emotion with clear and musical expression, and his best stories are written in a frank and attractive style. Adelbert von Chamisso (1781-1838), although usually classed as to some extent a Romanticist, has none of the dreaminess and mysticism of the school. He became a German both i11 thought and feeling; but his Tlct li. Vack« roder.
I-‘« '11 qu