We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
In the studies devoted to the literary growth of Novalis the roots that lower into the realm of Shakespearean art and thought have strangely been overlooked. Such omission is not entirely unwarranted in view of the seeming disparity in substance and character between the works of the two poets. And yet the assumption that Novalis should have remained impervious to the “fine frenzy” of Shakespeare, when all of his friends and literary companions came under the spell of it, must give us pause. Literary “influences” do not always proceed along the path of material evidence; they are forces that often come to light in forms and directions which we least expect. A poet as sensitive and unpredictable as Novalis is no exception; he strove to be unique and master of his own existence and style, although the evidence shows that the poetic art of Shakespeare vitally contributed to the fruition of the Hymnen an die Nacht.
1 Novalis' Schriflen, ed. Paul Kluckhohn and Richard Samuel, 4 vols. (Leipzig, n.d. [1928])—quoted hereafter as Kluckhohn—introduction to Vol. i. Paul Kohler, “Zur Ent-stehungsgeschichte von Novalis' Hymnen an die Nacht”, in Euphorion, xrx (1912), 174–98. Heinz Ritter, Novalis' Hymnen an die Nacht, Beitràge zur neueren Literaturgeschichte, xiii (Heidelberg, 1930). No information could be obtained concerning August Ullner, Entstehungsgeschichte von Novalis' Hymnen an die Nacht. Frankf. Diss. Masch. (1926). Particular reference should be made to the valuable book by Henry Kamla, Novalis' Hymnen an die Nacht: Zur Deutung und Datierung (Copenhagen, 1945), which, however, did not become available until the present study had been set in print. Kamla does not discuss Novalis' acquaintance with Shakespeare's works.
2 Cf. Kluckhohn, i, 25∗. See also Wilhelm Dilthey, Das Erlebnis und die Dichiung (Leipzig, 1910).
3 Herder, Novalis und Kleist, Studien iiber die Entwicklung des Todesproblems … Deutsche Forschungen, Heft 9 (Frankfurt, 1922).
4 “Jean Paul und Novalis”, in Gesammelte Studien, Vol. n: Aufsaize zur Literatur- und Geistesgeschichte (Berlin, 1929); “Das Visionserlebnis der dritten Hymne an die Nacht und Jean Paul”, Euphorion, xxx (1929), 246–9—incorporated in the preceding in enlarged form. Sophie von Hardenberg, authoress of Friedrich von Hardenberg. Eine Nachlese‘ 2 (Gotha, 1883), pointed in passing (p. 141) at the significance of Jean Paul for the poetic expression of Novalis’ sentiments on death.
5 Kluckhohn, iv, 385.
6 Journal, May 14–15, 1797.
7 Briefe von und an August Wilhelm Schlegel, Gesammelt und erlâutert durch Josef Komer, i (1930), p. 60.
8 Ibid., p. 61. Von Borcke's translation of Julius Caesar, in rhymed alexandrines (1741), remained without succession.
9 Ibid., pp. 61–2.
10 A. W. Schlegel und Fr. Schlegel im Briefwechsel mit Schiller und Goethe, herausgegeben von Josef Kôrner und Ernst Wieneke (Leipzig, 1926), p. 168.
11 Kluckhohn, iv, 205.
12 Kluckhohn, iv, 206.
13 Kluckhohn, iv, 390.
14 In Die Horen (1796), Viertes Stuck, pp. 56-112.
15 Cf. Johannes Hofmann, “Eine unbekannte Widmung A. W. Schlegels an Goethe”, Zeitschrifl fur Biicherfreunde, 36. Jahrg., 3. Folge, i (1932), 34.
16 Kluckhohn, iv, 390 (spacing in the original).
17 Cf. Helmut Rehder, “Literary Criticism in Germany during the Romantic Period”, Monatshefle (1946), pp. 237–43.
18 Kluckhohn, ii, 326.
19 Kluckhohn, ii, 327.
20 Kluckhohn, π, 19 (spacing by the author).
21 Ibid., ii, 405.
22 Zeilschrifl für Bucherfreunde, 36. Jahrg., 3. Folge, i (1932), 34.
23 Kluckhohn, iv, 477.
24 Cf. Fr. Gundolf, Shakespeare und der deutsche Geisf (1923), p. 315 ff.
25 Horen 1796, Drittes Stuck, pp. 92–104. Meanwhile, also the “Grabszene” from Romeo und Julia had appeared in the fifth number of Reichardt's journal, “Deutschland”, of 1796.
26 Horen 1796, Viertes Stuck, pp. 56–112.
27 Ibid., p. 60.
28 Ibid., p. 61.
29 Ibid., p. 69.
30 Letter to Fr. Schlegel of March 14 (Kluckhohn, rv, 179).
31 For the following cf. Johann R. Thierstein, Novalis und der Pietismus. Diss. (Bern, 1910).
32 Kluckhohn, rv, 186.
33 Ibid., p. 184.
34 Ibid., pp. 188–90.
35 Although Erasmus did not die until April 14, and Novalis did not receive the news until several days later, he speaks of the death of his brother as an accomplished fact.
36 Kluckhohn, iv, 196–7.
37 Shakespeare's iramatische Werke, übersetzt von August Wilhelm Schlegel, erster Theil (Berlin: Johann Friedrich Unger, 1797), “Romeo und Julia”, v. Aufzug, 1. Szene, p. 148.
38 Kluckhohn, iii, 380.
39 Shakespeare, “Romeo und Julia”, v. Aufzug. 3. Szene, p. 159.
40 Ibid., iv, Aufzug. 5. Szene, p. 143.
41 Kluckhohn, iii, 380.
42 Shakespeare, “Romeo und Julia”, iii. Aufzug, 1. Szene, p. 87.
43 Shakespeare, “Romeo und Julia”, iii. Aufzug. 2. Szene, p. 93.
44 “Im Gedrânge zwischen schiichternen Wallungen und den Bildern ihrer entfiammten Phantasie ergiesst sie sich in einen Hymnus an die Nacht, und fleht siean, sowohl diesen als der verstohlenen Vermahlung ihren Schleyer zu gônnen.” In Die Horen, 1797, 6. Stuck, p. 28. Spacing not in the original.
46 Schiller had received the essay from A. W. Schlegel sometime before May 7; on that date he forwarded the honorarium to Schlegel. (Cf. August Wilhelm Schlegel uni Friedrich Schlegel im Briefwechsel mit Schiller und Goethe, Her. von Josef Kôrner und Ernst Wieneke [Leipzig, n.d.], p. 37). Between May 19 and June 16 Goethe visited with Schiller in Jena. During this time the essay was passed back and forth. On June 10 Goethe recommended it for publication in the Horen, subject to some alterations (Cf. Briefwechsel zwischen Schiller und Goethe: 10. Juni 1797). On June 14 it was back from A. W. Schlegel (Cf. Korner, pp. 40-1). The issue of the Horen, containing the essay, appeared before July 22, when receipt was acknowledged by Goethe (Cf. Schiller-Goethe Briefwechsel).
46 Horen 1797,6. Stuck, p. 18 (spacing by the author). See also the reprint of this essay in Deutsche Literatur in Enlwicklungsreihen (Reihe Romantik), ii, 157 ff.
47 Ibid., p. 22.
48 Ibid., p. 48.
49 Ibid., p. 26.
50 Ibid., p. 26.
51 Ibid., p. 32.
52 Cf. Friedrich Schlegel, Gesprdch iiber die Poésie, “Brief iiber den Roman”: “und der Geist der Liebe muß in der romantischen Poesie tiberall unsichtbar sichtbar schweben.”
53 OPΦEō AANTA, ed. Gessner and Hamberger (Leipzig, 1764), pp. 188–9. Cf. also The Mystical Hymns of Orpheus, New Edition, by Thomas Taylor (London, 1896), pp. 10–15.
54 Friedrich Schlegels Briefe an seinen Brader August Wilhelm, ed. Oskar Walzel, p. 295; cf. p. 297.
55 Ibid., p. 298.
56 A. W. Schlegel's Poetische Werke, Bd., ed. Booking, pp. 35–7. Cf. also Caroline, Briefe ans der Fruhromantik, ed. Erich Schmidt, 1,659-60.
57 Kluckhohn, iv, 213.
58 Ibid., i, 13.
59 Ibid., in, 347.
60 Ibid., iii, 348.
61 Ibid., iii, 334.
62 Cf. Deutsche Literatur in Enlwicklungsreihen (Reihe Romantik), iv, 217. See also notes, p. 329.
63 Kluckhohn, iii, 336.
64 Ibid., iii, 299. 65 Ibid., iii, 334–5.
66 Ibid., iii, 327.
67 Ibid., iii, 244–5; iii, 318.
68 Ibid., iii, 321. Cf. also Gundolf, Shakespeare und der deutsche GeisC (Berlin, 1923), p. 340.
69 Kluckhohn, iv, 458.
70 Ibid., iii, 342.
