1770 (Edinburgh, 4 vols.), of 1774 (London, 5 vols.), of 1778 (Isaac Reed, 6 vols.), of 1798 (London, 3 vols.), and of 1854 (John Doran, 2 vols.). These editions have become so scarce that it required a search of two years both here and abroad to procure one.

The fate of the Conjectures in English literature is hardly deserved, and they are worth rescuing from such oblivion. They are not only interesting to read, but also form a valuable historical document. To the student of English literature they prove a revelation as to the period of their composition as well as to their author's literary career. While they embody to a large extent the literary program of their time, they are also their author's most complete expression as to literature and literary composition, constituting his literary testament to posterity.

CHAPTER II

YOUNG'S "CONJECTURES” IN GERMANY

Very soon after the Conjectures had come off the press in England they became known also in Germany. They appeared there in three translations, they were brought to the notice of the public through several reviews, favorable as well as adverse, and they were discussed among the writers and reckoned with by the literary critics. In this way they soon attained greater eminence in Germany than they ever enjoyed in their own country.

The first German translation of the Conjectures appeared towards the end of February, in 1760, or about nine months after the publication of the first English edition. It was signed "V. T." and was made by Hans Ernst von Teubern. He made his translation from the second English edition and had it printed in Leipzig. In the introduction the translator speaks of Young in terms of the highest praise. In this same year, 1760, a second translation of the Conjectures made its appearance. This one was signed "G." But the signature proved a mystery, and who the author was, is still unknown. It was a translation of the first English edition, and was published in Hamburg, in the form of a contribution to the Freymüthige Briefe über die neuesten Werke aus den Wissenschaften in und ausser Deutschland. In the year 1761 the Conjectures went forth anew from Leipzig in the form of an unaltered reprint of Teubern's translation. Finally there appeared, nearly two decades later, in the year 1787, a third and entirely new translation. It was published also in Leipzig, from which city Teubern's two editions had gone forth. The translator signed it only "C", and as such he still remains unknown. He used the first English edition and produced a rather free rendering. In the introduction he states that he received some help with his task, but does not say from whom. In the preface he adds that he considers his translation of Young's essay the first one in Germany, having failed to find mention of any other, and that he hopes, if there is one and it had been forgotten, his work would reawaken Young's spirit among the Germans.

These various translations indicate how favorably Young's essay was received in Germany. The first ones particularly show that it met with immediate and high esteem. That Teubern had his translation before the public within but a few months after the essay was written, and his second edition within a year of the first, and that the Freymüthige Briefe

offered the essay to their readers in a special translation, is strong evidence of ardent and spreading interest. The latest translation, though, is of more restricted significance. In the first place, it came when the wave of such theorizing was almost spent. It came, moreover, from a translator who was clearly not a leading critic. He states erroneously that the Conjectures had been published over thirty years before. Although the greatest German writers of the century had already done some of their most promising work, and the country was intoxicated with enthusiasm over its literary ability and success, he nevertheless says in the preface to his translation that no previous decade had been so void of original writers as his, and that German letters were suffering from the bane of much imitation, slavery to literary rules, and the mercenary interests of the writers. The preface bears witness, however, to unbounded enthusiasm on the part of its author for Young as an original genius and for his Conjectures as a guide to literary success.

We come next to the several literary reviews of the Conjectures. The earliest one appeared in the Neue Zeitungen von gelehrten Sachen of Leipzig on February 25, 1760. It consisted of a synopsis, favorable comment, and the announcement that a German translation (meaning Teubern's) was soon to appear. Shortly after this translation was published it was reviewed by Gottsched in his periodical Das Neuste aus der Anmuthigen Gelehrsamkeit. As was to be expected of such a classicist, he accuses Young of meddling with matters of which he was not competent to speak, and deplores that Teubern did not translate something more worthy of his talents. He adds, however, that Young's style in particular and also some of his ideas were good, and that the translation was a creditable piece of work. In the same year the Bibliothek der schönen Wissenschaften reviews the treatise favorably and gives a long synopsis of it. Then it mentions the two German translations, and closes with the remark that the treatise was already too well known in Germany to require further comment. On June 25, 1761, Nicolai reviewed the Conjectures in the Literaturbriefe with much praise, and censured severely Gottsched's criticism of them. In the same year the Bremisches Magazin published a translation of the article on the Conjectures which had appeared in the Gentleman's Magazine two years before. In 1762 the Göttingische Anzeiger von gelehrten Sachen reviewed the second edition of Teubern's translation, praising both the original and the translation. An article appearing in the Beiträge zur Literatur und zum Vergnügen in the year 1766, finally, discusses the literary excellence of Greece and

England and also mentions the Coniectures favorably and quotes from them.

Schmid's Theorie der Poesie, published in 1767, further recommends the Conjectures highly as a literary guide to immortal originality. Rambach, on the other hand, undertook a refutation of them in a Schulprogramm in 1765. He was answered by Herder with a strong defence of Young in the form of a review in the Königsbergische gelehrte und politische Zeitung. The Gelehrter Mercurius likewise attacks the Conjectures for discrediting the ancients. Meusel's article De veterum poetarum interpretatione of 1767, finally, carries this attack still farther. Cramer's Nordischer Aufseher, again, printed an eleven-page synopsis of the Conjectures in 1770 and makes favorable comments on them. Thereafter mention was made of the Conjectures in various bibliographies and critical treatises. A further review of them appeared as late as 1791 in the supplement to the Allgemeine deutsche Bibliothek, criticising the translation of 1787, but praising Teubern's translation and the English original. And even as late as 1794 the Englische Blätter, published by Schubart, contained an article which cites with approval a passage from the Conjectures.

These data show that the essay received prompt and wide attention. The reason for this favorable reception is a matter for further inquiry. Was it that the essay brought new and stirring ideas to Germany? If so, it must have been one of the principal agents which evoked the discussion and subsequent cult of literary genius and originality which prevailed for several decades, during the so-called Storm and Stress period in German literature. Or did the essay achieve its popularity in Germany because it treated so forcefully certain subject-matter that was already familiar from other sources, but was just becoming a burning question of the day? The answer to these questions will be found by a careful study of the rôle which the Conjectures played in contemporary German literature.

The Germans not only translated, praised, and criticised Young's "lively letter" on literature and literary composition, as we have just observed; they also studied, applied, and quoted it, as we shall now see. We find, in fact, that almost everything it contains of vital literary criticism occurs in some form or manner in the literature of Germany during the next two decades. Let us ascertain as far as possible to what extent this was due to the influence of Young's treatise.

Various critics have concluded that the treatise exerted a profound and decisive influence on German literature. Stein says that it did much towards establishing in Germany the conception of the poet as a creator,1 the very idea which constitutes the soul of the Storm and Stress movement. Walter Thomas, in his thorough treatise on the life and works of Young, likewise asserts that the Conjectures were of great consequence in Germany, and particularly for the literary revolution which followed upon them.2 More recently still Professor Kind, in his excellent monograph on Young, has argued that they established their doctrine of individuality and original genius in Germany as the watchword of a new literary school. Lastly we are told by Dr. Rudolph Unger that the Conjectures gave Germany a conception of genius that became a revolutionizing factor in her literature."

While at the first glance the reasoning of these critics seems altogether plausible, the question remains whether their conclusions are not based too exclusively on the fact that the ideas in question later became so general and effective in Germany, particularly during the "Genieperiode." It will be in place, therefore, to inquire into the definite evidence for the assumption that Young's critique became so influential in Germany. To be sure there are instances which show unmistakable traces of the effect of the critique upon German literature. Thus Hamann admired and quoted not only Young's Night Thoughts but also his Conjectures. In one passage he mentions the latter and again alludes to them indirectly when treating of literary imitation, of genuine and deep feeling as a requisite of the poet, and of Young's advice to the author: "Know thyself!" In another place he mentions them again and uses two expressions from them, "the noble few," and "the latest edition of the human soul."6 Finally, in a third passage he says: "In his codicil to Richardson Young sets the task to imitate the ancients in such a manner that we get, the farther the better, away from similarity to them." These three passages are as far as I can see the only ones in which we can be certain that he was making use of the Conjectures. To believe, however, that the latter permeated his thinking to the extent of excluding other similar influences as well as his own independent

1 Die Enstehung der neueren Ästhetik, pp. 136 ff.

2 Le Poète Edward Young, pp. 513 ff.

4

Edward Young in Germany, Chapter II.

♦ Hamann und die Aufklärung, pp. 275 ff.

'Hamann, Vol. II, p. 198.

Same, Vol. II, pp. 265 f.