Chapter III
Whore Brentano sowed, many have reaped. Since the publication of his _Godwi_, about sixty-five _Loreleidichtungen_[75] have been written in German, the most important being those by Brentano (1810-16), Niklas Vogt[76] (1811), Eichendorff (_ca._ 1812), Loeben (1821), Heine (1823), Simrock (1837, 1840), Otto Ludwig (1838), Geibel (1834, 1846), W. Müller von Königswinter (1851), Carmen Sylva, (_ca._ 1885), A. L'Arronge (1886), Julius Wolff (1886), and Otto Roquette (1889). In addition[77] to these, the story has been retold[78] many times, with slight alterations of the "original" versions, by compilers of chrestomathies, and parodies have been written on it. There is hardly a conceivable interpretation that has not been placed upon the legend.[79] The Lorelei has been made by some the evil spirit that entices men into hazardous games of chance, by others, she is the lofty incarnation of a desire to live and be blessed with the love that knows no turning away. The story has also wandered to Italy, France, England, Scotland, Scandinavia, and the United States,[80] and the heroine has proved a grateful theme for painters and sculptors. Of the epic works, that by Julius Wolff is of interest because of the popularity it has enjoyed. First published in 1886, it had reached the forty-sixth thousand in 1898. Of the dramas that by L'Arronge should be valuable, but it has apparently never been published; nor has Otto Ludwig's operatic fragment,[81] unless recently. Aside from Geibel, Otto Roquette is the most interesting librettist. Of the forty-odd (there were forty-two in 1898) composers of Heine's ballad, the greatest are Schumann, Raff, and Liszt, and in this case Friedrich Sucher,[82] who married the ballad to its now undivorceable melody.
Though Brentano created[83] the story of his ballad, he located it in a region rich in legendary material, and it was the echo-motif of which he made especial use, and traces of this can be found in German literature as early as the thirteenth century.[84] The first real poet to borrow from Brentano was Eichendorff,[85] in whose _Ahnung und Gegenwart_ we have the poem since published separately under the title of "Waldgespräch," and familiar to many through Schumann's composition.[86] That Eichendorff's Lorelei operates the forest is only to be expected of the author of so many _Waldlieder_. Even if Heine had known it he could have borrowed nothing from it except the name of his heroine.[87]
As to Loeben's saga, there can be but little doubt that he derived his initial inspiration from Schreiber, with whom he became intimately acquainted[88] at Heidelberg during the winter of 1807-8. This, of course, is not to say that Heine borrowed from Loeben. Indeed, one of the strongest proofs that Heine borrowed from Schreiber rather than from Loeben is the clarity and brevity, ease and poetry of Schreiber's saga as over against the obscurity and diffuseness, clumsiness and woodenness of Loeben's saga,[89] the plot of which, so far as the action is concerned, is as follows: Hugbert von Stahleck, the son of the Palsgrave, falls in love with the Lorelei and rows out in the night to her seat by the Rhine. In landing, he falls into the stream, the Lorelei dives after him and brings him to the surface. The old Palsgrave has, in the meanwhile, sent a knight and two servants to capture the Lorelei. They climb the lofty rock and hang a stone around the enchantress' neck, when she voluntarily leaps from the cliff into the Rhine below and is drowned.
The one episode in Loeben not found in any of Schreiber's _Rheinsagen_ is the story of the castaway ring miraculously restored from the stomach of the fish. This Loeben could have taken from "Magelone" by Tieck, or "Polykrates" by Schiller, both of whom he revered as men and with whose works he was thoroughly familiar. But there is nothing in Loeben that Heine could not have derived in more inspiring form from Schreiber; and Schreiber contains essentials not in Loeben at all. Indeed, a general study of Schreiber's manuals leads one to believe that the influence of them, as a whole, on Heine would be a most grateful theme: there is not one Germanic legend referred to in Heine that is not contained in Schreiber. And as a prose writer, Heine's fame rests largely on his travel pictures.[90]
The points of similarity between Loeben's ballad and saga and the ballads and Märchen of Brentano, all of which Loeben knew in 1821, are wholly negligible. It remains,[91] therefore, simply to point out some of the peculiarities of Brentano's "Loreley" as protrayed in the _Rheinmärchen_--peculiarities that are interesting in themselves and that may have played a part in the development of the legend since 1846.
In "Das Märchen von dem Rhein und dem Müller Radlauf,"[92] Loreley is portrayed in a sevenfold capacity, as it were: seven archways lead to seven doors that open onto seven stairways that lead to a large hall in which Frau Lureley sits on a sevenfold throne with seven crowns upon her head and her seven daughters around her. This makes interesting reading for children, but Brentano did not lose sight of adults, including those who like to speculate as to the origin of the legend. He says: "Sie [Lorelei] ist eine Tochter der Phantasie, welches eine berühmte Eigenschaft ist, die bei Erschaffung der Welt mitarbeitete und das Allerbeste dabei that; als sie unter der Arbeit ein schönes Lied sang, hörte sie es immer wiederholen und fand endlich den Wiederhall, einen schönen Jüngling in einem Felsen sitzen, mit dem sie sich verheiratete und mit ihm die Frau Lureley erzeugte; sie hatten auch noch viele andere Kinder, zum Beispiel: die Echo, den Akkord, den Reim, deren Nachkommen sich noch auf der Welt herumtreiben."
Just as Frau Lureley closes the first _Märchen_, so does she begin the second: "Von dem Hause Staarenberg und den Ahnen des Müllers Radlauf."[93] Here she creates, or motivates, the other characters. Her seven daughters appear with her, as follows: Herzeleid, Liebesleid, Liebeseid, Liebesneid, Liebesfreud, Reu und Leid, and Mildigkeit. She reappears then with her seven daughters at the close of the _Märchen_, and each sings a beautiful song, while Frau Lureley, the mother of Radlauf, proves to be a most beneficent creature. Imaginative as Brentano was, he rarely rose to such heights as in this and the next, "Märchen vom Murmelthier,"[94] in which Frau Lureley continues her great work of love and kindness. She rights all wrongs, rewards the just, corrects the unjust, and leads a most remarkable life whether among the poor on land or in her element in the water. All of which is poles removed from Loeben's saga, though he knew these _Märchen_,[95] for they were written when Brentano was his intimate friend.
As to the importance of Loeben's saga, Wilhelm Hertz says: "Fast alle jüngeren Dichter knüpfen an seinen Erfindungen an, so besonders die zahlreichen musikdramatischen Bearbeitungen."[96] It is extremely doubtful that this statement is correct. It is plain that many of the lyric writers leaned on Schreiber, and the librettists could have done the same; or they could have derived their initial suggestion in more attractive form than that offered by Loeben. It seems, however, that Geibel[97] knew Loeben's saga. Though his individual poems on the Lorelei betray the influence of Heine, and though his drama resembles Brentano's ballad in mood and in unimportant details, it contains the same proper names of persons and places that are found in Loeben. And what is more significant, it contains two important events that are not found in any of the other versions of the saga: the scene with the wine-growers and the story of the castaway ring. The latter is an old theme, but that they both occur in Loeben and in Geibel would argue that the latter took them from the former. It is largely a question as to whether a poet like Geibel has to have a source for everything that is not absolutely abstract. The entire matter is complicated.[98] The paths of the Lorelei have crossed each other many times since Brentano started her on her wanderings. To draw up a map of her complete course, showing just who influenced whom, would be a task more difficult than grateful.[99]
As to Brentano's original ballad,[100] try as we may to depreciate the value of his creation by tracing it back to echo-poetry and by coupling it with older legends, such as that of Frau Holla, we are forced to give him credit for having not simply revived but for having created a legend that is beautiful in itself and that has found a host of imitators, direct and indirect, the world over, including one of the world's greatest lyric writers. This then is just one of the many things that the German romanticists started; it is just one of their many contributions to the literature that lasts. And for the perpetuation of this one, students of German literature have, it seems, given the obscure Graf von Loeben entirely too much credit. But who will give the oft-scolded Clemens Brentano too little credit? Only those who dislike romanticism on general principles and who will not be convinced that the romanticists could be original.[101]
ALLEN WILSON PORTERFIELD
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
NEW YORK CITY
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Ferdinand August Otto Heinrich Graf von Loeben, the scion of an
old, aristocratic, Protestant family, was born at Dresden, August
18, 1786. He received his first instruction from private
tutors. For three years from 1804 on, he unsuccessfully, because
unwillingly, studied law at the University of Wittenberg. In 1807
he entered, to his profound delight, the University of Heidelberg,
where, in association with Arnim, Brentano, and Görres, he
satisfied his longing for literature and art. Beginning with 1808
he lived alternately at Wien, Dresden, and Berlin and with Fouqué
at Nennhausen. He took an active part in the campaign of 1813-14,
marched to Paris, and returned after his company had been
disbanded, to Dresden, where, in 1817, he married Johanna Victoria
Gottliebe _geb._ von Bressler and established there his
permanent abode. In 1822 he suffered a stroke of apoplexy from
which he never recovered: even the magnetic treatment given him by
Justinus Kerner proved of no avail. He died at Dresden, April 3,
1825. See _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_, XIX, 40-45. The
article is by Professor Muncker. Wilhelm Müller also wrote an
article full of lavish praise of Loeben in _Neuer Nekrolog der
Deutschen_, III, Jahrg. 1824, Ilmenau, 1827.
[2] Meyer (6th ed.) does not mention Loeben even in the articles on
Fouqué and Malsburg, two of Loeben's best friends; Brockhaus
(Jubilee ed.) mentions him as one of Eichendorff's friends in the
article on Eichendorff, but neither has an independent note on
Loeben. Nor is he mentioned in such compendious works on the
nineteenth century as those by Gottschall, R.M. Meyer
(_Grundriss_ and _Geschichte_), and Fr. Kummer. Biese
says (_Deutsche Literaturgeschichte_, II. 436) of him: "Auch
ein so ausgesprochenes Talent, wie es Graf von Loeben war, entging
nicht der Gefahr, die Romantik in ihre Karikatur zu verzerren."
[3] Cf. _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_, XIX, 42.
[4] Partial lists of his works are given in: Goedeke,
_Grundriss_, VI, 108-10 (2nd ed.): _Allgemeine deutsche
Biographie_, XIX. 40-45; the sole monograph on Loeben by
Raimund Pissin. _Otto Heinrich Graf von Loeben, sein Leben und
seine Werke_, Berlin, 1905, 326 pages. By piecing these lists
together--for they vary--it seems that Loeben wrote, aside from
the works mentioned above, the following: 1 conventional drama, 1
musical-romantic drama, 2 narrative poems, one of which is on
Ferdusi, 3 collections of poems, between 30 and 40 novelettes,
fairy tales and so on. and_ "einige tausend" aphorisms and
detached thoughts. It is in Pissin's monograph that Loeben's
position in the Heidelberg circle of 1807-8 is worked out. as
follows: Loeben and Eichendorff constituted one branch, Arnim and
Brentano the other, Görres stood loosely between the two, and the
others sided now with one group, now with the other.
[5] The verses are from _Geständnisse_, No. 125 in Pissin's
collection of Loeben's poems.
[6] _Geständnisse_. No. 125.
[7] Aside from the reviews, letters, and individual poems reprinted
here and there, the following works were accessible to the writer:
(1) _Das weisse Ross, eine altdeutsche Familienchronik; (2) Die
Sonnenkinder, eine Erzählung; (3) Die Perle und die Maiblume, eine
Novelle; (4) Cephalus und Procris, ein Drama; (5) Ferdusi; (6)
Persiens Ritter, eine Erzählung; (7) Die Zaubernächte am Bosporus,
ein romantisches Gedicht; (8) Prinz Floridio, ein Märchen; (9)
Leda; eine Erzählung; (10) Weinmärchen; (11) Gesänge._
[8] Eichendorff's relation to Loeben can be studied in the edition of
Eichendorff's works by Wilhelm Kusch, Regensburg. Vols. III,
X-XIII have already appeared. For a poetization of Loeben, see
_Ahnung und Gegenwart_, chap. xii, pp. 144 ff. For a
historical account of Loeben, see _Erlebtes_, chap. x,
pp. 425 ff. It is here that Eichendorff makes Goethe praise Loeben
in the foregoing fashion.
[9] There is no positive evidence that Goethe made any such remark. In
his _Gespräche_ (Biedermann. V, 270; VI, 198-99) there are
two references to Loeben by Goethe; they are favorable but
noncommittal as to his poetic ability.
[10] Cf. _Die Tagebücher des Gräfen von Platen_, Stuttgart, 1900.
Under date of August 14, 1824, Platen wrote: "Es enthält viele
gute Bemerkungen, wiewohl diese Art Prosa nicht nach meinem Sinne
ist." The reference is to Loeben's commentary to Madame de Staëls
_De l'Allemayne._
[11] Cf. _Heinrick von Kleists Berliner Kämpfe_, Berlin, 1901, pp.
490-96. The story in question is "Die furchtbare Einladung."
[12] Cf. _Herm. Anders Krüger, _Pseudoromantik. Friedrich Kind und der
Dresdener Liederkreis._ Leipzig. 1904. pp. 144-48. Krüger also
discusses Loeben in his _Der junge Eichendorff._ Leipzig. 1904.
pp. 88 and 128.
[13] Cf. Fouqué, Apel. Miltitz. _Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen
Romantik_, Leipzig,1908. In a letter to his brother. Fouqué wrote
(January 6, 1813): "Ein Dichter, meine ich, ist er allerdings, ein
von Gott dazu bestimmter." Fouqué, however, realized Loeben's many
weaknesses as a poet, though at Loeben's death he wrote a poem on
him praising him as the master of verse technique.
[14] Cf. Kosch's edition of Eichendorff. XIII. 65. Loeben says: "In
Weimar war ich im vorigen Winter bei Goethe; er war mir
freundlich." The "previous winter" was 1813.
[15] Cf. Kosch's edition, XI, 220. The remark was made in 1807.
[16] Cf. Pissin. p. 25. The incident occurred in 1803 and Herder died
in 1804.
[17] Cf. Kosch's edition, XI, 308. Lochen himself utterly condemned
this work later. See Pissin, pp. 238-39, 267-08. Pissin gives the
number of verse and strophe forms on p. 266.
[18] Cf. Pissin, p. 267. Uhland made the remark in 1812--his own most
fruitful year as a poet.
[19] The story was published in 1817. The full title is _Das weisse
Ross, eine altdeutsche Familienchronik in sechs und dreissig
Bildern._ It is 160 pages long.
[20] An idea as to the lack of action in this story can be derived
from the following statement by Otto (pp. 127-28), the brave hero:
"Was man Schicksale zu nennen pflegt, habe ich wenige gehabt, aber
erfahren habe ich dennoch viel und mehr als mancher durch seine
glänzenden Schicksale erfahren mag: nämlich die Führungen der
ewigen Liebe habe ich erfahren, die keinen verlässt. und alles
herrlich hinausfuhrt." And then Siegenot, the other hero, says
that this is very true--whereupon they embrace each other.
[21] The story was first published In Urania: Taschenbuch für Damen
auf das Jahr 1818. pp. 305-37.
[22] Aside from the poems in Pissin's collection in the _D.L.D. des
18. u. 19. Jahr._, Ignaz Hub's _Deutschlands Balladen- und
Romanzen-Dichter_, Karlsruhe, 1845, contains: (1) "Romanze von der
weissen Rose," (2) "Der Tanz mit dem Tode," (3) "Der Bergknapp,"
(4) "Das Schwanenlied." "Loreley" is also reprinted here, with
modifications for the worse. "Schau', Schiffer, schau' nicht
hinauf," is certainly not an improvement on Loeben's "Lieb Knabe,
sieh' nicht hinauf,"
[23] The following are common forms: "Nez," "zwey," "versteken,"
"Sfären," "Saffo," "Stralenboten," "Abendrothen." "Uebermuth,"
and so on, though the regular forms, except in the case of
"Saffo," also occur.
[24] "Der Abend" reminds one strongly of Hölderlin's "Die Nacht,"
while "Tag und Nacht" goes back undoubtedly to Novalis' "Hymnen an
die Nacht," W. Schlegels sonnet on the sonnet stood sponsor for
"Das Sonett," and Goethe and Tieck also reoccur in changed
dress. The poems on Correggio (73), Ruisdael (75), Goethe (137),
Tieck (138-39), and Novalis (141) sound especially like
W. Schlegel's poems on other poets and artists.
[25] In his _Geschichte des Sonettes in der deutschen
Dichtung_.'Leipzig, 1884. Heinrich Weltl (pp. 210-17) criticizes
Loeben's sonnets most severely from the point of view of content;
and as to their form he says: "Blos die Form, oder gar die blosse
Form der Form ist beachtenswert." This is unquestionably a case of
warping the truth in order to bring in a sort of pun.
[26] The triolett is worth quoting as a type of Loeben's prettiness:
Galt es mir, das süsse Blicken
Aus dem hellen Augenpaar?
Unter'm Netz vom goldnen Haar
Galt es mir das süsse Blicken?
Einem sprach es von Gefahr,
Einen wollt' es licht umstricken;
Galt es mir, das süsso Blicken
Aus dem hellen Augenpaar.
[27] An idea as to Loeben's temperament can he derived from the
following passage in a letter to Tieck: "Gott sei mit Ihnen und
die heilige Muse! Oft drängt es mich, niederzuknien im Schein, den
Albrecht Dürers und Novalis Glorie wirft, im alten frommen
Dom. dann denk' ich Ihrer und ich lieg' an Ihrer Seele. Ich fühle
Sie in mir, wie man eine Gottheit fühlt in geweihter
Stunde. 'Liebe denkt in sel'gen Tönen, denn Gedanken stehn zu
fern." The quotation should read "süssen" instead of "sel'gen."
See _Briefe an Tierk._ edited by Holtei, II, 266.
[28] As a corrective to the monographs of Pissin on Loeben and
H. A. Krüger on Eichendorff. one should read Wilhelm Kosch's
article in _Euphorion_ (1907, pp. 310-20). Kosch. contends
that Pissin and Krüger have vastly overestimated Loeben's
influence on Eichendorff, and that Loeben in general was "eine
bedeutungslose Tageserscheinung."
[29] The complete title is _Godwi, oder das steinerne Bild der
Mutter. Ein verwilderter Roman von Maria_. The very rare first
edition of this novel, in two volumes, is in the Columbia
Library. Friedrich Wilmans was the publisher.
[30] Cf. Alfred Kerr, _Godwi. Ein Kapitel deutscher
Romantik_. Berlin, 1898, p. 2.
[31] Cf. Wilhelm Hertz, "Über den Namen Lorelei," _Sitzungsberichte
der k.b. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu München_, Jahrgang
1886, pp. 217-51. For the etymologist, this is an invaluable
study.
[32] The superficial similarity of those two poems can easily be
exaggerated. The rhyme "sitzet-blitzet" is perfectly natural: the
Lorelei had to be portrayed as "sitzen"; what is then easier than
"blitzen"? In "Ritter Peter von Stauffenberg und die Meerfeye"
(Des Knaben Wunderhorn, ed. of Eduard Grisebach, p. 277) we have
this couplet:
Er sieht ein schönes Weib da sitzen. Von Gold und Silber herrlich blitzen.
For more detailed illustrations, see below.
[33] It is worth while to note the actual date of Heine's composition
of his ballad, since so eminent an authority as Wilhelm Scherer
(_Ges. d. deut. Lit._, 8th ed., p. 662) says that Heine wrote the
poem in 1824. And Eduard Thorn (_Heinrich Heines Beziehungen zu
Clemens Brentano_, p. 90.) says that he published it in 1826.
This is incorrect, as is also Thorn's statement, p. 88, that
Brentano wrote his ballad in 1802. For the correct date of Heine's
ballad, see _Sämtliche Werke_, Hamburg, 1865, XV, 200.]
[34] An instance of this is seen in _Selections from Heine's
Poems_, edited by H.S. White, D.C. Heath & Co., Boston, 1900,
p. 182. Professor White does, to be sure, refer to Strodtmann for
the details; but Strodtmann does not prove anything. And in
_Heines Werke in fünfzehn Teilen_, edited by Hermann
Friedeman, Helene Herrmann. Erwin Kaliseher. Raimund Pissin, and
Veit Valentin, we have the comment by Helene Herrmann, who follows
Pissin: "Die Loreleysage, erfunden von Clemens Brentano; vielfach
von Romantikern gestaltet. Zwischen Brentanos Romanze und Heines
Situationsbild steht die Behandlung durch den Grafen Loeben, einen
unbedeutenden romantischen Dichter."
[35] The best finished collection of Heine's letters is the one by
Hans Daffis, Berlin, 1907, 2 vols. This collection will, however,
soon be superseded by _Heinrich Heines Briefwechsel_, edited
by Friedrich Hirth, München and Berlin, 1914. The first volume
covers Heine's life up to 1831. In neither of these collections is
either Brentano or Loeben mentioned. There are 643 pages in
Hirth's first volume.
[36] For a discussion of _Godwi_, see _Clemens Brentano: Ein
Lebensbild_, by Johannes Baptista Diel and Wilhelm Kreiten,
Freiburg i.B., 1877, two volumes in one, pp. 104-25. As to the
obscurity of Brentano's work, one sentence (p. 116) is
significant: "_Godwi_ spukt heutzutage nur mehr in den Köpfen
der liberalen Literaturgeschichtsschreiber, denen er einen
willkommenen Vorwand an die Hand gibt, mit einigen stereotyp
abgeschriebenen Phrasen den Stab über den phantastischen,
verschwommenen, unsittlichen u.s.w., u.s.w. Dichter zu brechen."
[37] _Clemens Brentano: Godwi oder das steinerne Bild der
Mutter. Ein verwilderter. Roman_. Herausgegeben und
eingeleitet von Dr. Anselm Ruest, Berlin, 1906. Ruest edited the
work because he thought it was worth reviving. In this edition,
the ballad is on pages 507-10. Bartels (Handbuch, 2d ed., p. 400)
lists a reprint in 1905, E.A. Regener, Berlin.
[38] II, 391-93.
[39] For the various references, see Thorn's _Heinrich Heines
Beziehungen zu Clemens Brentano_. pp. 88-90. His study is
especially unsatisfactory in view of the fact that he says (p. 88)
in this connection: "Wirklich Neues zu bringen ist uns nicht
vergönnt, denn selbstverständlich haben die Forscher dieses
dankbare und interessante Objekt schon in der eingehendsten Weise
untersucht." And Thorn's attempt to show that Heine knew
_Godwi_ early in life by pointing out similarities between
poems in it and poems by Heine is about as untenable as argument
could be, in view of the great number of poets who may have
influenced Heine in these instances; Thorn himself lists (p. 63)
Bürger, Fouqué, Arnim, E.T.A. Hoffmann.
[40] In Pissin's collection of Loeben's poems (_D.L.D_., No. 135)
we have a peculiar note. After the ballad (_Anmerk._,
p. 161), which Pissin entitles "Der Lurleifels," we read:
"N.d. Hs." This would argue that Loeben did so entitle his ballad
and that Pissin had access to the original MS. But then Pissin
says: "Auch, die gleichnamige Novelle einleitend, in der
_Urania_ auf 1821." But in _Urania_ the novelette is
entitled "Eine Sage vom Rhein." and the ballad is entitled
"Loreley." Bet him who can unravel this!
[41] For the entire story of the composition and publication of the
_Rheinmärchen_, see _Die Märchen von Clemens Brentano_,
edited by Guido Görres. 2 vols. in 1, Stuttgart, 1879 (2d ed.)
This edition contains the preface to the original edition of 1840,
pp. i-1.
[42] Thorn, who drew on M.R. Hewelcke's _Die Loreleisage_,
Paderborn, 1908, makes (p. 90) this suggestion. It is impossible
for the writer to see how Thorn can be so positive in regard to
Brentano's influence on Heine. And one's faith is shaken by this
sentence on the same page: "Brentano veröffentlichte sein
_Radlauf-Märchen_ erst 1827, Heine 'Die Lorelei' schon 1826."
Both of these dates are incorrect. Guido Görres, who must be
considered a final authority on this matter, says that, though
Brentano tried to publish his _Märchen_ as early as 1816,
none of them were published until 1846, except extracts from "Das
Myrtenfräulein," and a version of "Gockel," neither of which bears
directly on the Lorelei-matter.
[43] Of Görres' second edition, I, 250: "Nachdem Murmelthier herzlich
für diese Geschenke gedankt hatte, sagte Frau Else: 'Nun, mein
Kind! kämme mir und Frau Lurley die Haare, wir wollen die deinigen
dann auch kämmen'--dann gab sie ihr einen goldnen Kamm, und
Murmelthier kämmte Beiden die Haare und flocht sie so schön, dass
die Wasserfrauen sehr zufrieden mit ihr waren."
[44] In _H. Heines Leben und Werke_. Hamburg, 1884 (3d ed.),
Bd. I. p. 363. In the notes, Strodtmann reprints Loeben's ballad,
pp. 696-97. His statement is especially unsatisfactory in view of
the fact that he refers to the "fast gleicher Inhalt," though the
essentials of Heine's ballad are not in Loeben's, and to
"einegewisse Ähnlichkeit in Form," though the similarity in form
is most pronounced.
[45] In _Allgemeine deut. Biog_., XIX. 44. It is interesting to
see how Professor Muncker lays stress on this matter by placing in
parentheses the statement: "Einige Züge der letzten Geschichte
["Sage vom Rhein"] regten Heine zu seinem bekannten Liede an."
[46] In _Dichtungen von Heinrich Heine, ausgewählt und
erläutert_, Bonn, 1887, p. 326. Hessel's Statement is
peculiarly unsatisfactory, since he says (p. 309) that he is going
to the sources of Heine's poems, and then, after reprinting
Loeben's ballad, he says: "Dieses Lied war Heines nächstes
Vorbild. Ausführlicheres bei Strodtmann, Bd. I, S. 362." And this
edition has been well received.
[47] In _Grundriss, VI, 110. Again we read in parentheses: "Aus
diesem Liede und dem Eingänge der Erzählung schöpfte H. Heine sein
Lied von der Loreley."
[48] In _Ges. d. deut. Lit_., p. 662 (8th ed.).
[49] In _Heinrich Heines Beziehungen zum deutschen Mittelalter_,
Berlin, 1908, pp., 94-95. Mücke is the most cautious of the ten
authorities above listed; and he anticipated Walzel in his
reference to Schreiber's _Handbuch_.
[50] In _Ueber den Namen Lorelei, p. 224. Hertz is about as cautious
as Strodtmann; "Es ist kaum zu bezweifeln dass," etc.
[51] In _Sämtliche Werke_, I, 491.
[52] In _Hauptströmungen_. VI, 178. Brandes says: "Der Gegenstand
ist der gleiche, das Versmass ist dasselbe, ja die Reimen sind an
einzelnen Stellen die gleichen: blitzetsitzet; statt 'an-gethan'
steht da nur 'Kahn-gethan.'"
[53] In _Der deutschen Romantiker_, Leipzig, 1903, p. 235.
[54] In _Deutsches Literatur-Lexikon_, München, 1914, p. 271. It
is significant that Krüger makes this statement, for the subtitle
of his book Is "Biographisches und bibliographisches Handbuch mit
Motivübersichten und Quellennachweisen." And it is, on the whole,
an extremely useful book.
[55] It is impossible to see how Brandes can lay great stress on the
fact that this rhyme occurs in both poems. The following rhymes
are found on the following pages of the Elster edition, Vol. I, of
Heine's works: "Spitze-Blitze" (36), "sitzen-nützen" (116),
"Witzen-nützen" (124), "sitzen-blitzen" (216),
"erhitzet-bespitzet" (242), "Blitz-Sitz" (257), "blitzt-gestützt"
(276), "blitze-besitze" (319), "blitzet-gespitzet" (464). And in
Loeben's poems the rhyme is equally common. The first strophe of
his _Ferdusi_ runs as follows:
Hell erglänzt an Persiens Throne Wo der grosse Mahmud sitzt; Welch Juwel ist's, das die Krone So vor allen schön umblitzt.
And in Schreiber's saga we have in juxtaposition, the
words. "Blitze" and "Spitze." The rhyme "Sitze-Blitze" occurs in
Immanuel's "Lorelei," quoted by Seeliger, p. 31.
[56] There are, to be sure, only 114 words in Loeben's ballad if we
count "um's," "dir's," and "glaub's" as three words and not six.
[57] These numbers are in the Columbia Library.
[58] During these years Heine's letters are dated from Göttingen,
Berlin, Gnesen, Berlin, Münster, Berlin, Lüneburg, Hamtburg,
Ritzenbüttel, and Lüneburg. During these same years Loeben was in
Dresden and he was ill.
[59] We need only to mention such a strophe as the following from
_Atta Troll_:
Klang das nicht wie Jugendträume. Die ich träumte mit Chamisso Und Brentano und Fouqué In den blauen Mondscheinnächten?
See Elster edition, II, 421. The lines were written in 1843.
[60] The first edition of Karl Simrock's _Rheinsagen_ came out in
1836. This was not accessible. The edition of 1837, "zweite,
vermehrte Auflage," contains 168 poems, 572 pages; this contains
Simrock's "Ballade von der Lorelei." The edition of 1841 also
contains Simrock's "Der Teufel und die Lorelei." The book contains
455 pages, 218 poems. The sixth edition (1809) contains 231 poems.
In all editions the poems are arranged in geographical order from
Südersee to Graubünden. Alexander Kaufmann's _Quellenangaben und
Bemerkungen zu Kart Simrocks Rheinsagen_ throws no new light on
the Lorelei-legend.
[61] Cf. _Heinrich Heines sämtliche Werke_, edited by Walzel,
Fränkel, Krähe, Leitzmann, and Peterson. Leipzig. 1911, II,
408. So far as I have looked into the matter, Walzel stands alone
in this belief, though Mücke, as has been pointed out above,
anticipated him in the statement that Heine drew on Schreiber in
this case. But Mücke thinks that Heine also knew Loeben.
[62] The reference in question reads as follows: "Ich will kein Wort
verlieren über den Wert dieses unverdaulichen Machwerkes [_Les
Burgraves_], das mit allen möglichen Prätensionen auftritt,
namentlich mit historischen, obgleich alles Wissen Victor Hugos
über Zeit und Ort, wo sein Stück spielt, lediglich aus der
französischen Uebersetzung von Schreibers _Handbuch für
Rheinreisende_ geschöpft, ist." This was written March 20, 1843
(see Elster edition, VI. 344).
[63] Aloys Wilhelm Schreiber (1763-1840) was a teacher in the Lyceum
at Baden-Baden (1800-1802), professor of aesthetics at Heidelberg
(1802-13) where he was intimate with the Voss family,
historiographer at Karlsruhe (1813-26), and in 1826 he retired and
became a most prolific writer. He interested himself in guidebooks
for travelers. His manuals contain maps, distances, expense
accounts, historical sketches, in short, about what the modern
_Baedeker_ contains with fewer statistics and more popular
description. His books appeared in German, French, and
English. In 1812 he published his _Handbuch für Reisende am
Rhein von Schaffhausen bis Holland_, to give only a small part
of the wordy title, and in 1818 he brought out a second, enlarged
edition of the same work with an appendix containing 17
_Volkssagen aus den Gegenden am Rhein und am Taunus_, the
sixteenth of which is entitled "Die Jungfrau auf dem Lurley." His
books were exceedingly popular in their day and are still
obtainable. Of the one here in question, Von Weech
(_Allgem. deut. Biog._, XXXII, 471) says: "Sein _Handbuch
für Reisende am Rhein_, dessen Anhang eine wertvolle Sammlung
rheinischer Volkssagen enthält, war lange der beliebteste Führer
auf Rheinreisen." There are 7 volumes of his manuals in the New
York Public Library, and one, _Traditions populaires du
Rhin,_ Heidelberg, 1830 (2d ed.), is in the Columbia
Library. It contains 144 legends and beautiful engravings. (The
writer has just [October 15, 1915] secured the four Volumes of
Schreiber's _Rheinische Geschichten und Sagen_. The fourth
volume, published in 1830. is now a very rare book.)
[64] The remainder of Schreiher's plot is as follows: The news of the
infatuated hero's death so grieved the old Count that ho
determined to have the Lorelei captured, dead or alive. One of his
captains, aided by a number of brave followers, set out on the
hazardous expedition. First, they surround the rock on which the
Lorelei sits, and. then three of the most courageous ascend to her
seat and determine to kill her, so that the danger of her
repealing her former deed maybe forever averted. But when they
reach her and she hoars what they intend to do, she simply smiles
and invokes the aid of her Father, who immediately sends two white
horses--two white waves--up the Rhine, and. after leaping down to
the Rhine, she is safely carried away by these. She was never
again seen, but her voice was frequently heard as she mocked, in
echo, the songs of the sailors on her paternal stream.
[65] It is not simply in the appendix of Schreiber's _Handbuch_
that he discusses the legend of Lorelei, but also in the
scientific part of it. Concerning the Lorelei rock he says
(pp. 174-75): "Ein wunderbarer Fels schiebt sich jetzt dem
Schiffer gleichsam in seine Bahn--es ist der Lurley (von Lure,
Lauter, und Ley, Schiefer) aus welchem ein Echo den Zuruf der
Vorbeifahrendem fünfzehnmal wiederholt. Diesen Schieferfels
bewohnte in grauen Zeiten eine Undine, welche die Schiffenden
durch ihr Zurufen ins Verderben lockte."
[66] Brockhaus says (p. xxiv): "Die einfache Sage von den beiden
feindlichen Brüdern am Rhein, van denen die Trümmer ihrer Bürgen
selbst noch _Die Brüder_ heissen ist in A. Schreiber's
Auswahl von Sagen jener Gegenden zu lesen." Usener's tragedy is
published In full in this number of _Urania_, pp. 383-442.
[67] Cf. Elster edition, IV, 406-9. The circumstantial way in which
Heine retells this story is almost sufficient to lead one to
believe that he had Schreiber at hand when he wrote this part of
Elementargeister; but he says that he did not.
[68] Discussion as to the first conception of Heine's _Rabbi_ are
found in: _Heinrich Heines Fragment_; _Der Rabbi von Bacharach_,
by Lion Feuchtwanger, München, 1907; _Heinrich Heine und Der Rabbi
von Bacharach_, by Gustav Karpeles, Wien, 1895.
[69] The poem is one of the _Junge Leiden_, published in 1821, Elster
(I, 490) says: "Eine bekannte Sage, mit einzelnen vielfach
wiederkehrenden uralten Zügen, dargestellt In Simrocks
_Rheinsagen_." Simrock had, of course, done nothing on the
_Rheinsagen_ in 1821, being then only nineteen years old and an
inconspicuous student at Bonn. Walzel says (I. 449.): "Mit einem
andern Ausgang ist die Sage in dem von Heine vielbenutzten
_Handbuch für Reisende am Rhein_ von Aloys Schreiber (Heidelberg,
1816) überliefert." The edition of this work in the New York
Public Library has no printed date, but 1818 is written in. Walzel
may be correct. The outcome of Heine's poem is, after all, not so
different: In Schreiber, both brothers relinquish their clalms to
the girl and remain unmarried; in Heine the one kills the other
and in this way neither wins the girl.
[70] It is the same story as the one told by Bulwer-Lytton in his
_Pilgrims of the Rhine_. chap. xxiv.
[71] All through the body of Schreiber's _Handbuch_, there are
references to the places and legends mentioned in Heine's
_Rabbi_. On Bacharach there is the following: "Der Reisende,
wenn er auch nur eine Stunde in Bacharach verweilt, unterlasse
nicht, die Ruinen von Staleck zu besteigen, wo eine der schönsten
Rheinlandschaften sich von seinen Blicken aufrollt. Die Burg von
sehr beträchtlichem Umfang scheint, auf den Trümmern eines
Römerkastells erbaut. Die, welche die Entstehung derselben den
Hunnen zuschreiben, well sie in Urkunden den Namen Stalekum hat,
sind in einem Irrtum befangen, denn Stalekum oder Stalek heisst
eben so viel als Stalbühl, oder ein Ort, wo ein Gericht gehegt
wurde. Pfalzgraf Hermann von Staleck, starb im 12ten Jahrhundert;
er war der letzte seines Stammes, und von ihm kam die Burg, als
Kölnisches Lehen, an Konrad Von Staufen."
[72] To come back to Heine and Loeben, Herm. Anders Krüger says (p.,
147) in his _Pseudoromantik:_ "Heinrich Heine, der überhaupt
Loeben studiert zu haben scheint," etc. He offers no proof. If one
wished to make out a case for Loeben, it could bo done with his
narrative poem "Ferdusi" (1817) and Heine's "Der Dichter Ferdusi."
Both tell about the same story; but each tells a story that was
familiar in romantic circles.
[73] In reply to a letter addressed to Professor Elster on October 4,
1914, the writer received the following most kind reply on
November 23: "Die Frage, die Sie an mich richten ist leicht
beantwortet: Heine hat Loeben in seinen Schriften nicht erwähnt,
aber das besagt nicht viel; er hat manchen benutzt, den er nicht
nennt. Und es kann _gar keinem Zweifel unterliegen_, dass
Loeben für die Lorelei Heines _unmittelbares_ Vorbild ist;
darauf habe ich öfter hingewiesen, aber wohl auch andere. Das
Taschenbuch _Urania_ für das Jahr 1821, wo Loebens Gedicht
u. Novelle zuerst erschienen, ist unserem Dichter zweifellos zu
Gesicht gekommen." No one can view Professor Elster in any other
light than as an eminent authority on Heine, but his certainty
here must be accepted with reserve, and his "wohl auch andere" is,
in view of the fact that, he was by no means the first, and
certainly not the last, to make this assertion, a trifle
disconcerting.
[74] The ultimate determining of sources is an ungrateful theme. Some
excellent suggestions on this subject are offered by Hans Rohl in
his _Die ältere Romantik und die Kunst des jungen Goethe_,
Berlin, 1909, pp. 70-72. This work was written under the general
leadership of Professor Elster. The disciple would, in this case,
hardly agree with the master. Pissin likewise speaks wisely in
discussing the influence of Novalis on Loeben in his monograph on
the latter, pp. 97-98. and 129-30. And Heine himself (Elster
edition, V. 294) says in regard to the question whether Hegel did
borrow so much from Schelling: "Nichts ist lächerlicher als das
reklamierte Eigentumsrecht an Ideen." He then shows how the ideas
were not original with Schelling either; he had them from
Spinoza. And it is just so here. Brentano started the legend;
Heine goes back to him indirectly. Eichenidorff and Vogt directly;
Schreiber borrowed from Vogt, Loeben from Schreiber, and Heine
from Schreiber--and thereafter it would be impossible to say who
borrowed from whom.
[75] The majority of the _Loreleidichtungen_ can be found in:
_Opern-Handbuch_, by Hugo Riemann, Leipzig, 1886: _Zur
Geschichte der Märchenoper_, by Leopold Schmidt, Halle, 1895;
_Die Loreleysage in Dichtung und Musik_, by Hermann Seeliger,
Leipzig, 1898. Seeliger took the majority of his titles from
_Nassau in seinen Sagen, Geschichten und Liedern_, by
Henniger, Wiesbaden, 1845. At least he says so, but one is
inclined to doubt the statement, for "die meisten Balladen" have
been written since 1845. Seeliger's book is on the whole
unsatisfactory. He has, for example, Schreiber improving on, and
remodeling Loeben's saga; but Schreiber was twenty-three years
older than Loeben, and wrote his saga at least three years before
Loeben wrote his.
[76] In F. Gräter's _Idunna und Hermode, eine Alterthumszeitung_,
Breslau, 1812, pp. 191-92, Gräter gives under the heading, "Die
Bildergallerie des Rheins." thirty well-known German sagas. The
twenty-seventh is "Der Lureley: Ein Gegenstück zu der Fabel von
der Echo." It is the version of Vogt.
[77] Aside from the above, some of the less important authors of
lyrics, ballads, dramas, novels, etc., on the Lorelei-theme are:
J. Bartholdi, H. Bender, H. Berg, J. P. Berger, A. H. Bernard,
G. Conrad, C. Doll, L. Elchrodt, O. Fiebach, Fr. Förster,
W. Fournier, G. Freudenberg, W. Freudenberg, W. Genth, K. Geib,
H. Grieben, H. Grüneberg, G. Gurski, Henriette Heinze-Berg,
A. Henniger, H. Hersch, Mary Koch, Wilhelmine Lorenz, I. Mappes,
W. Molitor, Fr. Mücke, O. W. Notzsch, Luise Otto, E. Rüffer, Max
Schaffroth, Luise Frelin von Sell, E. A. W. Siboni, H. Steinheuer,
Adelheid von Stolterfoth, A. Storm, W. von Waldbrühl, L. Werft,
and others even more obscure than these.
[78] In Menco Stern's _Geschichten vom Rhein_, the story is told
so as to connect the legend of the Lorelei with the treasures of
the _Nibelungenlied_. In this way we have gold in the
mountain, wine around it, a beautiful woman on it--what more could
mortal wish? Sympathy! And this the Lorelei gives him in the
echo. In reply to an inquiry, Mr. Stern very kindly wrote as
follows: "The facts given in my _Geschichten vom Rhein_ are
all well known to German students; and especially those mentioned
in my chapter 'Lorelay' can bo verified in the book: _Der
Rhein_ von Philipp F. W. Oertel (W. O. v. Horn) who was, I
think, the greatest authority on the subject of the Rhine." Oertel
is not an authority. In Eduard-Prokosch's _German for
Beginners_, the version of Schreiber was used, as is evident
from the lines spoken by the Lorelei to her Father:
Vater, Vater, geschwind, geschwind. Die weissen Rosse schick' deinem Kind, Es will reiten auf Wogen und Wind.
These verses are worked into a large number of the ballads, and
since they are Schreiber's own material, his saga must have had
great general influence.
[79] There would be no point in listing all of the books on the
legends of the Rhine that treat the story of the Lorelei. Three,
however, are important, since it is interesting to see how their
compilers were not satisfied with one version of the story, but
included, as becomes evident on reading them, the versions of
Brentano, Schreiber, Loeben, and Heine: _Der Rhein: Geschichten
und Sagen_, by W. O. von Horn, Stuttgart, 1866, pp. 207-11;
_Legends of the Rhine_, by H. A. Guerber, New York, 1907, pp:
199-206; _Eine Sammlung von Rhein-Sagen_, by A. Hermann
Bernard, Wiesbaden, no year, pp. 225-37.
[80] Mrs. Caroline M. Sawyer wrote a poem entitled "The Lady of
Lorlei. A Legend of the Rhine." It is published in _The female
Poets of America_, by Rufus Wilmot Griswold, New York, 1873,
p. 221. This is not the first edition of this work, nor is it the
original edition of Mrs. Sawyer's ballad. It is an excellent
poem. Fr. Hoebel set it to music, and Adolf Strodtmann translated
it into German, because of its excellence, and included it in his
_Amerikanische Anthologie_. It was impossible to determine
just when Mrs. Sawyer wrote her poem. The writer is deeply
indebted to Professor W. B. Cairns, of the department of English
in the University of Wisconsin, who located the poem for him.
[81] Cf. _Otto Ludwigs gesammelte Schriften_, edited by Adolf
Stern, Leipzig, 1801, I. 69, 107, 114.
[82] It has been impossible to determine just when Sucher (1789-1860)
set Heine's ballad to music, but since he was professor of music
at the University of Tübingen from 1817 on, and since he became
interested in music while quite young, it is safe to assume that
he wrote his music for "Die Lorelei" soon after its
publication. The question is of some importance by way of finding
out just when the ballad began to be popular. Strangely enough,
there is nothing on Silcher in Hobert Eitner's compendious
_Quellen-Lexicon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten der christlichen
Zeitrechnung_, Leipzig, 1900-1904. Heine's ballad is included
in the _Allgemeines deutsches Commersbuch unter musikalischer
Redaktion von Fr. Silcher und Fr. Erck_, Strassburg, 1858 (17th
ed.), but the date of composition is not given.
[83] In _Pauls Grundriss der germanischen Philologie_, I, 1039,
Mogk says: "Die Weiblichen Nixen bezaubern durch ihren Gesang, die
Loreley und ähnliche Sagen mögen hierin ihre Wurzel haben." The
only trouble is, no one has thus far unearthed this saga.
[84] Wilhelm Hertz gives (pp.229-30) instances of this so that
uncertainty as to its accuracy is removed. The passages are
striking in that they concern the "Lorberg" and the "Lorleberg."
[85] In chap, XV Eichendorff introduces the ballad as follows:
"Leontin, der wenig darauf achtgab, begann folgendes Lied über ein
am Rheine bekanntes Märchen." The reference can be only to
Brentano, despite the fact that the first two lines are so
strongly reminiscent of Goethe's "Erlkonig." Eichendorff and
Brentano became acquainted in Heidelberg and then in Berlin they
were intimate. There is every reason to believe that Eichendorff
knew Bretano's "Rheinmärchen" in manuscript form. For the relation
of the two, see the Kosch edition of Eichendorff's
works. _Briefe_ and _Tagebücher,_ Vols. XI-XIII.
[86] Niklas Vogt included, to be sure, in his _Jugendphantasien üher
die Sagen des Rheins_ (_ca._ 1811) an amplified
recapitulation in prose of Brentano's ballad. Schreiber knew this
work, for in his _Handbuch_ there is a bibliography of no
fewer than ten pages of "Schriften, welche auf die Rheingegend
Bezug haben." So far as one can determine such a matter from mere
titles, the only one of these that could have helped him in the
composition of his Lorelei-saga is: _Rheinische Geschichten und
Sagen_, von Niklas Vogt. Frankfurt am Main, 1817, 6 Bände.
[87] Eduard Thorn says (p. 89): "Man darf annehmen, dass Heine die
Ballade Brentano's kennen gelernt hat, dass er aus ihr den Namen
entlehnte, wobei ihm Eichendorff die Fassung 'Lorelei' lieferte,
und das ihm erst Loebens Auffassung der Sage zur Gestaltung
verhelfen hat." It sounds like a case of _ceterum censeo_,
but Thorn's argument as to Brentano and Heine is so thin that this
statement too can be looked upon only as a weakly supported
hypothesis.
[88] Cf. Raimund Pissin's monograph, pp. 73-74.
[89] There are about two thousand words in Schreiber's saga, and about
five thousand in Loeben's.
[90] It must be remembered that Schreiber's manuals are written in an
attractive style: his purpose was not simply to instruct, but to
entertain. And it was not simply the legends of the Rhine and its
tributaries, but those of the whole of Western Germany that he
wrote up with this end in view.
[91] Some minor details that Loeben, or Heine, had he known the
_Märchen_ in 1823, could have used are pointed out in Wilhelm
Hertz's article, pp. 220-21.
[92] Cf. Görres' edition, pp. 94-108.
[93] Cf. _ibid_., pp. 128-40, and 228-44. It is in this
_Märchen_ (p. 231) that Herzeleid sings Goethe's "Wer nie
sein Brod in Thränon asz."
[94] Cf. Görres' edition, pp. 247-57. There are a number of details in
this _Märchen_ that remind strongly of Fouqué's _Undine_,
which Brentano knew.
[95] In his _Die Märchen Clemens Brentanos_, Köln, 1895,
H. Cardauns gives an admirable study of Brentano's _Märchen_,
covering the entire ground concerning the question whether
Brentano's ballad was original and pointing out the sources and
the value of his, _Rheinmärchen_. Cardauns comes to the only
conclusion that can be reached: Brentano located his ballad in a
region replete with legends, but there is no positive evidence
that he did not wholly invent his own ballad. The story that
Hermann Bender tells about having found an old MS dating back to
the year 1650 and containing the essentials of Brentano's ballad
collapses, for this MS cannot be produced, not even by Bender who
claims to have found it. See Cardauns, pp. 60-67. Reinhold Steig
reviewed Cardauns' book in _Euphorion_ (1896, pp. 791-99)
without taking in the question as to the originality of Brentano's
ballad.
[96] P. 224.
[97] In Geibel's _Gesammelte Werke_, VI. 106-74, Geibel wrote the
libretto for Felix Mendelssohn in 1846. Mendelssohn died before
finishing it; Max Bruch completed the opera independently in
1863. It has also been set to music by two obscure composers. Karl
Goedeke gives a very unsatisfactory discussion of the matter in
_Emanuel Geibel_, Stuttgart, 1860. pp. 307 ff.
[98] Hermann Seeliger says (p. 73): "Zu den Bearbeitungen, die sich an
die Ballade von Brentano anlehnen, gehören die Dichtungen von
Geibel, Mohr, Roquette, Hillemacher, Fiebach und Sommer." Seeliger
wrote his study for musicians, and his statement may be correct.
[99] Aside from the treatises on the Lorelei already mentioned, there
are the following: _Zu Heines Balladen und Romanzen_, by
Oskar Netoliczka, Kronstadt, 1891; this study does not treat the
Lorelei; _Die Lurleisage_, by F. Rehorn, Frankfurt am Main,
1891; _Sagen und Geschichten des Rheinlandes_, by Karl Geib,
Mannheim, 1836; the work is naturally long since superseded;
_Kölnische Zeitung_ of July 12, 1867, by H. Grieben;
_Kölnische Zeitung_ of 1855, by H. Düntzer; _H. Heine, ein
Vortrag_, by H. Sintenis, pp. 21-26; _Die Lorelei: Die
Loreleidichtungen mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Ballade von
Heinr. Heine_, by C. L. Leimbach, Wolfenbüttel, 1879. The last
six of these works were not accessible, but, since they are quoted
by the accessible studies, it seems that they offer nothing
new. (The writer has since secured Leimbach's treatise of 50 small
pages. It offers nothing new.)
[100] Adolf Seybert in his _Die Loreleisage_, Wiesbaden, 1863 and
1872 (Programm), contends that Frau Holla and the Lorelei are
related. Fritz Strich in his _Die Mythologie in der deutschen
Literatur von Klopstock bis Wagner_, Halle, 1910, says
(pp. 307-9) that Brentano's ballad is "eine mythologische
Erfindung Brentanos, zu der ihn der echoreiche Felsen dieses
Namens bei Bacharach anregte." He also says: "Ob nicht Heines Lied
auf Brentanos Phantasie zurückgewirkt haben mag?" The reference is
to Brentano's _Märchen_. Strich's book contains a detailed
account of the use of mythology in Heine, Loeben, and Brentano.
[101] Hermann Seeliger says (p. 8): "Ich meine, die ganze romantische
Schule hätte ohne den Stoff vom Volke zu bekommen, ein Gedicht von
solcher Schönheit wie das von Brentano weder gemacht noch machen
können." Vis-à-vis such a statement, sociability ceases.
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
Graf von Loeben and the Legend of LoreleiChapter III
0%30 min left in chapter