In addition to the songs of the ghosts, we have two Bardiete in the drama, one in Act 4, 8, the other in Act 4, 9. Needless to say, Ossian’s influence is plainly discernible. The first begins thus:
Aufdämmernd hinter Wolken schlief
Der junge Morgen im trüberen Roth!...
. . . . . . . .
Und warnend thürmte die Wolke sich auf;
Und aus der Wolke brach, verkündigt von Blitz,
Mit tausend Spiessen der Tag hervor.[198]
In the first edition the ending of the drama was somewhat differently motivated, inasmuch as Äzia, clothed in the armor of a warrior, allows herself to be captured by some of Edelstan’s soldiers and makes an attempt to assassinate Minona, but is foiled in the effort by Ryno. Undoubtedly this motif of the disguise was taken from Ossian, where we find almost a dozen examples of maids taking on the disguise of a youth.[199]
Many of the geographical and historical notes to the drama are based upon Macpherson, “dessen historische Data noch Niemand angefochten hat.”[200] From the notes to the first edition of Minona we can get some idea of Gerstenberg’s opinion of Ossian in the middle of the eighties. He says in note 8: “Auch können wir uns aus dem Ossian, dessen historische Data wenigstens itzt keinen Einwand mehr leiden, wenn gleich die Ächtheit seiner gegenwärtigen epischen und dramatischen Gestalt noch etwaz zweydeutig seyn möchte, ganz vernünftig überzeugen,” etc. And in note 14 he writes: “Es wäre ein gut Theil gewagter gewesen, einer alten Chronik, als der lautern Quelle Ossians nachzuspüren.” Another note (the 10th) gives evidence of the popularity that Ossian still enjoyed as late as 1785: “Was übrigens die ossianische Urkunde von Inisthona betrifft, ... so hat sich der Verfasser berechtigt geglaubt, diese Geschichte als aus einem der classischen Werke unsers Jahrhunderts allgemein bekannt vorauszusetzen...” These notes are omitted in the final version of 1815, a fact which leads me to believe that Gerstenberg’s early scruples returned to him late in life. Minona had served to dispel them momentarily, but no doubt the unsatisfactory character of the Report of the Committee of the Highland Society and the aspersions cast upon Macpherson’s translation by Ahlwardt served to reëstablish them in his wavering mind.
§3. Johann Nepomuk Cosmas Michael Denis.[201]
No one did more to increase the knowledge of Ossian in Germany and to enlarge the sphere of his influence there, than did the Jesuit Michael Denis, a native of Bavaria, who took up his residence in Vienna early in life and there spent the remainder of his days. Although himself the author of a considerable number of poetic productions, his contemporary fame was based primarily upon his translation of Ossian, which created a great stir at the time of its appearance, setting all the previous efforts at translation in the shade for good and all. It remained for many years the standard, the classical German translation of the works of Ossian, in spite of the fact that the mold in which it is cast aroused the most violent opposition from many quarters.
Denis had been led to the study of English by his admiration for Klopstock’s Messiah, the prototype of which, Paradise Lost, he was desirous of reading in the original. When he began his translation in 1767, he was well equipped for the task as far as a knowledge of the language is concerned, and the true poetical genius that he lacked was compensated for in large measure by the sincere enthusiasm with which he set about his task. A serious obstacle presented itself at the very outset: there was not a copy of Macpherson’s Ossianic poems to be had in Vienna. Nothing daunted, Denis commenced by translating from Cesarotti’s Italian translation—which had appeared at Padua in 1763[202]—a fact that explains the presence of the notes from Cesarotti interspersed throughout his translation. Fortunately he soon obtained a copy of the English original from Prague, whereupon he destroyed all he had so far done and started in afresh. His enthusiasm for the Messiah led to the choice of the hexameter for his translation. Denis was a very rapid worker, a quality that stood him in good stead in the manufacture of the many occasional poems that emanated from his pen. Once on the right track, he worked at his translation with the utmost diligence and persistence and pushed it rapidly to a conclusion, volumes 1 and 2 appearing in 1768, and volume 3 in the following year. The two editions that appeared simultaneously apparently found a ready sale. In the preface to the first volume, Denis confesses what an instantaneous effect the songs of Ossian had upon him. “Kaum hatte ich ein paar Gedichte durchgelesen,” he says, “als ich ihn in meinen Gedanken Homern und Virgiln an die Seite setzte.” And when Ossian received Klopstock’s stamp of approval, Denis was overjoyed. “Wie froh war ich! Ich fieng zu übersetzen an.”[203] At the conclusion of the preface he expresses doubts as to the gracious reception of the translation: “Ossian ist viel zu sonderlich,” he thinks, “viel zu unmodern, viel zu unterschieden von denen Dichtern, die man immer in den Händen hat. Allein, wenn man nur einmal mit seinem Geiste bekannter wird, wenn seine Art sich auszudrücken durch ein wiederholtes Lesen ihre Ungewöhnlichkeit verlieret, dann, dächte ich, sollte er nach dem Engländer am ersten bei einem Deutschen sein Glück machen.” It was only a few years later that the real Ossian craze began in Germany, and then Denis was to realize that these unmodern poems with their sentimental coloring appealed even more strongly to the German soul than they did to the English.
Dr. Blair’s arguments were not needed to convince Denis of the authenticity of the poems. He could not accept as spurious poems whose author he had in his first enthusiasm placed by the side of Homer and Vergil, unless irrefutable proof of forgery were given, and this was not forthcoming. And so when Dr. Blair in the appendix to his “Dissertation” in the edition of 1765 undertakes to defend the poems for external reasons also, Denis is led to remark: “Alle diese Gründe dürften für England und Irland, wo vielleicht Scheelsucht und Partheylichkeit Zweifler erwecket haben mag, nöthiger seyn. Einen von Vorurtheilen freyen deutschen Kenner wird immer der innere Gehalt genugsam überzeugen, das Ossians Gedichte nicht unterschoben, sondern wahrhaft alte Gedichte sind.” Denis never took the trouble to institute any original researches or to devote himself to a serious study of this field, but accepted the genuineness of the poems as a matter of course. The unanimity of the German critics allowed no scruples to arise in his mind to vex him.
The reception granted the translation was most flattering indeed, and Denis could not but feel completely satisfied with the result of his labors. Nicolai, e. g., writes from Berlin, as early as Nov. 14, 1769: “Ihre vortreffliche Übersetzung des Ossian, ist auch in unsern Gegenden in den Händen aller Kenner; ich auch habe sie mit grossem Vergnügen gelesen, und sie stets für eins der wichtigsten Neuen Werke gehalten.”[204] Gleim sends Denis his ‘poetical trifles,’ “aus Dankbarkeit vornehmlich für das Vergnügen, welches der deutsche Ossian ihm machte.”[205] Denis writes in the preface to Vol. 3: “Seitdem der erste Band dieser Uebersetzung in Deutschland bekannt geworden ist, sind mir verschiedene Beweise zugekommen, dass sie dort ganz gut aufgenommen worden sey, wo ich es am meisten wünschte.” The reviews in the Neue Bibliothek der schönen Wissenschaften, in the Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek, in the Göttingische Anzeigen von gelehrten Sachen, and elsewhere, all were extremely gratifying, and only one note of disapproval insisted upon asserting itself, a note that found most emphatic expression in the Erfurtische gelehrte Zeitungen: the form of the translation met with pronounced opposition. The most important of these reviews is that in the Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek. It was written by Herder, who designates the departure as “neu und schön,” and refers to the poems of Ossian as “diese kostbaren Ueberbleibsel aus der alten celtischen oder gallischen Sprache.” But soon doubts arise: “So sind also die Gedichte Ossians in Hexameter übersezt—aber würde Ossian, wenn er in unsrer Sprache sie abgesungen, sie hexametrisch abgesungen haben? oder wenn die Frage zu nah und andringend ist; mag er in seiner Originalsprache den Hexameterbau begünstigt haben? ... Oder ...: thut Ossian in seinem homerischen Gewande eben die Würkung, als Ossian der Nordische Barde?”[206] Here was the rub: Denis had given Ossian, the Gaelic bard, the ‘rough, sublime Scotchman’ in the measure of a Greek rhapsodist. “Vielleicht aber wird er dadurch verschönert, und gleichsam classisch? Er mag es werden: nur er verliert mehr, als er gewinnt, den Bardenton seines Gesangs.”[207] The translation makes an epic, a heroic impression, but does not reproduce its natural Scotch heroic impression. Herder proceeds to show how Ossian and Homer are antitheses in almost every respect, and holds that in consequence the difference in expression should be emphasized by the choice of different meters. Although Herder regards many of Denis’s hexameters as melodious and euphonious, he opines that the free meters introduced by Klopstock in his odes are better adapted to a translation of the bard. That the translation made a favorable impression upon Herder in spite of its metrical drawbacks is evidenced by the concluding lines of the review: “Wir freuen uns überhaupt auf die ganze Fortsetzung der Dennisschen Arbeit mehr, als auf manche neuere süsslallende Originale in Deutschland, und wünschen, dass Ossian der Lieblingsdichter junger epischer Genies werde!”[208] Herder here had in mind Vol. 1 only; his review of Vols. 2 and 3 did not appear until three years later, in 1772, being written at about the same time as the “Auszug aus einem Briefwechsel über Ossian und die Lieder alter Völker,” which opened the Blätter von Deutscher Art und Kunst.[209] His view–point and line of argument are to all intents and purposes identical in the review and the essay. In the review he laments: “Noch immer Ossian der Hexametrist, der Klopstockianer, da man Ossian den kurztönenden, unregelmässigen Celtischen Barden hören sollte.”[210] Again and again Herder returns to the attack; he can not reconcile the smooth poetry of Denis with the unpolished bard. The soft lyric cadence of Denis’s verses appeals to Herder, to be sure, but “hier, so sanft, so vieltönig und schön sie sey, hier passet sie Ossianen oft so an, als etwa einen Samojedischen Gesandten bey der russischen Gesetzkommission das Ceremonienkleid des Hofmarschalls.”[211] But not alone the hexameters aroused Herder’s dissatisfaction; his displeasure increases when he views Denis’s attempt to translate a poem in the measure employed by Gerstenberg in his Gedicht eines Skalden. Here Denis employs rime with poor success, and we must agree with Herder when he says: “Denis gelingen nicht Reime!”[212]