522 RUS

pean Courier. A periodical which drew the attentionof the public to politics, and awakened reflection. HisEssays upon some of the political topics of the day,and upon morals, are models in their respective kinds.His beautiful style gave to his ideas a still highercharm. The third epoch is marked by his Historyof Russia. This history, as a literary production, isa mine for all authors of his nation. No Russian prosewriter since Karamsin has acquired a high reputation :greater purity, perhaps, prevails than did before, buthis style has not been equalled. Many have wishedto imitate him, but they have only shown their owninferiority'. Makaroff edited a Critical Journal; hewrote very correctly, but his style is dry. Batus-chkoff has been able to give grace to his prose, andthe Italian harmony to his verse. Shukoffskij was,after Karamsin, the editor of the European Courier,and wrote in it some essays in prose. These, andother authors, have each of them some peculiar merit,but they are not equal to their master. Besides, theirworks arc unimportant, and cannot, therefore, muchpromote the further development of the language.

The Russian literature is very barren in originalworks on the subject of philosophy. In the historyof the language of poetry, Dmitrieff’s imitations ofLa Fontaine and his tales make a particular epoch.Before him, Lomonozoff, and especially Derschawin,had furnished models of poetical beauty, and openedthe way to bold originality'. Without checking theflight of genius, Dmitrieff knew how to direct it so asnot to offend against taste and sound criticism. Thereare about one hundred excellent fables by him,in imitation of La Fontaine and others, many’ songs,which have become popular, and odes, consideredclassical, without having the brilliancy of Derschawin’soriginality and boldness. Dmitrieff has given thelanguage of Russian poetry its permanent form. Nele-dinsky-Meletzsky’ is less pure and correct thanDmitrieff, but many of his songs are in the mouths ofthe common people; and the true fire of passion ani-mates his poetry. Chemnitzer is esteemed as afabulist; his expression is natural, but very prosaic.Kriloff, a poet in the full sense of the word, is, in hisdepartment, like Derschawin, the representative ofthe national poetry, for his fables are almost all original.Derschawin, in his odes, described the bright side ofthe age; but Kriloff, in his fables, painted the absur-dities and prosaic thought of his time. In expressionless pure and perfect than his predecessor Dmitrieff,he, however, excels him in descriptive powers. Kriloffhas much observation ; his fables, which, in this re-spect, will bear comparison with the best in anyliterature, are rich in ideas and instruction; many ofhis verses, therefore, are now current as proverbs.

Shukoffskij has enriched the poetical language ofthe Russians, by describing ideas and feelings whichhad not been treated in their literature. His poemsare a true picture of his individual character at thetime in which he wrote them. They' therefore pos-sess uncommon attraction for the reader. His predi-lection for German poetry, which was before his timebut little known to his countrymen, induced him toincorporate it with the Russian in his imitations; hisoems, on this account, have a peculiar stamp, whichas given a singular charm to their deep melancholyfeeling and natural tone.

Batjuschkoff pleases by the charms of his diction.With a brilliant imagination he unites the finest taste,(tad he is inimitable in the choice and harmony of

SI A. j

his expression. We possess of his writings some *amorous elegies, ingenious epistles, and attempts atlyric poetry—all excellent. Prince Wiasemskij et. Ipresses much in few words: this sometimes gives Mg ilanguage an air of stiffness and dryriegs; but liij 1 isatires and epigrams are particularly happy. Wo^tokoifhas richness of thought, power of imagination, anjwarmth of expression; but his style is but tittle re-lished. Gneditsch deserves much credit for his trarts-' 'lation of the Iliad into Russian hexameters. Thegeneral characteristic of this period is an eleganceand correctness previously foreign to Russian liter, jature. The language has acquired a more-settled icharacter; but Russian prose still wants the labour jof thinking minds to perfect it. The poetical laj.guage of the Russians alone can be called rich. The j,latest period of Russian literature is yet in its bloom, !Already it numbers one very promising poet, Alex- Iunder Pitschkin, who is distinguished for his imagine- ■tion and originalitv, and whose style is in the highest jdegree refined. Ivaramsin’s historical work opened anew field for national poetry', for Russian history was 'previously enveloped in the obscurity of, chronicles |and traditions. Karamsin dissipated this obscurity,and threw light upon the darkness of the past. Amongother living poets, may be mentioned Kosloff; Gribo-gedoff, the author of a very amusing comedy; Glinka,a lyric poet, full of fire; baron Delwig, Schazykoff,Baratinskij, Ac.

Among the translators we may mention professorMerslakoff of Moscow, who has translated Tasso'spoem of Jerusalem Delivered. Russian prose enu-merates, at the present time, but few original pro-ductions. There are many’ journals, hut they arefor the most part filled with extracts from foreignperiodicals. The critical department of them cannotbe important, because the national literature is poor; jnevertheless, among a great number of tolerable prosewriters, Gretsch has distinguished himself; his styleis easy, although he sometimes offends against goodtaste. For many years he edited the best RussianJournal. He has" likewise been engaged in the com-position of a Russian grammar. In connexion withthis, besides the old Russian grammars of Ludolph ofGroning, of Lomonozoff, Rodde, and Hevm, thatof the Russian academy, that of Vater, and thatof Tappe, on 'account of the happily chosen ex-amples and practical exercises, deserve to be recom-mended, as well as Pnchmayer’s System of theRussian Language in German, published in 1820.They' all, at least the modern, embrace only thecommon Russian. For the Sclavonian or ecclesias-tical language grammatical aids arc greatly needed.

The grammar of the ecclesiastical Sclavian, writteninthe Russian language, which Peter Winogradoff pub-lished in 1811, is far surpassed in value by Dobrosvsky’sInstitutiones Linguae Slawic® Dialccti veteris, pub-lished at Vienna, 1822. The government itsclttastaken charge of grammatical education, and prohibitedthe sale of Lewitzkij’s small Russian Grammar, whichwas put under the interdict of the minister of instruc-tion, in 1814, “on account of its many defects andfalse definitions.” Since that, Oldekop has publisheda Russian-German and a German-Russian Dictionary,in five volumes. The president of the Russian aca-demy. admiral and minister Alexander Schischkoff,caused a second edition of the Academy’s Dictionaryto be published in six volumes quarto, in tbsyear 1826.