308 ON THE POLITE LITERATURE OR BELLES LETTRES OF HOLLAND. AN account of the Polite Literature, or, as it is technically called, the Belles Lettres, of the Dutch, may perhaps be in the same degree interesting to the English reader, in which it is probably new to him. Very few Englishmen, it may be presumed, have given the Dutch credit for distinguishing themselves as much as other nations of Europe, by the productions of genius and taste which come under that denomination. They have not been in the habit of associating with the character of a Dutchman the ideas of wit, imagination, and sensibility. These qualities, it has generally been thought, are not to be met with in Holland. It will, however, appear from the statement which is to follow, that such a prejudice is unfounded. As to the intellectual capacity of the people of Holland, no doubt can be entertained. There is, perhaps, no country, in proportion to its population and extent of territory, which has produced more eminent men in science and learning. Let us but recollect the names of Grotius, Noodt, Voet, Bynhershoek, in the department of the law; Boerhave, Gaubius, Albinus, Van Swieten, in medicine and anatomy; Huyghens, Leeuwenhoek, 's Gravesande, Muschenbroek, Ruysch, Swammerdam, in mathematics, physics, and natural history; Erasmus, in divinity, and other branches of knowledge; those masters of classic lore, the Vossii, Burmanni, Gronovii, Grævii, Hemsterhuis, Wesseling, Drakenborch, Valckenaer, Lennep, Schultens, Alberti; to whom may be added Lipsius, Scaliger, D'Orville, Ruhnkenius, and Wyttenbach: for though these five men last named were not natives of Holland, yet they lived there, having adopted it for their country, and there rose to celebrity and fame. This will be a sufficient argument to prove that the country is not unpropitious to the cultivation of the mental faculties; and naturally lead to the inference, that there is no ground for supposing that elegant literature would not succeed, where graver learning and science have so remarkably prospered. Otherwise we must assume the ridiculous position, that the Dutch people are by nature formed in a particular manner, and only endowed with one kind of mental ability, fitting them for serious pursuits, but leaving them destitute where imagination is required to co-operate. If such an assertion be but slightly considered, the futility of it will soon become evident. There might, however, have been circumstances, quite distinct from a similar objection, which had a tendency to impede the progress of that species of literature which forms the subject of the present communication, so as to leave the Dutch, in this particular, behind the other nations of Europe. First, much would depend on the state of cultivation, which their native language had received, and on the time when it began to be employed in the service of literature; for there was a period when the people of Europe made use of the Latin tongue for the purposes of science, to the neglect of their own. To this practice the Dutch perhaps adhered as long as any of their neighbours, and consequently prejudiced the interests of their native idiom. By degrees, however, it experienced that attention, without which it could not thrive, and was brought to a state of improvement, which rendered it fit for the productions of the Muses. What the character of the Dutch language is, may be next enquired, as a preliminary to the present discussion. It is unquestionably a branch of the German tongue, and so nearly resembles that idiom, which is called Low German, that the one appears only a modification of the other. To those, who are acquainted with both, this is an evident truth; though the Dutch themselves would rather claim a greater share of originality for their dialect than that proposition allows. I have heard some literary men in Holland make such a pretension, by asserting, that though the Dutch must be referred to the Germanic tongues, yet it ought to be considered as a distinct branch of them, and, in a certain degree, as an original language. This opinion is more the result of national vanity, than of an impartial view of the subject, and of reasoning founded upon a knowledge of the respective languages. The Dutch language, as it now exists, has been very successfully cultivated. It is copious; and has the peculiar advantage, which distinguishes the German tongue, that it possesses the means of creating, out of its own elements, whatever terms may be required for the expression and representation of ideas. Thus it is exempted from the necessity of borrowing foreign words, which gives it a character of purity that cannot be regarded otherwise than as a very high commendation. In such a capability, the powers and resources of a language consist; and, in proportion as it is invested with that aptness, it is calculated for the operations of literature and science. The Greek language had that qualification; and we know from the works of genius it has produced, how such a prerogative ought to be appreciated. The German language is endowed with it to a remarkable degree; but it is only of late years that the attention of the Germans has been awakened to the importance of this attribute. The Dutch have been before them in developing and applying this principle; and in many instances the Germans have been indebted to them for improvements in phraseology. In its grammatical organization, the Dutch language resembles the German; but it is more simple and easy. To one particular we must advert, the position of words, depending, as it does in German, not on a vague and undefined perception of the ear, as is the case in the Greek, Latin, and other tongues, but on certain laws inherent in the language, which are not to be infringed at the will and option of the writer or speaker. The subject of the collocation of the words in the German language is curious and interesting to the linguist; and I have treated of it fully in my German Grammar, to which I refer the reader,' who wishes to know something farther on the subject. I believe that I have been among the first, who ascer. tained these laws, and exhibited them in a system. They were always obeyed, and practised; but, though every German tacitly acknowledged and respected them, yet few were aware of their existence, or ever thought of classing them with the body of their grammatical rules. This will appear by examining the different grammatical works that have been published on that language. The circumstance that the same arrangement of words is found in the Dutch idiom is very important, as it proves that it is an original and permanent quality of the German language, which is the mother tongue, and not an accidental form arbitrarily introduced into the latter. Indeed this may also be inferred from the prevalence of that peculiarity throughout the German nation, where the principles of the position of words are universally adhered to in the common intercourse of life, though some modification or deviation from the rules that are laid down may occasionally occur. It is not an oratorical artifice, or the contrivance of learned persons, but a practice that rests on the general consent of the people, and is as much identified with their habit of speaking and writing, as any other property of their language. An arrangement of words in speech, so precisely defined and settled by rules, and at the same time well calculated to promote the effect, which is always intended and to be desired, of stimulating, by the manner in which the words are made to follow one another, the attention of the hearer or the reader, and of giving to the sentences a certain symmetry, must be acknowledged as a great advantage. The ancients, I mean the Greeks and Romans, were sensible of the want of this requisite for the purposes of oratory; but they had not in their languages the means of supplying it. It would have supplied what they call rhythm, oi numerus oratorius; which, although it was the object of laborious research, could never be reduced under any rule, nor be made available for general use. It is not uncommon to hear foreigners say, that the Dutch is an ugly language. This observation, proceeding from persons who do not understand it, is naturally meant to apply to the sound, which, it is intimated, is of such a character as to affect the ear disagreeably. As there is no settled standard for the merits of sound, by which such an opinion might be regulated, we may expect that there will frequently be a fallacy in a similar declaration. But on the other hand, it is not to be denied that there exists a great difference in sounds; and that some are fitted to touch the ear pleasantly, while others tend to produce a contrary sensation. We must, therefore, allow any individual, though totally ignorant of the language he hears, to judge, as far as regards himself, whether it sounds agreeably or otherwise. Much too depends on habit; and it may be conceived, that what abso A Grammar of the German Language, for the use of Englishmen. Part ii. Chap. 3. lutely would be called harsh sounds, may, to those who are accustomed to them, be harmonious and delightful, especially if they have been used to associate with them particular ideas. Among the enlightened nations of Europe, who are not confined within themselves, but have interchanged their sentiments and feelings, in consequence of that intercourse which civilization and refinement, knowledge and literature, have produced, the question may rest on somewhat different ground. The notions of sound, as they are generally received, according to which the Italian language, for example, is held up as a standard of beauty, would not lead to a favorable conclusion in behalf of the Dutch. The vowels and diphthongs in this tongue, are, for the most part, broad and heavy, instead of being clear and sonorous; and the guttural breath assigned to the letters g and ch, which pervades the language, is not calculated to conciliate the ear of a foreigner unaccustomed to its sound. It would, for these reasons, be difficult to dispute, with a stranger his assertion, that the Dutch is not a wellsounding language, when compared to others, to which he attributes the character of being harmonious and musical. But he must confine himself, when he says the Dutch is an ugly language, to that outward qualification alone; and not attempt to imply that its internal and essential properties, consisting in copiousness, aptitude, and force of signification and expression, are to be comprehended in his censure. That There is a difference in nations, as in individuals, as to their respective capacity and talents for the various branches of literature. difference is, in many instances, more to be ascribed to practice and habit, than to natural fitness and ability, I am particularly inclined to think so with respect to nations. When any one nation excels in some branch of literary composition, it is in a great measure owing to the degree of attention with which that branch has been cultivated, to the frequency and multiplicity of the practice it has undergone, and the encouragement it has met with from the prevailing inclinations of the people. It is to be observed in Dutch literature, that in the departments of Satire and Comedy the productions are extremely scanty. Those two kinds of compositions seem to be almost entirely neglected. From this circumstance, however, I should not infer that a Dutchman has naturally no talent for either. This would be a random and illogical conclusion; and would be confuted by placing a native of that country in a situation where there was scope and incitement for such an employment of literary ability. It may be said, that the people of Holland are of a grave, sedate, and quiet character, and not so fond of the amusement derived from wit and humor, from merriment and ridicule, as other nations that are of a more sprightly and susceptible disposition. If that be so, it is readily accounted for, why their writers, whose business it is to adapt themselves to the taste of those for whom they write, have not furnished any specimens of those compositions. When I speak of Comedy, I do not mean that which is merely opposed to Tragedy, by having a happy and cheerful conclusion, instead of an unfortunate and melancholy catastrophe; but I designate a play, of which mirth and gaiety, wit and humor, form prominent features. In a similar manner it is to be explained, why the Dutch are not possessed of that species of popular poetry which is known by the name of ballads, and is much in vogue in other countries. The cause is, that the taste of the Dutch is not in favor of it, or that they are not accustomed to that kind of entertainment. The names, which stand most distinguished in the polite literature of Holland, are 'HOOFT, VONDEL, and ANTONIDES, of former days, and BILDERDYK, of the present time. To these, Dutch literature owes its rise and progress, and that degree of perfection which it has attained. It encountered in its course an impediment which considerably retarded its advances; this was the practice, I may almost call it passion, of translating the literary productions of other nations, instead of aiming at original compositions. That taste for foreign literature in the Dutch, is supposed to date from the peace of Nimeguen, in the year 1678, when Holland, after having successfully ended its struggle for independence with France, being left to pursue the arts and occupations of peace, by degrees converted the acquaintance with the French nation, which had for a considerable time only turned on sentiments of hostility, into admiration of the talents and genius, by which, at that period, the French were distinguished. The works of French writers were much read, not only in the original language, but also in translations; and from the encouragement which these versions received, many individuals employed their literary leisure in the task of translating. It became the ordinary business of men of letters, who might have engaged their talents in the service of the native Muses, to look abroad, and snatch the flowers of a foreign clime, in order to transplant them on Dutch soil. It is palpable, that this practice must have been prejudicial to the development of original genius, and proved injurious to the interests of national literature. For there is a certain number of individuals in a nation who devote their time and abilities to the purposes of science and literature, and the number and value of their productions depend on the manner in which they employ their leisure. If they bestow it on translating the works of others, the consequence of this must naturally be a diminution of their own compositions. And so far the frequency of translation is to be considered as a disadvantage to the national literature. It must also have had an important influence ou national taste, and on the style of the language, both which could not fail to receive a tincture from the foreign writers who were translated. In this sensé also the originality of Dutch composition suffered an encroachment, Whether the language itself gained by this circumstance, or sustained a loss, may not be easy at first sight to determine. On the one hand, many foreign turns and peculiarities must have crept in; but, on the other hand, a certain ease and versatility may have been acquired, as the effects of the repeated efforts to render with aptness the expres-> sions and the idioms of a foreign tongue. The purity of the language, with regard to words and phrases, has not been affected; but we find it copious and pliable, without any such admixture of extraneous terms, as, for a long time, disgraced the German nation. The French |