Erich Auerbach (1892-1957) German philologist, educator, critic, and literary historian.

Auerbach's famous account of the genesis of the novel, Mimesis (1946), has been since its appearance one the most widely read scholarly works on literary history and criticism. Ren Wellek, Auerbach's colleague at Yale University, wrote: "The work is a strikingly successful combination of philology, stylistics, history of ideas and sociology, of meticulous learning and artistic taste, of historical imagination and awareness of our own age." (from A History of Modern Criticism 1970-1950, Volume 7, 1991) "He who represents the course of a human life, or a sequence of events extending over a prolonged period of time, and represents it from beginning to end, must prune and isolate arbitrary. Life has always long since begun, and it is always still going on. And the people whose story the author is telling experience much more than he can ever hope to tell. But the things that happen to a few individuals in the course of a few minutes, hours, possibly even days - these one can hope to report with reasonable completeness." (Auerbach in Mimesis) Erich Auerbach was born in Berlin into a upper-middle class Jewish family. He studied at the universities of Berlin, Freiburg, and Munich. In 1913 Auerbach received a Doctor of Law degree from the University of Heidelberg. During World War I he served in in the German army. After the war Auerbach changed disciplines and earned his doctorate in Romance philology from the University of Greifswald in 1921. His dissertation was entitled Zur Technik der Frhrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich. Between the years 1923 and 1929 Auerbach served as a librarian of the Prussian State Library in Berlin. After that he was professor of Romance philology at the University of Marburg. In Marburg Auerbach gained recognition with his work Dante, Poet of the Secular World (1929). After Hitler was elected chancellor of German in 1933, a law was passed which would make impossible for Jews to hold official positions. Aurbach was dismissed by the Nazis in 1935 and he went to Istanbul where he taught at the Istanbul State University. During his years in Turkey Auerbach wrote his famous work, Mimesis, which was first published in German in 1946 and seven years later in English. In Istanbul Auerbach did not have access to all the literature he needed and the libraries were not well equipped for European studies. "On the other hand it is quite possible that the book owes its existence to just this lack of a rich and specialized library. It had been possible for me to acquaint myself with all the work that has been done on so many subjects, I might never have reached the point of writing." Two smaller studies dating from this period appeared in Finland in the journal Neuphilologische Mitteilungen. In 1947 Auerbach moved to the United States. He was a teacher at Pennsylvania State University and a member of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton in 1949-50 before he was appointed Professor of Romance philology at Yale University. Auerbach died in Wallingford, Connecticut, on October 13, 1957.

In Mimesis Auerbach examined changing conceptions of reality as they are reflected in literary works. The word "mimesis" has almost the same meaning as "mime," but is broadly translated as "imitation." Auerbach starts from Homer and continues throught the texts of Dante, Shakespeare, Cervantes, etc. ending with such writers as Marcel Proust and Virginia Woolf. Often he first focuses on stylistic analysis and interpretations of meaning, and from these comments he moves to broader observations on social history and culture. Although Auerbach analyzes writers' attitudes toward reality, he does not rush to give the reader his own definition of the concept "realism." Auerbach's idea is to approach the subject from different points of view, through writers and a selection of excerpts from wide variety of texts, mostly from France and Italy. From Scandinavian writers Ibsen is settled with a few sentences and about Russian realism Auerbach writes: "...remembering it came into its own only during the nineteenth century and indeed only during the second half of it, we cannot escape the observation that it is based on a Christian and traditionally patriarchal concept of the creatural dignity of every human being regardless of social rank and position, and hence that it is fundamentally related to old-Christian than to modern occidental realism. The enlightened, active bourgeoisie, with its assumption of economic and intellectual leadership, which everywhere else underlay modern culture in general and modern realism in particular, seems to have scarcely existed in Russia." According to Auerbach, Stendhal and Balzac broke the rigid separation of stylistic levels, dating from classical antiquity, in which the low, comic mode was reserved for the description of ordinary, everyday reality, and tragic, the problematic, the serious within everyday life was depicted in the high style. But before these French writers, who did not separate the serious and the realistic, the unification of styles was seen in Dante's Commedia. Christ's passion, in which the low and the sublime were combined, broke down the hierarchical rules of literary depiction for the first time. Modern realistic view of the world was fully developed in the character of Julien Sorel from Stendhal's novel The Red and the Black (1830) - Sorel's tragic life is deeply connected with the historical, social, and political conditions of the period. Ren Wellek has criticized that Auerbach's concept of realism is contradictory: "... the early examples of the uses of realism are quite different from those he uses in the later sections on Stendhal, Balzac, and the Goncourts. He uses the term realism in the book in the most diverse manner, yet still always referring to the "represented reality." (from A History of Modern Criticism 1970-1950, Volume 7) Also the concept of mimesis has been defined in many ways in contemporary aesthetics, referring sometimes to the inner world of consciousness. Against the view of the novel as a realistic representation of human experience, structuralists and deconstructionists have emphasized the self-referentiality of all literature. For further reading: Literary History and the Challenge of Philology, edited by Seth Lerer (1996); A History of Modern Criticism 1750-1950: Volume 7, by Ren Wellek

(1991); Literary Criticism and the Structures of History by G. Green (1982) - For further information: Erich Auerbach's Mimesis by William Calin Selected works:

Zur Technik der Frhrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich, 1921 introduction and translation: Giambattista Vico: Die neue Wissenschaft,

1924 Dante als Dichter der iridischen Welt, 1929 - Dante, Poet of the Secular World (trans. by Ralph Mannheim) Vico und Herder, 1932 Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abenlndischen Literatur, 1946 Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (trans. by Willard R. Trask) Introducion aux tudes de philologie romane, 1949 - Introduction to Romance Languages and Literature Vier Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der franzsischen Bildung, 1951 Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter, 1958 - Literary Language and Its Public in Late Antiquity and in the Middle Ages (trans. by Ralph Manheim) Scenes from the Drama of European Literature, 1959 Gesammelte Aufstze zur romanischen Philologie, 1962

Erich Auerbach's Mimesis'Tis Fifty Years Since: A Reassessment - Critical Essay Style, Fall, 1999 by William Calin Recent conferences at Stanford and at Groningen commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of Erich Auerbach's Mimesis (1946). [1] 'Tis fifty years since--now more than fifty--when appeared the first German edition of a scholarly volume that was recognized immediately to be one of the great books of criticism in our century. [2] Charles Muscatine reviewed the English translation as "one of those rare books that speak to everyone in the literate world" (448); and Ren[acute{e}] Wellek, who had reservations about Mimesis, nonetheless characterized it in 1991 as "a book of such scope and breadth, ranging as it does from Homer to Proust, combining so many methods so skillfully, raising so many questions of theory, history, and criticism, displaying so much erudition, insight and wisdom, that it was hailed as the most important and brilliant book in the field of aesthetics and literary history that had been published in the last fifty years" (113). Fifty years later, at the end of our century, Auerbach's masterwork has lost little of its luster or even its immediacy. Whatever the criteria--translations of books into English,

books in print, paperback editions readily available, sales, symposia, or conference sessions devoted to him, books and articles written about him--it would appear that, in America, as a foreign-language critic Auerbach stands second only to Roland Barthes in terms of continuing presence (Ziolkowski, Lindenberger). Whatever the evolution of our profession in methodology or in the acquisition of knowledge, students and their mentors turn to Auerbach with much the same enthusiasm and sense of discovery or of recovery as in the past. Many of us would say that Mimesis remains the most important single work of criticism in the modern age and, therefore, that Auerbach deserves a place among the handful of supreme literary scholars and critics Auerbach, together with Leo Spitzer, Ernst Robert Curtius, Karl Vossler, and Helmut Hatzfeld, form a circle or current of German-language academic criticism--humanist critics--the finest in their day. [3] These German and Austrian scholars combined vast scholarship and historical knowledge with a rare literary sensitivity and imagination; they specialized in all three major romance literatures, from the Middle Ages to the twentieth century; and they authored a rich, extensive corpus of original critical scholarship. Yet whatever their similarities--and there were many--they were scholars grounded in the tradition of classical German-university philology and literary history: each arrived at his own way of writing philology and literary history, i.e., at his own approach. The method, in Mimesis as in Literary Language and Its Public (1958), is to submit a number of brief excerpts from longer texts to a close reading--stylistic analysis concerning features of grammar, syntax, and diction--that then leads to the consideration of broader questions of culture and society in their historical dimension and that then leads to or includes one of Auerbach's central concerns--the literary public and its social response to texts. Somewhat like Spitzer, Auerbach proceeds, back and forth, from the individual passage in a work of art to the style typical of the age, from the particular text or the page to universal principles. Ultimately, however, Auerbach's version of "the philological circle" transcends Stilforschung [stylistic study] or, rather, juxtaposes and fuses Stilforschung with what Wellek calls "historical sociology," hence Spitzer's complaint ("Development" 446), citing Aurelio Roncaglia, that his colleague was not a stylistician. [4] Because of his work in the historical socio logy of literature, in what W. Wolfgang Holdheim calls historical understanding, Auerbach, unlike Spitzer, is himself aware and makes his readers aware of historical process and change.

Auerbach's mastery of stylistic analysis on the page, as well as of the broader social and historical context, enabled him to appeal to philologists, historians of literature, formalists, and Marxists--pretty much at the same time. The close reading and the exaltation of a tradition of great books explain why the impact of Mimesis in the United States did not wane over the decades of New Criticism, structuralism, and deconstruction; whereas the history of literary publics explains why, when the book was finally translated into French (in 1977), it was hailed in Paris as Marxist sociocritique. Auerbach has always been a favorite of medievalists. This is true for a number of reasons. First of all, as stated earlier, like Spitzer, Curtius, Vossler, and Hatzfeld, he was a medievalist and a modernist; he was both, throughout his career. Secondly, influenced by Vico and the founders of German historicism, Auerbach committed himself totally to what he calls historical perspectivism. Historical perspectivism holds that each epoch and civilization has its own possibilities of aesthetic perfection. The universally human is to be perceived in the finest works of each epoch, manifest in a form or style unique to it. It is his credo, as a child of historicism, to appreciate the culture of all periods as part of a universal human condition. Thus he stands at the farthest possible distance from what Lee Patterson designates as Whig literary history, whose adepts, for example, praised Dante and Chaucer for being nonmedieval, that is, for allegedly anticipating our modern psychological portrayal of character and our modern social democracy. Assuming that we are allowed to count Gregory of Tours as medieval, seven of the original nineteen chapters of Mimesis (it later became seven of twenty; the Cervantes chapter was written for and first published in the Spanish edition [1950]) are devoted to the Middle Ages. The medieval centuries, their varying styles, publics, and mental attitudes, as variety and multiplicity, not a single, simple medievalness, are offered maximum scrutiny that treats Western culture as a whole, one in which the Middle Ages occupies a place of honor. In addition, like Spitzer, Auerbach was committed to a single methodology--his own-which he applied to the medieval and the modern equally, and which produced similar results across the centuries. Perhaps still more significant is the fact that, instead of the usual approach, that is, applying modern insights to medieval texts (what most of us, who think of ourselves as theoretically progressive, do all the time), Auerbach does the opposite. He defines our

human conscious and unconscious apprehension of reality, our attitude toward the world, and our artistic expression of that attitude as shaped by two cultural phenomena that date from the Middle Ages and from classical antiquity. Auerbach concentrates on figura and on the hierarchy of styles--these are examples of his Ansatzph[ddot{a}]nomen [point of departure]. The classical triad of high, middle, arid low styles in Antiquity, when it breaks down due to the impact of Christianity, gives rise to a mixed style; and the figural Christian vision of history (today, under the influence of D. W. Robertson, we call it allegorical or typological [5]) allows for random events in the present or the past to prefigure or postfigure momentous events in history. Thus emerged the possibility of writing in the vernacular where the low can be treated with high seriousness. In Dante human existence is fulfilled in its ultimate destiny; the individual in his earthly existence and the individual in eternity both are concretely real. In Dante we find a mixture of styles in which the seeming sermo humilis (low register--for Dante, vernacular Italian) is transformed into a new sublime style embracing historical existence and the cosmos, just what the authors of the New Testament did with and for demotic Greek. [6] This powerful, concrete representation of reality in Dante was then, because of figura and because of a second collapse of the hierarchy of styles re-established by French classicism, to fuel a tradition of realism in the modern centuries culminating in Balzac, Stendhal, Flaubert, and Zola. Modern realism allows for the lower classes and their social concerns to be depicted as and in historical reality, in the dynamic concreteness of history, their unique historical peculiarity, and also allows that they be treated not as comedy but with depth and the problematic seriousness of tragedy, the tragic seriousness heretofore reserved to Virgil's Aeneas and Racine's Nero. Now, the French novelists' achievement in endowing the humble and the quotidian with the dynamic concreteness of history, that is, with historical significance and with high tragic seriousness, occurs as a modern secular replication of Dante and as a cultural phenomenon that could occur only in the West because of Christian figura and because of the (now broken) hierarchy of styles. Thus, the medieval is not depicted simply as a precursor of or introduction to the modern. Instead, with two summits-Dante and the nineteenth-century French novel--the two periods exist in a structure of dynamic tension wherein the modern is shaped by the medieval and is a direct outgrowth of it. Hayden White has even proposed that this structure is figural, a secular, aesthetic figural pattern of the history of literature according to which the medieval foreshadows the modern, which then fulfills the medieval. Auerbach made major contributions to the criticism of early literature and of the modern. His starting points--the three styles and figura--became genuine methodologies in their own right (rhetorical criticism, typological criticism), exploited now by two generations of

scholars. His readings of the Song of Roland, of Chr[acute{e}]tien, of fifteenth-century prose, and, of course, of Dante continue to have an impact. They are still regularly cited today. The same is true for the Old and New Testaments. The same is true for the essay on Don Quixote, which launched a revisionist current in Cervantes studies, emphasizing the comic in reaction to the then dominant quasi-existential high seriousness of the Unamuno school; and for the essay on Zola, which was one of the first examples of sociocritique to counter the orthodox Marxist belittlement of Zola compared to Balzac. In terms of influence, to cite but one example (my own), I profited from the idea of typology as a way into Renaissance and Baroque French epic and into Catholic writers of the twentieth century (Muse, chs. 7-10, 18). [7] And Auerbach's Schiller chapter, with its insights into a sentimental ideology of rural or burgher virtue, where the concerns of little people are granted dignity and treated with seriousness, helped me to explore the phenomenon of Biedermeier in a European context, in writers as disparate as Lamartine (Muse, ch. 13), Aubanel, and Stephen Phillips. Finally, it should not be overlooked that Erich Auerbach is not just the author of Mimesis. Just as prior to 1946 he penned a dissertation on the fifteenth-century nouvelle (Zur Technik), an abridged translation of Vico's Scienza Nuova, and the Dante book, so too, after 1946, he continued to produce. Medievalists are familiar with his Introduction aux [acute{e}]tudes de philologie romane, and with the essays contained in Literary Language and Its Public, which make a statement on Latin prose during the so-called Dark Ages and on the language and publics of early French romance and Dante. Of equal importance are the essays--brilliantly innovative--on Pascal ("Triumph"), Rousseau ("[ddot{U}]ber den historischen"), and Baudelaire ("Esthetic"), as well as on Vico. [8] The fact that, at the end of his life, Auerbach made such a commitment to French literature, from the Eneas to Baudelaire, gives the lie to the assertion, heard now and then, that the master's primary concern was always for things Italian. On the c ontrary, Auerbach was a genuine romance philologist; his field was Romanistik. While lacking some of the range of Curtius and Spitzer, he nonetheless gave major, continuing attention to French, Italian, and Latin, each over a period of centuries. Despite the cavil from susceptible teachers of English such as Robert Gorham Davis and, for that matter, Wellek (114-15), Mimesis offers a legitimate and fair reading of the central tradition in the literature of our civilization. Were one to criticize Mimesis, half a century later, it would not be for Auerbach's overall vision of literature or his approach(es). They hold up. Nor would it be for his commitment to a tradition of great books and the high culture that they nourish (see below). One can express, however, some reservations about the reading of individual texts. [9] Brilliant,

provocative, and partial as they are and would have to be, Auerbach's readings can be, or over the past five decades actually have been, nuanced and enriched by those who come after. To cite some medieval examples, today most of us would deem the Song of Roland, Yvain, and the fabliaux deeper, more complex, and more problematic, according to Auerbach's own criteria for the representation of reality, than he recognized them to be in 1946. In addition, we could propose other texts from roughly the same time frame and genre or mode--Raoul de Cambrai or Girart de Roussillon, Beroul's Tristan, Thomas's Tristan, or the Prose Lancelot, and the Roman de Renart . These manifest significantly greater historicity, density, and concreteness. More importantly, they also are grounded in immediate political and social issues; all but the beast epic radiate tragic seriousness of one kind or another, and they are composed in a genuine mixture of styles [grave{a}] la Dante and a juxtaposition of voices [grave{a}] la Dostoevsky (as read by Mikhail Bakhtin). These observations on the early medieval are applicable also to the books of Antiquity and the books of post-medieval modernity. Thus, today we have a more complete and problematic picture of Homer or Chr[acute{e}]tien de Troyes or the century of Voltaire and Rousseau than Auerbach did. This picture is due in part to the torrent of criticism devoted to all the major writers since the 1950s. Our discipline is progressive. Literary criticism resembles the sciences in that we build upon the discoveries of our predecessors just as our successors will build upon ours. Given that, in some sense of the term, we see further than Boileau, Sainte-Beuve, and Arnold, so also we see further than F.O. Matthiessen and Auerbach. The medieval clich[acute{e}] is apt in this context: we are dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants. A second explanation lies in the nature of what it means to write literary history. Here we should recall Auerbach's commitment to Vichian historical perspectivism and to history as such. As much as any of the great critics of our century, he was sensitive to historical process and evolution. He said: "My purpose is always to write history" (Literary Language 10). In a book of seminal importance, Is Literary History Possible?, David Perkins argues that such literary history must be structured by and according to an implied narrative. The implied narrative proceeds from a beginning to an end, almost always underscoring the complexity of the evolution to the summit (the end) and oversimplifying the origins (the

beginning), from which the evolution is derived. The narrative itself determines, more or less arbitrarily, which texts will be chosen and how they will be read. I should add, given that most scholars favor their own field of research while remaining to some extent uninformed about other fields, most monographs devoted to a century, a movement, or a current will attribute "good" qualities to that century, movement, or current and significantly fewer good qualities to the preceding one from which it arose. Whig literary history also applies here, Thus medievalists have a right to bewail the number of studies on the Renaissance that proclaim any number of "modern-" seeming traits in the sixteenth century--subjectivity, individual psychology, political and social concerns--set off against the Middle Ages, the latter (Christian, unproblematic, uniform) depicted in terms two generations out of date. Medievalists should take heart, however, from the fact that specialists on Neoclassicism or the Baroque will do to the Renaissance what the seizi[acute{e}]mistes did to the Middle Ages. The phenomenon continues, unabated, to the present where a number of studies on the postmodern attribute uninformed clich[acute{e}]traits to the masters of modernism: Yeats, Joyce, Pound, Eliot, and Faulkner. [10] Of all men, Erich Auerbach avoids this kind of provincialism. Of all men, Auerbach avoids Whig literary history, Nonetheless, he is not compiling a series of essays or an encyclopedia. He writes literary history.. Therefore, despite the historical perspectivism, despite the particular, unique beauty of each time and place, given the narrative of figural realism, Dante and the nineteenth-century French novel embody or fulfil the representation of reality in ways that other authors and genres do not. Those works that lead up to (precede) Dante or that lead up to (precede) Balzac will inevitably be faulted, in one sense or another, for not (yet) being Dante or Balzac. Perhaps for this reason and this reason alone Auerbach's readings of single texts do not hold up as well as Spitzer's, for Spitzer never published a book of literary history but, instead, collections of discrete critical and linguistic essays, I think Perkins would say that to write a book of literary history you have to be willing to pay the pric e. [11] The relative distortion of certain books, easily correctable, is a small price to pay for Auerbach' s masterwork and the master narrative that it structures. As much as Spitzer and more than any critic writing in French or Italian, and without ever having read the likes of F. R. Leavis and Matthiessen, Auerbach made a contribution to American critical modernism. [12] For this reason, Mimesis has recently been studied as an

historical phenomenon in its own right. Especially prevalent in the Stanford proceedings (Lerer) is this wish to "historicize" Auerbach and, as some have said, to make him timely rather than timeless. In today's climate of politically charged scholarship, however, it should surprise no one that analyzing Mimesis as history can lead to the analyst displacing his own ideology onto Auerbach or criticizing Auerbach's ideology in favor of his own In my opinion, such would be the case for Geoffrey Green's thesis that Mimesis embodies a specifically Jewish protest against the Third Reich or Paul Bov[acute{e}]'s thesis that we find in Auerbach evidence for and a confession of the cultural exhaustion of bourgeois humanism, Historicizing Auerbach also al lows distinguished critics whom I admire (Terry Eagleton and Herbert Lindenberger) to portray him as a dated phenomenon, in some sense of the term obsolete, and of diminished relevance to us today. In Literary Criticism and the Structures of History, Green proposes that Spitzer and Auerbach were historically oriented whereas Vossler and Curtius partook more of formalism, indeed that while Spitzer and Auerbach became attuned to history as a result of their experience of exile, Vossler and Curtius, remaining at home, turned to the ideal of literature as timeless. Green's thesis is to distinguish, in intellectual terms, those who left the Reich from those who stayed and, at least implicitly, Jews from non-Jews. I do not agree. First of all, Auerbach and Spitzer differed enormously as to their own critical practice and conception of literature vis-[acute{a}]-vis history. Of the great German-language critics, Vossler and Auerbach were probably the most historical, and Spitzer and Hatzfeld the least. Second, Spitzer's and Auerbach's visions of literature and of criticism form two unities, from their earliest writings to their last. If anything, it is Vossler and Curtius who changed their critical approach and their field in response to and in protest against the F[ddot{u}]hrer (Calin, "Ernst Robert Curtius" 220-21, 224-25). To the extent that personal testimony can contribute to such discussion, I remember Auerbach's telling me that, like Goethe, he had the idea for all of his books, in his head, at age twenty-five. [13] He never indulged in Germany-bashing. On the contrary, on another occasion he volunteered to me that he never truly felt at home as a professor in America. He would have accepted the offer of Curtius' s chair at Bonn and returned to Germany but for the fact that his son, Clemens, was a scientist established in America, not far from New Haven. Finally, although it is certain that figural typology reasserts the link between the Old and New Testaments and between Judaism and Christianity, and also offers the reminder (alas,

that the reminder is needed) that it is impossible, indeed a flat contradiction in terms, for a genuine Christian to be antisemitic, nevertheless, figura is a complex, problematic notion. Northrop Frye discovered this with the negative reviews of his studies on the Bible and literature, The Great Code and Words with Power, that denounced his version of Biblical typology as insensitive to or insulting of Judaism. Bov[acute{e}] finds two or three passages in Auerbach that bring grist to his mill--the tragic consciousness of the end, failure, exhaustion, or defeat of Western bourgeois humanist culture. He analyzes them in depth with brio. Auerbach, however, was scarcely unique in this domain. Most of the great exiles despaired at one moment or another as they envisaged the New Order in Europe--the F[ddot{u}]hrer and his thugs dominating the continent of high culture and their homelands for what appeared to be the foreseeable future. Similar passages can be found in Bernanos, Mann, and St.-John Perse, to name three of the most eminent. Stefan Zweig committed suicide. Yet the others did not commit suicide. They arose from their own ashes to reclaim the heritage of Western civilization, their own. Auerbach's Lebensdenken can be distilled from his work, all his work; this work is not and never was an admission of defeat. I have more sympathy, therefore, with those--Wellek (122), Jan Ziolkowski (xxii-xxiii), Paul Zumthor--who assert that Auerbach cannot be limited to ideology or to being a symptom of the history of his time. [14] Or, at least, I propose that grounding him historically in his age has to be done in a more subtle, complex, and problematic manner. In any case, we would argue that Auerbach never repudiated scholarly or creative humanism and that he never spread a pall of gloom about him. He maintained to the end his faith in "the inner history of the last thousand years [which] is the history of mankind achieving self-expression" and in the capacity of the literary scholar, including the young who emerge, to recover that history and make it live ("Philology" 5). In contrast to the "high civilization" of Western culture, he did observe and deplore what he called "levelling," "standardization," and "imposed uniformity" (2). He was alluding not only to the Soviet Union but also to the United States, with its then so vaunted American Way of Life. I see him as having anticipated, with brilliant prescience, among other things, today's phenomenon--the spread over the entire world of American pop culture, though he could not have foreseen the academic adulation of the spread, what Irving Howe called "glorious infatuation with trash."

Throughout the history of Western culture, from Homer to Proust and beyond, there have always been Greeks and there have always been barbarians. The tension between them constitutes one of the more exciting chapters in that history. One legacy of Auerbach is showing that mankind always has a choice, and that the result is three thousand years of culture--a culture which, thanks to the historicism that he so honored, now not only is but also is known. William Calin (wcalin@rll.ufl.edu) is graduate research professor at the University of Florida. His research focuses on medieval French, Anglo-French literary relations, French poetry from the Renaissance onwards, and French minority literatures. His most recent book (his ninth) is The French Tradition and the Literature of Medieval England (U of Toronto P, 1994). He has recently completed Minority Literatures and Modernism: Scots, Breton, and Occitan, 1920-1990. In the works is a volume of essays on modern humanist critics, from Leo Spitzer to Northrop Frye. Notes 1.) The proceedings of the Stanford conference (Lerer) are a tribute to Auerbach and a touchstone for critical opinion in this our "postmodern" age. (2.) My term, "'Tis fifty years since," alludes, of course, to the subtitle of Scott's Waverley; or, 'Tis Sixty Years Since, a novel which commemorates a time of transition in the history of Scotland no less momentous than the post-Second World War period for us. (3.) I discuss them, with reference to Auerbach, in "Makers" and "Ernst Robert Curtius." See also Evans, "Ernst Robert Curtius," and Green, Literary Criticism. (4.) Spitzer "places" Auerbach in "Development of a Method" (the original was published in Italian as "Sviluppo di un metodo") and in "Les [acute{e}]tudes de style." (5.) Although the change of fashion in English studies has proved to be so rapid that, nowadays, Robertson is neglected, his impact was enormous and, in the long run, beneficial.

(6.) On Dante, the reader should consult, in addition to Mimesis, Auerbach's Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt and the articles, translated into Italian and collected in Studi su Dante. (7.) Pierre Emmanuel informed me that, although he had never heard of figural typology, my reading of him was accurate; he said he must have picked up figura indirectly, from his immersion in a particular, quasi-underground tradition of Catholicism that surfaced in Bloy and Bernanos. He also was a passionate defender of D'Aubign[acute{e}]. 8.) The original German versions of the Pascal and Baudelaire articles plus six essays on Vico are also to be found in the Gesammelte Aufs[ddot{a}]tze. (9.) This was already Hatzfeld's response as far back as the late 1940s. (10.) Shoddy scholarship in this domain is demystified by Astradur Eysteinsson and by Joseph Frank, among others. (11.) He himself wrote an outstanding piece of literary history: A History of Modern Poetry. (12.) In Lerer, Literary History, Auerbach is deemed to be modernist in the opinion of Green, Landauer, and White. (13.) I was Auerbach's last student and, during the year 1956-1957, his research assistant. (14.) I consider Ziolkowski's essay, along with one by Evans, to be especially insightful readings of Auerbach. Evans also wrote one of the best studies on Curtius. Works Cited Auerbach, Erich. Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1929. Trans. Ralph Manheim: Dante, Poet of the Secular World. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1961. ___. "The Esthetic Dignity of the Fleurs du Mal." Hopkins Review 4 (1950): 29-45. Rpt. Scenes 201-26, 246-49. ___. Gesammelte Aufs[ddot{a}tze zur romanischen Philologie. Bern: Francke, 1967.

___. Introduction aux [acute{e}]tudes de philologie romane. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann, 1949. Trans. (abr.) Guy Daniels: Introduction to Romance Languages and Literature. New York: Capricorn, 1961. ___. Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sp[ddot{a}]tantike und im Mittelalter. Bern: Francke, 1958. Trans. Ralph Manheim: Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1993. ___. Mimesis: dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendl[ddot{a}]ndischen Literatur, Bern: Francke, 1946. Trans. Willard R. Trask: Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1953. ___. Mimesis: La representaci[acute{o}]n de la realidad en la literatura occidental. Trans. I. Villanueva and E. Imaz, M[acute{e}]xico and Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Econ[acute{o}]mica, 1950. ___. "Philology and Weltliteratur." Trans. Edward and Maire Said. Centennial Review 13 (1969): 1-17. ___. Scenes from the Drama of European Literature. New York: Meridian, 1959. Rpt. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1984. ___. Studi su Dante. Milano: Feltrinelli, 1963. ___. "The Triumph of Evil in Pascal." Trans, Ralph Manheim. Hudson Review 4 (1951): 58-79. Rpt. Scenes 101-29, 238-39 ("On the Political Theory of Pascal"). ___. "[ddot{U}]ber den historischen Ort Rousseaus." Gesammelte Aufs[ddot{a}]tze 29195. ___. Zur Technik der Fr[ddot{u}]hrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich. Heidelberg: Winter, 1921. ___, trans. Die neue Wissenschaft [ddot{u}]ber die gemeinschaftliche Natur der V[ddot{o}]lker. By Giambattista Vico. M[ddot{u}]nchen: Allegemeine Verlagsanstalt, 1924.

Bakhtin, Mikhail M. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. Trans. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1984. Orig. pub. 1924; rev. ed. 1963. Bov[acute{e}], Paul, Intellectuals in Power: A Genealogy of Critical Humanism. New York: Columbia UP, 1986. Calin, William. "Aubanel's Mi[acute{o}]ugrano and the Romantic Persona: A Modern Reading." Tenso 3 (1987-1988): 43-57. ___. "Dante on the Edwardian Stage: Stephen Phillips's Paolo and Francesca." Medievalism in the Modern World. Ed. Richard Utz and Tom Shippey. Turnhout: Brepols, 1998. 255-61. ___. "Ernst Robert Curtius: The Achievement of a Humanist." Studies in Medievalism 9 (1997): 218-27. ___. "Makers of the Middle Ages: Leo Spitzer." Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 27 (1997): 495-506. ___. A Muse for Heroes: Nine Centuries of the Epic in France. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1983. Davis, Robert Gorham. "The Imitation of Life." Partisan Review 21(1954): 321-26. Eagleton, Terry. Review of Green, Literary Criticism. Modern Language Review 79 (1984): 385-86. Evans, Arthur R. Jr. "Erich Auerbach as European Critic." Romance Philology 25 (19711972) 193-215. ___. "Ernst Robert Curtius." On Four Modern Humanists: Hofmannsthal, Gundolf Curtius, Kantorowicz. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1970. 85-145. Eysteinsson, Astradur. The Concept of Modernism. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1990. Frank, Joseph, The Idea of Spatial Form. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 1991.

Frye, Northrop. The Great Code: The Bible and Literature. Toronto: Academic Press Canada, 1981. ___. Words with Power: Being a Second Study of "The Bible and Literature." New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990. Green, Geoffrey. "Erich Auerbach and the 'Inner Dream' of Transcendence." Lerer 214-26. ___. Literary Criticism and the Structures of History: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer. Lincoln: U of Nebraska P, 1982. Hatzfeld, Helmut A. Rev, of Mimesis by Erich Auerbach, Romance Philology 2 (19481949): 333-38. Holdheim, W. Wolfgang. "Auerbach's Mimesis: Aesthetics as Historical Understanding." CLIO 10 (1980-81): 143-54. Landauer, Carl. "Auerbach's Performance and the American Academy, or How New Haven Stole the Idea of Mimesis," Lerer 179-94. Lerer, Seth, ed. Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1996. Lindenberger, Herbert. "On the Reception of Mimesis." Lerer 195-213. Muscatine, Charles. Rev. of Mimesis by Erich Auerbach, Romance Philology 9 (19551956): 448-57. Patterson, Lee. Negotiating the Past: The Historical Understanding of Medieval Literature, Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1987. Perkins, David. A History of Modern Poetry. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1976-1987. ___. Is Literary History Possible? Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1992.

Robertson, D. W. Jr. A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspectives, Princeton: Princeton UP, 1962. Spitzer, Leo. "Development of a Method," Leo Spitzer: Representative Essays. Ed. Alban K. Forcione et al. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1988, 425-48. ___. "Les [acute{e}]tudes de style et les diff[acute{e}]rents pays." Langue et litt[acute{e}]rature: Actes du VIIIe Congr[grave{e}]s de la F[acute{e}]d[acute{e}]ration Internationale des Langues et Litt[acute{e}]ratures Modernes. Paris: Belles Lettres, 1961. 23-39. ___. "Sviluppo di un metodo." Cultura Neolatina 20 (1960): 109-28. Wellek, Ren[acute{e}]. A History of Modern Criticism: 1750-1950. Vol. 7: German, Russian and Eastern European Criticism, 1900-1950, New Haven: Yale UP, 1991. 113-34. White, Hayden. "Auerbach's Literary History: Figural Causation and Modernist Historicism." Lerer 124-39. Ziolkowski, Jan M. "Foreword." Auerbach, Literary Language ix-xxxix. Zumthor, Paul. "Erich Auerbach ou l'[acute{e}]loge de la philologie." Litt[acute{e}]rature 5 (1972): 107-16. COPYRIGHT 1999 Northern Illinois University COPYRIGHT 2000 Gale Group AUERBACH, Erich, * 9.11. 1892 in Berlin, 13.10. 1957 in Wallingford, Connecticut, USA. Romanist, Jurist und Bibliothekar. 1. Promotion (Jura) 1913 in Heidelberg. 2. Promotion (Romanistik) 1921 in Greifswald. Von 1923 bis 1929 Bibliothekar an der Preuischen Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. 1929 Professor der Romanistik in Marburg. Lehrttigkeit als Professor an der Staatsuniversitt Istanbul (1936-1947), dann Pennsylvania State University (1947-1949) und am Institute of Advanced Studies in Princeton (1949-50). 1950 Professor der Romanistik an der Yale University. 1956 Sterling Professor of Romance Languages an der Yale University. - Erich Auerbach kam am 9. November 1892 in Berlin zur Welt. Nach dem Besuch des Franzsischen Gymnasiums nahm A. das Jurastudium in Berlin, Freiburg und Mnchen auf und erhielt 1913 von der Universitt Heidelberg den Doktortitel. Im Ersten Weltkrieg diente A. als Soldat und beschlo nach seiner Heimkehr sich dem Studium der romanischen Sprachen zu widmen.

Fr seine Dissertation "Zur Technik der Frhrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich" wurde A. 1921 der Doktorgrad von der Universitt Greifswald verliehen. Von 1923 bis 1929 war A. als Bibliothekar an der Preuischen Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin ttig. Wahrend dieser Zeit bersetzte er Giambattista Vicos "Scienzia Nuova" ins Deutsche (1924) und verffentlichte sein erstes einschlgiges Werk, "Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt" (1929). Letzteres wahr ausschlaggebend fr seine Berufung auf die Professur der Romanistik in Marburg, welche noch im selben Jahr erfolgte. In "Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt" erarbeitete A. bereits viele seiner einflureichen Thesen zum Realismus in der westlichen Literatur, die er spter in "Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur" vertiefte. Aufgrund seiner jdischen Herkunft fiel A. den nationalsozialistischen Verfolgungen zum Opfer und wurde 1935 seines Lehrstuhls beraubt. Einige Monate spter nahm er die Einladung romanistische Literaturwissenschaft an der Staatsuniversitt in Istanbul zu lehren an. A. blieb bis 1947 in Istanbul und trug wesentlich zur Entwicklung seines Faches in der Trkei bei. Dort schuf und beendete er auch sein berhmtestes Werk, "Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur", welches er 1946 in Bern verffentlichte. Eine spanische bersetzung folgte bereits 1950, dann, u.a., weitere ins Englische (1953), Italienische (1956), Polnische (1964) und Franzsische (1977). "Mimesis" galt schon kurz nach der Verffentlichung als einer der entscheidenden Beitrge zur Literatur- und Kulturkritik des 20. Jahrhunderts. Im Gegensatz zu den rein philologischen Anstzen Leo Spitzers oder den thematischen Analysen von Ernst Robert Curtius, zog A. eine Vorgehensweise vor, die den kulturgeschichtlichen Wandel mittels der Erforschung von literarischen Stilen zu bestimmen versuchte. Sowohl in "Mimesis" als auch in seinem Lebenswerk unternimmt A. eine im Studium der Religionsgeschichte verwurzelte Historiographie der in der westlichen Literatur vorhandenen und sie bestimmenden Wirklichkeitskonstruktionen. - In seinem Literaturdenken sah sich A. hauptschlich von Giambattista Vico und von Hegels romantischen Denken beeinflut. A.s zweifellos grter Beitrag zur Literatur- und Kulturkritik des letzten Jahrhunderts liegt in der Erschlieung und Bestimmung grundlegender Mechanismen und Stilmittel zur Transformation von Motiven in der abendlndischen Literatur. Den Beginn dieser Theorie schuf A. bereits 1938 mit seinem Essay "Figura" dessen Grundidee sich durch zahlreiche Schriften A.s ziehen sollte. Unter diesem Begriff versteht A. das zunchst patristische und spter allgemeinchristliche typologische Prinzip bei welchem eine historische Gestalt oder ein frheres Ereignis ein spteres symbolisiert. Dabei werden beide chronologische Punkte klar als geschichtlich voneinander getrennt betrachtet, und obwohl es keiner kausalen Verbindung bedarf, besteht laut christlicher Hermeneutik eine wirkliche und wirksame Beziehung zwischen ihnen. Diese grundstzlich anachronistische Auslegung von historischen Faktoren ist bestimmend, laut A., fr das Realittsverstndnis des abendlndischen Christentums. Ein weiteres Schlsselelement in A.s Literaturtheorie ist der stilistische Ausdruck christlicher Frmmigkeit mit welcher seit dem Hl. Augustinus christliche Homiletiker und Verfasser sich von klassischen Stilen abzugrenzen versucht haben. A. nennt diese von Einfachheit gekennzeichnete Schreib- und Erzhlform "Sermo humilis". - Im stilgeschichtlichen Kontext sieht A. daher die Entwicklung von den neutestamentlichen Bchern bis zu den

Texten der Moderne als ein stndiges Aneinanderrcken von Frmmigkeit und Spiritualitt. A.s auerordentliches Talent als Literaturtheoretiker blieben nicht lnger unerkannt, und er zog 1947 in die Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika und nahm seine Lehrttigkeit an der Pennsylvania State University auf. Bereits zwei Jahre spter war A. Mitglied des hchst angesehenen Institute of Advanced Studies in Princeton bevor er in 1950 als Professor der Romanistik an die Yale University berufen wurde. Dieser Lebensabschnitt war durch weitere publizistische Ttigkeiten gekennzeichnet, die nicht nur dazu beitrugen, da A. schon zu Lebzeiten als einer der bedeutendsten Literaturkritiker und -theoretiker anerkannt wurde, sondern sie inspirierten eine ganze Generation von einflureichen amerikanischen Akademikern wie Edward Said oder Seth Lerer. A. starb am 13. Oktober im Gaylord Sanatorium in Wallingford, Connecticut, wahrscheinlich an den Folgen eines leichten Schlaganfalls, den er im Sommer des gleichen Jahres in Deutschland erlitt. Bis zu seinem Lebensende hatte A. gehofft, eines Tages die Rckkehr nach Deutschland wagen zu knnen, und sah sich, wie er bereits 1921 in einem Brief schrieb, "als ein Preue jdischen Glaubens." Sein Werk, allem voran "Mimesis", hat die Geisteswissenschaften weit ber die Grenzen der Romanistik und Literaturwissenschaft verndert, und der Einflu von A.s Theorien und Beobachtungen ist weiterhin in solch verwandten Disziplinen wie der Religionswissenschaft, Geschichte oder Soziologie zu spren. Werke: Zur Technik der Frhrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich, Diss., Greifswald 1921; verff. Heidelberg 1921; Giambattista Vico: Die neue Wissenschaft (bersetzt und eingeleitet), Mnchen 1924; Paul-Louis Courier, in: Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 4, 1926, 514-547 (reprint. in: Vier Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der franzsischen Bildung, Bern 1951); Racine und die Leidenschaften, in: Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 14, 1926, 371379; ber das Persnliche in der Wirkung des heiligen Franz von Assisi, in: Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 5, 1927, 65-77; Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt, Berlin 1929; Entdeckung Dantes in der Romantik, in: Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 7, 1929, 682693; Der Schriftsteller Montaigne, in: Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 20, 1932, 39-52; Vico und Herder, in: Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 10, 1932, 671-503; Remarques sur le mot "passion", in: Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 38, 1937, 218-224; Sprachliche Beitrge zur Erklrung der Scienza Nuova von G. B. Vico, in: Archivum romanicum: nuova rivista di filologia romanza 21, 1937, 173-184; Figura, in: Archivum romanicum: nuova rivista di filologia romanza 22, 1938, 436-489; Passio als Leidenschaft, in: Proceedings of the Modern Language Association of America (PMLA) 56, 1941, 1179-1196; Sacrae scripturae sermo humilis, in: Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 42, 1941, 57-67; St. Francis of Assisi in Dante's Commedia, Italica 22, 1945, 166-179; Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur, Bern 1946; Figurative Texts Illustrating Certain Passages of Dante's Commedia, in: Speculum 21, 1946, 474-489; Essays in Historical Semantics Linguistics and Literary History (Verf.: Leo Spitzer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanische

Forschungen 61, 1948, 393-403; Dante's prayer to the virgin ("Paradiso", XXXIII) and earlier eulogies, in: Romance Philology 3, 1949, 1-26; Introduction aux tudes de philologie romane, Frankfurt a.M., 1949; Linguistics and Literary History. Essays in Stylistics (Verf.: Leo Spitzer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 1, 1949, 8284; Rising to Christ on the Cross (Paradiso, XI, 70-72), in: Modern Language Notes 64, 1949, 166-168; Saul's Pride (Purg. XII, 40-42), in: Modern Language Notes 64, 1949, 267269; The New Science of Giambattista Vico (Verf.: Thomas Goddard Bergin und Max Harold Fisch) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 64, 1949, 196-197; Vico and Aesthetic Historism, in: Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 8, 1949, 110-118; An Essay on the Vita Nuova (Verf.: Charles S. Singleton) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 2, 1950, 373-375; Europische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter (Verf.: Ernst Robert Curtius) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 65, 1950, 348-351; Europische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter (Verf.: Ernst Robert Curtius) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanische Forschungen 62, 1950, 237-245; The Scar of Ulysses, in: Partisan Review 17, 1950, 411-432; The Word in Pantagruel's Mouth, in: Partisan Review 17, 1950, 672-694; Minnesinger und Troubadours (Verf.: Theodor Frings) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romance Philology 4, 1950/1951, 65; Montaigne (Verf.: Hugo Friedrich) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 66, 1951, 562-564; In the Hotel de la Mole, in: Partisan Review 18, 1951, 265-303; Nathan und Johannes Chrysostomus, in: Zeitschrift fr romanische Philologie 67, 1951, 118-123; The Triumph of Evil in Pascal, in: Hudson Review 4, 1951, 58-79; Die verzauberte Dulcinea, in: Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 25, 1951, 294-316; Vier Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der franzsischen Bildung, Bern 1951; Die Dichtungsformen der Romanen (Verf.: Andreas Bauer und Karl Vossler) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 67, 1952, 129-131; Initiation und Wandlung. Zur Geschichte des altfranzsischen Romans im zwlften Jahrhundert von Chretien de Troyes zu Renaut de Beaujeu (Verf.: Antoinette Fierz-Monnier) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanic Review 43, 1952, 208-209; Philologie der Weltliteratur, Bern 1952; Sermo humilis; in: Romanische Forschungen 64, 1952, 304-364 (Reprint: Filologia della Weltliteratur, in: Armando Gnisci (Hrsg.): La letteratura del mondo, Gaia: Collana di Studi di Letteratura Comparata 6, Rom 1991, 89-102); Typological Symbolism in Medieval Literature, in: Yale French Studies 9, 1952, 3-10; Epilegomena zu Mimesis, in: Romanische Forschungen 65, 1953, 1-18; An Analysis of Pietro Alighieri's Commentary on the Divine Comedy (Verf.: John Paul Bowden), in: Romance Philology 8, 1954/1955, 167; Dante's addresses to the reader, in: Romance Philology 7, 1954, 268-278; Dante's Drama of the Mind. A Modern Reading of the Purgatorio (Verf.: Francis Fergusson) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romance Philology 8, 1954/1955, 237; L'Aventure de L'Humanisme Europeen au Moyen-Age (IVe-XIVe Siecle) (Verf.: Paul Renucci) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 6, 1954, 176-178; Lateinische Prosa des 9. und 10. Jahrhunderts ("Sermo humilis II"), in: Romanische Forschungen 66, 1955, 1-64; A History of Modern Criticism (Hrsg.: Ren Wellek) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanische Forschungen 67, 1956, 387-396; Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter, Bern 1958; Avantgardisme 1864, in: Vindrosen 6, 1959,

352-362; Scenes from the Drama of European Literature, New York 1959; Farinata und Cavalcante, in: Mark Musa, Hersg. Essays on Dante, Bloomington, Indiana, 1964, 110144; Das franzsische Publikum des 17. Jahrhunderts, Mnchen 1965; Gesammelte Aufstze zur romanischen Philologie, Bern und Mnchen 1967; Studi Su Dante, Mailand 1963; Begriffsbestimmung des literarischen Realismus (Beitrag), Darmstadt 1969; S. Francesco, Dante, Vico, Bari 1970; Erich Auerbach: Le Culte des passions. Essais sur le XVII sicle francais. Inroduction et traduction de l'allemand par Diane Meur, Paris: Macula 1997; Erich Auerbach: Ecrits sur Dante. Introduction et traduction de l'allemand et de l'anglais par Diane Meur, Paris: Macula 1998; Vico et la philologie, in: Poesie 86, 1998, 83-94; Om hensigt og metode, in: Kultur og Klasse. Kritik og Kulturanalyse, 92, 2001, 1328. Lit. (Auswahl): Eva Seifert, Zur Technik der Frhrenaissancenovelle in Italien und Frankreich (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Zeitschrift fr romanische Philologie 42, 1922, 255; - Arthur Franz, Dante als Dichter der irdischen Welt (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Archiv fr das Studium der abendlndischen Sprachen 161, 1932, 284-287; - F. Baldensberger, Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Revue de littrature compare 21, 1947, 679; - R. Nykl, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Speculum 22, 1947, 461; - Herbert Dieckmann, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanic Review 39, 1948, 331-334; - Norbert Fuerst, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Journal of English and Germanic Philology 47, 1948, 289-290; - Walter Naumann, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Philology 45, 1948, 211-212; - Helmut A. Hatzfeld, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romance Philology 2, 1948/1949, 333; - Helen Adolf, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Quarterly 10, 1949, 249; - Ulrich Leo, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 1, 1949, 92-95; - E. EberweinDabcovich, Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanistisches Jahrbuch 3, 1950, 573; - Stephen Gilman, Mimesis; la realidad en la literatura (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Nueva revista de filologa hispnica 6, 1952, 83-90; - Joaquin Casalduero, Mimesis: La representacion de la realidad en la literatura occidental (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Hispanic Review 21, 1953, 343-346; - Robert Gorham Davis, The Imitation of Life, in: Partisan Review 21, 1954, 321-326; - Friedrich Gogarten, Das abendlndische Geschichtsdenken. Bemerkungen zu dem Buch von Erich Auerbach Mimesis, in: Zeitschrift fr Theologie und Kirche 51, 1954, 270-359; - Arnold Isenberg, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach)

(Buchbesprechung), in: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 12, 1954, 526-527; Ants Oras, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Journal of English and Germanic Philology 53, 1954, 444- 447; - Nathan A. Scott, Jr., The Realism of Erich Auerbach - An Article on Mimesis by Erich Auerbach, in: Christian Scholar 37, 1954, 538-547; - Ren Wellek, Auerbach's Special Realism: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: The Kenyon Review 16, 1954, 299-336; - Harry Bergholz, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: The Modern Language Journal 39, 1955, 109; - Albert J. George, Mimesis. The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Symposium; a Journal Devoted to Modern Foreign Languages and Literature 9, 1955, 152-153; - Charles Muscatine, Erich Auerbach, Mimesis, in: Romance Philology 9, 1955, 448-457 (reprint. Charles Muscatine (Hrsg.): Medieval Literature, Style, and Culture, Columbia, South Carolina, 1999, 205-216); Mario Fubini, Mimesis. Il realismo nella letteratura occidentale. Con un saggio introduttivo di Aurelio Roncaglia (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 133, 1956, 280-281; - Mario Marti, Mimesis. Il realismo nella letteratura occidentale (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Rassegna della letteratura italiana, 7. Serie, 61, 1957, 88-90; - Erich Auerbach, in: Romance Philology 11, 1957/1958, 162; - M. Messina, Farinata e Cavalcante (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Studi danteschi 35, 1958, 281; - Rimpianto per Henri Bdarida e per Erich Auerbach, Studi francesi 2, 1958, 175; - Aurelio Roncaglia, Necrologi: Erich Auerbach, in: Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 135, 1958, 678-681; - Fritz Schalk, Erich Auerbach, Romanische Forschungen 69, 1958, 126-128; - Ren Wellek, Erich Auerbach (1892-1957), in: Comparative Literature 10, 1958, 93-95; - Annunzi a cura di Remo Ceserani, Fausto Ghisalberti, Giuseppe Vidossi, in: Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 136, 1959, 677-680; - M. Dardano, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Cultura neolatina 19, 1959, 279-283; - Ludwig Edelstein, Mimesis: Dargestellte Wirklichkeit in der abendlndischen Literatur (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 65, 1959, 426-431; - F. Schneider, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Deutsche Literaturzeitung 80, 1959, 499-502; - F.M. Wassermann, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Books Abroad 33, 1959, 153-154; - Wilson, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Erasmus 12, 1959, 172-173; - Edward Charles Witke, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Speculum 34, 1959, 440-443; - Dieter Beyerle, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanistisches Jahrbuch 11, 1960, 253256; - Y.M., Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romance Philology 14, 1960, 106-110; - Alfredo

Schiaffini, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 137, 1960, 461-464; - Antonio Viscardi, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Studi medievali 1, 1960, 205-216; - W.T. Elwert, Erich Auerbach: Mimesis. Il realismo nella letteratura occidentale. Trad. di Alberto Romagnoli e Hans Hinterhuser (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Archiv fr das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Kulturen 198, 1962, 419; - Jacques Fontaine, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Revue des tudes anciennes 64, 1962, 525-528; - Ralph Paul deGorog, Introduction to Romance Languages and Literature (Verf.: Erich Auerbach, Guy Daniels) (Buchbesprechung), in: The Modern Language Journal 46, 1962, 184-185; - Albert C. De Veer, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Revue tudes augustiniennes 8, 1962, 188189; - Oscar Bdel, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanische Forschungen 75, 1963, 119-134; - Daniel J. Donno, Dante: Poet of the Secular World (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Renaissance News 16, 1963, 114-115; - Francis Fergusson, Dante, Poet of the Secular World (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Philology 60, 1963, 283-286; - Helmut Kuhn, Literaturgeschichte als Geschichtsphilosophie (Erich Auerbach), in: Philosophische Rundschau 11, 1963, 222248; - Dante Della Terza, Erich Auerbach, in: Belfagor 18, 1963, 306-323; - E. Scuderi, Studi su Dante (Verf.: Erich Auerbach, Dante Della Terza; Maria Luisa De Pieri Bonino) (Buchbesprechung), in: Orpheus 11, 1964, 70-74; - Cesare Segre, Studi su Dante (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Giornale storico della letteratura italiana 141, 1964, 438-440; - Alfredo Stussi, Introduction aux tudes de philologie romane (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Studi medievali, 3. Serie, 4, 1964, 377-378; John Freccero, Studi su Dante (Verf.: Erich Auerbach, Dante Della Terza; Maria Luisa De Pieri Bonino) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 80, 1965, 105-108; Gwynfor T. Griffith, Dante: Poet of the Secular World (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Review 60, 1965, 630; - John Dennis Hurrell, The Figural Approach to Medieval Drama, in: College English 26, 1965, 598-604; - Ralph Manheim, Bibliography of the Writings of Erich Auerbach, in: Erich Auerbach (Hrsg.): Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages, Princeton, New Jersey, 1965, 397-406; - Peter Dronke, Style in Late Classical and Medieval Latin: A Review of Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: The Classical Review 16, 1966, 362-364; - Wolfgang Bernard Fleischmann, Erich Auerbach's Critical Theory and Practice: An Assessment, in: Modern Language Notes 81, 1966, 535-541; - M. Winterbottom, Literatursprache und Publikum in der lateinischen Sptantike und im Mittelalter (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: History 51, 1966, 68-69; - J. Norton-Smith, Auerbach on Literary Language, in: Medium Aevum 36, 1967, 159-167; Paul Zumthor, Gesammelte Aufstze zur romanischen Philologie (Verf.: Erich Auerbach)

(Buchbesprechung), in: Neophilologus 52, 1968, 314-315; - Claude de Grve, Gesammelte Aufstze zur romanischen Philologie (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 47, 1969, 268-269; - Arnold G. Reichenberger, Gesammelte Aufstze zur romanischen Philologie (Verf.: Erich Auerbach) (Buchbesprechung), in: Romanic Review, 61, 1970, 161-163; - Arthur R. Evans, Jr., Erich Auerbach as European Critic, in: Romance Philology 25, 1971, 193-215; - P.P., Erich Auerbach, in: Giornale critico della filosofia italiana, 4. Serie 2, 1971, 174-175; - Paul Zumthor, Erich Auerbach, ou L'eloge de la philologie, in: Litterature 5, 1972, 107-16; Brian Stock, The Middle Ages as Subject and Object: Romantic Attitudes and Academic Medievalism, in: New Literary History: A Journal of Theory and Interpretation 5, 1974, 527-547; - David Carroll, Mimesis Reconsidered: Literature, History, Ideology: A Review of Mimesis (Hrsg.: Erich Auerbach, Willard Trask) (Buchbesprechung), in: Diacritics 5, 1975, 5-12; - Ulrich Knoke, Erich Auerbach: Eine erkenntnis- und methodenkritische Betrachtung, in: LiLi: Zeitschrift fur Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 17, 1975, 74-93; - John C. Jorgensen, Hvad er realisme? Realismen hos Erich Auerbach, George Lukacs og Vilh. Andersen, in: Meddelelser fra Dansklrerforeningen, 1977, 49-81; - Klaus Gronau, Literarische Form und gesellschaftliche Entwicklung: Erich Auerbachs Beitrag zur Theorie und Methodologie der Literaturgeschichte, Knigstein 1979; - Lowry Nelson, Jr., Erich Auerbach: Memoir of a Scholar, in: Yale Review 69, 1979, 312; - Thomas M. DePietro, Literary Criticism as History: The Example of Auerbach's Mimesis, in: Clio 8, 1979, 377387; - Betsy Emerick, Auerbach and Gramsci on Dante: Criticism and Ideology, in: Carte Italiane: A Journal of Italian Studies 1, 1979-1980, 9-22; - Timothy Bahti, Vico, Auerbach and Literary History, in: Philological Quarterly 60, 1981, 239-255; - W. Wolfgang Holdheim, Auerbach's Mimesis: Aesthetics as Historical Understanding, in: CLIO: A Journal of Literature, History, and the Philosophy of History 10, 1981, 143-154; - Ren Wellek, Auerbach and Vico, in: Giorgio Tagliacozzo (Hrsg.): Vico: Past and Present, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1981, t. II, 85-96; - Ders., Vico, Auerbach, and Literary History, in: Giorgio Tagliacozzo (Hrsg.): Vico: Past and Present, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1981, Bd. 2, 97-114; - Geoffrey Green und Robert Scholes, Literary Criticism and the Structures of History: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer, Lincoln, Nebraska, 1982; George Steiner, Literary criticism and the structures of history: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer (Verf.: Geoffrey Green) (Buchbesprechung), in: Times Literary Supplement, 25 Mrz 1983, 186; - Regina Schwartz, Free Will and Character Autonomy in the Bible, in: Religion and Literature 15, 1983, 51-74; - Terry Eagleton, Literary criticism and the structures of history: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer (Verf.: Geoffrey Green) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Review 79, 1984, 385-386; - Yossi Gamzu, The Semitic and the Hellenic Types of Narrative, in: Biblical Hebrew Studies, Semitics 9, Pretoria 1984, 58-85; - Karl Kohut, La hispanstica alemana entre la literatura comparada y literatura nacional, in: Arbor: Ciencia, Pensamiento y Cultura 119, 1984, 39-45; - Albert J. Kuhn, Literary criticism and the structures of history: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer (Verf.: Geoffrey Green) (Buchbesprechung), in: South Atlantic Quarterly 83, 1984, 467468; - Henri Peyre, Literary criticism and the structures of history: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer (Verf.: Geoffrey Green) (Buchbesprechung), in: Yearbook of Comparative and

General Literature 33, 1984, 99-101; - Timothy Bahti, Auerbach's Mimesis: Figural Structure and Historical Narrative, in: Gregory S. Jay und David L. Miller (Hrsg.): After Strange Texts: The Role of Theory in the Study of Literature, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 1985, 124-145; - Arthur R. Evans, Jr., Literary Criticism and the Structures of History: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer (Verf.: Geoffrey Green) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 37, 1985, 90-94; - W. Wolfgang Holdheim, The Hermeneutic Significance of Auerbach's Ansatz, in: New Literary History: A Journal of Theory and Interpretation 16, 1985, 627-631; - Joseph A. Mazzeo, Medieval Hermeneutics: Dante's Poetic and Historicity, Religion and Literature 17, 1985, 1-24; - Bruce Robbins, The Representation of Servants, in: Raritan: A Quarterly Review 4, 1985, 57-77; - Paul A. Bov, Intellectuals in Power: A Genealogy of Critical Humanism, New York 1986; - H. K. Riikonen, Aristoteleen varjon hajottajia: Erich Auerbach ja Mihail Bahtin, in: Kirjallisuudentutkijain Seuran Vuosikirja 40, 1986, 123-138; - J.P. Stern, In praise of Erich Auerbach's "Mimesis", in: London German Studies 3, 1986, 194; - Margaret Drabble, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in the Post-War Novel, in: Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 20, 1987, 1-14; - Larry D. Bouchard, Depth and Background in Four Digressions from the "Odyssey": A Demur to Erich Auerbach, in: Literature and Theology 2, 1988, 18-36; - Luiz Costa Lima, Erich Auerbach: History and Metahistory, in: New Literary History: A Journal of Theory and Interpretation 19, 1988, 467-499; - Carl Lindauer, Mimesis and Erich Auerbach's Self-Mythologizing, in: German Studies Review 11, 1988, 83-96; - Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, La inquietud de Luiz Costa Lima, in: Nuevo Texto Crt. 2, 1989, 5-8; - Hans-Jrg Neuschfer, Sermo humilis oder: Was wir mit Erich Auerbach vertrieben haben, in: H.H. Christmann u.a. (Hrsg.): Deutsche und sterreichische Romanisten als Verfolgte des Nationalsozialismus, Tbingen 1989, 8595; - William D. Paden, Tenebrism in the Song of Roland, in: Modern Philology: A Journal Devoted to Research in Medieval and Modern Literature 86, 1989, 339-356; Ulrich Schulz-Buschhaus, Typen des Realismus und Typen der Gattungsmischung-eine Postille zu Erich Auerbachs Mimesis, in: Sprachkunst: Beitrge zur Literaturwissenschaft 20, 1989, 51-67; - William Walker, Typology and Paradise Lost: Books XI and XII, in: Milton Studies 25, 1989, 245-264; - Thomas Docherty, Anti-Mimesis: The Historicity of Representation, in: Forum for Modern Language Studies 26, 1990, 272-281; - Albert Russell Ascoli, Boccaccio's Auerbach: Holding the Mirror Up to Mimesis, in: Studi sul Boccaccio 20, 1991-1992, 377-397; - Rolf Kloepfer, Fr eine Geschichte der Literatur als Kunst-Sympraxis am Beispiel Diderots, in: Michael Titzmann und Georg Jger (Hrsg.): Modelle des literarischen Strukturwandels, Studien und Texte zur Sozialgeschichte der Literatur 33, Tbingen 1991, 247-274; - Ruth Rosenberg, The Ghost Story as Aggada: Cynthia Ozick's 'The Pagan Rabbi' and Sheindel's Scar, in: Lynnette Carpenter und Wendy K. Kolmar (Hrsg.): Haunting the House of Fiction: Feminist Perspectives on Ghost Stories by American Women, Knoxville, Tennessee, 1991, 215-228; - Ren Wellek, A History of Modern Criticism 1750-1950, Bd. 7, New Haven, Connecticut, 1991; - Karlheinz Barck, Walter Benjamin and Erich Auerbach: Fragments of a Correspondence, in: Diacritics: A Review of Contemporary Criticism 22, 1992, 81-83; - Cynthia Rae Doell, Structures of Temporality, Reflections on History: Twentieth Century Literature and Theory, Diss.

(Buffalo, New York) 1992; - Richard K. Emmerson, Figura and the Medieval Typological Imagination, in: Hugh T. Keenan (Hrsg.): Typology and English Medieval Literature, Georgia State Literary Studies Series 7, New York 1992, 7-42; - Martin Vialon, Ein Marburger Gelehrter im Exil am Bosporus. Zum 100. Geburtstag des Romanisten Erich Auerbach, n: Marburger Universittszeitung 230, 1992, 5; - Otto Pggeler und Silvia Caianiello, Philologiam ad Philosophiae Principia Revocare: La recezione di Vico in Auerbach, in: Bollettino del Centro di Studi Vichiani (BCSV) 22-23, 1992-1993, 307-324; - Marguerite Mills Chiarenza, Dante's Lady Poverty, in: Dante Studies 111, 1993, 153-175; - Luiz Costa Lima, Auerbach e a Histria Literria, in: Colquio Letras 129-130, 1993, 1937; - Michael Holquist, The Last European: Erich Auerbach as Precursor in the History of Cultural Criticism, in: Modern Language Quarterly: A Journal of Literary History 54, 1993, 371-391; - Vassilis Lambropoulos, The Hebraic and Hellenic models in the western literary canon: the case of Erich Auerbach 4, 1993, 63-86; - Franceso Orlando and Jeanne Clegg, Topoi of Realism: The Metamorphosis of Colors, in: Werner Sollors (Hrsg.): The Return of Thematic Criticism, Harvard English Studies 18, Cambridge, Massachussetts, 1993, 209-216; - Jan M. Ziolkowski, Vorwort, in: Erich Auerbach (Verf.): Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages, Princeton, New Jersey, 1993, ix-xxxix; - Andrea Battistini, Limpide voci dello spirito europeo: Il Vico di Croce e il Vico di Auerbach, in: Tra storia e simbolo, Studi dedicati a Ezio Raimondi, Biblioteca di Lettere Italiane: Studi e Testi 46, Florenz 1994, 253-279; - Walter Bruno Berg, Figura - modelo para armar outra histria? (Reflexes acerca da la utilizao do conceito em Auerbach y Cortzar); in: Dirce Crtes Riedel, Joo Cezar de Castro Rocha, Johannes Kretschmer (Hrsg.): V Colquio UERJ. Erich Auerbach, Rio de Janeiro 1994, 15-26 (Reprint: Revista de Filosofa Latinoamericana y Ciencias Sociales 11, Buenos Aires 1996, 27-40); - Marc Escola, Vrai caractre du faux dvot: Molire, La Bruyre et Auerbach, in: Potique: Revue de Theorie et d'Analyse Litteraires 25, 1994, 181-198; Seth Lerer, Erich Auerbach, in: Michael Gordon und Martin Kreiswirth (Hrsg.): The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism, Baltimore und London 1994; - Yakov Malkiel, Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages (Verf.: Erich Auerbach), in: Romance Philology 48, 1994, 145-150; - Claire Sprague, Multipersonal and Dialogic Modes in Mrs. Dalloway and The Golden Notebook, in Ruth Saxton und Jean Tobin (Hrsg.): Woolf and Lessing: Breaking the Mold, New York 1994, 3-14; - Martin Vialon, Erich Auerbach: Zu Leben und Werk des Marburger Romanisten in der Zeit des Faschismus, in: Lendemains. Etudes compares sur la France/Vergleichende Frankreichforschung. konomie. Politik. Geschichte. Kultur. Literatur. Medien. Sprache 75/76, 1994, 135-155; - Ders., Erich Auerbach: Philologie der Weltliteratur. Sechs Versuche ber Stil und Wirklichkeitswahrnehmung (Buchbesprechung), in: Zeitschrift fr Germanistik 3, 1994, 699-703; - Ders., Die Vertreibung des Romanisten Erich Auerbach aus seinem Amt, in: Oberhessische Presse, 20. 1. 1994, 5; - David Damrosch, Auerbach in Exile, in: Comparative Literature 47, 1995, 97-117; - Kevin Brownlee, The Ideology of Periodization: Mimesis 10 and the Late Medieval Aesthetic, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 156-175; - Giuseppe Candela,

Aspects of Realism in Auerbach and Croce, in: Canadian Review of Comparative Literature/Revue Canadienne de Littrature Compare 23, 1996, 485-499; - Luiz Costa Lima und Paulo Henriques Brito, Auerbach and Literary History, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 50-60; - Suzanne Fleischman, Medieval Vernaculars and the Myth of Monoglossia: A Conspiracy of Linguistics and Philology, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 92-104; - Jesse M. Gellrich, Figura, Allegory, and the Question of History, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 107-123; Geoffrey Green, Erich Auerbach and the 'Inner Dream' of Transcendence, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 214-226; - Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, Pathos of the Earthly Progress: Erich Auerbach's Everydays, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 13-35; - Thomas R. Hart, Literature as Language: Auerbach, Spitzer, Jakobson, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 227-239; - Carl Landauer, Auerbach's Performance and the American Academy: Or, How New Haven Stole the Idea of Mimesis, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 179194; - Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996; - Ders., Making Mimesis: Erich Auerbach and the Institutions of Medieval Studies, in: Howard R. Bloch und Stephen G. Nichols (Hrsg.): Medievalism and the Modernist Temper, Baltimore, Maryland, 1996, 308-333; - Ders., Philology and Collaboration: The Case of Adam and Eve, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 78-91; - Herbert Lindenberger, On the Reception of Mimesis, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 195-213; - Arne Melberg, Mimesis i tid: Auerbachs figura, in: Tidskrift fr Litteraturvetenskap 2, 1996, 69-79; Stephen G. Nichols, Philology in Auerbach's Drama of (Literary) History, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 63-77; - Brian Stock, Literary Realism in the Later Ancient Period, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 143-155; - Claus Uhlig, Auerbach's "Hidden"(?) Theory of History, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 36-49; - Martin Vialon, Erich Auerbach: Zu Leben und Werk des Marburger

Romanisten in der Zeit des Faschismus, in: Jrg Jochen Berns (Hrsg.): Marburg-Bilder. Eine Ansichtssache, Bd. 2, Marburg 1996, 383-408; - Ders., Walter Benjamin - Erich Auerbach: Persnliche Bekanntschaft und Ausarbeitung einer Theorie der menschlichen Wahrnehmung fr die Kunstmedien Literatur und Film, in: Jrg Leinweber (Hrsg.): Walter Benjamin-Sammlung J. Leinweber. Mit einem Vorwort von Iring Fetscher, Wrzburg 1996, 121-126; - Hayden White, Auerbach's Literary History: Figural Causation and Modernist Historicism, in: Seth Lerer (Hrsg.): Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach, Figurae: Reading Medieval Culture, Stanford, Kalifornien, 1996, 124-139; - Marc Blanchard, Mimesis, Not Mimicry: A Review of Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature Mimesis Reconsidered: Literature, History, Ideology, Diacritics / Literary Criticism and the Structures of History: Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer / Literary History and the Challenges of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach (Verf.: Erich Auerbach, Willard R. Trask, David Carroll, Geoffrey Green, Seth Lerer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Comparative Literature 49, 1997, 176-190; - Nicholas Howe, The Figural Presence of Erich Auerbach, in: The Yale Review 85, 1997, 136-144; - Hans-Jrg Neuschfer, Die verzauberte Dulcinea: Zur Wirklichkeitsauffassung in Mimesis und im Don Quijote, in: Karl Hlz, Siegfried Jttner, Rainer Stillers, Christoph Strosetzki (Hrsg.): Sinn und Sinnverstndnis: Festschrift fr Ludwig Schrader zum 65. Geburtstag, Berlin 1997, 44-51; - Willis Goth Regier, Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach (Hrsg.: Seth Lerer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Language Notes 112, 1997, 702-705; - Martin Vialon: Erich Auerbachs Briefe an Martin Hellweg (1939-1950). Edition und historischphilologischer Kommentar, Tbingen-Basel 1997; - Ders., 50 Jahre Mimesis. Wahrnehmen - Lesen - Deuten. Erich Auerbachs Lektre der Moderne, in: Literatur um elf, Jahrbuch 14, 1997, 181-184; - Giovanna Angeli, Le Dialogue nocturne conjugal: Entre "cadre" et topos, in: J. Claude Faucon, Alain Labb, Danielle Quruel (Hrsg.): Miscellanea Mediaevalia, 12, Mlanges offerts Philippe Mnard, Nouvelle Bibliothque du Moyen Age 46, Paris 1998, 51-63; - Rob K. Baum, Utter Holiness: Sarah's Laughter and Judaic Performativity, in: Journal of Theatre and Drama 4, 1998, 37-53; - Magnus Bergh, Aftonlandet eller filologens triumf: Om Erich Auerbachs Mimesis, in: Bonniers Litterra Magasin 67, 1998, 64-68; - Walter Busch und Gerhart Pickertodt, Wahrnehmen Lesen Deuten: Erich Auerbachs Lektre der Moderne, Analecta Romanica 58, Frankfurt a.M. 1998; - Peter F. Dembowski, The Philological Legacy of Erich Auerbach, in: Romance philology 52, 1998, 71-95; - Gottfried Gabriel: Fact, Fiction and Fictionalism. Erich Auerbach's Mimesis in Perspektive, in: Bernhard F. Scholz (Hrsg.): Mimesis. Studien zur literarischen Reprsentation. Studies on Literary Representation, Tbingen, Basel 1998, 33-; - Aamir R. Mufti, Auerbach in Istanbul: Edward Said, Secular Criticism, and the Question of Minority Culture, in: Critical Inquiry 25, 1998, 95-125; - Lowry Nelson, Erich Auerbach (18921957), in: Helen Damico (Hrsg.): Medieval Scholarship: Biographical Studies on the Formation of a Discipline, Bd. 2: Literature and Philology, New York, 1998, 395-403; Salvatore Claudio Sgroi, Chi ha paura di Erich Auerbach? Ovvero la porta del piacer che nessun diserra, in: Quaderni di Semantica: Rivista Internazionale di Semantica Teorica e Applicata /An International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Semantics 19, 1998, 123-

126; - Hans R. Runte, Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach (Hrsg.: Seth Lerer) (Buchbesprechung), in: French Review 72, 1998, 120121; - Jerry A. Varsava, Cultural Readings - the Cultural Politics of Erich Auerbach: Minesis Revisited, in: Canadian Review of Comparative Literature, Revue canadienne de littrature compare 25, 1998, 158-174; - Jan M. Ziolkowski, Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach (Hrsg.: Seth Lerer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Speculum 73, 1998, 557-558; - Frank R. Ankersmith, Why Realism? Auerbach on the Representation of Reality, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 53-75; Egbert J. Bakker, Mimesis as Performance: Rereading Auerbach's First Chapter, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 11-26; - Paul A. Bov, Literary History and the Challenge of Philology: The Legacy of Erich Auerbach (Hrsg.: Seth Lerer) (Buchbesprechung), in: Modern Philology 96, 1999, 555-557; - Jan M. Bremmer, Erich Auerbach and His Mimesis, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 3-10; - William Calin, Erich Auerbach's Mimesis - 'tis fifty years since: a reassessment, in: Style 33, 1999, 463-474; - Giuseppe Candela, Casistiche ideologiche tra politica e letteratura, New York 1999; - Martin Elsky, Church History and the Cultural Geography of Erich Auerbach: Europe and Its Eastern Other, in: Peter C. Herman und Edward W. Tayler (Hrsg.): Opening the Borders: Inclusivity in Early Modern Studies, Newark, Delaware, und London 1999, 324-349; - Lazlo K. Gfin, Auerbach's Stendhal: Realism, Figurality, and Refiguration, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 27-40; - Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, Ren Peters und Sabine Wolters, Pathos des irdischen Verlaufs: Erich Auerbachs Alltag, in: Frank Frbeth, Pierre Krgel, Ernst E. Metzner, Olaf Mller (Hrsg.): Zur Geschichte und Problematik der Nationalphilologien in Europa, 150 Jahre Erste Germanistenversammlung in Frankfurt am Main (1846-1996), Tbingen 1999, 649-664; Michael Holquist, Erich Auerbach and the Fate of Philology Today, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 77-91; - Peter Jehle, Erich Auerbach - ein europischer Philologe, in: Frank Frbeth, Pierre Krgel, Ernst E. Metzner, Olaf Mller (Hrsg.): Zur Geschichte und Problematik der Nationalphilologien in Europa, 150 Jahre Erste Germanistenversammlung in Frankfurt am Main (1846-1996), Tbingen 1999, 985-997; - Barry Maine, Erich Auerbach's Mimesis and Nelson Goodman's Ways of Worldmaking: A Nominal(ist) Revision, in: Poetics Today 20, 1999, 41-52; - Karin Nykvist, Mimetiska mnster i medeltida landskapslag, in: Edda: Nordisk Tidsskrift for Litteraturforskning 3, 1999, 272-279; - William Whallon, Auerbach Was a Friend, but a Greater Friend Is "Truth", in: Comparative Literature Studies 36, 1999, 294-305; - Kathleen Biddick, Coming out of Exile: Dante on the Orient Express, in: Jeffrey Jerome (Hrsg.): The Postcolonial Middle Ages, New York 2000, 35-52; - Luiz Costa Lima, Figura as a Kernel of Auerbach's Literary History, in: Literary Research/Recherche Littraire: A Journal of the International Comparative Literature Association/Une Revue de l'Association Internationale de Littrature Compare 17, 2000, 268-279; - J. Allan Mitchell, The Middle English Pearl: figuring the unfigurable, in: Chaucer Review: A Journal of Medieval Studies and Literary Criticism 35, 2000, 86-111; - Aamir R. Mufti, Auerbach in Istanbul: Edward Said, Secular Criticism, and the Question of Minority Culture, in: Paul A. Bov (Hrsg.): Edward Said and the Work of the Critic: Speaking Truth to Power, Durham, North Carolina, 2000; 229-256; - Martin Vialon, ber Bilder, Mimesis, ein Gesprch ber den Roman und den Film - Erich Auerbach und Siegfried Kracauer, in:

Michael Ewert und Martin Vialon (Hrsg.): Konvergenzen. Studien zur deutschen und europischen Literatur. Festschrift fr E. Theodor Voss, Wrzburg 2000, 157-167; Pamela L. Caughie, Returning to the Lighthouse: A Postmodern Approach, in: Beth Rigel Daugherty und Mary Beth Pringle (Hrsg.): Approaches to Teaching Woolf's To the Lighthouse, New York 2001, 47-53; - Martin Elsky, Introduction to Erich Auerbach, Passio as Passion [Passio als Leidenschaft], in: Criticism: A Quarterly for Literature and the Arts 43, 2001, 285-308; - Georgia Frank, Macrina's Scar: Homeric Allusion and Heroic Identity in Gregory of Nyssa's Life of Macrina, in: Journal of Early Christian Studies 8, 2000, 511- 530; - Anton Jrgensen, Hvad hjertet er fuldt af, lber pennen over med (om visse selvbiografiske trk ved Auerbachs Mimesis), in: K&K: Kultur og Klasse. Kritik og Kulturanalyse 92, 2001, 71-94; - Robert Kahn, L'Ombre porte de la latinit tardive: Erich Auerbach et le 'drame' de la philologie, in: Rmy Poignault (Hrsg.): Prsence de l'Antiquit grecque et romaine au XXe sicle, Actes du colloque tenu Tours (30 novembre-2 dcembre 2000), Caesarodunum: 34-35, Tours 2001, 391-398; - William Thomas McBride, Figura Preserves: History (in) Ajar, in: Steve Martinot (Hrsg.): Maps and Mirrors: Topologies of Art and Politics, Evanston, Iillinois, 2001, 8-15; - Martin Mller, Verden i et sandskorn: Curtius, Auerbach, litteraturhistorien og litteraturvidenskaben, in: K&K: Kultur og Klasse. Kritik og Kulturanalyse 92, 2001, 29-69; - M.B. Pranger, Nachttaal. Het realisme van Gregorius van Tours, in: Utrechtse historische cahiers 22, 2001, 29-36; - Ulrich Schulz-Buschhaus, Curtius und Auerbach als Kanonbildner, in: Gerhard R. Kaiser und Stefan Matuschek (Hrsg.): Begrndungen und Funktionen des Kanons: Beitrge aus der Literatur- und Kunstwissenschaft, Philosophie und Theologie, Heidelberg 2001, 155-172; - Ders., Curtius und Auerbach als Kanonbildner, in: Germanisch-Romanische Monatsschrift 51, 2001, 199-215; - Edward H. Friedman, Realities and Poets: Gngora, Cervantes, and the Nature of Art, in: Calope: Journal of the Society for Renaissance and Baroque Hispanic Poetry 8, 2002, 55-68; - W.P. Gerritsen, Auerbachs Mimesis, veertig jaar later, in: Madoc: Tijdschrift over de Middeleeuwen 16, 2002, 33-36; - Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, Vom Leben und Sterben der groen Romanisten, Carl Vossler, Ernst Robert Curtius, Leo Spitzer, Erich Auerbach, Werner Krauss, Mnchen 2002; - Diane Meur: Das franzsische 17. Jahrhundert als Paradigma bei Erich Auerbach und Werner Krauss, in: Hermann Hofer/Thilo Karger/Christa Riehn (Hrsg.): Werner Krauss. Literatur - Geschichte - Schreiben, Tbingen und Basel 2003, 129-141; - R. Schober, Vom Leben und Sterben der groen Romanisten. Carl Vossler, Ernst Robert Curtius, Leo Spitzer, Erich Auerbach, Werner Krauss (Verf.: Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht) (Buchbesprechung), in: Poetica 34, 2002, 278-2; - Paolo Bagni, Tra Europa e utopia: Rileggendo Mimesis, in: Francofonia: Studi e Ricerche Sulle Letterature di Lingua Francese 23, 2003, 13-25; - Martin Elsky, Erich Auerbach's Seltsamkeit: The Seventeenth Century and the History of Feelings, in: Marc Berley und Edward W. Tayler (Hrsg.): Reading the Renaissance: Ideas and Idioms from Shakespeare to Milton, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2003, 176-204; - Ottmar Ette, Erich Auerbach oder Die Aufgabe der Philologie, in: Frank Estelmann, Pierre Krgel und Olaf Mller (Hrsg.): Tradition der Entgrenzung: Beitrge zur romanistischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte, Sprache: Mehrsprachigkeit und Sozialer Wandel 1, Frankfurt a.M. 2003, 21-42; - J. Jensen, Vom

Leben und Sterben der groen Romanisten. Carl Vossler, Ernst Robert Curtius, Leo Spitzer, Erich Auerbach, Werner Krauss (Verf.: Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht) (Buchbesprechung), in: Revue Romane 38, 2003, 346-350; - David Lawton, History and Legend: The Exile and the Turk, in: Patricia Clare Ingham und Michelle R. Warren (Hrsg.): Postcolonial Moves: Medieval Through Modern, New York 2003, 173-194; Hans Reiss, Geisteswissenschaften in the Third Reich: Some Reflections, in: German History 21, 2003, 86-103; - Andrew N. Rubin, Techniques of Trouble: Edward Said and the Dialectics of Cultural, in: South Atlantic Quarterly 102, 2003, 861-876; - Jrgen von Stackelberg, Erich Auerbachs Wissenschaftsauffassung, in: Romanische Forschungen 115, 2003, 351-359; - George Steiner, Grave jubilation: Auerbach's Mimesis remains a monument, and a gift, in: Times Literary Supplement, 19 Sept. 2003, 3-5; - Martin Vialon, The Scars of Exile: Paralipomena concerning the Relationship between History, Literature and Politics - demonstrated in the Examples of Erich Auerbach, Traugott Fuchs and their Circle in Istanbul, in: Yeditepe'De Felsefe 2, 2003, 191-246; - Edward W. Amend, Mimesis as History: Erich Auerbach's Theory of Literary Representation, in: Annals of Scholarship: 3, 2004, 15-27; - Emily Apter, Saidian Humanism, in: Boundary 31, 2004, 3553; - V. Makhlin, I. Ivanova, P. Leshchenko, A. Lyzlova, Sami veshchi dolzhny zagovorit: Erikh Auerbakh i delo filologii, in: Voprosy Literatury 5, 2004, 115-139; - Peter Madsen, World Literature and World Thoughts: Brandes/Auerbach, in: Christopher Prendergast (Hrsg.): Debating World Literature, London 2004, 54-75; - A. D. Nuttall, Auerbach's Mimesis, in: Essays in Criticism 54, 2004, 60-74; - Edward W. Said, Erich Auerbach, Critic of the Earthly World, in: Boundary 2 31, 2004, 11-34; - Tobin Siebers, Words stare like a glass eye: from literary to visual to disability studies and back again, Proceedings of the Modern Language Association of America 119, 2004, 1315-1324; - D. Goy Blanquet, Erich Auerbach le haut langage, in: Quinzaine Litteraire 898, 2005, 23; - Martin Vialon, Auerbach-Adressen; Einzelphnomen; Fascismus; Had we but world enough and time; Istanbul; Romantik und Realismus, in: Bernhard Dotzle und Robert Stockhammer (Hrsg.): Auerbach-Alphabet. Karlheinz Barck zum 70. Geburtstag (Trajekte. Sonderheft des Zentrums fr Literaturforschung. Beilage zu Heft 9, Berlin 2004, 5, 6-7, 8, 13, 13-15, 2223; - Ders., Ein Exil-Brief Erich Auerbachs aus Istanbul an Freya Hobohm in Marburg, versehen mit einer Nachschrift von Marie Auerbach (1938) - Transkription und Kommentar. In: Trajekte. Zeitschrift des Zentrums fr Literaturforschung 9, 2004, 8-17; G. Hartman, Erinnerungen an Erich Auerbach, in: Sinn und Form 57, 2005, 262-270; George Steiner, Erich Auerbach ou la puissance du verbe, in: Debat 133, 2005, 178-187; Martin Vialon, Philologie als kritische Kunst: Ein unbekanntes Vico-Typoskript von Erich Auerbach ber Giambattista Vicos Philosophie (1948) im Kontext von "Mimesis" (1946) und im Hinblick auf "Philologie der Weltliteratur" (1952), in: Helga Schreckenberger (Hrsg.): Die Alchemie des Exils. Exil als schpferischer Impuls, Wien 2005, 227-251. Sebastian Sobecki