By this time the tendencies of the contending parties—of Bodmer and Breitinger in the Æsthetic-Romantic direction, and of Gottsched in the Classical-Preceptist—had been strengthened and developed, in the one case by study of Milton specially, in the other by that of the French: and the gulf between them was deepened and widened in various writings, especially in the successive editions of Gottsched’s _Dichtkunst_, and in occasional utterances of his _Beiträge_. But the great manifestos of the Swiss school—four in number, but it would seem representing a larger and more uniform scheme, of which the _Imagination_ had been the pioneer—did not appear till nearly twenty years after the first publication of the _Diskurse_. Three of them came out at Zürich in the single year 1740; the fourth, a year later, in 1741. The titles given below require no comment in their exhibition of the odd enlacements of the pair.[32] [Sidenote: _Breitinger’s_ Kritische Dichtkunst, &c.] Of these the _Kritische Dichtung_ is the largest, the most ambitious, and, according to Herr Braitmaier, the most important. It was certainly that which hurt and shocked Gottsched most, and which drew from him the pathetically ludicrous expostulation with its unpractical character, which was quoted in the last volume.[33] And no doubt it must appear so to those who pay most attention to the theory of poetry in general. As the very title shows, Breitinger here nails the poetic-pictorial principle to the mast, and he defends it in the book itself, and in the Dissertation on Similes, which is a sort of tender to it, with no insufficient learning and variety of application, with reinforcements of philosophy from Leibnitz and Wolff, even with the sketching of a “Logic of Phantasy,” which is to be regulator and administrator of things poetical. [Sidenote: _Bodmer’s_ Von Dem Wunderbaren, &c.]