“The poet that was declared “new Anacreon”, the excellent arcadian poet in the Phanariote circles, was Athanassios Christopoulos. […] He had studied medicine and law in Padova and the unpretentious poetics of Italian literature of that time, that sought to eliminate bad taste and sought inspiration in the purity of rural life, seems to have left its traces on the metric structures of Christopoulos too, which he borrowed from the highly popular at the time Anacreontic odes in Italian literature. Thus, Christopoulos transfers to Greek poetry the naivity of speech and the attempt to imitate the vivid, everyday expression that had prevailed in the West. […] Christopoulos became famous and was translated in Italian too, where Tommaseo praised him “for the mildness of his style and the sense of moderation no matter the breakthrough reflections”. His world was strictly structured, limited in love myths, without other choices than those permitted by standardization. […] His pleasantries and his sighs are not necessarily due to real heartbreaks, as implied by the poet himself. Or to be exact the figures of his poetry, which he elaborates consistently and graciously, do not allow the true and unconfessed conflict that was taking place in the soul of the courtier to be expressed. Having flattered rulers and having escaped to arcadian poetry and the melancholic paradise of Anacreon, in a notebook containing notes on politics, which was never published, he seems to take cynical revenge for the division that circumstances imposed to him. The raw and cruel tone seems to reflect precisely this lack of satisfaction:

«Prospoiisin lego ton tropon kath’ on politevometha, allo fainomenoi kai allote ontes. Polla kata tin chreian ton kairon, kai ton prosopon, kai ton peristaseon, prepei na prospoieitai o exousiastis, na vlepei diladi kai na plattetai, oti den paratirei, kai to enantion! Na akouei kai na kamonetai, oti den katalamvanei, kai to anapalin».

The man that had resorted to a sad monologue, when he tried to justify demotic, which he used, had to seek for theoretical arguments. Starting from the belief that demotic could escape from where it was and to be vindicated if correlated to ancient Greek language, Christopoulos invented the “eolian-doric” dialect, which he presents as a direct ancestor of modern demotic. This way, in the field of linguistic philosophy of the time, he “pretended”, as he says, unconsciously of course, whatever his environment required. The above sad thoughts for the courtier should not overshadow at all the achievements of his poetry. In an endemic doldrums in poetry, at the time of pointless poetry forged on good education and dark pedantic obsession with verse, Christopoulos brings back to poetry a fresh wind and a virgin look. Vilaras is the next, but on his own. However, Christopoulos is the first that saved poetry further embarrassment”. p(p.  151-153)