{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_26572/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_26572","id":"gutenberg_26572","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/26572","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: German Literature","Comparative linguistics","Folklore","Literature -- History and criticism","Mythology","Religions"],"text":"CHIPS FROM A GERMAN WORKSHOP\n\n                                    BY\n\n                          F. MAX M\u00dcLLER, M. A.,\n\n               FOREIGN MEMBER OF THE FRENCH INSTITUTE, ETC.\n\n                               VOLUME III.\n\n            ESSAYS ON LITERATURE, BIOGRAPHY, AND ANTIQUITIES.\n\n                                NEW YORK:\n\n                      CHARLES SCRIBNER AND COMPANY.\n\n                                  1871.\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nDEDICATION.\nI. GERMAN LITERATURE.\n   LIST OF EXTRACTS FOR ILLUSTRATING THE HISTORY OF GERMAN LITERATURE.\nII. OLD GERMAN LOVE-SONGS.\nIII. YE SCHYPPE OF FOOLES.\nIV. LIFE OF SCHILLER.\nV. WILHELM M\u00dcLLER. 1794-1827.\nVI. ON THE LANGUAGE AND POETRY OF SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN.\nVII. JOINVILLE.\nVIII. THE JOURNAL DES SAVANTS AND THE JOURNAL DE TR\u00c9VOUX.\nIX. CHASOT.\nX. SHAKESPEARE.\nXI. BACON IN GERMANY.\nXII. A GERMAN TRAVELLER IN ENGLAND.\nXIII. CORNISH ANTIQUITIES.\nXIV. ARE THERE JEWS IN CORNWALL?\nXV. THE INSULATION OF ST. MICHAEL\u2019S MOUNT.\nXVI. BUNSEN.\n   LETTERS FROM BUNSEN TO MAX M\u00dcLLER IN THE YEARS 1848 TO 1859.\nFootnotes\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDEDICATION.\n\n\nTO\nFRANCIS TURNER PALGRAVE,\n\nIN GRATEFUL REMEMBRANCE OF KIND HELP\n\nGIVEN TO ME\n\nIN MY FIRST ATTEMPTS AT WRITING IN ENGLISH,\n\nAND AS A MEMORIAL\n\nOF MANY YEARS OF FAITHFUL FRIENDSHIP.\n\n\n\n\n\nI. GERMAN LITERATURE.(1)\n\n\nThere is no country where so much interest is taken in the literature of\nGermany as in England, and there is no country where the literature of\nEngland is so much appreciated as in Germany. Some of our modern classics,\nwhether poets or philosophers, are read by Englishmen with the same\nattention as their own; and the historians, the novel-writers, and the\npoets of England have exercised, and continue to exercise, a most powerful\nand beneficial influence on the people of Germany. In recent times, the\nliterature of the two countries has almost grown into one. Lord Macaulay\u2019s\nHistory has not only been translated into German, but reprinted at Leipzig\nin the original; and it is said to have had a larger sale in Germany than\nthe work of any German historian. Baron Humboldt and Baron Bunsen address\ntheir writings to the English as much as to the German public. The novels\nof Dickens and Thackeray are expected with the same impatience at Leipzig\nand Berlin as in London. The two great German classics, Schiller and\nGoethe, have found their most successful biographers in Carlyle and Lewes;\nand several works of German scholarship have met with more attentive and\nthoughtful readers in the colleges of England than in the universities of\nGermany. Goethe\u2019s idea of a world-literature has, to a certain extent,\nbeen realized; and the strong feeling of sympathy between the best classes\nin both countries holds out a hope that, for many years to come, the\nsupremacy of the Teutonic race, not only in Europe, but over all the\nworld, will be maintained in common by the two champions of political\nfreedom and of the liberty of thought,\u2014Protestant England and Protestant\nGermany.\n\nThe interest, however, which Englishmen take in German literature has\nhitherto been confined almost exclusively to the literature of the last\nfifty years, and very little is known of those fourteen centuries during\nwhich the German language had been growing up and gathering strength for\nthe great triumphs which were achieved by Lessing, Schiller, and Goethe.\nNor is this to be wondered at. The number of people in England, who take\nany interest in the early history of their own literature, is extremely\nsmall, and there is as yet no history of English literature worthy of that\nname. It cannot be expected, therefore, that in England many people will\ncare to read in the original the ancient epic poems of the \u201cNibelunge\u201d or\n\u201cGudrun,\u201d or acquire a grammatical knowledge of the Gothic of Ulfilas and\nthe Old High-German of Otfried. Gothic, Old High-German, and Middle\nHigh-German are three distinct languages, each possessing its own grammar,\neach differing from the others and from Modern German more materially than\nthe Greek of Homer differs from the Greek of Demosthenes. Even in Germany\nthese languages are studied only by professional antiquarians and\nscholars, and they do not form part of the general system of instruction\nin public schools and universities. The study of Gothic grammar alone\n(where we still find a dual in addition to the singular and plural, and\nwhere some tenses of the passive are still formed, as in Greek and Latin,\nwithout auxiliary verbs), would require as much time as the study of Greek\ngrammar, though it would not offer the key to a literature like that of\nGreece. Old High-German, again, is as difficult a language to a German as\nAnglo-Saxon is to an Englishman; and the Middle High-German of the\n\u201cNibelunge,\u201d of Wolfram, and Walther, nay even of Eckhart and Tauler, is\nmore remote from the language of Goethe than Chaucer is from Tennyson.\n\nBut, without acquiring a grammatical knowledge of these ancient languages,\nthere are, I believe, not a few people who wish to know something of the\nhistory of German literature. Nor is this, if properly taught, a subject\nof narrow or merely antiquarian interest. The history of literature\nreflects and helps us to interpret the political history of a country. It\ncontains, as it were, the confession which every generation, before it\npassed away, has made to posterity. \u201cWithout Literary History,\u201d as Lord\nBacon says, \u201cthe History of the World seemeth to be as the Statue of\nPolyphemus with his eye out; that part being wanting which doth most shew\nthe spirit and life of the person.\u201d From this point of view the historian\nof literature learns to value what to the critic would seem unmeaning and\ntedious, and he is loath to miss the works even of mediocre poets, where\nthey throw light on the times in which they lived, and serve to connect\nthe otherwise disjointed productions of men of the highest genius,\nseparated, as these necessarily are, by long intervals in the annals of\nevery country.\n\nAlthough there exists no literature to reward the student of Gothic, yet\nevery one who cares for the history of Germany and of German thought\nshould know something of Ulfilas, the great Bishop of the Goths, who\nanticipated the work of Luther by more than a thousand years, and who, at\na time when Greek and Latin were the only two respectable and orthodox\nlanguages of Europe, dared for the first time to translate the Bible into\nthe vulgar tongue of Barbarians, as if foreseeing with a prophetic eye the\ndestiny of these Teutonic tribes, whose language, after Greek and Latin\nhad died away, was to become the life-spring of the Gospel over the whole\ncivilized world. He ought to know something of those early missionaries\nand martyrs, most of them sent from Ireland and England to preach the\nGospel in the dark forests of Germany,\u2014men like St. Gall (died 638), St.\nKilian (died 689), and St. Boniface (died 755), who were not content with\nfelling the sacred oak-trees and baptizing unconverted multitudes, but\nfounded missionary stations, and schools, and monasteries; working hard\nthemselves in order to acquire a knowledge of the language and the\ncharacter of the people, and drawing up those curious lists of barbarous\nwords, with their no less barbarous equivalents in Latin, which we still\npossess, though copied by a later hand. He ought to know the gradual\nprogress of Christianity and civilization in Germany, previous to the time\nof Charlemagne; for we see from the German translations of the Rules of\nthe Benedictine monks, of ancient Latin hymns, the Creeds, the Lord\u2019s\nPrayer, and portions of the New Testament, that the good sense of the\nnational clergy had led them to do what Charlemagne had afterwards to\nenjoin by repeated Capitularia.(2) It is in the history of German\nliterature that we learn what Charlemagne really was. Though claimed as a\nsaint by the Church of Rome, and styled _Empereur Fran\u00e7ais_ by modern\nFrench historians, Karl was really and truly a German king, proud, no\ndoubt, of his Roman subjects, and of his title of Emperor, and anxious to\ngive to his uncouth Germans the benefit of Italian and English teachers,\nbut fondly attached in his heart to his own mother tongue, to the lays and\nlaws of his fatherland: feelings displayed in his own attempt to compose a\nGerman grammar, and in his collection of old national songs, fragments of\nwhich may have been preserved to us in the ballads of Hildebrand and\nHadubrand.\n\nAfter the death of Charlemagne, and under the reign of the good but weak\nKing Ludwig, the prospects of a national literature in Germany became\ndarkened. In one instance, indeed, the king was the patron of a German\npoet; for he encouraged the author of the \u201cHeliand\u201d to write that poem for\nthe benefit of his newly converted countrymen. But he would hardly have\napproved of the thoroughly German and almost heathen spirit which pervades\nthat Saxon epic of the New Testament, and he expressed his disgust at the\nold German poems which his great father had taught him in his youth. The\nseed, however, which Charlemagne had sown had fallen on healthy soil, and\ngrew up even without the sunshine of royal favor. The monastery of Fulda,\nunder Hrabanus Maurus, the pupil of Alcuin, became the seminary of a truly\nnational clergy. Here it was that Otfried, the author of the rhymed\n\u201cGospel-book\u201d was brought up. In the mean time, the heterogeneous elements\nof the Carlovingian Empire broke asunder. Germany, by losing its French\nand Italian provinces, became Germany once more. Ludwig the German was\nKing of Germany, Hrabanus Maurus Archbishop of Mayence; and the spirit of\nCharlemagne, Alcuin, and Eginhard was revived at Aachen, Fulda, and many\nother places, such as St. Gall, Weissenburg, and Corvey, where schools\nwere founded on the model of that of Tours. The translation of the\n\u201cHarmony of the Gospels,\u201d gives us a specimen of the quiet studies of\nthose monasteries, whereas the lay on the victory of Louis III. over the\nNormans, in 881, reminds us of the dangers that threatened Germany from\nthe West at the same time that the Hungarians began their inroads from the\nEast. The Saxon Emperors had hard battles to fight against these invaders,\nand there were few places in Germany where the peaceful pursuits of the\nmonasteries and schools could be carried on without interruption. St. Gall\nis the one bright star in the approaching gloom of the next centuries. Not\nonly was the Bible read, and translated, and commented upon in German at\nSt. Gall, as formerly at Fulda, but Greek and Roman classics were copied\nand studied for educational purposes. Notker Teutonicus is the great\nrepresentative of that school, which continued to maintain its reputation\nfor theological and classical learning, and for a careful cultivation of\nthe national language, nearly to the close of the eleventh century. At the\ncourt of the Saxon Emperors, though their policy was thoroughly German,\nthere was little taste for German poetry. The Queen of Otto I. was a\nLombard, the Queen of Otto II. a Greek lady; and their influence was not\nfavorable to the rude poetry of national bards. If some traces of their\nwork have been preserved to us, we owe it again to the more national taste\nof the monks of St. Gall and Passau. They translate some of the German\nepics into Latin verse, such as the poem of the \u201cNibelunge,\u201d of \u201cWalther\nof Aquitain,\u201d and of \u201cRuodlieb.\u201d The first is lost; but the other two have\nbeen preserved and published.(3) The stories of the Fox and the Bear, and\nthe other animals,\u2014a branch of poetry so peculiar to Germany, and epic\nrather than didactic in its origin,\u2014attracted the attention of the monks;\nand it is owing again to their Latin translations that the existence of\nthis curious style of poetry can be traced back so far as the tenth\ncentury.(4) As these poems are written in Latin, they could not find a\nplace in a German reading-book; but they, as well as the unduly suspected\nLatin plays of the nun Hrosvitha, throw much light on the state of German\ncivilization during the tenth and eleventh centuries.\n\nThe eleventh century presents almost an entire blank in the history of\nliterature. Under the Frankish or Salic dynasty, Germany had either to\ndefend herself against the inroads of Hungarian and Slavonic armies, or it\nwas the battle-field of violent feuds between the Emperors and their\nvassals. The second half of that century was filled with the struggles\nbetween Henry IV. and Pope Gregory VII. The clergy, hitherto the chief\nsupport of German literature, became estranged from the German people; and\nthe insecurity of the times was unfavorable to literary pursuits.\nWilliram\u2019s German had lost the classical correctness of Notker\u2019s language,\nand the \u201cMerigarto,\u201d and similar works, are written in a hybrid style,\nwhich is neither prose nor poetry. The Old High-German had become a\nliterary language chiefly through the efforts of the clergy, and the\ncharacter of the whole Old High-German literature is pre\u00ebminently\nclerical. The Crusades put an end to the preponderance of the clerical\nelement in the literature of Germany. They were, no doubt, the work of the\nclergy. By using to the utmost the influence which they had gradually\ngained and carefully fomented, the priests were able to rouse a whole\nnation to a pitch of religious enthusiasm never known before or after. But\nthe Crusades were the last triumph of the clergy; and with their failure\nthe predominant influence of the clerical element in German society is\nchecked and extinguished.\n\nFrom the first beginning of the Crusades the interest of the people was\nwith the knight,\u2014no longer with the priest. The chivalrous Emperors of the\nHohenstaufen dynasty formed a new rallying point for all national\nsympathies. Their courts, and the castles of their vassals, offered a new\nand more genial home to the poets of Germany than the monasteries of Fulda\nand St. Gall. Poetry changed hands. The poets took their inspirations from\nreal life, though they borrowed their models from the romantic cycles of\nBrittany and Provence. Middle High-German, the language of the Swabian\ncourt, became the language of poetry. The earliest compositions in that\nlanguage continue for a while to bear the stamp of the clerical poetry of\na former age. The first Middle High-German poems are written by a nun; and\nthe poetical translation of the Books of Moses, the poem on Anno, Bishop\nof Cologne, and the \u201cChronicle of the Roman Emperors,\u201d all continue to\nbreathe the spirit of cloisters and cathedral towns. And when a new taste\nfor chivalrous romances was awakened in Germany; when the stories of\nArthur and his knights, of Charlemagne and his champions, of Achilles,\n\u00c6neas, and Alexander, in their modern dress, were imported by French and\nProven\u00e7al knights, who, on their way to Jerusalem, came to stay at the\ncastles of their German allies, the first poets who ventured to imitate\nthese motley compositions were priests, not laymen. A few short extracts\nfrom Konrad\u2019s \u201cRoland\u201d and Lamprecht\u2019s \u201cAlexander\u201d are sufficient to mark\nthis period of transition. Like Charlemagne, who had been changed into a\nlegendary hero by French poets before he became again the subject of\nGerman poetry, another German worthy returned at the same time to his\nnative home, though but slightly changed by his foreign travels, \u201cReinhard\nthe Fox.\u201d The influence of Provence and of Flanders is seen in every\nbranch of German poetry at that time; and yet nothing can be more\ndifferent than the same subject, as treated by French and German poets.\nThe German Minnes\u00e4nger in particular were far from being imitators of the\nTrouv\u00e8res or Troubadours. There are a few solitary instances of lyric\npoems translated from Proven\u00e7al into German;(5) as there is, on the other\nhand, one poem translated from German into Italian,(6) early in the\nthirteenth century. But the great mass of German lyrics are of purely\nGerman growth. Neither the Romans, nor the lineal descendants of the\nRomans, the Italians, the Proven\u00e7als, the Spaniards, can claim that poetry\nas their own. It is Teutonic, purely Teutonic in its heart and soul,\nthough its utterance, its rhyme and metre, its grace and imagery, have\nbeen touched by the more genial rays of the brilliant sun of a more\nsouthern sky. The same applies to the great romantic poems of that period.\nThe first impulse came from abroad. The subjects were borrowed from a\nforeign source, and the earlier poems, such as Heinrich von Veldecke\u2019s\n\u201c\u00c6neid,\u201d might occasionally paraphrase the sentiments of French poets. But\nin the works of Hartmann von Aue, Wolfram von Eschenbach, and Gottfried\nvon Strassburg, we breathe again the pure German air; and we cannot but\nregret that these men should have taken the subjects of their poems, with\ntheir unpronounceable names, extravagant conceits, and licentious manners,\nfrom foreign sources, while they had at home their grand mythology, their\nheroic traditions, their kings and saints, which would have been more\nworthy subjects than Tristan and Isold, Schionatulander and Sigune. There\nwere new thoughts stirring in the hearts and minds of those men of the\ntwelfth and thirteenth centuries. A hundred years before Dante, the German\npoets had gazed with their eyes wide open into that infinite reality which\nunderlies our short existence on earth. To Wolfram, and to many a poet of\nhis time, the human tragedy of this world presented the same unreal,\ntransitory, and transparent aspect which we find again in Dante\u2019s \u201cDivine\nComedy.\u201d Everything points to another world. Beauty, love, virtue,\nhappiness,\u2014everything, in fact, that moves the heart of the poet,\u2014has a\nhidden reference to something higher than this life; and the highest\nobject of the highest poetry seems to be to transfer the mind to those\nregions where men feel the presence of a Divine power and a Divine love,\nand are lost in blissful adoration. The beginning of the thirteenth\ncentury is as great an era in the history of German literature as the\nbeginning of the nineteenth. The German mind was completely regenerated.\nOld words, old thoughts, old metres, old fashions, were swept away, and a\nnew spring dawned over Germany. The various branches of the Teutonic race\nwhich, after their inroads into the seats of Roman civilization, had for a\ntime become separated, were beginning to assume a national\nindependence,\u2014when suddenly a new age of migration threatened to set in.\nThe knights of France and Flanders, of England, Lombardy, and Sicily, left\ntheir brilliant castles. They marched to the East, carrying along with\nthem the less polished, but equally enthusiastic, nobility of Germany.\nFrom the very first the spirit of the Roman towns in Italy and Gaul had\nexercised a more civilizing influence on the Barbarians who had crossed\nthe Alps and the Rhine, whereas the Germans of Germany proper had been\nleft to their own resources, assisted only by the lessons of the Roman\nclergy. Now, at the beginning of the Crusades, the various divisions of\nthe German race met again, but they met as strangers; no longer with the\nimpetuosity of Franks and Goths, but with the polished reserve of a\nGodefroy of Bouillon and the chivalrous bearing of a Frederick Barbarossa.\nThe German Emperors and nobles opened their courts to receive their guests\nwith brilliant hospitality. Their festivals, the splendor and beauty of\ntheir tournaments, attracted crowds from great distances, and foremost\namong them poets and singers. It was at such festivals as Heinrich von\nVeldecke describes at Mayence, in 1184, under Frederick I., that French\nand German poetry were brought face to face. It was here that high-born\nGerman poets learnt from French poets the subjects of their own romantic\ncompositions. German ladies became the patrons of German poets; and the\netiquette of French chivalry was imitated at the castles of German\nknights. Poets made bold for the first time to express their own feelings,\ntheir joys and sufferings, and epic poetry had to share its honors with\nlyric songs. Not only France and Germany, but England and Northern Italy\nwere drawn into this gay society. Henry II. married Eleanor of Poitou, and\nher grace and beauty found eloquent admirers in the army of the Crusaders.\nTheir daughter Mathilde was married to Henry the Lion, of Saxony, and one\nof the Proven\u00e7al poets has celebrated her loveliness. Frenchmen became the\ntutors of the sons of the German nobility. French manners, dresses,\ndishes, and dances were the fashion everywhere. The poetry which\nflourished at the castles was soon adopted by the lower ranks. Travelling\npoets and jesters are frequently mentioned, and the poems of the\n\u201cNibelunge\u201d and \u201cGudrun,\u201d such as we now possess them, were composed at\nthat time by poets who took their subjects, their best thoughts and\nexpressions, from the people, but imitated the language, the metre, and\nthe manners of the court poets. The most famous courts to which the German\npoets resorted, and where they were entertained with generous hospitality,\nwere the court of Leopold, Duke of Austria (1198-1230), and of his son\nFrederick II.; of Hermann, Landgrave of Thuringia, who resided at the\nWartburg, near Eisenach (1190-1215); of Berthold, Duke of Z\u00e4hringen\n(1186-1218); and of the Swabian Emperors in general. At the present day,\nwhen not only the language, but even the thoughts of these poets have\nbecome to most of us unintelligible and strange, we cannot claim for their\npoetry more than an historical interest. But if we wish to know the men\nwho took a leading part in the Crusades, who fought with the Emperors\nagainst the Pope, or with the Pope against the Emperors, who lived in\nmagnificent castles like that of the Wartburg, and founded cathedrals like\nthat of Cologne (1248), we must read the poetry which they admired, which\nthey composed or patronized. The subjects of their Romances cannot gain\nour sympathy. They are artificial, unreal, with little of humanity, and\nstill less of nationality in them. But the mind of a poet like Wolfram von\nEschenbach rises above all these difficulties. He has thoughts of his own,\ntruly human, deeply religious, and thoroughly national; and there are\nexpressions and comparisons in his poetry which had never been used\nbefore. His style, however, is lengthy, his descriptions tiresome, and his\ncharacters somewhat vague and unearthly. As critics, we should have to\nbestow on Wolfram von Eschenbach, on Gottfried von Strassburg, even on\nHartman von Aue and Walther von der Vogelweide, as much of blame as of\npraise. But as historians, we cannot value them too highly. If we measure\nthem with the poets that preceded and those that followed them, they tower\nabove all like giants. From the deep marks which they left behind, we\ndiscover that they were men of creative genius, men who had looked at life\nwith their own eyes, and were able to express what they had seen and\nthought and felt in a language which fascinated their contemporaries, and\nwhich even now holds its charm over all who can bring themselves to study\ntheir works in the same spirit in which they read the tragedies of\n\u00c6schylus, or the \u201cDivina Commedia\u201d of Dante.\n\nBut the heyday of German chivalry and chivalrous poetry was of short\nduration. Toward the end of the thirteenth century we begin to feel that\nthe age is no longer aspiring, and hoping, and growing. The world assumes\na different aspect. Its youth and vigor seem spent; and the children of a\nnew generation begin to be wiser and sadder than their fathers. The\nCrusades languish. Their object, like the object of many a youthful hope,\nhas proved unattainable. The Knights no longer take the Cross \u201cbecause God\nwills it;\u201d but because the Pope commands a Crusade, bargains for\nsubsidies, and the Emperor cannot decline his commands. Walther von der\nVogelweide already is most bitter in his attacks on Rome. Walther was the\nfriend of Frederick II. (1215-50), an Emperor who reminds us, in several\nrespects, of his namesake of Prussia. He was a sovereign of literary\ntastes,\u2014himself a poet and a philosopher. Harassed by the Pope, he\nretaliated most fiercely, and was at last accused of a design to extirpate\nthe Christian religion. The ban was published against him, and his own son\nrose in rebellion. Germany remained faithful to her Emperor, and the\nEmperor was successful against his son. But he soon died in disappointment\nand despair. With him the star of the Swabian dynasty had set, and the\nsweet sounds of the Swabian lyre died away with the last breath of\nCorradino, the last of the Hohenstaufen, on the scaffold at Naples, in\n1268. Germany was breaking down under heavy burdens. It was visited by the\npapal interdict, by famine, by pestilence. Sometimes there was no Emperor,\nsometimes there were two or three. Rebellion could not be kept under, nor\ncould crime be punished. The only law was the \u201cLaw of the Fist.\u201d The\nChurch was deeply demoralized. Who was to listen to romantic poetry? There\nwas no lack of poets or of poetry. Rudolf von Ems, a poet called Der\nStricker, and Konrad von W\u00fcrzburg, all of them living in the middle of the\nthirteenth century, were more fertile than Hartmann von Aue and Gottfried\nvon Strassburg. They complain, however, that no one took notice of them,\nand they are evidently conscious themselves of their inferiority. Lyric\npoetry continued to flourish for a time, but it degenerated into an\nunworthy idolatry of ladies, and affected sentimentality. There is but one\nbranch of poetry in which we find a certain originality, the didactic and\nsatiric. The first beginnings of this new kind of poetry carry us back to\nthe age of Walther von der Vogelweide. Many of his verses are satirical,\npolitical, and didactic; and it is supposed, on very good authority, that\nWalther was the author of an anonymous didactic poem, \u201cFreidank\u2019s\nBescheidenheit.\u201d By Thomasin von Zerclar, or Tommasino di Circlaria, we\nhave a metrical composition on manners, the \u201cItalian Guest,\u201d which\nlikewise belongs to the beginning of the thirteenth century.(7) Somewhat\nlater we meet, in the works of the Stricker, with the broader satire of\nthe middle classes; and toward the close of the century, Hugo von\nTrimberg, in his \u201cRenner,\u201d addresses himself to the lower ranks of German\nsociety, and no longer to princes, knights, and ladies.\n\nHow is this to be accounted for? Poetry was evidently changing hands\nagain. The Crusades had made the princes and knights the representatives\nand leaders of the whole nation; and during the contest between the\nimperial and the papal powers, the destinies of Germany were chiefly in\nthe hands of the hereditary nobility. The literature, which before that\ntime was entirely clerical, had then become worldly and chivalrous. But\nnow, when the power of the emperors began to decline, when the clergy was\ndriven into taking a decidedly anti-national position, when the unity of\nthe empire was well-nigh destroyed, and princes and prelates were\nasserting their independence by plunder and by warfare, a new element of\nsociety rose to the surface,\u2014the middle classes,\u2014the burghers of the free\ntowns of Germany. They were forced to hold together, in order to protect\nthemselves against their former protectors. They fortified their cities,\nformed corporations, watched over law and morality, and founded those\npowerful leagues, the first of which, the Hansa, dates from 1241. Poetry\nalso took refuge behind the walls of free towns; and at the fireside of\nthe worthy citizen had to exchange her gay, chivalrous, and romantic\nstrains, for themes more subdued, practical, and homely. This accounts for\nsuch works as Hugo von Trimberg\u2019s \u201cRenner,\u201d as well as for the general\ncharacter of the poetry of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Poetry\nbecame a trade like any other. Guilds were formed, consisting of\nmaster-singers and their apprentices. Heinrich Frauenlob is called the\nfirst Meisters\u00e4nger; and during the fourteenth, the fifteenth, and even\nthe sixteenth centuries, new guilds or schools sprang up in all the\nprincipal towns of Germany. After order had been restored by the first\nHapsburg dynasty, the intellectual and literary activity of Germany\nretained its centre of gravitation in the middle classes. Rudolf von\nHapsburg was not gifted with a poetical nature, and contemporaneous poets\ncomplain of his want of liberality. Attempts were made to revive the\nchivalrous poetry of the Crusades by Hugo von Montfort and Oswald von\nWolkenstein in the beginning of the fifteenth century, and again at the\nend of the same century by the \u201cLast of the German Knights,\u201d the Emperor\nMaximilian. But these attempts could not but fail. The age of chivalry was\ngone, and there was nothing great or inspiring in the wars which the\nEmperors had to wage during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries against\ntheir vassals, against the Pope, against the precursors of the\nReformation, the Hussites, and against the Turks. In Fritsche Closener\u2019s\n\u201cChronicle\u201d there is a description of the citizens of Strassburg defending\nthemselves against their bishop in 1312; in Twinger\u2019s \u201cChronicle\u201d a\npicture of the processions of the Flagellants and the religious enthusiasm\nof that time (1349). The poems of Suchenwirt and Halbsuter represent the\nwars of Austria against Switzerland (1386), and Niclas von Weyl\u2019s\ntranslation gives us a glimpse into the Council of Constance (1414) and\nthe Hussite wars, which were soon to follow. The poetry of those two\ncenturies, which was written by and for the people, is interesting\nhistorically, but, with few exceptions, without any further worth. The\npoets wish to amuse or to instruct their humble patrons, and they do this,\neither by giving them the dry bones of the romantic poetry of former ages,\nor by telling them fables and the quaint stories of the \u201cSeven Wise\nMasters.\u201d What beauty there was in a Meistergesang may be fairly seen from\nthe poem of Michael Beheim; and the Easter play by no means shows the\nlowest ebb of good taste in the popular literature of that time.\n\nIt might seem, indeed, as if all the high and noble aspirations of the\ntwelfth and thirteenth centuries had been lost and forgotten during the\nfourteenth and fifteenth. And yet it was not quite so. There was one class\nof men on whom the spirit of true nobility had descended, and whose works\nform a connecting chain between the great era of the Crusades and the\nstill greater era of the Reformation. These are the so-called\nMystics,\u2014true Crusaders, true knights of the Spirit, many of whom\nsacrificed their lives for the cause of truth, and who at last conquered\nfrom the hands of the infidels that Holy Sepulchre in which the true\nChristian faith had been lying buried for centuries. The name of Mystics,\nwhich has been given to these men, is apt to mislead. Their writings are\nnot dark or unintelligible, and those who call them so must find\nChristianity itself unintelligible and dark. There is more broad daylight\nin Eckhart and Tauler than in the works of all the Thomists and Scotists.\nEckhart was not a dreamer. He had been a pupil of Thomas Aquinas, and his\nown style is sometimes painfully scholastic. But there is a fresh breeze\nof thought in his works, and in the works of his disciples. They knew that\nwhenever the problems of man\u2019s relation to God, the creation of the world,\nthe origin of evil, and the hope of salvation come to be discussed, the\nsharpest edge of logical reasoning will turn, and the best defined terms\nof metaphysics die away into mere music. They knew that the hard and\nnarrow categories of the schoolmen do greater violence to the highest\ntruths of religion than the soft, and vague, and vanishing tones with\nwhich they tried to shadow forth in the vulgar language of the people the\ndistant objects which transcend the horizon of human understanding. They\ndid not handle the truths of Christianity as if they should or could be\nproved by the syllogisms of our human reasoning. Nevertheless these\nMystics were hard and honest thinkers, and never played with words and\nphrases. Their faith is to them as clear and as real as sunshine; and\ninstead of throwing scholastic dust into the eyes of the people, they\nboldly told them to open their eyes and to look at the mysteries all\naround them, and to feel the presence of God within and without, which the\npriests had veiled by the very revelation which they had preached. For a\ntrue appreciation of the times in which they lived, the works of these\nReformers of the Faith are invaluable. Without them we should try in vain\nto explain how a nation which, to judge from its literature, seemed to\nhave lost all vigor and virtue, could suddenly rise and dare the work of a\nreformation of the Church. With them we learn how that same nation, after\ngroaning for centuries under the yoke of superstition and hypocrisy, found\nin its very prostration the source of an irresistible strength. The higher\nclergy contributed hardly anything to the literature of these two\ncenturies; and what they wrote would better have remained unwritten. At\nSt. Gall, toward the end of the thirteenth century, the monks, the\nsuccessors of Notker, were unable to sign their names. The Abbot was a\nnobleman who composed love-songs, a branch of poetry at all events out of\nplace in the monastery founded by St. Gall. It is only among the lower\nclergy that we find the traces of genuine Christian piety and intellectual\nactivity, though frequently branded by obese prelates and obtuse\nmagistrates with the names of mysticism and heresy. The orders of the\nFranciscans and Dominicans, founded in 1208 and 1215, and intended to act\nas clerical spies and confessors, began to fraternize in many parts of\nGermany with the people against the higher clergy. The people were hungry\nand thirsty after religious teaching. They had been systematically\nstarved, or fed with stones. Part of the Bible had been translated for the\npeople, but what Ulfilas was free to do in the fourth century, was\ncondemned by the prelates assembled at the Synod of Trier in 1231. Nor\nwere the sermons of the itinerant friars in towns and villages always to\nthe taste of bishops and abbots. We possess collections of these\ndiscourses, preached by Franciscans and Dominicans under the trees of\ncemeteries, and from the church-towers of the villages. Brother Berthold,\nwho died in 1272, was a Franciscan. He travelled about the country, and\nwas revered by the poor like a saint and prophet. The doctrine he\npreached, though it was the old teaching of the Apostles, was as new to\nthe peasants who came to hear him, as it had been to the citizens of\nAthens who came to hear St. Paul. The saying of St Chrysostom that\nChristianity had turned many a peasant into a philosopher, came true again\nin the time of Eckhart and Tauler. Men who called themselves Christians\nhad been taught, and had brought themselves to believe, that to read the\nwritings of the Apostles was a deadly sin. Yet in secret they were\nyearning after that forbidden Bible. They knew that there were\ntranslations, and though these translations had been condemned by popes\nand synods, the people could not resist the temptation of reading them. In\n1373, we find the first complete version of the Bible into German, by\nMatthias of Beheim. Several are mentioned after this. The new religious\nfervor that had been kindled among the inferior clergy, and among the\nlower and middle classes of the laity, became stronger; and, though it\nsometimes degenerated into wild fanaticism, the sacred spark was kept in\nsafe hands by such men as Eckhart (died 1329), Tauler (died 1361), and the\nauthor of the German Theology. Men like these are sure to conquer; they\nare persecuted justly or unjustly; they suffer and die, and all they\nthought and said and did seems for a time to have been in vain. But\nsuddenly their work, long marked as dangerous in the smooth current of\nsociety, rises above the surface like the coral reefs in the Pacific, and\nit remains for centuries the firm foundation of a new world of thought and\nfaith. Without the labors of these Reformers of the Faith, the Reformers\nof the Church would never have found a whole nation waiting to receive,\nand ready to support them.\n\nThere are two other events which prepared the way of the German Reformers\nof the sixteenth century: the foundation of universities, and the\ninvention of printing. Their importance is the same in the literary and in\nthe political history of Germany. The intellectual and moral character of\na nation is formed in schools and universities; and those who educate a\npeople have always been its real masters, though they may go by a more\nmodest name. Under the Roman Empire public schools had been supported by\nthe government, both at Rome and in the chief towns of the Provinces. We\nknow of their existence in Gaul and parts of Germany. With the decline of\nthe central authority, the salaries of the grammarians and rhetors in the\nProvinces ceased to be paid, and the pagan gymnasia were succeeded by\nChristian schools, attached to episcopal sees and monasteries. Whilst the\nclergy retained their vigor and efficiency, their schools were powerful\nengines for spreading a half clerical and half classical culture in\nGermany. During the Crusades, when ecclesiastical activity and learning\ndeclined very rapidly, we hear of French tutors at the castles of the\nnobility, and classical learning gave way to the superficial polish of a\nchivalrous age. And when the nobility likewise relapsed into a state of\nsavage barbarism, new schools were wanted, and they were founded by the\ntowns, the only places where, during the fourteenth and fifteenth\ncenturies, we see any evidence of a healthy political life. The first town\nschools are mentioned in the beginning of the fourteenth century, and they\nwere soon followed by the high schools and universities. The University of\nPrague was founded in 1348; Vienna, 1366; Heidelberg, 1386; Erfurt, 1392;\nLeipzig, 1408; Basle, 1460; T\u00fcbingen, 1477; Mainz, 1482. These\nuniversities are a novel feature in the history of German and of European\ncivilization. They are not ecclesiastical seminaries, not restricted to\nany particular class of society; they are national institutions, open to\nthe rich and the poor, to the knight, the clerk, the citizen. They are\nreal universities of learning: they profess to teach all branches of\nknowledge,\u2014theology and law, medicine and philosophy. They contain the\nfirst practical acknowledgment of the right of every subject to the\nhighest education, and through it to the highest offices in Church and\nState. Neither Greece nor Rome had known such institutions: neither the\nChurch nor the nobility, during the days of their political supremacy,\nwere sufficiently impressed with the duty which they owed to the nation at\nlarge to provide such places of liberal education. It was the nation\nitself, when forsaken by its clergy and harassed by its nobility, which\ncalled these schools into life; and it is in these schools and\nuniversities that the great men who inaugurate the next period of\nliterature\u2014the champions of political liberty and religious freedom\u2014were\nfostered and formed.\n\nThe invention of printing was in itself a reformation, and its benefits\nwere chiefly felt by the great masses of the people. The clergy possessed\ntheir libraries, where they might read and study if they chose; the\ncastles contained collections of MSS., sacred and profane, illuminated\nwith the most exquisite taste; while the citizen, the poor layman, though\nhe might be able to read and to write, was debarred from the use of books,\nand had to satisfy his literary tastes with the sermons of travelling\nFranciscans, or the songs of blind beggars and peddlers. The art of\nprinting admitted that large class to the same privileges which had\nhitherto been enjoyed almost exclusively by clergy and nobility: it placed\nin the hands of the third estate arms more powerful than the swords of the\nknights, and the thunderbolts of the priests: it was a revolution in the\nhistory of literature more eventful than any in the history of mankind.\nPoets and philosophers addressed themselves no longer to emperors and\nnoblemen, to knights and ladies, but to the people at large, and\nespecially to the middle classes, in which henceforth the chief strength\nof the nation resides.\n\nThe years from 1450 to 1500 form a period of preparation for the great\nstruggle that was to inaugurate the beginning of the sixteenth century. It\nwas an age \u201crich in scholars, copious in pedants, but poor in genius, and\nbarren of strong thinkers.\u201d One of the few interesting men in whose life\nand writings the history of that preliminary age may be studied, is\nSebastian Brant, the famous author of the famous \u201cShip of Fools.\u201d\n\nWith the sixteenth century, we enter upon the modern history and the\nmodern literature of Germany. We shall here pass on more rapidly, dwelling\nonly on the men in whose writings the political and social changes of\nGermany can best be studied.\n\nWith Luther, the literary language of Germany became New High-German. A\nchange of language invariably betokens a change in the social constitution\nof a country. In Germany, at the time of the Reformation, the change of\nlanguage marks the rise of a new aristocracy, which is henceforth to\nreside in the universities. Literature leaves its former homes. It speaks\nno longer the language of the towns. It addresses itself no longer to a\nfew citizens, nor to imperial patrons, such as Maximilian I. It indulges\nno longer in moral saws, didactic verses, and prose novels, nor is it\ncontent with mystic philosophy and the secret outpourings of religious\nfervor. For a time, though but for a short time, German literature becomes\nnational. Poets and writers wish to be heard beyond the walls of their\nmonasteries and cities. They speak to the whole nation; nay, they desire\nto be heard beyond the frontiers of their country. Luther and the\nReformers belonged to no class,\u2014they belonged to the people. The voice of\nthe people, which during the preceding periods of literature could only be\nheard like the rolling of distant thunder, had now become articulate and\ndistinct, and for a time one thought seemed to unite all\nclasses,\u2014emperors, kings, nobles, and citizens, clergy and laity, high and\nlow, old and young. This is a novel sight in the history of Germany. We\nhave seen in the first period the gradual growth of the clergy, from the\ntime when the first missionaries were massacred in the marshes of\nFriesland to the time when the Emperor stood penitent before the gates of\nCanossa. We have seen the rise of the nobility, from the time when the\nbarbarian chiefs preferred living outside the walls of cities to the time\nwhen they rivaled the French cavaliers in courtly bearing and chivalrous\nbravery. Nor were the representatives of these two orders, the Pope and\nthe Emperor, less powerful at the beginning of the sixteenth century than\nthey had been before. Charles V. was the most powerful sovereign whom\nEurope had seen since the days of Charlemagne, and the papal see had\nrecovered by diplomatic intrigue much of the influence which it had lost\nby moral depravity. Let us think, then, of these two ancient powers: the\nEmperor with his armies, recruited in Austria, Spain, Naples, Sicily, and\nBurgundy, and with his treasures brought from Mexico and Peru; and the\nPope with his armies of priests and monks, recruited from all parts of the\nChristian world, and armed with the weapons of the Inquisition and the\nthunderbolts of excommunication: let us think of their former victories,\ntheir confidence in their own strength, their belief in their divine\nright: and let us then turn our eyes to the small University of\nWittenberg, and into the bleak study of a poor Augustine monk, and see\nthat monk step out of his study with no weapon in his hand but the\nBible,\u2014with no armies and no treasures,\u2014and yet defying with his clear and\nmanly voice both Pope and Emperor, both clergy and nobility: there is no\ngrander sight in history; and the longer we allow our eyes to dwell on it,\nthe more we feel that history is not without God, and that at every\ndecisive battle the divine right of truth asserts its supremacy over the\ndivine right of Popes and Emperors, and overthrows with one breath both\nempires and hierarchies. We call the Reformation the work of Luther; but\nLuther stood not alone, and no really great man ever stood alone. The\nsecret of their greatness lies in their understanding the spirit of the\nage in which they live, and in giving expression with the full power of\nfaith and conviction to the secret thoughts of millions. Luther was but\nlending words to the silent soul of suffering Germany, and no one should\ncall himself a Protestant who is not a Lutheran with Luther at the Diet of\nWorms, and able to say with him in the face of princes and prelates, \u201cHere\nI stand; I can not do otherwise; God help me: Amen.\u201d\n\nAs the Emperor was the representative of the nobility, as the Pope was the\nrepresentative of the clergy, Luther was the head and leader of the\npeople, which through him and through his fellow-workers claimed now, for\nthe first time, an equality with the two old estates of the realm. If this\nnational struggle took at first an aspect chiefly religious, it was\nbecause the German nation had freedom of thought and of belief more at\nheart than political freedom. But political rights also were soon\ndemanded, and demanded with such violence, that during his own life-time\nLuther had to repress the excesses of enthusiastic theorists and of a\nviolent peasantry. Luther\u2019s great influence on the literature of Germany,\nand the gradual adoption of his dialect as the literary language, were\nowing in a great measure to this, that whatever there was of literature\nduring the sixteenth century, was chiefly in the hands of one class of\nmen. After the Reformation, nearly all eminent men in Germany\u2014poets,\nphilosophers, and historians\u2014belonged to the Protestant party, and resided\nchiefly in the universities.\n\nThe universities were what the monasteries had been under Charlemagne, the\ncastles under Frederick Barbarossa,\u2014the centres of gravitation for the\nintellectual and political life of the country. The true nobility of\nGermany was no longer to be found among the priests,\u2014Alcuin, Hrabanus\nMaurus, Notker Teutonicus; nor among the knights,\u2014Walther von der\nVogelweide, Wolfram von Eschenbach, and their patrons, Frederick II.,\nHermann von Th\u00fcringen, and Leopold of Austria. The intellectual sceptre of\nGermany was wielded by a new nobility,\u2014a nobility that had risen from the\nranks, like the priests and the knights, but which, for a time at least,\nkept itself from becoming a caste, and from cutting away those roots\nthrough which it imbibed its vigor and sustained its strength. It had its\ncastles in the universities, its tournaments in the diets of Worms and\nAugsburg, and it counted among its members, dukes and peasants, divines\nand soldiers, lawyers and artists. This was not, indeed, an hereditary\nnobility, but on that very ground it is a nobility which can never become\nextinct. The danger, however, which threatens all aristocracies, whether\nmartial, clerical, or municipal, was not averted from the intellectual\naristocracy of Germany. The rising spirit of caste deprived the second\ngeneration of that power which men like Luther had gained at the beginning\nof the Reformation. The moral influence of the universities in Germany was\ngreat, and it is great at the present day. But it would have been greater\nand more beneficial if the conceit of caste had not separated the leaders\nof the nation from the ranks whence they themselves had arisen, and to\nwhich alone they owed their position and their influence. It was the same\nwith the priests, who would rather form a hierarchy than be merged in the\nlaity. It was the same with the knights, who would rather form a select\nsociety than live among the gentry. Both cut away the ground under their\nfeet; and the Reformers of the sixteenth century fell into the same snare\nbefore they were aware of it. We wonder at the eccentricities of the\npriesthood, at the conceit of the hereditary nobility, at the affectation\nof majestic stateliness inherent in royalty. But the pedantic display of\nlearning, the disregard of the real wants of the people, the contempt of\nall knowledge which does not wear the academic garb, show the same foible,\nthe same conceit, the same spirit of caste among those who, from the\nsixteenth century to the present day, have occupied the most prominent\nrank in the society of Germany. Professorial knight-errantry still waits\nfor its Cervantes. Nowhere have the objects of learning been so completely\nsacrificed to the means of learning, nowhere has that Dulcinea,\u2014knowledge\nfor its own sake,\u2014with her dark veil and her barren heart, numbered so\nmany admirers; nowhere have so many windmills been fought, and so many\nreal enemies been left unhurt, as in Germany, particularly during the last\ntwo centuries. New universities have been founded: Marburg, in 1527;\nK\u00f6nigsberg, in 1547; Jena, in 1558; Helmst\u00e4dt, in 1575; Giessen, in 1607.\nAnd the more the number and the power of the professors increased, the\nmore they forgot that they and their learning, their universities and\ntheir libraries, were for the benefit of the people; that a professor\nmight be very learned, and very accurate, and very laborious, yet worse\nthan useless as a member of our toiling society. It was considered more\nlearned and respectable to teach in Latin, and all lectures at the\nuniversities were given in that language. Luther was sneered at because of\nhis little German tracts which \u201cany village clerk might have written.\u201d\nSome of the best poets in the sixteenth century were men such as Eoban\nHessius (1540), who composed their poetry in Latin. National poems, for\ninstance, Brant\u2019s \u201cShip of Fools,\u201d were translated into Latin in order to\ninduce the German professors to read them. The learned doctors were\nashamed of their honest native names. Schwarzerd must needs call himself\nMelancthon; Meissel Celtes, Schnitter Agricola; Hausschein, \u0152colampadius!\nAll this might look very learned, and professorial, and imposing; but it\nseparated the professors from the people at large; it retarded the\nprogress of national education, and blighted the prospects of a national\npolicy in Germany. Everything promised well at the time of the\nReformation; and a new Germany might have risen before a new France, if,\nlike Luther, the leaders of the nation had remained true to their calling.\nBut when to speak Latin was considered more learned than to speak German,\nwhen to amass vast information was considered more creditable than to\ndigest and to use it, when popularity became the same bugbear to the\nprofessors which profanity had been to the clergy, and vulgarity to the\nknights, Luther\u2019s work was undone; and two more centuries had to be spent\nin pedantic controversies, theological disputes, sectarian squabbles, and\npolitical prostration, before a new national spirit could rise again in\nmen like Lessing, and Schiller, and Fichte, and Stein. Ambitious princes\nand quarrelsome divines continued the rulers of Germany, and, towards the\nend of the sixteenth century, everything seemed drifting back into the\nMiddle Ages. Then came the Thirty Years\u2019 War, a most disastrous war for\nGermany, which is felt in its results to the present day. If, as a civil\nand religious contest, it had been fought out between the two parties,\u2014the\nProtestants and Roman Catholics of Germany,\u2014it would have left, as in\nEngland, one side victorious; it would have been brought to an end before\nboth were utterly exhausted. But the Protestants, weakened by their own\ndissensions, had to call in foreign aid. First Denmark, then Sweden,\npoured their armies into Germany, and even France\u2014Roman Catholic\nFrance\u2014gave her support to Gustavus Adolphus and the Protestant cause.\nEngland, the true ally of Germany, was too weak at home to make her\ninfluence felt abroad. At the close of the war, the Protestants received\nindeed the same rights as the Roman Catholics; but the nation was so\ncompletely demoralized that it hardly cared for the liberties guaranteed\nby the treaty of Westphalia. The physical and moral vigor of the nation\nwas broken. The population of Germany is said to have been reduced by one\nhalf. Thousands of villages and towns had been burnt to the ground. The\nschools, the churches, the universities, were deserted. A whole generation\nhad grown up during the war, particularly among the lower classes, with no\neducation at all. The merchants of Germany, who formerly, as \u00c6neas Sylvius\nsaid, lived more handsomely than the Kings of Scotland, were reduced to\nsmall traders. The Hansa was broken up. Holland, England, and Sweden had\ntaken the wind out of her sails. In the Eastern provinces, commerce was\nsuspended by the inroads of the Turks; whilst the discovery of America,\nand of the new passage to the East Indies, had reduced the importance of\nthe mercantile navy of Germany and Italy in the Mediterranean. Where there\nwas any national feeling left, it was a feeling of shame and despair, and\nthe Emperor and the small princes of Germany might have governed even more\nselfishly than they did, without rousing opposition among the people.\n\nWhat can we expect of the literature of such times? Popular poetry\npreserved some of its indestructible charms. The Meisters\u00e4nger went on\ncomposing according to the rules of their guilds, but we look in vain for\nthe raciness and honest simplicity of Hans Sachs. Some of the professors\nwrote plays in the style of Terence, or after English models, and fables\nbecame fashionable in the style of Ph\u00e6drus. But there was no trace\nanywhere of originality, truth, taste, or feeling, except in that branch\nwhich, like the palm-tree, thrives best in the desert,\u2014sacred poetry. Paul\nGerhard is still without an equal as a poet of sacred songs; and many of\nthe best hymns which are heard in the Protestant churches of Germany date\nfrom the seventeenth century. Soon, however, this class of poetry also\ndegenerated on one side into dry theological phraseology, on the other\ninto sentimental and almost erotic affectation.\n\nThere was no hope of a regeneration in German literature, unless either\ngreat political and social events should rouse the national mind from its\nlanguor, or the classical models of pure taste and true art should be\nstudied again in a different spirit from that of professorial pedantry.\nNow, after the Thirty Years\u2019 War, there was no war in Germany in which the\nnation took any warm interest. The policy pursued in France during the\nlong reign of Louis XIV. (1643-1708) had its chief aim in weakening the\nhouse of Hapsburg. When the Protestants would no longer fight his battles,\nLouis roused the Turks. Vienna was nearly taken, and Austria owed its\ndelivery to Johann Sobiesky. By the treaty of Ryswick (1697), all the\ncountry on the left side of the Rhine was ceded to France, and German\nsoldiers fought under the banners of the Great Monarch. The only German\nprince who dared to uphold the honor of the empire, and to withstand the\nencroachments of Louis, was Frederick William, the great Elector of\nPrussia (1670-88). He checked the arrogance of the Swedish court, opened\nhis towns to French Protestant refugees, and raised the house of\nBrandenburg to a European importance. In the same year in which his\nsuccessor, Frederick III., assumed the royal title as Frederick I., the\nKing of Spain, Charles I., died; and Louis XIV., whilst trying to add the\nSpanish crown to his monarchy, was at last checked in his grasping policy\nby an alliance between England and Germany. Prince Eugene and Marlborough\nrestored the peace and the political equilibrium of Europe. In England,\nthe different parties in Parliament, the frequenters of the clubs and\ncoffee-houses, were then watching every move on the political chess-board\nof Europe, and criticising the victories of their generals and the\ntreaties of their ambassadors. In Germany, the nation took but a passive\npart. It was excluded from all real share in the great questions of the\nday; and, if it showed any sympathies, they were confined to the simple\nadmiration of a great general, such as Prince Eugene.\n\nWhile the policy of Louis XIV. was undermining the political independence\nof Germany, the literature of his court exercised an influence hardly less\ndetrimental on the literature of Germany. No doubt, the literature of\nFrance stood far higher at that time than that of Germany. \u201cPoet\u201d was\namongst us a term of abuse, while in France the Great Monarch himself did\nhomage to his great poets. But the professorial poets who had failed to\nlearn the lessons of good taste from the Greek and Roman classics, were\nnot likely to profit by an imitation of the spurious classicality of\nFrench literature. They heard the great stars of the court of Louis XIV.\npraised by their royal and princely patrons, as they returned from their\ntravels in France and Italy, full of admiration for everything that was\nnot German. They were delighted to hear that in France, in Holland, and in\nItaly, it was respectable to write poetry in the modern vernacular, and\nset to work in good earnest. After the model of the literary academies in\nItaly, academies were founded at the small courts of Germany. Men like\nOpitz would hardly have thought it dignified to write verses in their\nnative tongue had it not been for the moral support which they received\nfrom these academies and their princely patrons. His first poems were\nwritten in Latin, but he afterwards devoted himself completely to German\npoetry. He became a member of the \u201cOrder of the Palm-tree,\u201d and the\nfounder of what is called the _First Silesian School_. Opitz is the true\nrepresentative of the classical poetry of the seventeenth century. He was\na scholar and a gentleman; most correct in his language and versification;\nnever venturing on ground that had not been trodden before by some\nclassical poet, whether of Greece, Rome, France, Holland, or Italy. In him\nwe also see the first traces of that baneful alliance between princes and\npoets which has deprived the German nation of so many of her best sons.\nBut the charge of mean motives has been unjustly brought against Opitz by\nmany historians. Poets require an audience, and at his time there was no\nclass of people willing to listen to poetry, except the inmates of the\nsmall German courts. After the Thirty Years\u2019 War the power of these\nprinces was greater than ever. They divided the spoil, and there was\nneither a nobility, nor a clergy, nor a national party to control or\nresist them. In England, the royal power had, at that time, been brought\nback to its proper limits, and it has thus been able to hold ever since,\nwith but short interruptions, its dignified position, supported by the\nself-respect of a free and powerful nation. In France it assumed the most\nenormous proportions during the long reign of Louis XIV., but its\nappalling rise was followed, after a century, by a fall equally appalling,\nand it has not yet regained its proper position in the political system of\nthat country. In Germany the royal power was less imposing, its\nprerogatives being divided between the Emperor and a number of small but\nalmost independent vassals, remnants of that feudal system of the Middle\nAges which in France and England had been absorbed by the rise of national\nmonarchies. These small principalities explain the weakness of Germany in\nher relation with foreign powers, and the instability of her political\nconstitution. Continental wars gave an excuse for keeping up large\nstanding armies, and these standing armies stood between the nation and\nher sovereigns, and made any moral pressure of the one upon the other\nimpossible. The third estate could never gain that share in the government\nwhich it had obtained, by its united action, in other countries; and no\nform of government can be stable which is deprived of the support and the\nactive co\u00f6peration of the middle classes. Constitutions have been granted\nby enlightened sovereigns, such as Joseph II. and Frederick William IV.,\nand barricades have been raised by the people at Vienna and at Berlin; but\nboth have failed to restore the political health of the country. There is\nno longer a German nobility in the usual sense of the word. Its vigor was\nexhausted when the powerful vassals of the empire became powerless\nsovereigns with the titles of king or duke, while what remained of the\nlanded nobility became more reduced with every generation, owing to the\nabsence of the system of primogeniture. There is no longer a clergy as a\npowerful body in the state. This was broken up at the time of the\nReformation; and it hardly had time to recover and to constitute itself on\na new basis, when the Thirty Years\u2019 War deprived it of all social\ninfluence, and left it no alternative but to become a salaried class of\nservants of the crown. No third estate exists powerful enough to defend\nthe interests of the commonwealth against the encroachments of the\nsovereign; and public opinion, though it may pronounce itself within\ncertain limits, has no means of legal opposition, and must choose, at\nevery critical moment, between submission to the royal will and rebellion.\n\nThus, during the whole modern history of Germany, the political and\nintellectual supremacy is divided. The former is monopolized by the\nsovereigns, the latter belongs to a small class of learned men. These two\nsoon begin to attract each other. The kings seek the society, the advice,\nand support of literary men; whilst literary men court the patronage of\nkings, and acquire powerful influence by governing those who govern the\npeople. From the time of Opitz there have been few men of eminence in\nliterature or science who have not been drawn toward one of the larger or\nsmaller courts of Germany; and the whole of our modern literature bears\nthe marks of this union between princes and poets. It has been said that\nthe existence of these numerous centres of civilization has proved\nbeneficial to the growth of literature; and it has been pointed out that\nsome of the smallest courts, such as Weimar, have raised the greatest men\nin poetry and science. Goethe himself gives expression to this opinion.\n\u201cWhat has made Germany great,\u201d he says, \u201cbut the culture which is spread\nthrough the whole country in such a marvelous manner, and pervades equally\nall parts of the realm? And this culture, does it not emanate from the\nnumerous courts which grant it support and patronage? Suppose we had had\nin Germany for centuries but two capitals, Vienna and Berlin, or but one;\nI should like to know how it would have fared with German civilization, or\neven with that general well-being which goes hand in hand with true\ncivilization.\u201d In these words we hear Goethe, the minister of the petty\ncourt of Weimar, not the great poet of a great nation. Has France had more\nthan one capital? Has England had more than one court? Great men have\nrisen to eminence in great monarchies like France, and they have risen to\neminence in a great commonwealth such as England, without the patronage of\ncourts, by the support, the sympathy, the love of a great nation. Truly\nnational poetry exists only where there is a truly national life; and the\npoet who, in creating his works, thinks of a whole nation which will\nlisten to him and be proud of him, is inspired by a nobler passion than he\nwho looks to his royal master, or the applause even of the most refined\naudience of the _dames de la cour_. In a free country, the sovereign is\nthe highest and most honored representative of the national will, and he\nhonors himself by honoring those who have well deserved of his country.\nThere a poet laureate may hold an independent and dignified position,\nconscious of his own worth, and of the support of the nation. But in\ndespotic countries, the favor even of the most enlightened sovereign is\ndangerous. Germany never had a more enlightened king than Frederick the\nGreat; and yet, when he speaks of the Queen receiving Leibnitz at court,\nhe says, \u201cShe believed that it was not unworthy of a queen to show honor\nto a philosopher; and as those who have received from heaven a privileged\nsoul rise to the level of sovereigns, she admitted Leibnitz into her\nfamiliar society.\u201d\n\nThe seventeenth century saw the rise and fall of the first and the second\nSilesian schools. The first is represented by men like Opitz and\nWeckherlin, and it exercised an influence in the North of Germany on Simon\nDach, Paul Flemming, and a number of less gifted poets, who are generally\nknown by the name of the _K\u00f6nigsberg School_. Its character is\npseudo-classical. All these poets endeavored to write correctly, sedately,\nand eloquently. Some of them aimed at a certain simplicity and sincerity,\nwhich we admire particularly in Flemming. But it would be difficult to\nfind in all their writings one single thought, one single expression, that\nhad not been used before. The second Silesian school is more ambitious;\nbut its poetic flights are more disappointing even than the honest prose\nof Opitz. The \u201cShepherds of the Pegnitz\u201d had tried to imitate the\nbrilliant diction of the Italian poets; but the modern Meisters\u00e4nger of\nthe old town of N\u00fcrnberg had produced nothing but wordy jingle.\nHoffmannswaldau and Lohenstein, the chief heroes of the second Silesian\nschool, followed in their track, and did not succeed better. Their\ncompositions are bombastic and full of metaphors. It is a poetry of\nadjectives, without substance, truth, or taste. Yet their poetry was\nadmired, praised not less than Goethe and Schiller were praised by their\ncontemporaries, and it lived beyond the seventeenth century. There were\nbut few men during that time who kept aloof from the spirit of these two\nSilesian schools, and were not influenced by either Opitz or\nHoffmannswaldau. Among these independent poets we have to mention\nFriedrich von Logau, Andreas Gryphius, and Moscherosch. Beside these,\nthere were some prose writers whose works are not exactly works of art,\nbut works of original thought, and of great importance to us in tracing\nthe progress of science and literature during the dreariest period of\nGerman history. We can only mention the \u201cSimplicissimus,\u201d a novel full of\nclever miniature drawing, and giving a truthful picture of German life\nduring the Thirty Years\u2019 War; the patriotic writings of Professor Schupp;\nthe historical works of Professor Pufendorf (1631-94); the pietistic\nsermons of Spener, and of Professor Franke (1663-1727), the founder of the\nOrphan School at Halle; Professor Arnold\u2019s (1666-1714) Ecclesiastical\nHistory; the first political pamphlets by Professor Thomasius (1655-1728);\nand among philosophers, Jacob B\u00f6hme at the beginning, and Leibnitz at the\nend of the seventeenth century.\n\nThe second Silesian school was defeated by Gottsched, professor at\nLeipzig. He exercised, at the beginning of the eighteenth century, the\nsame dictatorship as a poet and a critic which Opitz had exercised at the\nbeginning of the seventeenth. Gottsched was the advocate of French models\nin art and poetry, and he used his wide-spread influence in recommending\nthe correct and so-called classical style of the poets of the time. After\nhaving rendered good service in putting down the senseless extravagance of\nthe school of Lohenstein, he became himself a pedantic and arrogant\ncritic; and it was through the opposition which he roused by his\n\u201cGallomania\u201d that German poetry was delivered at last from the trammels of\nthat foreign school. Then followed a long literary warfare; Gottsched and\nhis followers at Leipzig defended the French, Bodmer and his friends in\nSwitzerland the English style of literature. The former insisted on\nclassical form and traditional rules; the latter on natural sentiment and\nspontaneous expression. The question was, whether poets should imitate the\nworks of the classics, or imitate the classics who had become classics by\nimitating nobody. A German professor wields an immense power by means of\nhis journals. He is the editor; he writes in them himself, and allows\nothers to write; he praises his friends, who are to laud him in turn; he\npatronizes his pupils, who are to call him master; he abuses his\nadversaries, and asks his allies to do the same. It was in this that\nProfessor Gottsched triumphed for a long time over Bodmer and his party,\ntill at last public opinion became too strong, and the dictator died the\nlaughing-stock of Germany. It was in the very thick of this literary\nstruggle that the great heroes of German poetry grew up,\u2014Klopstock,\nLessing, Wieland, Herder, Goethe, and Schiller. Goethe, who knew both\nGottsched and Bodmer, has described that period of fermentation and\ntransition in which his own mind was formed, and his extracts may be read\nas a commentary on the poetical productions of the first half of the\neighteenth century. He does justice to G\u00fcnther, and more than justice to\nLiscow. He shows the influence which men like Brockes, Hagedorn, and\nHaller exercised in making poetry respectable. He points out the new\nnational life which, like an electric spark, flew through the whole\ncountry when Frederick the Great said, \u201c_J\u2019ai jet\u00e9 le bonnet pardessus les\nmoulins_;\u201d and defied, like a man, the political popery of Austria. The\nestimate which Goethe forms of the poets of the time, of Gleim and Uz, of\nGessner and Rabener, and more especially of Klopstock, Lessing, and\nWieland, should be read in the original, as likewise Herder\u2019s \u201cRhapsody on\nShakspeare.\u201d The latter contains the key to many of the secrets of that\nnew period of literature, which was inaugurated by Goethe himself and by\nthose who like him could dare to be classical by being true to nature and\nto themselves.\n\nMy object in taking this rapid survey of German literature has been to\nshow that the extracts which I have collected in my \u201cGerman Classics\u201d have\nnot been chosen at random, and that, if properly used, they can be read as\na running commentary on the political and social history of Germany. The\nhistory of literature is but an applied history of civilization. As in the\nhistory of civilization we watch the play of the three constituent classes\nof society,\u2014clergy, nobility, and commoners,\u2014we can see, in the history of\nliterature, how that class which is supreme politically shows for the time\nbeing its supremacy in the literary productions of the age, and impresses\nits mark on the works of poets and philosophers.\n\nSpeaking very generally, we might say that, during the first period of\nGerman history, the really moving, civilizing, and ruling class was the\nclergy; and in the whole of German literature, nearly to the time of the\nCrusades, the clerical element predominates. The second period is marked\nby the Crusades, and the triumph of Teutonic and Romantic chivalry, and\nthe literature of that period is of a strictly correspondent tone. After\nthe Crusades, and during the political anarchy that followed, the sole\nprinciple of order and progress is found in the towns, and in the towns\nthe poetry of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries finds its new home.\nAt last, at the time of the Reformation, when the political life of the\ncountry assumed for a time a national character, German literature also is\nfor a short time national. The hopes, however, which had been raised of a\nnational policy and of a national literature were soon blighted, and, from\nthe Thirty Years\u2019 War to the present day, the inheritance of the nation\nhas been divided between princes and professors. There have been moments\nwhen the princes had to appeal to the nation at large, and to forget for a\nwhile their royal pretensions; and these times of national enthusiasm, as\nduring the wars of Frederick the Great, and during the wars against\nNapoleon, have not failed to tell on the literature of Germany. They\nproduced a national spirit, free from professorial narrowness, such as we\nfind in the writings of Lessing and Fichte. But with the exception of\nthese short lucid intervals, Germany has always been under the absolute\ndespotism of a number of small sovereigns and great professors, and her\nliterature has been throughout in the hands of court poets and academic\ncritics. Klopstock, Lessing, and Schiller are most free from either\ninfluence, and most impressed with the duties which a poet owes, before\nall, to the nation to which he belongs. Klopstock\u2019s national enthusiasm\nborders sometimes on the fantastic; for, as his own times could not\ninspire him, he borrowed the themes of his national panegyrics from the\ndistant past of Arminius and the German bards. Lessing looked more to his\nown age, but he looked in vain for national heroes. \u201cPity the\nextraordinary man,\u201d says Goethe, \u201cwho had to live in such miserable times,\nwhich offered him no better subjects than those which he takes for his\nworks. Pity him, that in his \u2018Minna von Barnhelm,\u2019 he had to take part in\nthe quarrel between the Saxons and the Prussians, because he found nothing\nbetter. It was owing to the rottenness of his time that he always took,\nand was forced to take, a polemical position. In his \u2018Emilia Galotti,\u2019 he\nshows his _pique_ against the princes; in \u2018Nathan,\u2019 against the priests.\u201d\nBut, although the subjects of these works of Lessing were small, his\nobject in writing was always great and national. He never condescended to\namuse a provincial court by masquerades and comedies, nor did he degrade\nhis genius by pandering, like Wieland, to the taste of a profligate\nnobility. Schiller, again, was a poet truly national and truly liberal;\nand although a man of aspirations rather than of actions, he has left a\ndeeper impress on the kernel of the nation than either Wieland or Goethe.\nThese considerations, however, must not interfere with our appreciation of\nthe greatness of Goethe. On the contrary, when we see the small sphere in\nwhich he moved at Weimar, we admire the more the height to which he grew,\nand the freedom of his genius. And it is, perhaps, owing to this very\nabsence of a strongly marked national feeling, that in Germany the first\nidea of a world-literature was conceived. \u201cNational literature,\u201d Goethe\nsays, \u201cis of little importance: the age of a world-literature is at hand,\nand every one ought to work in order to accelerate this new era.\u201d Perhaps\nGoethe felt that the true poet belonged to the whole of mankind, and that\nhe must be intelligible beyond the frontiers of his own country. And, from\nthis point of view, his idea of a world-literature has been realized, and\nhis own works have gained their place side by side with the works of\nHomer, Virgil, Dante, and Shakespeare. But, so long as there are different\nlanguages and different nations, let each poet think and work and write\nfor his own people, without caring for the applause of other countries.\nScience and philosophy are cosmopolitan; poetry and art are national: and\nthose who would deprive the Muses of their home-sprung character, would\ndeprive them of much of their native charms.\n\n\n\n\nLIST OF EXTRACTS FOR ILLUSTRATING THE HISTORY OF GERMAN LITERATURE.\n\n\n                       FOURTH CENTURY AFTER CHRIST.\n\n_Gothic:_\u2014\n\nUlfilas, Translation of the Bible; the Lord\u2019s Prayer.\n\n                             SEVENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Old High-German:_\u2014\n\nVocabulary of St. Gall.\n\n                             EIGHTH CENTURY.\n\n_Old High-German:_\u2014\n\nInterlinear Translation of the Benedictine Rules.\nTranslation of the Gospel of St. Matthew.\nExhortation addressed to the Christian Laity.\nLiteral Translations of the Hymns of the Old Church:\u2014\n1. Deus qui cordi lumen es.\n2. Aurora lucis rutilat.\n3. Te Deum laudamus.\nThe Song of Hildebrand and his son Hadubrand,\u2014in alliterative metre.\nThe Prayer from the Monastery of Wessobrun,\u2014in alliterative metre.\nThe Apostolic Creed.\n\n                              NINTH CENTURY.\n\n_Old High-German:_\u2014\n\nFrom Einhard\u2019s Life of Charlemagne,\u2014the German names of the Months and the\n            Winds fixed by the Emperor.\nMuspilli, or on the Last Judgment,\u2014alliterative poem.\nThe Oaths of Lewis the German and Charles the Bald,\nand their armies at Strassburg, 842, in Old\nFrankish and Old French; from the History of\nNithard, the grandson of Charlemagne.\nThe Heliand, or the Saviour,\u2014old Saxon poem, in alliterative metre.\nThe Krist, or the Gospel-book,\u2014poem in rhyme by Otfried, the pupil of\n            Hrabanus Maurus, dedicated to Lewis the German.\nTranslation of a Harmony of the Gospels.\nLay on St. Peter.\nSong on the Victory gained by King Lewis III. at Saucourt, in 881, over\n            the Normans.\n\n                              TENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Old High-German:_\u2014\n\nNotker Teutonicus of St. Gall,\u2014\n1. Translation of the Psalms.\n2. Treatise on Syllogisms.\n3. Translation of Aristotle.\n4. Translation of Bo\u00ebthius de Consolatione.\n\n                            ELEVENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Old High-German:_\u2014\n\nWilliram\u2019s Explanation of the Song of Solomon.\nMerigarto, or the Earth,\u2014fragment of a geographical poem.\n\n                             TWELFTH CENTURY.\n\n_Middle High-German:_\u2014\n\nThe Life of Jesus,\u2014poem by the Nun Ava.\nPoetical Translation of the Books of Moses.\nHistorical Poem on Anno, Bishop of Cologne.\nPoetical Chronicle of the Roman Emperors.\nNortperti Tractatus de Virtutibus, translated.\nThe poem of Roland, by Konrad the Priest.\nThe poem of Alexander, by Lamprecht the Priest.\nPoem of Reinhart the Fox.\nDietmar von Aist,\u2014lyrics.\nThe Spervogel,\u2014lyrics.\nThe K\u00fcrenberger,\u2014lyrics.\nThe Eneid, by Heinrich von Veldecke.\n\n                           THIRTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Middle High-German:_\u2014\n\nHartmann von Aue; extracts from his \u201cIwein,\u201d\u2014a heroic poem.\nThe Old Reinmar,\u2014lyrics.\nWalther von der Vogelweide,\u2014lyrics.\nFreidank\u2019s Bescheidenheit,\u2014didactic poem.\nWolfram von Eschenbach,\u2014\n1. Extracts from his \u201cParcival,\u201d\u2014a heroic poem.\n2. Extracts from his \u201cTiturel,\u201d\u2014a heroic poem.\nGottfried von Strassburg; extracts from his \u201cTristan,\u201d\u2014a heroic poem.\nThe poem of the \u201cNibelunge,\u201d\u2014epic poem.\nThomasin von Zerclar; extracts from his poem on manners, called \u201cThe\n            Italian Guest.\u201d\nNeidhart von Reuenthal,\u2014lyrics.\nOtto von Botenlaube,\u2014lyrics.\nGudrun,\u2014epic poem.\nThe Stricker,\u2014extract from his satirical poem, \u201cAmis the Priest.\u201d\nRudolf von Ems,\u2014extract from his \u201cWilhelm von Orleans.\u201d\nChristian von Hamle,\u2014lyrics.\nGottfried von Neifen,\u2014lyrics.\nUlrich von Lichtenstein,\u2014lyrics.\nSermon of Friar Berthold of Regensburg.\nReinmar von Zweter,\u2014lyrics.\nMaster Stolle,\u2014satire.\nThe Marner,\u2014lyrics.\nMaster Konrad of W\u00fcrzburg,\u2014\n1. Poem.\n2. Extract from the Trojan War.\nAnonymous poet,\u2014extract from the life of St. Elizabeth.\nHerman der Damen.\nAnonymous poet,\u2014extract from the \u201cWartburg Krieg.\u201d\nMarcgrave Otto von Brandenburg,\u2014lyrics.\nHeinrich, Duke of Breslau,\u2014lyrics.\nHugo von Trimberg,\u2014extract from the \u201cRenner.\u201d\n\n                           FOURTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Middle High-German:_\u2014\n\nHeinrich Frauenlob,\u2014lyrics.\nMaster Johann Hadlaub,\u2014lyrics.\nThe Great Rosegarden,\u2014popular epic poem.\nMaster Eckhart,\u2014homily.\nHermann von Fritzlar,\u2014life of St. Elizabeth.\nDr. Johann Tauler,\u2014sermon.\nHeinrich Suso.\nHeinrich der Teichner,\u2014fable.\nPeter Suchenwirt,\u2014on the death of Leopold, Duke of Austria, 1386.\nHalbsuter\u2019s poem on the Battle of Sempach, 1386.\nFritsche Closener\u2019s Strassburg Chronicle.\nJacob Twinger\u2019s Chronicle,\u2014on the Flagellants.\n\n                            FIFTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Middle High-German:_\u2014\n\nHugo von Montfort,\u2014lyrics.\nOswald von Wolkenstein,\u2014lyrics.\nMuscatbl\u00fct,\u2014lyrics.\nHans von B\u00fchel\u2019s Life of Diocletian, or The Seven Wise Masters.\nPopular Songs.\nSacred Songs.\nThe Soul\u2019s Comfort,\u2014didactic prose.\nMichael Beheim,\u2014Meistergesang.\nAn Easter Mystery.\nPopular Rhymes.\nCaspar von der Roen\u2019s Heldenbuch,\u2014Hildebrand and his Son.\nNiclas von Weyl\u2019s Translations,\u2014Hieronymus at the Council of Constance.\nVeit Weber\u2019s poem on the Victory of Murten, 1476.\nHeinrich Steinh\u00f6wel\u2019s Fables.\nSebastian Brant\u2019s \u201cShip of Fools.\u201d\nJohann Geiler von Kaisersberg,\u2014sermon.\nEmperor Maximilian,\u2014extract from the \u201cTheuerdank.\u201d\n\n                            SIXTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Modern High-German:_\u2014\n\nMartin Luther,\u2014\n1. Sacred Song.\n2. Letter on the Diet of the Jackdaws and Crows.\n3. His Last Sermon.\nUlrich Zwingle:\u2014\n1. A Poem on his Illness.\n2. Criticism on Luther.\nPhilipp Nicolai,\u2014sacred songs.\nJustus Jonas,\u2014sacred songs.\nUlrich von Hutten,\u2014\n1. Letter to Franz von Sickingen.\n2. Political poem.\nSebastian Frank,\u2014\n1. Preface to his Germania.\n2. Rudolf von Hapsburg.\n3. Maximilian der Erste.\n4. Fables.\nBurkard Waldis,\u2014fables.\nHans Sachs,\u2014\n1. Sacred Song.\n2. Poem on the Death of Martin Luther.\n3. Poem on the War.\nPetermann Etterlin\u2019s Chronicle,\u2014William Tell and Rudolf von Hapsburg.\n\u00c6gidius Tschudi\u2019s Chronicle,\u2014William Tell.\nPaulus Melissus Schede.\nJohann Fischart,\u2014\n1. Exhortation addressed to the German people.\n2. Das gl\u00fcckhafte Schiff.\nGeorg Rollenhagen,\u2014fable.\nPopular Books,\u2014\n1. Tyll Eulenspiegel.\n2. Dr. Faust.\nPopular Songs.\n\n                           SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Modern High-German:_\u2014\n\nMartin Opitz, and the First Silesian School.\nGeorg Rudolf Weckherlin.\nAnonymous Poem,\u2014\u201cO Ewigkeit.\u201d\nMichael Altenburg\u2019s Camp-song (Gustavus Adolphus).\nJohannes Heermann,\u2014sacred song.\nPopular Songs.\nJohann Arndt,\u2014\n1. Sacred Song.\n2. On the Power and Necessity of Prayer.\nJacob B\u00f6hme, Mysterium Magnum.\nJohann Valentin Andre\u00e6.\nFriedrich Spee.\nJulius Wilhelm Zinegreff.\nFriedrich von Logau.\nSimon Dach and the K\u00f6nigsberg School.\nPaul Flemming.\nPaul Gerhard.\nGeorg Philipp Harsd\u00f6rffer and the N\u00fcrnberg School.\nJohannes Rist.\nAndreas Gryphius,\u2014\n1. Sonnets.\n2. From the Tragedy \u201cCardenio and Celinde.\u201d\nJoachim Rachel,\u2014satire.\nJohann Michael Moscherosch,\u2014satires.\nChristoph von Grimmelshausen, Simplicissimus,\u2014novel.\nJohann Balthasar Schupp,\u2014on the German Language.\nAngelus Silesius.\nHoffmannswaldau and Lohenstein,\u2014Second Silesian School.\nAbraham a Santa Clara,\u2014sermon.\nPhilipp Jacob Spener,\u2014on Luther.\nGottfried Arnold,\u2014sacred poem.\nChristian Weise.\nHans Assmann von Abschatz.\nFriedrich R. L. von Canitz.\nChristian Wernicke.\nGottfried Wilhelm von Leibnitz,\u2014on the German Language.\n\n                           EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.\n\n_Modern High-German:_\u2014\n\nJohann Christoph Gottsched,\u2014Cato.\nJohann Jacob Bodmer,\u2014Character of German Poetry.\nBarthold Heinrich Brockes.\nJohann Christian G\u00fcnther.\nNicolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf.\nChristian Ludwig Liscow.\nFriedrich von Hagedorn.\nAlbrecht von Haller.\nGottlieb Wilhelm Rabener.\nEwald Christian von Kleist.\nChristian F\u00fcrchtegott Gellert.\nJohann Ludwig Gleim.\nJohann Peter Uz.\nJustus M\u00f6ser.\nKlopstock. See below.\nSalomon Gessner.\nJohann Winckelmann.\nLessing. See below.\nJohann Georg Hamann.\nImmanuel Kant.\nJohann August Mus\u00e6us.\nWieland. See below.\nGottlieb Konrad Pfeffel.\nChristian Friedrich Daniel Schubart.\nMatthias Claudius.\nJohann Caspar Lavater.\nHerder. See below.\nHeinrich Jung, Stilling.\nGeorg Christoph Lichtenberg.\nGottfried August B\u00fcrger.\nJohann Heinrich Voss.\nFriedrich Leopold und Christian Grafen zu Stollberg.\nDas Siebengestirn der Dichter des achtzehnten Jahrhunderts,\u2014\n1. Friedrich Gottlieb Klopstock.\n2. Gotthold Ephraim Lessing.\n3. Christoph Martin Wieland.\n4. Johann Gottfried von Herder.\n5. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.\n6. Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller.\n7. Jean Paul Friedrich Richter.\n\n\n\n\n\nII. OLD GERMAN LOVE-SONGS.(8)\n\n\nSeven hundred years ago! What a long time it seems! Philip Augustus, King\nof France; Henry II., King of England; Frederic I., the famous Barbarossa,\nEmperor of Germany! When we read of their times, the times of the\nCrusades, we feel as the Greeks felt when reading of the War of Troy. We\nlisten, we admire, but we do not compare the heroes of St. Jean d\u2019Acre\nwith the great generals of the nineteenth century. They seem a different\nrace of men from those who are now living, and poetry and tradition have\nlent to their royal frames such colossal proportions that we hardly dare\nto criticise the legendary history of their chivalrous achievements. It\nwas a time of heroes, of saints, of martyrs, of miracles! Thomas \u00e0 Becket\nwas murdered at Canterbury, but for more than three hundred years his name\nlived on, and his bones were working miracles, and his soul seemed as it\nwere embodied and petrified in the lofty pillars that surround the spot of\nhis martyrdom. Abelard was persecuted and imprisoned, but his spirit\nrevived in the Reformers of the sixteenth century, and the shrine of\nAbelard and H\u00e9loise in the P\u00e8re La Chaise is still decorated every year\nwith garlands of _immortelles_. Barbarossa was drowned in the same river\nin which Alexander the Great had bathed his royal limbs, but his fame\nlived on in every cottage of Germany, and the peasant near the Kyffh\u00e4user\nstill believes that some day the mighty Emperor will awake from his long\nslumber, and rouse the people of Germany from their fatal dreams. We dare\nnot hold communion with such stately heroes as Frederick the Red-beard and\nRichard the Lion-heart; they seem half to belong to the realm of fable. We\nfeel from our very school-days as if we could shake hands with a\nThemistocles and sit down in the company of a Julius C\u00e6sar, but we are\nawed by the presence of those tall and silent knights, with their hands\nfolded and their legs crossed, as we see them reposing in full armor on\nthe tombs of our cathedrals.\n\nAnd yet, however different in all other respects, these men, if they once\nlift their steel beaver and unbuckle their rich armor, are wonderfully\nlike ourselves. Let us read the poetry which they either wrote themselves,\nor to which they liked to listen in their castles on the Rhine or under\ntheir tents in Palestine, and we find it is poetry which a Tennyson or a\nMoore, a Goethe or Heine, might have written. Neither Julius C\u00e6sar nor\nThemistocles would know what was meant by such poetry. It is modern\npoetry,\u2014poetry unknown to the ancient world,\u2014and who invented it nobody\ncan tell. It is sometimes called Romantic, but this is a strange misnomer.\nNeither the Romans, nor the lineal descendants of the Romans, the\nItalians, the Proven\u00e7als, the Spaniards, can claim that poetry as their\nown. It is Teutonic poetry,\u2014purely Teutonic in its heart and soul, though\nits utterance, its rhyme and metre, its grace and imagery, show the marks\nof a warmer clime. It is called sentimental poetry, the poetry of the\nheart rather than of the head, the picture of the inward rather than of\nthe outward world. It is subjective, as distinguished from objective\npoetry, as the German critics, in their scholastic language, are fond of\nexpressing it. It is Gothic, as contrasted with classical poetry. The one,\nit is said, sublimizes nature, the other bodies forth spirit; the one\ndeifies the human, the other humanizes the divine; the one is ethnic, the\nother Christian. But all these are but names, and their true meaning must\nbe discovered in the works of art themselves, and in the history of the\ntimes which produced the artists, the poets, and their ideals. We shall\nperceive the difference between these two hemispheres of the Beautiful\nbetter if we think of Homer\u2019s \u201cHelena\u201d and Dante\u2019s \u201cBeatrice,\u201d if we look\nat the \u201cVenus of Milo\u201d and a \u201cMadonna\u201d of Francia, than in reading the\nprofoundest systems of \u00e6sthetics.\n\nThe work which has caused these reflections is a volume of German poetry,\njust published by Lachmann and Haupt. It is called \u201cDes Minnesangs\nFr\u00fchling,\u201d\u2014\u201cthe Spring of the Songs of Love;\u201d and it contains a collection\nof the poems of twenty German poets, all of whom lived during the period\nof the Crusades, under the Hohenstaufen Emperors, from about 1170 to 1230.\nThis period may well be called the spring of German poetry, though the\nsummer that followed was but of short duration, and the autumn was cheated\nof the rich harvest which the spring had promised. Tieck, one of the first\nwho gathered the flowers of that forgotten spring, describes it in glowing\nlanguage. \u201cAt that time,\u201d he says, \u201cbelievers sang of faith, lovers of\nlove, knights described knightly actions and battles; and loving,\nbelieving knights were their chief audience. The spring, beauty, gayety,\nwere objects that could never tire: great duels and deeds of arms carried\naway every hearer, the more surely, the stronger they were painted; and as\nthe pillars and dome of the church encircle the flock, so did religion, as\nthe highest, encircle poetry and reality; and every heart, in equal love,\nhumbled itself before her.\u201d Carlyle, too, has listened with delight to\nthose merry songs of spring. \u201cThen truly,\u201d he says, \u201cwas the time of\nsinging come; for princes and prelates, emperors and squires, the wise and\nthe simple, men, women, and children, all sang and rhymed, or delighted in\nhearing it done. It was a universal noise of song, as if the spring of\nmanhood had arrived, and warblings from every spray\u2014not, indeed, without\ninfinite twitterings also, which, except their gladness, had no music\u2014were\nbidding it welcome.\u201d And yet it was not all gladness; and it is strange\nthat Carlyle, who has so keen an ear for the silent melancholy of the\nhuman heart, should not have heard that tone of sorrow and fateful boding\nwhich breaks, like a suppressed sigh, through the free and light music of\nthat Swabian era. The brightest sky of spring is not without its clouds in\nGermany, and the German heart is never happy without some sadness. Whether\nwe listen to a short ditty, or to the epic ballads of the \u201cNibelunge,\u201d or\nto Wolfram\u2019s grand poems of the \u201cParcival\u201d and the \u201cHoly Grail,\u201d it is the\nsame everywhere. There is always a mingling of light and shade,\u2014in joy a\nfear of sorrow, in sorrow a ray of hope, and throughout the whole, a\nsilent wondering at this strange world. Here is a specimen of an anonymous\npoem; and anonymous poetry is an invention peculiarly Teutonic. It was\nwritten before the twelfth century; its language is strangely simple, and\nsometimes uncouth. But there is truth in it; and it is truth after all,\nand not fiction, that is the secret of all poetry:\u2014\n\n\u201cIt has pained me in the heart,\nFull many a time,\nThat I yearned after that\nWhich I may not have,\nNor ever shall win.\nIt is very grievous.\nI do not mean gold or silver;\nIt is more like a human heart.\n\n\u201cI trained me a falcon,\nMore than a year.\nWhen I had tamed him,\nAs I would have him,\nAnd had well tied his feathers\nWith golden chains,\nHe soared up very high,\nAnd flew into other lands.\n\n\u201cI saw the falcon since,\nFlying happily;\nHe carried on his foot\nSilken straps,\nAnd his plumage was\nAll red of gold....\nMay God send them together,\nWho would fain be loved.\u201d\n\nThe key-note of the whole poem of the \u201cNibelunge,\u201d such as it was written\ndown at the end of the twelfth, or the beginning of the thirteenth\ncentury, is \u201cSorrow after Joy.\u201d This is the fatal spell against which all\nthe heroes are fighting, and fighting in vain. And as Hagen dashes the\nChaplain into the waves, in order to belie the prophecy of the Mermaids,\nbut the Chaplain rises, and Hagen rushes headlong into destruction, so\nChriemhilt is bargaining and playing with the same inevitable fate,\ncautiously guarding her young heart against the happiness of love, that\nshe may escape the sorrows of a broken heart. She, too, has been dreaming\n\u201cof a wild young falcon that she trained for many a day, till two fierce\neagles tore it.\u201d And she rushes to her mother Ute, that she may read the\ndream for her; and her mother tells her what it means. And then the coy\nmaiden answers:\u2014\n\n              \u201cNo more, no more, dear mother, say,\nFrom many a woman\u2019s fortune this truth is clear as day,\nThat falsely smiling Pleasure with Pain requites us ever.\nI from both will keep me, and thus will sorrow never.\u201d\n\nBut Siegfried comes, and Chriemhilt\u2019s heart does no longer cast up the\nbright and the dark days of life. To Siegfried she belongs; for him she\nlives, and for him, when \u201ctwo fierce eagles tore him,\u201d she dies. A still\nwilder tragedy lies hidden in the songs of the \u201cEdda,\u201d the most ancient\nfragments of truly Teutonic poetry. Wolfram\u2019s poetry is of the same sombre\ncast. He wrote his \u201cParcival\u201d about the time when the songs of the\n\u201cNibelunge\u201d were written down. The subject was taken by him from a French\nsource. It belonged originally to the British cycle of Arthur and his\nknights. But Wolfram took the story merely as a skeleton, to which he\nhimself gave a new body and soul. The glory and happiness which this world\ncan give is to him but a shadow,\u2014the crown for which his hero fights is\nthat of the Holy Grail.\n\nFaith, Love, and Honor are the chief subjects of the so-called\nMinnes\u00e4nger. They are not what we should call erotic poets. _Minne_ means\nlove in the old German language, but it means, originally, not so much\npassion and desire, as thoughtfulness, reverence, and remembrance. In\nEnglish _Minne_ would be \u201cMinding,\u201d and it is different therefore from the\nGreek _Eros_, the Roman Amor, and the French Amour. It is different also\nfrom the German _Liebe_, which means originally desire, not love. Most of\nthe poems of the \u201cMinnes\u00e4nger\u201d are sad rather than joyful,\u2014joyful in\nsorrow, sorrowful in joy. The same feelings have since been so often\nrepeated by poets in all the modern languages of Europe, that much of what\nwe read in the \u201cMinnes\u00e4nger\u201d of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries\nsounds stale to our ears. Yet there is a simplicity about these old songs,\na want of effort, an entire absence of any attempt to please or to\nsurprise; and we listen to them as we listen to a friend who tells us his\nsufferings in broken and homely words, and whose truthful prose appeals to\nour heart more strongly than the most elaborate poetry of a Lamartine or a\nHeine. It is extremely difficult to translate these poems from the\nlanguage in which they are written, the so-called Middle High-German, into\nModern German,\u2014much more so to render them into English. But translation\nis at the same time the best test of the true poetical value of any poem,\nand we believe that many of the poems of the Minnes\u00e4ngers can bear that\ntest. Here is another poem, very much in the style of the one quoted\nabove, but written by a poet whose name is known,\u2014Dietmar von Eist:\u2014\n\n\u201cA lady stood alone,\nAnd gazed across the heath,\nAnd gazed for her love.\nShe saw a falcon flying.\n\u201cO happy falcon that thou art,\nThou fliest wherever thou likest;\nThou choosest in the forest\nA tree that pleases thee.\nThus I too had done.\nI chose myself a man:\nHim my eyes selected.\nBeautiful ladies envy me for it.\nAlas! why will they not leave me my love?\nI did not desire the beloved of any one of them.\nNow woe to thee, joy of summer!\nThe song of birds is gone;\nSo are the leaves of the lime-tree:\nHenceforth, my pretty eyes too\nWill be overcast.\nMy love, thou shouldst take leave\nOf other ladies;\nYes, my hero, thou shouldst avoid them.\nWhen thou sawest me first,\nI seemed to thee in truth\nRight lovely made:\nI remind thee of it, dear man!\u2019 \u201d\n\nThese poems, simple and homely as they may seem to us, were loved and\nadmired by the people for whom they were written. They were copied and\npreserved with the greatest care in the albums of kings and queens, and\nsome of them were translated into foreign languages. The poem which we\nquoted first was translated as an Italian sonnet in the thirteenth\ncentury, and has been published in Franc Trucchi\u2019s \u201cPoesie Italiane\nInedite:\u201d\u2014\n\n\u201cTapina me, che amava uno sparviero;\namaval tanto ch\u2019io me ne moria:\na lo richiamo ben m\u2019era maniero\ned unque troppo pascer no\u2019 l dovia.\nor \u00e8 montato e salito s\u00ec altero,\nassai pi\u00f9 altero che far non solia;\ned \u00e8 assiso dentro a un verziero,\ne un\u2019altra donna l\u2019aver\u00e0 in bal\u00eca.\nisparvier mio, ch\u2019io t\u2019avea nodrito;\nsonaglio d\u2019oro ti facea portare,\nperch\u00e8 nell\u2019uccellar fossi pi\u00f9 ardito.\nor sei salito siccome lo mare,\ned hai rotti li getti, e se\u00ec fuggito\nquando eri fermo nel tuo uccellare.\u201d\n\nOne of the most original and thoughtful of the \u201cMinnes\u00e4nger\u201d is the old\nReinmar. His poems are given now for the first time in a correct and\nreadable text by Lachmann and Haupt, and many a difficult passage has been\nelucidated by their notes. His poems, however, are not easy to read, and\nwe should have been thankful for some more help than the editors have\ngiven us in their notes. The following is a specimen of Reinmar\u2019s poetry:\u2014\n\n\u201cHigh as the sun stands my heart;\nThat is because of a lady who can be without change\nIn her grace, wherever she be.\nShe makes me free from all sorrow.\n\n\u201cI have nothing to give her, but my own life,\nThat belongs to her: the beautiful woman gives me always\nJoy, and a high mind,\nIf I think of it, what she does for me.\n\n\u201cWell is it for me that I found her so true!\nWherever she dwell, she alone makes every land dear to me;\nIf she went across the wild sea,\nThere I should go; I long so much for her.\n\n\u201cIf I had the wisdom of a thousand men, it would be well\nThat I keep her, whom I should serve:\nMay she take care right well,\nThat nothing sad may ever befall me through her.\n\n\u201cI was never quite blessed, but through her:\nWhatever I wish to her, may she allow it to me!\nIt was a blessed thing for me\nThat she, the Beautiful, received me into her grace.\u201d\n\nCarlyle, no doubt, is right when he says that, among all this warbling of\nlove, there are infinite twitterings which, except their gladness, have\nlittle to charm us. Yet we like to read them as part of the bright history\nof those by-gone days. One poet sings:\u2014\n\n\u201cIf the whole world was mine,\nFrom the Sea to the Rhine,\nI would gladly give it all,\nThat the Queen of England\nLay in my arms,\u201d etc.\n\nWho was the impertinent German that dared to fall in love with a Queen of\nEngland? We do not know. But there can be no doubt that the Queen of\nEngland whom he adored was the gay and beautiful Eleanor of Poitou, the\nQueen of Henry II., who filled the heart of many a Crusader with unholy\nthoughts. Her daughter, too, Mathilde, who was married to Henry the Lion\nof Saxony, inspired many a poet of those days. Her beauty was celebrated\nby the Proven\u00e7al Troubadours; and at the court of her husband, she\nencouraged several of her German vassals to follow the example of the\nFrench and Norman knights, and sing the love of Tristan and Isolt, and the\nadventures of the knights of Charlemagne. They must have been happy times,\nthose times of the Crusades! Nor have they passed away without leaving\ntheir impress on the hearts and minds of the nations of Europe. The Holy\nSepulchre, it is true, is still in the hands of the Infidels, and the\nbones of the Crusaders lie buried in unhallowed soil, and their deeds of\nvalor are well-nigh forgotten, and their chivalrous Tournaments and their\nCourts of Love are smiled at by a wiser generation. But much that is noble\nand heroic in the feelings of the nineteenth century has its hidden roots\nin the thirteenth. Gothic architecture and Gothic poetry are the children\nof the same mother; and if the true but unadorned language of the heart,\nthe aspirations of a real faith, the sorrow and joy of a true love, are\nstill listened to by the nations of Europe; and if what is called the\nRomantic school is strong enough to hold its ground against the classical\ntaste and its royal patrons, such as Louis XIV., Charles II., and\nFrederick the Great,\u2014we owe it to those chivalrous poets who dared for the\nfirst time to be what they were, and to say what they felt, and to whom\nFaith, Love, and Honor were worthy subjects of poetry, though they lacked\nthe sanction of the Periclean and Augustan ages.\n\nThe new edition of the Poems of the \u201cMinnes\u00e4nger\u201d is a masterpiece of\nGerman scholarship. It was commenced by Lachmann, the greatest critic,\nafter Wolf, that Germany has produced. Lachmann died before the work was\nfinished, and Professor Haupt, his successor at Berlin, undertook to\nfinish it. His share in the edition, particularly in the notes, is greater\nthan that of Lachmann; and the accuracy with which the text has been\nrestored from more than twenty MSS., is worthy of the great pupil of that\ngreat master.\n\n1858.\n\n\n\n\n\nIII. YE SCHYPPE OF FOOLES.(9)\n\n\nThe critical periods in the history of the world are best studied in the\nlives of a few representative men. The history of the German Reformation\nassumes a living, intelligible, and human character in the biographies of\nthe Reformers; and no historian would imagine that he understood the\nsecret springs of that mighty revolution in Germany without having read\nthe works of Hutten, the table-talk of Luther, the letters of Melancthon,\nand the sermons of Zwingle. But although it is easy to single out\nrepresentative men in the great decisive struggles of history, they are\nmore difficult to find during the preparatory periods. The years from 1450\nto 1500 are as important as the years from 1500 to 1550,\u2014nay, to the\nthoughtful historian, that silent period of incubation is perhaps of\ndeeper interest than the violent outburst of the sixteenth century. But\nwhere, during those years, are the men of sufficient eminence to represent\nthe age in which they lived? It was an age of transition and preparation,\nof dissatisfaction and hesitation. Like the whole of the fifteenth\ncentury, \u201cIt was rich in scholars, copious in pedants, but poor in genius,\nand barren of strong thinkers.\u201d We must not look for heroes in so unheroic\nan age, but be satisfied with men if they be but a head taller than their\ncontemporaries.\n\nOne of the most interesting men in whose life and writings the history of\nthe preliminary age of the German Reformation may be studied, is Sebastian\nBrant, the famous author of the famous \u201cShip of Fools.\u201d He was born in the\nyear 1457. The Council of Basle had failed to fulfill the hopes of the\nGerman laity as to a _reformatio ecclesi\u00e6 in capite et membris_. In the\nvery year of Brant\u2019s birth, Martin Meyer, the Chancellor of Mayence, had\naddressed his letter to his former friend, \u00c6neas Sylvius,\u2014a national\nmanifesto, in boldness and vigor only surpassed by the powerful pamphlet\nof Luther, \u201cTo the Nobility of the German Nation.\u201d Germany seemed to\nawaken at last to her position, and to see the dangers that threatened her\npolitical and religious freedom. The new movement which had taken place in\nItaly in classical learning, supported chiefly by Greek refugees, began to\nextend its quickening influence beyond the Alps. \u00c6neas Sylvius, afterwards\nPope Pius II., 1458, writes in one of his letters, that poets were held in\nno estimation in Germany, though he admits that their poetry is less to be\nblamed for this than their patrons, the princes, who care far more for any\ntrifles than for poetry. The Germans, he says, do not care for science nor\nfor a knowledge of classical literature, and they have hardly heard the\nname of Cicero or any other orator. In the eyes of the Italians, the\nGermans were barbarians; and when Constantine Lascaris saw the first\nspecimen of printing, he was told by the Italian priests that this\ninvention had lately been made _apud barbaros in urbe __ Germani\u00e6_. They\nwere dangerous neighbors\u2014these barbarians, who could make such discoveries\nas the art of printing; and Brant lived to see the time when Joh. C\u00e6sarius\nwas able to write to a friend of his: \u201cAt this moment, Germany, if she\ndoes not surpass Italy, at least need not, and will not, yield to her, not\nso much on account of her empire, as for her wonderful fecundity in\nlearned men, and the almost incredible growth of learning.\u201d\n\nThis period of slow but steady progress, from the invention of printing to\nthe Council of Worms, is bridged over by the life of Sebastian Brant, who\nlived from 1457 to 1521. Brant was very early the friend of Peter Schott,\nand through him had been brought in contact with a circle of learned men,\nwho were busily engaged in founding one of the first schools of classical\nlearning at Schlettstadt. Men like Jac. Wimpheling, Joh. Torrentinus,\nFlorentius Hundius, and Johannes Hugo, belonged to that society. Brant\nafterwards went to Basle to study law. Basle was then a young university.\nIt had only been founded in 1459, but it was already a successful rival of\nHeidelberg. The struggle between the Realists and Nominalists was then\nraging all over Europe, and it divided the University of Basle into two\nparties, each of them trying to gain influence and adherents among the\nyoung students. It has been usual to look upon the Realists as the\nConservative, and upon the Nominalists as the Liberal party of the\nfifteenth century. But although at times this was the case, philosophical\nopinions, on which the differences between these two parties were founded,\nwere not of sufficient strength to determine for any length of time the\npolitical and religious bias of either school. The Realists were chiefly\nsupported by the Dominicans, the Nominalists by the Franciscans; and there\nis always a more gentle expression beaming in the eyes of the followers of\nthe seraphic Doctor, particularly if contrasted with the stern frown of\nthe Dominican. Ockam himself was a Franciscan, and those who thought with\nhim were called _doctores renovatores_ and _sophist\u00e6._ Suddenly, however,\nthe tables were turned. At Oxford, the Realists, in following out their\nprinciples in a more independent spirit, had arrived at results dangerous\nto the peace of the Church. As philosophers, they began to carry out the\ndoctrines of Plato in good earnest; as reformers, they looked wistfully to\nthe early centuries of the Christian Church. The same liberal and\nindependent spirit reached from Oxford to Prague, and the expulsion of the\nGerman nation from that university may be traced to the same movement. The\nRealists were at that time no longer in the good odor of orthodoxy; and,\nat the Council of Constanz, the Nominalists, such as Joh. Gerson and\nPetrus de Alliaco, gained triumphs which seemed for a time to make them\nthe arbiters of public opinion in Germany, and to give them the means of\nsecuring the Church against the attacks of Huss on one side, and against\nthe more dangerous encroachments of the Pope and the monks on the other.\nThis triumph, however, was of short duration. All the rights which the\nGermans seemed to have conquered at the Councils of Constanz and Basle\nwere sacrificed by their own Emperor. No one dared to say again what\nGregory von Heimburg had said to the Italian clergy,\u2014\u201cQuid fines alienos\ninvaditis? quid falcem vestram in messem alienam extenditis?\u201d Under \u00c6neas\nSylvius, the power of the Pope in Germany was as absolute as ever. The\nNominalist party lost all the ground which it had gained before. It was\nlooked upon with suspicion by Pope and Emperor. It was banished from\ncourts and universities, and the disciples of the Realistic school began a\ncomplete crusade against the followers of Ockam.\n\nJohannes Heynlin a Lapide, a former head of a house in Paris, migrated to\nBasle, in order to lend his influence and authority to the Realist party\nin that rising university. Trithemius says of him: \u201cHic doctrinam eorum\nParisiensium qui reales appellantur primus ad Basiliensium universitatem\ntranstulit, ibidemque plantavit, roboravit et auxit.\u201d This Johannes\nHeynlin a Lapide, however, though a violent champion of the then\nvictorious Realist party, was by no means a man without liberal\nsentiments. On many points the Realists were more tolerant, or at least\nmore enlightened, than the Nominalists. They counted among themselves\nbetter scholars than the adherents of Ockam. They were the first and\nforemost to point out the uselessness of the dry scholastic system of\nteaching grammar and logic, and nothing else. And though they cherished\ntheir own ideas as to the supreme authority of the Pope, the divine right\nof the Emperor, or the immaculate conception of the Virgin (a dogma denied\nby the Dominicans, and defended by the Franciscans), they were always\nready to point out abuses and to suggest reforms. The age in which they\nlived was not an age of decisive thought or decisive action. There was a\nwant of character in individuals as well as in parties; and the points in\nwhich they differed were of small importance, though they masked\ndifferences of greater weight. At Basle, the men who were gathered round\nJohannes a Lapide were what we should call Liberal Conservatives, and it\nis among them that we find Sebastian Brant. Basle could then boast of some\nof the most eminent men of the time. Besides Agricola, and Wimpheling, and\nGeiler von Kaisersberg, and Trithemius, Reuchlin was there for a time, and\nWessel, and the Greek Kontablacos. Sebastian Brant, though on friendly\nterms with most of these men, was their junior; and, among his\ncontemporaries, a new generation grew up, more independent and more\nfree-spoken than their masters, though as yet very far from any\nrevolutionary views in matters of Church or State. Feuds broke out very\nsoon between the old and the young schools. Locher, the friend of\nBrant,\u2014the poet who had turned his \u201cShip of Fools\u201d into Latin\nverse,\u2014published a poem, in which he attacked rather petulantly the\nscholastic philosophy and theology. Wimpheling, at the request of Geiler\nof Kaisersberg, had to punish him for this audacity, and he did it in a\npamphlet full of the most vulgar abuse. Reuchlin also had given offense,\nand was attacked and persecuted; but his party retaliated by the \u201cEpistol\u00e6\nObscurorum Virorum.\u201d Thus the Conservative, or Realistic party became\ndivided; and when, at the beginning of a new century and a new era in the\nhistory of the world, Luther raised his voice in defense of national and\nreligious freedom, he was joined not only by the more advanced descendants\nof the Nominalistic school, but by all the vigor, the talent, and the\nintellect of the old Conservatives.\n\nBrant himself, though he lived at Strassburg up to 1521, did not join the\nstandard of the Reformation. He had learned to grumble, to find fault, to\nabuse, and to condemn; but his time was gone when the moment for action\narrived. And yet he helped toward the success of the Reformation in\nGermany. He had been one of the first, after the discovery of printing, to\nuse the German language for political purposes. His fly-sheets, his\nillustrated editions, had given useful hints how to address the large\nmasses of the people. If he looked upon the world, as it then was, as a\nship of fools, and represented every weakness, vice, and wickedness under\nthe milder color of foolery, the people who read his poems singled out\nsome of his fools, and called them knaves. The great work of Sebastian\nBrant was his \u201cNarrenschiff.\u201d It was first published in 1497, at Basle,\nand the first edition, though on account of its wood-cuts it could not\nhave been a very cheap book, was sold off at once. Edition after edition\nfollowed, and translations were published in Latin, in Low-German, in\nDutch, in French, and English. Sermons were preached on the\n\u201cNarrenschiff;\u201d Trithemius calls it _Divina Satira_, Locher compares Brant\nwith Dante, Hutten calls him the new lawgiver of German poetry. The\n\u201cNarrenschiff\u201d is a work which we may still read with pleasure, though it\nis difficult to account for its immense success at the time of its\npublication. Some historians ascribe it to the wood-cuts. They are\ncertainly very clever, and there is reason to suppose that most of them\nwere, if not actually drawn, at least suggested by Brant himself. Yet even\na Turner has failed to render mediocre poetry popular by his\nillustrations, and there is nothing to show that the caricatures of Brant\nwere preferred to his satires. Now his satires, it is true, are not very\npowerful, nor pungent, nor original. But his style is free and easy. Brant\nis not a ponderous poet. He writes in short chapters, and mixes his fools\nin such a manner that we always meet with a variety of new faces. It is\ntrue that all this would hardly be sufficient to secure a decided success\nfor a work like his at the present day. But then we must remember the time\nin which he wrote. What had the poor people of Germany to read toward the\nend of the fifteenth century? Printing had been invented, and books were\npublished and sold with great rapidity. People were not only fond, but\nproud, of reading books. Reading was fashionable, and the first fool who\nenters Brant\u2019s ship is the man who buys books. But what were the books\nthat were offered for sale? We find among the early prints of the\nfifteenth century religious, theological, and classical works in great\nabundance, and we know that the respectable and wealthy burghers of\nAugsburg and Strassburg were proud to fill their shelves with these portly\nvolumes. But then German aldermen had wives, and daughters, and sons, and\nwhat were they to read during the long winter evenings? The poetry of the\nthirteenth century was no longer intelligible, and the fourteenth and\nfifteenth centuries had produced very little that would be to the taste of\nyoung ladies and gentlemen. The poetry of the \u201cMeisters\u00e4nger\u201d was not very\nexhilarating. The romances of \u201cThe Book of Heroes\u201d had lost all their\nnative charms under the rough treatment they had experienced at the hand\nof their latest editor, Casper von der Roen. The so-called \u201cMisteries\u201d\n(not mysteries) might be very well as Christmas pantomimes once a year,\nbut they could not be read for their own sake, like the dramatic\nliterature of later times. The light literature of the day consisted\nentirely in novels; and in spite of their miserable character, their\npopularity was immense. Besides the \u201cGesta Romanorum,\u201d which were turned\ninto German verse and prose, we meet with French novels, such as \u201cLother\nand Maler,\u201d translated by a Countess of Nassau in 1437, and printed in\n1514; \u201cPontus and Sidonia,\u201d translated from the French by Eleanor of\nScotland, the wife of Sigismund of Austria, published 1498; \u201cMelusina,\u201d\nequally from the French, published 1477. The old epic poems of \u201cTristan,\u201d\nand \u201cLancelot,\u201d and \u201cWigalois,\u201d were too long and tedious. People did not\ncare any longer for the deep thoughts of Wolfram von Eschenbach, and the\nbeautiful poetry of Gottfried von Strassburg. They wanted only the plot,\nthe story, the dry bones; and these were dished up in the prose novels of\nthe fifteenth century, and afterwards collected in the so-called \u201cBook of\nLove.\u201d There was room, therefore, at that time for a work like the \u201cShip\nof Fools.\u201d It was the first printed book that treated of contemporaneous\nevents and living persons, instead of old German battles and French\nknights. People are always fond of reading the history of their own times.\nIf the good qualities of their age are brought out, they think of\nthemselves or their friends; if the dark features of their contemporaries\nare exhibited, they think of their neighbors and enemies. Now, the \u201cShip\nof Fools\u201d is just such a satire which ordinary people would read, and read\nwith pleasure. They might feel a slight twinge now and then, but they\nwould put down the book at the end, and thank God that they were not like\nother men. There is a chapter on Misers,\u2014and who would not gladly give a\npenny to a beggar? There is a chapter on Gluttony,\u2014and who was ever more\nthan a little exhilarated after dinner? There is a chapter on\nChurch-goers,\u2014and who ever went to church for respectability\u2019s sake, or to\nshow off a gaudy dress, or a fine dog, or a new hawk? There is a chapter\non Dancing,\u2014and who ever danced except for the sake of exercise? There is\na chapter on Adultery,\u2014and who ever did more than flirt with his\nneighbor\u2019s wife? We sometimes wish that Brant\u2019s satire had been a little\nmore searching, and that, instead of his many allusions to classical fools\n(for his book is full of scholarship), he had given us a little more of\nthe _chronique scandaleuse_ of his own time. But he was too good a man to\ndo this, and his contemporaries no doubt were grateful to him for his\nforbearance.\n\nBrant\u2019s poem is not easy to read. Though he was a contemporary of Luther,\nhis language differs much more from modern German than Luther\u2019s\ntranslation of the Bible. His \u201cShip of Fools\u201d wanted a commentary, and\nthis want has been supplied by one of the most learned and industrious\nscholars of Germany, Professor Zarncke, in his lately published edition of\nthe \u201cNarrenschiff.\u201d This must have been a work of many years of hard\nlabor. Nothing that is worth knowing about Brant and his works has been\nomitted, and we hardly know of any commentary on Aristophanes or Juvenal\nin which every difficulty is so honestly met as in Professor Zarncke\u2019s\nnotes on the German satirist. The editor is a most minute and painstaking\ncritic. He tries to re\u00ebstablish the correct reading of every word, and he\nenters upon his work with as much zeal as if the world could not be saved\ntill every tittle of Brant\u2019s poem had been restored. He is, however, not\nonly a critic, but a sensible and honest man. He knows what is worth\nknowing and what is not, and he does not allow himself to be carried away\nby a desire to display his own superior acquirements,\u2014a weakness which\nmakes so many of his colleagues forgetful of the real ends of knowledge,\nand the real duties of the scholar and the historian.\n\nWe have to say a few words on the English translation of Brant\u2019s \u201cShip of\nFools.\u201d It was not made from the original, but from Locher\u2019s Latin\ntranslation. It reproduces the matter, but not the manner of the original\nsatire. Some portions are added by the translator, Alexander Barclay, and\nin some parts his translation is an improvement on the original. It was\nprinted in 1508, published 1509, and went through several editions.\n\nThe following may serve as a specimen of Barclay\u2019s translation, and of his\noriginal contributions to Brant\u2019s \u201cNavis Stultifera:\u201d\u2014\n\n\u201cHere beginneth the \u2018Ship of Fooles,\u2019 and first of unprofitable books:\u2014\n\n\u201cI am the first foole of all the whole navie,\nTo keep the Pompe, the Helme, and eke the Sayle:\nFor this is my minde, this one pleasure have I,\nOf bookes to have great plentie and apparayle.\nI take no wisdome by them, not yet avayle,\nNor them perceave not, and then I them despise:\nThus am I a foole, and all that sue that guise.\n\n\u201cThat in this Ship the chiefe place I governe,\nBy this wide Sea with fooles wandring,\nThe cause is plaine and easy to discerne,\nStill am I busy, bookes assembling,\nFor to have plentie it is a pleasant thing\nIn my conceyt, and to have them ay in hande:\nBut what they meane do I not understande.\n\n\u201cBut yet I have them in great reverence\nAnd honoure, saving them from filth and ordure,\nBy often brusshing and much diligence,\nFull goodly bounde in pleasant coverture,\nOf Damas, Sattin, or els of Velvet pure:\nI keepe them sure, fearing least they should be lost,\nFor in them is the cunning wherein I me boast.\n\n\u201cBut if it fortune that any learned men\nWithin my house fall to disputation,\nI drawe the curtaynes to shewe my bokes then,\nThat they of my cunning should make probation:\nI kepe not to fall in alterication,\nAnd while they comment, my bookes I turne and winde,\nFor all is in them, and nothing in my minde.\u201d\n\nIn the fourth chapter, \u201cOf newe fassions and disguised garmentes,\u201d there\nis at the end what is called \u201cThe Lenvoy of Alexander Barclay,\u201d and in it\nan allusion to Henry VIII.:\u2014\n\n\u201cBut ye proude galants that thus your selfe disguise,\nBe ye ashamed, beholde unto your prince:\nConsider his sadness, his honestie devise,\nHis clothing expresseth his inwarde prudence,\nYe see no example of such inconvenience\nIn his highness, but godly wit and gravitie,\nEnsue him, and sorrowe for your enormitie.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nIV. LIFE OF SCHILLER.(10)\n\n\nThe hundredth anniversary of the birthday of Schiller, which, according to\nthe accounts published in the German newspapers, seems to have been\ncelebrated in most parts of the civilized, nay, even the uncivilized\nworld, is an event in some respects unprecedented in the literary annals\nof the human race. A nation honors herself by honoring her sons, and it is\nbut natural that in Germany every town and village should have vied in\ndoing honor to the memory of one of their greatest poets. The letters\nwhich have reached us from every German capital relate no more than what\nwe expected. There were meetings and feastings, balls and theatrical\nrepresentations. The veteran philologist, Jacob Grimm, addressed the\nBerlin Academy on the occasion in a soul-stirring oration; the directors\nof the Imperial Press at Vienna seized the opportunity to publish a\nsplendid album, or \u201cSchillerbuch,\u201d in honor of the poet; unlimited\neloquence was poured forth by professors and academicians; school children\nrecited Schiller\u2019s ballads; the German students shouted the most popular\nof his songs; nor did the ladies of Germany fail in paying their tribute\nof gratitude to him who, since the days of the Minnes\u00e4ngers, had been the\nmost eloquent herald of female grace and dignity. In the evening torch\nprocessions might be seen marching through the streets, bonfires were\nlighted on the neighboring hills, houses were illuminated, and even the\nsolitary darkness of the windows of the Papal Nuncio at Vienna added to\nthe lustre of the day.(11) In every place where Schiller had spent some\nyears of his life, local recollections were revived and perpetuated by\ntablets and monuments. The most touching account of all came from the\nsmall village of Cleversulzbach. On the village cemetery, or, as it is\ncalled in German, the \u201cGod\u2019s-acre,\u201d there stands a tombstone, and on it\nthe simple inscription, \u201cSchiller\u2019s Mother.\u201d On the morning of her son\u2019s\nbirthday the poor people of the village were gathered together round that\ngrave, singing one of their sacred hymns, and planting a lime-tree in the\nsoil which covers the heart that loved him best.\n\nBut the commemoration of Schiller\u2019s birthday was not confined to his\nnative country. We have seen, in the German papers, letters from St.\nPetersburg and Lisbon, from Venice, Rome, and Florence, from Amsterdam,\nStockholm, and Christiana, from Warsaw and Odessa, from Jassy and\nBucharest, from Constantinople, Algiers, and Smyrna, and lately from\nAmerica and Australia, all describing the festive gatherings which were\nsuggested, no doubt, by Schiller\u2019s cosmopolitan countrymen, but joined in\nmost cheerfully by all the nations of the globe. Poets of higher rank than\nSchiller\u2014Dante, Shakespeare, and Goethe\u2014have never aroused such world-wide\nsympathies; and it is not without interest to inquire into the causes\nwhich have secured to Schiller this universal popularity. However\nsuperlative the praises which have lately been heaped on Schiller\u2019s poetry\nby those who cannot praise except in superlatives, we believe that it was\nnot the poet, but the man, to whom the world has paid this unprecedented\ntribute of love and admiration. After reading Schiller\u2019s works we must\nread Schiller\u2019s life,\u2014the greatest of all his works. It is a life not\nunknown to the English public, for it has been written by Carlyle. The\nlast festivities, however, have given birth to several new biographies.\nPalleske\u2019s \u201cLife of Schiller\u201d has met with such success in Germany that it\nwell deserved the honor which it has lately received at the hands of Lady\nWallace, and under the special patronage of the Queen, of being translated\ninto English. Another very careful and lucid account of the poet\u2019s life is\ndue to the pen of a member of the French Institute, M. A. Regnier, the\ndistinguished tutor of the Comte de Paris.\n\nIn reading these lives, together with the voluminous literature which is\nintended to illustrate the character of the German poet, we frequently\nfelt inclined to ask one question, to which none of Schiller\u2019s biographers\nhas returned a satisfactory answer: \u201cWhat were the peculiar circumstances\nwhich brought out in Germany, and in the second half of the eighteenth\ncentury, a man of the moral character, and a poet of the creative genius,\nof Schiller?\u201d Granted that he was endowed by nature with the highest\ntalents, how did he grow to be a poet, such as we know him, different from\nall other German poets, and yet in thought, feeling, and language the most\ntruly German of all the poets of Germany? Are we reduced to appeal to the\nmysterious working of an unknown power, if we wish to explain to ourselves\nwhy, in the same country and at the same time, poetical genius assumed\nsuch different forms as are seen in the writings of Schiller and Goethe?\nIs it to be ascribed to what is called individuality, a word which in\ntruth explains nothing; or is it possible for the historian and\npsychologist to discover the hidden influences which act on the growing\nmind, and produce that striking variety of poetical genius which we admire\nin the works of contemporaneous poets, such as Schiller and Goethe in\nGermany, or Wordsworth and Byron in England? Men grow not only from\nwithin, but also from without. We know that a poet is born,\u2014_poeta\nnascitur_,\u2014but we also know that his character must be formed; the seed is\ngiven, but the furrow must be ploughed in which it is to grow; and the\nsame grain which, if thrown on cultivated soil, springs into fullness and\nvigor, will dwindle away, stunted and broken, if cast upon shallow and\nuntilled land. There are certain events in the life of every man which\nfashion and stamp his character; they may seem small and unimportant in\nthemselves, but they are great and important to each of us; they mark that\nslight bend where two lines which had been running parallel begin to\ndiverge, never to meet again. The Greeks call such events _epochs_, _i.e._\nhalts.\n\nWe halt for a moment, we look about and wonder, and then choose our\nfurther way in life. It is the duty of biographers to discover such\nepochs, such halting-points, in the lives of their heroes; and we shall\nendeavor to do the same in the life of Schiller by watching the various\ninfluences which determined the direction of his genius at different\nperiods of his poetical career.\n\nThe period of Schiller\u2019s childhood is generally described with great\ndetail by his biographers. We are told who his ancestors were. I believe\nthey were bakers. We are informed that his mother possessed in her\n_trousseau_, among other things, four pairs of stockings,\u2014three of cotton,\none of wool. There are also long discussions on the exact date of his\nbirth. We hear a great deal of early signs of genius, or rather, we should\nsay, of things done and said by most children, but invested with\nextraordinary significance if remembered of the childhood of great men. To\ntell the truth, we can find nothing very important in what we thus learn\nof the early years of Schiller, nor does the poet himself in later years\ndwell much on the recollections of his dawning mind. If we must look for\nsome determinating influences during the childhood of Schiller, they are\nchiefly to be found in the character of his father. The father was not\nwhat we should call a well-educated man. He had been brought up as a\nbarber and surgeon; had joined a Bavarian regiment in 1745, during the\nAustrian war of succession; and had acted as a non-commissioned officer,\nand, when occasion required, as a chaplain. After the peace of\nAix-la-Chapelle he had married the daughter of an innkeeper. He was a\nbrave man, a God-fearing man, and, as is not unfrequently the case with\nhalf-educated people, a man very fond of reading. What he had failed to\nattain himself, he wished to see realized in his only son. The following\nprayer was found among the papers of the father: \u201cAnd Thou, Being of all\nbeings, I have asked Thee after the birth of my only son, that Thou\nwouldst add to his powers of intellect what I from deficient instruction\nwas unable to attain. Thou hast heard me. Thanks be to Thee, bounteous\nBeing, that Thou heedest the prayers of mortals.\u201d A man of this stamp of\nmind would be sure to exercise his own peculiar influence on his children.\nHe would make them look on life, not as a mere profession, where the son\nhas only to follow in the steps of his father; his children would early\nbecome familiar with such ideas as \u201c_making_ one\u2019s way in life,\u201d and would\nlook forward to a steep path rather than to a beaten track. Their thoughts\nwould dwell on the future at a time when other children live in the\npresent only, and an adventurous spirit would be roused, without which no\ngreat work has ever been conceived and carried out.\n\nWhen his children, young Frederick and his sisters, were growing up, their\nfather read to them their morning and evening prayers; and so fond was the\nboy of the Old and New Testament stories that he would often leave his\ngames in order to be present at his father\u2019s readings. In 1765 the family\nleft Marbach on the Neckar. The father was ordered by the Duke of\nWurtemberg to Lorch, a place on the frontier, where he had to act as\nrecruiting officer. His son received his education in the house of a\nclergyman, began Latin at six, Greek at seven; and as far as we are able\nto see, he neither seems to have considered himself, nor to have been\nconsidered by his masters, as very superior to other boys. He was a good\nboy, tenderly attached to his parents, fond of games, and regular at\nschool. There are but two marked features which we have an opportunity of\nwatching in him as a boy. He knew no fear, and he was full of the warmest\nsympathy for others. The first quality secured him the respect, the second\nthe love, of those with whom he came in contact. His parents, who were\npoor, had great difficulty in restraining his generosity. He would give\naway his school-books and the very buckles off his shoes. Both his\nfearlessness and universal sympathy are remarkable through the whole of\nhis after-life. Not even his enemies could point out one trait of\ncowardice or selfishness in anything he ever did, or said, or wrote. There\nare some pertinent remarks on the combination of these two qualities,\nsympathy with others and courage, by the author of \u201cFriends in Council.\u201d\n\n\n    \u201cIf greatness,\u201d he writes, \u201ccan be shut up in qualities, it will\n    be found to consist in courage and in openness of mind and soul.\n    These qualities may not seem at first to be so potent. But see\n    what _growth_ there is in them. The education of a man of open\n    mind is never ended. Then with openness of soul a man sees some\n    way into all other souls that come near him, feels with them, has\n    their experience, is in himself a people. Sympathy is the\n    universal solvent. Nothing is understood without it.... Add\n    courage to this openness, and you have a man who can own himself\n    in the wrong, can forgive, can trust, can adventure, can, in\n    short, use all the means that insight and sympathy endow him\n    with.\u201d\n\n\nA plucky and warm-hearted boy, under the care of an honest, brave, and\nintelligent father and a tender and religious mother,\u2014this is all we know\nand care to know about Schiller during the first ten years of his life. In\nthe year 1768 there begins a new period in the life of Schiller. His\nfather was settled at Ludwigsburg, the ordinary residence of the reigning\nDuke of Wurtemberg, the Duke Charles. This man was destined to exercise a\ndecisive influence on Schiller\u2019s character. Like many German sovereigns in\nthe middle of the last century, Duke Charles of Wurtemberg had felt the\ninfluence of those liberal ideas which had found so powerful an utterance\nin the works of the French and English philosophers of the eighteenth\ncentury. The philosophy which in France was smiled at by kings and\nstatesmen, while it roused the people to insurrection and regicide,\nproduced in Germany a deeper impression on the minds of the sovereigns and\nruling classes than of the people. In the time of Frederick the Great and\nJoseph II. it became fashionable among sovereigns to profess Liberalism,\nand to work for the enlightenment of the human race. It is true that this\nliberal policy was generally carried out in a rather despotic way, and\npeople were emancipated and enlightened very much as the ancient Saxons\nwere converted by Charlemagne. We have an instance of this in the case of\nSchiller. Duke Charles had founded an institution where orphans and the\nsons of poor officers were educated free of expense. He had been informed\nthat young Schiller was a promising boy, and likely to reflect credit on\nhis new institution, and he proceeded without further inquiry to place him\non the list of his _prot\u00e9g\u00e9s_, assigning to him a place at his military\nschool. It was useless for the father to remonstrate, and explain to the\nDuke that his son had a decided inclination for the Church. Schiller was\nsent to the Academy in 1773, and ordered to study law. The young student\ncould not but see that an injustice had been done him, and the irritation\nwhich it caused was felt by him all the more deeply because it would have\nbeen dangerous to give expression to his feelings. The result was that he\nmade no progress in the subjects which he had been commanded to study. In\n1775 he was allowed to give up law, not, however, to return to theology,\nbut to begin the study of medicine. But medicine, though at first it\nseemed more attractive, failed, like law, to call forth his full energies.\nIn the mean time another interference on the part of the Duke proved even\nmore abortive, and to a certain extent determined the path which\nSchiller\u2019s genius was to take in life. The Duke had prohibited all German\nclassics at his Academy; the boys, nevertheless, succeeded in forming a\nsecret library, and Schiller read the works of Klopstock, Klinger,\nLessing, Goethe, and Wieland\u2019s translations of Shakespeare with rapture,\nno doubt somewhat increased by the dangers he braved in gaining access to\nthese treasures. In 1780, the same year in which he passed his examination\nand received the appointment of regimental surgeon, Schiller wrote his\nfirst tragedy, \u201cThe Robbers.\u201d His taste for dramatic poetry had been\nroused partly by Goethe\u2019s \u201cGoetz von Berlichingen\u201d and Shakespeare\u2019s\nplays, partly by his visits to the theatre, which, under the patronage of\nthe Duke, was then in a very flourishing state. The choice of the subject\nof his first dramatic composition was influenced by the circumstances of\nhis youth. His poetical sympathy for a character such as Karl Moor, a man\nwho sets at defiance all the laws of God and man, can only be accounted\nfor by the revulsion of feeling produced on his boyish mind by the strict\nmilitary discipline to which all the pupils at the Academy were subjected.\nHis sense of right and wrong was strong enough to make him paint his hero\nas a monster, and to make him inflict on him the punishment he merited.\nBut the young poet could not resist the temptation of throwing a brighter\nlight on the redeeming points in the character of a robber and murderer by\npointedly placing him in contrast with the even darker shades of\nhypocritical respectability and saintliness in the picture of his brother\nFranz. The language in which Schiller paints his characters is powerful,\nbut it is often wild and even coarse. The Duke did not approve of his\nformer _prot\u00e9g\u00e9_; the very title-page of \u201cThe Robbers\u201d was enough to\noffend his Serene Highness,\u2014it contained a rising lion, with the motto\n\u201c_In tyrannos_.\u201d The Duke gave a warning to the young military surgeon,\nand when, soon after, he heard of his going secretly to Mannheim to be\npresent at the first performance of his play, he ordered him to be put\nunder military arrest. All these vexations Schiller endured, because he\nknew full well there was no escape from the favors of his royal protector.\nBut when at last he was ordered never to publish again except on medical\nsubjects, and to submit all his poetical compositions to the Duke\u2019s\ncensorship, this proved too much for our young poet. His ambition had been\nroused. He had sat at Mannheim a young man of twenty, unknown, amid an\naudience of men and women who listened with rapturous applause to his own\nthoughts and words. That evening at the theatre of Mannheim had been a\ndecisive evening,\u2014it was an epoch in the history of his life; he had felt\nhis power and the calling of his genius; he had perceived, though in a dim\ndistance, the course he had to run and the laurels he had to gain. When he\nsaw that the humor of the Duke was not likely to improve, he fled from a\nplace where his wings were clipped and his voice silenced. Now, this\nflight from one small German town to another may seem a matter of very\nlittle consequence at present. But in Schiller\u2019s time it was a matter of\nlife and death. German sovereigns were accustomed to look upon their\nsubjects as their property. Without even the show of a trial the poet\nSchubart had been condemned to life-long confinement by this same Duke\nCharles. Schiller, in fleeing his benefactor\u2019s dominions, had not only\nthrown away all his chances in life, but he had placed his safety and the\nsafety of his family in extreme danger. It was a bold, perhaps a reckless\nstep. But whatever we may think of it in a moral point of view, as\nhistorians we must look upon it as the Hegira in the life of the poet.\n\nSchiller was now a man of one or two and twenty, thrown upon the world\npenniless, with nothing to depend on but his brains. The next ten years\nwere hard years for him; they were years of unsettledness, sometimes of\npenury and despair, sometimes of extravagance and folly. This third period\nin Schiller\u2019s life is not marked by any great literary achievements. It\nwould be almost a blank were it not for the \u201cDon Carlos,\u201d which he wrote\nduring his stay near Dresden, between 1785-87. His \u201cFiesco\u201d and \u201cCabale\nund Liebe,\u201d though they came out after his flight from Stuttgard, had been\nconceived before, and they were only repeated protests, in the form of\ntragedies, against the tyranny of rulers and the despotism of society.\nThey show no advance in the growth of Schiller\u2019s mind. Yet that mind,\nthough less productive than might have been expected, was growing as every\nmind grows between the years of twenty and thirty; and it was growing\nchiefly through contact with men. We must make full allowance for the\npowerful influence exercised at that time by the literature of the day (by\nthe writings of Herder, Lessing, and Goethe), and by political events,\nsuch as the French Revolution. But if we watch Schiller\u2019s career\ncarefully, we see that his character was chiefly moulded by his\nintercourse with men. His life was rich in friendships, and what mainly\nupheld him in his struggles and dangers was the sympathy of several\nhigh-born and high-minded persons, in whom the ideals of his own mind\nseemed to have found their fullest realization.\n\nNext to our faith in God, there is nothing so essential to the healthy\ngrowth of our whole being as an unshaken faith in man. This faith in man\nis the great feature in Schiller\u2019s character, and he owes it to a kind\nProvidence which brought him in contact with such noble natures as Frau\nvon Wolzogen, K\u00f6rner, Dalberg; in later years with his wife; with the Duke\nof Weimar, the Prince of Augustenburg, and lastly with Goethe. There was\nat that time a powerful tension in the minds of men, and particularly of\nthe higher classes, which led them to do things which at other times men\nonly aspire to do. The impulses of a most exalted morality\u2014a morality\nwhich is so apt to end in mere declamation and deceit\u2014were not only felt\nby them, but obeyed and carried out. Frau von Wolzogen, knowing nothing of\nSchiller except that he had been at the same school with her son, received\nthe exiled poet, though fully aware that by doing so she might have\ndispleased the Duke and blasted her fortunes and those of her children.\nSchiller preserved the tenderest attachment to this motherly friend\nthrough life, and his letters to her display a most charming innocence and\npurity of mind.\n\nAnother friend was K\u00f6rner, a young lawyer living at Leipzig, and\nafterwards at Dresden\u2014a man who had himself to earn his bread. He had\nlearned to love Schiller from his writings; he received him at his house,\na perfect stranger, and shared with the poor poet his moderate income with\na generosity worthy of a prince. He, too, remained his friend through\nlife; his son was Theodore K\u00f6rner, the poet of \u201cLyre and Sword,\u201d who fell\nfighting as a volunteer for his country against French invaders.\n\nA third friend and patron of Schiller was Dalberg. He was the coadjutor,\nand was to have been the successor, of the Elector of Hesse, then an\necclesiastical Electorate. His rank was that of a reigning prince, and he\nwas made afterwards by Napoleon F\u00fcrst-Primas\u2014Prince Primate\u2014of the\nConfederation of the Rhine. But it was not his station, his wealth, and\ninfluence, it was his mind and heart which made him the friend of\nSchiller, Goethe, Herder, Wieland, Jean Paul, and all the most eminent\nintellects of his time. It is refreshing to read the letters of this\nPrince. Though they belong to a later period of Schiller\u2019s life, a few\npassages may here be quoted in order to characterize his friend and\npatron. Dalberg had promised Schiller a pension of 4,000 florins (not\n4,000 thalers, as M. Regnier asserts) as soon as he should succeed to the\nElectorate, and Schiller in return had asked him for some hints with\nregard to his own future literary occupations. The Prince answers: \u201cYour\nletter has delighted me. To be remembered by a man of your heart and mind\nis a true joy to me. I do not venture to determine what Schiller\u2019s\ncomprehensive and vivifying genius is to undertake. But may I be allowed\nto humbly express a wish that spirits endowed with the powers of giants\nshould ask themselves, \u2018How can I be most useful to mankind?\u2019 This\ninquiry, I think, leads most surely to immortality, and the rewards of a\npeaceful conscience. May you enjoy the purest happiness, and think\nsometimes of your friend and servant, Dalberg.\u201d When Schiller was\nhesitating between history and dramatic poetry, Dalberg\u2019s keen eye\ndiscovered at once that the stage was Schiller\u2019s calling, and that there\nhis influence would be most beneficial. Schiller seemed to think that a\nprofessorial chair in a German university was a more honorable position\nthan that of a poet. Dalberg writes: \u201cInfluence on mankind\u201d (for this he\nknew to be Schiller\u2019s highest ambition) \u201cdepends on the vigor and strength\nwhich a man throws into his works. Thucydides and Xenophon would not deny\nthat poets like Sophocles and Horace have had at least as much influence\non the world as they themselves.\u201d When the French invasion threatened the\nruin of Germany and the downfall of the German sovereigns, Dalberg writes\nagain, in 1796, with perfect serenity: \u201cTrue courage must never fail! The\nfriends of virtue and truth ought now to act and speak all the more\nvigorously and straightforwardly. In the end, what you, excellent friend,\nhave so beautifully said in your \u2018Ideals\u2019 remains true: \u2018The diligence of\nthe righteous works slowly but surely, and friendship is soothing comfort.\nIt is only when I hope to be hereafter of assistance to my friends that I\nwish for a better fate.\u2019 \u201d The society and friendship of such men, who are\nrare in all countries and in all ages, served to keep up in Schiller\u2019s\nmind those ideal notions of mankind which he had first imbibed from his\nown heart, and from the works of philosophers. They find expression in all\nhis writings, but are most eloquently described in his \u201cDon Carlos.\u201d We\nshould like to give some extracts from the dialogue between King Philip\nand the Marquis Posa; but our space is precious, and hardly allows us to\ndo more than just to glance at those other friends and companions whose\nnobility of mind and generosity of heart left so deep an impress on the\npoet\u2019s soul.\n\nThe name of Karl August, the Duke of Weimar, has acquired such a\nworld-wide celebrity as the friend of Goethe and Schiller that we need not\ndwell long on his relation to our poet. As early as 1784 Schiller was\nintroduced to him at Darmstadt, where he was invited to court to read some\nscenes of his \u201cDon Carlos.\u201d The Duke gave him then the title of \u201cRath,\u201d\nand from the year 1787, when Schiller first settled at Weimar, to the time\nof his death, in 1804, he remained his firm friend. The friendship of the\nPrince was returned by the poet, who, in the days of his glory, declined\nseveral advantageous offers from Vienna and other places, and remained at\nthe court of Weimar, satisfied with the small salary which that great Duke\nwas able to give him.\n\nThere was but one other Prince whose bounty Schiller accepted, and his\nname deserves to be mentioned, not so much for his act of generosity as\nfor the sentiment which prompted it. In 1792, when Schiller was ill and\nunable to write, he received a letter from the Hereditary Prince of\nHolstein-Augustenburg and from Count Schimmelmann. We quote from the\nletter:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cYour shattered health, we hear, requires rest, but your\n    circumstances do not allow it. Will you grudge us the pleasure of\n    enabling you to enjoy that rest? We offer you for three years an\n    annual present of 1,000 thalers. Accept this offer, noble man. Let\n    not our titles induce you to decline it. We know what they are\n    worth; we know no pride but that of being men, citizens of that\n    great republic which comprises more than the life of single\n    generations, more than the limits of this globe. You have to deal\n    with men,\u2014your brothers,\u2014not with proud princes, who, by this\n    employment of their wealth, would fain indulge but in a more\n    refined kind of pride.\u201d\n\n\nNo conditions were attached to this present, though a situation in Denmark\nwas offered if Schiller should wish to go there. Schiller accepted the\ngift so nobly offered, but he never saw his unknown friends.(12) We owe to\nthem, humanly speaking, the last years of Schiller\u2019s life, and with them\nthe master-works of his genius, from \u201cWallenstein\u201d to \u201cWilliam Tell.\u201d As\nlong as these works are read and admired, the names of these noble\nbenefactors will be remembered and revered.\n\nThe name of her whom we mentioned next among Schiller\u2019s noble friends and\ncompanions,\u2014we mean his wife,\u2014reminds us that we have anticipated events,\nand that we left Schiller after his flight in 1782, at the very beginning\nof his most trying years. His hopes of success at Mannheim had failed. The\ndirector of the Mannheim theatre, also a Dalberg, declined to assist him.\nHe spent the winter in great solitude at the country-house of Frau von\nWolzogen, finishing \u201cCabale und Liebe,\u201d and writing \u201cFiesco.\u201d In the\nsummer of 1783 he returned to Mannheim, where he received an appointment\nin connection with the theatre of about \u00a340 a year. Here he stayed till\n1785, when he went to Leipzig, and afterwards to Dresden, living chiefly\nat the expense of his friend K\u00f6rner. This unsettled kind of life continued\ntill 1787, and produced, as we saw, little more than his tragedy of \u201cDon\nCarlos.\u201d In the mean time, however, his taste for history had been\ndeveloped. He had been reading more systematically at Dresden, and after\nhe had gone to Weimar in 1787 he was able to publish, in 1788, his\n\u201cHistory of the Revolt of the Netherlands.\u201d On the strength of this he was\nappointed professor at Jena in 1789, first without a salary, afterwards\nwith about \u00a330 a year. He tells us himself how hard he had to work: \u201cEvery\nday,\u201d he says, \u201cI must compose a whole lecture and write it out,\u2014nearly\ntwo sheets of printed matter, not to mention the time occupied in\ndelivering the lecture and making extracts.\u201d However, he had now gained a\nposition, and his literary works began to be better paid. In 1790 he was\nenabled to marry a lady of rank, who was proud to become the wife of the\npoor poet, and was worthy to be the \u201cwife of Schiller.\u201d Schiller was now\nchiefly engaged in historical researches. He wrote his \u201cHistory of the\nThirty Years\u2019 War\u201d in 1791-92, and it was his ambition to be recognized as\na German professor rather than as a German poet. He had to work hard in\norder to make up for lost time, and under the weight of excessive labor\nhis health broke down. He was unable to lecture, unable to write. It was\nthen that the generous present of the Duke of Augustenburg freed him for a\ntime from the most pressing cares, and enabled him to recover his health.\n\nThe years of thirty to thirty-five were a period of transition and\npreparation in Schiller\u2019s life, to be followed by another ten years of\nwork and triumph. These intermediate years were chiefly spent in reading\nhistory and studying philosophy, more especially the then reigning\nphilosophy of Kant. Numerous essays on philosophy, chiefly on the Good,\nthe Beautiful, and the Sublime, were published during this interval. But\nwhat is more important, Schiller\u2019s mind was enlarged, enriched, and\ninvigorated; his poetical genius, by lying fallow for a time, gave promise\nof a richer harvest to come; his position in the world became more\nhonorable, and his confidence in himself was strengthened by the\nconfidence placed in him by all around him. A curious compliment was paid\nhim by the Legislative Assembly then sitting at Paris. On the 26th of\nAugust, 1792, a decree was passed, conferring the title of _Citoyen\nFran\u00e7ais_ on eighteen persons belonging to various countries, friends of\nliberty and universal brotherhood. In the same list with Schiller were the\nnames of Klopstock, Campe, Washington, Kosciusko, and Wilberforce. The\ndecree was signed by Roland, Minister of the Interior, and countersigned\nby Danton. It did not reach Schiller till after the enthusiasm which he\ntoo had shared for the early heroes of the French Revolution had given way\nto disappointment and horror. In the month of December of the very year in\nwhich he had been thus honored by the Legislative Assembly, Schiller was\non the point of writing an appeal to the French nation in defense of Louis\nXVI. The King\u2019s head, however, had fallen before this defense was begun.\nSchiller, a true friend of true liberty, never ceased to express his\naversion to the violent proceedings of the French revolutionists. \u201cIt is\nthe work of passion,\u201d he said, \u201cand not of that wisdom which alone can\nlead to real liberty.\u201d He admitted that many important ideas, which\nformerly existed in books only or in the heads of a few enlightened\npeople, had become more generally current through the French Revolution.\nBut he maintained that the real principles which ought to form the basis\nof a truly happy political constitution were still hidden from view.\nPointing to a volume of Kant\u2019s \u201cCriticism of Pure Reason,\u201d he said, \u201cThere\nthey are, and nowhere else; the French republic will fall as rapidly as it\nhas risen; the republican government will lapse into anarchy, and sooner\nor later a man of genius will appear (he may come from any place) who will\nmake himself not only master of France, but perhaps also of a great part\nof Europe.\u201d This was a remarkable prophecy for a young professor of\nhistory.\n\nThe last decisive event in Schiller\u2019s life was his friendship with Goethe.\nIt dates from 1794, and with this year begins the great and crowning\nperiod of Schiller\u2019s life. To this period belong his \u201cWallenstein,\u201d his\n\u201cSong of the Bell,\u201d his Ballads (1797-98), his \u201cMary Stuart\u201d (1800), the\n\u201cMaid of Orleans\u201d (1801), the \u201cBride of Messina\u201d (1803), and \u201cWilliam\nTell;\u201d in fact, all the works which have made Schiller a national poet and\ngained for him a worldwide reputation and an immortal name.\n\nGoethe\u2019s character was in many respects diametrically opposed to\nSchiller\u2019s, and for many years it seemed impossible that there should ever\nbe a community of thought and feeling between the two. Attempts to bring\ntogether these great rivals were repeatedly made by their mutual friends.\nSchiller had long felt himself drawn by the powerful genius of Goethe, and\nGoethe had long felt that Schiller was the only poet who could claim to be\nhis peer. After an early interview with Goethe, Schiller writes, \u201cOn the\nwhole, this meeting has not at all diminished the idea, great as it was,\nwhich I had previously formed of Goethe; but I doubt if we shall ever come\ninto close communication with each other. Much that interests me has\nalready had its epoch with him; his world is not my world.\u201d Goethe had\nexpressed the same feeling. He saw Schiller occupying the very position\nwhich he himself had given up as untenable; he saw his powerful genius\ncarrying out triumphantly \u201cthose very paradoxes, moral and dramatic, from\nwhich he was struggling to get liberated.\u201d \u201cNo union,\u201d as Goethe writes,\n\u201cwas to be dreamt of. Between two spiritual antipodes there was more\nintervening than a simple diameter of the spheres. Antipodes of that sort\nact as a kind of poles, which can never coalesce.\u201d How the first approach\nbetween these two opposite poles took place Goethe has himself described,\nin a paper entitled \u201cHappy Incidents.\u201d But no happy incident could have\nled to that glorious friendship, which stands alone in the literary\nhistory of the whole world, if there had not been on the part of Schiller\nhis warm sympathy for all that is great and noble, and on the part of\nGoethe a deep interest in every manifestation of natural genius. Their\ndifferences on almost every point of art, philosophy, and religion, which\nat first seemed to separate them forever, only drew them more closely\ntogether, when they discovered in each other those completing elements\nwhich produced true harmony of souls. Nor is it right to say that Schiller\nowes more to Goethe than Goethe to Schiller. If Schiller received from\nGoethe the higher rules of art and a deeper insight into human nature,\nGoethe drank from the soul of his friend the youth and vigor, the purity\nand simplicity, which we never find in any of Goethe\u2019s works before his\n\u201cHermann and Dorothea.\u201d And, as in most friendships, it was not so much\nGoethe as he was, but Goethe as reflected in his friend\u2019s soul, who\nhenceforth became Schiller\u2019s guide and guardian. Schiller possessed the\nart of admiring, an art so much more rare than the art of criticising. His\neye was so absorbed in all that was great, and noble, and pure, and high\nin Goethe\u2019s mind, that he could not, or would not, see the defects in his\ncharacter. And Goethe was to Schiller what he was to no one else. He was\nwhat Schiller believed him to be; afraid to fall below his friend\u2019s ideal,\nhe rose beyond himself until that high ideal was reached, which only a\nSchiller could have formed. Without this regenerating friendship it is\ndoubtful whether some of the most perfect creations of Goethe and Schiller\nwould ever have been called into existence.\n\nWe saw Schiller gradually sinking into a German professor, the sphere of\nhis sympathies narrowed, the aim of his ambition lowered. His energies\nwere absorbed in collecting materials and elaborating his \u201cHistory of the\nThirty Years\u2019 War,\u201d which was published in 1792. The conception of his\ngreat dramatic Trilogy, the \u201cWallenstein,\u201d which dates from 1791, was\nallowed to languish until it was taken up again for Goethe, and finished\nfor Goethe in 1799. Goethe knew how to admire and encourage, but he also\nknew how to criticise and advise. Schiller, by nature meditative rather\nthan observant, had been most powerfully attracted by Kant\u2019s ideal\nphilosophy. Next to his historical researches, most of his time at Jena\nwas given to metaphysical studies. Not only his mind, but his language\nsuffered from the attenuating influences of that rarefied atmosphere which\npervades the higher regions of metaphysical thought. His mind was\nattracted by the general and the ideal, and lost all interest in the\nindividual and the real. This was not a right frame of mind, either for an\nhistorian or a dramatic poet. In Goethe, too, the philosophical element\nwas strong, but it was kept under by the practical tendencies of his mind.\nSchiller looked for his ideal beyond the real world; and, like the\npictures of a Raphael, his conceptions seemed to surpass in purity and\nharmony all that human eye had ever seen. Goethe had discovered that the\ntruest ideal lies hidden in real life; and like the master-works of a\nMichael Angelo, his poetry reflected that highest beauty which is revealed\nin the endless variety of creation, and must there be discovered by the\nartist and the poet. In Schiller\u2019s early works every character was the\npersonification of an idea. In his \u201cWallenstein\u201d we meet for the first\ntime with real men and real life. In his \u201cDon Carlos,\u201d Schiller, under\nvarious disguises more or less transparent, acts every part himself. In\n\u201cWallenstein\u201d the heroes of the \u201cThirty Years\u2019 War\u201d maintain their own\nindividuality, and are not forced to discuss the social problems of\nRousseau, or the metaphysical theories of Kant. Schiller was himself aware\nof this change, though he was hardly conscious of its full bearing. While\nengaged in composing his \u201cWallenstein,\u201d he writes to a friend:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI do my business very differently from what I used to do. The\n    subject seems to be so much outside me that I can hardly get up\n    any feeling for it. The subject I treat leaves me cold and\n    indifferent, and yet I am full of enthusiasm for my work. With the\n    exception of two characters to which I feel attached, Max\n    Piccolomini and Thekla, I treat all the rest, and particularly the\n    principal character of the play, only with the pure love of the\n    artist. But I can promise you that they will not suffer from this.\n    I look to history for limitation, in order to give, through\n    surrounding circumstances, a stricter form and reality to my\n    ideals. I feel sure that the historical will not draw me down or\n    cripple me. I only desire through it to impart life to my\n    characters and their actions. The life and soul must come from\n    another source, through that power which I have already perhaps\n    shown elsewhere, and without which even the first conception of\n    this work would, of course, have been impossible.\u201d\n\n\nHow different is this from what Schiller felt in former years! In writing\n\u201cDon Carlos,\u201d he laid down as a principle, that the poet must not be the\npainter but the lover of his heroes, and in his early days he found it\nintolerable in Shakespeare\u2019s dreams that he could nowhere lay his hand on\nthe poet himself. He was then, as he himself expresses it, unable to\nunderstand nature, except at second-hand.\n\nGoethe was Schiller\u2019s friend, but he was also Schiller\u2019s rival. There is a\nperilous period in the lives of great men, namely, the time when they\nbegin to feel that their position is made, that they have no more rivals\nto fear. Goethe was feeling this at the time when he met Schiller. He was\nsatiated with applause, and his bearing towards the public at large became\ncareless and offensive. In order to find men with whom he might measure\nhimself, he began to write on the history of Art, and to devote himself to\nnatural philosophy. Schiller, too, had gained his laurels chiefly as a\ndramatic poet; and though he still valued the applause of the public, yet\nhis ambition as a poet was satisfied; he was prouder of his \u201cThirty Years\u2019\nWar\u201d than of his \u201cRobbers\u201d and \u201cDon Carlos.\u201d When Goethe became intimate\nwith Schiller, and discovered in him those powers which as yet were hidden\nto others, he felt that there was a man with whom even he might run a\nrace. Goethe was never jealous of Schiller. He felt conscious of his own\ngreat powers, and he was glad to have those powers again called out by one\nwho would be more difficult to conquer than all his former rivals.\nSchiller, on the other hand, perceived in Goethe the true dignity of a\npoet. At Jena his ambition was to have the title of Professor of History;\nat Weimar he saw that it was a greater honor to be called a poet, and the\nfriend of Goethe. When he saw that Goethe treated him as his friend, and\nthat the Duke and his brilliant court looked upon him as his equal,\nSchiller, too modest to suppose he had earned such favors, was filled with\na new zeal, and his poetical genius displayed for a time an almost\ninexhaustible energy. Scarcely had his \u201cWallenstein\u201d been finished, in\n1799, when he began his \u201cMary Stuart.\u201d This play was finished in the\nsummer of 1800, and a new one was taken in hand in the same year,\u2014the\n\u201cMaid of Orleans.\u201d In the spring of 1801 the \u201cMaid of Orleans\u201d appeared on\nthe stage, to be followed in 1803 by the \u201cBride of Messina,\u201d and in 1804\nby his last great work, his \u201cWilliam Tell.\u201d During the same time Schiller\ncomposed his best ballads, his \u201cSong of the Bell,\u201d his epigrams, and his\nbeautiful Elegy, not to mention his translations and adaptations of\nEnglish and French plays for the theatre at Weimar. After his \u201cWilliam\nTell\u201d Schiller could feel that he no longer owed his place by the side of\nGoethe to favor and friendship, but to his own work and worth. His race\nwas run, his laurels gained. His health, however, was broken, and his\nbodily frame too weak to support the strain of his mighty spirit. Death\ncame to his relief, giving rest to his mind, and immortality to his name.\n\nLet us look back once more on the life of Schiller. The lives of great men\nare the lives of martyrs; we cannot regard them as examples to follow, but\nrather as types of human excellence to study and to admire. The life of\nSchiller was not one which many of us would envy; it was a life of toil\nand suffering, of aspiration rather than of fulfillment, a long battle\nwith scarcely a moment of rest for the conqueror to enjoy his hard-won\ntriumphs. To an ambitious man the last ten years of the poet\u2019s life might\nseem an ample reward for the thirty years\u2019 war of life which he had to\nfight single-handed. But Schiller was too great a man to be ambitious.\nFame with him was a means, never an object. There was a higher, a nobler\naim in his life, which upheld him in all his struggles. From the very\nbeginning of his career Schiller seems to have felt that his life was not\nhis. He never lived for himself; he lived and worked for mankind. He\ndiscovered within himself how much there was of the good, the noble, and\nthe beautiful in human nature; he had never been deceived in his friends.\nAnd such was his sympathy with the world at large that he could not bear\nto see in any rank of life the image of man, created in the likeness of\nGod, distorted by cunning, pride, and selfishness. His whole poetry may be\nsaid to be written on the simple text, \u201cBe true, be good, be noble!\u201d It\nmay seem a short text, but truth is very short, and the work of the\ngreatest teachers of mankind has always consisted in the unflinching\ninculcation of these short truths. There is in Schiller\u2019s works a kernel\nfull of immortal growth, which will endure long after the brilliant colors\nof his poetry have faded away. That kernel is the man, and without it\nSchiller\u2019s poetry, like all other poetry, is but the song of sirens.\nSchiller\u2019s character has been subjected to that painful scrutiny to which,\nin modern times, the characters of great men are subjected; everything he\never did, or said, or thought, has been published; and yet it would be\ndifficult, in the whole course of his life, to point out one act, one\nword, one thought, that could be called mean, untrue, or selfish. From the\nbeginning to the end Schiller remained true to himself; he never acted a\npart, he never bargained with the world. We may differ from him on many\npoints of politics, ethics, and religion; but though we differ, we must\nalways respect and admire. His life is the best commentary on his poetry;\nthere is never a discrepancy between the two. As mere critics, we may be\nable to admire a poet without admiring the man; but poetry, it should be\nremembered, was not meant for critics only, and its highest purpose is\nnever fulfilled, except where, as with Schiller, we can listen to the poet\nand look up to the man.\n\n1859.\n\n\n\n\n\nV. WILHELM M\u00dcLLER.(13) 1794-1827.\n\n\nSeldom has a poet in a short life of thirty years engraven his name so\ndeeply on the memorial tablets of the history of German poetry as Wilhelm\nM\u00fcller. Although the youthful efforts of a poet may be appreciated by\nthose few who are able to admire what is good and beautiful, even though\nit has never before been admired by others, yet in order permanently to\nwin the ear and heart of his people, a poet must live with the people, and\ntake part in the movements and struggles of his age. Thus only can he hope\nto stir and mould the thoughts of his contemporaries, and to remain a\npermanent living power in the recollections of his countrymen. Wilhelm\nM\u00fcller died at the very moment when the rich blossoms of his poetic genius\nwere forming fruit; and after he had warmed and quickened the hearts of\nthe youth of Germany with the lyric songs of his own youth, only a short\nspan of time was granted him to show the world, as he did more especially\nin his \u201cGreek Songs\u201d and \u201cEpigrams,\u201d the higher goal toward which he\naspired. In these his last works one readily perceives that his poetry\nwould not have reflected the happy dreams of youth only, but that he could\nperceive the poetry of life in its sorrows as clearly as in its joys, and\ndepict it in true and vivid colors.\n\nOne may, I think, divide the friends and admirers of Wilhelm M\u00fcller into\ntwo classes: those who rejoice and delight in his fresh and joyous songs,\nand those who admire the nobleness and force of his character as shown in\nthe poems celebrating the war of Greek independence, and in his epigrams.\nAll poetry is not for every one, nor for every one at all times. There are\ncritics and historians of literature who cannot tolerate songs of youth,\nof love, and of wine; they always ask \u201cwhy?\u201d and \u201cwherefore?\u201d and they\ndemand in all poetry, before anything else, high or deep thoughts. No\ndoubt there can be no poetry without thought, but there are thoughts which\nare poetical without being drawn from the deepest depths of the heart and\nbrain, nay, which are poetical just because they are as simple and true\nand natural as the flowers of the field or the stars of heaven. There is a\npoetry for the old, but there is also a poetry for the young. The young\ndemand in poetry an interpretation of their own youthful feelings, and\nfirst learn truly to understand themselves through those poets who speak\nfor them as they would speak for themselves, had nature endowed them with\nmelody of thought and harmony of diction. Youth is and will remain the\nmajority of the world, and will let no gloomy brow rob it of its poetic\nenthusiasm for young love and old wine. True, youth is not over-critical;\ntrue, it does not know how to speak or write in learned phrases of the\nmerits of its favorite poets. But for all that, where is the poet who\nwould not rather live in the warm recollection of the never-dying youth of\nhis nation than in voluminous encyclop\u00e6dias, or even in the marble\nWalhallas of Germany? The story and the songs of a miller\u2019s man who loves\nhis master\u2019s daughter, and of a miller\u2019s daughter who loves a huntsman\nbetter, may seem very trivial, commonplace, and unpoetical to many a man\nof forty or fifty. But there are men of forty and fifty who have never\nlost sight of the bright but now far-off days of their own youth, who can\nstill rejoice with those that rejoice, and weep with those that weep, and\nlove with those that love,\u2014aye, who can still fill their glasses with old\nand young, and in whose eyes every-day life has not destroyed the poetic\nbloom that rests everywhere on life so long as it is lived with warm and\nnatural feelings. Songs which, like the \u201cBeautiful Miller\u2019s Daughter\u201d and\nthe \u201cWinter Journey,\u201d could so penetrate and again spring forth from the\nsoul of Franz Schubert, may well stir the very depths of our own hearts,\nwithout the need of fearing the wise looks of those who possess the art of\nsaying nothing in many words. Why should poetry be less free than painting\nto seek for what is beautiful wherever a human eye can discover, wherever\nhuman art can imitate it? No one blames the painter if, instead of giddy\npeaks or towering waves, he delineates on his canvas a quiet narrow\nvalley, filled with a green mist, and enlivened only by a gray mill and a\ndark brown mill-wheel, from which the spray rises like silver dust, and\nthen floats away, and vanishes in the rays of the sun. Is what is not too\ncommon for the painter, too common for the poet? Is an idyl in the truest,\nwarmest, softest colors of the soul, like the \u201cBeautiful Miller\u2019s\nDaughter,\u201d less a work of art than a landscape by Ruysdael? And observe in\nthese songs how the execution suits the subject; their tone is thoroughly\npopular, and reminds many of us, perhaps too much, of the popular songs\ncollected by Arnim and Brentano in \u201cDes Knaben Wunderhorn.\u201d But this could\nnot be helped. Theocritus could not write his idyls in grand Attic Greek;\nhe needed the homeliness of the B\u0153otian dialect. It was the same with\nWilhelm M\u00fcller, who must not be blamed for expressions which now perhaps,\nmore than formerly, may sound, to fastidious ears, too homely or\ncommonplace.\n\nHis simple and natural conception of nature is shown most beautifully in\nthe \u201cWanderer\u2019s Songs,\u201d and in the \u201cSpring Wreath from the Plauen Valley.\u201d\nNowhere do we find a labored thought or a labored word. The lovely spring\nworld is depicted exactly as it is, but over all is thrown the life and\ninspiration of a poet\u2019s eye and a poet\u2019s mind, which perceives and gives\nutterance to what others fail to see, and silent nature cannot utter. It\nis this recognition of the beautiful in what is insignificant, of\ngreatness in what is small, of the marvelous in ordinary life,\u2014yes, this\nperception of the divine in every earthly enjoyment,\u2014which gives its own\ncharm to each of Wilhelm M\u00fcller\u2019s smallest poems, and endears them so\ntruly to those who, amidst the hurry of life, have not forgotten the\ndelight of absorption in nature, who have never lost their faith in the\nmystery of the divine presence in all that is beautiful, good, and true on\nearth. We need only read the \u201cFr\u00fchlingsmahl,\u201d or \u201cPfingsten\u201d to see how a\nwhole world, aye, a whole heaven, may be mirrored in the tiniest drop of\ndew.\n\nAnd as enjoyment of nature finds so clear an echo in the poetry of Wilhelm\nM\u00fcller, so also does the delight which man should have in man. Drinking\nsongs and table songs do not belong to the highest flights of poetry; but\nif the delights of friendly meetings and greetings belong to some of the\nbrightest moments of human happiness, why should a poet hold them to be\nbeneath his muse? There is something especially German in all drinking\nsongs, and no other nation has held its wine in such honor. Can one\nimagine English poems on port and sherry? or has a Frenchman much to tell\nus of his Bordeaux, or even of his Burgundy? The reason that the poetry of\nwine is unknown in England and France is, that in these countries people\nknow nothing of what lends its poetry to wine, namely, the joyous\nconsciousness of mutual pleasure, the outpouring of hearts, the feeling of\ncommon brotherhood, which makes learned professors and divines, generals\nand ministers, men once more at the sound of the ringing glasses. This\npurely human delight in the enjoyment of life, in the flavor of the German\nwine, and in the yet higher flavor of the German Symposium, finds it\nhappiest expression in the drinking songs of Wilhelm M\u00fcller. They have\noften been set to music by the best masters, and have long been sung by\nthe happy and joyous. The name of the poet is often forgotten, whilst many\nof his songs have become popular songs, just because they were sung from\nthe heart and soul of the German people, as the people were fifty years\nago, and as the best of them still are, in spite of many changes in the\nFatherland.\n\nIt is easy to see that a serious tone is not wanting even in the drinking\nsongs. The wine was good, but the times were bad. Those who, like Wilhelm\nM\u00fcller, had shared in the great sufferings and the great hopes of the\nGerman people, and who then saw that after all the sacrifices that had\nbeen made, all was in vain, all was again as bad or even worse than\nbefore, could with difficulty conceal their disaffection, however helpless\nthey felt themselves against the brutalities of those in power. Many, who\nlike Wilhelm M\u00fcller had labored to reanimate German popular feeling; who\nlike him had left the university to sacrifice as common soldiers their\nlife and life\u2019s happiness to the freedom of the Fatherland, and who then\nsaw how the terror felt by the scarcely rescued princes of their\ndeliverers, and the fear of foreign nations of a united and strong\nGermany, joined hand in hand to destroy the precious seed sown in blood\nand tears,\u2014could not always suppress their gloomy anger at such\nfaint-hearted, weak-minded policy. On the first of January, 1820, Wilhelm\nM\u00fcller wrote thus, in the dedication of the second part of his \u201cLetters\nfrom Rome\u201d to his friend Atterbom, the Swedish poet, with whom he had but\na short time before passed the Carnival time in Italy joyously and\ncarelessly: \u201cAnd thus I greet you in your old sacred Fatherland, not\njokingly and merrily, like the book, whose writer seems to have become a\nstranger to me, but earnestly and briefly; for the great fast of the\nEuropean world, expecting the passion, and waiting for deliverance, can\nendure no indifferent shrug of the shoulders and no hollow compromises and\nexcuses. He who cannot act at this time, can yet rest and mourn.\u201d For such\nwords, veiled as they were, resigned as they were, the fortress of Mayence\nwas at that time the usual answer.\n\n\u201cDeutsch und frei und stark und lauter\n  In dem deutschen Land\nIst der Wein allein geblieben\n  An der Rheines Strand.\nIst _der_ nicht ein Demagoge,\n  Wer soll einer sein?\nMainz, du stolze Bundesfeste,\n  Sperr ihn nur nicht ein.\u201d(14)\n\nThat Wilhelm M\u00fcller escaped the petty and annoying persecutions of the\nthen police system, he owed partly to the retired life he led in his\nlittle native country, partly to his own good spirits, which prevented him\nfrom entirely sinking the man in the politician. He had some enemies in\nthe little court, whose Duke and Duchess were personally so attached to\nhim. A prosperous life such as his could not fail to attract envy, and his\nfrank, guileless character gave plenty of occasion for suspicion. But the\nonly answer which he vouchsafed to his detractors was:\u2014\n\n\u201cUnd lasst mir doch mein volles Glass,\nUnd lasst mir meinen guten Spass,\nMit unsrer schlechten Zeit!\nWer bei dem Weine singt und lacht,\nDen thut, ihr Herrn, nicht in die Acht!\nEin Kind ist Fr\u00f6hligkeit.\u201d(15)\n\nWilhelm M\u00fcller evidently felt that when words are not deeds, or do not\nlead to deeds, silence is more worthy of a man than speech. He never\nbecame a political poet, at least never in his own country. But when the\nrising of the Greeks appealed to those human sympathies of Christian\nnations which can never be quite extinguished, and when here, too, the\nfaint-hearted policy of the great powers played and bargained over the\ngreat events in the east of Europe instead of trusting to those principles\nwhich alone can secure the true and lasting well-being of states, as well\nas of individuals, then the long accumulated wrath of the poet and of the\nman burst forth and found utterance in the songs on the Greek war of\nindependence. Human, Christian, political, and classical sympathies\nstirred his heart, and breathed that life into his poems, which most of\nthem still possess. It is astonishing how a young man in a small isolated\ntown like Dessau, almost shut out from intercourse with the great world,\ncould have followed step by step the events of the Greek revolution,\nseizing on all the right, the beauty, the grandeur of the struggle, making\nhimself intimately acquainted with the dominant characters, whilst he at\nthe same time mastered the peculiar local coloring of the passing events.\nWilhelm M\u00fcller was not only a poet, but he was intimately acquainted with\nclassic antiquity. He _knew_ the Greeks and the Romans. And just as during\nhis stay in Rome he recognized at all points the old in what was new, and\neverywhere sought to find what was eternal in the eternal city, so now\nwith him the modern Greeks were inseparably joined with the ancient. A\nknowledge of the modern Greek language appeared to him the natural\ncompletion of the study of old Greek; and it was his acquaintance with the\npopular songs of modern as well as of ancient Hellas that gave the color\nwhich imparted such a vivid expression of truth and naturalness to his own\nGreek songs. It was thus that the \u201cGriechen Lieder\u201d arose, which appeared\nin separate but rapid numbers, and found great favor with the people. But\neven these \u201cGriechen Lieder\u201d caused anxiety to the paternal governments of\nthose days:\u2014\n\n\u201cRuh und Friede will Europa\u2014warum hast du sie gest\u00f6rt?\nWarum mit dem Wahn der Freiheit eigenm\u00e4chtig dich beth\u00f6rt?\nHoff\u2019 auf keines Herren H\u00fclfe gegen eines Herren Frohn:\nAuch des T\u00fcrkenkaisers Polster nennt Europa einen Thron.\u201d(16)\n\nHis last poems were suppressed by the Censor, as well as his \u201cHymn on the\nDeath of Raphael Riego.\u201d Some of these were first published long after his\ndeath; others must have been lost whilst in the Censor\u2019s hands.\n\nTwo of the Greek songs, \u201cMark Bozzaris,\u201d and \u201cSong before Battle,\u201d may\nhelp the English reader to form his own opinion both of the poetical\ngenius and of the character of Wilhelm M\u00fcller:\u2014\n\nMARK BOZZARI.(17)\n\nOeffne deine hohen Thore, Missolunghi, Stadt der Ehren,\nWo der Helden Leichen ruhen, die uns fr\u00f6hlich sterben lehren,\nOeffne deine hohen Thore, \u00f6ffne deine tiefen Gr\u00fcfte,\nAuf, und streue Lorberreiser auf den Pfad und in die L\u00fcfte;\nMark Bozzari\u2019s edlen Leib bringen wir zu dir getragen.\nMark Bozzari\u2019s! Wer darf\u2019s wagen, solchen Helden zu beklagen?\nWillst zuerst du seine Wunden oder seine Siege z\u00e4hlen?\nKeinem Sieg wird eine Wunde, keiner Wund\u2019 ein Sieg hier fehlen.\nSieh auf unsern Lanzenspitzen sich die Turbanh\u00e4upter drehen,\nSieh, wie \u00fcber seiner Bahre die Osmanenfahnen wehen,\nSieh, o sieh die letzten Werke, die vollbracht des Helden Rechte\nIn dem Feld von Karpinissi, wo sein Stahl im Blute zechte!\nIn der schwarzen Geisterstunde rief er unsre Schar zusammen.\nFunken spr\u00fchten unsre Augen durch die Racht wie Wetterflammen,\nUebers Knie zerbrachen wir jauchzend unsrer Schwerter Scheiden,\nUm mit Sensen einzum\u00e4hen in die feisten T\u00fcrkenweiden;\nUnd wir dr\u00fcckten uns die H\u00e4nde, und wir strichen uns die B\u00e4rte,\nUnd der stampfte mit dem Fusze, und der rieb an seinem Schwerte.\nDa erscholl Bozzari\u2019s Stimme: \u201cAuf, ins Lager der Barbaren!\nAuf, mir nach! Verirrt euch nicht, Br\u00fcder, in der Feinde Scharen!\nSucht ihr mich, im Zelt des Paschas werdet ihr mich sicher finden.\nAuf, mit Gott! Er hilft die Feinde, hilft den Tod auch \u00fcberwinden!\nAuf!\u201d Und die Trompete risz er hastig aus des Bl\u00e4sers H\u00e4nden\nUnd stiesz selbst hinein so hell, dasz es von den Felsenw\u00e4nden\nHeller stets und heller muszte sich verdoppelnd widerhallen;\nAber heller widerhallt\u2019 es doch in unsern Herzen allen.\nWie des Herren Blitz und Donner aus der Wolkenburg der N\u00e4chte,\nAlso traf das Schwert der Freien die Tyrannen und die Knechte;\nWie die Tuba des Gerichtes wird dereinst die S\u00fcnder wecken,\nAlso scholl durchs T\u00fcrkenlager brausend dieser Ruf der Schrecken:\n\u201cMark Bozzari! Mark Bozzari! Sulioten! Sulioten!\u201d\nSolch ein guter Morgengrusz ward den Schl\u00e4fern da entboten.\nUnd sie r\u00fcttelten sich auf, und gleich hirtenlosen Schafen\nRannten sie durch alle Gassen, bis sie aneinander trafen\nUnd, beth\u00f6rt von Todesengeln, die durch ihre Schw\u00e4rme gingen,\nBr\u00fcder sich in blinder Wuth st\u00fcrzten in der Br\u00fcder Klingen.\nFrag\u2019 die Nacht nach unsern Thaten; sie hat uns im Kampf gesehen\u2014\nAber wird der Tag es glauben, was in dieser Nacht geschehen?\nHundert Griechen, tausend T\u00fcrken: also war die Saat zu schauen\nAuf dem Feld von Karpinissi, als das Licht begann zu grauen.\nMark Bozzari, Mark Bozzari, und dich haben wir gefunden\u2014\nKenntlich nur an deinem Schwerte, kenntlich nur an deinen Wunden,\nAn den Wunden, die du schlugest, und an denen, die dich trafen\u2014\nWie du es verheiszen hattest, in dem Zelt des Paschas schlafen.\n\nOeffne deine hohen Thore, Missolunghi, Stadt der Ehren,\nWo der Helden Leichen ruhen, die uns fr\u00f6hlich sterben lehren,\nOeffne deine tiefen Gr\u00fcfte, dasz wir in den heil\u2019gen St\u00e4tten\nNeben Helden unsern Helden zu dem langen Schlafe betten!\u2014\nSchlafe bei dem deutschen Grafen, Grafen Normann, Fels der Ehren,\nBis die Stimmen des Gerichtes alle Gr\u00e4ber werden leeren.\n\nMARK BOZZARIS.\n\nOpen wide, proud Missolonghi, open wide thy portals high,\nWhere repose the bones of heroes, teach us cheerfully to die!\nOpen wide thy lofty portals, open wide thy vaults profound;\nUp, and scatter laurel garlands to the breeze and on the ground!\nMark Bozzaris\u2019 noble body is the freight to thee we bear,\u2014\nMark Bozzaris\u2019! Who for hero great as he to weep will dare?\nTell his wounds, his victories over! Which in number greatest be?\nEvery victory has its wound, and every wound its victory!\nSee, a turbaned head is grimly set on all our lances here!\nSee, how the Osmanli\u2019s banner swathes in purple folds his bier!\nSee, O see the latest trophies, which our hero\u2019s glory sealed,\nWhen his glaive with gore was drunken on great Karpinissi\u2019s field!\nIn the murkiest hour of midnight did we at his call arise;\nThrough the gloom like lightning-flashes flashed the fury from our eyes;\nWith a shout, across our knees we snapped the scabbards of our swords,\nBetter down to mow the harvest of the mellow Turkish hordes;\nAnd we clasped our hands together, and each warrior stroked his beard,\nAnd one stamped the sward, another rubbed his blade, and vowed its wierd.\nThen Bozzaris\u2019 voice resounded: \u201cOn, to the barbarian\u2019s lair!\nOn, and follow me, my brothers, see you keep together there!\nShould you miss me, you will find me surely in the Pasha\u2019s tent!\nOn, with God! Through Him our foemen, death itself through Him is shent!\nOn!\u201d And swift he snatched the bugle from the hands of him that blew,\nAnd himself awoke a summons that o\u2019er dale and mountain flew,\nTill each rock and cliff made answer clear and clearer to the call,\nBut a clearer echo sounded in the bosom of us all!\nAs from midnight\u2019s battlemented keep the lightnings of the Lord\nSweep, so swept our swords, and smote the tyrants and their slavish horde;\nAs the trump of doom shall waken sinners in their graves that lie,\nSo through all the Turkish leaguer thundered his appalling cry:\n\u201cMark Bozzaris! Mark Bozzaris! Suliotes, smite them in their lair!\u201d\nSuch the goodly morning greeting that we gave the sleepers there.\nAnd they staggered from their slumber, and they ran from street to street,\nRan like sheep without a shepherd, striking wild at all they meet;\nRan, and frenzied by Death\u2019s angels, who amidst their myriads strayed,\nBrother, in bewildered fury, dashed and fell on brother\u2019s blade.\nAsk the night of our achievements! It beheld us in the fight,\nBut the day will never credit what we did in yonder night.\nGreeks by hundreds, Turks by thousands, there like scattered seed they\n            lay,\nOn the field of Karpinissi, when the morning broke in gray.\nMark Bozarris, Mark Bozarris, and we found thee gashed and mown\nBy thy sword alone we knew thee, knew thee by thy wounds alone;\nBy the wounds thy hand had cloven, by the wounds that seamed thy breast,\nLying, as thou hadst foretold us, in the Pasha\u2019s tent at rest!\n\nOpen wide, proud Missolonghi, open wide thy portals high,\nWhere repose the bones of heroes, teach us cheerfully to die!\nOpen wide thy vaults! Within their holy bounds a couch we\u2019d make,\nWhere our hero, laid with heroes, may his last long slumber take!\nRest beside that Rock of Honor, brave Count Normann, rest thy head,\nTill, at the archangel\u2019s trumpet, all the graves give up their dead!\n\nLIED VOR DER SCHLACHT.\n\nWer f\u00fcr die Freiheit kampft und f\u00e4llt, desz Ruhm wird bl\u00fchend stehn,\nSolange frei die Winde noch durch freie L\u00fcfte wehn,\nSolange frei der B\u00e4ume Laub noch rauscht im gr\u00fcnen Wald,\nSolang\u2019 des Stromes Woge noch frei nach dem Meere wallt,\nSolang\u2019 des Adlers Fittich frei noch durch die Wolken fleugt,\nSolang\u2019 ein freier Odem noch aus freiem Herzen steigt.\n\nWer f\u00fcr die Freiheit k\u00e4mpft und f\u00e4llt, desz Ruhm wird bl\u00fchend stehn,\nSolange freie Geister noch durch Erd\u2019 und Himmel gehn.\nDurch Erd\u2019 und Himmel schwebt er noch, der Helden Schattenreihn,\nUnd rauscht um uns in stiller Nacht, in hellem Sonnenschein,\nIm Sturm, der stolze Tannen bricht, und in dem L\u00fcftchen auch,\nDas durch das Gras auf Gr\u00e4bern spielt mit seinem leisen Hauch,\nIn ferner Enkel Hause noch um alle Wiegen kreist\nAuf Hellas\u2019 heldenreicher Flur der freien Ahnen Geist;\nDer haucht in Wundertr\u00e4umen schon den zarten S\u00e4ugling an\nUnd weiht in seinem ersten Schlaf das Kind zu einem Mann;\nDen J\u00fcngling lockt sein Ruf hinaus mit nie gef\u00fchlter Lust\nZur St\u00e4tte, wo ein Freier fiel; da greift er in die Brust\nDem Zitternden, und Schauer ziehn ihm durch das tiefe Herz,\nEr weisz nicht, ob es Wonne sei, ob es der erste Schmerz.\nHerab, du heil\u2019ge Geisterschar, schwell\u2019 unsre Fahnen auf,\nBefl\u00fcgle unsrer Herzen Schlag und unsrer F\u00fcse Lauf;\nWir ziehen nach der Freiheit aus, die Waffen in der Hand,\nWir ziehen aus auf Kampf und Tod f\u00fcr Gott, f\u00fcrs Vaterland!\nIhr seid mit uns, ihr rauscht um uns, eu\u2019r Geisterodem zieht\nMit zauberischen T\u00f6nen hin durch unser Jubellied;\nIhr seid mit uns, ihr schwebt daher, ihr aus Thermopyl\u00e4,\nIhr aus dem gr\u00fcnen Marathon, ihr von der blauen See,\nAm Wolkenfelsen Mykale, am Salaminerstrand,\nIhr all\u2019 aus Wald, Feld, Berg und Thal im weiten Griechenland!\n\nWer f\u00fcr die Freiheit kampft und f\u00e4llt, desz Ruhm wird bl\u00fchend stehn,\nSolange frei die Winde noch durch freie L\u00fcfte wehn,\nSolange frei der B\u00e4ume Laub noch rauscht im gr\u00fcnen Wald,\nSolang\u2019 des Stromes Woge noch frei nach dem Meere wallt,\nSolang\u2019 des Adlers Fittich frei noch durch die Wolken fleugt,\nSolang\u2019 ein freier Odem noch aus freiem Herzen steigt.\n\nSONG BEFORE BATTLE.\n\nWhoe\u2019er for freedom fights and falls, his fame no blight shall know,\nAs long as through heaven\u2019s free expanse the breezes freely blow,\nAs long as in the forest wild the green leaves flutter free,\nAs long as rivers, mountain-born, roll freely to the sea,\nAs long as free the eagle\u2019s wing exulting cleaves the skies,\nAs long as from a freeman\u2019s heart a freeman\u2019s breath doth rise.\n\nWhoe\u2019er for freedom fights and falls, his fame no blight shall know,\nAs long as spirits of the free through earth and air shall go;\nThrough earth and air a spirit-band of heroes moves always,\n\u2019Tis near us at the dead of night, and in the noontide\u2019s blaze,\nIn the storm that levels towering pines, and in the breeze that waves\nWith low and gentle breath the grass upon our fathers\u2019 graves.\nThere\u2019s not a cradle in the bounds of Hellas broad and fair,\nBut the spirit of our free-born sires is surely hovering there.\nIt breathes in dreams of fairy-land upon the infant\u2019s brain,\nAnd in his first sleep dedicates the child to manhood\u2019s pain;\nIts summons lures the youth to stand, with new-born joy possessed,\nWhere once a freeman fell, and there it fires his thrilling breast,\nAnd a shudder runs through all his frame; he knows not if it be\nA throb of rapture, or the first sharp pang of agony.\nCome, swell our banners on the breeze, thou sacred spirit-band,\nGive wings to every warrior\u2019s foot, and nerve to every hand.\nWe go to strike for freedom, to break the oppressor\u2019s rod,\nWe go to battle and to death for our country and our God.\nYe are with us, we hear your wings, we hear in magic tone\nYour spirit-voice the p\u00e6an swell, and mingle with our own.\nYe are with us, ye throng around,\u2014you from Thermopyl\u00e6,\nYou from the verdant Marathon, you from the azure sea,\nBy the cloud-capped rocks of Mykale, at Salamis,\u2014all you\nFrom field and forest, mount and glen, the land of Hellas through!\n\nWhoe\u2019er for freedom fights and falls, his fame no blight shall know,\nAs long as through heaven\u2019s free expanse the breezes freely blow,\nAs long as in the forest wild the green leaves flutter free,\nAs long as rivers, mountain-born, roll freely to the sea,\nAs long as free the eagle\u2019s wing exulting cleaves the skies,\nAs long as from a freeman\u2019s heart a freeman\u2019s breath doth rise.\n\nWhen we remember all that was compressed into this short life, we might\nwell believe that this ceaseless acquiring and creating must have tired\nand weakened and injured both body and mind. Such, however, was not the\ncase. All who knew the poet agree in stating that he never overworked\nhimself, and that he accomplished all he did with the most perfect ease\nand enjoyment. Let us only remember how his life as a student was broken\ninto by his service during the war, how his journey to Italy occupied\nseveral years of his life, how later in Dessau he had to follow his\nprofession as teacher and librarian, and then let us turn our thoughts to\nall the work of his hands and the creations of his mind, and we are\nastonished, not only at the amount of work done, but still more at the\nfinished form which distinguishes all his works. He was one of the first\nwho with Zeune, Von der Hagen, and the brothers Grimm, labored to reawaken\nan interest in ancient and medi\u00e6val German literature. He was a favorite\npupil of Wolf, and his \u201cHomerische Vorschule\u201d did more than any other work\nat that time to propagate the ideas of Wolf. He had explored the modern\nlanguages of Europe,\u2014French, Italian, English, and Spanish; and his\ncritiques in all these fields of literature show how intimately acquainted\nhe was with the best authors of these nations. Besides all this, he worked\nregularly for journals and encyclop\u00e6dias, and was engaged co-editor of the\ngreat \u201cEncyclop\u00e6dia of Arts and Sciences,\u201d by Ersch and Gruber. He also\nundertook the publication of a \u201cLibrary of the German Poets of the\nSeventeenth Century,\u201d and all this, without mentioning his poems and\nnovels, in the short space of a life of thirty-three years.\n\nI almost forget that I am speaking of my father; for indeed I hardly knew\nhim, and when his scientific and poetic activity reached its end, he was\nfar younger than I am now. I do not believe, however, that a natural\naffection and veneration for the poet deprives us of the right of judging.\nIt is well said that love is blind, but love also strengthens and sharpens\nthe dull eye, so that it sees beauty where thousands pass by unmoved. If\none reads most of our critical writings, it would almost appear as if the\nchief duty of the reviewer were to find out the weak points and faults of\nevery work of art. Nothing has so injured the art of criticism as this\nprejudice. A critic is a judge; but a judge, though he is no advocate,\nshould also be no prosecutor. The weak points of any work of art betray\nthemselves only too soon; but in order to discover its beauties, not only\na sharp, but an experienced eye is needed; and love and sympathy are\nnecessary above anything else. It is the heart that makes the critic, not\nthe nose. It is well known how many of the most beautiful spots in\nScotland, and Wales, and Cornwall, were not many years ago described as\nwastes and wildernesses. Richmond and Hampton Court were admired, people\ntravelled also to Versailles, and admired the often admired blue sky of\nItaly. But poets such as Walter Scott and Wordsworth discovered the\nbeauties of their native land. Where others had only lamented over bare\nand wearisome hills, they saw the battle-fields and burial-places of the\nprimeval Titan struggles of nature. Where others saw nothing but barren\nmoors full of heather and broom, the land in their eyes was covered as\nwith a carpet softer and more variegated than the most precious loom of\nTurkey. Where others lost their temper at the gray cold fog, they marveled\nat the silver veil of the bride of the morning, and the gold illumination\nof the departing sun. Now every cockney can admire the smallest lake in\nWestmoreland or the barest moor in the Highlands. Why is this? Because few\neyes are so dull that they cannot see what is beautiful after it has been\npointed out to them, and when they know that they need not feel ashamed of\nadmiring it. It is the same with the beauties of poetry, as with the\nbeauties of nature. We must first discover what is beautiful in poetry,\nand, when it is discovered, communicate it; otherwise the authors of\nScotch ballads are but strolling singers, and the Niebelungen songs are,\nas Frederick the Great said, not worth powder and shot. The trade of\nfault-finding is quickly learnt; the art of admiration is a difficult art,\nat least for little minds, narrow hearts, and timid souls, who prefer\ntreading broad and safe paths. Thus many critics and literary historians\nhave rushed by the poems of Wilhelm M\u00fcller, just like travellers, who go\non in the beaten track, passing by on the right hand and on the left the\nmost beautiful scenes of nature, and who only stand still and open both\neyes and mouth when their \u201cMurray\u201d tells them there is something they\nought to admire. Should an old man who is at home here meet them on their\nway, and counsel the travellers to turn for a moment from the high road in\norder to accompany him through a shady path to a mill, many may feel at\nfirst full of uneasiness and distrust. But when they have refreshed\nthemselves in the dark green valley with its lively mill stream and\ndelicious wood fragrance, they no longer blame their guide for having\ncalled somewhat loudly to them to pause in their journey. It is such a\npause that I have tried in these few introductory lines to enforce on the\nreader, and I believe that I too may reckon on pardon, if not on thanks,\nfrom those who have followed my sudden call.\n\n1858\n\n\n\n\n\nVI. ON THE LANGUAGE AND POETRY OF SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN.\n\n\nAfter all that has been written about the Schleswig-Holstein question, how\nlittle is known about those whom that question chiefly concerns,\u2014the\nSchleswig-Holsteiners! There may be a vague recollection that, during the\ngeneral turmoil of 1848, the German inhabitants of the Duchies rose\nagainst the Danes; that they fought bravely, and at last succumbed, not to\nthe valor, but to the diplomacy of Denmark. But, after the treaty of\nLondon in 1852 had disposed of them as the treaty of Vienna had disposed\nof other brave people, they sank below the horizon of European interests,\nnever to rise again, it was fondly hoped, till the present generation had\npassed away.\n\nYet these Schleswig-Holsteiners have an interest of their own, quite apart\nfrom the political clouds that have lately gathered round their country.\nEver since we know anything of the history of Northern Europe, we find\nSaxon races established as the inhabitants of that northern peninsula\nwhich was then called the _Cimbric Chersonese_. The first writer who ever\nmentions the name of Saxons is Ptolemy,(18) and he speaks of them as\nsettled in what is now called Schleswig-Holstein.(19) At the time of\nCharlemagne the Saxon race is described to us as consisting of three\ntribes: the _Ostfalai_, _Westfalai_, and _Angrarii_. The _Westphalians_\nwere settled near the Rhine, the _Eastphalians_ near the Elbe, and the\nintermediate country, washed by the Weser, was held by the _Angrarii_.(20)\nThe name of Westphalia is still in existence; that of Eastphalia has\ndisappeared, but its memory survives in the English _sterling_.\nEastphalian traders, the ancestors of the merchant princes of Hamburg,\nwere known in England by the name of _Easterlings_; and their money being\nof the purest quality, _easterling_, in Latin esterlingus, shortened to\n_sterling_, became the general name of pure or sterling money. The name of\nthe third tribe, the _Angrarii_, continued through the Middle Ages as the\nname of a people; and to the present day, my own sovereign, the Duke of\nAnhalt, calls himself Duke of \u201c_Sachsen_, _Engern_, und _Westphalen_.\u201d But\nthe name of the Angrarii was meant to fulfill another and more glorious\ndestiny. The name _Angrarii_ or _Angarii_(21) is a corruption of the older\nname, _Angrivarii_, the famous German race mentioned by Tacitus as the\nneighbors of the _Cherusci_. These _Angrivarii_ are in later documents\ncalled _Anglevarii_. The termination _varii_(22) represents the same word\nwhich exists in A.-S. as _ware_; for instance, in _Cant-ware_, inhabitants\nof Kent, or _Cant-ware-burh_, Canterbury; _burh-ware_, inhabitants of a\ntown, burghers. It is derived from _werian_, to defend, to hold, and may\nbe connected with _wer_, a man. The same termination is found in\n_Ansivarii_ or _Ampsivarii_; probably also in _Teutonoarii_ instead of\n_Teutoni_, _Chattuari_ instead of _Chatti_.\n\nThe principal seats of these _Angrarii_ were, as we saw, between the Rhine\nand Elbe, but Tacitus(23) knows of _Anglii_, _i.e._ _Angrii_, east of the\nElbe; and an offshoot of the same Saxon tribe is found very early in\npossession of that famous peninsula between the Schlei and the Bay of\nFlensburg on the eastern coast of Schleswig,(24) which by Latin writers\nwas called _Anglia_, _i.e._ _Angria_. To derive the name of _Anglia_ from\nthe Latin _angulus_,(25) corner, is about as good an etymology as the\nkind-hearted remark of St. Gregory, who interpreted the name of _Angli_ by\n_angeli_. From that Anglia, the _Angli_, together with the _Saxons_ and\n_Juts_, migrated to the British Isles in the fifth century, and the name\nof the _Angli_, as that of the most numerous tribe, became in time the\nname of _Englaland_.(26) In the Latin laws ascribed to King Edward the\nConfessor, a curious supplement is found, which states \u201cthat the _Juts_\n(_Guti_) came formerly from the noble blood of the _Angli_, namely, from\nthe state of _Engra_, and that the English came from the same blood. The\nJuts, therefore like the Angli of Germany, should always be received in\nEngland as brothers, and as citizens of the realm, because the Angli of\nEngland and Germany had always intermarried, and had fought together\nagainst the Danes.\u201d(27)\n\nLike the Angli of Anglia, the principal tribes clustering round the base\nof the Cimbric peninsula, and known by the general name of _Northalbingi_\nor _Transalbiani_, also _Nordleudi_, were all offshoots of the Saxon stem.\nAdam of Bremen (2, 15) divides them into _Tedmarsgoi_, _Holcetae_, and\n_Sturmarii_. In these it is easy to recognize the modern names of\n_Dithmarschen_, _Holtseten_ or _Holsten_, and _Stormarn_. It would require\nmore space than we can afford, were we to enter into the arguments by\nwhich Grimm has endeavored to identify the _Dithmarschen_ with the\n_Teutoni_, the _Stormarn_ with the _Cimbri_, and the _Holsten_ with the\n_Harudes_. His arguments, if not convincing, are at least highly\ningenious, and may be examined by those interested in these matters, in\nhis \u201cHistory of the German Language,\u201d pp. 633-640.\n\nFor many centuries the Saxon inhabitants of those regions have had to bear\nthe brunt of the battle between the Scandinavian and the German races.\nFrom the days when the German Emperor Otho I. (died 973) hurled his swift\nspear from the northernmost promontory of Jutland into the German Ocean to\nmark the true frontier of his empire, to the day when Christian IX. put\nhis unwilling pen to that Danish constitution which was to incorporate all\nthe country north of the Eider with Denmark, they have had to share in all\nthe triumphs and all the humiliations of the German race, to which they\nare linked by the strong ties of a common blood and a common language.\n\nSuch constant trials and vicissitudes have told on the character of these\nGerman borderers, and have made them what they are, a hardy and\ndetermined, yet careful and cautious race. Their constant watchings and\nstruggles against the slow encroachments or sudden inroads of an enemy\nmore inveterate even than the Danes,\u2014namely, the sea,\u2014had imparted to them\nfrom the earliest times somewhat of that wariness and perseverance which\nwe perceive in the national character of the Dutch and the Venetians. But\nthe fresh breezes of the German Ocean and the Baltic kept their nerves\nwell braced and their hearts buoyant; and for muscular development the\narms of these sturdy ploughers of the sea and the land can vie with those\nof any of their neighbors on the isles or on the Continent.\n_Holsten-treue_, _i.e._ Holstein-truth, is proverbial throughout Germany,\nand it has stood the test of long and fearful trials.\n\nThere is but one way of gaining an insight into the real character of a\npeople, unless we can actually live among them for years; and that is to\nexamine their language and literature. Now it is true that the language\nspoken in Schleswig-Holstein is not German,\u2014at least not in the ordinary\nsense of the word,\u2014and one may well understand how travellers and\ncorrespondents of newspapers, who have picked up their German phrases from\nOllendorf, and who, on the strength of this, try to enter into a\nconversation with Holstein peasants, should arrive at the conclusion that\nthese peasants speak Danish, or, at all events, that they do not speak\nGerman.\n\nThe Germans of Schleswig-Holstein are Saxons, and all true Saxons speak\nLow-German, and Low-German is more different from High-German than English\nis from Lowland Scotch. Low-German, however, is not to be mistaken for\nvulgar German. It is the German which from time immemorial was spoken in\nthe low countries and along the northern sea-coast of Germany, as opposed\nto the German of the high country, of Swabia, Thuringia, Bavaria, and\nAustria. These two dialects differ from each other like Doric and Ionic;\nneither can be considered as a corruption of the other; and however far\nback we trace these two branches of living speech, we never arrive at a\npoint when they diverge from one common source. The Gothic of the fourth\ncentury, preserved in the translation of the Bible by Ulfilas, is not, as\nhas been so often said, the mother both of High and Low German. It is to\nall intents and purposes Low-German, only Low-German in its most primitive\nform, and more primitive therefore in its grammatical framework than the\nearliest specimens of High-German also, which date only from the seventh\nor eighth century. This Gothic, which was spoken in the east of Germany,\nhas become extinct. The Saxon, spoken in the north of Germany, continues\nits manifold existence to the present day in the Low-German dialects, in\nFrisian, in Dutch, and in English. The rest of Germany was and is occupied\nby High-German. In the West the ancient High-German dialect of the Franks\nhas been absorbed in French, while the German spoken from the earliest\ntimes in the centre and south of Germany has supplied the basis of what is\nnow called the literary and classical language of Germany.\n\nAlthough the literature of Germany is chiefly High-German, there are a few\nliterary compositions, both ancient and modern, in the different spoken\ndialects of the country, sufficient to enable scholars to distinguish at\nleast nine distinct grammatical settlements; in the Low-German branch,\n_Gothic_, _Saxon_, _Anglo-Saxon_, _Frisian_, and _Dutch_; in the\nHigh-German branch, _Thuringian_, _Frankish_, _Bavarian_, and\n_Alemannish_. Professor Weinhold is engaged at present in publishing\nseparate grammars of six of these dialects, namely, of _Alemannish_,\n_Bavarian_, _Frankish_, _Thuringian_, _Saxon_, and _Frisian_: and in his\ngreat German Grammar Jacob Grimm has been able to treat these, together\nwith the Scandinavian tongues, as so many varieties of one common,\nprimitive type of Teutonic speech.\n\nBut although, in the early days of German life, the Low and High German\ndialects were on terms of perfect equality, Low-German has fallen back in\nthe race, while High-German has pressed forward with double speed.\nHigh-German has become the language of literature and good society. It is\ntaught in schools, preached in church, pleaded at the bar; and, even in\nplaces where ordinary conversation is still carried on in Low-German,\nHigh-German is clearly intended to be the language of the future. At the\ntime of Charlemagne this was not so; and one of the earliest literary\nmonuments of the German language, the \u201cHeliand,\u201d _i.e._ the Saviour, is\nwritten in Saxon or Low-German. The Saxon Emperors, however, did little\nfor German literature, while the Swabian Emperors were proud of being the\npatrons of art and poetry. The language spoken at their court being\nHigh-German, the ascendency of that dialect may be said to date from their\ndays, though it was not secured till the time of the Reformation, when the\ntranslation of the Bible by Luther put a firm and lasting stamp on what\nhas since become the literary speech of Germany.\n\nBut language, even though deprived of literary cultivation, does not\neasily die. Though at present people write the same language all over\nGermany, the towns and villages teem everywhere with dialects, both High\nand Low. In Hanover, Brunswick, Mecklenburg, Oldenburg, the Free Towns,\nand in Schleswig-Holstein, the lower orders speak their own German,\ngenerally called _Platt-Deutsch_, and in many parts of Mecklenburg,\nOldenburg, Ostfriesland, and Holstein, the higher ranks too cling in their\nevery-day conversation to this more homely dialect.(28) Children\nfrequently speak two languages: High-German at school, Low-German at their\ngames. The clergyman speaks High-German when he stands in the pulpit; but\nwhen he visits the poor, he must address them in their own peculiar\n_Platt_. The lawyer pleads in the language of Schiller and Goethe; but\nwhen he examines his witnesses he has frequently to condescend to the\nvulgar tongue. That vulgar tongue is constantly receding from the towns;\nit is frightened away by railways, it is ashamed to show itself in\nparliament. But it is loved all the more by the people; it appeals to\ntheir hearts, and it comes back naturally to all who have ever talked it\ntogether in their youth. It is the same with the local patois of\nHigh-German. Even where at school the correct High-German is taught and\nspoken, as in Bavaria and Austria, each town still keeps its own patois,\nand the people fall back on it as soon as they are among themselves. When\nMaria Theresa went to the Burgtheater to announce to the people of Vienna\nthe birth of a son and heir, she did not address them in high-flown\nliterary German. She bent forward from her box, and called out: \u201c_H\u00f6rts!\nder Leopold hot \u00e1n Bueb\u00e1_\u201d: \u201cHear! Leopold has a boy.\u201d In German comedies,\ncharacters from Berlin, Leipzig, and Vienna are constantly introduced\nspeaking their own local dialects. In Bavaria, Styria, and the Tyrol, much\nof the poetry of the people is written in their patois; and in some parts\nof Germany sermons even, and other religious tracts, continue to be\npublished in the local vernaculars.\n\nThere are here and there a few enthusiastic champions of dialects,\nparticularly of Low-German, who still cherish a hope that High-German may\nbe thrown back, and Low-German restored to its rights and former dominion.\nYet, whatever may be thought of the relative excellences of High and Low\nGerman,\u2014and in several points, no doubt, Low-German has the advantage of\nHigh-German,\u2014yet, practically, the battle between the two is decided, and\ncannot now be renewed. The national language of Germany, whether in the\nSouth or the North, will always be the German of Luther, Lessing,\nSchiller, and Goethe. This, however, is no reason why the dialects,\nwhether of Low or High German, should be despised or banished. Dialects\nare everywhere the natural feeders of literary languages; and an attempt\nto destroy them, if it could succeed, would be like shutting up the\ntributaries of great rivers.\n\nAfter these remarks it will be clear that, if people say that the\ninhabitants of Schleswig-Holstein do not speak German, there is some truth\nin such a statement, at least just enough of truth to conceal the truth.\nIt might be said, with equal correctness, that the people of Lancashire do\nnot speak English. But, if from this a conclusion is to be drawn that the\nSchleswig-Holsteiners, speaking this dialect, which is neither German nor\nDanish, might as well be taught in Danish as in German, this is not quite\ncorrect, and would deceive few if it were adduced as an argument for\nintroducing French instead of English in the national schools of\nLancashire.\n\nThe Schleswig-Holsteiners have their own dialect, and cling to it as they\ncling to many things which, in other parts of Germany, have been discarded\nas old-fashioned and useless. \u201c_Oll Knust h\u00f6lt Hus_,\u201d\u2014\u201cStale bread lasts\nlongest,\u201d\u2014is one of their proverbs. But they read their Bible in\nHigh-German; they write their newspapers in High-German, and it is in\nHigh-German that their children are taught, and their sermons preached in\nevery town and in every village. It is but lately that Low-German has been\ntaken up again by Schleswig-Holstein poets; and some of their poems,\nthough intended originally for their own people only, have been read with\ndelight, even by those who had to spell them out with the help of a\ndictionary and a grammar. This kind of homespun poetry is a sign of\nhealthy national life. Like the songs of Burns in Scotland, the poems of\nKlaus Groth and others reveal to us, more than anything else, the real\nthoughts and feelings, the every-day cares and occupations, of the people\nwhom they represent, and to whose approval alone they appeal. But as\nScotland, proud though she well may be of her Burns, has produced some of\nthe best writers of English, Schleswig-Holstein, too, small as it is in\ncomparison with Scotland, counts among its sons some illustrious names in\nGerman literature. Niebuhr, the great traveller, and Niebuhr, the great\nhistorian, were both Schleswig-Holsteiners, though during their lifetime\nthat name had not yet assumed the political meaning in which it is now\nused. Karsten Niebuhr, the traveller, was a Hanoverian by birth; but,\nhaving early entered the Danish service, he was attached to a scientific\nmission sent by King Frederick V. to Egypt, Arabia, and Palestine, in\n1760. All the other members of that mission having died, it was left to\nNiebuhr, after his return in 1767, to publish the results of his own\nobservations and of those of his companions. His \u201cDescription of Arabia,\u201d\nand his \u201cTravels in Arabia and the Adjoining Countries,\u201d though published\nnearly a hundred years ago, are still quoted with respect, and their\naccuracy has hardly ever been challenged. Niebuhr spent the rest of his\nlife as a kind of collector and magistrate at Meldorf, a small town of\nbetween two and three thousand inhabitants, in Dithmarschen. He is\ndescribed as a square and powerful man, who lived to a good old age, and\nwho, even when he had lost his eyesight, used to delight his family and a\nlarge circle of friends by telling them of the adventures in his Oriental\ntravels, of the starry nights of the desert, and of the bright moonlight\nof Egypt, where, riding on his camel, he could, from his saddle, recognize\nevery plant that was growing on the ground. Nor were the listeners that\ngathered round him unworthy of the old traveller. Like many a small German\ntown, Meldorf, the home of Niebuhr, had a society consisting of a few\ngovernment officials, clergymen, and masters at the public school; most of\nthem men of cultivated mind, and quite capable of appreciating a man of\nNiebuhr\u2019s powers. Even the peasants there were not the mere clods of other\nparts of Germany. They were a well-to-do race, and by no means illiterate.\nTheir sons received at the Gymnasium of Meldorf a classical education, and\nthey were able to mix with ease and freedom in the society of their\nbetters. The most hospitable house at Meldorf was that of Boie, the High\nSheriff of Dithmarschen. He had formerly, at G\u00f6ttingen, been the life and\nsoul of a circle of friends who have become famous in the history of\nGerman literature, under the name of \u201cHainbund.\u201d That \u201cHainbund,\u201d or\nGrove-club, included B\u00fcrger, the author of \u201cLenore;\u201d Voss, the translator\nof Homer; the Counts Stolberg, H\u00f6lty, and others. With Goethe, too, Boie\nhad been on terms of intimacy, and when, in after life, he settled down at\nMeldorf, many of his old friends, his brother-in-law Voss, Count Stolberg,\nClaudius, and others, came to see him and his illustrious townsman,\nNiebuhr. Many a seed was sown there, many small germs began to ripen in\nthat remote town of Meldorf, which are yielding fruit at the present day,\nnot in Germany only, but here in England. The sons of Boie, fired by the\ndescriptions of the old, blind traveller, followed his example, and became\ndistinguished as explorers and discoverers in natural history. Niebuhr\u2019s\nson, young Barthold, soon attracted the attention of all who came to see\nhis father, particularly of Voss; and he was enabled by their help and\nadvice, to lay, in early youth, that foundation of solid learning which\nfitted him, in the intervals of his checkered life, to become the founder\nof a new era in the study of Ancient History. And how curious the threads\nwhich bind together the destinies of men! how marvelous the rays of light\nwhich, emanating from the most distant centres, cross each other in their\nonward course, and give their own peculiar coloring to characters\napparently original and independent! We have read, of late, in the\nConfessions of a modern St. Augustine, how the last stroke that severed\nhis connection with the Church of England was the establishment of the\nJerusalem bishopric. But for that event, Dr. Newman might now be a bishop,\nand his friends a strong party in the Church of England. Well, that\nJerusalem bishopric owes something to Meldorf. The young schoolboy of\nMeldorf was afterwards the private tutor and personal friend of the\nCrown-Prince of Prussia, and he thus exercised an influence both on the\npolitical and the religious views of King Frederick William IV. He was\nlikewise Prussian Ambassador at Rome, when Bunsen was there as a young\nscholar, full of schemes, and planning his own journey to the East.\nNiebuhr became the friend and patron of Bunsen, and Bunsen became his\nsuccessor in the Prussian embassy at Rome. It is well known that the\nJerusalem bishopric was a long-cherished plan of the King of Prussia,\nNiebuhr\u2019s pupil, and that the bill for the establishment of a Protestant\nbishopric at Jerusalem was carried chiefly through the personal influence\nof Bunsen, the friend of Niebuhr. Thus we see how all things are working\ntogether for good or for evil, though we little know of the grains of dust\nthat are carried along from all quarters of the globe, to tell like\ninfinitesimal weights in the scales that decide hereafter the judgment of\nindividuals and the fate of nations.\n\nIf Holstein, and more particularly Dithmarschen, of which Meldorf had in\nformer days been the capital, may claim some share in Niebuhr the\nhistorian,\u2014if he himself, as the readers of his history are well aware, is\nfond of explaining the social and political institutions of Rome by\nreferences to what he had seen or heard of the little republic of\nDithmarschen,\u2014it is certainly a curious coincidence that the only worthy\nsuccessor of Niebuhr, in the field of Roman history, Theodore Mommsen, is\nlikewise a native of Schleswig. His History of Rome, though it did not\nproduce so complete a revolution as the work of Niebuhr, stands higher as\na work of art. It contains the results of Niebuhr\u2019s critical researches,\nsifted and carried on by a most careful and thoughtful disciple. It is, in\nmany respects, a most remarkable work, particularly in Germany. The fact\nthat it is readable, and has become a popular book, has excited the wrath\nof many critics, who evidently consider it beneath the dignity of a\nlearned professor that he should digest his knowledge, and give to the\nworld, not all and everything he has accumulated in his note-books, but\nonly what he considers really important and worth knowing. The fact,\nagain, that he does not load his pages with references and learned notes\nhas been treated like a _crimen l\u0153s\u00e6 majestatis;_ and yet, with all the\nclamor and clatter that has been raised, few authors have had so little to\nalter or rectify in their later editions as Mommsen. To have produced two\nsuch scholars, historians, and statesmen as Niebuhr and Mommsen, would be\nan honor to any kingdom in Germany: how much more to the small duchy of\nSchleswig-Holstein, in which we have been told so often that nothing is\nspoken but Danish and some vulgar dialects of Low-German!\n\nWell, even those vulgar dialects of Low-German, and the poems and novels\nthat have been written in them by true Schleswig-Holsteiners, are well\nworth a moment\u2019s consideration. In looking at their language, an\nEnglishman at once discovers a number of old acquaintances: words which we\nwould look for in vain in Schiller or Goethe. We shall mention a few.\n\n_Black_ means black; in High-German it would be _schwarz_. _De black_ is\nthe black horse; _black up wit_ is black on white; _gif mek kil un blak_,\ngive me quill and ink. _Blid_ is _blithe_, instead of the High-German\n_mild_. _Bottervogel_, or _botterhahn_, or _botterhex, is __butterfly__,\ninstead of __schmetterling__. It is a common superstition in_ the North of\nGermany, that one ought to mark the first butterfly one sees in spring. A\nwhite one betokens mourning, a yellow one a christening, a variegated one\na wedding. _Bregen_ or _brehm_ is used instead of the High-German\n_gehirn_; it is the English _brain_. People say of a very foolish person,\nthat his brain is frozen, _de brehm is em verfrorn_. The peculiar English\nbut, which has given so much trouble to grammarians and etymologists,\nexists in the Holstein _buten_, literally outside, the Dutch _buiten_, the\nOld-Saxon _bi-\u00fbtan_. _Buten_ in German is a regular contraction, just as\n_binnen_, which means inside, within, during. _Heben_ is the English\nheaven, while the common German name is _Himmel_. _H\u00fcckup_ is a sigh, and\nno doubt the English _hiccough_. _D\u00fcsig_ is dizzy; _talkig_ is talkative.\n\nThere are some curious words which, though they have a Low-German look,\nare not to be found in English or Anglo-Saxon. Thus _plitsch_, which is\nused in Holstein in the sense of clever, turns out to be a corruption of\n_politisch_, _i.e._ political. _Kr\u00fcdsch_ means particular or over nice; it\nis a corruption of _kritisch_, critical. _Katolsch_ means angry, mad, and\nis a corruption of _catholic_, _i.e._ Roman Catholic. _Kr\u00e4nsch_ means\nplucky, and stands for _courageux_. _Fr\u00e4nksch_, _i.e._ Frankish, means\nstrange; _Fl\u00e4msch_, _i.e._ Flemish, means sulky, and is used to form\nsuperlatives; _Polsch_, _i.e._ Polish, means wild. _Forsch_ means strong\nand strength, and comes from the French _force_. _Kl\u00fcr_ is a corruption of\n_couleur_, and _Kunkelfusen_ stands for confusion or fibs.\n\nSome idiomatic and proverbial expressions, too, deserve to be noted.\nInstead of saying, \u201cThe sun has set,\u201d the Holsteiners, fond as they are of\ntheir beer, particularly in the evening after a hard day\u2019s work, say, \u201c_De\nS\u00fcnn geiht to Beer_,\u201d \u201cThe sun goes to beer.\u201d If you ask in the country\nhow far it is to some town or village, a peasant will answer, \u201c_\u2019n\nHunnblaff_,\u201d \u201cA dog\u2019s bark,\u201d if it is quite close; or \u201c_\u2019n Pip Toback_,\u201d\n\u201cA pipe of tobacco,\u201d meaning about half an hour. Of a conceited fellow\nthey say, \u201c_H\u00ea h\u00f6rt de Fl\u00e9gn hosten_,\u201d \u201cHe hears the flies coughing.\u201d If a\nman is full of great schemes, he is told, \u201c_In Gedanken f\u00f6rt de Bur \u00f4k\nin\u2019t Kutsch_.\u201d \u201cIn thought the peasant, too, drives in a coach.\u201d A man who\nboasts is asked, \u201c_Pracher! h\u00e4st \u00f4k L\u00fcs, oder schuppst di man so?_\u201d\n\u201cBraggart! have you really lice, or do you only scratch yourself as if you\nhad?\u201d\n\n\u201c_Holstein singt nicht_,\u201d \u201cHolstein does not sing,\u201d is a curious proverb;\nand if it is meant to express the absence of popular poetry in that\ncountry, it would be easy to convict it of falsehood by a list of poets\nwhose works, though unknown to fame beyond the limits of their own\ncountry, are cherished, and deservedly cherished, by their own countrymen.\nThe best known among the Holstein poets is Klaus Groth, whose poems,\npublished under the title of \u201cQuickborn,\u201d _i.e._ quick bourn, or living\nspring, show that there is a well of true poetical feeling in that\ncountry, and that its strains are all the more delicious and refreshing if\nthey bubble up in the native accent of the country. Klaus Groth was born\nin 1819. He was the son of a miller; and, though he was sent to school, he\nhad frequently to work in the field in summer, and make himself generally\nuseful. Like many Schleswig-Holsteiners, he showed a decided talent for\nmathematics; but, before he was sixteen, he had to earn his bread, and\nwork as a clerk in the office of a local magistrate. His leisure hours\nwere devoted to various studies: German, Danish, music, psychology,\nsuccessively engaged his attention. In his nineteenth year he went to the\nseminary at Tondern to prepare himself to become a schoolmaster. There he\nstudied Latin, French, Swedish; and, after three years, was appointed\nteacher at a girls\u2019 school. Though he had to give forty-three lessons a\nweek, he found time to continue his own reading, and he acquired a\nknowledge of English, Dutch, Icelandic, and Italian. At last, however, his\nhealth gave way, and in 1847 he was obliged to resign his place. During\nhis illness his poetical talent, which he himself had never trusted,\nbecame a source of comfort to himself and to his friends, and the warm\nreception which greeted the first edition of his \u201cQuickborn\u201d made him what\nhe was meant to be,\u2014the poet of Schleswig-Holstein.\n\nHis political poems are few; and, though a true Schleswig-Holsteiner at\nheart, he has always declined to fight with his pen when he could not\nfight with his sword. In the beginning of this year, however, he published\n\u201cFive Songs for Singing and Praying,\u201d which, though they fail to give an\nadequate idea of his power as a poet, may be of interest as showing the\ndeep feelings of the people in their struggle for independence. The text\nwill be easily intelligible with the help of a literal English\ntranslation.\n\nDUTSCHE EHR AND DUTSCHE EER.\n\nI.\n\n_Fr\u00fchling_, 1848.\n\nDar keemn Soldaten \u00e6wer de Elf,\nHurah, hurah, na\u2019t Norn!\nSe keemn so dicht as Wagg an Wagg,\nUn as en Koppel vull Korn.\n\nGundag, Soldaten! wo kamt j\u00fc her?\nVun alle Bargen de Kr\u00fcz un Quer,\nUt d\u00fctschen Landen na\u2019t d\u00fctsche Meer\u2014\nSo wannert un treckt dat Heer.\n\nWat liggt so eben as weert de See?\nWat schint so gel as Gold?\nDat is de Marschen er Saat un Staat,\nDat is de Holsten er Stoet.\n\nGundag j\u00fc Holsten op d\u00fctsche Eer!\nGundag j\u00fc Friesen ant d\u00fctsche Meer!\nTo leben un starben v\u00e6r d\u00fctsche Ehr\nSo wannert un treckt dat Heer.\n\nGerman Honor and German Earth.\n\n_Spring_, 1848.\n\nThere came soldiers across the Elbe,\nHurrah, hurrah, to the North!\nThey came as thick as wave on wave,\nAnd like a field full of corn.\n\nGood day, soldiers! whence do you come?\nFrom all the hills on the right and left,\nFrom German lands to the German sea,\u2014\nThus wanders and marches the host.\n\nWhat lies so still as it were the sea?\nWhat shines so yellow as gold?\nThe splendid fields of the Marshes they are,\nThe pride of the Holsten race.\n\nGood day, ye Holsten on German soil!\nGood day, ye Friesians, on the German sea\nTo live and to die for German honor,\u2014\nThus wanders and marches the host.\n\nII.\n\n_Sommer_, 1851.\n\nDat treckt so trurig \u00e6wer de Elf,\nIn Tritt un Schritt so swar\u2014\nDe Swalw de wannert, de Hatbar treckt\u2014\nSe kamt wedder to tokum Jahr.\n\nAde, ade, du d\u00fctsches Heer!\n\u201cAde, ade, du Holsten meer!\nAde op Hoffen un Wiederkehr!\u201d\nWi truert alleen ant Meer.\n\nDe Storch kumt wedder, de Swalw de singt\nSo fr\u00f6hlich as all tov\u00e6r\u2014\nWann kumt de d\u00fctsche Adler un bringt\nDi wedder, du d\u00fctsche Ehr?\n\nWak op du Floth, wak op du Meer!\nWak op du Dunner, un week de Eer!\nWi sitt op H\u00e6pen un Wedderkehr\u2014\nWi truert alleen ant Meer.\n\n_Summer_, 1851.\n\nThey march so sad across the Elbe,\nSo heavy, step by step,\u2014\nThe swallow wanders, the stork departs,\u2014\nThey come back in the year to come.\n\nAdieu, adieu, thou German host!\n\u201cAdieu, adieu, thou Holsten sea!\nAdieu, in hope, and to meet again!\u201d\nWe mourn alone by the sea.\n\nThe stork comes back, the swallow sings\nAs blithe as ever before,\u2014\nWhen will the German eagle return,\nAnd bring thee back, thou German honor!\n\nWake up, thou flood! wake up, thou sea!\nWake up, thou thunder, and rouse the land!\nWe are sitting in hope to meet again,\u2014\nWe mourn alone by the sea.\n\nIII.\n\n_Winter_, 1863.\n\nDar kumt en Brusen as V\u00e6rjahswind,\nDat dr\u00e6hnt as w\u00e6r dat de Floth,\u2014\nWill\u2019t Fr\u00f6hjahr kamen to Wihnachtstid?\nH\u00f6lpt Gott uns s\u00fclb\u2019n inne Noth?\n\nVun alle Bargen de Kr\u00fcz un Quer\nDar is dat wedder dat d\u00fctsche Heer!\nDat gelt op Nu oder Nimmermehr!\nSo rett se, de d\u00fctsche Ehr!\n\nWi h\u00f6rt den Adler, he kumt, he kumt!\nNoch eenmal h\u00e6pt wi un harrt!\nIs\u2019t Friheit endlich, de he uns bringt?\nls\u2019t Wahrheit, wat der ut ward?\n\nSunst h\u00f6lp uns Himmel, nu geit\u2019t ni mehr!\nH\u00f6lp du, un bring uns den Herzog her!\nDenn w\u00fcllt wi starben v\u00e6r d\u00fctsche Ehr!\nDenn begravt uns in d\u00fctsche Eer!\n\n30 _December_, 1863.\n\n_Winter_, 1863.\n\nThere comes a blast like winter storm;\nIt roars as it were the flood.\nIs the spring coming at Christmas-tide?\nDoes God himself help us in our need?\n\nFrom all the hills on the right and left,\nThere again comes the German host!\nIt is to be now or never!\nO, save the German honor!\n\nWe hear the eagle, he comes, he comes!\nOnce more we hope and wait!\nIs it freedom at last he brings to us?\nIs it truth what comes from thence?\n\nElse Heaven help us, now it goes no more!\nHelp thou, and bring us our Duke!\nThen will we die for German honor!\nThen bury us in German earth!\n\n_December_ 30, 1863.\n\nIt is not, however, in war songs or political invective that the poetical\ngenius of Klaus Groth shows to advantage. His proper sphere is the quiet\nidyl, a truthful and thoughtful description of nature, a reproduction of\nthe simplest and deepest feelings of the human heart, and all this in the\nhomely, honest, and heartfelt language of his own \u201cPlatt Deutsch.\u201d That\nthe example of Burns has told on Groth, that the poetry of the Scotch poet\nhas inspired and inspirited the poet of Schleswig-Holstein, is not to be\ndenied. But to imitate Burns, and to imitate him successfully, is no mean\nachievement, and Groth would be the last man to disown his master. The\npoem \u201cMin Jehann\u201d might have been written by Burns. I shall give a free\nmetrical translation of it, but should advise the reader to try to spell\nout the original; for much of its charm lies in its native form, and to\nturn Groth even into High-German destroys his beauty as much as when Burns\nis translated into English.\n\nMIN JEHANN.\n\nIk wull, wi weern noch kleen, Jehann,\n  Do weer de Welt so grot!\nWe seten op den Steen, Jehann,\n  Weest noch? by Nawers Sot.\n    An Heben sell de stille Maan,\n    Wi segen, wa he leep,\n    Un snacken, wa de Himmel hoch,\n    Un wa de Sot wul deep.\n\nWeest noch, wa still dat weer, Jehann?\n  Dar r\u00f6hr keen Blatt an Bom.\nSo is dat nu ni mehr, Jehann,\n  As h\u00f6chstens noch in Drom.\n    Och ne, wenn do de Scheper sung\u2014\n    Alleen in\u2019t wide Feld:\n    Ni wahr, Jehann? dat weer en Ton\u2014\n    De eenzige op de Welt.\n\nMit\u00fcnner inne Schummerntid\n  Denn ward mi so to Mod,\nDenn l\u00f6ppt mi\u2019t langs den R\u00fcgg so hitt,\n  As domals bi den Sot.\n    Den dreih ik mi so hasti um,\n    As weer ik nich alleen:\n    Doch Allens, wat ik finn, Jehann,\n    Dat is\u2014ik stah un ween.\n\nMY JOHN.\n\nI wish we still were little, John,\n  The world was then so wide!\nWhen on the stone by neighbor\u2019s bourn\n  We rested side by side.\n    We saw the moon in silver veiled\n    Sail silent through the sky;\n    Our thoughts were deeper than the bourn,\n    And as the heavens high.\n\nYou know how still it was then, John;\n  All nature seemed at rest;\nSo is it now no longer, John,\n  Or in our dreams at best!\n    Think when the shepherd boy then sang\n    Alone o\u2019er all the plain,\n    Aye, John, you know, that was a sound\n    We ne\u2019er shall hear again.\n\nSometimes now, John, the eventides\n  The self-same feelings bring,\nMy pulses beat as loud and strong\n  As then beside the spring.\n    And then I turn affrighted round,\n    Some stranger to descry;\n    But nothing can I see, my John,\u2014\n    I am alone and cry.\n\nThe next poem is a little popular ballad, relating to a tradition, very\ncommon on the northern coast of Germany, both east and west of the\npeninsula, of islands swallowed by the sea, their spires, pinnacles, and\nroofs being on certain days still visible, and their bells audible, below\nthe waves. One of these islands was called _B\u00fcsen_, or _Old B\u00fcsum_, and is\nsupposed to have been situated opposite the village now called B\u00fcsen, on\nthe west coast of Dithmarschen. Strange to say, the inhabitants of that\nisland, in spite of their tragic fate, are represented rather in a comical\nlight, as the B\u0153otians of Holstein.\n\nWAT SIK DAT VOLK VERTELLT.\n\n_Ol B\u00fcsum._\n\nOl B\u00fcsen hggt int wille Haff,\nDe Floth de keem un w\u00f6hl en Graff.\nDe Floth de keem un sp\u00f6l un sp\u00f6l,\nBet se de Insel \u00fcnner w\u00f6hl.\nDar blev keen Steen, dar blev keen Pahl,\nDat Water sch\u00e6l dat all hendal.\nDar weer keen Beest, dar weer keen Hund,\nDe ligt nu all in depen Grund.\nUn Allens, wat der lev un lach,\nDat deck de See mit depe Nach.\nMit\u00fcnner in de holle Ebb\nSo s\u00fcht man vunne H\u00fcs\u2019 de K\u00f6pp.\nDenn dukt de Thorn herut ut Sand,\nAs weert en Finger vun en Hand.\nDenn h\u00f6rt man sach de Klocken klingn,\nDenn h\u00f6rt man sach de Kanter singn;\nDenn geit dat lisen d\u00e6r de Luft:\n\u201cBegrabt den Leib in seine Gruft.\u201d\n\nWHAT THE PEOPLE TELL.\n\n_Old B\u00fcsum._\n\nOld B\u00fcsen sank into the waves;\nThe sea has made full many graves;\nThe flood came near and washed around,\nUntil the rock to dust was ground.\nNo stone remained, no belfry steep;\nAll sank into the waters deep.\nThere was no beast, there was no hound;\nThey all were carried to the ground.\nAnd all that lived and laughed around\nThe sea now holds in gloom profound.\nAt times, when low the water falls,\nThe sailor sees the broken walls;\nThe church tower peeps from out the sand,\nLike to the finger of a hand.\nThen hears one low the church bells ringing\nThen hears one low the sexton singing;\nA chant is carried by the gust:\n\u201cGive earth to earth, and dust to dust.\u201d\n\nIn the Baltic, too, similar traditions are current of sunken islands and\ntowns buried in the sea, which are believed to be visible at certain\ntimes. The most famous tradition is that of the ancient town of\nVineta,\u2014once, it is said, the greatest emporium in the north of\nEurope,\u2014several times destroyed and built up again, till, in 1183, it was\nupheaved by an earthquake and swallowed by a flood. The ruins of Vineta\nare believed to be visible between the coast of Pomerania and the island\nof R\u00fcgen. This tradition has suggested one of Wilhelm M\u00fcller\u2019s\u2014my\nfather\u2019s\u2014lyrical songs, published in his \u201cStones and Shells from the\nIsland of R\u00fcgen,\u201d 1825, of which I am able to give a translation by Mr. J.\nA. Froude.\n\nVINETA.\n\nI.\n\nAus des Meeres tiefem, tiefem Grunde\n  Klingen Abendglocken dumpf und matt,\nUns zu geben wunderbare Kunde\n  Von der sch\u00f6nen alten Wunderstadt.\n\nII.\n\nIn der Fluthen Sehooss hinabgesunken\n  Blieben unten ihre Tr\u00fcmmer stehn,\nIhre Zinnen lassen goldne Funken\n  Wiederscheinend auf dem Spiegel sehn.\n\nIII.\n\nUnd der Schiffer, der den Zauberschimmer\n  Einmal sah im hellen Abendroth,\nNach derselben Stelle schifft er immer,\n  Ob auch rings umher die Klippe droht.\n\nIV.\n\nAus des Herzens tiefem, tiefem Grunde\n  Klingt es mir, wie Glocken, dumpf und matt:\nAch, sie geben wunderbare Kunde\n  Von der Liebe, die geliebt es hat.\n\nV.\n\nEine sch\u00f6ne Welt ist da versunken,\n  Ihre Tr\u00fcmmer blieben unten stehn,\nLassen sich als goldne Himmelsfunken\n  Oft im Spiegel meiner Tr\u00e4ume sehn.\n\nVI.\n\nUnd dann m\u00f6cht\u2019 ich tauchen in die Tiefen,\n  Mich versenken in den Wiederschein,\nUnd mir ist als ob mich Engel riefen\n  In die alte Wunderstadt herein.\n\nVINETA.\n\nI.\n\nFrom the sea\u2019s deep hollow faintly pealing,\n  Far off evening bells come sad and slow;\nFaintly rise, the wondrous tale revealing\n  Of the old enchanted town below.\n\nII.\n\nOn the bosom of the flood reclining,\n  Ruined arch and wall and broken spire,\nDown beneath the watery mirror shining,\n  Gleam and flash in flakes of golden fire.\n\nIII.\n\nAnd the boatman who at twilight hour\n  Once that magic vision shall have seen,\nHeedless how the crags may round him lour,\n  Evermore will haunt the charm\u00e9d scene.\n\nIV.\n\nFrom the heart\u2019s deep hollow faintly pealing,\n  Far I hear them, bell-notes sad and slow,\nAh, a wild and wondrous tale revealing\n  Of the drown\u00e9d wreck of love below.\n\nV.\n\nThere a world, in loveliness decaying,\n  Lingers yet in beauty ere it die;\nPhantom forms, across my senses playing,\n  Flash like golden fire-flakes from the sky.\n\nVI.\n\nLights are gleaming, fairy bells are ringing,\n  And I long to plunge and wander free,\nWhere I hear the angel-voices singing\n  In those ancient towers below the sea.\n\nI give a few more specimens of Klaus Groth\u2019s poetry, which I have ventured\nto turn into English verse, in the hope that my translations, though very\nimperfect, may, perhaps on account of their very imperfection, excite\namong some of my readers a desire to become acquainted with the originals.\n\nHE S\u00c4 MI SO VEL.\n\nI.\n\nHe s\u00e4 mi so vel, un ik s\u00e4 em keen Wort,\nUn all wat ik s\u00e4, weer: Jehann, ik mutt fort!\n\nII.\n\nHe s\u00e4 mi vun Lev un vun Himmel un Eer,\nHe s\u00e4 mi vun allens\u2014ik weet ni mal mehr!\n\nIII.\n\nHe s\u00e4 mi so vel, un ik s\u00e4 em keen Wort,\nUn all wat ik s\u00e4, weer: Jehann, ik mutt fort!\n\nIV.\n\nHe heeld mi de Hann, un he be mi so dull,\nIk schull em doch gut wen, un ob ik ni wull?\n\nV.\n\nIk weer je ni b\u00f6s, awer s\u00e4 doch keen Wort,\nUn all wat ik s\u00e4, weer: Jehann, ik mutt fort!\n\nVI.\n\nNu sitt ik un denk, un denk j\u00fcmmer deran\nMi d\u00fcch, ik muss seggt hebbn: Wa geern, min Jehann!\n\nVII.\n\nUn doch, kumt dat wedder, so segg ik keen Wort,\nUn hollt he mi, segg ik: Jehann, ik mutt fort!\n\nHE TOLD ME SO MUCH.\n\nI.\n\nThough he told me so much, I had nothing to say,\nAnd all that I said was, John, I must away!\n\nII.\n\nHe spoke of his true love, and spoke of all that,\nOf honor and heaven,\u2014I hardly know what.\n\nIII.\n\nThough he told me so much, I had nothing to say,\nAnd all that I said was, John, I must away!\n\nIV.\n\nHe held me, and asked me, as hard as he could,\nThat I too should love him, and whether I would?\n\nV.\n\nI never was wrath, but had nothing to say,\nAnd all that I said was, John, I must away!\n\nVI.\n\nI sit now alone, and I think on and on,\nWhy did I not say then, How gladly, my John!\n\nVII.\n\nYet even the next time, O what shall I say,\nIf he holds me and asks me?\u2014John, I must away!\n\nT\u00d6F MAL!\n\nSe is doch de stillste vun alle to Kark!\nSe is doch de sch\u00f6nste vun alle to Mark!\nSo weekli, so bleekli, un de Ogen so grot,\nSo blau as en Heben un deep as en Sot.\n\nWer kikt wul int Water, un denkt ni sin Deel?\nWer kikt wul nan Himmel, un w\u00fcnscht sik ne vel?\nWer s\u00fcht er in Ogen, so blau un so fram,\nUn denkt ni an Engeln, un allerhand Kram?\n\nI.\n\nIn church she is surely the stillest of all,\nShe steps through the market so fair and so tall,\n\nII.\n\nSo softly, so lightly, with wondering eyes,\nAs deep as the sea, and as blue as the skies.\n\nIII.\n\nWho thinks not a deal when he looks on the main?\nWho looks to the skies, and sighs not again?\n\nIV.\n\nWho looks in her eyes, so blue and so true,\nAnd thinks not of angels and other things too?\n\nKEEN GRAFF IS SO BRUT.\n\nI.\n\nKeen Graff is so brut un keen M\u00fcer so hoch,\nWenn Twe sik man gut s\u00fcnd, so drapt se sik doch.\n\nII.\n\nKeen Wedder so gruli, so d\u00fcster keen Nacht,\nWenn Twe sik man sehn w\u00fcllt, so seht se sik sacht.\n\nIII.\n\nDat gif wul en Maanschin, dar schint wul en Steern,\nDat gift noch en Licht oder L\u00fccht un Lantern.\n\nIV.\n\nDar fiunt sik en Ledder, en Stegelsch un Steg:\nWenn Twe sik man leef hebbt\u2014keen Sorg vaer den Weg.\n\nI.\n\nNo ditch is so deep, and no wall is so high,\nIf two love each other, they\u2019ll meet by and by.\n\nII.\n\nNo storm is so wild, and no night is so black,\nIf two wish to meet, they will soon find a track.\n\nIII.\n\nThere is surely the moon, or the stars shining bright,\nOr a torch, or a lantern, or some sort of light;\n\nIV.\n\nThere is surely a ladder, a step, or a stile,\nIf two love each other, they\u2019ll meet ere long while.\n\nJEHANN, NU SPANN DE SCHIMMELS AN!\n\nI.\n\nJehann, nu spann de Schimmels an!\nNu fahr wi na de Brut!\nUn hebbt wi nix as brune Per,\nJehann, so is\u2019t ok gut!\n\nII.\n\nUn hebbt wi nix as swarte Per,\nJehann, so is\u2019t ok recht!\nUn b\u00fcn ik nich uns Weerth sin S\u0153n,\nSo b\u00fcn\u2019k sin j\u00fcngste Knecht!\n\nIII.\n\nUn hebbt wi gar keen Per un Wag\u2019,\nSo hebbt wi junge Been!\nUn de so gl\u00fcckli is as ik,\nJehann, dat w\u00fcll wi sehn!\n\nMAKE HASTE, MY JOHN, PUT TO THE GRAYS.\n\nI.\n\nMake haste, my John, put to the grays,\nWe\u2019ll go and fetch the bride,\nAnd if we have but two brown hacks,\nThey\u2019ll do as well to ride.\n\nII.\n\nAnd if we\u2019ve but a pair of blacks,\nWe still can bear our doom,\nAnd if I\u2019m not my master\u2019s son,\nI\u2019m still his youngest groom.\n\nIII.\n\nAnd have we neither horse nor cart,\nStill strong young legs have we,\u2014\nAnd any happier man than I,\nJohn, I should like to see.\n\nDE JUNGE WETFRU.\n\nWenn Abends roth de Wulken treckt,\nSo denk ik och! an di!\nSo trock verbi dat ganze Heer,\nUn du weerst mit derbi.\n\nWenn ut de B\u00f6m de Blaeder fallt,\nSo denk ik glik an di:\nSo full so menni brawe Jung,\nUn du weerst mit derbi.\n\nDenn sett ik mi so truri hin,\nUn denk so vel an di,\nIk et alleen min Abendbrot\u2014\nUn du b\u00fcst nich derbi.\n\nTHE SOLDIER\u2019S WIDOW.\n\nWhen ruddy clouds are driving past,\n\u2019Tis more than I can bear;\nThus did the soldiers all march by,\nAnd thou, too, thou wert there.\n\nWhen leaves are falling on the ground,\n\u2019Tis more than I can bear;\nThus fell full many a valiant lad,\nAnd thou, too, thou wert there.\n\nAnd now I sit so still and sad,\n\u2019Tis more than I can bear;\nMy evening meal I eat alone,\nFor thou, thou art not there.\n\nI wish I could add one of Klaus Groth\u2019s tales (\u201cVertellen,\u201d as he calls\nthem), which give the most truthful description of all the minute details\nof life in Dithmarschen, and bring the peculiar character of the country\nand of its inhabitants vividly before the eyes of the reader. But, short\nas they are, even the shortest of them would fill more pages than could\nhere be spared for Schleswig-Holstein. I shall, therefore, conclude this\nsketch with a tale which has no author,\u2014a simple tale from one of the\nlocal Holstein newspapers. It came to me in a heap of other papers,\nfly-sheets, pamphlets, and books, but it shone like a diamond in a heap of\nrubbish; and, as the tale of \u201cThe Old Woman of Schleswig-Holstein,\u201d it may\nhelp to give to many who have been unjust to the inhabitants of the\nDuchies some truer idea of the stuff there is in that strong and staunch\nand sterling race to which England owes its language, its best blood, and\nits honored name.\n\n\u201cWhen the war against Denmark began again in the winter of 1863, offices\nwere opened in the principal towns of Germany for collecting charitable\ncontributions. At Hamburg, Messrs. L. and K. had set apart a large room\nfor receiving lint, linen, and warm clothing, or small sums of money. One\nday, about Christmas, a poorly clad woman from the country stepped in and\ninquired, in the pure Holstein dialect, whether contributions were\nreceived here for Schleswig-Holstein. The clerk showed her to a table\ncovered with linen rags and such like articles. But she turned away and\npulled out an old leather purse, and, taking out pieces of money, began to\ncount aloud on the counter: \u2018One mark, two marks, three marks,\u2019 till she\nhad finished her ten marks. \u2018That makes ten marks,\u2019 she said, and shoved\nthe little pile away. The clerk, who had watched the poor old woman while\nshe was arranging her small copper and silver coins, asked her,\u2014\u2018From whom\ndoes the money come?\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018From me,\u2019 she said, and began counting again, \u2018One mark, two marks,\nthree marks.\u2019 Thus she went on emptying her purse, till she had counted\nout ten small heaps of coin, of ten marks each. Then, counting each heap\nonce over again, she said: \u2018These are my hundred marks for\nSchleswig-Holstein; be so good as to send them to the soldiers.\u2019\n\n\u201cWhile the old peasant woman was doing her sums, several persons had\ngathered round her; and, as she was leaving the shop, she was asked again\nin a tone of surprise from whom the money came.\n\n\u201c \u2018From me,\u2019 she said; and, observing that she was closely scanned, she\nturned back, and looking the man full in the face, she added, smiling: \u2018It\nis all honest money; it won\u2019t hurt the good cause.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe clerk assured her that no one had doubted her honesty, but that she\nherself had, no doubt, often known want, and that it was hardly right to\nlet her contribute so large a sum, probably the whole of her savings.\n\n\u201cThe old woman remained silent for a time, but, after she had quietly\nscanned the faces of all present, she said: \u2018Surely it concerns no one how\nI got the money. Many a thought passed through my heart while I was\ncounting that money. You would not ask me to tell you all? But you are\nkind gentlemen, and you take much trouble for us poor people. So I\u2019ll tell\nyou whence the money came. Yes, I have known want; food has been scarce\nwith me many a day, and it will be so again, as I grow older. But our\ngracious Lord watches over us. He has helped me to bear the troubles which\nHe sent. He will never forsake me. My husband has been dead this many and\nmany a year. I had one only son; and my John was a fine stout fellow, and\nhe worked hard, and he would not leave his old mother. He made my home\nsnug and comfortable. Then came the war with the Danes. All his friends\njoined the army; but the only son of a widow, you know, is free. So he\nremained at home, and no one said to him, \u201cCome along with us,\u201d for they\nknew that he was a brave boy, and that it broke his very heart to stay\nbehind. I knew it all. I watched him when the people talked of the war, or\nwhen the schoolmaster brought the newspaper. Ah, how he turned pale and\nred, and how he looked away, and thought his old mother did not see it!\nBut he said nothing to me, and I said nothing to him, Gracious God, who\ncould have thought that it was so hard to drive our oppressors out of the\nland? Then came the news from Fredericia! That was a dreadful night. We\nsat in silence opposite each other. We knew what was in our hearts, and we\nhardly dared to look at each other. Suddenly he rose and took my hand, and\nsaid, \u201cMother!\u201d\u2014God be praised, I had strength in that moment\u2014\u201cJohn,\u201d I\nsaid, \u201cour time has come; go in God\u2019s name. I know how thou lovest me, and\nwhat thou hast suffered. God knows what will become of me if I am left\nquite alone, but our Lord Jesus Christ will forsake neither thee nor me.\u201d\nJohn enlisted as a volunteer. The day of parting came. Ah, I am making a\nlong story of it all! John stood before me in his new uniform. \u201cMother,\u201d\nhe said, \u201cone request before we part\u2014if it is to be\u201d\u2014\u201cJohn,\u201d I said to\nhim, \u201cI know what thou meanest,\u2014O, I shall weep, I shall weep very much\nwhen I am alone; but my time will come, and we shall meet again in the day\nof our Lord, John! and the land shall be free, John! the land shall be\nfree!\u201d \u2019\n\n\u201cHeavy tears stood in the poor old woman\u2019s eyes as she repeated her sad\ntale; but she soon collected herself, and continued: \u2018I did not think then\nit would be so hard. The heart always hopes even against hope. But for all\nthat\u2019\u2014and here the old woman drew herself up, and looked at us like a\nqueen\u2014\u2018I have never regretted that I bade him go. Then came dreadful days;\nbut the most dreadful of all was when we read that the Germans had\nbetrayed the land, and that they had given up our land with all our dead\nto the Danes! Then I called on the Lord and said, \u201cO Lord, my God, how is\nthat possible? Why lettest Thou the wicked triumph and allowest the just\nto perish?\u201d And I was told that the Germans were sorry for what they had\ndone, but that they could not help it. But that, gentlemen, I could never\nunderstand. We should never do wrong, nor allow wrong to be done. And,\ntherefore, I thought, it cannot always remain so; our good Lord knows his\nown good time, and in his own good time He will come and deliver us. And I\nprayed every evening that our gracious Lord would permit me to see that\nday when the land should be free, and our dear dead should sleep no more\nin Danish soil. And, as I had no other son against that day, I saved every\nyear what I could save, and on every Christmas Eve I placed it before me\non a table, where, in former years, I had always placed a small present\nfor my John, and I said in my heart, The war will come again, and the land\nwill be free, and thou shalt sleep in a free grave, my only son, my John!\nAnd now, gentlemen, the poor old woman has been told that the day has\ncome, and that her prayer has been heard, and that the war will begin\nagain; and that is why she has brought her money, the money she saved for\nher son. Good morning, gentlemen,\u2019 she said, and was going quickly away.\n\n\u201cBut, before she had left the room, an old gentleman said, loud enough for\nher to hear, \u2018Poor body! I hope she may not be deceived.\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018Ah,\u2019 said the old woman, turning back, \u2018I know what you mean; I have\nbeen told all is not right yet. But have faith, men! the wicked cannot\nprevail against the just; man cannot prevail against the Lord. Hold to\nthat, gentlemen; hold fast together, gentlemen! This very day I\u2014begin to\nsave up again.\u2019\n\n\u201cBless her, good old soul! And, if Odin were still looking out of his\nwindow in the sky as of yore, when he granted victory to the women of the\nLombards, might he not say even now:\u2014\n\n\u201c \u2018When women are heroes,\nWhat must the men be like?\nTheirs is the victory;\nNo need of me.\u2019 \u201d\n\n1864.\n\n\n\n\n\nVII. JOINVILLE.(29)\n\n\nOur attention was attracted a few months ago by a review published in the\n\u201cJournal des D\u00e9bats,\u201d in which a new translation of Joinville\u2019s \u201cHistoire\nde Saint Louis,\u201d by M. Natalis de Wailly, a distinguished member of the\nFrench Institute, was warmly recommended to the French public. After\npointing out the merits of M. de Wailly\u2019s new rendering of Joinville\u2019s\ntext, and the usefulness of such a book for enabling boys at school to\ngain an insight into the hearts and minds of the Crusaders, and to form to\nthemselves a living conception of the manners and customs of the people of\nthe thirteenth century, the reviewer, whose name is well known in this\ncountry as well as in France by his valuable contributions to the history\nof medicine, dwelt chiefly on the fact that through the whole of\nJoinville\u2019s \u201cM\u00e9moires\u201d there is no mention whatever of surgeons or\nphysicians. Nearly the whole French army is annihilated, the King and his\ncompanions lie prostrate from wounds and disease, Joinville himself is\nseveral times on the point of death; yet nowhere, according to the French\nreviewer, does the chronicler refer to a medical staff attached to the\narmy or to the person of the King. Being somewhat startled at this remark,\nwe resolved to peruse once more the charming pages of Joinville\u2019s History;\nnor had we to read far before we found that one passage at least had been\noverlooked, a passage which establishes beyond the possibility of doubt\nthe presence of surgeons and physicians in the camp of the French\nCrusaders. On page 78 of M. de Wailly\u2019s spirited translation, in the\naccount of the death of Gautier d\u2019Autr\u00e8che, we read that when that brave\nknight was carried back to his tent nearly dying, \u201cseveral of the surgeons\nand physicians of the camp came to see him, and not perceiving that he was\ndangerously injured, they bled him on both his arms.\u201d The result was what\nmight be expected: Gautier d\u2019Autr\u00e8che soon breathed his last.\n\nHaving once opened the \u201cM\u00e9moires\u201d of Joinville, we could not but go on to\nthe end, for there are few books that carry on the reader more pleasantly,\nwhether we read them in the quaint French of the fourteenth century, or in\nthe more modern French in which they have just been clothed by M. Natalis\nde Wailly. So vividly does the easy gossip of the old soldier bring before\nour eyes the days of St. Louis and Henry III., that we forget that we are\nreading an old chronicle, and holding converse with the heroes of the\nthirteenth century. The fates both of Joinville\u2019s \u201cM\u00e9moires\u201d and of\nJoinville himself suggest in fact many reflections apart from mere\nmedi\u00e6val history; and a few of them may here be given in the hope of\nreviving the impressions left on the minds of many by their first\nacquaintance with the old Crusader, or of inviting others to the perusal\nof a work which no one who takes an interest in man, whether past or\npresent, can read without real pleasure and real benefit.\n\nIt is interesting to watch the history of books, and to gain some kind of\ninsight into the various circumstances which contribute to form the\nreputation of poets, philosophers, or historians. Joinville, whose name is\nnow familiar to the student of French history, as well as to the lover of\nFrench literature, might fairly have expected that his memory would live\nby his acts of prowess, and by his loyal devotion and sufferings when\nfollowing the King of France, St. Louis, on his unfortunate crusade. When,\nprevious to his departure for the Holy Land, the young S\u00e9n\u00e9chal de\nChampagne, then about twenty-four years of age, had made his confession to\nthe Abbot of Cheminon; when, barefoot and in a white sheet, he was\nperforming his pilgrimages to Blehecourt (Blechicourt), St. Urbain, and\nother sacred shrines in his neighborhood, and when on passing his own\ndomain he would not once turn his eyes back on the castle of Joinville,\n\u201c_pour ce que li cuers ne me attendrisist dou biau chastel que je lessoie\net de mes dous enfans_\u201d (\u201cthat the heart might not make me pine after the\nbeautiful castle which I left behind, and after my two children\u201d), he must\nhave felt that, happen what might to himself, the name of his family would\nlive, and his descendants would reside from century to century in those\nstrong towers where he left his young wife, Alix de Grandpr\u00e9, and his son\nand heir Jean, then but a few months old. After five years he returned\nfrom his crusade, full of honors and full of wounds. He held one of the\nhighest positions that a French nobleman could hold. He was S\u00e9n\u00e9chal de\nChampagne, as his ancestors had been before him. Several members of his\nfamily had distinguished themselves in former crusades, and the services\nof his uncle Geoffroi had been so highly appreciated by Richard C\u0153ur de\nLion that he was allowed by that King to quarter the arms of England with\nhis own. Both at the court of the Comtes de Champagne, who were Kings of\nNavarre, and at the court of Louis IX., King of France, Joinville was a\nwelcome guest. He witnessed the reigns of six kings,\u2014of Louis VIII.,\n1223-26; Louis IX., or St. Louis, 1226-70; Philip III., le Hardi, 1270-85\n; Philip IV., le Bel, 1285-1314; Louis X., le Hutin, 1314-16 ; and Philip\nV., le Long, 1316-22. Though later in life Joinville declined to follow\nhis beloved King on his last and fatal crusade in 1270, he tells us\nhimself how, on the day on which he took leave of him, he carried his\nroyal friend, then really on the brink of death, in his arms from the\nresidence of the Comte d\u2019Auxerre to the house of the Cordeliers. In 1282\nhe was one of the principal witnesses when, previous to the canonization\nof the King, an inquest was held to establish the purity of his life, the\nsincerity of his religious professions, and the genuineness of his\nself-sacrificing devotion in the cause of Christendom. When the daughter\nof his own liege lord, the Comte de Champagne, Jeanne de Navarre, married\nPhilip le Bel, and became Queen of France, she made Joinville Governor of\nChampagne, which she had brought as her dowry to the grandson of St.\nLouis. Surely, then, when the old Crusader, the friend and counselor of\nmany kings, closed his earthly career, at the good age of ninety-five, he\nmight have looked forward to an honored grave in the Church of St.\nLaurent, and to an eminent place in the annals of his country, which were\nthen being written in more or less elegant Latin by the monks of St.\nDenis.\n\nBut what has happened? The monkish chroniclers, no doubt, have assigned\nhim his proper place in their tedious volumes, and there his memory would\nhave lived with that kind of life which belongs to the memory of Geoffroi,\nhis illustrious uncle, the friend of Philip Augustus, the companion of\nRichard C\u0153ur de Lion, whose arms were to be seen in the Church of St.\nLaurent, at Joinville, quartered with the royal arms of England. Such\nparchment or hatchment glory might have been his, and many a knight, as\ngood as he, has received no better, no more lasting reward for his loyalty\nand bravery. His family became extinct in his grandson. Henri de\nJoinville, his grandson, had no sons; and his daughter, being a wealthy\nheiress, was married to one of the Dukes of Lorraine. The Dukes of\nLorraine were buried for centuries in the same Church of St. Laurent where\nJoinville reposed, and where he had founded a chapel dedicated to his\ncompanion in arms, Louis IX., the Royal Saint of France; and when, at the\ntime of the French Revolution, the tombs of St. Denis were broken open by\nan infuriated people, and their ashes scattered abroad, the vaults of the\nchurch at Joinville, too, shared the same fate, and the remains of the\nbrave Crusader suffered the same indignity as the remains of his sainted\nKing. It is true that there were some sparks of loyalty and self-respect\nleft in the hearts of the citizens of Joinville. They had the bones of the\nold warrior and of the Dukes of Lorraine reinterred in the public\ncemetery; and there they now rest, mingled with the dust of their faithful\nlieges and subjects. But the Church of St. Laurent, with its tombs and\ntombstones, is gone. The property of the Joinvilles descended from the\nDukes of Lorraine to the Dukes of Guise, and, lastly, to the family of\nOrleans. The famous Duke of Orleans, Egalit\u00e9, sold Joinville in 1790, and\nstipulated that the old castle should be demolished. Poplars and fir-trees\nnow cover the ground of the ancient castle, and the name of Joinville is\nborne by a royal prince, the son of a dethroned king, the grandson of\nLouis Egalit\u00e9, who died on the guillotine.\n\nNeither his noble birth, nor his noble deeds, nor the friendship of kings\nand princes, would have saved Joinville from that inevitable oblivion\nwhich has blotted from the memory of living men the names of his more\neminent companions,\u2014Robert, Count of Artois; Alphonse, Count of Poitiers;\nCharles, Count of Anjou; Hugue, Duke of Burgundy; William, Count of\nFlanders, and many more. A little book which the old warrior wrote or\ndictated,\u2014for it is very doubtful whether he could have written it\nhimself,\u2014a book which for many years attracted nobody\u2019s attention, and\nwhich even now we do not possess in the original language of the\nthirteenth or the beginning of the fourteenth centuries\u2014has secured to the\nname of Jean de Joinville a living immortality, and a fame that will last\nlong after the bronze statue which was erected in his native place in 1853\nshall have shared the fate of his castle, of his church, and of his tomb.\nNothing could have been further from the mind of the old nobleman when, at\nthe age of eighty-five, he began the history of his royal comrade, St.\nLouis, than the hope of literary fame. He would have scouted it. That kind\nof fame might have been good enough for monks and abbots, but it would\nnever at that time have roused the ambition of a man of Joinville\u2019s stamp.\nHow the book came to be written he tells us himself in his dedication,\ndated in the year 1309, and addressed to Louis le Hutin, then only King of\nNavarre and Count of Champagne, but afterwards King of France. His mother,\nJeanne of Navarre, the daughter of Joinville\u2019s former liege lord, the last\nof the Counts of Champagne, who was married to Philip le Bel, the grandson\nof St. Louis, had asked him \u201cto have a book made for her, containing the\nsacred words and good actions of our King, St. Looys.\u201d She died before the\nbook was finished, and Joinville, therefore, sent it to her son. How it\nwas received by him we do not know; nor is there any reason to suppose\nthat there were more than a few copies made of a work which was intended\nchiefly for members of the royal family of France and of his own family.\nIt is never quoted by historical writers of that time; and the first\nhistorian who refers to it is said to be Pierre le Baud, who, toward the\nend of the fifteenth century, wrote his \u201cHistoire de Bretagne.\u201d It has\nbeen proved that for a long time no mention of the dedication copy occurs\nin the inventories of the private libraries of the Kings of France. At the\ndeath of Louis le Hutin his library consisted of twenty-nine volumes, and\namong them the History of St. Louis does not occur. There is, indeed, one\nentry, \u201cQuatre caiers de Saint Looys;\u201d but this could not be meant for the\nwork of Joinville, which was in one volume. These four _cahiers_ or quires\nof paper were more likely manuscript notes of St. Louis himself. His\nconfessor, Geoffroy de Beaulieu, relates that the King, before his last\nillness, wrote down with his own hand some salutary counsels in French, of\nwhich he, the confessor, procured a copy before the King\u2019s death, and\nwhich he translated from French into Latin.\n\nAgain, the widow of Louis X. left at her death a collection of forty-one\nvolumes, and the widow of Charles le Bel a collection of twenty volumes;\nbut in neither of them is there any mention of Joinville\u2019s History.\n\nIt is not till we come to the reign of Charles V. (1364-80) that\nJoinville\u2019s book occurs in the inventory of the royal library, drawn up in\n1373 by the King\u2019s valet de chambre, Gilles Mallet. It is entered as \u201cLa\nvie de Saint Loys, et les fais de son voyage d\u2019outre mer;\u201d and in the\nmargin of the catalogue there is a note, \u201cLe Roy l\u2019a par devers soy,\u201d\u2014\u201cThe\nKing has it by him.\u201d At the time of his death the volume had not yet been\nreturned to its proper place in the first hall of the Louvre; but in the\ninventory drawn up in 1411 it appears again, with the following\ndescription:(30)\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cUne grant partie de la vie et des fais de Monseigneur Saint Loys\n    que fist faire le Seigneur de Joinville; tr\u00e8s-bien escript et\n    histori\u00e9. Convert de cuir rouge, \u00e0 empreintes, \u00e0 deux fermoirs\n    d\u2019argent. Escript de lettres de forme en fran\u00e7ois \u00e0 deux\n    coulombes; commen\u00e7ant au deuxi\u00e8me folio \u2018et porceque,\u2019 et au\n    derrenier \u2018en tele maniere.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\nThis means, \u201cA great portion of the life and actions of St. Louis which\nthe Seigneur de Joinville had made, very well written and illuminated.\nBound in red leather, tooled, with two silver clasps. Written in formal\nletters in French, in two columns, beginning on the second folio with the\nwords \u2018_et porceque_,\u2019 and on the last with \u2018_en tele maniere_.\u2019 \u201d\n\nDuring the Middle Ages and before the discovery of printing, the task of\nhaving a literary work published, or rather of having it copied, rested\nchiefly with the author; and as Joinville himself, at his time of life,\nand in the position which he occupied, had no interest in what we should\ncall \u201cpushing\u201d his book, this alone is quite sufficient to explain its\nalmost total neglect. But other causes, too, have been assigned by M.\nPaulin Paris and others for what seems at first sight so very strange,\u2014the\nentire neglect of Joinville\u2019s work. From the beginning of the twelfth\ncentury the monks of St. Denis were the recognized historians of France.\nThey at first collected the most important historical works of former\ncenturies, such as Gregory of Tours, Eginhard, the so-called Archbishop\nTurpin, Nithard, and William of Jumi\u00e8ges. But beginning with the first\nyear of Philip I., 1060-1108, the monks became themselves the chroniclers\nof passing events. The famous Abbot Suger, the contemporary of Abelard and\nSt. Bernard, wrote the life of Louis le Gros; Rigord and Guillaume de\nNangis followed with the history of his successors. Thus the official\nhistory of St. Louis had been written by Guillaume de Nangis long before\nJoinville thought of dictating his personal recollections of the King.\nBesides the work of Guillaume de Nangis, there was the \u201cHistory of the\nCrusades,\u201d including that of St. Louis, written by Guillaume, Archbishop\nof Tyre, and translated into French, so that even the ground which\nJoinville had more especially selected as his own was preoccupied by a\npopular and authoritative writer. Lastly, when Joinville\u2019s History\nappeared, the chivalrous King, whose sayings and doings his old brother in\narms undertook to describe in his homely and truthful style, had ceased to\nbe an ordinary mortal. He had become a saint, and what people were anxious\nto know of him were legends rather than history. With all the sincere\nadmiration which Joinville entertained for his King, he could not compete\nwith such writers as Geoffroy de Beaulieu (Gaufridus de Belloloco), the\nconfessor of St. Louis, Guillaume de Chartres (Guillelmus Carnotensis),\nhis chaplain, or the confessor of his daughter Blanche, each of whom had\nwritten a life of the royal saint. Their works were copied over and over\nagain, and numerous MSS. have been preserved of them in public and private\nlibraries. Of Joinville one early MS. only was saved, and even that not\naltogether a faithful copy of the original.\n\nThe first edition of Joinville was printed at Poitiers in 1547, and\ndedicated to Fran\u00e7ois I. The editor, Pierre Antoine de Rieux, tells us\nthat when, in 1542, he examined some old documents at Beaufort en Val\u00e9e,\nin Anjou, he found among the MSS. the Chronicle of King Louis, written by\na Seigneur de Joinville, S\u00e9n\u00e9chal de Champagne, who lived at that time,\nand had accompanied the said St. Louis in all his wars. But because it was\nbadly arranged or written in a very rude language, he had it polished and\nput in better order, a proceeding of which he is evidently very proud, as\nwe may gather from a remark of his friend Guillaume de Perri\u00e8re, that \u201cit\nis no smaller praise to polish a diamond than to find it quite raw\u201d\n(_toute brute_).\n\nThis text, which could hardly be called Joinville\u2019s, remained for a time\nthe received text. It was reproduced in 1595, in 1596, and in 1609.\n\nIn 1617 a new edition was published by Claude Menard. He states that he\nfound at Laval a heap of old papers, which had escaped the ravages\ncommitted by the Protestants in some of the monasteries at Anjou. When he\ncompared the MS. of Joinville with the edition of Pierre Antoine de Rieux,\nhe found that the ancient style of Joinville had been greatly changed. He\ntherefore undertook a new edition, more faithful to the original.\nUnfortunately, however, his original MS. was but a modern copy, and his\nedition, though an improvement on that of 1547, was still very far from\nthe style and language of the beginning of the fourteenth century.\n\nThe learned Du Cange searched in vain for more trustworthy materials for\nrestoring the text of Joinville. Invaluable as are the dissertations which\nhe wrote on Joinville, his own text of the History, published in 1668,\ncould only be based on the two editions that had preceded his own.\n\nIt was not till 1761 that real progress was made in restoring the text of\nJoinville. An ancient MS. had been brought from Brussels by the Mar\u00e9chal\nMaurice de Saxe. It was carefully edited by M. Capperonnier, and it has\nserved, with few exceptions, as the foundation of all later editions. It\nis now in the Imperial Library. The editors of the \u201cRecueil des Historiens\nde France\u201d express their belief that the MS. might actually be the\noriginal. At the end of it are the words, \u201cCe fu escript en l\u2019an de gr\u00e2ce\nmil CCC et IX, on moys d\u2019octovre.\u201d This, however, is no real proof of the\ndate of the MS. Transcribers of MSS., it is well known, were in the habit\nof mechanically copying all they saw in the original, and hence we find\nvery commonly the date of an old MS. repeated over and over again in\nmodern copies.\n\nThe arguments by which in 1839 M. Paulin Paris proved that this, the\noldest MS. of Joinville, belongs not to the beginning, but to the end of\nthe fourteenth century, seem unanswerable, though they failed to convince\nM. Daunou, who, in the twentieth volume of the \u201cHistoriens de France,\u201d\npublished in 1840, still looks upon this MS. as written in 1309, or at\nleast during Joinville\u2019s life-time. M. Paulin Paris establishes, first of\nall, that this MS. cannot be the same as that which was so carefully\ndescribed in the catalogue of Charles V. What became of that MS. once\nbelonging to the private library of the Kings of France, no one knows, but\nthere is no reason, even now, why it should not still be recovered. The\nMS. of Joinville, which now belongs to the Imperial Library, is written by\nthe same scribe who wrote another MS. of \u201cLa Vie et les Miracles de Saint\nLouis.\u201d Now, this MS. of \u201cLa Vie et les Miracles\u201d is a copy of an older\nMS., which likewise exists at Paris. This more ancient MS., probably the\noriginal, and written, therefore, in the beginning of the fourteenth\ncentury, had been carefully revised before it served as the model for the\nlater copy, executed by the same scribe who, as we saw, wrote the old MS.\nof Joinville. A number of letters were scratched out, words erased, and\nsometimes whole sentences altered or suppressed, a red line being drawn\nacross the words which had to be omitted. It looks, in fact, like a\nmanuscript prepared for the printer. Now, if the same copyist who copied\nthis MS. copied likewise the MS. of Joinville, it follows that he was\nseparated from the original of Joinville by the same interval which\nseparates the corrected MSS. of \u201cLa Vie et les Miracles\u201d from their\noriginal, or from the beginning of the fourteenth century. This line of\nargument seems to establish satisfactorily the approximate date of the\noldest MS. of Joinville as belonging to the end of the fourteenth century.\n\nAnother MS. was discovered at Lucca. As it had belonged to the Dukes of\nGuise, great expectations were at one time entertained of its value. It\nwas bought by the Royal Library at Paris in 1741 for 360 livres, but it\nwas soon proved not to be older than about 1500, representing the language\nof the time of Fran\u00e7ois I. rather than of St. Louis, but nevertheless\npreserving occasionally a more ancient spelling than the other MS. which\nwas copied two hundred years before. This MS. bears the arms of the\nPrincess Antoinette de Bourbon and of her husband, Claude de Lorraine, who\nwas \u201cDuc de Guise, Comte d\u2019Aumale, Marquis de Mayence et d\u2019Elbeuf, and\nBaron de Joinville.\u201d Their marriage took place in 1513; he died in 1550,\nshe in 1583.\n\nThere is a third MS. which has lately been discovered. It belonged to M.\nBrissart-Binet of Rheims, became known to M. Paulin Paris, and was lent to\nM. de Wailly for his new edition of Joinville. It seems to be a copy of\nthe so-called MS. of Lucca, the MS. belonging to the Princess Antoinette\nde Bourbon, and it is most likely the very copy which that Princess\nordered to be made for Louis Lass\u00e9r\u00e9, canon of St. Martin of Tours who\npublished an abridgment of it in 1541. By a most fortunate accident it\nsupplies the passages from page 88 to 112, and from page 126 to 139, which\nare wanting in the MS. of Lucca.\n\nIt must be admitted, therefore, that for an accurate study of the\nhistorical growth of the French language, the work of Joinville is of less\nimportance than it would have been if it had been preserved in its\noriginal orthography, and with all the grammatical peculiarities which\nmark the French of the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth\ncentury. There may be no more than a distance of not quite a hundred years\nbetween the original of Joinville and the earliest MS. which we possess.\nBut in those hundred years the French language did not remain stationary.\nEven as late as the time of Montaigne, when French has assumed a far\ngreater literary steadiness, that writer complains of its constant change.\n\u201cI wrote my book,\u201d he says in a memorable passage (\u201cEssais,\u201d liv. 3, c.\n9)\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cFor few people and for a few years. If it had been a subject that\n    ought to last, it should have been committed to a more stable\n    language (_Latin_). After the continual variation which has\n    followed our speech to the present day, who can hope that its\n    present form will be used fifty years hence? It glides from our\n    hands every day, and since I have lived it has been half changed.\n    We say that at present it is perfect, but every century says the\n    same of its own. I do not wish to hold it back, if it will fly\n    away and go on deteriorating as it does. It belongs to good and\n    useful writers to nail the language to themselves\u201d (_de le clouer\n    \u00e0 eux_).\n\n\nOn the other hand, we must guard against forming an exaggerated notion of\nthe changes that could have taken place in the French language within the\nspace of less than a century. They refer chiefly to the spelling of words,\nto the use of some antiquated words and expressions, and to the less\ncareful observation of the rules by which in ancient French the nominative\nis distinguished from the oblique cases, both in the singular and the\nplural. That the changes do not amount to more than this can be proved by\na comparison of other documents which clearly preserve the actual language\nof Joinville. There is a letter of his which is preserved at the Imperial\nLibrary at Paris, addressed to Louis X. in 1315. It was first published by\nDu Cange, afterwards by M. Daunou, in the twentieth volume of the\n\u201cHistoriens de France,\u201d and again by M. de Wailly. There are, likewise,\nsome charters of Joinville, written in his _chancellerie_, and in some\ncases with additions from his own hand. Lastly, there is Joinville\u2019s\n\u201cCredo,\u201d containing his notes on the Apostolic Creed, preserved in a\nmanuscript of the thirteenth century. This was published in the\n\u201cCollection des Bibliophiles Fran\u00e7ais,\u201d unfortunately printed in\ntwenty-five copies only. The MS. of the \u201cCredo,\u201d which formerly belonged\nto the public library of Paris, disappeared from it about twenty years\nago; and it now forms No. 75 of a collection of MSS. bought in 1849 by\nLord Ashburnham from M. Barrois. By comparing the language of these\nthirteenth century documents with that of the earliest MS. of Joinville\u2019s\nHistory, it is easy to see that although we have lost something, we have\nnot lost very much, and that, at all events, we need not suspect in the\nearliest MS. any changes that could in any way affect the historical\nauthenticity of Joinville\u2019s work.(31)\n\nTo the historian of the French language, the language of Joinville, even\nthough it gives us only a picture of the French spoken at the time of\nCharles V. or contemporaneously with Froissart, is still full of interest.\nThat language is separated from the French of the present day by nearly\nfive centuries, and we may be allowed to give a few instances to show the\ncurious changes both of form and meaning which many words have undergone\nduring that interval.\n\nInstead of _s\u0153ur_, sister, Joinville still uses _sereur_, which was the\nright form of the oblique case, but was afterwards replaced by the\nnominative _suer_ or _s\u0153ur_. Thus, p. 424 E, we read, _quant nous menames\nla serour le roy_, _i.e._ _quand nous men\u00e2mes la s\u0153ur du roi_; but p. 466\nA, _l\u2019abba\u00efe que sa suer fonda_, _i.e._ _l\u2019abba\u00efe que sa s\u0153ur fonda_.\nInstead of _ange_, angel, he has both _angle_ and _angre_, where the _r_\nstands for the final _l_ of _angele_, the more ancient French form of\n_angelus_. The same transition of final _l_ into _r_ may be observed in\n_ap\u00f4tre_ for _apostolus_, _chapitre_ for _capitulum_, _chartre_ for\n_cartula_, _esclandre_ for _scandalum_. Instead of _vieux_, old, Joinville\nuses _veil_ or _veel_ (p. 132 C, _le veil le fil au veil_, _i.e._ _le\nvieux fils du vieux_); but in the nom. sing., _viex_, which is the Latin\n_vetulus_ (p. 302 A, _li Viex de __ la Montaingne_, _i.e._ _le Vieux de la\nMontagne_; but p. 304 A, _li messaige le Vieil_, _i.e._ _les messagers du\nVieux_.) Instead of _coude_, m., elbow, we find _coute_, which is nearer\nto the Latin _cubitus_, cubit. The Latin _t_ in words like _cubitus_ was\ngenerally softened in old French, and was afterwards dropped altogether.\nAs in _coude_, the _d_ is preserved in _aider_ for _adjutare_, in _fade_\nfor _fatuus_. In other words, such as _cha\u00eene_ for _catena_, _roue_ for\n_rota_, _\u00e9p\u00e9e_ for _spatha_, _aim\u00eae_ for _amata_, it has disappeared\naltogether. _True_ is _voir_, the regular modification of _verum_, like\n_soir_ of _serum_, instead of the modern French _vrai_; _e.g._, p. 524 B,\n_et sachiez que voirs estait_, _i.e._ _et sachez que c\u2019\u00e9tait vrai_. We\nstill find _ester_, to stand (\u201c_Et ne pooit ester sur ses pieds_,\u201d \u201cHe\ncould not stand on his legs\u201d). At present the French have no single word\nfor \u201cstanding,\u201d which has often been pointed out as a real defect of the\nlanguage. \u201cTo stand\u201d is _ester_, in Joinville; \u201cto be\u201d is _estre_.\n\nIn the grammatical system of the language of Joinville we find the\nconnecting link between the case terminations of the classical Latin and\nthe prepositions and articles of modern French. It is generally supposed\nthat the terminations of the Latin declension were lost in French, and\nthat the relations of the cases were expressed by prepositions, while the\n_s_ as the sign of the plural was explained by the _s_ in the nom. plur.\nof nouns of the third declension. But languages do not thus advance _per\nsaltum_. They change slowly and gradually, and we can generally discover\nin what is, some traces of what has been.\n\nNow the fact is that in ancient French, and likewise in Proven\u00e7al, there\nis still a system of declension more or less independent of prepositions.\nThere are, so to say, three declensions in old French, of which the second\nis the most important and the most interesting. If we take a Latin word\nlike _annus_, we find in old French two forms in the singular, and two in\nthe plural. We find sing. _an-s_, _an_, plur. _an_, _ans_. If _an_ occurs\nin the nom. sing. or as the subject, it is always _ans_; if it occur as a\ngen., dat., or acc., it is always _an_. In the plural, on the contrary, we\nfind in the nom. _an_, and in all the oblique cases _ans_. The origin of\nthis system is clear enough, and it is extraordinary that attempts should\nhave been made to derive it from German or even from Celtic, when the\nexplanation could be found so much nearer home. The nom. sing. has the\n_s_, because it was there in Latin; the nom. plur. has no _s_, because\nthere was no _s_ there in Latin. The oblique cases in the singular have no\n_s_, because the accusative in Latin, and likewise the gen., dat., and\nabl., ended either in vowels, which became mute, or in _m_, which was\ndropped. The oblique cases in the plural had the _s_, because it was there\nin the acc. plur., which became the general oblique case, and likewise in\nthe dat. and abl. By means of these fragments of the Latin declension, it\nwas possible to express many things without prepositions which in modern\nFrench can no longer be thus expressed. _Le fils Roi_ was clearly the son\nof the King; _il fil Roi_, the sons of the King. Again we find _li roys_,\nthe King, but _au roy_, to the King. Pierre Sarrasin begins his letter on\nthe crusade of St. Louis by _A seigneur Nicolas Arode, Jehan-s Sarrasin,\nchambrelen-s le roy de France, salut et bonne amour_.\n\nBut if we apply the same principle to nouns of the first declension, we\nshall see at once that they could not have lent themselves to the same\ncontrivance. Words like _corona_ have no _s_ in the nom. sing., nor in any\nof the oblique cases; it would therefore be in French _corone_ throughout.\nIn the plural indeed there might have been a distinction between the nom.\nand the acc. The nom. ought to have been without an _s_, and the acc. with\nan _s_. But with the exception of some doubtful passages, where a nom.\nplur. is supposed to occur in old French documents without an _s_, we find\nthroughout, both in the nom. and the other cases, the _s_ of the\naccusative as the sign of the plural.\n\nNearly the same applies to certain words of the third declension. Here we\nfind indeed a distinction between the nom. and the oblique cases of the\nsingular, such as _flor-s_, the flower, with _flor_, of the flower; but\nthe plural is _flor-s_ throughout. This form is chiefly confined to\nfeminine nouns of the third declension.\n\nThere is another very curious contrivance by which the ancient French\ndistinguished the nom. from the acc. sing., and which shows us again how\nthe consciousness of the Latin grammar was by no means entirely lost in\nthe formation of modern French. There are many words in Latin which change\ntheir accent in the oblique cases from what it was in the nominative. For\ninstance, _cant\u00e1tor_, a singer, becomes _cantat\u00f3rem_, in the accusative.\nNow in ancient French the nom., corresponding to _cantator_, is\n_ch\u00e1ntere_, but the gen. _chante\u00f3r_, and thus again a distinction is\nestablished of great importance for grammatical purposes. Most of these\nwords followed the analogy of the second declension, and added an _s_ in\nthe nom. sing., dropped it in the nom. plur., and added it again in the\noblique cases of the plural. Thus we get\u2014\n\nSINGULAR.                         PLURAL.\nNom.             Oblique Cases.   Nom.         Oblique Cases.\n_ch\u00e1ntere_       _chante\u00f3r_       _chante\u00f3r_   _chante\u00f3rs_\nFrom _baro,      _baron_          _baron_      _barons_\nbaronis_\n(O. Fr. _ber_)\n_latro,          _larron_         _larron_     _larrons_\nlatronis_\n(O. Fr.\n_lierre_)\n_senior,         _seignor_        _seignor_    _seignors_\nsenioris_\n(O. Fr.\n_sendre_)\n(sire)\n\nThus we read in the beginning of Joinville\u2019s History:\u2014\n\n_A son bon signour Looys, Jehans sires de Joinville salut et amour;_\n\nand immediately afterwards, _Chiers sire_, not _Chiers seigneur_.\n\nIf we compare this old French declension with the grammar of modern\nFrench, we find that the accusative or the oblique form has become the\nonly recognized form, both in the singular and plural. Hence\u2014\n\n[Corone]    [Ans]   [Flors]   [Ch\u00e1ntere] le\n                              chantre.\nCorone      An      Flor      Chante\u00f3r le\n                              chanteur.\n[Corones]   [An]    [Flors]   [Chante\u00f3r].\nCorones     Ans     Flors     Chante\u00f3rs.\n\nA few traces only of the old system remain in such words as _fils_,\n_bras_, _Charles_, _Jacques_, etc.\n\nNot less curious than the changes of form are the changes of meaning which\nhave taken place in the French language since the days of Joinville. Thus,\n_la viande_, which now only means meat, is used by Joinville in its\noriginal and more general sense of _victuals_, the Latin _vivenda_. For\ninstance (p. 248 D), \u201c_Et nous requeismes que en nous donnast la viande_,\u201d\n\u201cAnd we asked that one might give us something to eat.\u201d And soon after,\n\u201c_Les viandes que il nous donn\u00e8rent, ce furent begniet de fourmaiges qui\nestoient roti au soliel, pour ce que li ver n\u2019i venissent, et oef dur __\ncuit de quatre jours ou de cinc_,\u201d \u201cAnd the viands which they gave us were\ncheese-cakes roasted in the sun, that the worms might not get at them, and\nhard eggs boiled four or five days ago.\u201d\n\n_Payer_, to pay, is still used in its original sense of pacifying or\nsatisfying, the Latin _pacare_. Thus a priest who has received from his\nbishop an explanation of some difficulty and other ghostly comfort \u201c_se\ntint bin pour pai\u00e9_\u201d (p. 34 C), he \u201cconsidered himself well satisfied.\u201d\nWhen the King objected to certain words in the oath which he had to take,\nJoinville says that he does not know how the oath was finally arranged,\nbut he adds, \u201c_Li amiral se tindrent lien apai\u00e9_,\u201d \u201cThe admirals\nconsidered themselves satisfied\u201d (p. 242 C). The same word, however, is\nlikewise used in the usual sense of paying.\n\n_Noise_, a word which has almost disappeared from modern French, occurs\nseveral times in Joinville; and we can watch in different passages the\ngrowth of its various meanings. In one passage Joinville relates (p. 198)\nthat one of his knights had been killed, and was lying on a bier in his\nchapel. While the priest was performing his office, six other knights were\ntalking very loud, and \u201c_Faisoient noise au prestre_,\u201d \u201cThey annoyed or\ndisturbed the priest; they caused him annoyance.\u201d Here _noise_ has still\nthe same sense as the Latin _nausea_, from which it is derived. In another\npassage, however, Joinville uses _noise_ as synonymous with _bruit_ (p.\n152 A), _Vint li roys \u00e0 toute sa bataille, \u00e0 grant noyse et \u00e0 grant bruit\nde trompes et nacaires_, _i.e._ _vint le roi avec tout son corps de\nbataille, \u00e0 grand cris et \u00e0 grand bruit de trompettes et de timbales._\nHere _noise_ may still mean an annoying noise, but we can see the easy\ntransition from that to noise in general.\n\nAnother English word, \u201cto purchase,\u201d finds its explanation in Joinville.\nOriginally _pourchasser_ meant to hunt after a thing, to pursue it.\nJoinville frequently uses the expression \u201c_par son pourchas_\u201d (p. 458 E)\nin the sense of \u201cby his endeavors.\u201d When the King had reconciled two\nadversaries, peace is said to have been made _par son pourchas_.\n\u201c_Pourchasser_\u201d afterwards took the sense of \u201cprocuring,\u201d \u201ccatering,\u201d and\nlastly, in English, of \u201cbuying.\u201d\n\nTo return to Joinville\u2019s History, the scarcity of MSS. is very instructive\nfrom an historical point of view. As far as we know at present, his great\nwork existed for centuries in two copies only, one preserved in his own\ncastle, the other in the library of the Kings of France. We can hardly say\nthat it was published, even in the restricted sense which that word had\nduring the fourteenth century, and there certainly is no evidence that it\nwas read by any one except by members of the royal family of France, and\npossibly by descendants of Joinville. It exercised no influence; and if\ntwo or three copies had not luckily escaped (one of them, it must be\nconfessed, clearly showing the traces of mice\u2019s teeth), we should have\nknown very little indeed either of the military or of the literary\nachievements of one who is now ranked among the chief historians of\nFrance, or even of Europe. After Joinville\u2019s History had once emerged from\nits obscurity, it soon became the fashion to praise it, and to praise it\nsomewhat indiscriminately. Joinville became a general favorite both in and\nout of France; and after all had been said in his praise that might be\ntruly and properly said, each successive admirer tried to add a little\nmore, till at last, as a matter of course, he was compared to Thucydides,\nand lauded for the graces of his style, the vigor of his language, the\nsubtlety of his mind, and his worship of the harmonious and the beautiful,\nin such a manner that the old bluff soldier would have been highly\nperplexed and disgusted, could he have listened to the praises of his\nadmirers. Well might M. Paulin Paris say, \u201cI shall not stop to praise what\neverybody has praised before me; to recall the graceful _na\u00efvet\u00e9_ of the\ngood S\u00e9n\u00e9chal, would it not be, as the English poet said, \u2018to gild the\ngold and paint the lily white?\u2019 \u201d\n\nIt is surprising to find in the large crowd of indiscriminate admirers a\nman so accurate in his thoughts and in his words as the late Sir James\nStephen. Considering how little Joinville\u2019s History was noticed by his\ncontemporaries, how little it was read by the people before it was printed\nduring the reign of Fran\u00e7ois I., it must seem more than doubtful whether\nJoinville really deserved a place in a series of lectures, \u201cOn the Power\nof the Pen in France.\u201d But, waiving that point, is it quite exact to say,\nas Sir James Stephen does, \u201cthat three writers only retain, and probably\nthey alone deserve, at this day the admiration which greeted them in their\nown,\u2014I refer to Joinville, Froissart, and to Philippe de Comines?\u201d And is\nthe following a sober and correct description of Joinville\u2019s style?\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cOver the whole picture the genial spirit of France glows with all\n    the natural warmth which we seek in vain among the dry bones of\n    earlier chroniclers. Without the use of any didactic forms of\n    speech, Joinville teaches the highest of all wisdom\u2014the wisdom of\n    love. Without the pedantry of the schools, he occasionally\n    exhibits an eager thirst of knowledge, and a graceful facility of\n    imparting it, which attest that he is of the lineage of the great\n    father of history, and of those modern historians who have taken\n    Herodotus for their model.\u201d (Vol. ii. pp. 209, 219.)\n\n\nNow, all this sounds to our ears just an octave too high. There is some\ntruth in it, but the truth is spoilt by being exaggerated. Joinville\u2019s\nbook is very pleasant to read, because he gives himself no airs, and tells\nus as well as he can what he recollects of his excellent King, and of the\nfearful time which they spent together during the crusade. He writes very\nmuch as an old soldier would speak. He seems to know that people will\nlisten to him with respect, and that they will believe what he tells them.\nHe does not weary them with arguments. He rather likes now and then to\nevoke a smile, and he maintains the glow of attention by thinking more of\nhis hearers than of himself. He had evidently told his stories many times\nbefore he finally dictated them in the form in which we read them, and\nthis is what gives to some of them a certain finish and the appearance of\nart. Yet, if we speak of style at all,\u2014not of the style of thought, but of\nthe style of language,\u2014the blemishes in Joinville\u2019s History are so\napparent that one feels reluctant to point them out. He repeats his words,\nhe repeats his remarks, he drops the thread of his story, begins a new\nsubject, leaves it because, as he says himself, it would carry him too\nfar, and then, after a time, returns to it again. His descriptions of the\nscenery where the camp was pitched, and the battles fought, are neither\nsufficiently broad nor sufficiently distinct to give the reader that view\nof the whole which he receives from such writers as C\u00e6sar, Thiers,\nCarlyle, or Russell. Nor is there any attempt at describing or analyzing\nthe character of the principal actors in the crusade of St. Louis, beyond\nrelating some of their remarks or occasional conversations. It is an\nungrateful task to draw up these indictments against a man whom one\nprobably admires much more sincerely than those who bespatter him with\nundeserved praise. Joinville\u2019s book is readable, and it is readable even\nin spite of the antiquated and sometimes difficult language in which it is\nwritten. There are few books of which we could say the same. What makes\nhis book readable is partly the interest attaching to the subject of which\nit treats, but far more the simple, natural, straightforward way in which\nJoinville tells what he has to tell. From one point of view it may be\ntruly said that no higher praise could be bestowed on any style than to\nsay that it is simple, natural, straightforward, and charming. But if his\nindiscriminate admirers had appreciated this artless art, they would not\nhave applied to the pleasant gossip of an old general epithets that are\nappropriate only to the masterpieces of classical literature.\n\nIt is important to bear in mind what suggested to Joinville the first idea\nof writing his book. He was asked to do so by the Queen of Philip le Bel.\nAfter the death of the Queen, however, Joinville did not dedicate his work\nto the King, but to his son, who was then the heir apparent. This may be\nexplained by the fact that he himself was S\u00e9n\u00e9chal de Champagne, and\nLouis, the son of Philip le Bel, Comte de Champagne. But it admits of\nanother and more probable explanation. Joinville was dissatisfied with the\nproceedings of Philip le Bel, and from the very beginning of his reign he\nopposed his encroachments on the privileges of the nobility and the\nliberties of the people. He was punished for his opposition, and excluded\nfrom the assemblies in Champagne in 1287; and though his name appeared\nagain on the roll in 1291, Joinville then occupied only the sixth instead\nof the first place. In 1314 matters came to a crisis in Champagne, and\nJoinville called together the nobility in order to declare openly against\nthe King. The opportune death of Philip alone prevented the breaking out\nof a rebellion. It is true that there are no direct allusions to these\nmatters in the body of Joinville\u2019s book, yet an impression is left on the\nreader that he wrote some portion of the Life of St. Louis as a lesson to\nthe young prince to whom it is dedicated. Once or twice, indeed, he uses\nlanguage which sounds ominous, and which would hardly be tolerated in\nFrance, even after the lapse of five centuries. When speaking of the great\nhonor which St. Louis conferred on his family, he says \u201cthat it was,\nindeed, a great honor to those of his descendants who would follow his\nexample by good works, but a great dishonor to those who would do evil.\nFor people would point at them with their fingers, and would say that the\nsainted King from whom they descended would have despised such\nwickedness.\u201d There is another passage even stronger than this. After\nrelating how St. Louis escaped from many dangers by the grace of God, he\nsuddenly exclaims, \u201cLet the King who now reigns (Philip le Bel) take care,\nfor he has escaped from as great dangers\u2014nay, from greater ones\u2014than we;\nlet him see whether he cannot amend his evil ways, so that God may not\nstrike him and his affairs cruelly.\u201d\n\nThis surely is strong language, considering that it was used in a book\ndedicated to the son of the then reigning King. To the father of Philip le\nBel, Joinville seems to have spoken with the same frankness as to his son;\nand he tells us himself how he reproved the King, Philip le Hardi, for his\nextravagant dress, and admonished him to follow the example of his father.\nSimilar remarks occur again and again; and though the Life of St. Louis\nwas certainly not written merely for didactic purposes, yet one cannot\nhelp seeing that it was written with a practical object. In the\nintroduction Joinville says, \u201cI send the book to you, that you and your\nbrother and others who hear it may take an example, and that they may\ncarry it out in their life, for which God will bless them.\u201d And again (p.\n268), \u201cThese things shall I cause to be written, that those who hear them\nmay have faith in God in their persecutions and tribulations, and God will\nhelp them, as He did me.\u201d Again (p. 380), \u201cThese things I have told you,\nthat you may guard against taking an oath without reason, for, as the wise\nsay, \u2018He who swears readily, forswears himself readily.\u2019 \u201d\n\nIt seems, therefore, that when Joinville took to dictating his\nrecollections of St. Louis, he did so partly to redeem a promise given to\nthe Queen, who, he says, loved him much, and whom he could not refuse,\npartly to place in the hands of the young princes a book full of\nhistorical lessons which they might read, mark, and inwardly digest.\n\nAnd well might he do so, and well might his book be read by all young\nprinces, and by all who are able to learn a lesson from the pages of\nhistory; for few kings, if any, did ever wear their crowns so worthily as\nLouis IX. of France; and few saints, if any, did deserve their halo better\nthan St. Louis. Here lies the deep and lasting interest of Joinville\u2019s\nwork. It allows us an insight into a life which we could hardly realize,\nnay, which we should hardly believe in, unless we had the testimony of\nthat trusty witness, Joinville, the King\u2019s friend and comrade. The\nlegendary lives of St. Louis would have destroyed in the eyes of posterity\nthe real greatness and the real sanctity of the King\u2019s character. We\nshould never have known the man, but only his saintly caricature. After\nreading Joinville, we must make up our mind that such a life as he there\ndescribes was really lived, and was lived in those very palaces which we\nare accustomed to consider as the sinks of wickedness and vice. From other\ndescriptions we might have imagined Louis IX. as a bigoted, priest-ridden,\ncredulous King. From Joinville we learn that, though unwavering in his\nfaith, and most strict in the observance of his religious duties, the King\nwas by no means narrow in his sympathies, or partial to the encroachments\nof priestcraft. We find Joinville speaking to the King on subjects of\nreligion with the greatest freedom, and as no courtier would have dared to\nspeak during the later years of Louis XIV.\u2019s reign. When the King asked\nhim whether in the holy week he ever washed the feet of the poor,\nJoinville replied that he would never wash the feet of such villains. For\nthis remark he was, no doubt, reproved by the King, who, as we are told by\nBeaulieu, with the most unpleasant details, washed the feet of the poor\nevery Saturday. But the reply, though somewhat irreverent, is,\nnevertheless, highly creditable to the courtier\u2019s frankness. Another time\nhe shocked his royal friend still more by telling him, in the presence of\nseveral priests, that he would rather have committed thirty mortal sins\nthan be a leper. The King said nothing at the time, but he sent for him\nthe next day, and reproved him in the most gentle manner for his\nthoughtless speech.\n\nJoinville, too, with all the respect which he entertained for his King,\nwould never hesitate to speak his mind when he thought that the King was\nin the wrong. On one occasion the Abbot of Cluny presented the King with\ntwo horses, worth five hundred _livres_. The next day the Abbot came again\nto the King to discuss some matters of business. Joinville observed that\nthe King listened to him with marked attention. After the Abbot was gone,\nhe went to the King, and said, \u201c \u2018Sire, may I ask you whether you listened\nto the Abbot more cheerfully because he presented you yesterday with two\nhorses?\u2019 The King meditated for a time, and then said to me, \u2018Truly, yes.\u2019\n\u2018Sire,\u2019 said I, \u2018do you know why I asked you this question?\u2019 \u2018Why?\u2019 said\nhe. \u2018Because, Sire,\u2019 I said, \u2018I advise you, when you return to France, to\nprohibit all sworn counselors from accepting anything from those who have\nto bring their affairs before them. For you may be certain, if they accept\nanything, they will listen more cheerfully and attentively to those who\ngive, as you did yourself with the Abbot of Cluny.\u2019 \u201d\n\nSurely a king who could listen to such language is not likely to have had\nhis court filled with hypocrites, whether lay or clerical. The bishops,\nthough they might count on the King for any help he could give them in the\ngreat work of teaching, raising, and comforting the people, tried in vain\nto make him commit an injustice in defense of what they considered\nreligion. One day a numerous deputation of prelates asked for an\ninterview. It was readily granted. When they appeared before the King,\ntheir spokesman said, \u201cSire, these lords who are here, archbishops and\nbishops, have asked me to tell you that Christianity is perishing at your\nhands.\u201d The King signed himself with the cross, and said, \u201cTell me how can\nthat be?\u201d \u201cSire,\u201d he said, \u201cit is because people care so little nowadays\nfor excommunication that they would rather die excommunicated than have\nthemselves absolved and give satisfaction to the Church. Now, we pray you,\nSire, for the sake of God, and because it is your duty, that you command\nyour provosts and bailiffs that by seizing the goods of those who allow\nthemselves to be excommunicated for the space of one year, they may force\nthem to come and be absolved.\u201d Then the King replied that he would do this\nwillingly with all those of whom it could be _proved_ that they were in\nthe wrong (which would, in fact, have given the King jurisdiction in\necclesiastical matters). The bishops said that they could not do this at\nany price; they would never bring their causes before his court. Then the\nKing said he could not do it otherwise, for it would be against God and\nagainst reason. He reminded them of the case of the Comte de Bretagne, who\nhad been excommunicated by the prelates of Brittany for the space of seven\nyears, and who, when he appealed to the Pope, gained his cause, while the\nprelates were condemned. \u201cNow then,\u201d the King said, \u201cif I had forced the\nComte de Bretagne to get absolution from the prelates after the first\nyear, should I not have sinned against God and against him?\u201d\n\nThis is not the language of a bigoted man; and if we find in the life of\nSt. Louis traces of what in our age we might feel inclined to call bigotry\nor credulity, we must consider that the religious and intellectual\natmosphere of the reign of St. Louis was very different from our own.\nThere are, no doubt, some of the sayings and doings recorded by Joinville\nof his beloved King which at present would be unanimously condemned even\nby the most orthodox and narrow-minded. Think of an assembly of\ntheologians in the monastery of Cluny who had invited a distinguished\nrabbi to discuss certain points of Christian doctrine with them. A knight,\nwho happened to be staying with the abbot, asked for leave to open the\ndiscussion, and he addressed the Jew in the following words: \u201cDo you\nbelieve that the Virgin Mary was a virgin and Mother of God?\u201d When the Jew\nreplied, \u201cNo!\u201d the knight took his crutch and felled the poor Jew to the\nground. The King, who relates this to Joinville, draws one very wise\nlesson from, it\u2014namely, that no one who is not a very good theologian\nshould enter upon a controversy with Jews on such subjects. But when he\ngoes on to say that a layman who hears the Christian religion evil spoken\nof should take to the sword as the right weapon of defense, and run it\ninto the miscreant\u2019s body as far as it would go, we perceive at once that\nwe are in the thirteenth and not in the nineteenth century. The\npunishments which the King inflicted for swearing were most cruel. At\nCesarea, Joinville tells us that he saw a goldsmith fastened to a ladder,\nwith the entrails of a pig twisted round his neck right up to his nose,\nbecause he had used irreverent language. Nay, after his return from the\nHoly Land, he heard that the King ordered a man\u2019s nose and lower lip to be\nburnt for the same offense. The Pope himself had to interfere to prevent\nSt. Louis from inflicting on blasphemers mutilation and death. \u201cI would\nmyself be branded with a hot iron,\u201d the King said, \u201cif thus I could drive\naway all swearing from my kingdom.\u201d He himself, as Joinville assures us,\nnever used an oath, nor did he pronounce the name of the Devil except when\nreading the lives of the saints. His soul, we cannot doubt, was grieved\nwhen he heard the names which to him were the most sacred, employed for\nprofane purposes; and this feeling of indignation was shared by his honest\nchronicler. \u201cIn my castle,\u201d says Joinville, \u201cwhosoever uses bad language\nreceives a good pommeling, and this has nearly put down that bad habit.\u201d\nHere again we see the upright character of Joinville. He does not, like\nmost courtiers, try to outbid his sovereign in pious indignation; on the\ncontrary, while sharing his feelings, he gently reproves the King for his\nexcessive zeal and cruelty, and this after the King had been raised to the\nexalted position of a saint.\n\nTo doubt of any points of the Christian doctrine was considered at\nJoinville\u2019s time, as it is even now, as a temptation of the Devil. But\nhere again we see at the court of St. Louis a wonderful mixture of\ntolerance and intolerance. Joinville, who evidently spoke his mind freely\non all things, received frequent reproofs and lessons from the King; and\nwe hardly know which to wonder at most, the weakness of the arguments, or\nthe gentle and truly Christian spirit in which the King used them. The\nKing once asked Joinville how he knew that his father\u2019s name was Symon.\nJoinville replied he knew it because his mother had told him so. \u201cThen,\u201d\nthe King said, \u201cyou ought likewise firmly to believe all the articles of\nfaith which the Apostles attest, as you hear them sung every Sunday in the\nCreed.\u201d The use of such an argument by such a man leaves an impression on\nthe mind that the King himself was not free from religious doubts and\ndifficulties, and that his faith was built upon ground which was apt to\nshake. And this impression is confirmed by a conversation which\nimmediately follows after this argument. It is long, but it is far too\nimportant to be here omitted. The Bishop of Paris had told the King,\nprobably in order to comfort him after receiving from him the confession\nof some of his own religious difficulties, that one day he received a\nvisit from a great master in divinity. The master threw himself at the\nBishop\u2019s feet and cried bitterly. The Bishop said to him,\u2014\n\n\u201c \u2018Master, do not despair; no one can sin so much that God could not\nforgive him.\u2019\n\n\u201cThe master said, \u2018I cannot help crying, for I believe I am a miscreant:\nfor I cannot bring my heart to believe the sacrament of the altar, as the\nholy Church teaches it, and I know full well that it is the temptation of\nthe enemy.\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018Master,\u2019 replied the Bishop, \u2018tell me, when the enemy sends you this\ntemptation, does it please you?\u2019\n\n\u201cAnd the master said, \u2018Sir, it pains me as much as anything can pain.\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018Then I ask you,\u2019 the Bishop continued, \u2018would you take gold or silver\nin order to avow with your mouth anything that is against the sacrament of\nthe altar, or against the other sacred sacraments of the Church?\u2019\n\n\u201cAnd the master said, \u2018Know, sir, that there is nothing in the world that\nI should take; I would rather that all my limbs were torn from my body\nthan openly avow this.\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018Then,\u2019 said the Bishop, \u2018I shall tell you something else. You know that\nthe King of France made war against the King of England, and you know that\nthe castle which is nearest to the frontier is La Rochelle, in Poitou.\nNow, I shall ask you, if the King had trusted you to defend La Rochelle,\nand he had trusted me to defend the Castle of Laon, which is in the heart\nof France, where the country is at peace, to whom ought the King to be\nmore beholden at the end of the war,\u2014to you who had defended La Rochelle\nwithout losing it, or to me who kept the Castle of Laon?\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018In the name of God,\u2019 said the master, \u2018to me who had kept La Rochelle\nwith losing it.\u2019\n\n\u201c \u2018Master,\u2019 said the Bishop, \u2018I tell you that my heart is like the Castle\nof Laon (Montleheri), for I feel no temptation and no doubt as to the\nsacrament of the altar; therefore, I tell you, if God gives me one reward\nbecause I believe firmly and in peace, He will give you four, because you\nkeep your heart for Him in this fight of tribulation, and have such\ngoodwill toward Him that for no earthly good, nor for any pain inflicted\non your body, you would forsake Him. Therefore, I say to you, be at ease;\nyour state is more pleasing to our Lord than my own.\u2019 \u201d\n\nWhen the master had heard this, he fell on his knees before the Bishop,\nand felt again at peace.\n\nSurely, if the cruel punishment inflicted by St. Louis on blasphemers is\nbehind our age, is not the love, the humility, the truthfulness of this\nBishop,\u2014is not the spirit in which he acted toward the priest, and the\nspirit in which he related this conversation to the King, somewhat in\nadvance of the century in which we live?\n\nIf we only dwell on certain passages of Joinville\u2019s memoirs, it is easy to\nsay that he and his King, and the whole age in which they moved, were\ncredulous, engrossed by the mere formalities of religion, and fanatical in\ntheir enterprise to recover Jerusalem and the Holy Land. But let us\ncandidly enter into their view of life, and many things which at first\nseem strange and startling will become intelligible. Joinville does not\nrelate many miracles; and such is his good faith that we may implicitly\nbelieve the facts, such as he states them, however we may differ as to the\ninterpretation by which, to Joinville\u2019s mind, these facts assumed a\nmiraculous character. On their way to the Holy Land it seems that their\nship was windbound for several days, and that they were in danger of being\ntaken prisoners by the pirates of Barbary. Joinville recollected the\nsaying of a priest who had told him that, whatever had happened in his\nparish, whether too much rain or too little rain, or anything else, if he\nmade three processions for three successive Saturdays, his prayer was\nalways heard. Joinville, therefore, recommended the same remedy. Seasick\nas he was, he was carried on deck, and the procession was formed round the\ntwo masts of the ship. As soon as this was done, the wind rose, and the\nship arrived at Cyprus the third Saturday. The same remedy was resorted to\na second time, and with equal effect. The King was waiting at Damietta for\nhis brother, the Comte de Poitiers, and his army, and was very uneasy\nabout the delay in his arrival. Joinville told the legate of the miracle\nthat had happened on their voyage to Cyprus. The legate consented to have\nthree processions on three successive Saturdays, and on the third Saturday\nthe Comte de Poitiers and his fleet arrived before Damietta. One more\ninstance may suffice. On their return to France a sailor fell overboard,\nand was left in the water. Joinville, whose ship was close by, saw\nsomething in the water; but, as he observed no struggle, he imagined it\nwas a cask. The man, however, was picked up; and when asked why he did not\nexert himself, he replied that he saw no necessity for it. As soon as he\nfell into the water he commended himself to _Nostre Dame_, and she\nsupported him by his shoulders till he was picked up by the King\u2019s galley.\nJoinville had a window painted in his chapel to commemorate this miracle;\nand there, no doubt, the Virgin would be represented as supporting the\nsailor exactly as he described it.\n\nNow, it must be admitted that before the tribunal of the ordinary\nphilosophy of the nineteenth century, these miracles would be put down\neither as inventions or as exaggerations. But let us examine the thoughts\nand the language of that age, and we shall take a more charitable, and, we\nbelieve, a more correct view. Men like Joinville did not distinguish\nbetween a general and a special providence, and few who have carefully\nexamined the true import of words would blame him for that. Whatever\nhappened to him and his friends, the smallest as well as the greatest\nevents were taken alike as so many communications from God to man. Nothing\ncould happen to any one of them unless God willed it. \u201cGod wills it,\u201d they\nexclaimed, and put the cross on their breasts, and left house and home,\nand wife and children, to fight the infidels in the Holy Land. The King\nwas ill and on the point of death, when he made a vow that if he\nrecovered, he would undertake a crusade. In spite of the dangers which\nthreatened him and his country, where every vassal was a rival, in spite\nof the despair of his excellent mother, the King fulfilled his vow, and\nrisked not only his crown, but his life, without a complaint and without a\nregret. It may be that the prospect of Eastern booty, or even of an\nEastern throne, had some part in exciting the pious zeal of the French\nchivalry. Yet if we read of Joinville, who was then a young and gay\nnobleman of twenty-four, with a young wife and a beautiful castle in\nChampagne, giving up everything, confessing his sins, making reparation,\nperforming pilgrimages, and then starting for the East, there to endure\nfor five years the most horrible hardships; when we read of his sailors\nsinging a _Veni, Creator Spiritus_, before they hoisted their sails; when\nwe see how every day, in the midst of pestilence and battle, the King and\nhis S\u00e9n\u00e9chal and his knights say their prayers and perform their religious\nduties; how in every danger they commend themselves to God or to their\nsaints; how for every blessing, for every escape from danger, they return\nthanks to Heaven,\u2014we easily learn to understand how natural it was that\nsuch men should see miracles in every blessing vouchsafed to them, whether\ngreat or small, just as the Jews of old, in that sense the true people of\nGod, saw miracles, saw the finger of God in every plague that visited\ntheir camp, and in every spring of water that saved them from destruction.\nWhen the Egyptians were throwing the Greek fire into the camp of the\nCrusaders, St. Louis raised himself in his bed at the report of every\ndischarge of those murderous missiles, and, stretching forth his hands\ntowards heaven, he said, crying, \u201cGood Lord God, protect my people.\u201d\nJoinville, after relating this, remarks, \u201cAnd I believe truly that his\nprayers served us well in our need.\u201d And was he not right in this belief,\nas right as the Israelites were when they saw Moses lifting up his heavy\narms, and they prevailed against Amalek? Surely this belief was put to a\nhard test when a fearful plague broke out in the camp, when nearly the\nwhole French army was massacred, when the King was taken prisoner, when\nthe Queen, in childbed, had to make her old chamberlain swear that he\nwould kill her at the first approach of the enemy, when the small remnant\nof that mighty French army had to purchase its return to France by a heavy\nransom. Yet nothing could shake Joinville\u2019s faith in the ever-ready help\nof our Lord, of the Virgin, and of the saints. \u201cBe certain,\u201d he writes,\n\u201cthat the Virgin helped us, and she would have helped us more if we had\nnot offended her, her and her Son, as I said before.\u201d Surely, with such\nfaith, credulity ceases to be credulity. Where there is credulity without\nthat living faith which sees the hand of God in everything, man\u2019s\nindignation is rightly roused. That credulity leads to self-conceit,\nhypocrisy, and unbelief. But such was not the credulity of Joinville or of\nhis King, or of the Bishop who comforted the great master in theology. A\nmodern historian would not call the rescue of the drowning sailor, nor the\nfavorable wind which brought the Crusaders to Cyprus, nor the opportune\narrival of the Comte de Poitiers miracles, because the word \u201cmiracle\u201d has\na different sense with us from what it had during the Middle Ages, from\nwhat it had at the time of the Apostles, and from what it had at the time\nof Moses. Yet to the drowning sailor his rescue was miraculous; to the\ndespairing King the arrival of his brother was a godsend; and to Joinville\nand his crew, who were in imminent danger of being carried off as slaves\nby Moorish pirates, the wind that brought them safe to Cyprus was more\nthan a fortunate accident. Our language differs from the language of\nJoinville, yet in our heart of hearts we mean the same thing.\n\nAnd nothing shows better the reality and healthiness of the religion of\nthose brave knights than their cheerful and open countenance, their\nthorough enjoyment of all the good things of this life, their freedom in\nthought and speech. You never catch Joinville canting, or with an\nexpression of blank solemnity. When his ship was surrounded by the galleys\nof the Sultan, and when they held a council as to whether they should\nsurrender themselves to the Sultan\u2019s fleet or to his army on shore, one of\nhis servants objected to all surrender. \u201cLet us all be killed,\u201d he said to\nJoinville, \u201cand then we shall all go straight to Paradise.\u201d His advice,\nhowever, was not followed, because, as Joinville says, \u201cwe did not believe\nit.\u201d\n\nIf we bear in mind that Joinville\u2019s History was written after Louis has\nbeen raised to the rank of a saint, his way of speaking of the King,\nthough always respectful, strikes us, nevertheless, as it must have struck\nhis contemporaries, as sometimes very plain and familiar. It is well known\nthat an attempt was actually made by the notorious Jesuit, le P\u00e8re\nHardouin, to prove Joinville\u2019s work as spurious, or, at all events, as\nfull of interpolations, inserted by the enemies of the Church. It was an\nattempt which thoroughly failed, and which was too dangerous to be\nrepeated; but, on reading Joinville after reading the life and miracles of\nSt. Louis, one can easily understand that the soldier\u2019s account of the\nbrave King was not quite palatable or welcome to the authors of the\nlegends of the royal saint. At the time when the King\u2019s bones had begun to\nwork wretched miracles, the following story could hardly have sounded\nrespectful: \u201cWhen the King was at Acre,\u201d Joinville writes, \u201csome pilgrims\non their way to Jerusalem wished to see him. Joinville went to the King,\nand said, \u2018Sire, there is a crowd of people who have asked me to show them\nthe royal saint, though _I_ have no wish as yet to kiss your bones.\u2019 The\nKing laughed loud, and asked me to bring the people.\u201d\n\nIn the thick of the battle, in which Joinville received five wounds and\nhis horse fifteen, and when death seemed almost certain, Joinville tells\nus that the good Count of Soissons rode up to him and chaffed him, saying,\n\u201cLet those dogs loose, for, _par la quoife Dieu_,\u201d\u2014as he always used to\nswear,\u2014\u201cwe shall still talk of this day in the rooms of our ladies.\u201d\n\nThe Crusades and the Crusaders, though they are only five or six centuries\nremoved from us, have assumed a kind of romantic character, which makes it\nvery difficult even for the historian to feel towards them the same human\ninterest which we feel for C\u00e6sar or Pericles. Works like that of Joinville\nare most useful in dispelling that mist which the chroniclers of old and\nthe romances of Walter Scott and others have raised round the heroes of\nthese holy wars. St. Louis and his companions, as described by Joinville,\nnot only in their glistening armor, but in their everyday attire, are\nbrought nearer to us, become intelligible to us, and teach us lessons of\nhumanity which we can learn from men only, and not from saints and heroes.\nHere lies the real value of real history. It makes us familiar with the\nthoughts of men who differ from us in manners and language, in thought and\nreligion, and yet with whom we are able to sympathize, and from whom we\nare able to learn. It widens our minds and our hearts, and gives us that\ntrue knowledge of the world and of human nature in all its phases which\nbut few can gain in the short span of their own life, and in the narrow\nsphere of their friends and enemies. We can hardly imagine a better book\nfor boys to read or for men to ponder over; and we hope that M. de\nWailly\u2019s laudable efforts may be crowned with complete success, and that,\nwhether in France or in England, no student of history will in future\nimagine that he knows the true spirit of the Crusades and the Crusaders\nwho has not read once, and more than once, the original Memoirs of\nJoinville, as edited, translated, and explained by the eminent Keeper of\nthe Imperial Library at Paris, M. Natalis de Wailly.\n\n1866.\n\n\n\n\n\nVIII. THE JOURNAL DES SAVANTS AND THE JOURNAL DE TR\u00c9VOUX.(32)\n\n\nFor a hundred persons who, in this country, read the \u201cRevue des Deux\nMondes,\u201d how many are there who read the \u201cJournal des Savants?\u201d In France\nthe authority of that journal is indeed supreme; but its very title\nfrightens the general public, and its blue cover is but seldom seen on the\ntables of the _salles de lecture_. And yet there is no French periodical\nso well suited to the tastes of the better class of readers in England.\nIts contributors are all members of the Institut de France; and, if we may\nmeasure the value of a periodical by the honor which it reflects on those\nwho form its staff, no journal in France can vie with the \u201cJournal des\nSavants.\u201d At the present moment we find on its roll such names as Cousin,\nFlourens, Villemain, Mignet, Barth\u00e9lemy Saint-Hilaire, Naudet, Prosper\nM\u00e9rim\u00e9, Littr\u00e9, Vitet\u2014names which, if now and then seen on the covers of\nthe \u201cRevue des Deux Mondes,\u201d the \u201cRevue Contemporaine,\u201d or the \u201cRevue\nModerne,\u201d confer an exceptional lustre on these fortnightly or monthly\nissues. The articles which are admitted into this select periodical may be\ndeficient now and then in those outward charms of diction by which French\nreaders like to be dazzled; but what in France is called _trop savant,\ntrop lourd_, is frequently far more palatable than the highly spiced\narticles which are no doubt delightful to read, but which, like an\nexcellent French dinner, make you almost doubt whether you have dined or\nnot. If English journalists are bent on taking for their models the\nfortnightly or monthly contemporaries of France, the \u201cJournal des Savants\u201d\nmight offer a much better chance of success than the more popular\n_revues_. We should be sorry indeed to see any periodical published under\nthe superintendence of the \u201cMinistre de l\u2019Instruction Publique,\u201d or of any\nother member of the Cabinet; but, apart from that, a literary tribunal\nlike that formed by the members of the \u201cBureau du Journal des Savants\u201d\nwould certainly be a great benefit to literary criticism. The general tone\nthat runs through their articles is impartial and dignified. Each writer\nseems to feel the responsibility which attaches to the bench from which he\naddresses the public, and we can of late years recall hardly any case\nwhere the dictum of \u201cnoblesse oblige\u201d has been disregarded in this the\nmost ancient among the purely literary journals of Europe.\n\nThe first number of the \u201cJournal des Savants\u201d was published more than two\nhundred years ago, on the 5th of January, 1655. It was the first small\nbeginning in a branch of literature which has since assumed immense\nproportions. Voltaire speaks of it as \u201cle p\u00e8re de tous les ouvrages de ce\ngenre, dont l\u2019Europe est aujourd\u2019hui remplie.\u201d It was published at first\nonce a week, every Monday; and the responsible editor was M. de Sallo,\nwho, in order to avoid the retaliations of sensitive authors, adopted the\nname of Le Sieur de Hedouville, the name, it is said, of his _valet de\nchambre_. The articles were short, and in many cases they only gave a\ndescription of the books, without any critical remarks. The Journal\nlikewise gave an account of important discoveries in science and art, and\nof other events that might seem of interest to men of letters. Its success\nmust have been considerable, if we may judge by the number of rival\npublications which soon sprang up in France and in other countries of\nEurope. In England, a philosophical journal on the same plan was started\nbefore the year was over. In Germany, the \u201cJournal des Savants\u201d was\ntranslated into Latin by F. Nitzschius in 1668, and before the end of the\nseventeenth century the \u201cGiornale de\u2019 Letterati\u201d (1668), the \u201cBibliotheca\nVolante\u201d (1677), the \u201cActa Eruditorum\u201d (1682), the \u201cNouvelles de la\nR\u00e9publique des Lettres\u201d (1684), the \u201cBiblioth\u00e8que Universelle et\nHistorique\u201d (1686), the \u201cHistoire des Ouvrages des Savants\u201d (1687), and\nthe \u201cMonatliche Unterredungen\u201d (1689), had been launched in the principal\ncountries of Europe. In the next century it was remarked of the journals\npublished in Germany, \u201cPlura dixeris pullulasse brevi tempore quam fungi\nnascuntur un\u00e2 nocte.\u201d\n\nMost of these journals were published by laymen, and represented the\npurely intellectual interests of society. It was but natural, therefore,\nthat the clergy also should soon have endeavored to possess a journal of\ntheir own. The Jesuits, who at that time were the most active and\ninfluential order, were not slow to appreciate this new opportunity for\ndirecting public opinion, and they founded in 1701 their famous journal,\nthe \u201cM\u00e9moires de Tr\u00e9voux.\u201d Famous indeed it might once be called, and yet\nat present how little is known of that collection! how seldom are its\nvolumes called for in our public libraries! It was for a long time the\nrival of the \u201cJournal des Savants.\u201d Under the editorship of Le P\u00e8re\nBerthier it fought bravely against Diderot, Voltaire, and other heralds of\nthe French Revolution. It weathered even the fatal year of 1762, but,\nafter changing its name, and moderating its pretensions, it ceased to\nappear in 1782. The long rows of its volumes are now piled up in our\nlibraries likes rows of tombstones, which we pass by without even stopping\nto examine the names and titles of those who are buried in these vast\ncatacombs of thought.\n\nIt was a happy idea that led the P\u00e8re P. C. Sommervogel, himself a member\nof the order of the Jesuits, to examine the dusty volumes of the \u201cJournal\nde Tr\u00e9voux,\u201d and to do for it the only thing that could be done to make it\nuseful once more, at least to a certain degree, namely, to prepare a\ngeneral index of the numerous subjects treated in its volumes, on the\nmodel of the great index, published in 1753, of the \u201cJournal des Savants.\u201d\nHis work, published at Paris in 1865, consists of three volumes. The first\ngives an index of the original dissertations; the second and third, of the\nworks criticised in the \u201cJournal de Tr\u00e9voux.\u201d It is a work of much smaller\npretensions than the index to the \u201cJournal des Savants;\u201d yet, such as it\nis, it is useful, and will amply suffice for the purposes of those few\nreaders who have from time to time to consult the literary annals of the\nJesuits in France.\n\nThe title of the \u201cM\u00e9moires de Tr\u00e9voux\u201d was taken from the town of Tr\u00e9voux,\nthe capital of the principality of Dombes, which Louis XIV. had conferred\non the Duc de Maine, with all the privileges of a sovereign. Like Louis\nXIV., the young prince gloried in the title of a patron of art and\nscience, but, as the pupil of Madame de Maintenon, he devoted himself even\nmore zealously to the defense of religion. A printing-office was founded\nat Tr\u00e9voux, and the Jesuits were invited to publish a new journal, \u201co\u00f9\nl\u2019on e\u00fbt principalement en v\u00fb\u00eb la d\u00e9fense de la religion.\u201d This was the\n\u201cJournal de Tr\u00e9voux,\u201d published for the first time in February, 1701,\nunder the title of \u201cM\u00e9moires pour l\u2019Histoire des Sciences et des Beaux\nArts, recueillis par l\u2019ordre de Son Altesse S\u00e9r\u00e9nissime, Monseigneur\nPrince Souverain de Dombes.\u201d It was entirely and professedly in the hands\nof the Jesuits, and we find among its earliest contributors such names as\nCatrou, Tournemine, and Hardouin. The opportunities for collecting\nliterary and other intelligence enjoyed by the members of that order were\nextraordinary. We doubt whether any paper, even in our days, has so many\nintelligent correspondents in every part of the world. If any astronomical\nobservation was to be made in China or America, a Jesuit missionary was\ngenerally on the spot to make it. If geographical information was wanted,\neye-witnesses could write from India or Africa to state what was the exact\nheight of mountains or the real direction of rivers. The architectural\nmonuments of the great nations of antiquity could easily be explored and\ndescribed, and the literary treasures of India or China or Persia could be\nransacked by men ready for any work that required devotion and\nperseverance, and that promised to throw additional splendor on the order\nof Loyola. No missionary society has ever understood how to utilize its\nresources in the interest of science like the Jesuits; and if our own\nmissionaries may on many points take warning from the history of the\nJesuits, on that one point at least they might do well to imitate their\nexample.\n\nScientific interests, however, were by no means the chief motive of the\nJesuits in founding their journal, and the controversial character began\nsoon to preponderate in their articles. Protestant writers received but\nlittle mercy in the pages of the \u201cJournal de Tr\u00e9voux,\u201d and the battle was\nsoon raging in every country of Europe between the flying batteries of the\nJesuits and the strongholds of Jansenism, of Protestantism, or of liberal\nthought in general. Le Clerc was attacked for his \u201cHarmonia Evangelica;\u201d\nBoileau even was censured for his \u201cEp\u00eetre sur l\u2019Amour de Dieu.\u201d But the\nold lion was too much for his reverend satirists. The following is a\nspecimen of his reply:\u2014\n\n\u201cMes R\u00e9v\u00e9rends P\u00e8res en Dieu,\nEt mes confr\u00e8res en Satire.\nDans vos Escrits dans plus d\u2019un lieu\nJe voy qu\u2019\u00e0 mes d\u00e9pens vous affect\u00e9s de rire;\nMais ne craign\u00e9s-vous point, que pour rire de Vous,\nRelisant Juv\u00e9nal, refeuilletant Horace,\nJe ne ranime encor ma satirique audace?\nGrands Aristarques de Tr\u00e9voux,\nN\u2019all\u00e9s point de nouveau faire courir aux armes,\nUn athl\u00e8te tout prest \u00e0 prendre son cong\u00e9,\nQui par vos traits malins au combat rengag\u00e9\nPeut encore aux Rieurs faire verser des larmes.\nAppren\u00e9s un mot de R\u00e9gnier,\nNotre c\u00e9l\u00e8bre Devancier,\n_Corsaires attaquant Corsaires_\n_No font pas_, dit-il, _leurs affaires_.\u201d\n\nEven stronger language than this became soon the fashion in journalistic\nwarfare. In reply to an attack on the Marquis Orsi, the \u201cGiornale de\u2019\nLetterati d\u2019Italia\u201d accused the \u201cJournal de Tr\u00e9voux\u201d of _menzogna_ and\n_impostura_, and in Germany the \u201cActa Eruditorum Lipsiensium\u201d poured out\neven more violent invectives against the Jesuitical critics. It is\nwonderful how well Latin seems to lend itself to the expression of angry\nabuse. Few modern writers have excelled the following tirade, either in\nLatin or in German:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cQu\u00e6 mentis stupiditas! At si qua est, Jesuitarum est.... Res est\n    intoleranda, Trevoltianos Jesuitas, toties contusos, iniquissimum\n    in suis diariis tribunal erexisse, in eoque non ratione duce, sed\n    animi impotentia, non \u00e6quitatis legibus, sed pr\u00e6judiciis, non\n    veritatis lance, sed affectus aut odi pondere, optimis\n    exquisitissimisque operibus detrahere, pessima ad c\u0153lum usque\n    laudibus efferre: ignaris auctoribus, modo secum sentiant, aut\n    sibi faveant, ubique blandiri, doctissimos sibi non plane pleneque\n    deditos plus quam canino dente mordere.\u201d\n\n\nWhat has been said of other journals was said of the \u201cJournal de\nTr\u00e9voux:\u201d\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLes auteurs de ce journal, qui a son m\u00e9rite, sont constants \u00e0\n    louer tous les ouvrages de ceux qu\u2019ils affectionnent, et pour\n    \u00e9viter une froide monotonie, ils exercent quelquefois la critique\n    sur les \u00e9crivans \u00e0 qui rien ne les oblige de faire gr\u00e2ce.\u201d\n\n\nIt took some time before authors became at all reconciled to these new\ntribunals of literary justice. Even a writer like Voltaire, who braved\npublic opinion more than anybody, looked upon journals, and the influence\nwhich they soon gained in France and abroad, as a great evil. \u201cRien n\u2019a\nplus nui \u00e0 la litt\u00e9rature,\u201d he writes, \u201cplus r\u00e9pandu le mauvais go\u00fbt, et\nplus confondu le vrai avec le faux.\u201d Before the establishment of literary\njournals, a learned writer had indeed little to fear. For a few years, at\nall events, he was allowed to enjoy the reputation of having published a\nbook; and this by itself was considered a great distinction by the world\nat large. Perhaps his book was never noticed at all, or, if it was, it was\nonly criticised in one of those elaborate letters which the learned men of\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries used to write to each other, which\nmight be forwarded indeed to one or two other professors, but which never\ninfluenced public opinion. Only in extreme cases a book would be answered\nby another book, but this would necessarily require a long time; nor would\nit at all follow that those who had read and admired the original work\nwould have an opportunity of consulting the volume that contained its\nrefutation. This happy state of things came to an end after the year 1655.\nSince the invention of printing, no more important event had happened in\nthe republic of letters than the introduction of a periodical literature.\nIt was a complete revolution, differing from other revolutions only by the\nquickness with which the new power was recognized even by its fiercest\nopponents.\n\nThe power of journalism, however, soon found its proper level, and the\nhistory of its rise and progress, which has still to be written, teaches\nthe same lesson as the history of political powers. Journals which\ndefended private interests, or the interests of parties, whether\nreligious, political, or literary, never gained that influence which was\nfreely conceded to those who were willing to serve the public at large in\npointing out real merit wherever it could be found, and in unmasking\npretenders, to whatever rank they might belong. The once all-powerful\norgan of the Jesuits, the \u201cJournal de Tr\u00e8voux,\u201d has long ceased to exist,\nand even to be remembered; the \u201cJournal des Savants\u201d still holds, after\nmore than two hundred years, that eminent position which was claimed for\nit by its founder, as the independent advocate of justice and truth.\n\n1866.\n\n\n\n\n\nIX. CHASOT.(33)\n\n\nHistory is generally written _en face_. It reminds us occasionally of\ncertain royal family pictures, where the centre is occupied by the king\nand queen, while their children are ranged on each side like organ-pipes,\nand the courtiers and ministers are grouped behind, according to their\nrespective ranks. All the figures seem to stare at some imaginary\nspectator, who would require at least a hundred eyes to take in the whole\nof the assemblage. This place of the imaginary spectator falls generally\nto the lot of the historian, and of those who read great historical works;\nand perhaps this is inevitable. But it is refreshing for once to change\nthis unsatisfactory position, and, instead of always looking straight in\nthe faces of kings, and queens, and generals, and ministers, to catch, by\na side-glance, a view of the times, as they appeared to men occupying a\nless central and less abstract position than that of the general\nhistorian. If we look at the Palace of Versailles from the terrace in\nfront of the edifice, we are impressed with its broad magnificence, but we\nare soon tired, and all that is left in our memory is a vast expanse of\nwindows, columns, statues, and wall. But let us retire to some of the\n_bosquets_ on each side of the main avenue, and take a diagonal view of\nthe great mansion of Louis XIV., and though we lose part of the palace,\nthe whole picture gains in color and life, and it brings before our mind\nthe figure of the great monarch himself, so fond of concealing part of his\nmajestic stateliness under the shadow of those very groves where we are\nsitting.\n\nIt was a happy thought of M. Kurd von Schl\u00f6zer to try a similar experiment\nwith Frederic the Great, and to show him to us, not as the great king,\nlooking history in the face, but as seen near and behind another person,\nfor whom the author has felt so much sympathy as to make him the central\nfigure of a very pretty historical picture. This person is Chasot.\nFrederic used to say of him, _C\u2019est le matador de ma jeunesse_,\u2014a saying\nwhich is not found in Frederic\u2019s works, but which is nevertheless\nauthentic. One of the chief magistrates of the old Hanseatic town of\nL\u00fcbeck, Syndicus Curtius,\u2014the father, we believe, of the two distinguished\nscholars, Ernst and Georg Curtius,\u2014was at school with the two sons of\nChasot, and he remembers these royal words, when they were repeated in all\nthe drawing-rooms of the city where Chasot spent many years of his life.\nFrederic\u2019s friendship for Chasot is well known, for there are two poems of\nthe king addressed to this young favorite. They do not give a very high\nidea either of the poetical power of the monarch, or of the moral\ncharacter of his friend; but they contain some manly and straightforward\nremarks, which make up for a great deal of shallow declamation. This young\nChasot was a French nobleman, a fresh, chivalrous, buoyant\nnature,\u2014adventurous, careless, extravagant, brave, full of romance, happy\nwith the happy, and galloping through life like a true cavalry officer. He\nmet Frederic in 1734. Louis XV. had taken up the cause of Stanislas\nLesczynski, King of Poland, his father-in-law, and Chasot served in the\nFrench army which, under the Duke of Berwick, attacked Germany on the\nRhine, in order to relieve Poland from the simultaneous pressure of\nAustria and Russia. He had the misfortune to kill a French officer in a\nduel, and was obliged to take refuge in the camp of the old Prince Eug\u00e8ne.\nHere the young Prince of Prussia soon discovered the brilliant parts of\nthe French nobleman, and when his father, Frederic William I., no longer\nallowed him to serve under Eug\u00e8ne, he asked Chasot to follow him to\nPrussia. The years from 1735 to 1740 were happy years for the prince,\nthough he, no doubt, would have preferred taking an active part in the\ncampaign. He writes to his sister:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJ\u2019aurais r\u00e9pondu plus t\u00f4t, si je n\u2019avais \u00e9t\u00e9 tr\u00e8s-afflig\u00e9 de ce\n    que le roi ne veut pas me permettre d\u2019aller en campagne. Je le lui\n    ai demand\u00e9 quatre fois, et lui ai rappel\u00e9 la promesse qu\u2019il m\u2019en\n    avait faite; mais point de nouvelle; il m\u2019a dit qu\u2019il avait des\n    raisons tr\u00e8s-cach\u00e9es qui l\u2019en emp\u00eachaient. Je le crois, car je\n    suis persuad\u00e9 qu\u2019il ne les sait pas lui-m\u00eame.\u201d\n\n\nBut, as he wished to be on good terms with his father, he stayed at home,\nand travelled about to inspect his future kingdom. \u201cC\u2019est un peu plus\nhonn\u00eate qu\u2019en Sib\u00e9rie,\u201d he writes, \u201cmais pas de beaucoup.\u201d Frederic, after\nhis marriage, took up his abode in the Castle of Rheinsberg, near\nNeu-Ruppin, and it was here that he spent the happiest part of his\nexistence. M. de Schl\u00f6zer has described this period in the life of the\nking with great art; and he has pointed out how Frederic, while he seemed\nto live for nothing but pleasure,\u2014shooting, dancing, music, and\npoetry,\u2014was given at the same time to much more serious\noccupations,\u2014reading and composing works on history, strategy, and\nphilosophy, and maturing plans which, when the time of their execution\ncame, seemed to spring from his head full-grown and full-armed. He writes\nto his sister, the Markgravine of Baireuth, in 1737:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cNous nous divertissons de rien, et n\u2019avons aucun soin des choses\n    de la vie, qui la rendent d\u00e9sagr\u00e9able et qui jettent du d\u00e9go\u00fbt sur\n    les plaisirs. Nous faisons la trag\u00e9die et la com\u00e9die, nous avons\n    bal, mascarade, et musique \u00e0 toute sauce. Voil\u00e0 un abr\u00e9g\u00e9 de nos\n    amusements.\u201d\n\n\nAnd again, he writes to his friend Suhm, at Petersburg:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cNous allons repr\u00e9senter l\u2019_\u0152dipe_ de Voltaire, dans lequel je\n    ferai le h\u00e9ros de th\u00e9\u00e2tre; j\u2019ai choisi le r\u00f4le de Philoct\u00e9te.\u201d\n\n\nA similar account of the royal household at Rheinsberg is given by\nBielfeld:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cC\u2019est ainsi que les jours s\u2019\u00e9coulent ici dans une tranquillit\u00e9\n    assaisonne\u00e9 de tous les plaisirs qui peuvent flatter une \u00e2me\n    raisonnable. Ch\u00e8re de roi, vin des dieux, musique des anges,\n    promenades d\u00e9licieuses dans les jardins et dans les bois, parties\n    sur l\u2019eau, culture des lettres et des beaux-arts, conversation\n    spirituelle, tout concourt \u00e0 repandre dans ce palais enchant\u00e9 des\n    charmes sur la vie.\u201d\n\n\nFrederic, however, was not a man to waste his time in mere pleasure. He\nshared in the revelries of his friends, but he was perhaps the only person\nat Rheinsberg who spent his evenings in reading Wolff\u2019s \u201cMetaphysics.\u201d And\nhere let us remark, that this German prince, in order to read that work,\nwas obliged to have the German translated into French by his friend Suhm,\nthe Saxon minister at Petersburg. Chasot, who had no very definite duties\nto perform at Rheinsberg, was commissioned to copy Suhm\u2019s manuscript,\u2014nay,\nhe was nearly driven to despair when he had to copy it a second time,\nbecause Frederic\u2019s monkey, Mimi, had set fire to the first copy. We have\nFrederic\u2019s opinion on Wolff\u2019s \u201cMetaphysics,\u201d in his \u201cWorks,\u201d vol. i. p.\n263:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLes universit\u00e9s prosperaient en m\u00eame temps. Halle et Francfort\n    \u00e9taient fournies de savants professeurs: Thomasius, Gundling,\n    Ludewig, Wolff, et Stryke tenaient le premier rang pour la\n    c\u00e9l\u00e9brit\u00e9 et faisaient nombre de disciples. Wolff commenta\n    l\u2019ing\u00e9nieux syst\u00e8me de Leibnitz sur les monades, et noya dans un\n    d\u00e9luge de paroles, d\u2019arguments, de corollaires, et de citations,\n    quelques probl\u00e8mes que Leibnitz avait jet\u00e9es peut-\u00eatre comme une\n    amorce aux m\u00e9taphysiciens. Le professeur de Halle \u00e9crivait\n    laborieusement nombre de volumes, qui, au lieu de pouvoir\n    instruire des hommes faits, servirent tout au plus de cat\u00e9chisme\n    de didactique pour des enfants. Les monades ont mis aux prises les\n    m\u00e9taphysiciens et les g\u00e9om\u00eatres d\u2019Allemagne, et ils disputent\n    encore sur la divisibilit\u00e9 de la mati\u00e8re.\u201d\n\n\nIn another place, however, he speaks of Wolff with greater respect, and\nacknowledges his influence in the German universities. Speaking of the\nreign of his father, he writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cMais la faveur et les brigues remplissaient les chaires de\n    professeurs dans les universit\u00e9s; les d\u00e9vots, qui se m\u00ealent de\n    tout, acquirent une part \u00e0 la direction des universit\u00e9s; ils y\n    pers\u00e9cutaient le bon sens, et surtout la classe des philosophes:\n    Wolff fut exil\u00e9 pour avoir d\u00e8duit avec un ordre admirable les\n    preuves sur l\u2019existence de Dieu. La jeune noblesse qui se vouait\n    aux armes, cr\u00fbt d\u00e9roger en \u00e9tudiant, et comme l\u2019esprit humain\n    donne toujours dans les exc\u00e8s, ils regard\u00e8rent l\u2019ignorance comme\n    un titre de m\u00e9rite, et le savoir comme une p\u00e9danterie absurde.\u201d\n\n\nDuring the same time, Frederic composed his \u201cRefutation of Macchiavelli,\u201d\nwhich was published in 1740, and read all over Europe; and besides the gay\nparties of the court, he organized the somewhat mysterious society of the\n_Ordre de Bayard_, of which his brothers, the Duke Ferdinand of Brunswick,\nthe Duke Wilhelm of Brunswick-Bevern, Keyserling, Fouqu\u00e9, and Chasot, were\nmembers. Their meetings had reference to serious political matters, though\nFrederic himself was never initiated by his father into the secrets of\nPrussian policy till almost on his death-bed. The king died in 1740, and\nFrederic was suddenly called away from his studies and pleasures at\nRheinsberg, to govern a rising kingdom which was watched with jealousy by\nall its neighbors. He describes his state of mind, shortly before the\ndeath of his father, in the following words:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cVous pouvez bien juger que je suis assez tracass\u00e9 dans la\n    situation o\u00f9 je me trouve. On me laisse peu de repos, mais\n    l\u2019int\u00e9rieur est tranquille, et je puis vous assurer que je n\u2019ai\n    jamais \u00e9t\u00e9 plus philosophe qu\u2019en cette occasion-ci. Je regards\n    avec des yeux d\u2019indiff\u00e9rence tout ce qui m\u2019attend, sans d\u00e9sirer la\n    fortune ni la craindre, plein de compassion pour ceux qui\n    souffrent, d\u2019estime pour les honn\u00eates gens, et de tendresse pour\n    mes amis.\u201d\n\n\nAs soon, however as he had mastered his new position, the young king was\nagain the patron of art, of science, of literature, and of social\nimprovements of every kind. Voltaire had been invited to Berlin, to\norganize a French theatre, when suddenly the news of the death of Charles\nVI., the Emperor of Germany, arrived at Berlin. How well Frederic\nunderstood what was to follow, we learn from a letter to Voltaire:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cMon cher Voltaire,\u2014L\u2019\u00e9v\u00e9nement le moins pr\u00e9vu du monde m\u2019emp\u00eache,\n    pour cette fois, d\u2019ouvrir mon \u00e2me \u00e0 la v\u00f4tre comme d\u2019ordinaire, et\n    de bavarder comme je le voudrais. L\u2019empereur est mort. Cette mort\n    d\u00e9range toutes mes id\u00e9es pacifiques, et je crois qu\u2019il s\u2019agira, au\n    mois de juin, plut\u00f4t de poudre \u00e0 canon, de soldats, de tranch\u00e9es,\n    que d\u2019actrices, de ballets et de th\u00e9\u00e2tre.\u201d\n\n\nHe was suffering from fever, and he adds:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJe vais faire passer ma fi\u00e8vre, car j\u2019ai besoin de ma machine, et\n    il en faut tirer \u00e0 pr\u00e9sent tout le parti possible.\u201d\n\n\nAgain he writes to Algarotti:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cUne bagatelle comme est la mort de l\u2019empereur ne demande pas de\n    grands mouvements. Tout \u00e9tait pr\u00e9vu, tout \u00e9tait arrang\u00e9. Ainsi il\n    ne s\u2019agit que d\u2019ex\u00e9cuter des desseins que j\u2019ai roul\u00e9s depuis long\n    temps dans ma t\u00eate.\u201d\n\n\nWe need not enter into the history of the first Silesian war; but we see\nclearly from these expressions, that the occupation of Silesia, which the\nhouse of Brandenburg claimed by right, had formed part of the policy of\nPrussia long before the death of the emperor; and the peace of Breslau, in\n1742, realized a plan which had probably been the subject of many debates\nat Rheinsberg. During this first war, Chasot obtained the most brilliant\nsuccess. At Mollwitz, he saved the life of the king; and the following\naccount of this exploit was given to M. de Schl\u00f6zer by members of Chasot\u2019s\nfamily: An Austrian cavalry officer, with some of his men, rode up close\nto the king. Chasot was near. \u201cWhere is the king?\u201d the officer shouted;\nand Chasot, perceiving the imminent danger, sprang forward, declared\nhimself to be the king, and sustained for some time single-handed the most\nviolent combat with the Austrian soldiers. At last he was rescued by his\nmen, but not without having received a severe wound across his forehead.\nThe king thanked him, and Voltaire afterwards celebrated his bravery in\nthe following lines:\u2014\n\n\u201cIl me souvient encore de ce jour m\u00e9morable\nO\u00f9 l\u2019illustre Chasot, ce guerrier formidable,\nSauva par sa valeur le plus grand de nos rois.\nO Prusse! \u00e9l\u00e8ve un temple \u00e0 ses fameux exploits.\u201d\n\nChasot soon rose to the rank of major, and received large pecuniary\nrewards from the king. The brightest event, however, of his life was still\nto come; and this was the battle of Hohenfriedberg, in 1745. In spite of\nFrederic\u2019s successes, his position before that engagement was extremely\ncritical. Austria had concluded a treaty with England, Holland and Saxony\nagainst Prussia. France declined to assist Frederic, Russia threatened to\ntake part against him. On the 19th of April, the king wrote to his\nminister:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLa situation pr\u00e9sente est aussi violente que d\u00e9sagr\u00e9able. Mon\n    parti est tout pris. S\u2019il s\u2019agit de se battre, nous le ferons en\n    d\u00e9sesp\u00e9r\u00e9s. Enfin, jamais crise n\u2019a \u00e9t\u00e9 plus grande que la mienne.\n    Il faut laisser au temps de d\u00e9brouiller cette fus\u00e9e, et au destin,\n    s\u2019il y en a un, \u00e0 d\u00e9cider de l\u2019\u00e9v\u00e9nement.\u201d\n\n\nAnd again:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJ\u2019ai jet\u00e9 le bonnet pardessus les moulins; je me pr\u00e9pare \u00e0 tous\n    les \u00e9v\u00e9nements qui peuvent m\u2019arriver. Que la fortune me soit\n    contraire ou favorable, cela ne m\u2019abaissera ni m\u2019enorgueillira; et\n    s\u2019il faut p\u00e9rir, ce sera avec gloire et l\u2019\u00e9p\u00e9e \u00e0 la main.\u201d\n\n\nThe decisive day arrived\u2014\u201cle jour le plus d\u00e9cisif de ma fortune.\u201d The\nnight before the battle, the king said to the French ambassador\u2014\u201cLes\nennemis sont o\u00f9 je les voulais, et je les attaque demain;\u201d and on the\nfollowing day the battle of Hohenfriedberg was won. How Chasot\ndistinguished himself, we may learn from Frederic\u2019s own description:\u2014\n\n\u201cMuse dis-moi, comment en ces moments\nChasot brilla, faisant voler des t\u00eates,\nDe maints uhlans faisant de vrais squelettes,\nEt des hussards, devant lui s\u2019echappant,\nFandant les uns, les autres transper\u00e7ant,\nEt, maniant sa flamberge tranchante,\nMettait en fuite, et donnait l\u2019\u00e9pouvante\nAux ennemis effar\u00e9s et tremblants.\nTel Jupiter est peint arm\u00e9 du foudre,\nEt tel Chasot r\u00e9duit l\u2019uhlan en poudre.\u201d\n\nIn his account of the battle, the king wrote:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cAction inouie dans l\u2019histoire, et dont le succ\u00e8s est d\u00fb aux\n    G\u00e9n\u00e9raux Gessler et Schmettau, au Colonel Schwerin _et au brave\n    Major Chasot, dont la valeur et la conduite se sont fait conna\u00eetre\n    dans trois batailles \u00e9galement_.\u201d\n\n\nAnd in his \u201cHistoire de mon Temps,\u201d he wrote:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cUn fait aussi rare, aussi glorieux, m\u00e9rite d\u2019\u00eatre \u00e9crit en\n    lettres d\u2019or dans les fastes prussiens. Le G\u00e9n\u00e9ral Schwerin, _le\n    Major Chasot_ et beaucoup d\u2019officiers s\u2019y firent un nom immortel.\u201d\n\n\nHow, then, is it that, in the later edition of Frederic\u2019s \u201cHistoire de mon\nTemps,\u201d the name of Chasot is erased? How is it that, during the whole of\nthe Seven Years\u2019 War, Chasot is never mentioned? M. de Schl\u00f6zer gives us a\ncomplete answer to this question, and we must say that Frederic did not\nbehave well to the _matador de sa jeunesse_. Chasot had a duel with a\nMajor Bronickowsky, in which his opponent was killed. So far as we can\njudge from the documents which M. de Schl\u00f6zer has obtained from Chasot\u2019s\nfamily, Chasot had been forced to fight; but the king believed that he had\nsought a quarrel with the Polish officer, and, though a court-martial\nfound him not guilty, Frederic sent him to the fortress of Spandau. This\nwas the first estrangement between Chasot and the king; and though after a\ntime he was received again at court, the friendship between the king and\nthe young nobleman who had saved his life had received a rude shock.\n\nChasot spent the next few years in garrison at Treptow; and, though he was\nregularly invited by Frederic to be present at the great festivities at\nBerlin, he seems to have been a more constant visitor at the small court\nof the Duchess of Strelitz, not far from his garrison, than at Potsdam.\nThe king employed him on a diplomatic mission, and in this also Chasot was\nsuccessful. But notwithstanding the continuance of this friendly\nintercourse, both parties felt chilled, and the least misunderstanding was\nsure to lead to a rupture. The king, jealous perhaps of Chasot\u2019s frequent\nvisits at Strelitz, and not satisfied with the drill of his regiment,\nexpressed himself in strong terms about Chasot at a review in 1751. The\nlatter asked for leave of absence in order to return to his country and\nrecruit his health. He had received fourteen wounds in the Prussian\nservice, and his application could not be refused. There was another cause\nof complaint, on which Chasot seems to have expressed himself freely. He\nimagined that Frederic had not rewarded his services with sufficient\nliberality. He expressed himself in the following words:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJe ne sais quel malheureux guignon poursuit le roi: mais ce\n    guignon se reproduit dans tout ce que sa majest\u00e9 entrepend ou\n    ordonne. Toujours ses vues sont bonnes, ses plans sont sages,\n    r\u00e9fl\u00e9chis et justes; et toujours le succ\u00e8s est nul ou\n    tr\u00e8s-imparfait, et pourquoi? Toujours pour la m\u00eame cause! parce\n    qu\u2019il manque un louis \u00e0 l\u2019ex\u00e9cution! un louis de plus, et tout\n    irait \u00e0 merveille. Son guignon veut que partout il retienne ce\n    maudit louis; et tout se fait mal.\u201d\n\n\nHow far this is just, we are unable to say. Chasot was reckless about\nmoney, and whatever the king might have allowed him, he would always have\nwanted one louis more. But on the other hand, Chasot was not the only\nperson who complained of Frederic\u2019s parsimony; and the French proverb, \u201cOn\nne peut pas travailler pour le roi de Prusse,\u201d probably owes its origin to\nthe complaints of Frenchmen who flocked to Berlin at that time in great\nnumbers, and returned home disappointed. Chasot went to France, where he\nwas well received, and he soon sent an intimation to the king that he did\nnot mean to return to Berlin. In 1752 his name was struck off the Prussian\narmy-list. Frederic was offended, and the simultaneous loss of many\nfriends, who either died or left his court, made him _de mauvaise humeur_.\nIt is about this time that he writes to his sister:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJ\u2019\u00e9tudie beaucoup, et cela me soulage r\u00e9ellement; mais lorsque\n    mon esprit fait des retours sur les temps pass\u00e9s, alors les plaies\n    du c\u0153ur se rouvrent et je regrette inutilement les pertes que j\u2019ai\n    faites.\u201d\n\n\nChasot, however, soon returned to Germany, and probably in order to be\nnear the court of Strelitz, took up his abode in the old free town of\nL\u00fcbeck. He became a citizen of L\u00fcbeck in 1754, and in 1759 was made\ncommander of its militia. Here his life seems to have been very agreeable,\nand he was treated with great consideration and liberality. Chasot was\nstill young, as he was born in 1716, and he now thought of marriage. This\nhe accomplished in the following manner. There was at that time an artist\nof some celebrity at L\u00fcbeck,\u2014Stefano Torelli. He had a daughter whom he\nhad left at Dresden to be educated, and whose portrait he carried about on\nhis snuff-box. Chasot met him at dinner, saw the snuff-box, fell in love\nwith the picture, and proposed to the father to marry his daughter\nCamilla. Camilla was sent for. She left Dresden, travelled through the\ncountry, which was then occupied by Prussian troops, met the king in his\ncamp, received his protection, arrived safely at L\u00fcbeck, and in the same\nyear was married to Chasot. Frederic was then in the thick of the Seven\nYears\u2019 War, but Chasot, though he was again on friendly terms with the\nking, did not offer him his sword. He was too happy at L\u00fcbeck with his\nCamilla, and he made himself useful to the king by sending him recruits.\nOne of the recruits he offered was his son, and in a letter, April 8,\n1760, we see the king accepting this young recruit in the most gracious\nterms:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cJ\u2019accepte volontiers, cher de Chasot, la recrue qui vous doit son\n    \u00eatre, et je serai parrain de l\u2019enfant qui vous na\u00eetra, au cas que\n    ce soit un fils. Nous tuons les hommes, tandis que vous en\n    faites.\u201d\n\n\nIt was a son, and Chasot writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cSi ce gar\u00e7on me ressemble, Sire, il n\u2019aura pas une goutte de sang\n    dans ses veines qui ne soit \u00e0 vous.\u201d\n\n\nM. de Schl\u00f6zer, who is himself a native of L\u00fcbeck, has described the later\nyears of Chasot\u2019s life in that city with great warmth and truthfulness.\nThe diplomatic relations of the town with Russia and Denmark were not\nwithout interest at that time, because Peter III., formerly Duke of\nHolstein, had declared war against Denmark in order to substantiate his\nclaims to the Danish crown. Chasot had actually the pleasure of fortifying\nL\u00fcbeck, and carrying on preparations for war on a small scale, till Peter\nwas dethroned by his wife, Catherine. All this is told in a very\ncomprehensive and luminous style; and it is not without regret that we\nfind ourselves in the last chapter, where M. de Schl\u00f6zer describes the\nlast meetings of Chasot and Frederic in 1779, 1784, and 1785. Frederic had\nlost nearly all his friends, and he was delighted to see the _matador de\nsa jeunesse_ once more. He writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cUne chose qui n\u2019est presque arriv\u00e9e qu\u2019\u00e0 moi est que j\u2019ai perdu\n    tous mes amis de c\u0153ur et mes anciennes connaissances; ce sont des\n    plaies dont le c\u0153ur saigne long-temps, que la philosophie apaise,\n    mais que sa main ne saurait gu\u00e9rir.\u201d\n\n\nHow pleasant for the king to find at least one man with whom he could talk\nof the old days of Rheinsberg,\u2014of Fr\u00e4ulein von Schack and Fr\u00e4ulein von\nWalmoden, of C\u00e6sarion and Jordan, of Mimi and le Tourbillon! Chasot\u2019s two\nsons entered the Prussian service, though, in the manner in which they are\nreceived, we find Frederic again acting more as king than as friend.\nChasot in 1784 was still as lively as ever, whereas the king: was in bad\nhealth. The latter writes to his old friend, \u201cSi nous ne nous revoyons\nbient\u00f4t, nous ne nous reverrons jamais;\u201d and when Chasot had arrived,\nFrederic writes to Prince Heinrich, \u201cChasot est venu ici de L\u00fcbeck; il ne\nparle que de mangeaille, de vins de Champagne, du Rhin, de Mad\u00e8re, de\nHongrie, et du faste de messieurs les marchands de la bourse de L\u00fcbeck.\u201d\n\nSuch was the last meeting of these two knights of the _Ordre de Bayard_.\nThe king died in 1786, without seeing the approach of the revolutionary\nstorm which was soon to upset the throne of the Bourbons. Chasot died in\n1797. He began to write his memoirs in 1789, and it is to some of their\nfragments, which had been preserved by his family, and were handed over to\nM. Kurd de Schl\u00f6zer, that we owe this delightful little book. Frederic the\nGreat used to complain that Germans could not write history:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cCe si\u00e8cle ne produisit aucun bon historien. On chargea Teissier\n    d\u2019\u00e9crire l\u2019histoire de Brandebourg: il en fit le pan\u00e9gyrique.\n    Pufendorf \u00e9crivit la vie de Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric-Guillaume, et, pour ne rien\n    omettre, il n\u2019oublia ni ses clercs de chancellerie, ni ses valets\n    de chambre dont il put recueillir les noms. Nos auteurs ont, ce me\n    semble, toujours p\u00e9ch\u00e9, faute de discerner les choses essentielles\n    des accessoires, d\u2019\u00e9claircir les faits, de reserrer leur prose\n    tra\u00eenante et excessivement sujette aux inversions, aux nombreuses\n    \u00e9pith\u00e8tes, et d\u2019\u00e9crire en p\u00e9dants plut\u00f4t qu\u2019en hommes de g\u00e9nie.\u201d\n\n\nWe believe that Frederic would not have said this of a work like that of\nM. de Schl\u00f6zer; and as to Chasot, it is not too much to say that, after\nthe days of Mollwitz and Hohenfriedberg, the day on which M. de Schl\u00f6zer\nundertook to write his biography was perhaps the most fortunate for his\nfame.\n\n1856.\n\n\n\n\n\nX. SHAKESPEARE.(34)\n\n\nThe city of Frankfort, the birthplace of Goethe, sends her greeting to the\ncity of Stratford-on-Avon, the birthplace of Shakespeare. The old free\ntown of Frankfort, which, since the days of Frederick Barbarossa, has seen\nthe Emperors of Germany crowned within her walls, might well at all times\nspeak in the name of Germany. But to-day she sends her greeting, not as\nthe proud mother of German Emperors, but as the prouder mother of the\ngreatest among the poets of Germany; and it is from the very house in\nwhich Goethe lived, and which has since become the seat of \u201cthe Free\nGerman Institute for Science and Art,\u201d that this message of the German\nadmirers and lovers of Shakespeare has been sent, which I am asked to\npresent to you, the Mayor and Council of Stratford-on-Avon.\n\nWhen honor was to be done to the memory of Shakespeare, Germany could not\nbe absent, for next to Goethe and Schiller there is no poet so truly loved\nby us, so thoroughly our own, as your Shakespeare. He is no stranger with\nus, no mere classic, like Homer, or Virgil, or Dante, or Corneille, whom\nwe admire as we admire a marble statue. He has become one of ourselves,\nholding his own place in the history of our literature, applauded in our\ntheatres, read in our cottages, studied, known, loved, \u201cas far as sounds\nthe German tongue.\u201d There is many a student in Germany who has learned\nEnglish solely in order to read Shakespeare in the original, and yet we\npossess a translation of Shakespeare with which few translations of any\nwork can vie in any language. What we in Germany owe to Shakespeare must\nbe read in the history of our literature. Goethe was proud to call himself\na pupil of Shakespeare. I shall at this moment allude to one debt of\ngratitude only which Germany owes to the poet of Stratford-on-Avon. I do\nnot speak of the poet only, and of his art, so perfect because so artless;\nI think of the man with his large, warm heart, with his sympathy for all\nthat is genuine, unselfish, beautiful, and good; with his contempt for all\nthat is petty, mean, vulgar, and false. It is from his plays that our\nyoung men in Germany form their first ideas of England and the English\nnation, and in admiring and loving him we have learned to admire and to\nlove you who may proudly call him your own. And it is right that this\nshould be so. As the height of the Alps is measured by Mont Blanc, let the\ngreatness of England be measured by the greatness of Shakespeare. Great\nnations make great poets, great poets make great nations. Happy the nation\nthat possesses a poet like Shakespeare. Happy the youth of England whose\nfirst ideas of this world in which they are to live are taken from his\npages. The silent influence of Shakespeare\u2019s poetry on millions of young\nhearts in England, in Germany, in all the world, shows the almost\nsuperhuman power of human genius. If we look at that small house, in a\nsmall street of a small town of a small island, and then think of the\nworld-embracing, world-quickening, world-ennobling spirit that burst forth\nfrom that small garret, we have learned a lesson and carried off a\nblessing for which no pilgrimage would have been too long. Though the\ngreat festivals which in former days brought together people from all\nparts of Europe to worship at the shrine of Canterbury exist no more, let\nus hope, for the sake of England, more even than for the sake of\nShakespeare, that this will not be the last Shakespeare festival in the\nannals of Stratford-on-Avon. In this cold and critical age of ours the\npower of worshipping, the art of admiring, the passion of loving what is\ngreat and good are fast dying out. May England never be ashamed to show to\nthe world that she can love, that she can admire, that she can worship the\ngreatest of her poets! May Shakespeare live on in the love of each\ngeneration that grows up in England! May the youth of England long\ncontinue to be nursed, to be fed, to be reproved and judged by his spirit!\nWith that nation\u2014that truly English, because truly Shakespearian\nnation\u2014the German nation will always be united by the strongest\nsympathies; for, superadded to their common blood, their common religion,\ntheir common battles and victories, they will always have in Shakespeare a\ncommon teacher, a common benefactor, and a common friend.\n\n_April, 1864._\n\n\n\n\n\nXI. BACON IN GERMANY.(35)\n\n\n\u201cIf our German philosophy is considered in England and in France as German\ndreaming, we ought not to render evil for evil, but rather to prove the\ngroundlessness of such accusations by endeavoring ourselves to appreciate,\nwithout any prejudice, the philosophers of France and England, such as\nthey are, and doing them that justice which they deserve; especially as,\nin scientific subjects, injustice means ignorance.\u201d With these words M.\nKuno Fischer introduces his work on Bacon to the German public; and what\nhe says is evidently intended, not as an attack upon the conceit of\nFrench, and the exclusiveness of English philosophers, but rather as an\napology which the author feels that he owes to his own countrymen. It\nwould seem, indeed, as if a German was bound to apologize for treating\nBacon as an equal of Leibnitz, Kant, Hegel, and Schelling. Bacon\u2019s name is\nnever mentioned by German writers without some proviso that it is only by\na great stretch of the meaning of the word, or by courtesy, that he can be\ncalled a philosopher. His philosophy, it is maintained, ends where all\ntrue philosophy begins; and his style or method has frequently been\ndescribed as unworthy of a systematic thinker. Spinoza, who has exercised\nso great an influence on the history of thought in Germany, was among the\nfirst who spoke slightingly of the inductive philosopher. When treating of\nthe causes of error, he writes, \u201cWhat he (Bacon) adduces besides, in order\nto explain error, can easily be traced back to the Cartesian theory; it is\nthis, that the human will is free and more comprehensive than the\nunderstanding, or, as Bacon expresses himself in a more confused manner,\nin the forty-ninth aphorism, \u2018The human understanding is not a pure light,\nbut obscured by the will.\u2019 \u201d In works on the general history of\nphilosophy, German authors find it difficult to assign any place to Bacon.\nSometimes he is classed with the Italian school of natural philosophy,\nsometimes he is contrasted with Jacob Boehme. He is named as one of the\nmany who helped to deliver mankind from the thralldom of scholasticism.\nBut any account of what he really was, what he did to immortalize his\nname, and to gain that prominent position among his own countrymen which\nhe has occupied to the present day, we should look for in vain even in the\nmost complete and systematic treatises on the history of philosophy\npublished in Germany. Nor does this arise from any wish to depreciate the\nresults of English speculation in general. On the contrary, we find that\nHobbes, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume are treated with great respect. They\noccupy well-marked positions in the progress of philosophic thought. Their\nnames are written in large letters on the chief stations through which the\ntrain of human reasoning passed before it arrived at Kant and Hegel.\nLocke\u2019s philosophy took for a time complete possession of the German mind,\nand called forth some of the most important and decisive writings of\nLeibnitz; and Kant himself owed his commanding position to the battle\nwhich he fought and won against Hume. Bacon alone has never been either\nattacked or praised, nor have his works, as it seems, ever been studied\nvery closely by Germans. As far as we can gather, their view of Bacon and\nof English philosophy is something as follows. Philosophy, they say,\nshould account for experience; but Bacon took experience for granted. He\nconstructed a cyclop\u00e6dia of knowledge, but he never explained what\nknowledge itself was. Hence philosophy, far from being brought to a close\nby his \u201cNovum Organon,\u201d had to learn again to make her first steps\nimmediately after his time. Bacon had built a magnificent palace, but it\nwas soon found that there was no staircase in it. The very first question\nof all philosophy, \u201cHow do we know?\u201d or, \u201cHow can we know?\u201d had never been\nasked by him. Locke, who came after him, was the first to ask it, and he\nendeavored to answer it in his \u201cEssay concerning Human Understanding.\u201d The\nresult of his speculations was, that the mind is a _tabula rasa_, that\nthis _tabula rasa_ becomes gradually filled with sensuous perceptions, and\nthat these sensuous perceptions arrange themselves into classes, and thus\ngive rise to more general ideas or conceptions. This was a step in\nadvance; but there was again one thing taken for granted by Locke,\u2014the\nperceptions. This led to the next step in English philosophy, which was\nmade by Berkeley. He asked the question, \u201cWhat are perceptions?\u201d and he\nanswered it boldly: \u201cPerceptions are the things themselves, and the only\ncause of these perceptions is God.\u201d But this bold step was in reality but\na bold retreat. Hume accepted the results both of Locke and Berkeley. He\nadmitted with Locke that the impressions of the senses are the source of\nall knowledge; he admitted with Berkeley that we know nothing beyond the\nimpressions of our senses. But when Berkeley speaks of the cause of these\nimpressions, Hume points out that we have no right to speak of anything\nlike cause and effect, and that the idea of causality, of necessary\nsequence, on which the whole fabric of our reasoning rests, is an\nassumption; inevitable, it may be, yet an assumption. Thus English\nphilosophy, which seemed to be so settled and positive in Bacon, ended in\nthe most unsettled and negative skepticism in Hume; and it was only\nthrough Kant that, according to the Germans, the great problem was solved\nat last, and men again knew _how_ they knew.\n\nFrom this point of view, which we believe to be that generally taken by\nGerman writers of the historical progress of modern philosophy, we may\nwell understand why the star of Bacon should disappear almost below their\nhorizon. And if those only are to be called philosophers who inquire into\nthe causes of our knowledge, or into the possibility of knowing and being,\na new name must be invented for men like him, who are concerned alone with\nthe realities of knowledge. The two are antipodes,\u2014they inhabit two\ndistinct hemispheres of thought. But German Idealism, as M. Kuno Fischer\nsays, would have done well if it had become more thoroughly acquainted\nwith its opponent:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cAnd if it be objected,\u201d he says, \u201cthat the points of contact\n    between German and English philosophy, between Idealism and\n    Realism, are less to be found in Bacon than in other philosophers\n    of his kind; that it was not Bacon, but Hume, who influenced Kant;\n    that it was not Bacon, but Locke, who influenced Leibnitz; that\n    Spinoza, if he received any impulse at all from those quarters,\n    received it from Hobbes, and not from Bacon, of whom he speaks in\n    several places very contemptuously,\u2014I answer, that it was Bacon\n    whom Des Cartes, the acknowledged founder of dogmatic Idealism,\n    chose for his antagonist. And as to those realistic philosophers\n    who have influenced the opposite side of philosophy in Spinoza,\n    Leibnitz, and Kant, I shall be able to prove that Hobbes, Locke,\n    Hume, are all descendants of Bacon, that they have their roots in\n    Bacon, that without Bacon they cannot be truly explained and\n    understood, but only be taken up in a fragmentary form, and, as it\n    were, plucked off. Bacon is the creator of realistic philosophy.\n    Their age is but a development of the Baconian germs; every one of\n    their systems is a metamorphosis of Baconian philosophy. To the\n    present day, realistic philosophy has never had a greater genius\n    than Bacon, its founder; none who has manifested the truly\n    realistic spirit that feels itself at home in the midst of life,\n    in so comprehensive, so original and characteristic, so sober, and\n    yet at the same time so ideal and aspiring a manner; none, again,\n    in whom the limits of this spirit stand out in such distinct and\n    natural relief. Bacon\u2019s philosophy is the most healthy and quite\n    inartificial expression of Realism. After the systems of Spinoza\n    and Leibnitz had moved me for a long time, had filled, and, as it\n    were, absorbed me, the study of Bacon was to me like a new life,\n    the fruits of which are gathered in this book.\u201d\n\n\nAfter a careful perusal of M. Fischer\u2019s work, we believe that it will not\nonly serve in Germany as a useful introduction to the study of Bacon, but\nthat it will be read with interest and advantage by many persons in\nEngland who are already acquainted with the chief works of the\nphilosopher. The analysis which he gives of Bacon\u2019s philosophy is accurate\nand complete; and, without indulging in any lengthy criticisms, he has\nthrown much light on several important points. He first discusses the aim\nof his philosophy, and characterizes it as Discovery in general, as the\nconquest of nature by man (_Regnum hominis, interpretatio natur\u00e6_). He\nthen enters into the means which it supplies for accomplishing this\nconquest, and which consist chiefly in experience:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe chief object of Bacon\u2019s philosophy is the establishment and\n    extension of the dominion of man. The means of accomplishing this\n    we may call culture, or the application of physical powers toward\n    human purposes. But there is no such culture without discovery,\n    which produces the means of culture; no discovery without science,\n    which understands the laws of nature; no science without natural\n    science; no natural science without an interpretation of nature;\n    and this can only be accomplished according to the measure of our\n    experience.\u201d\n\n\nM. Fischer then proceeds to discuss what he calls the negative or\ndestructive part of Bacon\u2019s philosophy (_pars destruens_),\u2014that is to say,\nthe means by which the human mind should be purified and freed from all\npreconceived notions before it approaches the interpretation of nature. He\ncarries us through the long war which Bacon commenced against the idols of\ntraditional or scholastic science. We see how the _idola tribus_, the\n_idola specus_, the _idola fori_, and the _idola theatri_, are destroyed\nby his iconoclastic philosophy. After all these are destroyed, there\nremains nothing but uncertainty and doubt; and it is in this state of\nnudity, approaching very nearly to the _tabula rasa_ of Locke, that the\nhuman mind should approach the new temple of nature. Here lies the radical\ndifference between Bacon and Des Cartes, between Realism and Idealism. Des\nCartes also, like Bacon, destroys all former knowledge. He proves that we\nknow nothing for certain. But after he has deprived the human mind of all\nits imaginary riches, he does not lead it on, like Bacon, to a study of\nnature, but to a study of itself as the only subject which can be known\nfor certain, _Cogito, ergo sum_. His philosophy leads to a study of the\nfundamental laws of knowing and being; that of Bacon enters at once into\nthe gates of nature, with the innocence of a child (to use his own\nexpression) who enters the kingdom of God. Bacon speaks, indeed, of a\n_Philosophia prima_ as a kind of introduction to Divine, Natural, and\nHuman Philosophy; but he does not discuss in this preliminary chapter the\nproblem of the possibility of knowledge, nor was it with him the right\nplace to do so. It was destined by him as a \u201creceptacle for all such\nprofitable observations and axioms as fall not within the compass of the\nspecial parts of philosophy or sciences, but are more common, and of a\nhigher stage.\u201d He mentions himself some of these axioms, such as\u2014\u201c_Si\nin\u00e6qualibus \u00e6qualia addas, omnia erunt in\u00e6qualia;_\u201d \u201c_Qu\u00e6 in eodem tertio\nconveniunt, et inter se conveniunt;_\u201d \u201c_Omnia mutantur, nil interit._\u201d The\nproblem of the possibility of knowledge would generally be classed under\nmetaphysics; but what Bacon calls _Metaphysique_ is, with him, a branch of\nphilosophy treating only on Formal and Final Causes, in opposition to\n_Physique_, which treats on Material and Efficient Causes. If we adopt\nBacon\u2019s division of philosophy, we might still expect to find the\nfundamental problem discussed in his chapter on Human Philosophy; but\nhere, again, he treats man only as a part of the continent of Nature, and\nwhen he comes to consider the substance and nature of the soul or mind, he\ndeclines to enter into this subject, because \u201cthe true knowledge of the\nnature and state of soul must come by the same inspiration that gave the\nsubstance.\u201d There remains, therefore, but one place in Bacon\u2019s cyclop\u00e6dia\nwhere we might hope to find some information on this subject,\u2014namely,\nwhere he treats on the faculties and functions of the mind, and in\nparticular, of understanding and reason. And here he dwells indeed on the\ndoubtful evidence of the senses as one of the causes of error so\nfrequently pointed out by other philosophers. But he remarks that, though\nthey charged the deceit upon the senses, their chief errors arose from a\ndifferent cause, from the weakness of their intellectual powers, and from\nthe manner of collecting and concluding upon the reports of the senses.\nAnd he then points to what is to be the work of his life,\u2014an improved\nsystem of invention, consisting of the _Experientia Literata_, and the\n_Interpretatio Natur\u00e6_.\n\nIt must be admitted, therefore, that one of the problems which has\noccupied most philosophers,\u2014nay, which, in a certain sense, may be called\nthe first impulse to all philosophy,\u2014the question whether we can know\nanything, is entirely passed over by Bacon; and we may well understand why\nthe name and title of philosopher has been withheld from one who looked\nupon human knowledge as an art, but never inquired into its causes and\ncredentials. This is a point which M. Fischer has not overlooked; but he\nhas not always kept it in view, and in wishing to secure to Bacon his\nplace in the history of philosophy, he has deprived him of that more\nexalted place which Bacon himself wished to occupy in the history of the\nworld. Among men like Locke, Hume, Kant, and Hegel, Bacon is, and always\nwill be, a stranger. Bacon himself would have drawn a very strong line\nbetween their province and his own. He knows where their province lies;\nand if he sometimes speaks contemptuously of formal philosophy, it is only\nwhen formal philosophy has encroached on his own ground, or when it breaks\ninto the enclosure of revealed religion, which he wished to be kept\nsacred. There, he holds, the human mind should not enter, except in the\nattitude of the Semnones, with chained hands.\n\nBacon\u2019s philosophy could never supplant the works of Plato and Aristotle,\nand though his method might prove useful in every branch of\nknowledge,\u2014even in the most abstruse points of logic and metaphysics,\u2014yet\nthere has never been a Baconian school of philosophy, in the sense in\nwhich we speak of the school of Locke or Kant. Bacon was above or below\nphilosophy. Philosophy, in the usual sense of the word, formed but a part\nof his great scheme of knowledge. It had its place therein, side by side\nwith history, poetry, and religion. After he had surveyed the whole\nuniverse of knowledge, he was struck by the small results that had been\nobtained by so much labor, and he discovered the cause of this failure in\nthe want of a proper method of investigation and combination. The\nsubstitution of a new method of invention was the great object of his\nphilosophical activity; and though it has been frequently said that the\nBaconian method had been known long before Bacon, and had been practiced\nby his predecessors with much greater success than by himself or his\nimmediate followers, it was his chief merit to have proclaimed it, and to\nhave established its legitimacy against all gainsayers. M. Fischer has\nsome very good remarks on Bacon\u2019s method of induction, particularly on the\n_instanti\u00e6 pr\u00e6rogativ\u00e6_ which, as he points out, though they show the\nweakness of his system, exhibit at the same time the strength of his mind,\nwhich rises above all the smaller considerations of systematic\nconsistency, where higher objects are at stake.\n\nM. Fischer devotes one chapter to Bacon\u2019s relation to the ancient\nphilosophers, and another to his views on poetry. In the latter, he\nnaturally compares Bacon with his contemporary, Shakespeare. We recommend\nthis chapter, as well as a similar one in a work on Shakespeare by\nGervinus, to the author of the ingenious discovery that Bacon was the real\nauthor of Shakespeare\u2019s plays. Besides an analysis of the constructive\npart of Bacon\u2019s philosophy, or the _Instauratio Magna_, M. Fischer gives\nus several interesting chapters, in which he treats of Bacon as an\nhistorical character, of his views on religion and theology, and of his\nreviewers. His defense of Bacon\u2019s political character is the weakest part\nof his work. He draws an elaborate parallel between the spirit of Bacon\u2019s\nphilosophy and the spirit of his public acts. Discovery, he says, was the\nobject of the philosopher; success that of the politician. But what can be\ngained by such parallels? We admire Bacon\u2019s ardent exertions for the\nsuccessful advancement of learning, but, if his acts for his own\nadvancement were blamable, no moralist, whatever notions he may hold on\nthe relation between the understanding and the will, would be swayed in\nhis judgment of Lord Bacon\u2019s character by such considerations. We make no\nallowance for the imitative talents of a tragedian, if he stands convicted\nof forgery, nor for the courage of a soldier, if he is accused of murder.\nBacon\u2019s character can only be judged by the historian, and by a careful\nstudy of the standard of public morality in Bacon\u2019s times. And the same\nmay be said of the position which he took with regard to religion and\ntheology. We may explain his inclination to keep religion distinct from\nphilosophy by taking into account the practical tendencies of all his\nlabors. But there is such a want of straightforwardness, and we might\nalmost say, of real faith, in his theological statements, that no one can\nbe surprised to find that, while he is taken as the representative of\northodoxy by some, he has been attacked by others as the most dangerous\nand insidious enemy of Christianity. Writers of the school of De Maistre\nsee in him a decided atheist and hypocrite.\n\nIn a work on Bacon, it seems to have become a necessity to discuss Bacon\u2019s\nlast reviewer, and M. Fischer therefore breaks a lance with Mr. Macaulay.\nWe give some extracts from this chapter (page 358 _seq._), which will\nserve, at the same time, as a specimen of our author\u2019s style:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cMr. Macaulay pleads unconditionally in favor of practical\n    philosophy, which he designates by the name of Bacon, against all\n    theoretical philosophy. We have two questions to ask: 1. What does\n    Mr. Macaulay mean by the contrast of practical and theoretical\n    philosophy, on which he dwells so constantly? and 2. What has his\n    own practical philosophy in common with that of Bacon?\n\n\n    \u201cMr. Macaulay decides on the fate of philosophy with a ready\n    formula, which, like many of the same kind, dazzles by means of\n    words which have nothing behind them,\u2014words which become more\n    obscure and empty the nearer we approach them. He says, Philosophy\n    was made for Man, not Man for Philosophy. In the former case it is\n    practical; in the latter, theoretical. Mr. Macaulay embraces the\n    first, and rejects the second. He cannot speak with sufficient\n    praise of the one, nor with sufficient contempt of the other.\n    According to him, the Baconian philosophy is practical; the\n    pre-Baconian, and particularly the ancient philosophy,\n    theoretical. He carries the contrast between the two to the last\n    extreme, and he places it before our eyes, not in its naked form,\n    but veiled in metaphors, and in well-chosen figures of speech,\n    where the imposing and charming image always represents the\n    practical, the repulsive the theoretical, form of philosophy. By\n    this play he carries away the great mass of people, who, like\n    children, always run after images. Practical philosophy is not so\n    much a conviction with him, but it serves him to make a point;\n    whereas theoretical philosophy serves as an easy butt. Thus the\n    contrast between the two acquires a certain dramatic charm. The\n    reader feels moved and excited by the subject before him, and\n    forgets the scientific question. His fancy is caught by a kind of\n    metaphorical imagery, and his understanding surrenders what is due\n    to it.... What is Mr. Macaulay\u2019s meaning in rejecting theoretical\n    philosophy, because philosophy is here the object, and man the\n    means; whereas he adopts practical philosophy, because man is here\n    the object, and philosophy the means? What do we gain by such\n    comparisons, as when he says that practical and theoretical\n    philosophy are like works and words, fruits and thorns, a\n    high-road and a treadmill? Such phrases always remind us of the\n    remark of Socrates: They are said indeed, but are they well and\n    truly said? According to the strict meaning of Mr. Macaulay\u2019s\n    words, there never was a practical philosophy; for there never was\n    a philosophy which owed its origin to practical considerations\n    only. And there never was a theoretical philosophy, for there\n    never was a philosophy which did not receive its impulse from a\n    human want, that is to say, from a practical motive. This shows\n    where playing with words must always lead. He defines theoretical\n    and practical philosophy in such a manner that his definition is\n    inapplicable to any kind of philosophy. His antithesis is entirely\n    empty. But if we drop the antithesis, and only keep to what it\n    means in sober and intelligible language, it would come to\n    this,\u2014that the value of a theory depends on its usefulness, on its\n    practical influence on human life, on the advantage which we\n    derive from it. Utility alone is to decide on the value of a\n    theory. Be it so. But who is to decide on utility? If all things\n    are useful which serve to satisfy human wants, who is to decide on\n    our wants? We take Mr. Macaulay\u2019s own point of view. Philosophy\n    should be practical; it should serve man, satisfy his wants, or\n    help to satisfy them; and if it fails in this, let it be called\n    useless and hollow. But if there are wants in human nature which\n    demand to be satisfied, which make life a burden unless they are\n    satisfied, is that not to be called practical which answers to\n    these wants? And if some of them are of that peculiar nature that\n    they can only be satisfied by knowledge, or by theoretical\n    contemplation, is this knowledge, is this theoretical\n    contemplation, not useful,\u2014useful even in the eyes of the most\n    decided Utilitarian? Might it not happen that what he calls\n    theoretical philosophy seems useless and barren to the\n    Utilitarian, because his ideas of men are too narrow? It is\n    dangerous, and not quite becoming, to lay down the law, and say\n    from the very first, \u2018You must not have more than certain wants,\n    and therefore you do not want more than a certain philosophy!\u2019 If\n    we may judge from Mr. Macaulay\u2019s illustrations, his ideas of human\n    nature are not very liberal. \u2018If we were forced,\u2019 he says, \u2018to\n    make our choice between the first shoemaker and Seneca, the author\n    of the books on Anger, we should pronounce for the shoemaker. It\n    may be worse to be angry than to be wet. But shoes have kept\n    millions from being wet; and we doubt whether Seneca ever kept\n    anybody from being angry.\u2019 I should not select Seneca as the\n    representative of theoretical philosophy, still less take those\n    for my allies whom Mr. Macaulay prefers to Seneca, in order to\n    defeat theoretical philosophers. Brennus threw his sword into the\n    scale in order to make it more weighty. Mr. Macaulay prefers the\n    awl. But whatever he may think about Seneca, there is another\n    philosopher more profound than Seneca, but in Mr. Macaulay\u2019s eyes\n    likewise an unpractical thinker. And yet in him the power of\n    theory was greater than the powers of nature and the most common\n    wants of man. His meditations alone gave Socrates his serenity\n    when he drank the fatal poison. Is there, among all evils, one\n    greater than the dread of death? And the remedy against this, the\n    worst of all physical evils, is it not practical in the best sense\n    of the word? True, some people might here say, that it would have\n    been more practical if Socrates had fled from his prison, as\n    Criton suggested, and had died an old and decrepit man in B\u0153otia.\n    But to Socrates it seemed more practical to remain in prison, and\n    to die as the first witness and martyr of the liberty of\n    conscience, and to rise from the sublime height of his theory to\n    the seats of the immortals. Thus it is the want of the individual\n    which decides on the practical value of an act or of a thought,\n    and this want depends on the nature of the human soul. There is a\n    difference between individuals in different ages, and there is a\n    difference in their wants.... As long as the desire after\n    knowledge lives in our hearts, we must, with the purely practical\n    view of satisfying this want, strive after knowledge in all\n    things, even in those which do not contribute towards external\n    comfort, and have no use except that they purify and invigorate\n    the mind.... What is theory in the eyes of Bacon? \u2018A temple in the\n    human mind, according to the model of the world.\u2019 What is it in\n    the eyes of Mr. Macaulay? A snug dwelling, according to the wants\n    of practical life. The latter is satisfied if knowledge is carried\n    far enough to enable us to keep ourselves dry. The magnificence of\n    the structure, and its completeness according to the model of the\n    world, is to him useless by-work, superfluous and even dangerous\n    luxury. This is the view of a respectable rate-payer, not of a\n    Bacon. Mr. Macaulay reduces Bacon to his own dimensions, while he\n    endeavors at the same time to exalt him above all other people....\n    Bacon\u2019s own philosophy was, like all philosophy, a theory; it was\n    the theory of the inventive mind. Bacon has not made any great\n    discoveries himself. He was less inventive than Leibnitz, the\n    German metaphysician. If to make discoveries be practical\n    philosophy, Bacon was a mere theorist, and his philosophy nothing\n    but the theory of practical philosophy.... How far the spirit of\n    theory reached in Bacon may be seen in his own works. He did not\n    want to fetter theory, but to renew and to extend it to the very\n    ends of the universe. His practical standard was not the comfort\n    of the individual, but human happiness, which involves theoretical\n    knowledge.... That Bacon is not the Bacon of Mr. Macaulay. What\n    Bacon wanted was new, and it will be eternal. What Mr. Macaulay\n    and many people at the present day want, in the name of Bacon, is\n    not new, but novel. New is what opposes the old, and serves as a\n    model for the future. Novel is what flatters our times, gains\n    sympathies, and dies away.... And history has pronounced her final\n    verdict. It is the last negative instance which we oppose to Mr.\n    Macaulay\u2019s assertion. Bacon\u2019s philosophy has not been the end of\n    all theories, but the beginning of new theories,\u2014theories which\n    flowed necessarily from Bacon\u2019s philosophy, and not one of which\n    was practical in Mr. Macaulay\u2019s sense. Hobbes was the pupil of\n    Bacon. His ideal of a State is opposed to that of Plato on all\n    points. But one point it shares in common,\u2014it is as unpractical a\n    theory as that of Plato. Mr. Macaulay, however, calls Hobbes the\n    most acute and vigorous spirit. If, then, Hobbes was a practical\n    philosopher, what becomes of Macaulay\u2019s politics? And if Hobbes\n    was not a practical philosopher, what becomes of Mr. Macaulay\u2019s\n    philosophy, which does homage to the theories of Hobbes?\u201d\n\n\nWe have somewhat abridged M. Fischer\u2019s argument, for, though he writes\nwell and intelligibly, he wants condensation; and we do not think that his\nargument has been weakened by being shortened. What he has extended into a\nvolume of nearly five hundred pages, might have been reduced to a pithy\nessay of one or two hundred, without sacrificing one essential fact, or\ninjuring the strength of any one of his arguments. The art of writing in\nour times is the art of condensing; and those who cannot condense write\nonly for readers who have more time at their disposal than they know what\nto do with.\n\nLet us ask one question in conclusion. Why do all German writers change\nthe thoroughly Teutonic name of Bacon into Baco? It is bad enough that we\nshould speak of Plato; but this cannot be helped. But unless we protest\nagainst Baco, _gen._ Baconis, we shall soon be treated to Newto, Newtonis,\nor even to Kans, Kantis.\n\n1857.\n\n\n\n\n\nXII. A GERMAN TRAVELLER IN ENGLAND.(36)\n\n\nA. D. 1598.\n\nLessing, when he was Librarian at Wolfenb\u00fcttel, proposed to start a review\nwhich should only notice forgotten books,\u2014books written before reviewing\nwas invented, published in the small towns of Germany, never read,\nperhaps, except by the author and his friends, then buried on the shelves\nof a library, properly labeled and catalogued, and never opened again,\nexcept by an inquisitive inmate of these literary mausoleums. The number\nof those forgotten books is great, and as in former times few authors\nwrote more than one or two works during the whole of their lives, the\ninformation which they contain is generally of a much more substantial and\nsolid kind than our literary palates are now accustomed to. If a man now\ntravels to the unexplored regions of Central Africa, his book is written\nand out in a year. It remains on the drawing-room table for a season; it\nis pleasant to read, easy to digest, and still easier to review and to\nforget. Two or three hundred years ago this was very different. Travelling\nwas a far more serious business, and a man who had spent some years in\nseeing foreign countries, could do nothing better than employ the rest of\nhis life in writing a book of travels, either in his own language, or,\nstill better, in Latin. After his death his book continued to be quoted\nfor a time in works on history and geography, till a new traveller went\nover the same ground, published an equally learned book, and thus\nconsigned his predecessor to oblivion. Here is a case in point: Paul\nHentzner, a German, who, of course, calls himself Paulus Hentznerus,\ntravelled in Germany, France, England, and Italy; and after his return to\nhis native place in Silesia, he duly published his travels in a portly\nvolume, written in Latin. There is a long title-page, with dedications,\nintroductions, a preface for the _Lector benevolus_, Latin verses, and a\ntable showing what people ought to observe in travelling. Travelling,\naccording to our friend, is the source of all wisdom; and he quotes Moses\nand the Prophets in support of his theory. We ought all to travel, he\nsays,\u2014\u201cvita nostra peregrinatio est;\u201d and those who stay at home like\nsnails (_cochlearum instar_) will remain \u201cinhumani, insolentes, superbi,\u201d\netc.\n\nIt would take a long time to follow Paulus Hentznerus through all his\nperegrinations; but let us see what he saw in England. He arrived here in\nthe year 1598. He took ship with his friends at _Depa_, vulgo _Dieppe_,\nand after a boisterous voyage, they landed at _Rye_. On their arrival they\nwere conducted to a _Notarius_, who asked their names, and inquired for\nwhat object they came to England. After they had satisfied his official\ninquiries, they were conducted to a _Diversorium_, and treated to a good\ndinner, _pro regionis more_, according to the custom of the country. From\n_Rye_ they rode to _London_, passing _Flimwolt_, _Tumbridge_, and\n_Chepsted_ on their way. Then follows a long description of London, its\norigin and history, its bridges, churches, monuments, and palaces, with\nextracts from earlier writers, such as Paulus Jovius, Polydorus Vergilius,\netc. All inscriptions are copied faithfully, not only from tombs and\npictures, but also from books which the travellers saw in the public\nlibraries. Whitehall seems to have contained a royal library at that time,\nand in it Hentzner saw, besides Greek and Latin MSS., a book written in\nFrench by Queen Elizabeth, with the following dedication to Henry VIII.:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cA Tres haut et Tres puissant et Redoubte Prince Henry VIII. de ce\n    nom, Roy d\u2019Angleterre, de France, et d\u2019Irlande, defenseur de la\n    foy, Elizabeth, sa Tres humble fille, rend salut et obedience.\u201d\n\n\nAfter the travellers had seen St. Paul\u2019s, Westminster, the House of\nParliament, Whitehall, Guildhall, the Tower, and the Royal Exchange,\ncommonly called _Bursa_,\u2014all of which are minutely described,\u2014they went to\nthe theatres and to places _Ursorum et Taurorum venationibus destinata_,\nwhere bears and bulls, tied fast behind, were baited by bull-dogs. In\nthese places, and everywhere, in fact, as our traveller says, where you\nmeet with Englishmen, they use _herba nicotiana_, which they call by an\nAmerican name _Tobaca_ or _Paetum_. The description deserves to be quoted\nin the original:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cFistul\u00e6 in hunc finem ex argill\u00e2 fact\u00e6 orificio posteriori dictam\n    herbam probe exiccatam, ita ut in pulverem facile redigi possit,\n    immittunt, et igne admoto accendunt, unde fumus ab anteriori parte\n    ore attrahitur, qui per nares rursum, tamquam per infurnibulum\n    exit, et phlegma ac capitis defluxiones magn\u00e2 copi\u00e2 secum educit.\u201d\n\n\nAfter they had seen everything in London\u2014not omitting the ship in which\nFrancis Drake, _nobilissimus pyrata_, was said to have circumnavigated the\nworld,\u2014they went to Greenwich. Here they were introduced into the\npresence-chamber, and saw the Queen. The walls of the room were covered\nwith precious tapestry, the floor strewed with hay. The Queen had to pass\nthrough on going to chapel. It was a Sunday, when all the nobility came to\npay their respects. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London\nwere present. When divine service began, the Queen appeared, preceded and\nfollowed by the court. Before her walked two barons, carrying the sceptre\nand the sword, and between them the Great Chancellor of England with the\nseal. The Queen is thus minutely described:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cShe was said (_rumor erat_) to be fifty-five years old. Her face\n    was rather long, white, and a little wrinkled. Her eyes small,\n    black, and gracious; her nose somewhat bent; her lips compressed,\n    her teeth black (from eating too much sugar). She had ear-rings of\n    pearls; red hair, but artificial, and wore a small crown. Her\n    breast was uncovered (as is the case with all unmarried ladies in\n    England), and round her neck was a chain with precious gems. Her\n    hands were graceful, her fingers long. She was of middle stature,\n    but stepped on majestically. She was gracious and kind in her\n    address. The dress she wore was of white silk, with pearls as\n    large as beans. Her cloak was of black silk with silver lace, and\n    a long train was carried by a marchioness. As she walked along she\n    spoke most kindly with many people, some of them ambassadors. She\n    spoke English, French, and Italian; but she knows also Greek and\n    Latin, and understands Spanish, Scotch, and Dutch. Those whom she\n    addressed bent their knees, and some she lifted up with her hand.\n    To a Bohemian nobleman of the name of Slawata, who had brought\n    some letters to the Queen, she gave her right hand after taking\n    off her glove, and he kissed it. Wherever she turned her eyes,\n    people fell on their knees.\u201d\n\n\nThere was probably nobody present who ventured to scrutinize the poor\nQueen so impertinently as Paulus Hentznerus. He goes on to describe the\nladies who followed the Queen, and how they were escorted by fifty\nknights. When she came to the door of the chapel, books were handed to\nher, and the people called out, \u201cGod save the Queen Elizabeth!\u201d whereupon\nthe Queen answered, \u201cI thanke you myn good peuple.\u201d Prayers did not last\nmore than half an hour, and the music was excellent. During the time that\nthe Queen was in chapel, dinner was laid, and this again is described in\nfull detail.\n\nBut we cannot afford to tarry with our German observer, nor can we follow\nhim to Grantbridge (Cambridge) or Oxenford, where he describes the\ncolleges and halls (each of them having a library), and the life of the\nstudents. From Oxford he went to Woodstock, then back to Oxford, and from\nthence to Henley and Madenhood to Windsor. Eton also was visited, and\nhere, he says, sixty boys were educated gratuitously, and afterwards sent\nto Cambridge. After visiting Hampton Court and the royal palace of\nNonesuch, our travellers returned to London.\n\nWe shall finish our extracts with some remarks of Hentzner on the manners\nand customs of the English:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe English are grave, like the Germans, magnificent at home and\n    abroad. They carry with them a large train of followers and\n    servants. These have silver shields on their left arm, and a\n    pig-tail. The English excel in dancing and music. They are swift\n    and lively, though stouter than the French. They shave the middle\n    portion of the face, but leave the hair untouched on each side.\n    They are good sailors and famous pirates; clever, perfidious, and\n    thievish. About three hundred are hanged in London every year. At\n    table they are more civil than the French. They eat less bread,\n    but more meat, and they dress it well. They throw much sugar into\n    their wine. They suffer frequently from leprosy, commonly called\n    the white leprosy, which is said to have come to England in the\n    time of the Normans. They are brave in battle, and always conquer\n    their enemies. At home they brook no manner of servitude. They are\n    very fond of noises that fill the ears, such as explosions of\n    guns, trumpets, and bells. In London, persons who have got drunk\n    are wont to mount a church tower, for the sake of exercise, and to\n    ring the bells for several hours. If they see a foreigner who is\n    handsome and strong, they are sorry that he is not an\n    Anglicus,\u2014_vulgo_ Englishman.\u201d\n\n\nOn his return to France, Hentzner paid a visit to Canterbury, and, after\nseeing some ghosts on his journey, arrived safely at Dover. Before he was\nallowed to go on board, he had again to undergo an examination, to give\nhis name, to explain what he had done in England, and where he was going;\nand, lastly, his luggage was searched most carefully, in order to see\nwhether he carried with him any English money, for nobody was allowed to\ncarry away more than ten pounds of English money: all the rest was taken\naway and handed to the royal treasury. And thus farewell, Carissime\nHentzneri! and slumber on your shelf until the eye of some other\nbenevolent reader, glancing at the rows of forgotten books, is caught by\nthe quaint lettering on your back, \u201c_Hentzneri Itin_.\u201d\n\n1857.\n\n\n\n\n\nXIII. CORNISH ANTIQUITIES.(37)\n\n\nIt is impossible to spend even a few weeks in Cornwall without being\nimpressed with the air of antiquity which pervades that county, and seems,\nlike a morning mist, half to conceal and half to light up every one of its\nhills and valleys. It is impossible to look at any pile of stones, at any\nwall, or pillar, or gate-post, without asking one\u2019s self the question, Is\nthis old, or is this new? Is it the work of Saxon, or of Roman, or of\nCelt? Nay, one feels sometimes tempted to ask, Is this the work of Nature\nor of man?\n\n\u201cAmong these rocks and stones, methinks I see\nMore than the heedless impress that belongs\nTo lonely Nature\u2019s casual work: they bear\nA semblance strange of power intelligent,\nAnd of design not wholly worn away.\u201d\u2014_Excursion_.\n\nThe late King of Prussia\u2019s remark about Oxford, that in it everything old\nseemed new, and everything new seemed old, applies with even greater truth\nto Cornwall. There is a continuity between the present and the past of\nthat curious peninsula, such as we seldom find in any other place. A\nspring bubbling up in a natural granite basin, now a meeting-place for\nBaptists or Methodists, was but a few centuries ago a holy well, attended\nby busy friars, and visited by pilgrims, who came there \u201cnearly lame,\u201d and\nleft the shrine \u201calmost able to walk.\u201d Still further back the same spring\nwas a centre of attraction for the Celtic inhabitants, and the rocks piled\nup around it stand there as witnesses of a civilization and architecture\ncertainly more primitive than the civilization and architecture of Roman,\nSaxon, or Norman settlers. We need not look beyond. How long that granite\nbuttress of England has stood there, defying the fury of the Atlantic, the\ngeologist alone, who is not awed by ages, would dare to tell us. But the\nhistorian is satisfied with antiquities of a more humble and homely\ncharacter; and in bespeaking the interest, and, it may be, the active\nsupport of our readers, in favor of the few relics of the most ancient\ncivilization of Britain, we promise to keep within strictly historical\nlimits, if by historical we understand, with the late Sir G. C. Lewis,\nthat only which can be authenticated by contemporaneous monuments.\n\nBut even thus, how wide a gulf seems to separate us from the first\ncivilizers of the West of England, from the people who gave names to every\nheadland, bay, and hill of Cornwall, and who first planned those lanes\nthat now, like throbbing veins, run in every direction across that\nheath-covered peninsula! No doubt it is well known that the original\ninhabitants of Cornwall were Celts, and that Cornish is a Celtic language;\nand that, if we divide the Celtic languages into two classes, Welsh with\nCornish and Breton forms one class, the _Cymric_; while the Irish with its\nvarieties, as developed in Scotland and the Isle of Man, forms another\nclass, which is called the _Gaelic_ or _Gadhelic_. It may also be more or\nless generally known that Celtic, with all its dialects, is an Aryan or\nIndo-European language, closely allied to Latin, Greek, German, Slavonic,\nand Sanskrit, and that the Celts, therefore, were not mere barbarians, or\npeople to be classed together with Finns and Lapps, but heralds of true\ncivilization wherever they settled in their worldwide migrations, the\nequals of Saxons and Romans and Greeks, whether in physical beauty or in\nintellectual vigor. And yet there is a strange want of historical reality\nin the current conceptions about the Celtic inhabitants of the British\nIsles; and while the heroes and statesmen and poets of Greece and Rome,\nthough belonging to a much earlier age, stand out in bold and sharp relief\non the table of a boy\u2019s memory, his notions of the ancient Britons may\ngenerally be summed up \u201cin houses made of wicker-work, Druids with long\nwhite beards, white linen robes, and golden sickles, and warriors painted\nblue.\u201d Nay, strange to say, we can hardly blame a boy for banishing the\nancient bards and Druids from the scene of real history, and assigning to\nthem that dark and shadowy corner where the gods and heroes of Greece live\npeacefully together with the ghosts and fairies from the dreamland of our\nown Saxon forefathers. For even the little that is told in \u201cLittle\nArthur\u2019s History of England\u201d about the ancient Britons and the Druids is\nextremely doubtful. Druids are never mentioned before C\u00e6sar. Few writers,\nif any, before him were able to distinguish between Celts and Germans, but\nspoke of the barbarians of Gaul and Germany as the Greeks spoke of\nScythians, or as we ourselves speak of the negroes of Africa, without\ndistinguishing between races so different from each other as Hottentots\nand Kaffirs. C\u00e6sar was one of the first writers who knew of an\nethnological distinction between Celtic and Teutonic barbarians, and we\nmay therefore trust him when he says that the Celts had Druids, and the\nGermans had none. But his further statements about these Celtic priests\nand sages are hardly more trustworthy than the account which an ordinary\nIndian officer at the present day might give us of the Buddhist priests\nand the Buddhist religion of Ceylon. C\u00e6sar\u2019s statement that the Druids\nworshipped Mercury, Apollo, Mars, Jupiter, and Minerva, is of the same\nbase metal as the statements of more modern writers that the Buddhists\nworship the Trinity, and that they take Buddha for the Son of God. C\u00e6sar\nmost likely never conversed with a Druid, nor was he able to control, if\nhe was able to understand, the statements made to him about the ancient\npriesthood, the religion and literature of Gaul. Besides, C\u00e6sar himself\ntells us very little about the priests of Gaul and Britain; and the\nthrilling accounts of the white robes and the golden sickles belong to\nPliny\u2019s \u201cNatural History,\u201d by no means a safe authority in such\nmatters.(38)\n\nWe must be satisfied, indeed, to know very little about the mode of life,\nthe forms of worship, the religious doctrines, or the mysterious wisdom of\nthe Druids and their flocks. But for this very reason it is most essential\nthat our minds should be impressed strongly with the historical reality\nthat belongs to the Celtic inhabitants, and to the work which they\nperformed in rendering these islands for the first time fit for the\nhabitation of man. That historical lesson, and a very important lesson it\nis, is certainly learned more quickly, and yet more effectually, by a\nvisit to Cornwall or Wales, than by any amount of reading. We may doubt\nmany things that Celtic enthusiasts tell us; but where every village and\nfield, every cottage and hill, bear names that are neither English, nor\nNorman, nor Latin, it is difficult not to feel that the Celtic element has\nbeen something real and permanent in the history of the British Isles. The\nCornish language is no doubt extinct, if by extinct we mean that it is no\nlonger spoken by the people. But in the names of towns, castles, rivers,\nmountains, fields, manors, and families, and in a few of the technical\nterms of mining, husbandry, and fishing, Cornish lives on, and probably\nwill live on, for many ages to come. There is a well-known verse:\u2014\n\n\u201cBy Tre, Ros, Pol, Lan, Caer, and Pen,\nYou may know most Cornish men.\u201d(39)\n\nBut it will hardly be believed that a Cornish antiquarian, Dr. Bannister,\nwho is collecting materials for a glossary of Cornish proper names, has\namassed no less than 2,400 names with Tre, 500 with Fen, 400 with Ros, 300\nwith Lan, 200 with Pol, and 200 with Caer.\n\nA language does not die all at once, nor is it always possible to fix the\nexact date when it breathed its last. Thus, in the case of Cornish, it is\nby no means easy to reconcile the conflicting statements of various\nwriters as to the exact time when it ceased to be the language of the\npeople, unless we bear in mind that what was true with regard to the\nhigher classes was not so with regard to the lower, and likewise that in\nsome parts of Cornwall the vitality of the language might continue, while\nin others its heart had ceased to beat. As late as the time of Henry\nVIII., the famous physician Andrew Borde tells us that English was not\nunderstood by many men and women in Cornwall. \u201cIn Cornwal is two\nspeeches,\u201d he writes; \u201cthe one is naughty Englyshe, and the other the\nCornyshe speche. And there be many men and women the which cannot speake\none worde of Englyshe, but all Cornyshe.\u201d During the same King\u2019s reign,\nwhen an attempt was made to introduce a new church service composed in\nEnglish, a protest was signed by the Devonshire and Cornish men utterly\nrefusing this new English:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cWe will not receive the new Service, because it is but like a\n    Christmas game; but we will have our old Service of Matins, Mass,\n    Evensong, and Procession, in Latin as it was before. And so we the\n    Cornish men (whereof certain of us understand no English) utterly\n    refuse this new English.\u201d(40)\n\n\nYet in the reign of Elizabeth, when the liturgy was appointed by authority\nto take the place of the mass, the Cornish, it is said,(41) desired that\nit should be in the English language. About the same time we are told that\nDr. John Moreman(42) taught his parishioners the Lord\u2019s Prayer, the Creed,\nand the Ten Commandments, in the English tongue. From the time of the\nReformation onward, Cornish seems constantly to have lost ground against\nEnglish, particularly in places near Devonshire. Thus Norden, whose\ndescription of Cornwall was probably written about 1584, though not\npublished till 1728, gives a very full and interesting account of the\nstruggle between the two languages:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cOf late,\u201d he says (p. 26), \u201cthe Cornishe men have muche conformed\n    themselves to the use of the Englishe tounge, and their Englishe\n    is equall to the beste, espetially in the easterne partes; even\n    from Truro eastwarde it is in manner wholly Englishe. In the weste\n    parte of the countrye, as in the hundreds of Penwith and Kerrier,\n    the Cornishe tounge is moste in use amongste the inhabitantes, and\n    yet (whiche is to be marveyled), though the husband and wife,\n    parentes and children, master and servantes, doe mutually\n    communicate in their native language, yet ther is none of them in\n    manner but is able to convers with a straunger in the Englishe\n    tounge, unless it be some obscure people, that seldome conferr\n    with the better sorte: But it seemeth that in few yeares the\n    Cornishe language will be by litle and litle abandoned.\u201d\n\n\nCarew, who wrote about the same time, goes so far as to say that most of\nthe inhabitants \u201ccan no word of Cornish, but very few are ignorant of the\nEnglish, though they sometimes affect to be.\u201d This may have been true with\nregard to the upper classes, particularly in the west of Cornwall, but it\nis nevertheless a fact that, as late as 1640, Mr. William Jackman, the\nvicar of Feock,(43) was forced to administer the sacrament in Cornish,\nbecause the aged people did not understand English; nay, the rector of\nLandewednak preached his sermons in Cornish as late as 1678. Mr. Scawen,\ntoo, who wrote about that time, speaks of some old folks who spoke Cornish\nonly, and would not understand a word of English; but he tells us at the\nsame time that Sir Francis North, the Lord Chief Justice, afterwards Lord\nKeeper, when holding the assizes at Lanceston in 1678, expressed his\nconcern at the loss and decay of the Cornish language. The poor people, in\nfact, could speak, or at least understand, Cornish, but he says, \u201cThey\nwere laughed at by the rich, who understood it not, which is their own\nfault in not endeavoring after it.\u201d About the beginning of the last\ncentury, Mr. Ed. Lhuyd (died 1709), the keeper of the Ashmolean Museum,\nwas still able to collect from the mouths of the people a grammar of the\nCornish language, which was published in 1707. He says that at this time\nCornish was only retained in five or six villages towards the Land\u2019s End;\nand in his \u201cArch\u00e6ologia Britannica\u201d he adds, that although it was spoken\nin most of the western districts from the Land\u2019s End to the Lizard, \u201ca\ngreat many of the inhabitants, especially the gentry, do not understand\nit, there being no necessity thereof in regard there\u2019s no Cornish man but\nspeaks good English.\u201d It is generally supposed that the last person who\nspoke Cornish was Dolly Pentreath, who died in 1778, and to whose memory\nPrince Louis Lucien Bonaparte has lately erected a monument in the\nchurchyard at Paul. The inscription is:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cHere lieth interred Dorothy Pentreath, who died in 1778, said to\n    have been the last person who conversed in the ancient Cornish,\n    the peculiar language of this country from the earliest records\n    till it expired in this parish of St. Paul. This stone is erected\n    by the Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte, in union with the Rev. John\n    Garret, vicar of St. Paul, June, 1860.\u201d\n\n\nIt seems hardly right to deprive the old lady of her fair name; but there\nare many people in Cornwall who maintain that when travellers and grandees\ncame to see her, she would talk anything that came into her head, while\nthose who listened to her were pleased to think that they had heard the\ndying echoes of a primeval tongue.(44) There is a letter extant, written\nin Cornish by a poor fisherman of the name of William Bodener. It is dated\nJuly 3, 1776, that is, two years before the death of Dolly Pentreath; and\nthe writer says of himself in Cornish:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cMy age is threescore and five. I am a poor fisherman. I learnt\n    Cornish when I was a boy. I have been to sea with my father and\n    five other men in the boat, and have not heard one word of English\n    spoke in the boat for a week together. I never saw a Cornish book.\n    I learned Cornish going to sea with old men. There is not more\n    than four or five in our town can talk Cornish now,\u2014old people\n    fourscore years old. Cornish is all forgot with young people.\u201d(45)\n\n\nIt would seem, therefore, that Cornish died with the last century, and no\none now living can boast to have heard its sound when actually spoken for\nthe sake of conversation. It seems to have been a melodious and yet by no\nmeans an effeminate language, and Scawen places it in this respect above\nmost of the other Celtic dialects:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cCornish,\u201d he says, \u201cis not to be gutturally pronounced, as the\n    Welsh for the most part is, nor mutteringly, as the Armorick, nor\n    whiningly as the Irish (which two latter qualities seem to have\n    been contracted from their servitude), but must be lively and\n    manly spoken, like other primitive tongues.\u201d\n\n\nAlthough Cornish must now be classed with the extinct languages, it has\ncertainly shown a marvelous vitality. More than four hundred years of\nRoman occupation, more than six hundred years of Saxon and Danish sway, a\nNorman conquest, a Saxon Reformation, and civil wars, have all passed over\nthe land; but, like a tree that may bend before a storm but is not to be\nrooted up, the language of the Celts of Cornwall has lived on in an\nunbroken continuity for at least two thousand years. What does this mean?\nIt means that through the whole of English history to the accession of the\nHouse of Hanover, the inhabitants of Cornwall and the western portion of\nDevonshire, in spite of intermarriages with Romans, Saxons, and Normans,\nwere Celts, and remained Celts. People speak indeed of blood, and\nintermingling of blood, as determining the nationality of a people; but\nwhat is meant by blood? It is one of those scientific idols, that crumble\nto dust as soon as we try to define or grasp them; it is a vague, hollow,\ntreacherous term, which, for the present at least, ought to be banished\nfrom the dictionary of every true man of science. We can give a scientific\ndefinition of a Celtic language; but no one has yet given a definition of\nCeltic blood, or a Celtic skull. It is quite possible that hereafter\nchemical differences may be discovered in the blood of those who speak a\nCeltic, and of those who speak a Teutonic language. It is possible, also,\nthat patient measurements, like those lately published by Professor\nHuxley, in the \u201cJournal of Anatomy and Physiology,\u201d may lead in time to a\nreally scientific classification of skulls, and that physiologists may\nsucceed in the end in carrying out a classification of the human race,\naccording to tangible and unvarying physiological criteria. But their\ndefinitions and their classifications will hardly ever square with the\ndefinitions or classifications of the student of language, and the use of\ncommon terms can only be a source of constant misunderstandings. We know\nwhat we mean by a Celtic language, and in the grammar of each language we\nare able to produce a most perfect scientific definition of its real\ncharacter. If, therefore, we transfer the term Celtic to people, we can,\nif we use our words accurately, mean nothing but people who speak a Celtic\nlanguage, the true exponent, aye, the very life of Celtic nationality.\nWhatever people, whether Romans, or Saxons, or Normans, or, as some think,\neven Ph\u0153nicians and Jews, settled in Cornwall, if they ceased to speak\ntheir own language and exchanged it for Cornish, they are, before the\ntribunal of the science of language, Celts, and nothing but Celts; while,\nwhenever Cornishmen, like Sir Humphrey Davy or Bishop Colenso, have ceased\nto speak Cornish, and speak nothing but English, they are no longer Celts,\nbut true Teutons or Saxons, in the only scientifically legitimate sense of\nthat word. Strange stories, indeed, would be revealed, if blood could cry\nout and tell of its repeated mixtures since the beginning of the world. If\nwe think of the early migrations of mankind; of the battles fought before\nthere were hieroglyphics to record them; of conquests, leadings into\ncaptivity, piracy, slavery, and colonization, all without a sacred poet to\nhand them down to posterity,\u2014we shall hesitate, indeed, to speak of pure\nraces, or unmixed blood, even at the very dawn of real history. Little as\nwe know of the early history of Greece, we know enough to warn us against\nlooking upon the Greeks of Asia or Europe as an unmixed race. \u00c6gyptus,\nwith his Arabian, Ethiopian, and Tyrian wives; Cadmus, the son of Libya;\nPh\u0153nix, the father of Europa,\u2014all point to an intercourse of Greece with\nforeign countries, whatever else their mythological meaning may be. As\nsoon as we know anything of the history of the world, we know of wars and\nalliances between Greeks and Lydians and Persians, of Ph\u0153nician\nsettlements all over the world, of Carthaginians trading in Spain and\nencamped in Italy, of Romans conquering and colonizing Gaul, Spain,\nBritain, the Danubian Principalities and Greece, Western Asia and Northern\nAfrica. Then again, at a later time, follow the great ethnic convulsions\nof Eastern Europe, and the devastation and re-population of the ancient\nseats of civilization by Goths, and Lombards, and Vandals, and Saxons;\nwhile at the same time, and for many centuries to come, the few\nstrongholds of civilization in the East were again and again overwhelmed\nby the irresistible waves of Hunnish, Mongolic, and Tartaric invaders.\nAnd, with all this, people at the latter end of the nineteenth century\nventure to speak, for instance, of pure Norman blood as something definite\nor definable, forgetting how the ancient Norsemen carried their wives away\nfrom the coasts of Germany or Russia, from Sicily or from the very Pir\u00e6us;\nwhile others married whatever wives they could find in the North of\nFrance, whether of Gallic, Roman, or German extraction, and then settled\nin England, where they again contracted marriages with Teutonic, Celtic,\nor Roman damsels. In our own days, if we see the daughter of an English\nofficer and an Indian Ranee married to the son of a Russian nobleman, how\nare we to class the offspring of that marriage? The Indian Ranee may have\nhad Mongol blood, so may the Russian nobleman; but there are other\npossible ingredients of pure Hindu and pure Slavonic, of Norman, German,\nand Roman blood,\u2014and who is the chemist bold enough to disengage them all?\nThere is, perhaps, no nation which has been exposed to more frequent\nadmixture of foreign blood, during the Middle Ages, than the Greeks.\nProfessor Fallmerayer maintained that the Hellenic population was entirely\nexterminated, and that the people who at the present day call themselves\nGreeks are really Slavonians. It would be difficult to refute him by\narguments drawn either from the physical or the moral characteristics of\nthe modern Greeks as compared with the many varieties of the Slavonic\nstock. But the following extract from \u201cFelton\u2019s Lectures on Greece,\nAncient and Modern,\u201d contains the only answer that can be given to such\ncharges, without point or purpose: \u201cIn one of the courses of lectures,\u201d he\nsays, \u201cwhich I attended in the University of Athens, the Professor of\nHistory, a very eloquent man as well as a somewhat fiery Greek, took this\nsubject up. His audience consisted of about two hundred young men from\nevery part of Greece. His indignant comments on the learned German, that\nnotorious \u039c\u03b9\u03c3\u03ad\u03bb\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd or Greek-hater, as he stigmatized him, were received by\nhis hearers with a profound sensation. They sat with expanded nostrils and\nflashing eyes\u2014a splendid illustration of the old Hellenic spirit, roused\nto fury by the charge of barbarian descent. \u2018It is true,\u2019 said the\neloquent professor, \u2018that the tide of barbaric invaders poured down like a\ndeluge upon Hellas, filling with its surging floods our beautiful plains,\nour fertile valleys. The Greeks fled to their walled towns and mountain\nfastnesses. By and by the water subsided and the soil of Hellas\nreappeared. The former inhabitants descended from the mountains as the\ntide receded, resumed their ancient lands and rebuilt their ruined\nhabitations, and, the reign of the barbarians over, Hellas was herself\nagain.\u2019 Three or four rounds of applause followed the close of the\nlectures of Professor Manouses, in which I heartily joined. I could not\nhelp thinking afterwards what a singular comment on the German\nanti-Hellenic theory was presented by this scene,\u2014a Greek professor in a\nGreek university, lecturing to two hundred Greeks in the Greek language,\nto prove that the Greeks were Greeks, and not Slavonians.\u201d(46)\n\nAnd yet we hear the same arguments used over and over again, not only with\nregard to the Greeks, but with regard to many other modern nations; and\neven men whose minds have been trained in the school of exact science, use\nthe term \u201cbloods,\u201d in this vague and thoughtless manner. The adjective\nGreek may connote many things, but what it denotes is language. People who\nspeak Greek as their mother tongue are Greeks, and if a Turkish-speaking\ninhabitant of Constantinople could trace his pedigree straight to\nPericles, he would still be a Turk, whatever his name, his faith, his\nhair, features, and stature\u2014whatever his blood might be. We can classify\nlanguages, and as languages presuppose people that speak them, we can so\nfar classify mankind, according to their grammars and dictionaries; while\nall who possess scientific honesty must confess and will confess that, as\nyet, it has been impossible to devise any truly scientific classification\nof skulls, to say nothing of blood, or bones, or hair. The label on one of\nthe skulls in the Munich Collection, \u201cEtruscan-Tyrol, or Inca-Peruvian,\u201d\ncharacterizes not too unfairly the present state of ethnological\ncraniology. Let those who imagine that the great outlines, at least, of a\nclassification of skulls have been firmly established, consult Mr. Brace\u2019s\nuseful manual of \u201cThe Races of the World,\u201d where he has collected the\nopinions of some of the best judges on the subject. We quote a few\npassages:(47)\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cDr. Bachmann concludes, from the measurements of Dr. Tiedemann\n    and Dr. Morton, that the negro skull, though less than the\n    European, is within one inch as large as the Persian and the\n    Armenian, and three square inches larger than the Hindu and\n    Egyptian. The scale is thus given by Dr. Morton: European skull,\n    87 cubic inches; Malay, 85; Negro 83; Mongol, 82; Ancient\n    Egyptian, 80; American, 79. The ancient Peruvians and Mexicans,\n    who constructed so elaborate a civilization, show a capacity only\n    of from 75 to 79 inches.... Other observations by Huschke make the\n    average capacity of the skull of Europeans 40.88 oz.; of\n    Americans, 39.13; of Mongols, 38.39; of Negroes, 37.57; of Malays,\n    36.41.\u201d\n\n\n    \u201cOf the shape of the skull, as distinctive of different origin,\n    Professor M. J. Weber has said there is no proper mark of a\n    definite race from the cranium so firmly attached that it may not\n    be found in some other race. Tiedemann has met with Germans whose\n    skulls bore all the characters of the negro race; and an\n    inhabitant of Nukahiwa, according to Silesius and Blumenbach,\n    agreed exactly in his proportions with the Apollo Belvedere.\u201d\n\n\nProfessor Huxley, in his \u201cObservations on the Human Skulls of Engis and\nNeanderthal,\u201d printed in Sir Charles Lyell\u2019s \u201cAntiquity of Man,\u201d p. 81,\nremarks that \u201cthe most capacious European skull yet measured had a\ncapacity of 114 cubic inches, the smallest (as estimated by weight of\nbrain) about 55 cubic inches; while, according to Professor Schaaffhausen,\nsome Hindu skulls have as small a capacity as 46 cubic inches (27 oz. of\nwater);\u201d and he sums up by stating that \u201ccranial measurements alone afford\nno safe indication of race.\u201d\n\nAnd even if a scientific classification of skulls were to be carried out,\nif, instead of merely being able to guess that this may be an Australian\nand this a Malay skull, we were able positively to place each individual\nskull under its own definite category, what should we gain in the\nclassification of mankind? Where is the bridge from skull to man in the\nfull sense of that word? Where is the connecting link between the cranial\nproportions and only one other of man\u2019s characteristic properties, such as\nlanguage? And what applies to skulls applies to color and all the rest.\nEven a black skin and curly hair are mere outward accidents as compared\nwith language. We do not classify parrots and magpies by the color of\ntheir plumage, still less by the cages in which they live; and what is the\nblack skin or the white skin but the mere outward covering, not to say the\nmere cage, in which that being which we call man lives, moves, and has his\nbeing? A man like Bishop Crowther, though a negro in blood, is, in thought\nand speech, an Aryan. He speaks English, he thinks English, he acts\nEnglish; and, unless we take English in a purely historical, and not in\nits truly scientific, _i.e._ linguistic sense, he is English. No doubt\nthere are many influences at work\u2014old proverbs, old songs and traditions,\nreligious convictions, social institutions, political prejudices, besides\nthe soil, the food, and the air of a country\u2014that may keep up, even among\npeople who have lost their national language, that kind of vague\nsimilarity which is spoken of as national character.(48) This is a subject\non which many volumes have been written, and yet the result has only been\nto supply newspapers with materials for international insults or\ninternational courtesies, as the case may be. Nothing sound or definite\nhas been gained by such speculations, and in an age that prides itself on\nthe careful observance of the rules of inductive reasoning, nothing is\nmore surprising than the sweeping assertions with regard to national\ncharacter, and the reckless way in which casual observations that may be\ntrue of one, two, three, or it may be ten or even a hundred individuals,\nare extended to millions. However, if there is one safe exponent of\nnational character, it is language. Take away the language of a people,\nand you destroy at once that powerful chain of tradition in thought and\nsentiment which holds all the generations of the same race together, if we\nmay use an unpleasant simile, like the chain of a gang of galley-slaves.\nThese slaves, we are told, very soon fall into the same pace, without\nbeing aware that their movements depend altogether on the movements of\nthose who walk before them. It is nearly the same with us. We imagine we\nare altogether free in our thoughts, original and independent, and we are\nnot aware that our thoughts are manacled and fettered by language, and\nthat, without knowing and without perceiving it, we have to keep pace with\nthose who walked before us thousands and thousands of years ago. Language\nalone binds people together, and keeps them distinct from others who speak\ndifferent tongues. In ancient times particularly, \u201clanguages and nations\u201d\nmeant the same thing; and even with us our real ancestors are those whose\nlanguage we speak, the fathers of our thoughts, the mothers of our hopes\nand fears. Blood, bones, hair, and color, are mere accidents, utterly\nunfit to serve as principles of scientific classification for that great\nfamily of living beings, the essential characteristics of which are\nthought and speech, not fibrine, serum, coloring matter, or whatever else\nenters into the composition of blood.\n\nIf this be true, the inhabitants of Cornwall, whatever the number of\nRoman, Saxon, Danish, or Norman settlers within the boundaries of that\ncounty may have been, continued to be Celts as long as they spoke Cornish.\nThey ceased to be Celts when they ceased to speak the language of their\nforefathers. Those who can appreciate the charms of genuine antiquity will\nnot, therefore, find fault with the enthusiasm of Daines Barrington or Sir\nJoseph Banks in listening to the strange utterances of Dolly Pentreath;\nfor her language, if genuine, carried them back and brought them, as it\nwere, into immediate contact with people who, long before the Christian\nera, acted an important part on the stage of history, supplying the world\nwith two of the most precious metals, more precious then than gold or\nsilver, with copper and tin, the very materials, it may be, of the finest\nworks of art in Greece, aye, of the armor wrought for the heroes of the\nTrojan War, as described so minutely by the poets of the \u201cIliad.\u201d There is\na continuity in language which nothing equals, and there is an historical\ngenuineness in ancient words, if but rightly interpreted, which cannot be\nrivaled by manuscripts, or coins, or monumental inscriptions.\n\nBut though it is right to be enthusiastic about what is really ancient in\nCornwall,\u2014and there is nothing so ancient as language,\u2014it is equally right\nto be discriminating. The fresh breezes of antiquity have intoxicated many\nan antiquarian. Words, purely Latin or English, though somewhat changed\nafter being admitted into the Cornish dictionary, have been quoted as the\noriginals from which the Roman or English were in turn derived. The Latin\n_liber_, book, was supposed to be derived from the Welsh _llyvyr; litera_,\nletter, from Welsh _llythyr; persona_, person, from Welsh _person_, and\nmany more of the same kind. Walls built within the memory of men have been\nadmitted as relics of British architecture; nay, Latin inscriptions of the\nsimplest character have but lately been interpreted by means of Cornish,\nas containing strains of a mysterious wisdom. Here, too, a study of the\nlanguage gives some useful hints as to the proper method of disentangling\nthe truly ancient from the more modern elements. Whatever in the Cornish\ndictionary cannot be traced back to any other source, whether Latin,\nSaxon, Norman, or German, may safely be considered as Cornish, and\ntherefore as ancient Celtic. Whatever in the antiquities of Cornwall\ncannot be claimed by Romans, Saxons, Danes, or Normans, may fairly be\nconsidered as genuine remains of the earliest civilization of this island,\nas the work of the Celtic discoverers of Britain.\n\nThe Cornish language is by no means a pure or unmixed language,\u2014at least\nwe do not know it in its pure state. It is, in fact, a mere accident that\nany literary remains have been preserved, and three or four small volumes\nwould contain all that is left to us of Cornish literature. \u201cThere is a\npoem,\u201d to quote Mr. Norris, \u201cwhich we may by courtesy call epic, entitled\n\u2018Mount Calvary.\u2019 \u201d It contains 259 stanzas of eight lines each, in\nheptasyllabic metre, with alternate rhyme. It is ascribed to the fifteenth\ncentury, and was published for the first time by Mr. Davies Gilbert in\n1826.(49) There is, besides, a series of dramas, or mystery-plays, first\npublished by Mr. Norris for the University Press of Oxford, in 1858. The\nfirst is called \u201cThe Beginning of the World,\u201d the second \u201cThe Passion of\nour Lord,\u201d the third \u201cThe Resurrection.\u201d The last is interrupted by\nanother play, \u201cThe Death of Pilate.\u201d The oldest MS. in the Bodleian\nLibrary belongs to the fifteenth century, and Mr. Norris is not inclined\nto refer the composition of these plays to a much earlier date. Another\nMS., likewise in the Bodleian Library, contains both the text and a\ntranslation by Keigwyn (1695). Lastly, there is another sacred drama,\ncalled \u201cThe Creation of the World, with Noah\u2019s Flood.\u201d It is in many\nplaces copied from the dramas, and, according to the MS., it was written\nby William Jordan in 1611. The oldest MS. belongs again to the Bodleian\nLibrary, which likewise possesses a MS. of the translation by Keigwyn in\n1691.(50)\n\nThese mystery-plays, as we may learn from a passage in Carew\u2019s \u201cSurvey of\nCornwall\u201d (p. 71), were still performed in Cornish in his time, _i.e._ at\nthe beginning of the seventeenth century. He says:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cPastimes to delight the minde, the Cornish men have Guary\n    miracles and three mens songs; and, for the exercise of the body,\n    hunting, hawking, shooting, wrastling, hurling, and such other\n    games.\n\n\n    \u201cThe Guary miracle\u2014in English, a miracle-play\u2014is a kind of\n    enterlude, compiled in Cornish out of some Scripture history, with\n    that grossenes which accompanied the Romanes _vetus Comedia_. For\n    representing it, they raise an earthen amphitheatre in some open\n    field, having the diameter of his enclosed playne some forty or\n    fifty foot. The country people flock from all sides, many miles\n    off, to heare and see it, for they have therein devils and\n    devices, to delight as well the eye as the eare; the players conne\n    not their parts without booke, but are prompted by one called the\n    Ordinary, who followeth at their back with the booke in his hand,\n    and telleth them softly what they must pronounce aloud. Which\n    manner once gave occasion to a pleasant conceyted gentleman, of\n    practising a mery pranke; for he undertaking (perhaps of set\n    purpose) an actor\u2019s roome, was accordingly lessoned (beforehand)\n    by the Ordinary, that he must say after him. His turn came. Quoth\n    the Ordinary, Goe forth man and shew thy selfe. The gentleman\n    steps out upon the stage, and like a bad Clarke in Scripture\n    matters, cleaving more to the letter than the sense, pronounced\n    those words aloud. Oh! (sayes the fellowe softly in his eare) you\n    marre all the play. And with this his passion the actor makes the\n    audience in like sort acquainted. Hereon the prompter falls to\n    flat rayling and cursing in the bitterest termes he could devise:\n    which the gentleman, with a set gesture and countenance, still\n    soberly related, untill the Ordinary, driven at last into a madde\n    rage, was faine to give all over. Which trousse, though it brake\n    off the enterlude, yet defrauded not the beholders, but dismissed\n    them with a great deale more sport and laughter than such Guaries\n    could have afforded.\u201d(51)\n\n\nScawen, at the end of the seventeenth century, speaks of these\nmiracle-plays, and considers the suppression of the _Guirrimears_,(52) or\nGreat Plays or Speeches,(53) as one of the chief causes of the decay of\nthe Cornish language.\n\n\n    \u201cThese _Guirrimears_,\u201d he says, \u201cwhich were used at the great\n    conventions of the people, at which they had famous interludes\n    celebrated with great preparations, and not without shows of\n    devotion in them, solemnized in great and spacious downs of great\n    capacity, encompassed about with earthen banks, and some in part\n    stone-work, of largeness to contain thousands, the shapes of which\n    remain in many places at this day, though the use of them long\n    since gone.... This was a great means to keep in use the tongue\n    with delight and admiration. They had recitations in them,\n    poetical and divine, one of which I may suppose this small relique\n    of antiquity to be, in which the passion of our Saviour, and his\n    resurrection, is described.\u201d\n\n\nIf to these mystery-plays and poems we add some versions of the Lord\u2019s\nPrayer, the Commandments, and the Creed, a protestation of the bishops in\nBritain to Augustine the monk, the Pope\u2019s legate, in the year 600 after\nChrist (MS. Gough, 4), the first chapter of Genesis, and some songs,\nproverbs, riddles, a tale and a glossary, we have an almost complete\ncatalogue of what a Cornish library would be at the present day.\n\nNow if we examine the language as preserved to us in these fragments, we\nfind that it is full of Norman, Saxon, and Latin words. No one can doubt,\nfor instance, that the following Cornish words are all taken from Latin,\nthat is, from the Latin of the Church:\u2014\n\n_Abat_, an abbot; Lat. _abbas_.\n_Alter_, altar; Lat. _altare_.\n_Apostol_, apostle; Lat. _apostolus_.\n_Clauster_, cloister; Lat. _claustrum_.\n_Colom_, dove; Lat. _columba_.\n_Gwespar_, vespers; Lat. _vesper_.\n_Cantuil_, candle; Lat. _candela_.\n_Cantuilbren_, candlestick; Lat. _candelabrum_.\n_Ail_, angel; Lat. _angelus_.\n_Archail_, archangel; Lat. _archangelus_.\n\nOther words, though not immediately connected with the service and the\ndoctrine of the Church, may nevertheless have passed from Latin into\nCornish, either directly from the daily conversation of monks, priests,\nand schoolmasters, or indirectly from English or Norman, in both of which\nthe same Latin words had naturally been adopted, though slightly modified\naccording to the phonetic peculiarities of each. Thus:\u2014\n\n\n    _Ancar_, anchor; the Latin, _ancora_. This might have come\n    indirectly through English or Norman-French.\n\n\n    _Aradar_, plough; the Latin, _aratrum_. This must have come direct\n    from Latin, as it does not exist in Norman or English.\n\n\n    _Arghans_, silver; _argentum_.\n\n\n    _Keghin_, kitchen; _coquina_. This is taken from the same Latin\n    word from which the Romance languages formed _cuisine, cucina_;\n    not from the classical Latin, _culina_.\n\n\n    _Liver_, book; _liber_, originally the bark of trees on which\n    books were written.\n\n\n    _Dinair_, coin; _denarius. Seth_, arrow; _sagitta. Caus_, cheese;\n    _caseus_. _Caul_, cabbage; _caulis_.\n\n\nThese words are certainly foreign words in Cornish and the other Celtic\nlanguages in which they occur, and to attempt to supply for some of them a\npurely Celtic etymology shows a complete want of appreciation both of the\nhistory of words and of the phonetic laws that govern each family of the\nIndo-European languages. Sometimes, no doubt, the Latin words have been\nconsiderably changed and modified, according to the phonetic peculiarities\nof the dialects into which they were received. Thus, _gwespar_ for\n_vesper_, _seth_ for _sagitta_, _caus_ for _caseus_, hardly look like\nLatin words. Yet no real Celtic scholar would claim them as Celtic; and\nthe Rev. Robert Williams, the author of the \u201cLexicon Cornu-Britannicum,\u201d\nin speaking of a list of words borrowed from Latin by the Welsh during the\nstay of the Romans in Britain, is no doubt right in stating \u201cthat it will\nbe found much more extensive than is generally imagined.\u201d\n\nLatin words which have reached the Cornish after they had assumed a French\nor Norman disguise, are, for instance,\u2014\n\n\n    _Emperur_, instead of Latin _imperator_ (Welsh, _ymherawdwr_).\n\n\n    _Laian_, the French _loyal_, but not the Latin _legalis_.\n    Likewise, _dislaian_, disloyal.\n\n\n    _Fruit_, fruit; Lat. _fructus_; French, _fruit_.\n\n\n    _Funten_, fountain, commonly pronounced _fenton_; Lat. _fontana_;\n    French, _fontaine_.\n\n\n    _Gromersy_, _i.e._ grand mercy, thanks.\n\n\n    _Hoyz, hoyz, hoyz!_ hear, hear! The Norman-French, _Oyez_.\n\n\nThe town-crier of Aberconwy may still be heard prefacing his notices with\nthe shout of \u201cHoyz, hoyz, hoyz!\u201d which in other places has been corrupted\nto \u201cO yes.\u201d\n\nThe following words, adopted into Cornish and other Celtic dialects,\nclearly show their Saxon origin:\u2014\n\n\n    _Cafor_, a chafer; Germ, _k\u00e4fer_. _Craft_, art, craft. _Redior_, a\n    reader. _Storc_, a stork. _Let_, hindrance, let; preserved in the\n    German, _verletzen_.(54)\n\n\nConsidering that Cornish and other Celtic dialects are members of the same\nfamily to which Latin and German belong, it is sometimes difficult to tell\nat once whether a Celtic word was really borrowed, or whether it belongs\nto that ancient stock of words which all the Aryan languages share in\ncommon. This is a point which can be determined by scholars only, and by\nmeans of phonetic tests. Thus the Cornish _huir_, or _hoer_, is clearly\nthe same word as the Latin _soror_, sister. But the change of _s_ into _h_\nwould not have taken place if the word had been simply borrowed from\nLatin, while many words beginning with _s_ in Sanskrit, Latin, and German,\nchange the _s_ into _h_ in Cornish as well as in Greek and Persian. The\nCornish _hoer_, sister, is indeed curiously like the Persian _kh\u00e1her_, the\nregular representative of the Sanskrit _svasar_, the Latin _soror_. The\nsame applies to _braud_, brother, _dedh_, day, _dri_, three, and many more\nwords which form the primitive stock of Cornish, and were common to all\nthe Aryan languages before their earliest dispersion.\n\nWhat applies to the language of Cornwall, applies with equal force to the\nother relics of antiquity of that curious county. It has been truly said\nthat Cornwall is poor in antiquities, but it is equally true that it is\nrich in antiquity. The difficulty is to discriminate, and to distinguish\nwhat is really Cornish or Celtic from what may be later additions, of\nRoman, Saxon, Danish, and Norman origin. Now here, as we said before, the\nsafest rule is clearly the same as that which we followed in our analysis\nof language. Let everything be claimed for English, Norman, Danish, and\nRoman sources that can clearly be proved to come from thence; but let what\nremains unclaimed be considered as Cornish or Celtic. Thus, if we do not\nfind in countries exclusively inhabited by Romans or Saxons anything like\na cromlech, surely we have a right to look upon these strange structures\nas remnants of Celtic times. It makes no difference if it can be shown\nthat below these cromlechs coins have occasionally been found of the Roman\nEmperors. This only proves that even during the days of Roman supremacy\nthe Cornish style of public monuments, whether sepulchral or otherwise,\nremained. Nay, why should not even a Roman settled in Cornwall have\nadopted the monumental style of his adopted country? Roman and Saxon hands\nmay have helped to erect some of the cromlechs which are still to be seen\nin Cornwall, but the original idea of such monuments, and hence their\nname, is purely Celtic.\n\n_Croml\u00eah_ in Cornish, or _cromlech_ in Welsh, means a bent slab, from the\nCornish _crom_, bent, curved, rounded, and _l\u00eah_, a slab. Though many of\nthese cromlechs have been destroyed, Cornwall still possesses some fine\nspecimens of these ancient stone tripods. Most of them are large granite\nslabs, supported by three stones fixed in the ground. These supporters are\nlikewise huge flat stones, but the capstone is always the largest, and its\nweight inclining towards one point, imparts strength to the whole\nstructure. At Lanyon, however, where the top-stone of a cromlech was\nthrown down in 1816 by a violent storm, the supporters remained standing,\nand the capstone was replaced in 1824, though not, it would seem, at its\noriginal height. Dr. Borlase relates that in his time the monument was\nhigh enough for a man to sit on horseback under it. At present such a feat\nwould be impossible, the cover-stone being only about five feet from the\nground. These cromlechs, though very surprising when seen for the first\ntime, represent in reality one of the simplest achievements of primitive\narchitecture. It is far easier to balance a heavy weight on three uneven\nprops than to rest it level on two or four even supporters. There are,\nhowever, cromlechs resting on four or more stones, these stones forming a\nkind of chamber, or a _kist-vaen_, which is supposed to have served\noriginally as a sepulchre. These structures presuppose a larger amount of\narchitectural skill; still more so the gigantic portals of Stonehenge,\nwhich are formed by two pillars of equal height, joined by a\nsuperincumbent stone. Here weight alone was no longer considered\nsufficient for imparting strength and safety, but holes were worked in the\nupper stones, and the pointed tops of the pillars were fitted into them.\nIn the slabs that form the cromlechs we find no such traces of careful\nworkmanship; and this, as well as other considerations, would support the\nopinion, that in Stonehenge we have one of the latest specimens of Celtic\narchitecture. Marvelous as are the remains of that primitive style of\narchitectural art, the only real problem they offer is, how such large\nstones could have been brought together from a distance, and how such\nenormous weights could have been lifted up. The first question is answered\nby ropes and rollers; and the mural sculptures of Nineveh show us what can\nbe done by such simple machinery. We there see the whole picture of how\nthese colossal blocks of stone were moved from the quarry on to the place\nwhere they were wanted. Given plenty of time, and plenty of men and oxen,\nand there is no block that could not be brought to its right place by\nmeans of ropes and rollers. And that our forefathers did not stint\nthemselves either in time, or in men, or other cattle, when engaged in\nerecting such monuments, we know even from comparatively modern times.\nUnder Harold Harfagr, two kings spent three whole years in erecting one\nsingle tumulus; and Harold Blatand is said to have employed the whole of\nhis army and a vast number of oxen in transporting a large stone which he\nwished to place on his mother\u2019s tomb. As to the second question, we can\nreadily understand how, after the supporters had once been fixed in the\nground, an artificial mound might be raised, which, when the heavy slab\nhad been rolled up on an inclined plane, might be removed again, and thus\nleave the heavy stone poised in its startling elevation.\n\nAs skeletons have been found under some of the cromlechs, there can be\nlittle doubt that the chambers inclosed by them, the so-called\n_kist-vaens_, were intended to receive the remains of the dead, and to\nperpetuate their memory. And as these sepulchral monuments are most\nfrequent in those parts of the British Isles which from the earliest to\nthe latest times were inhabited by Celtic people, they may be considered\nas representative of the Celtic style of public sepulture. _Kist-vaen_, or\n_cist-vaen_, means a stone-chamber, from _cista_, a chest, and _vaen_, the\nmodified form of _maen_ or _m\u00ean_, stone. Their size is, with few\nexceptions, not less than the size of a human body. But although these\nmonuments were originally sepulchral, we may well understand that the\nburying-places of great men, of kings, or priests, or generals, were\nlikewise used for the celebration of other religious rites. Thus we read\nin the Book of Lecan, \u201cthat Amhalgaith built a cairn, for the purpose of\nholding a meeting of the Hy-Amhalgaith every year, and to view his ships\nand fleet going and coming, and as a place of interment for himself.\u201d(55)\nNor does it follow, as some antiquarians maintain, that every structure in\nthe style of a cromlech, even in England, is exclusively Celtic. We\nimitate pyramids and obelisks: why should not the Saxons have built the\nKitts Cotty House, which is found in a thoroughly Saxon neighborhood,\nafter Celtic models and with the aid of Celtic captives? This cromlech\nstands in Kent, on the brow of a hill about a mile and a half from\nAylesford, to the right of the great road from Rochester to Maidstone.\nNear it, across the Medway, are the stone circles of Addington. The stone\non the south side is 8 ft. high by 7-\u00bd broad, and 2 ft. thick; weight,\nabout 8 tons. That on the north is 8 ft. by 8, and 2 thick; weight, 8 tons\n10 cwt. The end stone, 5 ft. 6 in. high by 5 ft. broad; thickness, 14 in.;\nweight, 2 tons 8-\u00bc cwt. The impost is 11 ft. long by 8 ft. broad, and 2\nft. thick; weight, 10 tons 7 cwt. It is higher, therefore, than the\nCornish cromlechs, but in other respects it is a true specimen of that\nclass of Celtic monuments. The cover-stone of the cromlech at Molfra is 9\nft. 8 in. by 14 ft. 3 in.; its supporters are 5 ft. high. The cover-stone\nof the Ch\u00fbn cromlech measures 12-\u00bd ft. in length and 11 ft. in width. The\nlargest slab is that at Lanyon, which measures 18-\u00bd ft. in length and 9\nft. at the broadest part.\n\nThe cromlechs are no doubt the most characteristic and most striking among\nthe monuments of Cornwall. Though historians have differed as to their\nexact purpose, not even the most careless traveller could pass them by\nwithout seeing that they do not stand there without a purpose. They speak\nfor themselves, and they certainly speak in a language that is neither\nRoman, Saxon, Danish, nor Norman. Hence in England they may, by a kind of\nexhaustive process of reasoning, be claimed as relics of Celtic\ncivilization. The same argument applies to the cromlechs and stone avenues\nof Carnac, in Brittany. Here, too, language and history attest the former\npresence of Celtic people; nor could any other race, that influenced the\nhistorical destinies of the North of Gaul, claim such structures as their\nown. Even in still more distant places, in the South of France, in\nScandinavia, or Germany, where similar monuments have been discovered,\nthey may, though more hesitatingly, be classed as Celtic, particularly if\nthey are found near the natural high roads on which we know that the Celts\nin their westward migrations preceded the Teutonic and Slavonic Aryans.\nBut the case is totally different when we hear of cromlechs, cairns, and\nkist-vaens in the North of Africa, in Upper Egypt, on the Lebanon, near\nthe Jordan, in Circassia, or in the South of India. Here, and more\nparticularly in the South of India, we have no indications whatever of\nCeltic Aryans; on the contrary, if that name is taken in its strict\nscientific meaning, it would be impossible to account for the presence of\nCeltic Aryans in those southern latitudes at any time after the original\ndispersion of the Aryan family. It is very natural that English officers\nliving in India should be surprised at monuments which cannot but remind\nthem of what they had seen at home, whether in Cornwall, Ireland, or\nScotland. A description of some of these monuments, the so-called Pandoo\nCoolies in Malabar, was given by Mr. J. Babington, in 1820, and published\nin the third volume of the \u201cTransactions of the Literary Society of\nBombay,\u201d in 1823. Captain Congreve called attention to what he considered\nScythic Druidical remains in the Nilghiri hills, in a paper published in\n1847, in the \u201cMadras Journal of Literature and Science,\u201d and the same\nsubject was treated in the same journal by the Rev. W. Taylor. A most\ncareful and interesting description of similar monuments has lately been\npublished in the \u201cTransactions of the Royal Irish Academy,\u201d by Captain\nMeadows Taylor, under the title of \u201cDescription of Cairns, Cromlechs,\nKist-vaens, and other Celtic, Druidical, or Scythian Monuments in the\nDekhan.\u201d Captain Taylor found these monuments near the village of\nRajunkolloor, in the principality of Shorapoor, an independent native\nstate, situated between the Bheema and Krishna rivers, immediately above\ntheir junction. Others were discovered near Huggeritgi, others on the hill\nof Yemmee Gooda, others again near Shapoor, Hyderabad, and other places.\nAll these monuments in the South of India are no doubt extremely\ninteresting; but to call them Celtic, Druidical, or Scythic, is\nunscientific, or, at all events, exceedingly premature. There is in all\narchitectural monuments a natural or rational, and a conventional, or, it\nmay be, irrational element. A striking agreement in purely conventional\nfeatures may justify the assumption that monuments so far distant from\neach others as the cromlechs of Anglesea and the \u201cMori-Munni\u201d of Shorapoor\nowe their origin to the same architects, or to the same races. But an\nagreement in purely natural contrivances goes for nothing, or, at least,\nfor very little. Now there is very little that can be called conventional\nin a mere stone pillar, or in a cairn, that is, an artificial heap of\nstones. Even the erection of a cromlech can hardly be claimed as a\nseparate style of architecture. Children, all over the world, if building\nhouses with cards, will build cromlechs; and people, all over the world,\nif the neighborhood supplies large slabs of stone, will put three stones\ntogether to keep out the sun or the wind, and put a fourth stone on the\ntop to keep out the rain. Before monuments like those described by Captain\nMeadows Taylor can be classed as Celtic or Druidical, a possibility, at\nall events, must be shown that Celts, in the true sense of the word, could\never have inhabited the Dekhan. Till that is done, it is better to leave\nthem anonymous, or to call them by their native names, than to give to\nthem a name which is apt to mislead the public at large, and to encourage\ntheories which exceed the limits of legitimate speculation.\n\nReturning to Cornwall, we find there, besides the cromlechs, pillars,\nholed stones, and stone circles, all of which may be classed as public\nmonuments. They all bear witness to a kind of public spirit, and to a\ncertain advance in social and political life, at the time of their\nerection. They were meant for people living at the time, who understood\ntheir meaning, if not as messages to posterity, and, if so, as truly\nhistorical monuments; for history begins when the living begin to care\nabout a good opinion of those who come after them. Some of the single\nCornish pillars tell us little indeed; nothing, in reality, beyond the\nfact that they were erected by human skill, and with some human purpose.\nSome of these monoliths seem to have been of a considerable size. In a\nvillage called M\u00ean Perhen, in Constantine parish, there stood, \u201cabout five\nyears ago,\u201d\u2014so Dr. Borlase relates in the year 1769,\u2014a large pyramidal\nstone, twenty feet above the ground, and four feet in the ground; it made\nabove twenty stone posts for gates when it was clove up by the farmer who\ngave the account to the Doctor.(56) Other stones, like the M\u00ean Scrifa,\nhave inscriptions, but these inscriptions are Roman, and of comparatively\nlate date. There are some pillars, like the Pipers at Bolleit, which are\nclearly connected with the stone circles close by, remnants, it may be, of\nold stone avenues, or beacons, from which signals might be sent to other\ndistant settlements. The holed stones, too, are generally found in close\nproximity to other large stone monuments. They are called _m\u00ean-an-tol_,\nhole-stones, in Cornwall; and the name of _tol-men_, or _dol-men_, which\nis somewhat promiscuously used by Celtic antiquarians, should be\nrestricted to monuments of this class, _toll_ being the Cornish word for\n_hole_, _m\u00ean_ for _stone_, and _an_ the article. French antiquarians,\ntaking _dol_ or _t\u00f4l_ as a corruption of _tabula_, use _dolman_ in the\nsense of table-stones, and as synonymous with _cromlech_, while they\nfrequently use _cromlech_ in the sense of stone circles. This can hardly\nbe justified, and leads at all events to much confusion.\n\nThe stone circles, whether used for religious or judicial purposes,\u2014and\nthere was in ancient times very little difference between the two,\u2014were\nclearly intended for solemn meetings. There is a very perfect circle at\nBoscawen-\u00fbn, which consisted originally of nineteen stones. Dr. Borlase,\nwhose work on the Antiquities of the County of Cornwall contains the most\ntrustworthy information as to the state of Cornish antiquities about a\nhundred years ago, mentions three other circles which had the same number\nof stones, while others vary from twelve to seventy-two.\n\n\n    \u201cThe figure of these monuments,\u201d he says, \u201cis either simple, or\n    compounded. Of the first kind are exact circles; elliptical or\n    semicircular. The construction of these is not always the same,\n    some having their circumference marked with large separate stones\n    only; others having ridges of small stones intermixed, and\n    sometimes walls and seats, serving to render the inclosure more\n    complete. Other circular monuments have their figure more complex\n    and varied, consisting, not only of a circle, but of some other\n    distinguishing properties. In or near the centre of some stands a\n    stone taller than the rest, as at Boscawen-\u00fbn; in the middle of\n    others, a kist-vaen. A croml\u00eah distinguishes the centre of some\n    circles, and one remarkable rock that of others; some have only\n    one line of stones in their circumference, and some have two; some\n    circles are adjacent, some contiguous, and some include, and some\n    intersect each other. Sometimes urns are found in or near them.\n    Some are curiously erected on geometrical plans, the chief\n    entrance facing the cardinal points of the heavens; some have\n    avenues leading to them, placed exactly north and south, with\n    detached stones, sometimes in straight lines to the east and west,\n    sometimes triangular. These monuments are found in many foreign\n    countries, in Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and Germany, as well as in\n    all the isles dependent upon Britain (the Orkneys, Western Isles,\n    Jersey, Ireland, and the Isle of Man), and in most parts of\n    Britain itself.\u201d\n\n\nModern traditions have everywhere clustered round these curious stone\ncircles. Being placed in a circular order, so as to make an area for\ndancing, they were naturally called _Dawns-m\u00ean_, _i.e._ dancing stones.\nThis name was soon corrupted into dancemen, and a legend sprang up at once\nto account for the name, namely, that these men had danced on a Sunday and\nbeen changed into stones. Another corruption of the same name into\n_Danis-m\u00ean_ led to the tradition that these circles were built by the\nDanes. A still more curious name for these circles is that of \u201c_Nine\nMaidens_,\u201d which occurs at Boscawen-\u00fbn, and in several other places in\nCornwall. Now the Boscawen-\u00fbn circle consists of nineteen stones, and\nthere are very few \u201cNine Maidens\u201d that consist of nine stones only. Yet\nthe name prevails, and is likewise supported by local legends of nine\nmaidens having been changed into stones for dancing on a Sunday, or some\nother misdeed. One part of the legend may perhaps be explained by the fact\nthat _m\u00eadn_ would be a common corruption in modern Cornish for _m\u00ean_,\nstone, as _pen_ becomes _pedn_, and _gwyn_, _gwydn_, etc., and that the\nSaxons mistook Cornish _m\u00eadn_ for their own _maiden_. But even without\nthis, legends of a similar character would spring up wherever the popular\nmind is startled by strange monuments, the history and purpose of which\nhas been forgotten. Thus Captain Meadows Taylor tells us that at\nVibat-Hullie the people told him \u201cthat the stones were men who, as they\nstood marking out the places for the elephants of the king of the dwarfs,\nwere turned into stone by him, because they would not keep quiet.\u201d And M.\nde Cambry, as quoted by him, says in regard to Carnac, \u201cthat the rocks\nwere believed to be an army turned into stone, or the work of the\nCroins,\u2014men or demons, two or three feet high, who carried these rocks in\ntheir hands, and placed them there.\u201d\n\nA second class of Cornish antiquities comprises private buildings, whether\ncastles or huts or caves. What are called castles in Cornwall are simple\nintrenchments, consisting of large and small stones piled up about ten or\ntwelve feet high, and held together by their own weight, without any\ncement. There are everywhere traces of a ditch, then of a wall; sometimes,\nas at Ch\u00fbn Castle, of another ditch and another wall; and there is\ngenerally some contrivance for protecting the principal entrance by walls\noverlapping the ditches. Near these castles barrows are found, and in\nseveral cases there are clear traces of a communication between them and\nsome ancient Celtic villages and caves, which seem to have been placed\nunder the protection of these primitive strongholds. Many of the cliffs in\nCornwall are fortified towards the land by walls and ditches, thus cutting\noff these extreme promontories from communication with the land, as they\nare by nature inaccessible from the sea. Some antiquarians ascribed these\ncastles to the Danes, the very last people, one would think, to shut\nthemselves up in such hopeless retreats. Here, too, as in other cases, a\npopular etymology may have taken the place of an historical authority, and\nthe Cornish word for castle being _Dinas_ as in _Castle-an-Dinas_,\n_Pendennis_, etc., the later Saxon-speaking population may have been\nreminded by _Dinas_ of the Danes, and on the strength of this vague\nsimilarity have ascribed to these pirates the erection of the Cornish\ncastles.\n\nIt is indeed difficult, with regard to these castles, to be positive as to\nthe people by whom they were constructed. Tradition and history point to\nRomans and Saxons, as well as to Celts; nor is it at all unlikely that\nmany of these half-natural, half-artificial strongholds, though originally\nplanned by the Celtic inhabitants, were afterwards taken possession of and\nstrengthened by Romans or Saxons.\n\nBut no such doubts are allowed with regard to Cornish huts, of which some\nstriking remains have been preserved in Cornwall and other parts of\nEngland, particularly in those which, to the very last, remained the true\nhome of the Celtic inhabitants of Britain. The houses and huts of the\nRomans were rectangular, nor is there any evidence to show that the Saxon\never approved of the circular style in domestic architecture.\n\nIf, then, we find these so-called bee-hive huts in places peculiarly\nCeltic, and if we remember that so early a writer as Strabo(57) was struck\nwith the same strange style of Celtic architecture, we can hardly be\nsuspected of Celtomania, if we claim them as Celtic workmanship, and dwell\nwith a more than ordinary interest on these ancient chambers, now long\ndeserted and nearly smothered with ferns and weeds, but in their general\nplanning, as well as in their masonry, clearly exhibiting before us\nsomething of the arts and the life of the earliest inhabitants of these\nisles. Let anybody who has a sense of antiquity, and who can feel the\nspark which is sent on to us through an unbroken chain of history, when we\nstand on the Acropolis or on the Capitol, or when we read a ballad of\nHomer or a hymn of the Veda,\u2014nay, if we but read in a proper spirit a\nchapter of the Old Testament too,\u2014let such a man look at the Celtic huts\nat Bosprennis or Chysauster, and discover for himself, through the ferns\nand brambles, the old gray walls, slightly sloping inward, and arranged\naccording to a design that cannot be mistaken; and miserable as these\nshapeless clumps may appear to the thoughtless traveller, they will convey\nto the true historian a lesson which he could hardly learn anywhere else.\nThe ancient Britons will no longer be a mere name to him, no mere\nPelasgians or Tyrrhenians. He has seen their homes and their handiwork; he\nhas stood behind the walls which protected their lives and property; he\nhas touched the stones which their hands piled up rudely, yet\nthoughtfully. And if that small spark of sympathy for those who gave the\nhonored name of Britain to these islands has once been kindled among a few\nwho have the power of influencing public opinion in England, we feel\ncertain that something will be done to preserve what can still be\npreserved of Celtic remains from further destruction. It does honor to the\nBritish Parliament that large sums are granted, when it is necessary, to\nbring to these safe shores whatever can still be rescued from the ruins of\nGreece and Italy, of Lycia, Pergamos, Palestine, Egypt, Babylon, or\nNineveh. But while explorers and excavators are sent to those distant\ncountries, and the statues of Greece, the coffins of Egypt, and the winged\nmonsters of Nineveh, are brought home in triumph to the portals of the\nBritish Museum, it is painful to see the splendid granite slabs of British\ncromlechs thrown down and carted away, stone circles destroyed to make way\nfor farming improvements, and ancient huts and caves broken up to build\nnew houses and stables, with the stones thus ready to hand. It is high\ntime, indeed, that something should be done; and nothing will avail but to\nplace every truly historical monument under national protection.\nIndividual efforts may answer here and there, and a right spirit may be\nawakened from time to time by local societies; but during intervals of\napathy mischief is done that can never be mended; and unless the damaging\nof national monuments, even though they should stand on private ground, is\nmade a misdemeanor, we doubt whether, two hundred years hence, any\nenterprising explorer would be as fortunate as Mr. Layard and Sir H.\nRawlinson have been in Babylon and Nineveh, and whether one single\ncromlech would be left for him to carry away to the National Museum of the\nMaoris. It is curious that the willful damage done to Logan Stones, once\nin the time of Cromwell by Shrubsall, and more recently by Lieutenant\nGoldsmith, should have raised such indignation, while acts of Vandalism,\ncommitted against real antiquities, are allowed to pass unnoticed. Mr.\nScawen, in speaking of the mischief done by strangers in Cornwall, says:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cHere, too, we may add, what wrong another sort of strangers has\n    done to us, especially in the civil wars, and in particular by\n    destroying of Mincamber, a famous monument, being a rock of\n    infinite weight, which, as a burden, was laid upon other great\n    stones, and yet so equally thereon poised up by Nature only, as a\n    little child could instantly move it, but no one man or many\n    remove it. This natural monument all travellers that came that way\n    desired to behold; but in the time of Oliver\u2019s usurpation, when\n    all monumental things became despicable, one Shrubsall, one of\n    Oliver\u2019s heroes, then Governor of Pendennis, by labor and much\n    ado, caused to be undermined and thrown down, to the great grief\n    of the country; but to his own great glory, as he thought, doing\n    it, as he said, with a small cane in his hand. I myself have heard\n    him to boast of this act, being a prisoner then under him.\u201d\n\n\nMr. Scawen, however, does not tell us that this Shrubsall, in throwing\ndown the Mincamber, _i.e._ the M\u00eanamber, acted very like the old\nmissionaries in felling the sacred oaks in Germany. Merlin, it was\nbelieved, had proclaimed that this stone should stand until England had no\nking; and as Cornwall was a stronghold of the Stuarts, the destruction of\nthis loyal stone may have seemed a matter of wise policy.\n\nEven the foolish exploit of Lieutenant Goldsmith, in 1824, would seem to\nhave had some kind of excuse. Dr. Borlase had asserted \u201cthat it was\n_morally_ impossible that any lever, or indeed force, however applied in a\nmechanical way, could remove the famous Logan rock at Trereen Dinas from\nits present position.\u201d Ptolemy, the son of Heph\u00e6stion, had made a similar\nremark about the Gigoman rock,(58) stating that it might be stirred with\nthe stalk of an asphodel, but could not be removed by any force.\nLieutenant Goldsmith, living in an age of experimental philosophy,\nundertook the experiment, in order to show that it was _physically_\npossible to overthrow the Logan; and he did it. He was, however, very\nproperly punished for this unscientific experiment, and he had to replace\nthe stone at his own expense.\n\nAs this matter is really serious, we have drawn up a short list of acts of\nVandalism committed in Cornwall within the memory of living man. That list\ncould easily be increased, but even as it is, we hope it may rouse the\nattention of the public:\u2014\n\nBetween St. Ives and Zennor, on the lower road over Tregarthen Downs,\nstood a Logan rock. An old man, perhaps ninety years of age, told Mr.\nHunt, who mentions this and other cases in the preface to his charming\ncollection of Cornish tales and legends, that he had often logged it, and\nthat it would make a noise which could _be heard for miles_.\n\nAt Balnoon, between Nancledrea and Knill\u2019s Steeple, some miners came upon\n\u201ctwo slabs of granite cemented together,\u201d which covered a walled grave\nthree feet square, an ancient kist-vaen. In it they found an earthenware\nvessel, containing some black earth and a leaden spoon. The spoon was\ngiven to Mr. Praed, of Trevethow; the kist-vaen was utterly destroyed.\n\nIn Bosprennis Cross there was a very large coit or cromlech. It is said to\nhave been fifteen feet square, and not more than one foot thick in any\npart. This was broken in two parts some years since, and taken to Penzance\nto form the beds of two ovens.\n\nThe curious caves and passages at Chysauster have been destroyed for\nbuilding purposes within living memory.\n\nAnother Cornishman, Mr. Bellows, reports as follows:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cIn a field between the recently discovered Beehive hut and the\n    Boscawen-\u00fbn circle, out of the public road, we discovered part of\n    a \u2018Nine Maidens,\u2019 perhaps the third of the circle, the rest of the\n    stones being dragged out and placed against the hedge, to make\n    room for the plough.\u201d\n\n\nThe same intelligent antiquarian remarks:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe Boscawen-\u00fbn circle seems to have consisted originally of\n    twenty stones. Seventeen of them are upright, two are down, and a\n    gap exists of exactly the double space for the twentieth. We found\n    the missing stone not twenty yards off. A farmer had removed it,\n    and made it into a gate-post. He had cut a road through the\n    circle, and in such a manner that he was obliged to remove the\n    offending stone to keep it straight. Fortunately the present\n    proprietress is a lady of taste, and has surrounded the circle\n    with a good hedge to prevent further Vandalism.\u201d\n\n\nOf the M\u00ean-an-tol, at Boleit, we have received the following description\nfrom Mr. Botterell, who supplied Mr. Hunt with so many of his Cornish\ntales:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThese stones are from twenty to twenty-five feet above the\n    surface, and we were told by some folks of Boleit that more than\n    ten feet had been sunk near, without finding the base. The\n    M\u00ean-an-tol have both been displaced, and removed a considerable\n    distance from their original site. They are now placed in a hedge,\n    to form the side of a gateway. The upper portion of one is so much\n    broken that one cannot determine the angle, yet that it worked to\n    an angle is quite apparent. The other is turned downward, and\n    serves as the hanging-post of a gate. From the head being buried\n    so deep in the ground, only part of the hole (which is in both\n    stones about six inches diameter) could be seen; though the hole\n    is too small to pop the smallest, or all but the smallest, baby\n    through, the people call them _crick-stones_, and maintain they\n    were so called before they were born. Crick-stones were used for\n    dragging people through, to cure them of various diseases.\u201d\n\n\nThe same gentleman, writing to one of the Cornish papers, informs the\npublic that a few years ago a rock known by the name of Garrack-zans might\nbe seen in the town-place of Sawah, in the parish of St. Levan; another in\nRoskestal, in the same parish. One is also said to have been removed from\nnear the centre of Trereen, by the family of Jans, to make a grander\napproach to their mansion. The ruins, which still remain, are known by the\nname of the Jans House, although the family became extinct soon after\nperpetrating what was regarded by the old inhabitants as a sacrilegious\nact. The Garrack-zans may still be remaining in Roskestal and Sawah, but,\nas much alteration has recently taken place in these villages, in\nconsequence of building new farm-houses, making new roads, etc., it is a\ngreat chance if they have not been either removed or destroyed.\n\nMr. J. T. Blight, the author of one of the most useful little guide-books\nof Cornwall, \u201cA Week at the Land\u2019s End,\u201d states that some eight or ten\nyears ago the ruins of the ancient Chapel of St. Eloy, in St. Burian, were\nthrown over the cliff by the tenant of the estate, without the knowledge\nor permission of the owner of the property. Ch\u00fbn Castle, he says, one of\nthe finest examples of early military architecture in this kingdom, has\nfor many years been resorted to as a sort of quarry. The same applies to\nCastle-an-Dinas.\n\nFrom an interesting paper on Castallack Round by the same antiquarian, we\nquote the following passages, showing the constant mischief that is going\non, whether due to downright Vandalism or to ignorance and indifference:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cFrom a description of Castallack Round, in the parish of St.\n    Paul, written by Mr. Crozier, perhaps fourteen or fifteen years\n    ago, it appears that there was a massive outer wall, with an\n    entrance on the south; from which a colonnade of stones led to an\n    inner inclosure, also formed with stones, and nine feet in\n    diameter. Mr. Haliwell, so recently as 1861, refers to the avenue\n    of upright stones leading from the outer to the inner inclosure.\n\n\n    \u201cOn visiting the spot a few days ago (in 1865), I was surprised to\n    find that not only were there no remains of an avenue of stones,\n    but that the existence of an inner inclosure could scarcely be\n    traced. It was, in fact, evident that some modern Vandal had here\n    been at work. A laborer, employed in the field close by, with a\n    complaisant smile, informed me that the old Round had been dug\n    into last year, for the sake of the stones. I found, however,\n    enough of the work left to be worthy of a few notes, sufficient to\n    show that it was a kindred structure to that at Kerris, known as\n    the Roundago, and described and figured in Borlase\u2019s \u2018Antiquities\n    of Cornwall.\u2019 ... Mr. Crozier also refers to a stone, five feet\n    high, which stood within a hundred yards of the Castallack Round,\n    and from which the Pipers at Boleit could be seen.\n\n\n    \u201cThe attention of the Royal Institution of Cornwall has been\n    repeatedly called to the destruction of Cornish antiquities, and\n    the interference of landed proprietors has been frequently invoked\n    in aid of their preservation; but it unfortunately happens, in\n    most cases, that important remains are demolished by the tenants\n    without the knowledge or consent of the landlords. On comparing\n    the present condition of the Castallack Round with a description\n    of its appearance so recently as in 1861, I find that the greater\n    and more interesting part has been barbarously and irreparably\n    destroyed; and I regret to say, I could draw up a long list of\n    ancient remains in Cornwall, partially or totally demolished\n    within the last few years.\u201d\n\n\nWe can hardly hope that the wholesome superstition which prevented people\nin former days from desecrating their ancient monuments will be any\nprotection to them much longer, though the following story shows that some\ngrains of the old leaven are still left in the Cornish mind. Near Carleen,\nin Breage, an old cross has been removed from its place, and now does duty\nas a gate-post. The farmer occupying the farm where the cross stood, set\nhis laborer to sink a pit in the required spot for the gate-post, but when\nit was intimated that the cross standing at a little distance off was to\nbe erected therein, the man absolutely refused to have any hand in the\nmatter, not on account of the beautiful or the antique, but for fear of\nthe old people. Another farmer related that he had a neighbor who \u201chaeled\ndown a lot of stoans called the Roundago, and sold \u2019em for building the\ndocks at Penzance. But not a penny of the money he got for \u2019em ever\nprospered, and there wasn\u2019t wan of the hosses that haeld \u2019em that lived\nout the twelvemonth; and they do say that some of the stoans do weep\nblood, but I don\u2019t believe that.\u201d\n\nThere are many antiquarians who affect to despise the rude architecture of\nthe Celts, nay, who would think the name of architecture disgraced if\napplied to cromlechs and bee-hive huts. But even these will perhaps be\nmore willing to lend a helping hand in protecting the antiquities of\nCornwall when they hear that even ancient Norman masonry is no longer safe\nin that country. An antiquarian writes to us from Cornwall: \u201cI heard of\nsome farmers in Meneage (the Lizard district) who dragged down an ancient\nwell and rebuilt it. When called to task for it, they said, \u2018The ould\nthing was so shaky that a wasn\u2019t fit to be seen, so we thought we\u2019d putten\nto rights and build\u2019un up _fitty_.\u2019 \u201d\n\nSuch things, we feel sure, should not be, and would not be, allowed any\nlonger, if public opinion, or the public conscience, was once roused. Let\npeople laugh at Celtic monuments as much as they like, if they will only\nhelp to preserve their laughing-stocks from destruction. Let antiquarians\nbe as skeptical as they like, if they will only prevent the dishonest\nwithdrawal of the evidence against which their skepticism is directed. Are\nlake-dwellings in Switzerland, are flint-deposits in France, is\nkitchen-rubbish in Denmark, so very precious, and are the magnificent\ncromlechs, the curious holed stones, and even the rock-basins of Cornwall,\nso contemptible? There is a fashion even in scientific tastes. For thirty\nyears M. Boucher de Perthes could hardly get a hearing for his\nflint-heads, and now he has become the centre of interest for geologists,\nanthropologists, and physiologists. There is every reason to expect that\nthe interest, once awakened in the early history of our own race, will go\non increasing; and two hundred years hence the antiquarians and\nanthropologists of the future will call us hard names if they find out how\nwe allowed these relics of the earliest civilization of England to be\ndestroyed. It is easy to say, What is there in a holed stone? It is a\nstone with a hole in it, and that is all. We do not wish to propound new\ntheories; but in order to show how full of interest even a stone with a\nhole in it may become, we will just mention that the _M\u00ean-an-tol_, or the\nholed stone which stands in one of the fields near Lanyon, is flanked by\ntwo other stones standing erect on each side. Let any one go there to\nwatch a sunset about the time of the autumnal equinox, and he will see\nthat the shadow thrown by the erect stone would fall straight through the\nhole of the _M\u00ean-an-tol_. We know that the great festivals of the ancient\nworld were regulated by the sun, and that some of these festive\nseasons\u2014the winter solstice about Yule-tide or Christmas, the vernal\nequinox about Easter, the summer solstice on Midsummer-eve, about St. John\nBaptist\u2019s day, and the autumnal equinox about Michaelmas\u2014are still kept,\nunder changed names and with new objects, in our own time. This\n_M\u00ean-an-tol_ may be an old dial erected originally to fix the proper time\nfor the celebration of the autumnal equinox; and though it may have been\napplied to other purposes likewise, such as the curing of children by\ndragging them several times through the hole, still its original intention\nmay have been astronomical. It is easy to test this observation, and to\nfind out whether the same remark does not hold good of other stones in\nCornwall, as, for instance, the Two Pipers. We do not wish to attribute to\nthis guess as to the original intention of the _M\u00ean-an-tol_ more\nimportance than it deserves, nor would we in any way countenance the\nopinion of those who, beginning with C\u00e6sar, ascribe to the Celts and their\nDruids every kind of mysterious wisdom. A mere shepherd, though he had\nnever heard the name of the equinox, might have erected such a stone for\nhis own convenience, in order to know the time when he might safely bring\nhis flocks out, or take them back to their safer stables. But this would\nin no way diminish the interest of the _M\u00ean-an-tol_. It would still remain\none of the few relics of the childhood of our race; one of the witnesses\nof the earliest workings of the human mind in its struggle against, and in\nits alliance with, the powers of nature; one of the vestiges of the first\ncivilization of the British Isles. Even the Romans, who carried their\nRoman roads in a straight line through the countries they had conquered,\nundeterred by any obstacles, unawed by any sanctuaries, respected, as can\nhardly be doubted, Silbury Hill, and made the road from Bath to London\ndiverge from the usual straight line, instead of cutting through that\ntime-honored mound. Would the engineers of our railways show a similar\nregard for any national monument, whether Celtic, Roman, or Saxon? When\nCharles II., in 1663, went to see the Celtic remains of Abury, sixty-three\nstones were still standing within the intrenched inclosure. Not quite a\nhundred years later they had dwindled down to forty-four, the rest having\nbeen used for building purposes. Dr. Stukeley, who published a description\nof Abury in 1743, tells us that he himself saw the upper stone of the\ngreat cromlech there broken and carried away, the fragments of it making\nno less than twenty cart-loads. After another century had passed,\nseventeen stones only remained within the great inclosure, and these, too,\nare being gradually broken up and carted away. Surely such things ought\nnot to be. Let those whom it concerns look to it before it is too late.\nThese Celtic monuments are public property as much as London Stone,\nCoronation Stone, or Westminster Abbey, and posterity will hold the\npresent generation responsible for the safe keeping of the national\nheirlooms of England.(59)\n\n\n\n\n\nXIV. ARE THERE JEWS IN CORNWALL?\n\n\nThere is hardly a book on Cornish history or antiquities in which we are\nnot seriously informed that at some time or other the Jews migrated to\nCornwall, or worked as slaves in Cornish mines. Some writers state this\nsimply as a fact requiring no further confirmation; others support it by\nthat kind of evidence which Herodotus, no doubt, would have considered\nsufficient for establishing the former presence of Pelasgians in different\nparts of Greece, but which would hardly have satisfied Niebuhr, still less\nSir G. C. Lewis. Old smelting-houses, they tell us, are still called\n_Jews\u2019 houses_ in Cornwall; and if, even after that, anybody could be so\nskeptical as to doubt that the Jews, after the destruction of Jerusalem,\nwere sent in large numbers to work as slaves in the Cornish mines, he is\nsilenced at once by an appeal to the name of _Marazion_, the well-known\ntown opposite St. Michael\u2019s Mount, which means the \u201cbitterness of Zion,\u201d\nand is also called _Market Jew_. Many a traveller has no doubt shaken his\nunbelieving head, and asked himself how it is that no real historian\nshould ever have mentioned the migration of the Jews to the Far West,\nwhether it took place under Nero or under one of the later Flavian\nEmperors. Yet all the Cornish guides are positive on the subject, and the\n_prim\u00e2 facie_ evidence is certainly so startling that we can hardly wonder\nif certain anthropologists discovered even the sharply marked features of\nthe Jewish race among the sturdy fishermen of Mount\u2019s Bay.\n\nBefore we examine the facts on which this Jewish theory is founded,\u2014facts,\nas will be seen, chiefly derived from names of places, and other relics of\nlanguage,\u2014it will be well to inquire a little into the character of the\nCornish language, so that we may know what kind of evidence we have any\nright to expect from such a witness.\n\nThe ancient language of Cornwall, as is well known, was a Celtic dialect,\nclosely allied to the languages of Brittany and Wales, and less nearly,\nthough by no means distantly, related to the languages of Ireland,\nScotland, and the Isle of Man. Cornish began to die out in Cornwall about\nthe time of the Reformation, being slowly but surely supplanted by\nEnglish, till it was buried with Dolly Pentreath and similar worthies\nabout the end of the last century.(60) Now there is in most languages, but\nmore particularly in those which are losing their consciousness or their\nvitality, what, by a name borrowed from geology, may be called a\n_metamorphic process_. It consists chiefly in this, that words, as they\ncease to be properly understood, are slightly changed, generally with the\nobject of imparting to them once more an intelligible meaning. This new\nmeaning is mostly a mistaken one, yet it is not only readily accepted, but\nthe word in its new dress and with its new character is frequently made to\nsupport facts or fictions which could be supported by no other evidence.\nWho does not believe that sweetheart has something to do with _heart_? Yet\nit was originally formed like _drunk-ard_, _dull-ard_, and _nigg-ard_; and\npoets, not grammarians, are responsible for the mischief it may have done\nunder its plausible disguise. By the same process, _shamefast_, formed\nlike _steadfast_ and still properly spelt by Chaucer and in the early\neditions of the Authorized Version of the Bible, has long become\n_shamefaced_, bringing before us the blushing roses of a lovely face. The\n_Vikings_, mere pirates from the _viks_ or creeks of Scandinavia, have, by\nthe same process, been raised to the dignity of kings; just as _coat\ncards_\u2014the king, and queen, and knave in their gorgeous gowns\u2014were exalted\ninto _court cards_.\n\nAlthough this kind of metamorphosis takes place in every language, yet it\nis most frequent in countries where two languages come in contact with\neach other, and where, in the end, one is superseded by the other.\n_Robertus Curtus_, the eldest son of the Conqueror, was by the Saxons\ncalled _Curt-hose_. The name of _Oxford_ contains in its first syllable an\nold Celtic word, the well-known term for water or river, which occurs as\n_ux_ in _Uxbridge_, as _ex_ in _Exmouth_, as _ax_ in _Axmouth_, and in\nmany more disguises down to the _whisk_ of _whiskey_, the Scotch\n_Usquebaugh_.(61) In the name of the _Isis_, and of the suburb of _Osney_,\nthe same Celtic word has been preserved. The Saxons kept the Celtic name\nof the river, and they called the place where one of the Roman roads\ncrossed the river Ox, _Oxford_. The name, however, was soon mistaken, and\ninterpreted as purely Saxon; and if any one should doubt that Oxford was a\nkind of _Bosphorus_, and meant a ford for oxen, the ancient arms of the\ncity were readily appealed to in order to cut short all doubts on the\nsubject. The Welsh name _Ryt-yhcen_ for Oxford was a retranslation into\nWelsh of an original Celtic name, to which a new form and a new meaning\nhad been given by the Saxon conquerors.\n\nSimilar accidents happened to Greek words after they were adopted by the\npeople of Italy, particularly by the Romans. The Latin _orichalcum_, for\ninstance, is simply the Greek word \u1f40\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2, from \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, mountain, and\n\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03cc\u03c2, copper. Why it was called mountain-copper, no one seems to know.\nIt was originally a kind of fabulous metal, brought to light from the\nbrains of the poet rather than from the bowels of the earth. Though the\npoets, and even Plato, speak of it as, after gold, the most precious of\nmetals, Aristotle sternly denies that there ever was any real metal\ncorresponding to the extravagant descriptions of the \u1f40\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03bf\u03c2.\nAfterwards the same word was used in a more sober and technical sense,\nthough it is not always easy to say when it means copper, or bronze\n(_i.e._ copper and tin), or brass (_i.e._ copper and zinc). The Latin\npoets not only adopted the Greek word in the fabulous sense in which they\nfound it used in Homer, but forgetting that the first portion of the name\nwas derived from the Greek \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2, hill, they pronounced and even spelt it\nas if derived from the Latin _aurum_, gold, and thus found a new\nconfirmation of its equality with gold, which would have greatly surprised\nthe original framers of that curious compound.(62)\n\nIn a county like Cornwall, where the ancient Celtic dialect continued to\nbe spoken, though disturbed and overlaid from time to time by Latin,\nSaxon, and Norman, where Celts had to adopt certain Saxon and Norman, and\nSaxons and Normans certain Celtic words, we have a right to expect an\nample field for observing this metamorphic process, and for tracing its\ninfluence in the transformation of names, and in the formation of legends,\ntraditions, nay even, as we shall see, in the production of generally\naccepted historical facts. To call this process _metamorphic_, using that\nname in the sense given to it by geologists, may at first sight seem\npedantic and far-fetched. But if we see how a new language forms what may\nbe called a new stratum covering the old language; how the life or heat of\nthe old language, though apparently extinct, breaks forth again through\nthe superincumbent crust, destroys its regular features and assimilates\nits stratified layers with its own igneous or volcanic nature, our\ncomparison, though somewhat elaborate, will be justified to a great\nextent, and we shall only have to ask our geological readers to make\nallowance for this, that, in languages, the foreign element has always to\nbe considered as the superincumbent stratum, Cornish forming the crust to\nEnglish or English to Cornish, according as the speaker uses the one or\nthe other as his native or as his acquired speech.\n\nOur first witness in support of this metamorphic process is Mr. Scawen,\nwho lived about two hundred years ago, a true Cornishman, though he wrote\nin English, or in what he is pleased so to call. In blaming the Cornish\ngentry and nobility for having attempted to give to their ancient and\nhonorable names a kind of Norman varnish, and for having adopted\nnew-fangled coats of arms, Mr. Scawen remarks on the several mistakes,\nintentional or unintentional, that occurred in this foolish process. \u201cThe\ngrounds of two several mistakes,\u201d he writes, \u201care very obvious: 1st, upon\nthe _Tre_ or _Ter_; 2d, upon the _Ross_ or _Rose_. _Tre_ or _Ter_ in\nCornish commonly signifies a town, or rather place, and it has always an\nadjunct with it. _Tri_ is the number 3. Those men willingly mistake one\nfor another. And so, in French heraldry terms, they used to fancy and\ncontrive those with any such three things as may be like, or cohere with,\nor may be adapted to anything or things in their surnames, whether very\nhandsome or not is not much stood upon. Another usual mistake is upon\n_Ross_, which, as they seem to fancy, should be a Rose, but _Ross_ in\nCornish is a vale or valley. Now for this their French-Latin tutors, when\nthey go into the field of Mars, put them in their coat armor prettily to\nsmell out a Rose or flower (a fading honor instead of a durable one); so\nany three such things, agreeable perhaps a little to their names, are\ntaken up and retained from abroad, when their own at home have a much\nbetter scent and more lasting.\u201d\n\nSome amusing instances of what may be called Saxon puns on Cornish words\nhave been communicated to me by a Cornish friend of mine, Mr. Bellows.\n\u201cThe old Cornish name for Falmouth,\u201d he writes, \u201cwas _Penny come\nquick_,(63) and they tell a most improbable story to account for it. I\nbelieve the whole compound is the Cornish _Pen y cwm gwic_, \u2018Head of the\ncreek valley.\u2019 In like manner they have turned _Bryn uhella_ (highest\nhill) into _Brown Willy_, and _Cwm ty goed_ (woodhouse valley) into _Come\nto good_.\u201d To this might be added the common etymologies of _Helstone_ and\n_Camelford_. The former name has nothing to do with the Saxon _helstone_,\na covering stone, or with the infernal regions, but meant \u201cplace on the\nriver;\u201d the latter, in spite of the camel in the arms of the town, meant\nthe ford of the river Camel. A frequent mistake arises from the\nmisapprehension of the Celtic _dun_, hill, which enters in the composition\nof many local names, and was changed by the Saxons into _town_ or _tun_.\nThus _Meli-dunum_ is now _Moulton_, _Seccan-dun_ is _Seckington_, and\n_Beamdun_ is _Bampton_.(64)\n\nThis transformation of Celtic into Saxon or Norman terms is not confined,\nhowever, to the names of families, towns, and villages; and we shall see\nhow the fables to which it has given rise have not only disfigured the\nrecords of some of the most ancient families in Cornwall, but have thrown\na haze over the annals of the whole county.\n\nReturning to the Jews in their Cornish exile, we find, no doubt, as\nmentioned before, that even in the Ordnance maps the little town opposite\nSt. Michael\u2019s Mount is called _Marazion_ and _Market Jew_. _Marazion_\nsounds decidedly like Hebrew, and might signify _M\u00e2r\u00e2h_, \u201cbitterness,\ngrief,\u201d _Zion_, \u201cof Zion.\u201d M. Esquiros, a believer in Cornish Jews, thinks\nthat _Mara_ might be a corruption of the Latin _Amara_, bitter; but he\nforgets that this etymology would really defeat its very object, and\ndestroy the Hebrew origin of the name. The next question therefore is,\nWhat is the real origin of the name _Marazion_, and of its _alias_,\n_Market Jew_? It cannot be too often repeated that inquiries into the\norigin of local names are, in the first place, historical, and only in the\nsecond place, philological. To attempt an explanation of any name, without\nhaving first traced it back to the earliest form in which we can find it,\nis to set at defiance the plainest rules of the science of language as\nwell as of the science of history. Even if the interpretation of a local\nname should be right, it would be of no scientific value without the\npreliminary inquiry into its history, which frequently consists in a\nsuccession of the most startling changes and corruptions. Those who are at\nall familiar with the history of Cornish names of places will not be\nsurprised to find the same name written in four or five, nay, in ten\ndifferent ways. The fact is that those who pronounced the names were\nfrequently ignorant of their real import, and those who had to write them\ndown could hardly catch their correct pronunciation. Thus we find that\nCamden calls Marazion _Merkiu_; Carew, _Marcaiew_. Leland in his\n\u201cItinerary\u201d (about 1538) uses the names _Markesin_, _Markine_ (vol. iii.\nfol. 4); and in another place (vol. vii. fol. 119) he applies, it would\nseem, to the same town the name of _Marasdeythyon_. William of Worcester\n(about 1478) writes promiscuously _Markysyoo_ (p. 103), _Marchew_ and\n_Margew_ (p. 133), _Marchasyowe_ and _Markysyow_ (p. 98). In a charter of\nQueen Elizabeth, dated 1595, the name is written _Marghasiewe_; in another\nof the year 1313, _Markesion_; in another of 1309, _Markasyon_; in another\nof Richard, Earl of Cornwall (_Rex Romanorum_, 1257), _Marchadyon_, which\nseems the oldest, and at the same time the most primitive form.(65)\nBesides these, Dr. Oliver has found in different title-deeds the following\nvarieties of the same name:\u2014_Marghasion_, _Markesiow_, _Marghasiew_,\n_Maryazion_, and _Marazion_. The only explanation of the name which we\nmeet with in early writers, such as Leland, Camden, and Carew, is that it\nmeant \u201cThursday Market.\u201d Leland explains _Marasdeythyon_ by _forum Jovis_.\nCamden explains _Merkiu_ in the same manner, and Carew takes _Marcaiew_ as\noriginally _Marhas diew_, _i.e._ \u201cThursdaies market, for then it useth\nthis traffike.\u201d\n\nThis interpretation of _Marhasdiew_ as Thursday Market, appears at first\nvery plausible, and it has at all events far better claims on our\nacceptance than the modern Hebrew etymology of \u201cBitterness of Zion.\u201d But,\nstrange to say, although from a charter of Robert, Earl of Cornwall, it\nappears that the monks of the Mount had the privilege of holding a market\non Thursday (_die quint\u00e6 feri\u00e6_), there is no evidence, and no\nprobability, that a town so close to the Mount as Marazion ever held a\nmarket on the same day.(66) Thursday in Cornish was called _deyow_, not\n_diew_. The only additional evidence we get is this, that in the taxation\nof Bishop Walter Bronescombe, made August 12, 1261, and quoted in Bishop\nStapledon\u2019s register of 1313, the place is called _Markesion de parvo\nmercato_,(67) and that in a charter of Richard, King of the Romans and\nEarl of Cornwall, permission was granted to the prior of St. Michael\u2019s\nMount that three markets, which formerly had been held in _Marghasbigan_,\non ground not belonging to him, should in future be held on his own ground\nin _Marchadyon_. _Parvus mercatus_ is evidently the same place as\n_Marghasbigan_, for _Marghas-bigan_ means in Cornish the same as _Mercatus\nparvus_, namely, \u201cLittle Market.\u201d The charter of Richard, Earl of\nCornwall, is more perplexing, and it would seem to yield no sense, unless\nwe again take _Marchadyon_ as a mere variety of _Marghasbigan_, and\nsuppose that the privilege granted to the prior of St. Michael\u2019s Mount\nconsisted really in transferring the fair from land in Marazion not\nbelonging to him, to land in Marazion belonging to him. Anyhow, it is\nclear that in _Marazion_ we have some kind of name for market.\n\nThe old Cornish word for market is _marchas_, a corruption of the Latin\n_mercatus_. Originally the Cornish word must have been _marchad_, and this\nform is preserved in Armorican, while in Cornish the _ch_ gradually sunk\nto _h_, and the final _d_ to _s_. This change of _d_ into _s_ is of\nfrequent occurrence in modern as compared with ancient Cornish, and the\nhistory of our word will enable us, to a certain extent, to fix the time\nwhen that change took place. In the charter of Richard, Earl of Cornwall\n(about 1257), we find _Marchadyon_; in a charter of 1309, _Markasyon_. The\nchange of _d_ into _s_ had taken place during these fifty years.(68) But\nwhat is the termination _yon?_ Considering that Marazion is called the\nLittle Market, I should like to see in _yon_ the diminutive Cornish\nsuffix, corresponding to the Welsh _yn_. But if this should be objected\nto, on the ground that no such diminutives occur in the literary monuments\nof the Cornish language, another explanation is open, which was first\nsuggested to me by Mr. Bellows: _Marchadion_ may be taken as a perfectly\nregular plural in Cornish, and we should then have to suppose that,\ninstead of being called the Market or the Little Market, the place was\ncalled, from its three statute markets, \u201cThe Markets.\u201d And this would help\nus to explain, not only the gradual growth of the name Marazion, but\nlikewise, I think, the gradual formation of \u201cMarket Jew;\u201d for another\ntermination of the plural in Cornish is _ieu_, which, added to _Marchad_,\nwould give us _Marchadieu_.(69)\n\nNow it is perfectly true that no real Cornishman, I mean no man who spoke\nCornish, would ever have taken _Marchadiew_ for Market Jew, or Jews\u2019\nMarket. The name for Jew in Cornish is quite different. It is _Edhow_,\n_Yedhow_, _Yudhow_, corrupted likewise into _Ezow_; plural, _Yedhewon_,\netc. But to a Saxon ear the Cornish name _Marchadiew_ might well convey\nthe idea of _Market Jew_, and thus, by a metamorphic process, a name\nmeaning in Cornish the Markets would give rise in a perfectly natural\nmanner, not only to the two names, Marazion and Market Jew, but likewise\nto the historical legends of Jews settled in the county of Cornwall.(70)\n\nBut there still remain the _Jews\u2019 houses_, the name given, it is said, to\nthe old, deserted smelting-houses in Cornwall, and in Cornwall only.\nThough, in the absence of any historical evidence as to the employment of\nthis term _Jew\u2019s house_ in former ages, it will be more difficult to\narrive at its original form and meaning, yet an explanation offers itself\nwhich, by a procedure very similar to that which was applied to _Marazion_\nand _Market Jew_, may account for the origin of this name likewise.\n\nThe Cornish name for house was originally _ty_. In modern Cornish,\nhowever, to quote from Lhuyd\u2019s Grammar, _t_ has been changed to _tsh_, as\n_ti_, thou, _tshei_; _ty_, a house, _tshey_; which _tsh_ is also sometimes\nchanged to _dzh_, as _ol mein y dzkyi_, \u201call in the house.\u201d Out of this\n_dzhyi_ we may easily understand how a Saxon mouth and a Saxon ear might\nhave elicited a sound somewhat like the English _Jew_.\n\nBut we do not get at _Jews\u2019 house_ by so easy a road, if indeed we get at\nit at all. We are told that a smelting-house was called a White-house, in\nCornish _Chiwidden_, _widden_ standing for _gwydn_, which is a corruption\nof the old Cornish _gwyn_, white. This name of Chiwidden is a famous name\nin Cornish hagiography. He was the companion of St. Perran, or St. Piran,\nthe most popular saint among the mining population of Cornwall.\n\nMr. Hunt, who in his interesting work, \u201cThe Popular Romances of the West\nof England,\u201d has assigned a separate chapter to Cornish saints, tells us\nhow St. Piran, while living in Ireland, fed ten Irish kings and their\narmies, for ten days together, with three cows. Notwithstanding this and\nother miracles, some of these kings condemned him to be cast off a\nprecipice into the sea, with a millstone round his neck. St. Piran,\nhowever, floated on safely to Cornwall, and he landed, on the 5th of\nMarch, on the sands which still bear his name, _Perranzabuloe_, or _Perran\non the Sands_.\n\nThe lives of saints form one of the most curious subjects for the\nhistorian, and still more for the student of language; and the day, no\ndoubt, will come when it will be possible to take those wonderful\nconglomerates of fact and fiction to pieces, and, as in one of those huge\nmasses of graywacke or rubblestone, to assign each grain and fragment to\nthe stratum from which it was taken, before they were all rolled together\nand cemented by the ebb and flow of popular tradition. With regard to the\nlives of Irish and Scotch and British saints, it ought to be stated, for\nthe credit of the pious authors of the \u201cActa Sanctorum,\u201d that even they\nadmit their tertiary origin. \u201cDuring the twelfth century,\u201d they say, \u201cwhen\nmany of the ancient monasteries in Ireland were handed over to monks from\nEngland, and many new houses were built for them, these monks began to\ncompile the acts of the saints with greater industry than judgment. They\ncollected all they could find among the uncertain traditions of the\nnatives and in obscure Irish writings, following the example of Jocelin,\nwhose work on the acts of St. Patrick had been received everywhere with\nwonderful applause. But many of them have miserably failed, so that the\nfoolish have laughed at them, and the wise been filled with indignation.\u201d\n(\u201cBollandi Acta,\u201d 5th of March, p. 390, B). In the same work (p. 392, A),\nit is pointed out that the Irish monks, whenever they heard of any saints\nin other parts of England whose names and lives reminded them of Irish\nsaints, at once concluded that they were of Irish origin; and that the\npeople in some parts of England, as they possessed no written acts of\ntheir popular saints, were glad to identify their own with the famous\nsaints of the Irish Church. This has evidently happened in the case of St.\nPiran. St. Piran, in one of his characters, is certainly a truly Cornish\nsaint; but when the monks in Cornwall heard the wonderful legends of the\nIrish saint, St. Kiran, they seem to have grafted their own St. Piran on\nthe Irish St. Kiran. The difference in the names must have seemed less to\nthem than to us; for words which in Cornish are pronounced with _p_, are\npronounced, as a rule, in Irish with _k_. Thus, head in Cornish is _pen_,\nin Irish _ceann_, son is _map_, in Irish _mac_. The town built at the\neastern extremity of the wall of Severus, was called _Penguaul_, _i.e._\n_pen_, caput, _guaul_, walls; the English call it _Penel-tun_, while in\nScotch it was pronounced _Cenail_.(71) That St. Kiran had originally\nnothing to do with St. Piran can still be proved, for the earlier Lives of\nSt. Kiran, though full of fabulous stories, represent him as dying in\nIreland. His saint\u2019s day was the 5th of March; that of St. Piran, the 2d\nof May. The later Lives, however, though they say nothing as yet of the\nmillstone, represent St. Kiran, when a very old man, as suddenly leaving\nhis country in order that he might die in Cornwall. We are told that\nsuddenly, when already near his death, he called together his little\nflock, and said to them: \u201cMy dear brothers and sons, according to a divine\ndisposition I must leave Ireland and go to Cornwall, and wait for the end\nof my life there. I cannot resist the will of God.\u201d He then sailed to\nCornwall, and built himself a house, where he performed many miracles. He\nwas buried in Cornwall on the sandy sea, fifteen miles from Petrokstowe,\nand twenty-five miles from Mousehole.(72) In this manner the Irish and the\nCornish saints, who originally had nothing in common but their names,\nbecame amalgamated,(73) and the saint\u2019s day of St. Piran was moved from\nthe 2d of May to the 5th of March. Yet although thus welded into one,\nnothing could well be imagined more different than the characters of the\nIrish and of the Cornish saint. The Irish saint lived a truly ascetic\nlife; he preached, wrought miracles, and died. The Cornish saint was a\njolly miner, not always very steady on his legs.(74) Let us hear what the\nCornish have to tell of him. His name occurs in several names of places,\nsuch as Perran Zabuloe, Perran Uthno, in Perran the Little, and in Perran\nAr-worthall. His name, pronounced Perran, or Piran, has been further\ncorrupted into Picras, and Picrous, though some authorities suppose that\nthis is again a different saint from St. Piran. Anyhow, both St. Perran\nand St. Picras live in the memory of the Cornish miner as the discoverers\nof tin; and the tinners\u2019 great holiday, the Thursday before Christmas, is\nstill called Picrou\u2019s day.(75) The legend relates that St. Piran, when\nstill in Cornwall, employed a heavy black stone as a part of his\nfire-place. The fire was more intense than usual, and a stream of\nbeautiful white metal flowed out of the fire. Great was the joy of the\nsaint, and he communicated his discovery to St. Chiwidden. They examined\nthe stone together, and Chiwidden, who was learned in the learning of the\nEast, soon devised a process for producing this metal in large quantities.\nThe two saints called the Cornishmen together. They told them of their\ntreasures, and they taught them how to dig the ore from the earth, and\nhow, by the agency of fire, to obtain the metal. Great was the joy in\nCornwall, and many days of feasting followed the announcement. Mead and\nmetheglin, with other drinks, flowed in abundance; and vile rumor says the\nsaints and their people were rendered equally unstable thereby. \u201cDrunk as\na Perraner\u201d has certainly passed into a proverb from that day.\n\nIt is quite clear from these accounts that the legendary discoverer of tin\nin Cornwall was originally a totally different character from the Irish\nsaint, St. Kiran. If one might indulge in a conjecture, I should say that\nthere probably was in the Celtic language a root _kar_, which in the\nCymbric branch would assume the form _par_. Now _cair_ in Gaelic means to\ndig, to raise; and from it a substantive might be derived, meaning digger\nor miner. In Ireland, _Kiran_ seems to have been simply a proper name,\nlike Smith or Baker, for there is nothing in the legends of St. Kiran that\npoints to mining or smelting. In Cornwall, on the contrary, St. Piran,\nbefore he was engrafted on St. Kiran, was probably nothing but a\npersonification or apotheosis of the Miner, as much as Dorus was the\npersonification of the Dorians, and Brutus the first King of Britain.\n\nThe rule, \u201cnoscitur a sociis,\u201d may be applied to St. Piran. His friend and\nassociate, St. Chiwidden, or St. Whitehouse, is a personification of the\nwhite-house, _i.e._ the smelting-house, without which St. Piran, the\nminer, would have been a very useless saint. If Chywidden, _i.e._ the\nsmelting-house, became the St. Chywidden, why should we look in the\nCornish St. Piran for anything beyond Piran, _i.e._ the miner?\n\nHowever, what is of importance to us for our present object is not St.\nPiran, but St. Chywidden, the white-house or smelting-house. We are\nlooking all this time for the original meaning of the Jews\u2019 houses, and\nthe question is, how can we, starting from Chywidden, arrive at\nJews\u2019-house? I am afraid we can not do so without a jump or two; all we\ncan do is to show that they are jumps which language herself is fond of\ntaking, and which therefore we must not shirk, if we wish to ride straight\nafter her.\n\nWell, then, the first jump which language frequently takes is this, that\ninstead of using a noun with a qualifying adjective, such as white-house,\nthe noun by itself is used without any such qualification. This can, of\ncourse, be done with very prominent words only, words which are used so\noften, and which express ideas so constantly present to the mind of the\nspeaker, that no mistake is likely to arise. In English, \u201cthe House\u201d is\nused for the House of Commons; in later Latin \u201cdomus\u201d was used for the\nHouse of God. Among fisherman in Scotland \u201cfish\u201d means salmon. In Greek\n\u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2, stone, in the feminine, is used for the magnet, originally \u039c\u03b1\u03b3\u03bd\u1fc6\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\n\u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 while the masculine \u03bb\u03af\u03b8\u03bf\u03c2 means a stone in general. In Cornwall,\n_ore_ by itself means copper ore only, while tin ore is called black tin.\nIn times, therefore, when the whole attention of Cornwall was absorbed by\nmining and smelting, and when smelting-houses were most likely the only\nlarge buildings that seemed to deserve the name of houses, there is\nnothing extraordinary in _tshey_ or _dzhyi_, even without _widden_, white,\nhaving become the recognized name for smelting-houses.\n\nBut now comes a second jump, and again one that can be proved to have been\na very favorite one with many languages. When people speaking different\nlanguages live together in the same country, they frequently, in adopting\na foreign term, add to it, by way of interpretation, the word that\ncorresponds to it in their own language. Thus _Portsmouth_ is a name half\nLatin and half English. _Portus_ was the Roman name given to the harbor.\nThis was adopted by the Saxons, but interpreted at the same time by a\nSaxon word, namely, _mouth_, which really means harbor. This\ninterpretation was hardly intentional, but arose naturally. _Port_ first\nbecame a kind of proper name, and then _mouth_ was added, so that \u201cthe\nmouth of Port,\u201d _i.e._ of the place called _Portus_ by the Romans, became\nat last Portsmouth. But this does not satisfy the early historians, and,\nas happens so frequently when there is anything corrupt in language, a\nlegend springs up almost spontaneously to remove all doubts and\ndifficulties. Thus we read in the venerable Saxon Chronicle under the year\n501, \u201cthat Port came to Britain with his two sons, Bieda and Maegla, with\ntwo ships, and their place was called Portsmouth; and they slew a British\nman, a very noble man.\u201d(76) Such is the growth of legends, aye, and in\nmany cases the growth of history.\n\nFormed on the same principle as Portsmouth we find such words as\n_Hayle-river_, the Cornish _hal_ by itself meaning salt marsh, moor, or\nestuary; _Treville_ or _Trou-ville_, where the Celtic _tre_, town, is\nexplained by the French _ville_; the _Cotswold_ Hills, where the Celtic\nword _cot_, wood, is explained by the Saxon _wold_ or _weald_, a wood. In\n_Dun-bar-ton_, the Celtic word _dun_, hill, is explained by the Saxon\n_bar_ for _byrig_, burg, _ton_ being added to form the name of the town\nthat rose up under the protection of the hill-castle. In _Penhow_ the same\nprocess has been suspected; _how_, the German H\u00f6he,(77) expressing nearly\nthe same idea as _pen_, head. In Constantine, in Cornwall, one of the\nlarge stones with rock-basins is called the _M\u00ean-rock_,(78) rock being\nsimply the interpretation of the Cornish _m\u00ean_.\n\nIf, then, we suppose that in exactly the same manner the people of\nCornwall spoke of _Tshey-houses_, or _Dshyi-houses_, is it so very\nextraordinary that this hybrid word should at last have been interpreted\nas _Jew-houses_ or _Jews\u2019 houses_? I do not say that the history of the\nword can be traced through all its phases with the same certainty as that\nof Marazion; all I maintain is that, in explaining its history, no step\nhas been admitted that cannot be proved by sufficient evidence to be in\nstrict keeping with the well-known movements, or, if it is respectful to\nsay so, the well-known antics of language.\n\nThus vanish the Jews from Cornwall; but there still remain the _Saracens_.\nOne is surprised to meet with Saracens in the West of England; still more,\nto hear of their having worked in the tin-mines, like the Jews. According\nto some writers, however, Saracen is only another name for Jews, though no\nexplanation is given why this detested name should have been applied to\nthe Jews in Cornwall, and nowhere else. This view is held, for instance,\nby Carew, who writes: \u201cThe Cornish maintain these works to have been very\nancient, and the first wrought by the Jews with pickaxes of holm, box,\nhartshorn; they prove this by the names of those places yet enduring, to\nwit, _Attall-Sarazin_ (or, as in some editions, _Sazarin_); in English,\nthe Jews\u2019 Offcast.\u201d\n\nCamden (p. 69) says: \u201cWe are taught from Diodorus and \u00c6thicus that the\nancient Britons had worked hard at the mines, but the Saxons and Normans\nseem to have neglected them for a long time, or to have employed the labor\nof Arabs or Saracens, for the inhabitants call deserted shafts,\n_Attall-Sarazin_, _i.e._ the leavings of the Saracens.\u201d\n\nThus, then, we have not only the Saracens in Cornwall admitted as simply a\nmatter of history, but their presence actually used in order to prove that\nthe Saxons and Normans neglected to work the mines in the West of England.\n\nA still more circumstantial account is given by Hals, as quoted by Gilbert\nin his \u201cParochial History of Cornwall.\u201d Here we are told that King Henry\nIII., by proclamation, let out all Jews in his dominions at a certain rent\nto such as would poll and rifle them, and amongst others to his brother\nRichard, King of the Romans, who, after he had plundered their estates,\ncommitted their bodies, as his slaves, to labor in the tin-mines of\nCornwall; the memory of whose workings is still preserved in the names of\nseveral tin works, called _Towle Sarasin_, and corruptly _Attall Saracen_;\n_i.e._ the refuse or outcast of Saracens; that is to say, of those Jews\ndescended from Sarah and Abraham. Other works were called _Whele Etherson_\n(alias _Ethewon_), the Jews\u2019 Works, or Unbelievers\u2019 Works, in Cornish.\n\nHere we see how history is made; and if our inquiries led to no other\nresult, they would still be useful as a warning against putting implicit\nfaith in the statements of writers who are separated by several centuries\nfrom the events they are relating. Here we have men like Carew and Camden,\nboth highly cultivated, learned, and conscientious, and yet neither of\nthem hesitating, in a work of historical character, to assert as a fact,\nwhat, after making every allowance, can only be called a very bold guess.\nHave we any reason to suppose that Herodotus and Thucydides, when speaking\nof the original abodes of the various races of Greece, of their\nmigrations, their wars and final settlements, had better evidence before\nthem, or were more cautious in using their evidence, than Camden and\nCarew? And is it likely that modern scholars, however learned and however\ncareful, can ever arrive at really satisfactory results by sifting and\narranging and rearranging the ethnological statements of the ancients, as\nto the original abodes or the later migrations of Pelasgians, Tyrrhenians,\nThracians, Macedonians, and Illyrians, or even of Dorians, \u00c6olians, and\nIonians? What is Carew\u2019s evidence in support of his statement that the\nJews first worked the tin-mines of Cornwall? Simply the sayings of the\npeople in Cornwall, who support their sayings by the name given to\ndeserted mines, _Attall Sarazin_. Now admitting that _Attall Sarazin_ or\n_Attall Sazarin_, meant the refuse of the Saracens, how is it possible, in\ncold blood, to identify the Saracens with Jews, and where is there a\ntittle of evidence to prove that the Jews were the first to work these\nmines,\u2014mines, be it remembered, which, according to the same Carew, were\ncertainly worked before the beginning of our era?\n\nBut leaving the Jews of the time of Nero, let us examine the more definite\nand more moderate statements of Hals and Gilbert. According to them, the\ndeserted shafts are called by a Cornish name meaning the refuse of the\nSaracens, because, as late as the thirteenth century, the Jews were sent\nto work in these mines. It is difficult, no doubt, to prove a negative,\nand to show that no Jews ever worked in the mines of Cornwall. All that\ncan be done, in a case like this, is to show that no one has produced an\natom of evidence in support of Mr. Gilbert\u2019s opinion. The Jews were\ncertainly ill treated, plundered, tortured, and exiled during the reign of\nthe Plantagenet kings; but that they were sent to the Cornish mines, no\ncontemporary writer has ever ventured to assert. The passage in Matthew\nParis, to which Mr. Gilbert most likely alludes, says the very contrary of\nwhat he draws from it. Matthew Paris says that Henry III. extorted money\nfrom the Jews, and that when they petitioned for a safe conduct, in order\nto leave England altogether, he sold them to his brother Richard, \u201cut quos\nRex excoriaverat, Comes evisceraret.\u201d(79) But this selling of the Jews\nmeant no more than that, in return for money advanced him by his brother,\nthe Earl of Cornwall, the King pawned to him, for a number of years, the\ntaxes, legitimate or illegitimate, which could be extorted from the Jews.\nThat this was the real meaning of the bargain between the King and his\nbrother, the Earl of Cornwall, can be proved by the document printed in\nRymer\u2019s \u201cF\u0153dera,\u201d vol. i. p. 543, \u201cDe Jud\u00e6is Comiti Cornubi\u00e6 assignatis,\npro solutione pecuni\u00e6 sibi a Rege debit\u00e6.\u201d(80) Anyhow, there is not a\nsingle word about the Jews having been sent to Cornwall, or having had to\nwork in the mines. On the contrary, Matthew Paris says, \u201c_Comes pepercit\niis_,\u201d \u201cthe Earl spared them.\u201d\n\nAfter thus looking in vain for any truly historical evidence in support of\nJewish settlements in Cornwall, I suppose they may in future be safely\ntreated as a \u201cverbal myth,\u201d of which there are more indeed in different\nchapters of history, both ancient and modern, than is commonly supposed.\nAs in Cornwall the name of a market has given rise to the fable of Jewish\nsettlements, the name of another market in Finland led to the belief that\nthere were Turks settled in that northern country. _Abo_, the ancient\ncapital of Finland, was called _Turku_, which is the Swedish word _torg_,\nmarket. Adam of Bremen, enumerating the various tribes adjoining the\nBaltic, mentions _Turci_ among the rest, and these _Turci_ were by others\nmistaken for Turks.(81)\n\nEven after such myths have been laid open to the very roots, there is a\nstrong tendency not to drop them altogether. Thus Mr. H. Merivale is far\ntoo good an historian to admit the presence of Jews in Cornwall as far\nback as the destruction of Jerusalem.(82) He knows there is no evidence\nfor it, and he would not repeat a mere fable, however plausible. Yet\nMarazion and the Jews\u2019 houses evidently linger in his memory, and he\nthrows out a hint that they may find an historical explanation in the fact\nthat under the Plantagenet kings the Jews commonly farmed or wrought the\nmines. Is there any contemporary evidence even for this? I do not think\nso. Dr. Borlase, indeed, in his \u201cNatural History of Cornwall\u201d (p. 190),\nsays, \u201cIn the time of King John, I find the product of tin in this county\nvery inconsiderable, the right of working for tin being as yet wholly in\nthe King, the property of tinners precarious and unsettled, and what tin\nwas raised was engrossed and managed by the Jews, to the great regret of\nthe barons and their vassals.\u201d It is a pity that Dr. Borlase should not\nhave given his authority, but there is little doubt that he simply quoted\nfrom Carew. Carew tells us how the Cornish gentlemen borrowed money from\nthe merchants of London, giving them tin as security (p. 14); and though\nhe does not call the merchants Jews, yet he speaks of them as usurers, and\nreproves their \u201ccut throate and abominable dealing.\u201d He continues\nafterwards, speaking of the same usurers (p. 16), \u201cAfter such time as the\nJewes by their extreme dealing had worne themselves, first out of the love\nof the English inhabitants, and afterwards out of the land itselfe, and so\nleft the mines unwrought, it hapned, that certaine gentlemen, being lords\nof seven tithings in Blackmoore, whose grounds were best stored with this\nminerall, grewe desirous to renew this benefit,\u201d etc. To judge from\nseveral indications, this is really the passage which Dr. Borlase had\nbefore him when writing of the Jews as engrossing and managing the tin\nthat was raised, and in that case neither is Carew a contemporary witness,\nnor would it follow from what he says that one single Jew ever set foot on\nCornish soil, or that any Jews ever tasted the actual bitterness of\nworking in the mines.\n\nHaving thus disposed of the Jews, we now turn to the Saracens in Cornwall.\nWe shall not enter upon the curious and complicated history of that name.\nIt is enough to refer to a short note in Gibbon,(83) in order to show that\nSaracen was a name known to Greeks and Romans, long before the rise of\nIslam, but never applied to the Jews by any writer of authority, not even\nby those who saw in the Saracens \u201cthe children of Sarah.\u201d\n\nWhat, then, it may be asked, is the origin of the expression _Attal\nSarazin_ in Cornwall? _Attal_, or _Atal_, is said to be a Cornish word,\nthe Welsh _Adhail_, and means refuse, waste.(84) As to _Sarazin_, it is\nmost likely another Cornish word, which by a metamorphic process, has been\nslightly changed in order to yield some sense intelligible to Saxon\nspeakers. We find in Cornish _tarad_, meaning a piercer, a borer; and, in\nanother form, _tardar_ is distinctly used, together with axe and hammer,\nas the name of a mining implement. The Latin _taratrum_, Gr. \u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd, Fr.\n_tari\u00e8re_, all come from the same source. If from _tarad_ we form a\nplural, we get _taradion_. In modern Cornish we find that _d_ sinks down\nto _s_, which would give us _taras_,(85) and plural _tarasion_. Next, the\nfinal _l_ of _atal_ may, like several final _l_\u2019s in the closely allied\nlanguage of Brittany, have infected the initial _t_ of _tarasion_, and\nchanged it to _th_, which _th_, again, would, in modern Cornish, sink down\nto _s_.(86) Thus _atal tharasion_ might have been intended for the refuse\nof the borings, possibly the refuse of the mines; but pronounced in Saxon\nfashion, it might readily have been mistaken for the Atal or refuse of the\nSarasion or Saracens.\n\nPOSTSCRIPT.\n\nThe essay on the presence of Jews in Cornwall has given rise to much\ncontroversy; and as I republish it here without any important alterations,\nI feel it incumbent to say a few words in answer to the objections that\nhave been brought forward against it. No one, I think, can read my essay\nwithout perceiving that what I question is not the presence of single Jews\nin Cornwall, but the migration of large numbers of Jews into the extreme\nWest of Britain, whether at the time of the Ph\u0153nicians, or at the period\nof the destruction of Jerusalem, or under the Flavian princes, or even at\na later time. The Rev. Dr. Bannister in a paper on \u201cthe Jews in Cornwall,\u201d\npublished in the Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall, 1867, does\nindeed represent me as having maintained \u201cthat one single Jew never set\nfoot on Cornish soil!\u201d But if my readers will refer to the passage thus\nquoted from my essay by Dr. Bannister, they will see that it was not meant\nin that sense. In the passage thus quoted with inverted commas,(87) I\nsimply argued that from certain words used by Carew, on which great stress\nhad been laid, it would not even follow \u201cthat one single Jew ever set foot\non Cornish soil,\u201d which surely is very different from saying that I\nmaintained that no single Jew ever set foot on Cornish soil. It would\nindeed be the most extraordinary fact if Cornwall had never been visited\nby Jews. If it were so, Cornwall would stand alone, as far as such an\nimmunity is concerned, among all the countries of Europe. But it is one\nthing for Jews to be scattered about in towns,(88) or even for one or two\nJews to have actually worked in tin mines, and quite another to speak of\ntowns receiving Hebrew names in Cornwall, and of deserted tin-mines being\ncalled the workings of the Jews. To explain such startling facts, if facts\nthey be, a kind of Jewish exodus to Cornwall had to be admitted, and was\nadmitted as long as such names as _Marazion_ and _Attal Sarazin_ were\naccepted in their traditional meaning. My own opinion was that these names\nhad given rise to the assumed presence of Jews in Cornwall, and not that\nthe presence of Jews in Cornwall had given rise to these names.\n\nIf, therefore, it could be proved that some Jewish families had been\nsettled in Cornwall in very early times, or that a few Jewish slaves had\nbeen employed as miners, my theory would not at all be affected. But I\nmust say that the attempts at proving even so much have been far from\nsuccessful. Surely the occurrence of Old Testament names among the people\nof Cornwall, such as Abraham, Joseph, or Solomon (there is a Solomon, Duke\nof Cornwall), does not prove that their bearers were Jews. Again, if we\nread in the time of Edward II. that \u201cJohn Peverel held Hametethy of Roger\nle Jeu,\u201d we may be quite certain that _le Jeu_ does not mean \u201cthe Jew,\u201d\nand that in the time of Edward II. no John Peverel held land of a Jew.\nAgain, if in the time of Edward III. we read of one \u201cAbraham, the tinner,\nwho employed 300 men in the stream-works of Brodhok,\u201d it would require\nstronger proof than the mere name to make us believe that this Abraham was\na Jew.\n\nI had endeavored to show that there was no evidence as to the Earl of\nCornwall, the brother of Henry III., having employed Jews in the Cornish\nmines, and had pointed out a passage from Rymer\u2019s \u201cF\u0153dera\u201d where it is\nstated that the Earl spared them (_pepercit_). Dr. Bannister remarks:\n\u201cThough we are told that he spared them, might not this be similar to\nJoseph\u2019s brethren sparing him,\u2014by committing their bodies as his slaves to\nwork in the tin-mines?\u201d It might be so, no doubt, but we do not know it.\nAgain, Dr. Bannister remarks: \u201cJerome tells us that when Titus took\nJerusalem, an incredible number of Jews were sold like horses, and\ndispersed over the face of the whole earth. The account given by Josephus\nis, that of those spared after indiscriminate slaughter, some were\ndispersed through the provinces for the use of the theatres, as\ngladiators; others were sent to the Egyptian mines, and others sold as\nslaves. If the Romans at this time worked the Cornish mines, why may not\nsome have been sent here?\u201d I can only answer, as before; they may have\nbeen, no doubt, but we do not know it.\n\nI had myself searched very carefully for any documents that might prove\nthe presence even of single Jews in Cornwall, previous to the time when\nthey were banished the realm by Edward I. But my inquiries had not proved\nmore successful than those of my predecessors. Pearce, in his \u201cLaws and\nCustoms of the Stanaries,\u201d published in London, 1725, shares the common\nbelief that the Jews worked in the Cornish mines. \u201cThe tinners,\u201d he says\n(p. ii), \u201ccall the antient works by the name of the Working of the Jews,\nand it is most manifest, that there were Jews inhabiting here until 1291;\nand this they prove by the names yet enduring, viz. Attall Sarazin, in\nEnglish, The Jews Feast.\u201d But in spite of his strong belief in the\npresence of Jews in Cornwall, Pearce adds: \u201cBut whether they had liberty\nto work and search for tin, does not appear, because they had their\ndwellings chiefly in great Towns and Cities; and being great Usurers, were\nin that year banished out of England, to the number of 15,060, by the most\nnoble Prince, Edward I.\u201d\n\nAt last, however, with the kind assistance of Mr. Macray, I discovered a\nfew real Jews in Cornwall in the third year of King John, 1202, namely,\none _Simon de Dena_, one _Deudone, the son of Samuel_, and one _Aaron_.\nSome of their monetary transactions are recorded in the \u201cRotulus\nCancellarii vel Antigraphum Magni Rotuli Pip\u00e6 de tertio anno Regni Regis\nJohannis\u201d (printed under the direction of the Commissioners of the Public\nRecords in 1863, p. 96), and we have here not only their names as evidence\nof their Jewish origin, but they are actually spoken of as \u201c_pr\u00e6dictus\nJudens_.\u201d Their transactions, however, are purely financial, and do not\nlead us to suppose that the Jews, in order to make tin, condescended, in\nthe time of King John or at any other time, to the drudgery of working in\ntin-mines.\n\n_July_, 1867.\n\n\n\n\n\nXV. THE INSULATION OF ST. MICHAEL\u2019S MOUNT.(89)\n\n\nSt. Michael\u2019s Mount in Cornwall is so well known to most people, either\nfrom sight or from report, that a description of its peculiar features may\nbe deemed almost superfluous; but in order to start fair, I shall quote a\nshort account from the pen of an eminent geologist, Mr. Pengelly, to whom\nI shall have to refer frequently in the course of this paper.\n\n\u201cSt. Michael\u2019s Mount in Cornwall, he says, \u201cis an island at very high\nwater, and, with rare exceptions, a peninsula at very low water. The\ndistance from Marazion Cliff, the nearest point of the mainland, to\nspring-tide high-water mark on its own strand, is about 1680 feet. The\ntotal isthmus consists of the outcrop of highly inclined Devonian slate\nand associated rocks, and in most cases is covered with a thin layer of\ngravel or sand. At spring-tides, in still weather, it is at high-water\nabout twelve feet below, and at low-water six feet above, the sea level.\nIn fine weather it is dry from four to five hours every tide; but\noccasionally, during very stormy weather and neap tides, it is impossible\nto cross from the mainland for two or three days together.\u201d\n\n\u201cThe Mount is an outlier of granite, measuring at its base about five\nfurlongs in circumference, and rising to the height of one hundred and\nninety-five feet above mean tide. At high-water it plunges abruptly into\nthe sea, except on the north or landward side, where the granite comes\ninto contact with slate. Here there is a small plain occupied by a\nvillage.... The country immediately behind or north of the town of\nMarazion consists of Devonian strata, traversed by traps and elvans, and\nattains a considerable elevation.\u201d\n\nAt the meeting of the British Association in 1865, Mr. Pengelly, in a\npaper on \u201cThe Insulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount in Cornwall,\u201d maintained\nthat the change which converted that Mount from a promontory into an\nisland must have taken place, not only within the human period, but since\nCornwall was occupied by a people speaking the Cornish language. As a\nproof of this somewhat startling assertion, he adduced the ancient British\nname of St. Michael\u2019s Mount, signifying _the Hoar rock in the wood_.\nNobody would think of applying such a name to the Mount in its present\nstate; and as we know that during the last two thousand years the Mount\nhas been, as it is now, an island at high, and a promontory at low tide,\nit would indeed seem to follow that its name must have been framed before\nthe destruction of the ancient forest by which it was once surrounded, and\nbefore the separation of the Mount from the mainland.\n\nSir Henry James, in a \u201cNote on the Block of Tin dredged in Falmouth\nHarbor,\u201d asserts, it is true, that there are trees growing on the Mount in\nsufficient numbers to have justified the ancient descriptive name of \u201cthe\nHoar rock in the wood;\u201d but though there are traces of trees visible on\nthe engravings published a hundred years ago, in Dr. Borlase\u2019s\n\u201cAntiquities of Cornwall,\u201d these are most likely due to artistic\nembellishment only. At present no writer will discover in St. Michael\u2019s\nMount what could fairly be called either trees or a wood, even in\nCornwall.\n\nThat the geographical change from a promontory into a real island did not\ntake place during the last two thousand years, is proved by the\ndescription which Diodorus Siculus, a little before the Christian era,\ngives of St. Michael\u2019s Mount. \u201cThe inhabitants of the promontory of\nBelerium,\u201d he says (lib. v. c. 22), \u201cwere hospitable, and, on account of\ntheir intercourse with strangers, eminently civilized in their habits.\nThese are the people who work the tin, which they melt into the form of\nastragali, and then carry it to an island in front of Britain, called\n_Ictis_. This island is left dry at low tide, and they then transport the\ntin in carts from the shore. Here the traders buy it from the natives, and\ncarry it to Gaul, over which it travels on horseback in about thirty days\nto the mouths of the Rhone.\u201d That the Island of Ictis, described by\nDiodorus, is St. Michael\u2019s Mount, seems, to say the least, very probable,\nand was at last admitted even by the late Sir G. C. Lewis. In fact, the\ndescription which Diodorus gives answers so completely to what St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount is at the present day, that few would deny that if the\nMount ever was a \u201cHoar rock in the wood,\u201d it must have been so before the\ntime of which Diodorus speaks, that is, at least before the last two\nthousand years. The nine apparent reasons why St. Michael\u2019s Mount cannot\nbe the Ictis of Diodorus, and their refutation, may be seen in Mr.\nPengelly\u2019s paper \u201cOn the Insulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount,\u201d p. 6, seq.\n\nMr. Pengelly proceeded to show that the geological change which converted\nthe promontory into an island may be due to two causes. First, it may have\ntaken place in consequence of the encroachment of the sea. This would\ndemand a belief that at least 20,000 years ago Cornwall was inhabited by\nmen who spoke Cornish. Secondly, this change may have taken place by a\ngeneral subsidence of the land, and this is the opinion adopted by Mr.\nPengelly. No exact date was assigned to this subsidence, but Mr. Pengelly\nfinished by expressing his decided opinion that, subsequent to a period\nwhen Cornwall was inhabited by a race speaking a Celtic language, St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount was \u201ca hoar rock in the wood,\u201d and has since become\ninsulated by powerful geological changes.\n\nIn a more recent paper read at the Royal Institution (April 5, 1867), Mr.\nPengelly has somewhat modified his opinion. Taking for granted that at\nsome time or other St. Michael\u2019s Mount was a peninsula and not yet an\nisland, he calculates that it must have taken 16,800 years before the\ncoast line could have receded from the Mount to the present cliffs. He\narrived at this result by taking the retrocession of the cliffs at ten\nfeet in a century, the distance between the Mount and the mainland being\nat present 1,680 feet.\n\nIf, however, the severance of the Mount from the mainland was the result,\nnot of retrocession, but of the subsidence of the country,\u2014a rival theory\nwhich Mr. Pengelly still admits as possible,\u2014the former calculation would\nfail, and the only means of fixing the date of this severance would be\nsupplied by the remains found in the forests that were carried down by\nthat subsidence, and which are supposed to belong to the mammoth era. This\nmammoth era, we are told, is anterior to the lake-dwellings of\nSwitzerland, and the kitchenmiddens of Denmark, for in neither of these\nhave any remains of the mammoth been discovered. The mammoth, in fact, did\nnot outlive the age of bronze, and before the end of that age, therefore,\nSt. Michael\u2019s Mount must be supposed to have become an island.\n\nIn all these discussions it is taken for granted that St. Michael\u2019s Mount\nwas at one time unquestionably a \u201choar rock in the wood,\u201d and that the\nland between the Mount and the mainland was once covered by a forest which\nextended along the whole of the seaboard. That there are submerged forests\nalong that seaboard is attested by sufficient geological evidence; but I\nhave not been able to discover any proof of the unbroken continuity of\nthat shore-forest, still less of the presence of vegetable remains in the\nexact locality which is of interest to us, namely between the Mount and\nthe mainland. It is true that Dr. Borlase discovered the remains of trunks\nof trees on the 10th of January, 1757; but he tells us that these forest\ntrees were not found round the Mount, but midway betwixt the piers of St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount and Penzance, that is to say, about one mile distant from\nthe Mount; also, that one of them was a willow-tree with the bark on it,\nanother a hazel-branch with the bark still fat and glossy. The place where\nthese trees were found was three hundred yards below full-sea mark, where\nthe water is twelve feet deep when the tide is in.\n\nCarew, also, at an earlier date, speaks of roots of mighty trees found in\nthe sand about the Mount, but without giving the exact place. Lelant\n(1533-40) knows of \u201cSpere Heddes, Axis for Warre, and Swerdes of Copper\nwrapped up in lynist, scant perishid,\u201d that had been found of late years\nnear the Mount, in St. Hilary\u2019s parish, in tin works; but he places the\nland that had been devoured of the sea between Penzance and Mousehole,\n_i.e._ more than two miles distant from the Mount.\n\nThe value of this kind of geological evidence must of course be determined\nby geologists. It is quite possible that the remains of trunks of trees\nmay still be found on the very isthmus between the Mount and the mainland;\nbut it is, to say the least, curious that, even in the absence of such\nstringent evidence, geologists should feel so confident that the Mount\nonce stood on the mainland, and that exactly the same persuasion should\nhave been shared by people long before the name of geology was known.\nThere is a powerful spell in popular traditions, against which even men of\nscience are not always proof, and is just possible that if the tradition\nof the \u201choar rock in the wood\u201d had not existed, no attempts would have\nbeen made to explain the causes that severed St. Michael\u2019s Mount from the\nmainland. But even then the question remains, How was it that people quite\nguiltless of geology should have framed the popular name of the Mount, and\nthe popular tradition of its former connection with the mainland? Leaving,\ntherefore, for the present all geological evidence out of view, it will be\nan interesting inquiry to find out, if possible, how people that could not\nhave been swayed by any geological theories, should have been led to\nbelieve in the gradual insulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount.\n\nThe principal argument brought forward by non-geological writers in\nsupport of the former existence of a forest surrounding the Mount, is the\nCornish name of St. Michael\u2019s Mount, _Cara clowse in cowse_, which in\nCornish is said to mean \u201cthe hoar rock in the wood.\u201d In his paper read\nbefore the British Association at Manchester, Mr. Pengelly adduced that\nvery name as irrefragable evidence that Cornish, _i.e._ a Celtic language,\nan Aryan language, was spoken in the extreme west of Europe about 20,000\nyears ago. In his more recent paper Mr. Pengelly has given up this\nposition, and he considers it improbable that any philologer could now\ngive a trustworthy translation of a language spoken 20,000 years ago. This\nmay be or not; but before we build any hypothesis on that Cornish name,\nthe first question which an historian has to answer is clearly this:\u2014\n\n_What authority is there for that name? Where does it occur for the first\ntime? and does it really mean what it is supposed to mean?_\n\nNow the first mention of the Cornish name, as far as I am aware, occurs in\nRichard Carew\u2019s \u201cSurvey of Cornwall,\u201d which was published in 1602. It is\ntrue that Camden\u2019s \u201cBritannia\u201d appeared earlier, in 1586, and that Camden\n(p. 72), too, mentions \u201cthe Mons Michaelis, _Dinsol_ olim, ut in libro\nLandavensi habetur, incolis _Careg Cowse_,(90) _i.e._ rupis cana.\u201d But it\nwill be seen that he leaves out the most important part of the old name,\nnor can there be much doubt that Camden received his information about\nCornwall direct from Carew, before Carew\u2019s \u201cSurvey of Cornwall\u201d was\npublished.\n\nAfter speaking of \u201cthe countrie of Lionesse which the sea hath ravined\nfrom Cornwall betweene the lands end and the Isles of Scilley,\u201d Carew\ncontinues (p. 3), \u201cMoreover, the ancient name of Saint Michael\u2019s Mount was\n_Cara-clowse in Cowse_, in English, The hoare Rocke in the Wood; which now\nis at everie floud incompassed by the Sea, and yet at some low ebbes,\nrootes of mightie trees are discryed in the sands about it. The like\noverflowing hath happened in Plymmouth Haven, and divers other places.\u201d\nNow while in this place Carew gives the name _Cara-clowse in Cowse_, it is\nvery important to remark that on page 154, he speaks of it again as \u201c_Cara\nCowz in Clowze_, that is, the hoare rock in the wood.\u201d\n\nThe original Cornish name, whether it was _Cara clowse in Cowse_, or _Cara\nCowz in Clowze_, cannot be traced back beyond the end of the sixteenth\ncentury, for the Cornish Pilchard song in which the name likewise occurs\nis much more recent, at least in that form in which we possess it. The\ntradition, however, that St. Michael\u2019s Mount stood in a forest, and even\nthe Saxon designation, \u201cthe Hoar rock in the wood,\u201d can be followed up to\nan earlier date.\n\nAt least one hundred and twenty-five years before Carew\u2019s time, William of\nWorcester, though not mentioning the Cornish name, not only gives the\nMount the name of \u201choar rock of the wood,\u201d but states distinctly that St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount was formerly six miles distant from the sea, and\nsurrounded by a dense forest: \u201cPREDICTUS LOCUS OPACISSIMA PRIMO\nCLAUDEBATUR SYLVA, AB OCEANO MILIARIBUS DISTANS SEX.\u201d As William of\nWorcester never mentions the Cornish name, it is not likely that his\nstatement should merely be derived from the supposed meaning of _Cara Cowz\nin Clowze_, and it is but fair to admit that he may have drawn from a\nsafer source of information. We must therefore inquire more closely into\nthe credibility of this important witness. He is an important witness,\nfor, if it were not for him, I believe we should never have heard of the\ninsulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount at all. The passage in question occurs\nin William of Worcester\u2019s Itinerary, the original MS. of which is\npreserved in Corpus Christi College at Cambridge. It was printed at\nCambridge by James Nasmith, in the year 1778, from the original MS., but,\nas it would seem, without much care. William Botoner, or, as he is\ncommonly called, William of Worcester, was born at Bristol in 1415, and\neducated at Oxford about 1434. He was a member of the _Aula Cervina_,\nwhich at that time belonged to Balliol College. His \u201cItinerarium\u201d is dated\n1478. It hardly deserves the grand title which it bears, \u201cItinerarium,\nsive liber memorabilium Will. W. in viagio de Bristol usque ad montem St.\nMichaelis.\u201d It is not a book of travels in our sense of the word, and it\nwas hardly destined for the public in the form in which we possess it. It\nis simply a notebook in which William entered anything that interested him\nduring his journey; and it contains not only his own observations, but all\nsorts of extracts, copies, notices, thrown together without any connecting\nthread. He hardly tells us that he has arrived at St. Michael\u2019s Mount\nbefore he begins to copy a notice which he found posted up in the church.\nThis notice informed all comers that Pope Gregory had remitted a third of\ntheir penances to all who should visit this church and give to it\nbenefactions and alms. It can be fully proved that this notice, which was\nintended to attract pilgrims and visitors, repeats _ipsissimis verbis_ the\ncharter of Leofric, Bishop of Exeter, who exempted the church and convent\nfrom all episcopal jurisdiction. This was in the year 1088, when St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount was handed over by Robert, Earl of Mortain, half-brother\nof William the Conqueror, to the Abbey of St. Michel in Normandy. This\ncharter may be seen in Dr. Oliver\u2019s \u201cMonasticon Diocesis Exoniensis,\u201d\n1846. The passage copied by William of Worcester from a notice in the\nchurch of St. Michael\u2019s Mount occurs at the end of the original charter:\n\u201c_Et omnibus illis qui illam ecclesiam suis cum beneficiis elemosinis\nexpetierint et visitaverint, tertiam partem penitentiarum condonamus._\u201d\n\nThough it is not quite correct to say that this condonation was granted by\nPope Gregory, yet it is perfectly true that it was granted by the Bishop\nof Exeter at the command and exhortation of the Pope, \u201c_Jussione et\nexhortatione domini reverentissimi Gregorii_.\u201d The date also given by\nWilliam, 1070, cannot be correct, for Gregory occupied the papal throne\nfrom 1073-86. It was Gregory VII., not Gregory VI., as printed by Dr.\nOliver.\n\nImmediately after this memorandum in William\u2019s diary we meet with certain\nnotes on the apparitions of St. Michael. He does not say from what source\nhe takes his information on the subject, but we may suppose that he either\nrepeated what he heard from the monks in conversation, or that he copied\nfrom some MS. in their library. In either case it is startling to read\nthat there was an apparition of the Archangel St. Michael in Mount\n_Tumba_, formerly called _the Horerock in the wodd_. St. Michael seems\nindeed to have paid frequent visits to his worshippers, if we may trust\nthe \u201cChronicon apparitionum et gestorum S. Michaelis Archangeli,\u201d\npublished by Mich. Naveus, in 1632. Yet his visits were not made at\nrandom, and even Naveus finds it difficult to substantiate any apparition\nof St. Michael so far north as Cornwall, except by invectives against the\n_impudenta et ignorantia_ of Protestant heretics who dared to doubt such\noccurrences.\n\nBut this short sentence of William contains one word which is of great\nimportance for our purposes. He says that \u201cthe Hore-rock in the wodd\u201d was\nformerly called _Tumba_. Is there any evidence of this?\n\nThe name _Tumba_, as far as we know, belonged originally to Mont St.\nMichel in Normandy. There a famous and far better authenticated apparition\nof St. Michael is related to have taken place in the year 708, which led\nto the building of a church and monastery by Autbert, Bishop of Avranches.\nThe church was built in close imitation of the Church of St. Michael in\nMount Garganus in Apulia, which had been founded as early as 493.(91) If,\ntherefore, William of Worcester relates an apparition of St. Michael in\nCornwall at about the same date, in 710, it is clear that Mont St. Michel\nin Normandy has here been confounded by him with St. Michael\u2019s Mount in\nCornwall. In order to explain this strange confusion, and the consequences\nwhich it entailed, it will be necessary to bear in mind the peculiar\nrelations which existed between the two ecclesiastical establishments,\nperched the one on the island rock of St. Michel in Normandy, the other on\nSt. Michael\u2019s Mount in Cornwall. In physical structure there is a curious\nresemblance between the two mounts. Both are granite islands, and both so\nnear the coast that at low water a dry passage is open to them from the\nmainland. The Mount on the Norman coast is larger and more distant from\nthe coast than St. Michael\u2019s Mount, yet for all that their general\nlikeness is very striking. Now Mont St. Michel was called _Tumba_ at least\nas far back as the tenth century. Mabillon, in his \u201cAnnales Benedictini\u201d\n(vol. ii. p. 18), quotes from an ancient author the following explanation\nof the name. \u201cNow this place, to use the words of an ancient author, is\ncalled _Tumba_ by the inhabitants, because, emerging as it were from the\nsands like a hill, it rises up by the space of two hundred cubits,\neverywhere surrounded by the ocean; it is six miles distant from the\nshore, between the mouths of the rivers Segia and Senuna, six miles\ndistant from Avranches, looking westward, and dividing Avranches from\nBrittany. Here the sea by its recess allows twice a passage to the pious\npeople who proceed to the threshold of St. Michael the Archangel.\u201d \u201cHic\nigitur locus, ut verbis antiqui autoris utar, _Tumba_ vocitatur ab\nincolis, ideo quod in morem tumuli, quasi ab arenis emergens, ad altum\nSPATIO DUCENTORUM CUBITORUM porrigitur, OCEANO UNDIQUE CINCTUS, SEX\nMILLIBUS AB \u00c6STU OCEANI, inter ostia situs, ubi immergunt se mari flumina\nSegia (S\u00e9e) et Senuna (Selure), ab Abrincatensi urbe (Avranches) sex\ndistans millibus; oceanum prospectans, Abrincatensem pagum dirimit a\nBritannia. Illic mare suo recessu devotis populis desideratum bis pr\u00e6bet\niter petentibus limina beati Michaelis archangeli.\u201d\n\nThis fixes _Tumba_ as the name of Mont St. Michel before the tenth\ncentury, for the ancient author from whom Mabillon quotes wrote before the\nmiddle of the tenth century, and before Duke Richard had replaced the\npriests of St. Michel by Benedictine monks. _Tumba_ remained, in fact, the\nrecognized name of the Norman Mount, and has survived to the present day.\nThe church and monastery there were called \u201c_in monte Tumba_,\u201d or \u201c_ad\nduas Tumbas_,\u201d there being in reality two islands, the principal one\ncalled _Tumba_, the smaller _Tumbella_ or _Tumbellana_. This name of\n_Tumbellana_ was afterwards changed into _tumba Helen\u00e6_, giving rise to\nvarious legends about Elaine, one of the heroines of the Arthurian cycle;\nnay, the name was cited by learned antiquarians as a proof of the ancient\nworship of Belus in these northern latitudes.\n\nThe history of Mont St. Michel in Normandy is well authenticated,\nparticularly during the period which is of importance to us. Mabillon,\nquoting from the chronicler who wrote before the middle of the tenth\ncentury, relates how Autbert, the Bishop of Avranches, had a vision, and\nafter having been thrice admonished by St. Michael, proceeded to build on\nthe summit of the Mount a church under the patronage of the Archangel.\nThis was in 708, or possibly a few years earlier, if Pagius is right in\nfixing the dedication of the temple in 707.(92) Mabillon points out that\nthis chronicler says nothing as yet of the miracles related by later\nwriters, particularly of the famous hole in the Bishop\u2019s skull, which it\nwas believed St. Michael had made when on exhorting him the third time to\nbuild his church, he gently touched him with his archangelic finger. In\ndoing this the finger went through the skull, and left a hole. The\nperforated skull did not interfere with the Bishop\u2019s health, and it was\nshown after his death as a valuable relic. The new church was dedicated by\nAutbert himself, and the day of the dedication (xvii. Kalend. Novemb.) was\ncelebrated, not only in France, but also in England, as is shown by a\ndecree of the Synod held at Oxford in 1222. The further history of the\nchurch and monastery of St. Michel may be read with all its minute details\nin Mabillon, or in the \u201cNeustria Pia\u201d (p. 371), or in the \u201cGallia\nChristiana\u201d (vol. ix. p. 517 E, 870 A). What is of interest to us is that\nsoon after the Conquest, when the ecclesiastical property of England had\nfallen into the hands of her Norman conquerors, Robert, Earl of Mortain\nand Cornwall, the half-brother of William the Conqueror, endowed the\nNorman with the Cornish Mount. A priory of Benedictine monks had existed\non the Cornish Mount for some time, and had been richly endowed in 1044 by\nEdward the Confessor. Nay, if we may trust the charter of Edward the\nConfessor, it would seem that, even at that time, the Cornish Mount and\nits priory had been granted by him to the Norman Abbey, for the charter is\nwitnessed by Norman bishops, and its original is preserved in the Abbey of\nMont St. Michel. In that case William the Conqueror or his half-brother\nRobert would only have restored the Cornish priory to its rightful owners,\nthe monks of Mont St. Michel, who had well deserved the gratitude of the\nConqueror by supplying him after the Conquest with six ships and a number\nof monks, destined to assist in the restoration of ecclesiastical\ndiscipline in England. After that time the Cornish priory shared the fate\nof other so-called alien priories or cells. The prior was bound to visit\nin person or by proxy the mother-house every year, and to pay sixteen\nmarks of silver as an acknowledgment of dependence. Whenever a war broke\nout between England and France, the foreign priories were seized, though\nsome, and among them the priory of St. Michael\u2019s Mount obtained in time a\ndistinct corporate character, and during the reigns of Henry IV. and Henry\nV. were exempted from seizure during war.\n\nUnder these circumstances we can well understand how in the minds of the\nmonks, who spent their lives partly in the mother-house, partly in its\ndependencies, there was no very clear perception of any difference between\nthe founders, benefactors, and patrons of these twin establishments. A\nmonk brought up at Mont St. Michel would repeat as an old man the legends\nhe had heard about St. Michel and Bishop Autbert, even though he was\nending his days in the priory of the Cornish Mount. Relics and books would\nlikewise travel from one place to the other, and a charter originally\nbelonging to the one might afterwards form part of the archives of another\nhouse.\n\nAfter these preliminary remarks, let us look again at the memoranda which\nWilliam of Worcester made at St. Michael\u2019s Mount, and it will appear that\nwhat we anticipated has actually happened, and that a book originally\nbelonging to Mont St. Michel in Normandy, and containing the early history\nof that monastery, was transferred (either in the original or in a copy)\nto Cornwall, and there used by William of Worcester in the belief that it\ncontained the early history of the Cornish Mount and the Cornish priory.\n\nThe Memorandum of William of Worcester runs thus: \u201cApparicio Sancti\nMichaelis in monte Tumba, antea vocata le Hore-rok in the wodd; et fuerunt\ntam boscus quarn prata et terra arabilis inter dictum montem et insulas\nSyllye, et fuerunt 140 ecclesias parochiales inter istum montem et Sylly\nsubmersse.\n\n\u201cPrima apparicio Sancti Michaelis in monte Gorgon in regno Apuliae fuit\nanno Christi 391. Secunda apparicio fuit circa annum domini 710 in Tumba\nin Cornubia juxta mare.\n\n\u201cTertia apparicio Rom\u00e6 fuit; tempore Gregorii pap\u00e6 legitur accidisse: nam\ntempore magn\u00e6 pestilenci\u00e6, etc.\n\n\u201cQuarta apparicio fuit in ierarchiis nostrorum angelorum.\n\n\u201cSpacium loci mentis Sancti Michaelis est DUCENTORUM CUBITORUM UNDIQUE\nOCEANO CINCTUM, et religiosi monachi dicti loci. Abrincensis antistes\nAubertus nomine, ut in honore Sancti Michaelis construeret ... predictus\nLOCUS OPACISSIMA PRIMO CLAUDEBATUR SYLVA, AB OCEANO MILIARIBUS DISTANS\nSEX, aptissimam prasbens latebram ferarum, in quo loco olim comperimus\nMONACHOS domino servientes.\u201d\n\nThe text is somewhat corrupt and fragmentary, but may be translated as\nfollows:\u2014\n\n\u201cThe apparition of St. Michael in the Mount Tumba, formerly called the\nHore-rock in the wodd; and there were a forest and meadows and arable land\nbetween the said mount and the Syllye Isles, and there were 140 parochial\nchurches swallowed by the sea between that mount and Sylly.\n\n\u201cThe first apparition of St. Michael in Mount Gorgon in the Kingdom of\nApulia was in the year 391. The second apparition was about the year 710,\nin Tumba in Cornwall by the sea.\n\n\u201cThe third apparition is said to have happened at Rome in the time of Pope\nGregory: for at the time of the great pestilence, etc.\n\n\u201cThe fourth apparition was in the hierarchies of our angels.\n\n\u201cThe space of St. Michael\u2019s Mount is 200 cubits; it is everywhere\nsurrounded by the sea, and there are religious monks of that place. The\nhead of Abrinca, Aubertus by name, that he might erect a church(93) in\nhonor of St. Michael. The aforesaid place was at first enclosed by a very\ndense forest, six miles distant from the ocean, furnishing a good retreat\nfor wild animals. In which place we heard that formerly monks serving the\nLord,\u201d etc.\n\nThe only way to explain this jumble is to suppose that William of\nWorcester made these entries in his diary while walking up and down in the\nChurch of St. Michael\u2019s Mount, and listening to one of the monks, reading\nto him from a MS. which had been brought from Normandy, and referred in\nreality to the early history of the Norman, but not of the Cornish Mount.\nThe first line, \u201cApparicio Sancti Michaelis in monte Tumba,\u201d was probably\nthe title or the heading of the MS. Then William himself added, \u201cantea\nvocata le Hore-rok in the wodd,\u201d a name which he evidently heard on the\nspot, and which no doubt conveyed to him the impression that the rock had\nformerly stood in the midst of a wood. For instead of continuing his\naccount of the apparitions of St. Michael, he quotes a tradition in\nsupport of the former existence of a forest surrounding the Mount. Only,\nstrange to say, instead of producing the evidence which he produced\nafterwards in confirmation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount having been surrounded\nby a dense forest, he here gives the tradition about Lionesse, the sunken\nland between the Land\u2019s End and the Scylly Isles. This is evidently a\nmistake, for no other writer ever supposed the sunken land of Lionesse to\nhave reached as far as St. Michael\u2019s Mount.\n\nThen follows the entry about the four apparitions of St. Michael. Here we\nmust read \u201c_in monte Gargano_\u201d instead of \u201c_in monte Gorgon_.\u201d Opinions\nvary as to the exact date of the apparition in Mount Garganus in the South\nof Italy, but 391 is certainly far too early, and has to be changed into\n491 or 493. In the second apparition, all is right, if we leave out \u201cin\nCornubia juxta mare,\u201d which was added either by William or by the monk who\nwas showing him the book. It refers to the well-known apparition of St.\nMichael at Avranches. The third and fourth apparitions are of no\nconsequence to us.\n\nAs we read on, we come next to William\u2019s own measurements, fixing the\nextent of St. Michael\u2019s Mount at two hundred cubits. After that we are met\nby a passage which, though it hardly construes, can be understood in one\nsense only, namely, as giving an account of the Abbey of St. Michel in\nNormandy. I suppose it is not too bold if I recognize in _Aubertus\nAutbertus_, and in _Abrincensis antistes_, the _Abrincatensis episcopus_\nor _antistes_, the Bishop of Avranches.\n\nNow it is well known that the Mont St. Michel in Normandy was believed to\nhave been originally surrounded by forests and meadows. Du Moustier in the\n\u201cNeustria Pia\u201d relates (p. 371), \u201cH\u00e6c rupes antiquitus Mons erat cinctus\nsylvis et saltibus,\u201d \u201cThis rock was of old a mount surrounded by forests\nand meadows.\u201d But this is not all. In the old chronicle of Mont St.\nMichel, quoted by Mabillon, which was written before the middle of the\ntenth century, the same account is given; and if we compare that account\nwith the words used by William of Worcester, we can no longer doubt that\nthe old chronicle, or, it may be, a copy of it, had been brought from\nFrance to England, and that what was intended for a description of the\nNorman abbey and its neighborhood was taken, intentionally or\nunintentionally, as a description of the Cornish Mount. These are the\nwords of the Norman chronicler, as quoted by Mabillon, compared with the\npassage in William of Worcester:\u2014\n\n_Mont St. Michel._          _St. Michael\u2019s Mount._\n\u201cAddit idem auctor hunc     \u201cPredictus LOCUS\nlocum OPACISSIMA OLIM       OPACISSIMA OLIM\nSILVA CLAUSUM fuisse, et    CLAUDEBATUR Sylva ab\nMONACHOS IBIDEM             oceano miliaribus distans\nINHABITASSE duasque ad      sex, aptissimam pr\u00e6bens\nsuum usque tempus           latebram ferarum, in quo\nexstitisse ecclesias quas   loco olim comperimus\nilli scilicet monachi       MONACHOS DOMINO\nincolebant.\u201d                SERVIENTES\u201d.\n\n\u201cThe same author adds that this place was formerly inclosed by a very\ndense forest, and that monks dwelt there, and that two churches existed\nthere up to his own time, which those monks inhabited.\u201d\n\nThe words CLAUSUM OPACISSIMA SILVA are decisive. The phrase AB OCEANO\nMILIARIBUS DISTANS SEX, too, is taken from an earlier passage of the same\nauthor, quoted above, which passage may likewise have supplied the\nidentical phrases OCEANO UNDIQUE CINCTUS, and the SPATIUM DUCENTORUM\nCUBITORUM, which are hardly applicable to St. Michael\u2019s Mount. The \u201ctwo\nchurches _still_ existing in Mont St. Michel,\u201d had to be left out, for\nthere was no trace of them in St. Michael\u2019s Mount. But the monks who lived\nin them were retained, and to give a little more life, the wild beasts\nwere added. Even the expression of _antistes_ instead of _episcopus_\noccurs in the original, where we read, \u201cH\u00e6c loci facies erat ante sancti\nMichaelis apparitionem hoc anno factam religiosissimo Autberto\nAbrincatensi episcopo, admonentis se velle ut sibi in ejus montis vertice\necclesia sub ipsius patrocinio erigeretur. H\u00e6renti ANTISTITI tertio idem\nintimatum,\u201d etc.\n\nThus vanishes the testimony of William of Worcester, so often quoted by\nCornish antiquarians, as to the dense forest by which St. Michael\u2019s Mount\nin Cornwall was once surrounded, and all the evidence that remains to\nsubstantiate the former presence of trees on and around the Cornish Mount\nis reduced to the name \u201cthe Hoar rock in the wood,\u201d given by William, and\nthe Cornish names of _Cara clowse in Cowse_ or _Cara Cowz in Clowze_,\ngiven by Carew. How much or how little dependence can be placed on old\nCornish names of places and their supposed meaning has been shown before\nin the case of Marazion. Carew certainly did not understand Cornish, nor\ndid the people with whom he had intercourse; and there is no doubt that he\nwrote down the Cornish names as best he could, and without any attempt at\ndeciphering their meaning. He was told that \u201cCara clowse in Cowse\u201d meant\nthe \u201cHoar rock in the Wood,\u201d and he had no reason to doubt it. Even a very\nsmall knowledge of Cornish would have enabled Carew or anybody else at his\ntime to find out that _cowz_ might be meant for the Cornish word for wood,\nand that _careg_ was rock. _Clowse_ too might easily be taken in the sense\nof gray, as gray in Cornish was _glos_. Then why should we hesitate to\naccept _Cara clowse in cowse_ as the ancient Cornish name of the Mount,\nand why object to Mr. Pengelly\u2019s argument that it must have been given at\na time when the Mount was surrounded by a very dense forest, and that _a\nfortiori_ at that distant period Cornish must have been the spoken\nlanguage of Cornwall?\n\nThe first objection is that the old word for \u201cwood\u201d in Cornish was _cuit_\nwith a final _t_, and that the change of a final _t_ into _z_ is a\nphonetic corruption which takes place only in the later stage of the\nCornish language. The ancient Cornish _cuit_, \u201cwood,\u201d occurs in Welsh as\n_coed_, in Armorican as _koat_ and _koad_, and is supposed to exist in\nCornish names of places, such as _Penquite_, _Kilquite_, etc. _Cowz_,\ntherefore, could not have occurred in a Cornish name supposed to have been\nformed at least 2,000 if not 20,000 years ago.\n\nThis thrust might, no doubt, be parried by saying that the name of the\nMount would naturally change with the general changes of the Cornish\nlanguage. Yet this is not always the case with proper names, as may be\nseen by the names just quoted, _Penquite_ and _Kilquite_. At all events,\nwe begin to see how uncertain is the ground on which we stand.\n\nIf we take the facts, scanty and uncertain as they are, we may admit that,\nat the time of William of Worcester, the Mount had most likely a Latin, a\nCornish, and a Saxon appellation. It is curious that William should say\nnothing of a Cornish name, but only quote the Saxon one. However, this\nSaxon name, \u201cthe Hoar rock in the Wood\u201d sounds decidedly like a\ntranslation, and is far too long and cumbrous for a current name.\n_Michelstow_ is mentioned by others as the Saxon name of the Mount\n(Naveus, p. 233). The Latin name given to the Mount, but only after it had\nbecome a dependency of Mont St. Michel in Normandy, was, as we saw from\nWilliam of Worcester\u2019s diary, _Mons Tumba_ or _Mons Tumba in Cornubia_,\nand after his time the name of _St. Michael in Tumb\u00e2_ or in _Monte Tumb\u00e2_\nis certainly used promiscuously for the Cornish and Norman mounts.(94) Now\n_tumba_, after meaning hillock, became the recognized name for tomb, and\nthe medi\u00e6val Latin _tumba_, too, was always understood in that sense. If,\ntherefore, the name \u201cMons in tumba\u201d had to be rendered in Cornish for the\nbenefit of the Cornish-speaking monks of the Benedictine priory, _tumba_\nwould actually be taken in the sense of tomb. One form of the Cornish\nname, as preserved by Carew, is _Cara cowz in clowze_; and this, if\ninterpreted without any preconceived opinion, would mean in Cornish \u201cthe\nold rock of the tomb.\u201d _Cara_ stands for _carak_, a rock. _Cowz_ is meant\nfor _coz_, the modern Cornish and Armorican form corresponding to the\nancient Cornish _coth_, old.(95) _Clowze_ is a modern and somewhat corrupt\nform in Cornish, corresponding to the Welsh _clawdh_, a tomb. _Cladh-va_,\nin Cornish, means a burying-place; and _cluddu_, to bury, has been\npreserved as a Cornish verb, corresponding to the Welsh _cladhu_. In\nGaelic, too, _cladh_ is a tomb or burying-place; and in Armorican, which\ngenerally follows the same phonetic changes as the Cornish, we actually\nfind _kleuz_ and _kl\u00f4z_ for tomb or inclosure. (See Le Gonidec, \u201cDict.\nBreton-Fran\u00e7ais,\u201d s. v.) The _en_ might either be the Cornish preposition\n_yn_, or it may have been intended for the article in the genitive, _an_.\nThe old rock in the tomb, _i.e._ _in tumb\u00e2_, or the old rock of the tomb,\nCornish _carag goz an cloz_, would be intelligible and natural renderings\nof the Latin _Mons in tumba_.\n\nBut though this would fully account for the origin of the Cornish name as\npreserved by Carew, it would still leave the Saxon appellation the \u201cHore\nrock in the wodd\u201d unexplained. How could William of Worcester have got\nhold of this name? Let us remember that William does not mention any\nCornish name of the Mount, and that nothing is ever said at his time of\nthe \u201cHore rock in the wodd\u201d being a translation of an old Cornish name.\nAll we know is that the monks of the Mount used that name, and it is\nhardly likely that so long and cumbrous a name should ever have been used\nmuch by the people in the neighborhood. How the monks of St. Michael\u2019s\nMount came to call their place the \u201cHore rock in the wodd\u201d at the time of\nWilliam of Worcester, and probably long before his time, is, however, not\ndifficult to explain, after we have seen how they transferred the\ntraditions which originally referred to Mont St. Michel to their own\nmonastery. Having told the story of the \u201c_sylva opacissima_\u201d by which\ntheir mount was formerly surrounded to many visitors, as they told it to\nWilliam of Worcester, the name of the \u201cHore rock in the wodd\u201d might easily\nspring up among them, and be kept up within the walls of their priory. Nor\nis there any evidence that in this peculiar form the name ever spread\nbeyond their walls. But it is possible that here, too, language may have\nplayed some tricks. The number of people who used these names and kept\nthem alive can never have been large, and hence they were exposed much\nmore to accidents arising from ignorance and individual caprice than names\nof villages or towns which are in the keeping of hundreds and thousands of\npeople. The monks of St. Michael\u2019s Mount may in time have forgotten the\nexact purport of \u201cCara cowz in clowze,\u201d \u201cthe old rock of the tomb,\u201d really\nthe \u201cMons in tumba;\u201d and their minds being full of the old forest by which\nthey believed _their_ island, like Mont St. Michel, to have been formerly\nsurrounded, what wonder if _cara cowz in clowze_ glided away into _cara\nclowse in cowze_, and thus came to confirm the old tradition of the\nforest. For _cowz_ would at once be taken as the modern Cornish word for\nwood, corresponding to the old Cornish _cuit_, while _clowse_ might, with\na little effort, be identified with the Cornish _glos_, gray, the\nArmorican _gl\u00e2z_. Carew, it should be observed, sanctions both forms, the\noriginal one, _cara cowz in clowze_, \u201cthe old rock of the tomb,\u201d and the\nother _cara clowse in cowze_, meaning possibly \u201cthe gray rock in the\nwood.\u201d The sound of the two is so like that, particularly to the people\nnot very familiar with the language, the substitution of one for the other\nwould come very naturally; and as a reason could more easily be given for\nthe latter than for the former name, we need not be surprised if in the\nfew passages where the name occurs _after Carew\u2019s_ time, the secondary\nname, apparently confirming the monkish legend of the dense forest that\nonce surrounded St. Michael\u2019s Mount, should have been selected in\npreference to the former, which, but to a scholar and an antiquarian,\nsounded vague and meaningless.\n\nIf my object had been to establish any new historical fact, or to support\nany novel theory, I should not have indulged so freely in what to a\ncertain extent may be called mere conjecture. But my object was only to\npoint out the uncertainty of the evidence which Mr. Pengelly has adduced\nin support of a theory which would completely revolutionize our received\nviews as to the early history of language and the migrations of the Aryan\nrace. At first sight the argument used by Mr. Pengelly seems unanswerable.\nHere is St. Michael\u2019s Mount, which, according to geological evidence, may\nformerly have been part of the mainland. Here is an old Cornish name for\nSt. Michael\u2019s Mount, which means \u201cthe gray rock in the wood.\u201d Such a name,\nit might well be argued, could not have been given to the island after it\nhad ceased to be a gray rock in the wood; therefore it must have been\ngiven previous to the date which geological chronology fixes for the\ninsulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount. That date varies from 16,000 to 20,000\nyears ago. And as the name is Cornish, it follows that Cornish-speaking\npeople must have lived in Cornwall at that early geological period.\n\nNothing, as I said, could sound more plausible; but before we yield to the\nargument, we must surely ask, Is there no other way of explaining the\nnames _Cara cowz in clowze_ and _Cara clowse in cowze_? And here we find\u2014\n\n(1.) That the legend of the dense forest by which the Mount was believed\nto have been surrounded existed, so far as we know, before the earliest\noccurrence of the Cornish name, and that it owes its origin entirely to a\nmistake which can be accounted for by documentary evidence. A legend told\nof Mont St. Michel had been transferred _ipsissimis verbis_ to St.\nMichael\u2019s Mount, and the monks of that priory repeated the story which\nthey found in their chronicle to all who came to visit their establishment\nin Cornwall. They told the name, among others, to William of Worcester,\nand to prevent any incredulity on his part, they gave him chapter and\nverse from their chronicle, which he carefully jotted down in his\ndiary.(96)\n\n(2.) We find that when the Cornish name first occurs, it lends itself, in\none form, to a very natural interpretation, which does not give the\nmeaning of \u201cHore rock in the wodd,\u201d but shows the name _Cara cowz in\nclowze_ to have been a literal rendering of the Latin name \u201cMons in\ntumba,\u201d originally the name of Mont St. Michel, but at an early date\napplied in charters to St. Michael\u2019s Mount.\n\n(3.) We find that the second form of the Cornish name, namely, _cara\nclowse in cowze_, may either be a merely metamorphic corruption of _cara\ncowz in clowze_, readily suggested and supported by the new meaning which\nit yielded of \u201cgray rock in the wood;\u201d or, even if we accept it as an\noriginal name, that it would be no more than a name framed by the\nCornish-speaking monks of the Mount, in order to embody the same spurious\ntradition which had given rise to the name of \u201cHore rock in the wodd.\u201d\n\nI need hardly add that in thus arguing against Mr. Pengelly\u2019s conclusions,\nI do not venture to touch his geological arguments. St. Michael\u2019s Mount\nmay have been united with the mainland; it may, for all we know, have been\nsurrounded by a dense forest; and it may be perfectly possible\ngeologically to fix the date when that forest was destroyed, and the Mount\nsevered, so far as it is severed, from the Cornish coast. All I protest\nagainst is that any one of these facts could be proved, or even supported,\nby the Cornish name of the Mount, whether _cara cowz in clowze_, or _cara\nclowse in cowze_, or by the English name, communicated by William of\nWorcester, \u201cthe Hore rock in the wodd,\u201d or finally by the legend which\ngave rise to these names, and which, as can be proved by irrefragable\nevidence, was transplanted by mistake from the Norman to the Cornish\ncoast. The only question which, in conclusion, I should like to address to\ngeologists, is this: As geologists are obliged to leave it doubtful\nwhether the insulation of St. Michael\u2019s Mount was due to the washing of\nthe sea-shore, or to a general subsidence of the country, may it not have\nbeen due to neither of these causes, and may not the Mount have always\nbeen that kind of half-island which it certainly was two thousand years\nago?\n\n1867.\n\n\n\n\n\nXVI. BUNSEN.(97)\n\n\nOurs is, no doubt, a forgetful age. Every day brings new events rushing in\nupon us from all parts of the world; and the hours of real rest, when we\nmight ponder over the past, recall pleasant days, gaze again on the faces\nof those who are no more, are few indeed. Men and women disappear from\nthis busy stage, and though for a time they had been the radiating centres\nof social, political, or literary life, their places are soon taken by\nothers,\u2014\u201cthe place thereof shall know them no more.\u201d Few only appear again\nafter a time, claiming once more our attention through the memoirs of\ntheir lives, and then either flitting away forever among the shades of the\ndeparted, or assuming afresh a power of life, a place in history, and an\ninfluence on the future often more powerful even than that which they\nexercised on the world while living in it. To call the great and good thus\nback from the grave is no easy task; it requires not only the power of a\n_vates sacer_, but the heart of a loving friend. Few men live great and\ngood lives; still fewer can write them; nay, often, when they have been\nlived and have been written, the world passes by unheeding, as crowds will\npass without a glance by the portraits of a Titian or a Van Dyke. Now and\nthen, however, a biography takes root, and then acts, as a lesson, as no\nother lesson can act. Such biographies have all the importance of an _Ecce\nHomo_, showing to the world what man can be, and permanently raising the\nideal of human life. It was so in England with the life of Dr. Arnold; it\nwas so more lately with the life of Prince Albert; it will be the same\nwith the life of Bunsen.\n\nIt seems but yesterday that Bunsen left England; yet it was in 1854 that\nhis house in Carlton Terrace ceased to be the refreshing oasis in London\nlife which many still remember, and that the powerful, thoughtful,\nbeautiful, loving face of the Prussian Ambassador was seen for the last\ntime in London society. Bunsen then retired from public life, and after\nspending six more years in literary work, struggling with death, yet\nreveling in life, he died at Bonn on the 28th of November, 1860. His widow\nhas devoted the years of her solitude to the noble work of collecting the\nmaterials for a biography of her husband; and we have now in two large\nvolumes all that could be collected, or, at least, all that could be\nconveniently published, of the sayings and doings of Bunsen, the scholar,\nthe statesman, and, above all, the philosopher and the Christian.\nThroughout the two volumes the outward events are sketched by the hand of\nthe Baroness Bunsen; but there runs, as between wooded hills, the main\nstream of Bunsen\u2019s mind, the outpourings of his heart, which were given so\nfreely and fully in his letters to his friends. When such materials exist,\nthere can be no more satisfactory kind of biography than that of\nintroducing the man himself, speaking unreservedly to his most intimate\nfriends on the great events of his life. This is an autobiography, in\nfact, free from all drawbacks. Here and there that process, it is true,\nentails a greater fullness of detail than is acceptable to ordinary\nreaders, however highly Bunsen\u2019s own friends may value every line of his\nfamiliar letters. But general readers may easily pass over letters\naddressed to different persons, or treating of subjects less interesting\nto themselves, without losing the thread of the story of the whole life;\nwhile it is sometimes of great interest to see the same subject discussed\nby Bunsen in letters addressed to different people. One serious difficulty\nin these letters is that they are nearly all translations from the German,\nand in the process of translation some of the original charm is inevitably\nlost. The translations are very faithful, and they do not sacrifice the\npeculiar turn of German thought to the requirements of strictly idiomatic\nEnglish. Even the narrative itself betrays occasionally the German\natmosphere in which it was written, but the whole book brings back all the\nmore vividly to those who knew Bunsen the language and the very\nexpressions of his English conversation. The two volumes are too bulky,\nand one\u2019s arms ache while holding them; yet one is loth to put them down,\nand there will be few readers who do not regret that more could not have\nbeen told us of Bunsen\u2019s life.\n\nAll really great and honest men may be said to live three lives: there is\none life which is seen and accepted by the world at large, a man\u2019s outward\nlife; there is a second life which is seen by a man\u2019s most intimate\nfriends, his household life; and there is a third life, seen only by the\nman himself and by Him who searcheth the heart, which maybe called the\ninner or heavenly life. Most biographers are and must be satisfied with\ngiving the two former aspects of their hero\u2019s life,\u2014the version of the\nworld, and that of his friends. Both are important, both contain some\ntruth, though neither of them the whole truth. But there is a third life,\na life led in communion with God, a life of aspiration rather than of\nfulfillment,\u2014that life which we see, for instance, in St. Paul, when he\nsays, \u201cThe good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not,\nthat I do.\u201d It is but seldom that we catch a glimpse of those deep springs\nof human character which cannot rise to the surface even in the most\nconfidential intercourse, which in every-day life are hidden from a man\u2019s\nown sight, but which break forth when he is alone with his God in secret\nprayer,\u2014aye, in prayers without words. Here lies the charm of Bunsen\u2019s\nlife. Not only do we see the man, the father, the husband, the brother,\nthat stands behind the ambassador, but we see behind the man his angel\nbeholding the face of his Father which is in heaven. His prayers, poured\nforth in the critical moments of his life, have been preserved to us, and\nthey show us what the world ought to know, that our greatest men can also\nbe our best men, and that freedom of thought is not incompatible with\nsincere religion. Those who knew Bunsen well, know how that deep,\nreligious undercurrent of his soul was constantly bubbling up and breaking\nforth in his conversations, startling even the mere worldling by an\nearnestness that frightened away every smile. It was said of him that he\ncould drive out devils, and he certainly could, with his solemn, yet\nloving voice, soften hearts that would yield to no other appeal, and see\nwith one look through that mask which man wears but too often in the\nmasquerade of the world. Hence his numerous and enduring friendships, of\nwhich these volumes contain so many sacred relics. Hence that confidence\nreposed in him by men and women who had once been brought in contact with\nhim. To those who can see with their eyes only, and not with their hearts,\nit may seem strange that Sir Robert Peel, shortly before his death, should\nhave uttered the name of Bunsen. To those who know that England once had\nprime ministers who were found praying on their knees before they\ndelivered their greatest speeches, Sir Robert Peel\u2019s recollection, or, it\nmay be, desire of Bunsen in the last moments of his life has nothing\nstrange. Bunsen\u2019s life was no ordinary life, and the memoirs of that life\nare more than an ordinary book. That book will tell in England and in\nGermany far more than in the Middle Ages the life of a new saint; nor are\nthere many saints whose real life, if sifted as the life of Bunsen has\nbeen, would bear comparison with that noble character of the nineteenth\ncentury.\n\nBunsen was born in 1791 at Corbach, a small town in the small principality\nof Waldeck. His father was poor, but a man of independent spirit, of moral\nrectitude, and of deep religious convictions. Bunsen, the son of his old\nage, distinguished himself at school, and was sent to the University of\nMarburg at the age of seventeen. All he had then to depend on was an\nexhibition of about \u00a37 a year, and a sum of \u00a315, which his father had\nsaved for him to start him in life. This may seem a small sum; but if we\nwant to know how much of paternal love and self-denial it represented, we\nought to read an entry in his father\u2019s diary: \u201cAccount of cash receipts by\nGod\u2019s mercy obtained for transcribing law documents between 1793 and\n1814,\u2014sum total 3,020 thalers 23 groschen,\u201d that is to say, about \u00a322 per\nannum. Did any English Duke ever give his son a more generous\nallowance,\u2014more than two-thirds of his own annual income? Bunsen began by\nstudying divinity, and actually preached a sermon at Marburg, in the\nChurch of St. Elizabeth. Students in divinity are required in Germany to\npreach sermons as part of their regular theological training, and before\nthey are actually ordained. Marburg was not then a very efficient\nuniversity, and, not finding there what he wanted, Bunsen after a year\nwent to G\u00f6ttingen, chiefly attracted by the fame of Heyne. He soon devoted\nhimself entirely to classical studies: and in order to support\nhimself,\u2014for \u00a37 per annum will not support even a German student,\u2014he\naccepted the appointment of assistant teacher of Greek and Hebrew at the\nG\u00f6ttingen gymnasium, and also became private tutor to a young American,\nMr. Astor, the son of the rich American merchant. He was thus learning and\nteaching at the same time, and he acquired by his daily intercourse with\nhis pupil a practical knowledge of the English language. While at\nG\u00f6ttingen he carried off, in 1812, a prize for an essay on \u201cThe Athenian\nLaw of Inheritance,\u201d which attracted more than usual attention, and may,\nin fact, be looked upon as one of the first attempts at Comparative\nJurisprudence. In 1713 he writes from G\u00f6ttingen:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cPoor and lonely did I arrive in this place. Heyne received me,\n    guided me, bore with me, encouraged me, showed me in himself the\n    example of a high and noble energy and indefatigable activity in a\n    calling which was not that to which his merit entitled him; he\n    might have superintended and administered and maintained an entire\n    kingdom.\u201d\n\n\nThe following passage from the same letter deserves to be quoted as coming\nfrom the pen of a young man of twenty-two:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLearning annihilates itself, and the most perfect is the first\n    submerged; for the next age scales with ease the height which cost\n    the preceding the full vigor of life.\u201d\n\n\nAfter leaving the university Bunsen travelled in Germany with young Astor,\nand made the acquaintance of Frederic Schlegel at Vienna, of Jacobi,\nSchelling, and Thiersch at Munich. He was all that time continuing his own\nphilological studies, and we see him at Munich attending lectures on\nCriminal Law, and making his first beginning in the study of Persian. When\non the point of starting for Paris with his American pupil, the news of\nthe glorious battle of Leipzig (October, 1813) disturbed their plans, and\nhe resolved to settle again at G\u00f6ttingen till peace should have been\nconcluded. Here, while superintending the studies of Mr. Astor, he plunged\ninto reading of the most varied character. He writes (p. 51):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI remain firm, and strive after my earliest purpose in life, more\n    felt, perhaps, than already discerned,\u2014namely, to bring over into\n    my own knowledge and into my own Fatherland the language and the\n    spirit of the solemn and distant East. I would for the\n    accomplishment of this object even quit Europe, in order to draw\n    out of the ancient well that which I find not elsewhere.\u201d\n\n\nThis is the first indication of an important element in Bunsen\u2019s early\nlife, his longing for the East, and his all but prophetic anticipation of\nthe great results which a study of the ancient language of India would one\nday yield, and the light it would shed on the darkest pages in the ancient\nhistory of Greece, Italy, and Germany. The study of the Athenian law of\ninheritance seems first to have drawn his attention to the ancient codes\nof Indian law, and he was deeply impressed by the discovery that the\npeculiar system of inheritance which in Greece existed only in the\npetrified form of a primitive custom, sanctioned by law, disclosed in the\nlaws of Manu its original purport and natural meaning. This one spark\nexcited in Bunsen\u2019s mind that constant yearning after a knowledge of\nEastern and more particularly of Indian literature which very nearly drove\nhim to India in the same adventurous spirit as Anquetil Duperron and Czoma\nde K\u00f6r\u00f6s. We are now familiar with the great results that have been\nobtained by a study of the ancient languages and religion of the East; but\nin 1813 neither Bopp nor Grimm had begun to publish, and Frederic Schlegel\nwas the only one who in his little pamphlet, \u201cOn the Language and the\nWisdom of the Indians\u201d (1808), had ventured to assert a real intellectual\nrelationship between Europe and India. One of Bunsen\u2019s earliest friends,\nWolrad Schumacher, related that even at school Bunsen\u2019s mind was turned\ntowards India. \u201cSometimes he would let fall a word about India which was\nunaccountable to me, as at that time I connected only a geographical\nconception with that name\u201d (p. 17).\n\nWhile thus engaged in his studies at G\u00f6ttingen, and working in company\nwith such friends as Brandis, the historian of Greek philosophy; Lachmann,\nthe editor of the New Testament; L\u00fccke, the theologian; Ernst Schulze, the\npoet, and others,\u2014Bunsen felt the influence of the great events that\nbrought about the regeneration of Germany; nor was he the man to stand\naloof, absorbed in literary work, while others were busy doing mischief\ndifficult to remedy. The princes of Germany and their friends, though\ngrateful to the people for having at last shaken off with fearful\nsacrifices the foreign yoke of Napoleon, were most anxious to maintain for\ntheir own benefit that convenient system of police government which for so\nlong had kept the whole of Germany under French control. \u201cIt is but too\ncertain,\u201d Bunsen writes, \u201cthat either for want of good-will or of\nintelligence our sovereigns will not grant us freedom such as we\ndeserve.... And I fear that, as before, the much-enduring German will\nbecome an object of contempt to all nations who know how to value national\nspirit.\u201d His first political essays belong to that period. Up to August,\n1814, Bunsen continued to act as private tutor to Mr. Astor, though we see\nhim at the same time, with his insatiable thirst after knowledge,\nattending courses of lectures on astronomy, mineralogy, and other subjects\napparently so foreign to the main current of his mind. When Mr. Astor left\nhim to return to America, Bunsen went to Holland to see a sister to whom\nhe was deeply attached, and who seems to have shared with him the same\nreligious convictions which in youth, manhood, and old age formed the\nfoundation of Bunsen\u2019s life. Some of Bunsen\u2019s detractors have accused him\nof professing Christian piety in circles where such professions were sure\nto be well received. Let them read now the annals of his early life, and\nthey will find to their shame how boldly the same Bunsen professed his\nreligious convictions among the students and professors of G\u00f6ttingen, who\neither scoffed at Christianity or only tolerated it as a kind of harmless\nsuperstition. We shall only quote one instance:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cBunsen, when a young student at G\u00f6ttingen, once suddenly quitted\n    a lecture in indignation at the unworthy manner in which the most\n    sacred subjects were treated by one of the professors. The\n    professor paused at the interruption, and hazarded the remark that\n    \u2018some one belonging to the Old Testament had possibly slipped in\n    unrecognized.\u2019 That called forth a burst of laughter from the\n    entire audience, all being as well aware as the lecturer himself\n    who it was that had mortified him.\u201d\n\n\nDuring his stay in Holland, Bunsen not only studied the language and\nliterature of that country, but his mind was also much occupied in\nobserving the national and religious character of this small but\ninteresting branch of the Teutonic race. He writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cIn all things the German, or, if you will, the Teutonic character\n    is worked out into form in a manner more decidedly national than\n    anywhere else.... This journey has yet more confirmed my decision\n    to become acquainted with the entire Germanic race, and then to\n    proceed with the development of my governing ideas (_i.e._ the\n    study of Eastern languages in elucidation of Western thought). For\n    this purpose I am about to travel with Brandis to Copenhagen to\n    learn Danish, and, above all, Icelandic.\u201d\n\n\nAnd so he did. The young student, as yet without any prospects in life,\nthrew up his position at G\u00f6ttingen, declined to waste his energies as a\nschoolmaster, and started, we hardly know how, on his journey to Denmark.\nThere, in company with Brandis, he lived and worked hard at Danish, and\nthen attacked the study of the ancient Icelandic language and literature\nwith a fervor and with a purpose that shrank from no difficulty. He writes\n(p. 79):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe object of my research requires the acquisition of the whole\n    treasures of language, in order to complete my favorite linguistic\n    theories, and to inquire into the poetry and religious conceptions\n    of German-Scandinavian heathenism, and their historical connection\n    with the East.\u201d\n\n\nWhen his work in Denmark was finished, and when he had collected\nmaterials, some of which, as his copy taken of the \u201cV\u00f6luspa,\u201d a poem of\nthe Edda, were not published till forty years later, he started with\nBrandis for Berlin. \u201cPrussia,\u201d he writes on the 10th of October, 1815, \u201cis\n_the true_ Germany.\u201d Thither he felt drawn, as well as Brandis, and\nthither he invited his friends, though, it must be confessed, without\nsuggesting to them any settled plan of how to earn their daily bread. He\nwrites as if he was even then at the head of affairs in Berlin, though he\nwas only the friend of a friend of Niebuhr\u2019s, Niebuhr himself being by no\nmeans all powerful in Prussia, even in 1815. This hopefulness was a trait\nin Bunsen\u2019s character that remained through life. A plan was no sooner\nsuggested to him and approved by him than he took it for granted that all\nobstacles must vanish, and many a time did all obstacles vanish, before\nthe joyous confidence of that magician, a fact that should be remembered\nby those who used to blame him as sanguine and visionary. One of his\nfriends, L\u00fccke, writes to Ernst Schulze, the poet, whom Bunsen had invited\nto Denmark, and afterwards to Berlin:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cIn the inclosed richly filled letter you will recognize Bunsen\u2019s\n    power and splendor of mind, and you will also not fail to perceive\n    his thoughtlessness in making projects. He and Brandis are a pair\n    of most amiable speculators, full of affection; but one must meet\n    them with the _ne quid nimis_.\u201d\n\n\nHowever, Bunsen in his flight was not to be scared by any warning or\nchecked by calculating the chances of success or failure. With Brandis he\nwent to Berlin, spent the glorious winter from 1815 to 1816 in the society\nof men like Niebuhr and Schleiermacher, and became more and more\ndetermined in his own plan of life, which was to study Oriental languages\nin Paris, London, or Calcutta, and then to settle at Berlin as Professor\nof Universal History. A full statement of his literary labors, both for\nthe past and for the future, was drawn up by him, to be submitted to\nNiebuhr, and it will be read even now with interest by those who knew\nBunsen when he tried to take up after forty years the threads that had\nslipped from his hand at the age of four-and-twenty.\n\nInstead of being sent to study at Paris and London by the Prussian\ngovernment, as he seems to have wished, he was suddenly called to Paris by\nhis old pupil, Mr. Astor, who, after two years\u2019 absence, had returned to\nEurope, and was anxious to renew his relations with Bunsen. Bunsen\u2019s\nobject in accepting Astor\u2019s invitation to Paris was to study Persian; and\ngreat was his disappointment when, on arriving there, Mr. Astor wished him\nat once to start for Italy. This was too much for Bunsen, to be turned\nback just as he was going to quench his thirst for Oriental literature in\nthe lectures of Sylvestre de Sacy. A compromise was effected. Bunsen\nremained for three months in Paris, and promised then to join his friend\nand pupil in Italy. How he worked at Persian and Arabic during the\ninterval must be read in his own letters:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI write from six in the morning till four in the afternoon, only\n    in the course of that time having a walk in the garden of the\n    Luxembourg, where I also often study; from four to six I dine and\n    walk; from six to seven sleep; from seven to eleven work again. I\n    have overtaken in study some of the French students who had begun\n    a year ago. God be thanked for this help! Before I go to bed I\n    read a chapter in the New Testament, in the morning on rising one\n    in the Old Testament; yesterday I began the Psalms from the\n    first.\u201d\n\n\nAs soon as he felt that he could continue his study of Persian without the\naid of a master, he left Paris. Though immersed in work, he had made\nseveral acquaintances, among others that of Alexander von Humboldt, \u201cwho\nintends in a few years to visit Asia, where I may hope to meet him. He has\nbeen beyond measure kind to me, and from him I shall receive the best\nrecommendations for Italy and England, as well as from his brother, now\nPrussian Minister in London. Lastly, the winter in Rome may become to me,\nby the presence of Niebuhr, more instructive and fruitful than in any\nother place. Thus has God ordained all things for me for the best,\naccording to His will, not mine, and far better than I deserve.\u201d\n\nThese were the feelings with which the young scholar, then twenty-four\nyears of age, started for Italy, as yet without any position, without\nhaving published a single work, without knowing, as we may suppose, where\nto rest his head. And yet he was full, not only of hope, but of gratitude,\nand he little dreamt that before seven years had passed he would be in\nNiebuhr\u2019s place; and before twenty-five years had passed in the place of\nWilliam von Humboldt, the Prussian Ambassador at the Court of St. James.\n\nThe immediate future, in fact, had some severe disappointments in store\nfor him. When he arrived at Florence to meet Mr. Astor, the young American\nhad received peremptory orders to return to New York; and as Bunsen\ndeclined to follow him, he found himself really stranded at Florence, and\nall his plans thoroughly upset. Yet, though at that very time full of care\nand anxiety about his nearest relations, who looked to him for support\nwhen he could hardly support himself, his God-trusting spirit did not\nbreak down. He remained at Florence, continuing his Persian studies, and\nmaking a living by private tuition. A Mr. Cathcart seems to have been his\nfavorite pupil, and through him new prospects of eventually proceeding to\nIndia seemed to open. But, at the same time, Bunsen began to feel that the\ncircumstances of his life became critical. \u201cI feel,\u201d he says, \u201cthat I am\non the point of securing or losing the fruit of my labors for life.\u201d Rome\nand Niebuhr seemed the only haven in sight, and thither Bunsen now began\nto steer his frail bark. He arrived in Rome on the 14th of November, 1816.\nNiebuhr, who was Prussian Minister, received him with great kindness, and\nentered heartily into the literary plans of his young friend. Brandis,\nNiebuhr\u2019s secretary, renewed in common with his old friend his study of\nGreek philosophy. A native teacher of Arabic was engaged to help Bunsen in\nhis Oriental studies. The necessary supplies seem to have come partly from\nMr. Astor, partly from private lessons for which Bunsen had to make time\nin the midst of his varied occupations. Plato, Firdusi, the Koran, Dante,\nIsaiah, the Edda, are mentioned by himself as his daily study.\n\nFrom an English point of view that young man at Rome, without a status,\nwithout a settled prospect in life, would have seemed an amiable dreamer,\ndestined to wake suddenly, and not very pleasantly, to the stern realities\nof life. If anything seemed unlikely, it was that an English gentleman, a\nman of good birth and of independent fortune, should give his daughter to\nthis poor young German at Rome. Yet this was the very thing which a kind\nProvidence, that Providence in which Bunsen trusted amid all his troubles\nand difficulties, brought to pass. Bunsen became acquainted with Mr.\nWaddington, and was allowed to read German with his daughters. In the most\nhonorable manner he broke off his visits when he became aware of his\nfeelings for Miss Waddington. He writes to his sister:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cHaving, at first, believed myself quite safe (the more so as I\n    cannot think of marrying without impairing my whole scheme of\n    mental development, and, least of all, could I think of pretending\n    to a girl of fortune), I thought there was no danger.\u201d\n\n\nA little later he writes to Mrs. Waddington to explain to her the reason\nfor his discontinuing his visits. But the mother\u2014and, to judge from her\nletters, a high-minded mother she must have been\u2014accepted Bunsen on trust;\nhe was allowed to return to the house, and on the 1st of July, 1817, the\nyoung German student, then twenty-five years of age, was married at Rome\nto Miss Waddington. What a truly important event this was for Bunsen, even\nthose who had not the privilege of knowing the partner of his life may\nlearn from the work before us. Though little is said in these memoirs of\nhis wife, the mother of his children, the partner of his joys and sorrows,\nit is easy to see how Bunsen\u2019s whole mode of life became possible only by\nthe unceasing devotion of an ardent soul and a clear head consecrated to\none object,\u2014to love and to cherish, for better for worse, for richer for\npoorer, in sickness and in health, till death us do part,\u2014aye, and even\nafter death! With such a wife, the soul of Bunsen could soar on its wings,\nthe small cares of life were removed, an independence was secured, and,\nthough the Indian plans had to be surrendered, the highest ambition of\nBunsen\u2019s life, a professorship in a German university, seemed now easy of\nattainment. We should have liked a few more pages describing the joyous\nlife of the young couple in the heyday of their life; we could have wished\nthat he had not declined the wish of his mother-in-law, to have his bust\nmade by Thorwaldsen, at a time when he must have been a model of manly\nbeauty. But if we know less than we could wish of what Bunsen then was in\nthe eyes of the world, we are allowed an insight into that heavenly life\nwhich underlay all the outward happiness of that time, and which shows him\nto us as but one eye could then have seen him. A few weeks after his\nmarriage he writes in his journal:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cEternal, omnipresent God! enlighten me with thy Holy Spirit, and\n    fill me with thy heavenly light! What in childhood I felt and\n    yearned after, what throughout the years of youth grew clearer and\n    clearer before my soul, I will now venture to hold fast, to\n    examine, to represent the revelation of Thee in man\u2019s energies and\n    efforts: thy firm path through the stream of ages I long to trace\n    and recognize, as far as may be permitted to me even in this body\n    of earth. The song of praise to Thee from the whole of humanity,\n    in times far and near,\u2014the pains and lamentations of men, and\n    their consolations in Thee,\u2014I wish to take in, clear and\n    unhindered. Do Thou send me thy Spirit of Truth, that I may behold\n    things earthly as they are, without veil and without mask, without\n    human trappings and empty adornment, and that in the silent peace\n    of truth I may feel and recognize Thee. Let me not falter, nor\n    slide away from the great end of knowing Thee. Let not the joys,\n    or honors, or vanities of the world enfeeble and darken my spirit;\n    let me ever feel that I can only perceive and know Thee in so far\n    as mine is a living soul, and lives, and moves, and has its being\n    in Thee.\u201d\n\n\nHere we see Bunsen as the world did not see him, and we may observe how\nthen, as ever, his literary work was to him hallowed by the objects for\nwhich it was intended. \u201cThe firm path of God through the stream of ages\u201d\nis but another title for one of his last works, \u201cGod in History,\u201d planned\nwith such youthful ardor, and finished under the lengthening shadow of\ndeath.\n\nThe happiness of Bunsen\u2019s life at Rome may easily be imagined. Though\nanxious to begin his work at a German university, he stipulated for three\nmore years of freedom and preparation. Who could have made the sacrifice\nof the bright spring of life, of the unclouded days of happiness at Rome\nwith wife and children, and with such friends as Niebuhr and Brandis? Yet\nthis stay at Rome was fraught with fatal consequences. It led the straight\ncurrent of Bunsen\u2019s life, which lay so clear before him, into a new bed,\nat first very tempting, for a time smooth and sunny, but alas! ending in\nwaste of energy for which no outward splendor could atone. The first false\nstep seemed very natural and harmless. When Brandis went to Germany to\nbegin his professorial work, Bunsen took his place as Niebuhr\u2019s secretary\nat Rome. He was determined, then, that nothing should induce him to remain\nin the diplomatic career (p. 130), but the current of that mill-stream was\ntoo strong even for Bunsen. How he remained as Secretary of Legation,\n1818; how the King of Prussia, Frederick William III., came to visit Rome,\nand took a fancy to the young diplomatist, who could speak to him with a\nmodesty and frankness little known at courts; how, when Niebuhr exchanged\nhis embassy for a professorial chair at Bonn, Bunsen remained as Charg\u00e9\nd\u2019Affaires; how he went to Berlin, 1827-28, and gained the hearts of the\nold King and of everybody else; how he returned to Rome and was fascinated\nby the young Crown Prince of Prussia, afterwards Frederick William IV.,\nwhom he had to conduct through the antiquities and the modern life of the\nworld city; how he became Prussian Minister, the friend of popes and\ncardinals, the centre of the best and most brilliant society; how, when\nthe difficulties began between Prussia and the Papal government, chiefly\nwith regard to mixed marriages, Bunsen tried to mediate, and was at last\ndisowned by both parties in 1838,\u2014all this may now be read in the open\nmemoirs of his life. His letters during these twenty years are numerous\nand full, particularly those addressed to his sister, to whom he was\ndeeply attached. They are the most touching and elevating record of a life\nspent in important official business, in interesting social intercourse,\nin literary and antiquarian researches, in the enjoyment of art and\nnature, and in the blessedness of a prosperous family life, and throughout\nin an unbroken communion with God. There is hardly a letter without an\nexpression of that religion in common life, that constant consciousness of\na Divine Presence, which made his life a life in God. To many readers this\nfree outpouring of a God-loving soul will seem to approach too near to\nthat abuse of religious phraseology which is a sign of superficial rather\nthan of deep-seated piety. But, though through life a sworn enemy of every\nkind of cant, Bunsen never would surrender the privilege of speaking the\nlanguage of a Christian, because that language had been profaned by the\nthoughtless repetition of shallow pietists.\n\nBunsen has frequently been accused of pietism, particularly in Germany, by\nmen who could not distinguish between pietism and piety, just as in\nEngland he was attacked as a freethinker by men who never knew the freedom\nof the children of God. \u201cChristianity is ours, not theirs,\u201d he would\nfrequently say of those who made religion a mere profession, and imagined\nthey knew Christ because they held a crosier and wore a mitre. We can now\nwatch the deep emotions and firm convictions of that true-hearted man, in\nletters of undoubted sincerity, addressed to his sister and his friends,\nand we can only wonder with what feelings they have been perused by those\nwho in England questioned his Christianity or who in Germany suspected his\nhonesty.\n\nFrom the time of his first meeting with the King of Prussia at Rome, and\nstill more, after his stay at Berlin in 1827, Bunsen\u2019s chief interest with\nregard to Prussia centred in ecclesiastical matters. The King, after\neffecting the union of the Lutheran and Calvinistic branches of the\nProtestant Church, was deeply interested in drawing up a new Liturgy for\nhis own national, or, as it was called, Evangelical Church. The\nintroduction of his Liturgy, or _Agenda_, particularly as it was carried\nout, like everything else in Prussia, by royal decree, met with\nconsiderable resistance. Bunsen, who had been led independently to the\nstudy of ancient liturgies, and who had devoted much of his time at Rome\nto the collection of ancient hymns and hymn tunes, could speak to the King\non these favorite topics from the fullness of his heart. The King listened\nto him, even when Bunsen ventured to express his dissent from some of the\nroyal proposals, and when he, the young attach\u00e9, deprecated any\nauthoritative interference with the freedom of the Church. In Prussia the\nwhole movement was unpopular, and Bunsen, though he worked hard to render\nit less so, was held responsible for much which he himself had\ndisapproved. Of all these turbulent transactions there remains but one\nbright and precious relic, Bunsen\u2019s \u201cHymn and Prayer Book.\u201d\n\nThe Prussian Legation on the Capitol was during Bunsen\u2019s day not only the\nmeeting-place of all distinguished Germans, but, in the absence of an\nEnglish embassy, it also became the recognized centre of the most\ninteresting portion of English society at Rome. Among the Germans, whose\npresence told on Bunsen\u2019s life, either by a continued friendship or by\ncommon interests and pursuits, we meet the names of Ludwig, King of\nBavaria; Baron von Stein, the great Prussian statesman; Radowitz, the less\nfortunate predecessor of Bismarck; Schnorr, Overbeck, and Mendelssohn.\nAmong Englishmen, whose friendship with Bunsen dates from the Capitol, we\nfind Thirlwall, Philip Pusey, Arnold, and Julius Hare. The names of\nThorwaldsen, too, of Leopardi, Lord Hastings, Champollion, Sir Walter\nScott, Chateaubriand, occur again and again in the memoirs of that Roman\nlife which teems with interesting events and anecdotes. The only literary\nproductions of that eventful period are Bunsen\u2019s part in Platner\u2019s\n\u201cDescription of Rome,\u201d and the \u201cHymn and Prayer Book.\u201d But much material\nfor later publications had been amassed in the mean time. The study of the\nOld Testament had been prosecuted at all times, and in 1824 the first\nbeginning was made by Bunsen in the study of hieroglyphics, afterwards\ncontinued with Champollion, and later with Lepsius. The Arch\u00e6ological\nInstitute and the German Hospital, both on the Capitol, were the two\npermanent bequests that Bunsen left behind when he shook off the dust of\nhis feet, and left Rome on the 29th of April, 1838, in search of a new\nCapitol.\n\nAt Berlin, Bunsen was then in disgrace. He had not actually been dismissed\nthe service, but he was prohibited from going to Berlin to justify\nhimself, and he was ordered to proceed to England on leave of absence. To\nEngland, therefore, Bunsen now directed his steps with his wife and\nchildren, and there, at least, he was certain of a warm welcome, both from\nhis wife\u2019s relations and from his own very numerous friends. When we read\nthrough the letters of that period, we hardly miss the name of a single\nman illustrious at that time in England. As if to make up for the\ninjustice done to him in Italy, and for the ingratitude of his country,\npeople of all classes and of the most opposite views vied in doing him\nhonor. Rest he certainly found none, while travelling about from one town\nto another, and staying at friends\u2019 houses, attending meetings, making\nspeeches, writing articles, and, as usual, amassing new information\nwherever he could find it. He worked at Egyptian with Lepsius; at Welsh\nwhile staying with Lady Hall; at Ethnology with Dr. Prichard. He had to\ndraw up two state papers,\u2014one on the Papal aggression, the other on the\nlaw of divorce. He plunged, of course, at once into all the ecclesiastical\nand theological questions that were then agitating people\u2019s minds in\nEngland, and devoted his few really quiet hours to the preparation of his\nown \u201cLife of Christ.\u201d With Lord Ashley he attended Bible meetings, with\nMrs. Fry he explored the prisons, with Philip Pusey he attended\nagricultural assemblies, and he spent night after night as an admiring\nlistener in the House of Commons. He was presented to the Queen and the\nDuke of Wellington, was made a D.C.L. at Oxford, discussed the future with\nJ. H. Newman, the past with Buckland, Sedgwick, and Whewell. Lord\nPalmerston and Lord John Russell invited him to political conferences;\nMaurice and Keble listened to his fervent addresses; Dr. Arnold consulted\nthe friend of Niebuhr on his own \u201cHistory of Rome,\u201d and tried to convert\nhim to more liberal opinions with regard to Church reform. Dr. Holland,\nMrs. Austin, Ruskin, Carlyle, Macaulay, Gaisford, Dr. Hawkins, and many\nmore, all greeted him, all tried to do him honor, and many of them became\nattached to him for life. The architectural monuments of England, its\ncastles, parks, and ruins, passed quickly through his field of vision\nduring that short stay. But he soon calls out: \u201cI care not now for all the\nruins of England; it is her life that I like.\u201d\n\nMost touching is his admiration, his real love of Gladstone. Thirty years\nhave since passed, and the world at large has found out by this time what\nEngland possesses in him. But it was not so in 1838, and few men at that\nearly time could have read Gladstone\u2019s heart and mind so truly as Bunsen.\nHere are a few of his remarks:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLast night, when I came home from the Duke, Gladstone\u2019s book was\n    on my table, the second edition having come out at seven o\u2019clock.\n    It is the book of the time, a great event,\u2014the first book since\n    Burke that goes to the bottom of the vital question; far above his\n    party and his time. I sat up till after midnight; and this morning\n    I continued until I had read the whole, and almost every sheet\n    bears my marginal glosses, destined for the Prince, to whom I have\n    sent the book with all dispatch. Gladstone is the first man in\n    England as to intellectual powers, and he has heard higher tones\n    than any one else in this island.\u201d\n\n\nAnd again (p. 493):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cGladstone is by far the first living intellectual power on that\n    side. He has left his schoolmasters far behind him, but we must\n    not wonder if he still walks in their trammels; his genius will\n    soon free itself entirely, and fly towards heaven with its own\n    wings.... I wonder Gladstone should not have the feeling of moving\n    on an _inclined plane_, or that of sitting down among ruins, as if\n    he were settled in a well-stored house.\u201d\n\n\nOf Newman, whom he had met at Oxford, Bunsen says:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThis morning I have had two hours at breakfast with Newman. O! it\n    is sad,\u2014he and his friends are truly intellectual people, but they\n    have lost their ground, going exactly _my way_, but stopping short\n    in the middle. It is too late. There has been an amicable change\n    of ideas and a Christian understanding. Yesterday he preached a\n    beautiful sermon. A new period of life begins for me; may God\u2019s\n    blessing be upon it!\u201d\n\n\nOxford made a deep impression on Bunsen\u2019s mind. He writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI am luxuriating in the delights of Oxford. There has never been\n    enough said of this queen of all cities.\u201d\n\n\nBut what as a German he admired and envied most was, after all, the House\nof Commons:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI wish you could form an idea of what I felt. I saw for the first\n    time _man_, the member of a true Germanic State, in his highest,\n    his proper place, defending the highest interests of humanity with\n    the wonderful power of speech-wrestling, but with the arm of the\n    spirit, boldly grasping at or tenaciously holding fast power, in\n    the presence of his fellow-citizens, submitting to the public\n    conscience the judgment of his cause and of his own uprightness. I\n    saw before me the empire of the world governed, and the rest of\n    the world controlled and judged, by this assembly. I had the\n    feeling that, had I been born in England, I would rather be dead\n    than not sit among and speak among them. I thought of my own\n    country, and was thankful that I _could_ thank God for being a\n    German and being myself. But I felt, also, that we are all\n    children on this field in comparison with the English; how much\n    they, with their discipline of mind, body, and heart, can effect\n    even with but moderate genius, and even with talent alone! I drank\n    in every word from the lips of the speakers, even those I\n    disliked.\u201d\n\n\nMore than a year was thus spent in England in the very fullness of life.\n\u201cMy stay in England in 1838-39,\u201d he writes at a later time, the 22d of\nSeptember, 1841, \u201cwas the poetry of my existence as a man; this is the\nprose of it. There was a dew upon those fifteen months, which the sun has\ndried up, and which nothing can restore.\u201d Yet even then Bunsen could not\nhave been free from anxieties for the future. He had a large family\ngrowing up, and he was now again, at the age of forty-seven, without any\ndefinite prospects in life. In spite, however, of the intrigues of his\nenemies, the personal feelings of the King and the Crown Prince prevailed\nat last; and he was appointed in July, 1839, as Prussian Minister in\nSwitzerland, his secret and confidential instructions being \u201cto do\nnothing.\u201d These instructions were carefully observed by Bunsen, as far as\npolitics were concerned. He passed two years of rest at the Hubel, near\nBerne, with his family, devoted to his books, receiving visits from his\nfriends, and watching from a distance the coming events in Prussia.\n\nIn 1840 the old King died, and it was generally expected that Bunsen would\nat once receive an influential position at Berlin. Not till April, 1841,\nhowever, was he summoned to the court, although, to judge from the\ncorrespondence between him and the new King, Frederick William IV., few\nmen could have enjoyed a larger share of royal confidence and love than\nBunsen. The King was hungering and thirsting after Bunsen, yet Bunsen was\nnot invited to Berlin. The fact is that the young King had many friends,\nand those friends were not the friends of Bunsen. They were satisfied with\nhis honorary exile in Switzerland, and thought him best employed at a\ndistance in doing nothing. The King too, who knew Bunsen\u2019s character from\nformer years, must have known that Berlin was not large enough for him;\nand he therefore left him in his Swiss retirement till an employment\nworthy of him could be found. This was to go on a special mission to\nEngland with a view of establishing, in common with the Church of England,\na Protestant bishopric at Jerusalem. In Jerusalem the King hoped that the\ntwo principal Protestant churches of Europe would, across the grave of the\nRedeemer, reach to each other the right hand of fellowship. Bunsen entered\ninto this plan with all the energy of his mind and heart. It was a work\nthoroughly congenial to himself; and if it required diplomatic skill,\ncertainly no one could have achieved it more expeditiously and\nsuccessfully than Bunsen. He was then a _persona grata_ with bishops and\narchbishops, and Lord Ashley\u2014not yet Lord Shaftesbury\u2014gave him all the\nsupport his party could command. English influence was then so powerful at\nConstantinople that all difficulties due to Turkish bigotry were quickly\nremoved. At the end of June, 1841, he arrived in London; on the 6th of\nAugust he wrote, \u201cAll is settled;\u201d and on the 7th of November the new\nBishop of Jerusalem was consecrated. Seldom was a more important and more\ncomplicated transaction settled in so short a time. Had the discussions\nbeen prolonged, had time been given to the leaders of the Romanizing party\nto recover from their surprise, the bill that had to be passed through\nboth houses would certainly have been defeated. People have hardly yet\nunderstood the real bearing of that measure, nor appreciated the germ\nwhich it may still contain for the future of the Reformed Church. One man\nonly seems to have seen clearly what a blow this first attempt at a union\nbetween the Protestant churches of England and Germany was to his own\nplans, and to the plans of his friends; and we know now, from Newman\u2019s\n\u201cApologia,\u201d that the bishopric of Jerusalem drove him to the Church of\nRome. This may have been for the time a great loss to the Church of\nEngland; it marked, at all events, a great crisis in her history.\n\nIn spite, however, of his great and unexpected success, there are traces\nof weariness in Bunsen\u2019s letters of that time, which show that he was\nlonging for more congenial work. \u201cO, how I hate and detest diplomatic\nlife!\u201d he wrote to his wife; \u201cand how little true intellectuality is there\nin the high society here as soon as you cease to speak of English national\nsubjects and interests; and the eternal hurricanes, whirling, urging,\nrushing, in this monster of a town! Even with you and the children life\nwould become oppressive under the diplomatic burden. I can pray for our\ncountry life, but I cannot pray for a London life, although I dare not\npray against it, _if it must be_.\u201d\n\nBunsen\u2019s observations of character amidst the distractions of his London\nseason are very interesting and striking, particularly at this distance of\ntime. He writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cMr. Gladstone has been invited to become one of the trustees of\n    the Jerusalem Fund. He is beset with scruples; his heart is with\n    us, but his mind is entangled in a narrow system. He awaits\n    salvation from another code, and by wholly different ways from\n    myself. Yesterday morning I had a letter from him of twenty-four\n    pages, to which I replied early this morning by eight.\n\n\n    \u201cThe Bishop of London constantly rises in my estimation. He has\n    replied admirably to Mr. Gladstone, closing with the words, \u2018My\n    dear sir, my intention is not to limit and restrict the Church of\n    Christ, but to enlarge it.\u2019 \u201d\n\n\nA letter from Sir Robert Peel, too, must here be quoted in full:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cWHITEHALL, _October_ 10, 1841.\n\n\n    \u201cMY DEAR MR. BUNSEN,\u2014My note merely conveyed a request that you\n    would be good enough to meet Mr. Cornelius at dinner on Friday\n    last.\n\n\n    \u201cI assure you that I have been amply repaid for any attention I\n    may have shown to that distinguished artist, in the personal\n    satisfaction I have had in the opportunity of making his\n    acquaintance. He is one of a noble people distinguished in every\n    art of war and peace. The union and patriotism of that people,\n    spread over the centre of Europe, will contribute the surest\n    guarantee for the peace of the world, and the most powerful check\n    upon the spread of all pernicious doctrines injurious to the cause\n    of religion and order, and that liberty which respects the rights\n    of others.\n\n\n    \u201cMy earnest hope is that every member of this illustrious race,\n    while he may cherish the particular country of his birth as he\n    does his home, will extend his devotion beyond its narrow limits,\n    and exult in the name of a German, and recognize the claim of\n    Germany to the love and affection and patriotic exertions of all\n    her sons.\n\n\n    \u201cI hope I judge the feelings of every German by those which were\n    excited in my own breast (in the breast of a foreigner and a\n    stranger) by a simple ballad, that seemed, however, to concentrate\n    the will of a mighty people, and said emphatically,\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThey shall not have the Rhine.\u201d\n\n\n    \u201c_They_ will not have it: and the Rhine will be protected by a\n    song, if the sentiments which that song embodies pervade, as I\n    hope and trust they do, every German heart.\n\n\n    \u201cYou will begin to think that I am a good German myself, and so I\n    am, if hearty wishes for the union and welfare of the German race\n    can constitute one.\n\n\n    \u201cBelieve me, most faithfully yours,\n\n\n    \u201cROBERT PEEL.\u201d\n\n\nWhen Bunsen was on the point of leaving London, he received the unexpected\nand unsolicited appointment of Prussian Envoy in England, an appointment\nwhich he could not bring himself to decline, and which again postponed for\ntwelve years his cherished plans of an _otium cum dignitate_. What the\nworld at large would have called the most fortunate event in Bunsen\u2019s life\nproved indeed a real misfortune. It deprived Bunsen of the last chance of\nfully realizing the literary plans of his youth, and it deprived the world\nof services that no one could have rendered so well in the cause of\nfreedom of thought, of practical religion, and in teaching the weighty\nlessons of antiquity to the youth of the future. It made him waste his\nprecious hours in work that any Prussian baron could have done as well, if\nnot better, and did not set him free until his bodily strength was\nundermined, and the joyful temper of his mind saddened by sad experiences.\n\nNothing could have been more brilliant than the beginning of Bunsen\u2019s\ndiplomatic career in England. First came the visit of the King of Prussia,\nwhom the Queen had invited to be godfather to the Prince of Wales. Soon\nafter the Prince of Prussia came to England under the guidance of Bunsen.\nThen followed the return visit of the Queen at Stolzenfels, on the Rhine.\nAll this, no doubt, took up much of Bunsen\u2019s time, but it gave him also\nthe pleasantest introduction to the highest society of England; for as\nBaroness Bunsen shrewdly remarks, \u201cthere is nothing like standing within\nthe Bude-light of royalty to make one conspicuous, and sharpen perceptions\nand recollections.\u201d (II. p. 8.) Bunsen complained, no doubt, now and then,\nabout excessive official work, yet he seemed on the whole reconciled to\nhis position, and up to the year 1847 we hear of no attempts to escape\nfrom diplomatic bondage. In a letter to Mrs. Fry he says:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI can assure you I never passed a more quiet and truly\n    satisfactory evening in London than the last, in the Queen\u2019s\n    house, in the midst of the excitement of the season. I think this\n    is a circumstance for which one ought to be thankful; and it has\n    much reminded me of hours that I have spent at Berlin and Sans\n    Souci with the King and the Queen and the Prince William, and, I\n    am thankful to add, with the Princess of Prussia, mother of the\n    future King. It is a striking and consoling and instructive proof\n    that what is called the world, the great world, is not necessarily\n    worldly in itself, but only by that inward worldliness which, as\n    rebellion against the spirit, creeps into the cottage as well as\n    into the palace, and against which no outward form is any\n    protection. Forms and rules may prevent the outbreak of wrong, but\n    cannot regenerate right, and may quench the spirit and poison\n    inward truth. The Queen gives hours daily to the labor of\n    examining into the claims of the numberless petitions addressed to\n    her, among other duties to which her time of privacy is devoted.\u201d\n\n\nThe Queen\u2019s name and that of Prince Albert occur often in these memoirs,\nand a few of Bunsen\u2019s remarks and observations may be of interest, though\nthey contain little that can now be new to the readers of the \u201cLife of the\nPrince Consort\u201d and of the \u201cQueen\u2019s Journal.\u201d\n\nFirst, a graphic description, from the hand of Baroness Bunsen, of the\nQueen opening Parliament in 1842:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cLast, the procession of the Queen\u2019s entry, and herself, looking\n    worthy and fit to be the converging point of so many rays of\n    grandeur. It is self-evident that she is not tall; but were she\n    ever so tall, she could not have more grace and dignity, a head\n    better set, a throat more royally and classically arching; and one\n    advantage there is in her not being taller, that when she casts a\n    glance, it is of necessity upwards and not downwards, and thus the\n    effect of the eyes is not thrown away,\u2014the beam and effluence not\n    lost. The composure with which she filled the throne, while\n    awaiting the Commons, was a test of character,\u2014no fidget and no\n    apathy. Then her voice and enunciation could not be more perfect.\n    In short, it could not be said that _she did well_, but she _was_\n    the Queen,\u2014she was, and felt herself to be, the acknowledged chief\n    among grand and national realities.\u201d (Vol. II. p. 10.)\n\n\nThe next is an account of the Queen at Windsor Castle on receiving the\nPrincess of Prussia, in 1842:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe Queen looked well and _rayonnante_, with that expression that\n    she always has when thoroughly pleased with all that occupies her\n    mind, which you know I always observe with delight, as fraught\n    with that truth and reality which so essentially belong to her\n    character, and so strongly distinguish her countenance, in all its\n    changes, from the _fixed mask_ only too common in the royal rank\n    of society.\u201d (Vol. II. p. 115.)\n\n\nAfter having spent some days at Windsor Castle, Bunsen writes in 1846:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe Queen often spoke with me about education, and in particular\n    of religious instruction. Her views are very serious, but at the\n    same time liberal and comprehensive. She (as well as Prince\n    Albert) hates all formalism. The Queen reads a great deal, and has\n    done my book on \u2018The Church of the Future\u2019 the honor to read it so\n    attentively, that the other day, when at Cashiobury, seeing the\n    book on the table, she looked out passages which she had approved\n    in order to read them aloud to the Queen-Dowager.\u201d (Vol. II. p.\n    121.)\n\n\nAnd once more:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cThe Queen is a wife and a mother as happy as the happiest in her\n    dominions, and no one can be more careful of her charges. She\n    often speaks to me of the great task before her and the Prince in\n    the education of the royal children, and particularly of the\n    Prince of Wales and the Princess Royal.\u201d\n\n\nBefore the troubles of 1847 and 1848, Bunsen was enabled to spend part of\nhis time in the country, away from the turmoil of London, and much of his\nliterary work dates from that time. After his \u201cChurch of the Future,\u201d the\ndiscovery of the genuine Epistles of Ignatius by the late Dr. Cureton led\nBunsen back to the study of the earliest literature of the Christian\nChurch, and the results of these researches were published in his\n\u201cIgnatius.\u201d Lepsius\u2019 stay in England and his expedition to Egypt induced\nBunsen to put his own materials in order, and to give to the world his\nlong-matured views on \u201cThe Place of Egypt in Universal History.\u201d The later\nvolumes of this work led him into philological studies of a more general\ncharacter, and at the meeting of the British Association at Oxford, in\n1847, he read before the brilliantly attended ethnological section his\npaper \u201cOn the Results of the recent Egyptian Researches in reference to\nAsiatic and African Ethnology, and the Classification of Languages,\u201d\npublished in the \u201cTransactions\u201d of the Association, and separately under\nthe title, \u201cThree Linguistic Dissertations, by Chevalier Bunsen, Dr.\nCharles Meyer, and Dr. Max M\u00fcller.\u201d \u201cThose three days at Oxford,\u201d he\nwrites, \u201cwere a time of great distinction to me, both in my public and\nprivate capacity.\u201d Everything important in literature and art attracted\nnot only his notice, but his warmest interest; and no one who wanted\nencouragement, advice, or help in literary or historical researches,\nknocked in vain at Bunsen\u2019s door. His table at breakfast and dinner was\nfilled by ambassadors and professors, by bishops and missionaries, by\ndukes and poor scholars, and his evening parties offered a kind of neutral\nground, where people could meet who could have met nowhere else, and where\nEnglish prejudices had no jurisdiction. That Bunsen, holding the position\nwhich he held in society, but still more being what he was apart from his\nsocial position, should have made his presence felt in England, was not to\nbe wondered at. He would speak out whenever he felt strongly, but he was\nthe last man to meddle or to intrigue. He had no time even if he had had\ntaste for it. But there were men in England who could never forgive him\nfor the Jerusalem bishopric, and who resorted to the usual tactics for\nmaking a man unpopular. A cry was soon raised against his supposed\ninfluence at court, and doubts were thrown out as to his orthodoxy. Every\nLiberal bishop that was appointed was said to have been appointed through\nBunsen. Dr. Hampden was declared to have been his nominee,\u2014the fact being\nthat Bunsen did not even know of him before he had been made a bishop. As\nhis practical Christianity could not well be questioned, he was accused of\nholding heretical opinions, because his chronology differed from that of\nJewish Rabbis and Bishop Usher. It is extraordinary how little Bunsen\nhimself cared about these attacks, though they caused acute suffering to\nhis family. He was not surprised that he should be hated by those whose\ntheological opinions he considered unsound, and whose ecclesiastical\npolitics he had openly declared to be fraught with danger to the most\nsacred interests of the Church. Besides, he was the personal friend of\nsuch men as Arnold, Hare, Thirlwall, Maurice, Stanley, and Jowett. He had\neven a kind word to say for Froude\u2019s \u201cNemesis of Faith.\u201d He could\nsympathize, no doubt, with all that was good and honest, whether among the\nHigh Church or Low Church party, and many of his personal friends belonged\nto the one as well as to the other; but he could also thunder forth with\nno uncertain sound against everything that seemed to him hypocritical,\npharisaical, unchristian. Thus he writes (II. p. 81):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI apprehend having given the ill-disposed a pretext for\n    considering me a semi-Pelagian, a contemner of the Sacraments, or\n    denier of the Son, a perverter of the doctrine of justification,\n    and therefore a crypto-Catholic theosophist, heretic, and\n    enthusiast, deserving of all condemnation. I have written it\n    because I felt compelled in conscience to do so.\u201d\n\n\nAgain (II. p. 87):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cIn my letter to Mr. Gladstone, I have maintained the lawfulness\n    and the apostolic character of the German Protestant Church. You\n    will find the style changed in this work, bolder and more free.\u201d\n\n\nAttacks, indeed, became frequent, and more and more bitter, but Bunsen\nseldom took any notice of them. He writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cHare is full of wrath at an attack made upon me in the \u2018Christian\n    Remembrancer\u2019\u2014in a very Jesuitical way insinuating that I ought\n    not to have so much influence allowed me. Another article\n    execrates the bishopric of Jerusalem as an abomination. This zeal\n    savors more of hatred than of charity.\u201d\n\n\nBut though Bunsen felt far too firmly grounded in his own Christian faith\nto be shaken by such attacks upon himself, he too could be roused to wrath\nand indignation when the poisoned arrows of theological Fijians were shot\nagainst his friends. When speaking of the attacks on Arnold, he writes:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cTruth is nothing in this generation except a means, in the best\n    case, to something good; but never, like virtue, considered as\n    good, as the good,\u2014the object in itself. X dreams away in\n    twilight. Y is sliding into Puseyism. Z (the Evangelicals) go on\n    thrashing the old straw. I wish it were otherwise; but I love\n    England, with all her faults. I write to you, now only to you, all\n    I think. All the errors and blunders which make the Puseyites a\n    stumbling-block to so many,\u2014the rock on which they split is no\n    other than what Rome split upon, self-righteousness, out of want\n    of understanding justification by faith, and hovering about the\n    unholy and blasphemous idea of atoning for our sins, because they\n    feel not, understand not, indeed, believe not, _the Atonement_,\n    and therefore enjoy not the glorious privileges of the children of\n    God,\u2014the blessed duty of the sacrifice of thanksgiving through Him\n    who atoned for them. Therefore no sacrifice,\u2014therefore no\n    Christian priesthood,\u2014no Church. By our fathers these ideas were\n    fundamentally acknowledged; they were in abeyance in the worship\n    of the Church, but not on the domestic altar and in the hymns of\n    the spirit. With the Puseyites, as with the Romanists, these ideas\n    are cut off at the roots. O when will the Word of God be brought\n    up against them? What a state this country is in! The land of\n    liberty rushing into the worst slavery, the veriest thralldom!\u201d\n\n\nTo many people it might have seemed as if Bunsen during all this time was\ntoo much absorbed in English interests, political, theological, and\nsocial, that he had ceased to care for what was passing in his own\ncountry. His letters, however, tell a different tale. His voluminous\ncorrespondence with the King of Prussia, though not yet published, will\none day bear witness to Bunsen\u2019s devotion to his country, and his\nenthusiastic attachment to the house of Hohenzollern. From year to year he\nwas urging on the King and his advisers the wisdom of liberal concessions,\nand the absolute necessity of action. He was working at plans for\nconstitutional reforms; he went to Berlin to rouse the King, to shame his\nministers, to insist in season and out of season on the duty of acting\nbefore it was too late. His faith in the King is most touching. When he\ngoes to Berlin in 1844, he sees everywhere how unpopular the King is, how\neven his best intentions are misunderstood and misrepresented. Yet he goes\non working and hoping, and he sacrifices his own popularity rather than\noppose openly the suicidal policy that might have ruined Prussia, if\nPrussia could have been ruined. Thus he writes in August, 1845:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cTo act as a statesman at the helm, in the Fatherland, I consider\n    not to be in the least my calling: what I believe to be my calling\n    is to be mounted high before the mast, to observe what land, what\n    breakers, what signs of coming storm there may be, and then to\n    announce them to the wise and practical steersman. It is the same\n    to me whether my own nation shall know in my life-time or after my\n    death how faithfully I have taken to heart its weal and woe, be it\n    in Church or State, and borne it on my heart as my nearest\n    interest, as long as life lasted. I give up the point of making\n    myself understood in the present generation. Here (in London) I\n    consider myself to be upon the right spot. I seek to preserve\n    peace and unity, and to remove dissatisfaction, wherever it is\n    possible.\u201d\n\n\nNothing, however, was done. Year after year was thrown away, like a\nSibylline leaf, and the penalty for the opportunities that had been lost\nbecame heavier and heavier. The King, particularly when he was under the\ninfluences of Bunsen\u2019s good genius, was ready for any sacrifice. \u201cThe\ncommotion,\u201d he exclaimed, in 1845, \u201ccan only be met and overcome by\nfreedom, absolute freedom.\u201d But when Bunsen wanted measures, not words,\nthe King himself seemed powerless. Surrounded as he was by men of the most\nopposite characters and interests, and quite capable of gauging them\nall,\u2014for his intellect was of no common stamp,\u2014he could agree with all of\nthem to a certain point, but could never bring himself to go the whole\nlength with any one of them. Bunsen writes from Berlin: \u201cMy stay will\ncertainly not be a long one; the King\u2019s heart is like that of a brother\ntoward me, but our ways diverge. The die is cast, and he reads in my\ncountenance that I deplore the throw. He too fulfills his fate, and we\nwith him.\u201d\n\nWhen, at last, in 1847, a Constitution was granted by the King, it was too\nlate. Sir Robert Peel seems to have been hopeful, and in a letter of\ntwenty-two pages to Bunsen he expressed an opinion that the Prussian\ngovernment might still be able to maintain the Constitution if only\nsincere in desiring its due development, and prepared in mind for that\ndevelopment. To the King, however, and to the party at court, the\nConstitution, if not actually hateful, was a mere plaything, and the idea\nof surrendering one particle of his independence never entered the King\u2019s\nmind. Besides, 1848 was at the door, and Bunsen certainly saw the coming\nstorm from a distance, though he could not succeed in opening the eyes of\nthose who stood at the helm in Prussia. Shortly before the hurricane broke\nloose, Bunsen had once more determined to throw up his official position,\nand retire to Bonn. But with 1848 all these hopes and plans were scattered\nto the winds. Bunsen\u2019s life became more restless than ever, and his body\nwas gradually giving way under the constant tension of his mind. \u201cI feel,\u201d\nhe writes in 1848 to Archdeacon Hare, \u201cthat I have entered into a new\nperiod of life. I have given up all private concerns, all studies and\nresearches of my own, and live entirely for the present political\nemergencies of my country, to stand or to fall by and with it.\u201d\n\nWith his love for England he deeply felt the want of sympathy on the part\nof England for Prussia in her struggle to unite and regenerate the whole\nof Germany. \u201cIt is quite entertaining,\u201d he writes, with a touch of irony\nvery unusual in his letters, \u201cto see the stiff unbelief of the English in\nthe future of Germany. Lord John is merely uninformed. Peel has somewhat\nstaggered the mind of the excellent Prince by his unbelief; yet he has a\nstatesmanlike good-will towards the _Germanic_ nations, and even for the\n_German_ nation. Aberdeen is the greatest sinner. He believes in God and\nthe Emperor Nicholas!\u201d The Schleswig-Holstein question embittered his\nfeelings still more; and in absence of all determined convictions at\nBerlin, the want of moral courage and political faith among those in whose\nhands the destinies of Germany had been placed, roused him to wrath and\nfury, though he could never be driven to despair of the future of Prussia.\nFor a time, indeed, he seemed to hesitate between Frankfort, then the seat\nof the German Parliament, and Berlin; and he would have accepted the\nPremiership at Frankfort if his friend Baron Stockmar had accepted the\nMinistry of Foreign Affairs. But very soon he perceived that, however\nparalyzed for the moment, Prussia was the only possible centre of life for\na regeneration of Germany; that Prussia could not be merged in Germany,\nbut that Germany had to be resuscitated and reinvigorated through Prussia.\nHis patriotic nominalism, if we may so call his youthful dreams of a\nunited Germany, had to yield to the force of that political realism which\nsacrifices names to things, poetry to prose, the ideal to the possible.\nWhat made his decision easier than it would otherwise have been to a heart\nso full of enthusiasm was his personal attachment to the King and to the\nPrince of Prussia. For a time, indeed, though for a short time only,\nBunsen, after his interview with the King in January, 1849, believed that\nhis hopes might still be realized, and he seems actually to have had the\nKing\u2019s promise that he would accept the crown of a United Germany, without\nAustria. But as soon as Bunsen had left Berlin, new influences began to\nwork on the King\u2019s brain; and when Bunsen returned, full of hope, he was\ntold by the King himself that he had never repented in such a degree of\nany step as that which Bunsen had advised him to take; that the course\nentered upon was a wrong to Austria; that he would have nothing to do with\nsuch an abominable line of politics, but would leave that to the Ministry\nat Frankfort. Whenever the personal question should be addressed to him,\nthen would he reply as one of the Hohenzollern, and thus live and die as\nan honest man. Bunsen, though mourning over the disappointed hopes that\nhad once centred in Frederick William IV., and freely expressing the\ndivergence of opinion that separated him from his sovereign, remained\nthroughout a faithful servant and a loyal friend. His buoyant spirit,\nconfident that nothing could ruin Prussia, was looking forward to the\nfuture, undismayed by the unbroken succession of blunders and failures of\nPrussian statesmen,\u2014nay, enjoying with a prophetic fervor, at the time of\nthe deepest degradation of Prussia at Olm\u00fctz, the final and inevitable\ntriumph of that cause which counted among its heroes and martyrs such\nnames as Stein, Gneisenau, Niebuhr, Arndt, and, we may now add, Bunsen.\n\nAfter the reaction of 1849 Bunsen\u2019s political influence ceased altogether,\nand as Minister in England he had almost always to carry out instructions\nof which he disapproved. More and more he longed for rest and freedom, for\n\u201cleisure for reflection on the Divine which subsists in things human, and\nfor writing, if God enables me to do so. I live as one lamed; the pinions\nthat might have furthered my progress are bound,\u2014yet not broken.\u201d Yet he\nwould not give up his place as long as his enemies at Berlin did all they\ncould to oust him. He would not be beaten by them, nor did he altogether\ndespair of better days. His opinion of the Prince of Prussia (the present\nKing) had been raised very high since he had come to know him more\nintimately, and he expected much in the hour of need from his soldier-like\ndecision and sense of honor. The negotiations about the Schleswig-Holstein\nquestion soon roused again all his German sympathies, and he exerted\nhimself to the utmost to defend the just cause of the\nSchleswig-Holsteiners, which had been so shamefully misrepresented by\nunscrupulous partisans. The history of these negotiations cannot yet be\nwritten, but it will some day surprise the student of history when he\nfinds out in what way public opinion in England was dosed and stupefied on\nthat simple question. He found himself isolated and opposed by nearly all\nhis English friends. One statesman only, but the greatest of English\nstatesmen, saw clearly where the right and where the wrong was, but even\nhe could only dare to be silent. On the 31st of July, 1850, Bunsen\nwrites:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cPalmerston had yielded, when in a scrape, first to Russia, then\n    to France; the prize has been the protocol; the victim, Germany.\n    They shall never have my signature to such a piece of iniquity and\n    folly.\u201d\n\n\nHowever, on the 8th of May, 1852, Bunsen had to sign that very piece of\niniquity. It was done, machine like, at the King\u2019s command; yet, if Bunsen\nhad followed his own better judgment, he would not have signed, but sent\nin his resignation. \u201cThe first cannon-shot in Europe,\u201d he used to say,\n\u201cwill tear this Pragmatic Sanction to tatters;\u201d and so it was; but alas!\nhe did not live to see the Nemesis of that iniquity. One thing, however,\nis certain, that the humiliation inflicted on Prussia by that protocol was\nnever forgotten by one brave soldier, who, though not allowed at that time\nto draw his royal sword, has ever since been working at the reform of\nPrussia\u2019s army, till on the field of Sadowa the disgrace of the London\nprotocol and the disgrace of Olm\u00fctz were wiped out together, and German\nquestions can no longer be settled by the Great Powers of Europe, \u201cwith or\nwithout the consent of Prussia.\u201d\n\nBunsen remained in England two years longer, full of literary work,\ndelighted by the success of Prince Albert\u2019s Great Exhibition, entering\nheartily into all that interested and agitated English society, but\nnevertheless carrying in his breast a heavy heart. Prussia and Germany\nwere not what he wished them to be. At last the complications that led to\nthe Crimean War held out to his mind a last prospect of rescuing Prussia\nfrom her Russian thralldom. If Prussia could have been brought over to\njoin England and France, the unity of Northern Germany might have been her\nreward, as the unity of Italy was the reward of Cavour\u2019s alliance with the\nWestern Powers. Bunsen used all his influence to bring this about, but he\nused it in vain, and in April, 1854, he succumbed, and his resignation was\naccepted.\n\nNow, at last, Bunsen was free. He writes to a son:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cYou know how I struggled, almost desperately, to retire from\n    public employment in 1850. Now the cord is broken, and the bird is\n    free. The Lord be praised!\u201d\n\n\nBut sixty-two years of his life were gone. The foundations of literary\nwork which he had laid as a young man were difficult to recover; and if\nanything was to be finished, it had to be finished in haste. Bunsen\nretired to Heidelberg, hoping there to realize the ideal of his life, and\nrealizing it, too, in a certain degree,\u2014_i.e._ as long as he was able to\nforget his sixty-two years, his shaken health, and his blasted hopes. His\nnew edition of \u201cHippolytus,\u201d under the title of \u201cChristianity and\nMankind,\u201d had been finished in seven volumes before he left England. At\nHeidelberg his principal work was the new translation of the Bible, and\nhis \u201cLife of Christ,\u201d an enormous undertaking, enough to fill a man\u2019s\nlife, yet with Bunsen by no means the only work to which he devoted his\nremaining powers. Egyptian studies continued to interest him while\nsuperintending the English translation of his \u201cEgypt.\u201d His anger at the\nmachinations of the Jesuits in Church and State would rouse him suddenly\nto address the German nation in his \u201cSigns of the Times.\u201d And the prayer\nof his early youth, \u201cto be allowed to recognize and trace the firm path of\nGod through the stream of ages,\u201d was fulfilled in his last work, \u201cGod in\nHistory.\u201d There were many blessings in his life at Heidelberg, and no one\ncould have acknowledged them more gratefully than Bunsen. \u201cYet,\u201d he\nwrites,\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI miss John Bull, the sea, \u2018The Times\u2019 in the morning, and,\n    besides, some dozens of fellow-creatures. The learned class has\n    greatly sunk in Germany, more than I supposed; all behindhand....\n    Nothing appears of any importance; the most wretched trifles are\n    cried up.\u201d\n\n\nThough he had bid adieu to politics, yet he could not keep entirely aloof.\nThe Prince of Prussia and the noble Princess of Prussia consulted him\nfrequently, and even from Berlin baits were held out from time to time to\ncatch the escaped eagle. Indeed, once again was Bunsen enticed by the\nvoice of the charmer, and a pressing invitation of the King brought him to\nBerlin to preside at the meeting of the Evangelical Alliance in September,\n1857. His hopes revived once more, and his plans of a liberal policy in\nChurch and State were once more pressed on the King,\u2014in vain, as every one\nknew beforehand, except Bunsen alone, with his loving, trusting heart.\nHowever, Bunsen\u2019s hopes, too, were soon to be destroyed, and he parted\nfrom the King, the broken idol of all his youthful dreams,\u2014not in anger,\nbut in love, \u201cas I wish and pray to depart from this earth, as on the\ncalm, still evening of a long, beautiful summer\u2019s day.\u201d This was written\non the 1st of October; on the 3d the King\u2019s mind gave way, though his\nbodily suffering lasted longer than that of Bunsen. Little more is to be\nsaid of the last years of Bunsen\u2019s life. The difficulty of breathing, from\nwhich he suffered, became often very distressing, and he was obliged to\nseek relief by travel in Switzerland, or by spending the winter at Cannes.\nHe recovered from time to time, so as to be able to work hard at the\n\u201cBiblework,\u201d and even to make short excursions to Paris or Berlin. In the\nlast year of his life he executed the plan that had passed before his mind\nas the fairest dream of his youth: he took a house at Bonn, and he was not\nwithout hope that he might still, like Niebuhr, lecture in the university,\nand give to the young men the fruits of his studies and the advice founded\non the experience of his life. This, however, was not to be, and all who\nwatched him with loving eyes knew but too well that it could not be. The\nlast chapter of his life is painful beyond expression as a chronicle of\nhis bodily sufferings, but it is cheerful also beyond expression as the\nrecord of a triumph over death in hope, in faith,\u2014nay, one might almost\nsay, in sight,\u2014such as has seldom been witnessed by human eyes. He died on\nthe 28th of November, 1860, and was buried on the 1st of December in the\nsame churchyard at Bonn where rests the body of his friend and teacher,\nNiebuhr.\n\nThoughts crowd in thick upon us when we gaze at that monument, and feel\nagain the presence of that spirit as we so often felt it in the hours of\nsweet counsel. When we think of the literary works in which, later in life\nand almost in the presence of death, he hurriedly gathered up the results\nof his studies and meditations, we feel, as he felt himself when only\ntwenty-two years of age, that \u201clearning annihilates itself, and the most\nperfect is the first submerged, for the next age scales with ease the\nheight which cost the preceding the full vigor of life.\u201d It has been so,\nand always will be so. Bunsen\u2019s work, particularly in Egyptian philology\nand in the philosophy of language, was to a great extent the work of a\npioneer, and it will be easy for others to advance on the roads which he\nhas opened, and to approach nearer to the goal which he has pointed out.\nSome of his works, however, will hold their place in the history of\nscholarship, and particularly of theological scholarship. The question of\nthe genuineness of the original Epistles of Ignatius can hardly be opened\nagain after Bunsen\u2019s treatise; and his discovery that the book on \u201cAll the\nHeresies,\u201d ascribed to Origen, could not be the work of that writer, and\nthat most probably it was the work of Hippolytus, will always mark an\nepoch in the study of early Christian literature. Either of those works\nwould have been enough to make the reputation of a German professor, or to\nfound the fortune of an English bishop. Let it be remembered that they\nwere the outcome of the leisure hours of a hard-worked Prussian\ndiplomatist, who, during the London season, could get up at five in the\nmorning, light his own fire, and thus secure four hours of undisturbed\nwork before breakfast.\n\nAnother reason why some of Bunsen\u2019s works will prove more mortal than\nothers is their comprehensive character. Bunsen never worked for work\u2019s\nsake, but always for some higher purpose. Special researches with him were\na means, a ladder to be thrown away as soon as he had reached his point.\nThe thought of exhibiting his ladders never entered his mind.\nOccasionally, however, Bunsen would take a jump, and being bent on general\nresults, he would sometimes neglect the objections that were urged against\nhim. It has been easy, even during his life-time, to point out weak points\nin his arguments, and scholars who have spent the whole of their lives on\none Greek classic have found no difficulty in showing to the world that\nthey know more of that particular author than Bunsen. But even those who\nfully appreciate the real importance of Bunsen\u2019s labors\u2014labors that were\nmore like a shower of rain fertilizing large acres than like the\nartificial irrigation which supports one greenhouse plant\u2014will be first to\nmourn over the precious time that was lost to the world by Bunsen\u2019s\nofficial avocations. If he could do what he did in his few hours of rest,\nwhat would he have achieved if he had carried out the original plan of his\nlife! It is almost incredible that a man with his clear perception of his\ncalling in life, so fully expressed in his earliest letters, should have\nallowed himself to be drawn away by the siren voice of diplomatic life.\nHis success, no doubt, was great at first, and the kindness shown him by\nmen like Niebuhr, the King, and the Crown Prince of Prussia was enough to\nturn a head that sat on the strongest shoulders. It should be remembered,\ntoo, that in Germany the diplomatic service has always had far greater\ncharms than in England, and that the higher members of that service enjoy\noften the same political influence as members of the Cabinet. If we read\nof the brilliant reception accorded to the young diplomatist during his\nfirst stay at Berlin, the favors showered upon him by the old King, the\nfriendship offered him by the Crown Prince, his future King, the hopes of\nusefulness in his own heart, and the encouragement given him by all his\nfriends, we shall be less surprised at his preferring, in the days of his\nyouth, the brilliant career of a diplomatist to the obscure lot of a\nprofessor. And yet what would Bunsen have given later in life if he had\nremained true to his first love! Again and again his better self bursts\nforth in complaints about a wasted life, and again and again he is carried\nalong against his will. During his first stay in England he writes\n(November 18, 1838):\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cI care no more about my external position than about the\n    mountains in the moon; I know God\u2019s will will be done, in spite of\n    them all, and to my greatest benefit. What that is He alone knows.\n    Only one thing I think I see clearly. My whole life is without\n    sense and lasting use, if I squander it in affairs of the day,\n    brilliant and important as they may be.\u201d\n\n\nThe longer he remained in that enchanted garden, the more difficult it\nbecame to find a way out, even after he had discovered by sad experience\nhow little he was fitted for court life or even for public life in\nPrussia. When he first appeared at the court of Berlin, he carried\neverything by storm; but that very triumph was never forgiven him, and his\nenemies were bent on \u201cshowing this young doctor his proper place.\u201d Bunsen\nhad no idea how he was envied, for the lesson that success breeds envy is\none that men of real modesty seldom learn until it is too late. And he was\nhated not only by chamberlains, but, as he discovered with deepest grief,\neven by those whom he considered his truest friends, who had been working\nin secret conclave to undermine his influence with his royal friend and\nmaster. Whenever he returned to Berlin, later in life, he could not\nbreathe freely in the vitiated air of the court, and the wings of his soul\nhung down lamed, if not broken. Bunsen was not a courtier. Away from\nBerlin, among the ruins of Rome, and in the fresh air of English life, he\ncould speak to kings and princes as few men have spoken to them, and pour\nout his inmost convictions before those whom he revered and loved. But at\nBerlin, though he might have learnt to bow and to smile and to use\nByzantine phraseology, his voice faltered and was drowned by noisy\ndeclaimers; the diamond was buried in a heap of beads, and his rays could\nnot shine forth where there was no heavenly sunlight to call them out.\n\nKing Frederick William IV. was no ordinary King: that one can see even\nfrom the scanty extracts from his letters given in \u201cBunsen\u2019s Memoirs.\u201d Nor\nwas his love of Bunsen a mere passing whim. He loved the man, and those\nwho knew the refreshing and satisfying influence of Bunsen\u2019s society will\neasily understand what the King meant when he said, \u201cI am hungry and\nthirsty for Bunsen.\u201d But what constitution can resist the daily doses of\nhyperbolical flattery that are poured into the ears of royalty, and how\ncan we wonder that at last a modest expression of genuine respect does\nsound like rudeness to royal ears, and to speak the truth becomes\nsynonymous with insolence? In the trickeries and mimicries of court life\nBunsen was no adept, and nothing was easier than to outbid him in the\nprice that is paid for royal favors. But if much has thus been lost of a\nlife far too precious to be squandered among royal servants and\nmessengers, this prophet among the Sauls has taught the world some lessons\nwhich he could not have taught in the lecture-room of a German university.\nPeople who would scarcely have listened to the arguments of a German\nprofessor sat humbly at the feet of an ambassador and of a man of the\nworld. That a professor should be learned, and that a bishop should be\northodox, was a matter of course; but that an ambassador should hold forth\non hieroglyphics and the antiquity of man rather than on the _chronique\nscandaleuse_ of Paris; that a Prussian statesman should spend his mornings\non the Ignatian Epistles rather than in writing gossiping letters to\nladies in waiting at Berlin and Potsdam; that this learned man \u201cwho ought\nto know,\u201d should profess the simple faith of a child and the boldest\nfreedom of a philosopher, was enough to startle society, both high and\nlow. How Bunsen inspired those who knew him with confidence, how he was\nconsulted, and how he was loved, may be seen from some of the letters\naddressed to him, though few only of such letters have been published in\nhis \u201cMemoirs.\u201d That his influence was great in England we know from the\nconcurrent testimony both of his enemies and his friends, and the seed\nthat he has sown in the minds and hearts of men have borne fruit, and will\nstill bear richer fruit, both in England and in Germany. Nor should it be\nforgotten how excellent a use he made of his personal influence in helping\nyoung men who wanted advice and encouragement. His sympathy, his\ncondescension, his faith when brought in contact with men of promise, were\nextraordinary: they were not shaken, though they have been abused more\nthan once. In all who loved Bunsen his spirit will live on, imperceptibly,\nit may be, to themselves, imperceptibly to the world, but not the less\nreally. It is not the chief duty of friends to honor the departed by idle\ngrief, but to remember their designs, and to carry out their mandates.\n(Tac. Ann. II. 71.)\n\n1868.\n\n\n\n\nLETTERS FROM BUNSEN TO MAX M\u00dcLLER IN THE YEARS 1848 TO 1859.(98)\n\n\nAfter hesitating for a long time, and after consulting both those who had\na right to be consulted, and those whose independent judgment I could\ntrust, I have at last decided on publishing the following letters of Baron\nBunsen, as an appendix to my article on the Memoirs of his Life. They\nwill, I believe, show to the world one side of his character which in the\nMemoirs could appear but incidentally,\u2014his ardent love of the higher\nstudies from which his official duties were constantly tearing him away,\nand his kindness, his sympathy, his condescension in his intercourse with\nyounger scholars who were pursuing different branches of that work to\nwhich he himself would gladly have dedicated the whole energy of his mind.\nBunsen was by nature a scholar, though not exactly what in England is\nmeant by a German scholar. Scholarship with him was always a means, never\nin itself an object; and the study of the languages, the laws, the\nphilosophies and religions of antiquity, was in his eyes but a necessary\npreparation before approaching the problem of all problems, Is there a\nProvidence in the world, or is there not? \u201cTo trace the firm path of God\nthrough the stream of ages,\u201d this was the dream of his youth, and the toil\nof his old age; and during all his life, whether he was studying the laws\nof Rome or the hieroglyphic inscriptions of Egypt, the hymns of the Veda\nor the Psalms of the Old Testament, he was always collecting materials for\nthat great temple which in his mind towered high above all other temples,\nthe temple of God in history. He was an architect, but he wanted builders;\nhis plans were settled, but there was no time to carry them out. He\ntherefore naturally looked out for younger men who were to take some share\nof his work. He encouraged them, he helped them, he left them no rest till\nthe work which he wanted was done; and he thus exercised the most salutary\ninfluence on a number of young scholars, both in Rome, in London, and in\nHeidelberg.\n\nWhen I first came to know Bunsen, he was fifty-six, I twenty-four years of\nage; he was Prussian ambassador, I was nobody. But from the very beginning\nof our intercourse, he was to me like a friend and fellow-student; and\nwhen standing by his side at the desk in his library, I never saw the\nambassador, but only the hard-working scholar, ready to guide, willing to\nfollow, but always pressing forward to a definite goal. He would patiently\nlisten to every objection, and enter readily into the most complicated\nquestions of minute critical scholarship; but he always wanted to see\ndaylight; he could not bear mere groping for groping\u2019s sake. When he\nsuspected any scholar of shallowness, pettiness, or professorial conceit,\nhe would sometimes burst forth into rage, and use language the severity of\nwhich he was himself the first to regret. But he would never presume on\nhis age, his position, or his authority. In that respect few men remained\nso young, remained so entirely themselves through life as Bunsen. It is\none of the saddest experiences in life to see men lose themselves when\nthey become ministers or judges or bishops or professors. Bunsen never\nbecame ambassador, he always remained Bunsen. It has been my good fortune\nin life to have known many men whom the world calls great,\u2014philosophers,\nstatesmen, scholars, artists, poets; but take it all in all, take the full\nhumanity of the man, I have never seen, and I shall never see his like\nagain.\n\nThe rule followed in editing these letters has been a very simple one. I\nhave given them as they were, even though I felt that many could be of\ninterest to scholars only or to Bunsen\u2019s personal friends; but I have left\nout whatever could be supposed to wound the feelings of any one. Unless\nthis rule is most carefully observed, the publication of letters after the\ndeath of their writers seems to me simply dishonorable. When Bunsen speaks\nof public measures and public men, of parties in Church and State, whether\nin England or in Germany, there was no necessity for suppressing his\nremarks, for he had spoken his mind as freely on them elsewhere as in\nthese letters. But any personal reflections written on the spur of the\nmoment, in confidence or in jest, have been struck out, however strong the\ntemptation sometimes of leaving them. Many expressions, too, of his kind\nfeelings towards me have been omitted. If some have been left, I hope I\nmay be forgiven for a pride not altogether illegitimate.\n\n\n\n[1.]\n\n\nLONDON, _Thursday, December 7_, 1848, 9 o\u2019clock.\n\nMY DEAR M.,\u2014I have this moment received your affectionate note of\nyesterday, and feel as if I must respond to it directly, as one would\nrespond to a friend\u2019s shake of the hand. The information was quite new to\nme, and the success wholly unexpected. You have given a home to a friend\nwho was homeless in the world; may you also have inspired him with that\nenergy and stability, the want of which so evidently depresses him. The\nidea about Pauli is excellent, but he must decide quickly and send me\nword, that I may gain over William Hamilton, and his son (the President).\nThe place is much sought after; Pauli would certainly be the man for it.\nHe would not become a _Philister_ here, as most do.\n\nAnd now, my very dear M., I congratulate you on the courageous frame of\nmind which this event causes you to evince. It is exactly that which, as a\nfriend, I wish for you for the whole of life, and which I perceived and\nloved in you from the very first moment. It delights me especially at this\ntime, when _your_ contemporaries are even more dark and confused than\n_mine_ are sluggish and old-fashioned. The reality of life, as we enter\nthe period of full manhood, destroys the first dream of youth; but with\nmoral earnestness, and genuine faith in eternal providence, and in the\nsacredness of human destiny in that government of the world which exists\nfor all human souls that honestly seek after good,\u2014with these feelings,\nthe dream of youth is more than realized.\n\nYou have undertaken a great work, and have been rescued from the whirlpool\nand landed on this peaceful island that you might carry it on undisturbed,\nwhich you could not have done in the Fatherland. This is the first\nconsideration; but not less highly do I rate the circumstances which have\nkept you here, and have given you an opportunity of seeing English life in\nits real strength, with the consistency and stability, and with all the\nenergy and simplicity, that are its distinguishing features. I have known\nwhat it is to receive this complement of German life in the years of my\ntraining and apprenticeship. When rightly estimated, this knowledge and\nlove of the English element only strengthens the love of the German\nFatherland, the home of genius and poetry.\n\nI will only add that I am longing to see you amongst us: you must come to\nus before long. Meanwhile think of me with as much affection as I shall\nalways think of you. Lepsius has sent me his splendid work \u201cOn the\nFoundations of Egyptian Chronology,\u201d with astounding investigations.\n\nAs to Germany, my greatest hopes are based on this,\u2014that the King and\nHenry von Gagern have met and become real friends.\n\n\n\n[2.]\n\n\n_Sunday Morning, February 18, 1849._\n\nMy dear M.,\u2014Having returned home last night, I should like to see you\nquietly to-day, before the turmoil begins again to-morrow. Can you and Mr.\nTrithen come to me to-day at five o\u2019clock? I will ask Elze to dinner, but\nI should first like to read to you two my treatise \u201cOn the Classification\nof Languages,\u201d which is entirely rewritten, and has become my fifth book\n_in nuce_.\n\nI will at once tell you that I am convinced that the Lycians were the\n_true_ Pelasgians, and I shall not give you any rest till you have\ndiscovered the Pelasgic language from the monuments existing here. It is a\nsure discovery. It must be an older form of Greek, much as the Oscan or\nthe Carmen Saliare were of Latin, or even perhaps more so.\n\n\n\n[3.]\n\n\nTOTTERIDGE PARK, _Monday Morning, February 19, 1849._\n\nI landed yesterday, and took refuge here till this afternoon; and my first\nemployment is to thank you for your affectionate and faithful letter, and\nto tell you that I am not only to be here as hitherto, but that, with the\npermission of the King, I am to fill the post of confidential accredited\nminister of the _Reichsverweser_, formerly held by Baron Andrian. During\nmy stay here, be it long or short, it will always be a pleasure and\nrefreshment to me to see you as often as you can come to us. You know our\nway of living, which will remain the same, except now and then, when\nPalmerston may fix his conferences for a Sunday.\n\nPertz is quite ready to agree to the proposal of a regular completion of\nthe Chambers collection: the best thing would be for you to offer to make\nthe catalogue. He is waiting your proposal. The dark clouds of civil war\nare lowering over our dear and mighty Fatherland. Prussia will go on its\nown way quietly as a mediating power.\n\n\n\n[4.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _April 22, 1849_.\n\nYesterday evening, and night, and this morning early, I have been reading\nFroude\u2019s \u201cNemesis of Faith,\u201d and am so moved by it that I must write you a\nfew lines. I cannot describe the power of attraction exercised upon me by\nthis deeply searching, noble spirit: I feel the tragic nature of his\nposition, and long have I foreseen that such tragical combinations await\nthe souls of men in this island-world. Arnold and Carlyle, each in his own\nway, had seen this long before me. In the general world, no one can\nunderstand such a state of mind, except so far as to be enabled to\nmisconstrue it.\n\nIn the shortcoming of the English mind in judging of this book, its great\nalienation from the philosophy of Art is revealed. This book is not\ncomprehended as a work of Art, claiming as such due proportions and\nrelative significance of parts; otherwise many individuals would at least\nhave been moved to a more sparing judgment upon it, and in the first place\nthey would take in the import of the title.\n\nThis book shows the fatal result of the renunciation of the Church system\nof belief. The subject of the tale simply experiences moral annihilation;\nbut the object of his affection, whose mind he had been the means of\nunsettling in her faith, burst through the boundaries which humanity has\nplaced, and the moral order of the world imposes: they perish both,\u2014each\nat odds with self, with God, and with human society: only for him there\nyet remains room for further development. Then the curtain falls,\u2014that is\nright, according to artistic rule of composition; true and necessary\naccording to the views of those who hold the faith of the Church of\nEngland; and from a theological point of view, no other solution could be\nexpected from the book than that which it has given.\n\nBut here the author has disclosed the inward disease, the fearful\nhollowness, the spiritual death, of the nation\u2019s philosophical and\ntheological forms, with resistless eloquence; and like the Jews of old,\nthey will exclaim, \u201cThat man is a criminal! stone him!\u201d\n\nI wish you could let him know how deeply I feel for him, without ever\nhaving seen him; and how I desire to admonish him to accept and endure\nthis fatality, as, in the nature of things, he must surely have\nanticipated it; and as he has pointed out and defended the freedom of the\nspirit, so must he now (and I believe he will) show in himself, and make\nmanifest to the world, the courage, active in deed, cheerful in power, of\nthat free spirit.\n\nIt is presumptuous to intrude into the fate and mystery of life in the\ncase of any man, and more especially of a man so remarkable; but the\nconsciousness of community of spirits, of knowing, and endeavoring after\nwhat is morally good, and true, and perfect, and of the yearning after\nevery real disciple of the inner religion of Christians, impels me to\nsuggest to you to tell him from me, that I believe the spasm of his\nspiritual efforts would sooner be calmed, and the solution of the great\nproblem would sooner be found, if he were to live for a time among _us_; I\nmean, if he resided for a time in one of the German universities. We\nGermans have been for seventy years working as thinkers, inquirers, poets,\nseers, also as men of action, to pull down the old and to erect the new\nZion; each great man with us has contributed his materials towards the\nsanctuary, invisible, but firmly fixed in German hearts; the whole nation\nhas neglected and sacrificed political, individual existence and common\nfreedom\u2014to pursue in faith the search after truth. From us something may\nbe learnt, by every spirit of this age. He will experience how truly the\ndivine Plato spoke, when he said, \u201cSeven years of silent inquiry were\nneedful for a man to learn the truth, but fourteen in order to learn how\nto make it known to his fellow-men.\u201d\n\nFroude must know Schleiermacher\u2019s \u201cDiscourses on Religion,\u201d and perhaps\nalso his \u201cDogmatics.\u201d In this series of developments this is perhaps, as\nfar as the form is concerned, the most satisfactory work which immediately\nconcerns religion and its reconciliation with philosophy on the basis of\nmore liberal Christian investigation. But at all events we have not\nstriven and suffered in vain: our philosophy, research, and poetry show\nthis. But men, not books, are needed by such a mind, in order to become\nconscious of the truth, which (to quote Spinoza) \u201cremoto errore nuda\nremanet.\u201d He has still much to learn, and he should learn it as a man from\nman. I should like to propose to him first to go to Bonn. He would there\nfind that most deeply thoughtful and most original of speculative minds\namong our living theologians, the Hamann of this century, my dear friend\nR. Rothe; also a noble philosopher and teacher of ethics, Brandis; an\nhonest master of exegesis, Bleek; and young minds would soon attach\nthemselves to him. In Halle he would find Erdmann, almost the only\ndistinguished speculative follower of Hegel, and Tholuck, who has advanced\nmuch farther in the philosophical treatment of Christianity than is\ngenerally thought. I will gladly give him introductions to all of these.\nThey would all willingly admit him into their world of thought, and enter\nwith sympathy into his. It would be sure to suit him.... The free\natmosphere of thought would do him good, as formerly the atmosphere of\nfree England was good for Germans still struggling for political liberty.\nHe certainly needs physical change and invigorating. For this the lovely\nRhine is decidedly to be recommended. With \u00a3100 he could live there as a\nprince. Why go off to Van Diemen\u2019s Land? I should always be glad to be of\nthe least service to him, still more to make his personal acquaintance.\nAnd now, my dear M., you can, if you wish, read out to him what I have\nwritten, but do not give the letter out of your own hands.\n\n\n\n[5.]\n\n\n9 CARLTON TERRACE, _Monday, May 22, 1849._\n\nI thank you for two letters. I cannot tell how the first delighted and\nrejoiced me. The state of things in England is really as you describe it.\nAs to what concerns the second, you will by this time know that I have\nseen Froude twice. With M., too, personal acquaintance has been made, and\nthe point as to money is touched on. I must see him again alone before I\ngive my opinion. At all events, he is a man of genius, and Germany\n(especially Bonn) the country for him.\n\nI can well imagine the terrible scenes your dear mother has witnessed in\nDresden. However, I believe we have, in the very midst of the storm,\nreached the harbor. Even in Frankfort every one believes in the complete\nsuccess of Prussia\u2019s negotiations with the four Courts. We shall have the\nwhole constitution of the empire, and now with all necessary improvements.\nAs to matters of form, they must be arranged as between equals. Gagern and\nhis friends are ready for this. The constitution is to be declared at\nBerlin on the 25th. The disturbances will then be quieted as by magic.\nGeorge is _aux anges_ over this unexpected turn of affairs. At all events\nI hope soon to see you.\n\n\n\n[6].\n\n\nLONDON, _Wednesday, July 14, 1849._\n\n\u201cHurrah for M\u00fcller!\u201d\u2014so writes George, and as an answer I send you his\nnote from Frankfort. Hekscher\u2019s proposal is quite reasonable. I have since\nthen broken off all negotiations with the Danes. You will soon read the\ndocuments in the newspapers.\n\nIf the proposal of the parliamentary committee on the directory of the\nBund passes, which admits of little doubt, the question of to be or not to\nbe must be immediately decided.\n\nI do not intend going to Frankfort for this, so pray come here; I am alone\nhere with Charles.\n\n\n\n[7.]\n\n\n9 CARLTON TERRACE, _Friday Morning_.(99)\n\nMY DEAR M.,\u2014I did not thank you immediately for your delightful and\ninstructive letter, because there were many points on which I wished to\nwrite fully. The last decisive crisis of the German-European business has\nat length arrived, and I have had the opportunity of doing my duty in the\nmatter. But I have been doing nothing else since last Saturday, nothing\nChinese even. I recommend the inclosed to you. The young man is a good and\nhighly informed German bookseller. He has of course written just what I\ndid not tell him, and omitted what he ought to have said, \u201cthat he had\nbeen here for five years with the first booksellers, and before that was\ntrained under his father in Bonn; that he understands English, German,\nFrench, Italian, and Spanish.\u201d I have only heard what is good of him. How\ngrateful I feel to you for having begun the Index of Egyptian words at\nonce! We wanted one here for a special purpose, so our trouble has not\nbeen thrown away. I now perceive how impossible it is to understand the\nEgyptian language and history thoroughly without Chinese. In the\nchronology there is still much to be done.\n\nWe have as yet held our own in London and Warsaw as against Vienna. But in\nthe Schleswig-Holstein question we have the whole world, and unfortunately\nour own peace of July 2d, against us. Radowitz has worked most devotedly\nand honestly. When shall we see you again?\n\n\n\n[8.]\n\n\nPRUSSIAN LEGATION, _May 15, 1850._\n\nBy return of post thanks and greetings to my dear M. Your proposal as to\nSch\u00fctz is excellent. Let me know if I am to write to Humboldt. I draw a\ntotally different lesson from your news of the loss of the Veda MS. Wait\ntill a good copy arrives, and in the mean time pursue your philological\nstudies in some other direction, and get on with your Introduction. You\ncan work more in one day in Europe than in a week in India, unless you\nwish to kill yourself, which I could not allow. So come with bag and\nbaggage here, to 9 Carlton Terrace, to one who longs to see you.\n\nF. must have gone mad, or have been far more so politically than I\nimagined. The \u201cLeader,\u201d edited by him and N., is (as Mills says) _red and\nraw!_ and, in addition, badly written. It is a pity for prophets and poets\nto meddle with realities, instead of devoting themselves to futurity and\npoetry. George is happy in the intellectual wealth of Paris life, and\nquite perplexed at the perverseness and follies of the political cliques.\nHe promises to write about the acquaintance of Lamenais and George Sand. I\nam well, but fully use the right of a convalescent, and hardly go\nanywhere.\n\nFriend Stockmar sends a report from Erfurt, where the Parliament meets on\nthe 26th to receive the oaths of the Directory and the Ministers of the\nUnion. Usedom, Pertz, and Co. are quite mad in their enthusiasm for the\nBlack and White, as I have openly written to them.\n\n\n\n[9.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _July 10, 1850._\n\nMr. Eastwick, the translator of Bopp\u2019s Grammar, tells me that he and\nMurray wish for an article on this work in the \u201cQuarterly Review\u201d for\nJanuary, 1851; so it must be sent in in November. Wilson refuses, as he is\ntoo busy. I believe you could best write such a review, of about sixteen\npages (\u00a316). If you agree to this, write a line to me or direct to\nEastwick, who would then get a letter from Lockhart with the commission\nfor you. God help Schleswig-Holstein!\n\n\n\n[10.]\n\n\nLONDON, _October 10, 1850._\n\nYou have given me the greatest pleasure, my dear M., by your beautiful\npresent. Already, last night, I read the new \u201cGreek Songs,\u201d and others\nthat were new to me, with the greatest delight. We have, at all events,\nderived one benefit from the great storm,\u2014that the fetters have been taken\noff the press. It is a very charming edition, and a beautiful memorial.\n\nAs to F\u2014\u2014, it seems to me _contra rei naturam_ to arrange anything with\nthe \u201cQuarterly Review.\u201d The channel for such things is now really the\n\u201cEdinburgh;\u201d in the \u201cQuarterly\u201d everything not English must be run down,\nat all events in appearance, if it is to be appreciated. And now \u201cModern\nGerman Poetry and F\u2014\u2014,\u201d and Liberal politics! I cannot understand how F\u2014\u2014\ncould think of such a thing. I will willingly take charge of it for the\n\u201cEdinburgh Review.\u201d The editor is my political, theological, personal\nfriend, and sympathizes with me in such things as I consider F\u2014\u2014\u2019s\nbeautiful review will be. I have for years wished for such a one;\nepic-lyric poetry has made much greater advances since Goethe\u2019s time than\npeople in Germany (with the one exception of Platen) seem to perceive. It\nseems to me, though, that one should begin with the flowers of the\nRomantic school of poetry, with Schenkendorf and K\u00f6rner,\u2014that is, with the\nwhole romantic German national epoch, which found Goethe already a retired\nphilosopher. The whole development, from that time till now, appears to me\nas one intimately united whole, even including the present day. Even 1848\nto 1850 have furnished their contribution (Arndt\u2019s two inspired songs, for\ninstance); and in 1843-44, Geibel shines as a star of the first magnitude.\nHeine is difficult to treat. In fact, I do not think that F\u2014\u2014 has read\nenough of these poets. He spoke to me lately of an historical work that he\nhad in view, and which he wished to talk over with me; he meant to come up\nto me from the country, but has not yet appeared. He is always welcome,\nfor he is decidedly a man of genius, and I would willingly help him.\n\nNow to something different. My Chinese work is tolerably far advanced. I\nhave arranged the 214 keys alphabetically, and have examined about 100 of\nthem historically\u2014that is, I have separated the oldest (entirely\nhieroglyphic and ideographic) signs, and as far as possible fixed the\nrelationship of identical or similarly sounding roots. Then I laid aside\nthe work, and first began a complete list of all those pronominal,\nadverbial, and particle stems, arranged first alphabetically and then\naccording to matter, in which I found the recognizable corpses of the\noldest Chinese words. The result repays me even far more than I expected.\nI hope to have finished both works before Christmas; and at last, too, the\nalphabetical examination of the 450 words (of which about 150 are hidden\nin the 214 keys; the 64 others are similarly sounding roots). Naturally\nall this is only in reference to ancient Chinese, which is at least as\ndifferent (grammatically) from modern Chinese as Egyptian is from Coptic.\n\nAt the same time, I am reading the translation of the three \u201cKings,\u201d and\ntransliterate some passages. And now I must ask you to examine the\ninclosed system of transliteration. I have devised it according to my best\npowers after yours and Lepsius\u2019 system. Secondly, I want you to tell me\nwhether I ought to buy the Leipzig translation of Eichhoff\u2019s \u201cParall\u00e8le\ndes Langues Sanscrites.\u201d My own copy of the French edition has\ndisappeared. Pauli works at an Index of the Egyptian hieroglyphics and\nwords, which I can send you by and by.\n\n\u201cThe days and times are hard,\u201d says an old song.\n\n\n\n[10.]\n\n\nTOTTERIDGE PARK, _Tuesday Morning, October 16, 1850._\n\nMY DEAR FRIEND,\u2014So it seems that I am really not to see you this time. I\nam truly sorry, and count all the more on your calling on your return, if\nI am still in England. I should like to have thanked you at once for your\naffectionate letter for my birthday. But you know, if you altogether trust\nme, that a lifelong love for you lies deep in my heart.\n\nI had expected more from the great programme of New Oxford. It is not,\nhowever, much more unsatisfactory than the article on Plato, the writer of\nwhich now avows himself. It is only possible to excuse the milk-and-watery\ntreatment of the subject through the general mental cowardice and\nignorance in intellectual matters which is so predominant in this country.\nI find a comfort in the hope that this article is the prologue to able\nexegetical works, combined with a concrete statement of the absurdity, the\nuntruth, and untenableness of the present English conception of\ninspiration. Do not call me to account too sharply for this hope, or it is\nlikely to evaporate simply in pious wishes. Moral earnestness is the only\nthing that pleases me in this matter; the important thing now is to prove\nit, in opposition to invincible prejudices. Your plan of publishing your\nIntroduction after you have talked it over with Lassen and Burnouf, and\ndrawn in fresh breath, and just in January too, pleases me very much. If I\nmay, all in the dark, give you some good advice, try to make yourself\nclear on two points. First, as to the proper limits of language for the\ninvestigation of past and prehistoric times. As yet, no one has known how\nto handle these gigantic materials; what Jacob Grimm has lately attempted\nwith them is child\u2019s play. It is no longer of any use, as a Titan in\nintention, but confused as to aim, and uncertain in method,\u2014it is no\nlonger of any use to put down dazzling examples which demonstrate nothing,\nor at most only that something ought to be there to be demonstrated. What\nyou have told me entitles one to the highest hopes; and these will be\nrealized, if you in the French, not the Teutonic manner, arrive at full\nunderstanding of what is at present a mere instinctive intuition, and thus\narrive at the right method. You can do it. Only I have some anxiety as to\nthe second point, the historical proofs of the beginnings of nations. That\nis the weak side, first of all etymologists and word-masters, and then\nespecially of all \u201cIndologues,\u201d and of the whole Indian past itself. There\nis an enormous difference between what _can_ have been, nay, according to\ncertain abstract theoretic views _must_ have been, and what _has_ been.\nThat, however, is the distinctive problem for historical investigation.\nAnd here, above all, much depends on philological knowledge and sagacity;\nbut still more on that historical tact which understands how inferences\nshould be drawn. This demands much acquaintance with what is real, and\nwith purely historical material; much practice, and, as regards character,\nmuch self-denial. In this _judicium subactum_ of the historian lies the\ndifference between Niebuhr and O. M\u00fcller. To satisfy these demands, it is\nonly necessary, with your gifts and your character, that you should wish\nto do so earnestly, and perseveringly wish it. Of course you will not\nseparate the inquiry as to the oldest seat of the Sanskrit language from\nthe surrounding problems. I am perhaps too strongly prejudiced against the\nidea that the family of which we are speaking must have wandered from the\nbanks of the Upper Indus towards Bactria, and from thence founded Media\nand Persia. But I have for the present good grounds for this, and views\nwhich have long been tested by me. I can well imagine a migration of this\nfamily to and fro from the northern to the southern slopes of the\nHindu-Kush and back again; in Egypt one sees most plainly how the Semitic,\nor the family which inclines towards Semitism, migrated frequently from\nthe Mediterranean and the Euphrates to the Red Sea and _back again_. But\nthis alters nothing in the theory, on the one hand, that it is one and the\nsame family historically, and, on the other hand, that it is not\noriginally African, but Asiatic. You will certainly not adopt Niebuhr\u2019s\nautochthonic theory, where such facts lie before you. But enough. Only\nreceive these remarks as a proof of my lively interest in your researches,\nand in yourself; and may Minerva be your guide. I rejoice in the prize you\nhave gained at the French Academy in Paris, both for you and the\nFatherland.\n\nThe King _has_ subscribed for twenty copies of your Veda, and you have\nreceived 500 thalers of it beforehand. The rest you will receive,\naccording to the agreement then made, and which was communicated to you,\nas certainly _after_ the revolution and constitution as _before_. I\n_cannot_ have said a word with any other meaning. I may have recommended\nyou not to demand future prepayment: there might have been difficulties.\nExamine, then, the communication made to you, take twenty copies of your\nfirst volume in your pocket, or rather in the ship, and hand them in,\nwriting in any case to Humboldt, and beside him to the minister concerned,\ntherefore to the Minister of Public Instruction. As to what concerns the\nKing personally, ask Humboldt what you have to do. The thing itself is as\nclear and settled a matter of business as anything can well be; on this\nvery account I have completely forgotten the particulars.\n\nAnd now, God bless you, my dear friend. Greet all friendly minds and\nsouls, and first, \u201cthough I have not the pleasure of her acquaintance,\u201d\nyour mother; and then Humboldt and Lepsius before any one else.\n\n\n\n[12.]\n\n\nLONDON, _November_ 4, 1850.\n\nI must tell you by return of post that your letter has frightened me by\nwhat you tell me respecting your strong impulse to go to Benares or to\nBonn. This is the very worst moment for Bonn, and the very best for your\npublication of the Introduction to the Vedas. The crisis in our country\ndisturbs everything; it will soon be over, and, as I have good reason to\nbelieve, without dishonor or bloodshed. They would do everything to make\nyour stay in Bonn pleasant, as soon as they have recovered breath. Still,\nyou must print that English book in England; and I should add, before you\nsettle across the Channel. Or do you only intend to pay Lassen a visit?\nYou knew that some time ago Lassen longed to see you, more than any other\nman. It would be a good idea if you settle to make an excursion to\nGermany. You are one of those who always arrange things best personally.\nAt all events, you must come to us the day after to-morrow, and stay till\nthe 9th. We shall have a house full of visitors that day (evening), but\ntill then be quite alone. On the 7th you will give your presence to George\nas a birthday gift, a proof of great affection. Of Froude I have heard and\nseen nothing.\n\nEmpson has been here twice, without leaving his address. I have advanced\nas far in the astronomy and chronology of the Chinese as I can without an\nastronomer. _They have begun with the beginning of the Chaldeans._ With\nthe language, too, I have reached firm soil and ground, through the 120\nwords which become particles. More by word of mouth.\n\nThe struggle is over. Open conferences will be held at Vienna, where\nPrussia will represent and securely maintain the principle of free\nopinion.\n\nThe 8,000 Bavarians will return home again. The new constitution of the\nBund will include all Austria (except Italy), and will have a diet which\nhas no legislative power in internal German affairs. Will Radowitz stay?\nSend a line in answer.\n\n\n\n[13.]\n\n\nLONDON, _December 11, 1850._\n\nIn spite of the courier, who goes to-day, I must write a few words in\nanswer to your friendly inquiries.\n\nI am more and more convinced that you stake _everything_ if you begin the\nimportant affair in Bonn without going there yourself; and on the other\nhand, that the business _cannot_ fail _if_ you go there; _lastly_, that\nyou should go there at once, that Lassen and the government may not hit on\nsomething else. Once begun, the thing will, I hope, go exactly as you\nwish. But I should be _very_ sorry if you were to leave Oxford before\nfinishing the printing of the Introduction. That is your farewell to\nEngland, your greeting to the professoriate in Germany, both worthy and\nsuited to you.\n\nThe Lectures at Oxford appear, by the side of this, as a secondary\nconsideration. I cannot, however, restrain the wish that you should not\nrefuse the thing. It is not expected that a deputy-professor should spend\nmore time than is necessary on the charge committed to him. I should think\nyou could arrange such a course very pleasantly, and feel certain of\nsuccess, if you only bear in mind Lockhart\u2019s advice, to write as for\nladies,\u2014\u201cSpartam quam nactus es orna,\u201d as Niebuhr always told me, and I\nhave always found it a good maxim. I await the sending in of your article\nfor the \u201cEdinburgh,\u201d in order to make all preparations at once. I hope you\nwill be back from Bonn by Christmas Eve, or else wait till after Christmas\nbefore you go.\n\nAs a friend of many years\u2019 standing, you will forgive me if I say that if\nthe journey to Bonn is not financially convenient to you just now, I\n_depend_ upon your thinking of _me_.\n\n\n\n[14.]\n\n\n9 CARLTON TERRACE, _January 2, 1851_.\n\nMost heartily do I wish you success and happiness in the new year. Stanley\nwill have told you of our negotiations as to your beautiful article. He\nwill have laid before you the sketch of a genuine English prologue and\nepilogue promised by him, and for which I gave him a few ideas. You can\nthen choose between the \u201cQuarterly\u201d and \u201cEdinburgh Review.\u201d\n\nPertz has authorized me to pay you \u00a320 on the 1st of January, as you\nwished. So send your receipt, that I may at once send you the \u00a320 (in four\nbank-notes), unless you will fetch them yourself. If you can be here on\nMonday, you are invited to dinner with Macaulay, Mahon, and General\nRadowitz, otherwise any other day.\n\nP. S. (Wednesday). No, my dear M., I will not send your article, but take\nit myself. Let me have it soon.\n\n\n\n[15.]\n\n\nLONDON, _March 13, 1851_.\n\nIt is such a delight to be able at last to write to you, to tell you that\nfew events this year have given me such great pleasure as your noble\nsuccess in Oxford. The English have shown how gladly they will listen to\nsomething good and new, if any one will lay it before them in their own\nhalls and in their \u201cgown.\u201d Morier has faithfully reported everything, and\nmy whole family sympathize in your triumph, as if it concerned ourselves.\n\nI have heard from Empson that he will let your article appear in the third\nquarter (1st July). All space for the 1st of April had been promised since\nDecember. He will have it printed very early, that we may have time to\nread it comfortably, and see if it really wants a \u201chead and tail.\u201d He\nseems to think it is _not_ wanted. So much the better, I answered him.\n\nGeorge writes diligently, _De Nili fontibus_, and revels in the scientific\nlife of Bonn. He is coming at Easter for four weeks, and intends\nimmediately after Whitsuntide to take his degree _cum honore_.\n\nYou have seen that Lachmann was obliged to have his foot amputated, as it\nwas mortifying. The operation was very well performed; but the question\nis, whether the evil may not still spread. Haupt writes in great anxiety;\nhe hurried off to his friend, to nurse him.\n\nTheodore comes as early as the 7th of April, and goes to the University\nafter Easter.\n\nWe have all had something of influenza, but not so that we were obliged to\ngive up our _Tuesday evenings_, which are very well attended, as many as\n300 people, who amuse themselves and us well. When are you coming to us?\n\nI have come to the end of the third volume, in working over \u201cEgypt,\u201d and\nhave already besides a third of the fourth volume ready for press. By the\n1st of May the fourth volume must be sent to Gotha.\n\n\n\n[16.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Tuesday Morning, May 13, 1851_, 7 o\u2019clock.\n\n(_Olymp._ I. I. I.) according to new German Chronology. See tables for\n\u201cEgypt.\u201d\n\nI must at last take my early morning hour to write to you, instead of\nwriting, or rather preparing, a chapter of my fifth volume. For I find the\nflood of business which begins with breakfast subsides now only after\nmidnight, and I have many things I must say to you. First, my thanks and\ngood wishes for the sketch of your lectures. You have rightly understood\nthe importance of epic poetry in its historical bearing, and for _the __\nfirst time_ connected it with the earliest times of the epic nations,\nnamely, the primitive period of their community of language.\n\nThis has given me indescribable pleasure, and daily roused a longing to\nsee you again very soon, and to read to you some chapters out of my fifth\nvolume, the writing of which has continued to be an excessive delight to\nme. I have attempted the restoration of the times of the patriarchs, in\nthe full belief in their real existence and in my own method, and have\nbeen surprised at the great results. After I had finished this section I\nfelt inspirited to add the Introduction to the Preface, written at Easter,\n\u201cThe History and Method of the Philosophy of History,\u201d and then, as by a\nstroke of magic, I found myself again in the lost Paradise of the deepest\nphilosophical and historical convictions of all my life, on the strength\nof which I consecrated my dim anticipations to definite vows in the holy\nvigils of 1810-13, and wrote them down in the last weeks of my German life\n(January, 1816) in Berlin in order to explain myself to Niebuhr. The\nlittle book which I then wrote comes back again, after the lapse of quite\nthirty-five years, into my thoughts. The journey to India has turned out a\njourney to Egypt, and the journey of life hastens towards its close. But\nthough I, since 1816, never found the means and opportunity to fix my eyes\non the first youthful ideal, after I had dedicated my life to investigate,\nto think, and to live for it; and though all the grand and elevated views\nhad been hidden from me in the narrow valleys of life and of special\nresearch, except some blessed moments of intuition, I am now again raised\nby the flood of Egyptian research, after a quarter of a century, on to the\nheights of the same Ararat from whence, in the battle of life, I had to\ndescend. I only wished to give an introductory survey of the manner of\ntreating the world\u2019s history, and to my astonishment something else\nappears, to which I yield myself with fear as well as delight, with the\nold youthful ardor. I believe I owe something of my good fortune this time\nalso to my enemies and enviers. For it is quite true, as the newspaper\nsaid, that my removal or recall was demanded from the King, not only by\nour Camarilla and its tool, the ministry, but by more than \u201cflesh and\nblood,\u201d that high demoniacal power, which would willingly crush Prussia\nand Germany in its unholy embrace. It has come to an avowed struggle. As\nyet the King has held fast to me as king and friend. Such attacks always\nfill me with courageous indignation and indignant courage, and God has\ngraciously filled my heart with this courage ever since I, on the day of\nthe news of our complete defeat (November 10), determined to finish\n\u201cEgypt.\u201d Never, since I projected the five books on Egypt, when besieged\non the Capitol by the Pope and his followers, and abandoned by the\nministry at Berlin, from January 6th till Easter Sunday, 1838,\u2014never have\nI worked with such success. Even the Great Exhibition and the visit of the\nPrince and Princess of Prussia have not hindered me. Volume IV. was\nfinished on Sunday evening, April 27; and Tuesday morning, the 29th, I\nwrote at Dover the first chapter of the \u201cTraditions of Prehistoric Times,\u201d\nafter Easter Sunday had presented me with the above-mentioned Preface. On\nthe 27th of May all that is entailed by the Prince\u2019s visit ceases again on\nthe beach at Dover, and on the 1st June I hope to be able to begin with\nthe \u201cMethodology.\u201d I have now arrived at Leibnitz in the historical\nsurvey, which is to close with Schelling and Hegel, Goethe and Schiller,\nand which began with Abraham. Don\u2019t be frightened, it will please you.\n\nBut now, if Oxford and the gods of the Veda allow it, you should come\nhere. George will, before he returns to Bonn, sail up the waters of the\nNile with me; he has written the first sketch of the dissertation, and can\nget through everything in Bonn in six weeks; I believe he returns at the\nend of the first week.\n\nThink this over. I do so wish for him to see you before he leaves.\nMeanwhile I may tell you, _sub rosa_, that on Saturday morning he, with\nColonel Fischer and the charming Prince Friedrich Wilhelm, will go to\nOxford from Birmingham (12 o\u2019clock), and, in strictest _incognito_, show\nthe Benares of Europe to the future King of Prussia, who is enthusiastic\nabout England. He will write to you beforehand; he is now asleep, resting\nhimself, after running about all day yesterday with the Prince, and\nstaying at a ball till morning.\n\nBut enough of the outpourings of my heart. I hasten to business.\n\nFirst, Empson has sent me the proof-sheets of your article. I mean your\narticle for the \u201cEdinburgh Review.\u201d Early this morning I read it through\nat last, and joyfully and heartily utter my _Macte virtute_. You have\nworked up the article since I first read it in MS. far more than I\nexpected; and certainly with good and practical results. Your examples,\nand particularly your notes, will help and please the English reader very\nmuch. The introduction is as excellent (_ad hominem_ and yet dignified) as\nthe end. Many thanks for it. God will bless it. To-night I shall read out\nthe article to my wife, children, and Neukomm, as I long ago promised, and\nto-morrow I will send it to the printer (with a few corrected misprints),\nand will write to Empson \u201cwhat I think about it.\u201d So far, so good.\n\nSecondly, I find I cannot with honor shrink from some sort of comparison\nof my Egyptian forms and roots with the Semitic and Iranian forms and\nroots. The facts are so enormously great, that it does not in the least\nmatter whether the proof can be _thoroughly_ given in all its details. I\nhave therefore in my need thought of R\u00f6diger, and have sent a letter to\nhim, of which I inclose a copy. You will see from it that I hold fast to\nyour friendly promise, to stand by me in the matter of Iran. What I said\non the certainty and satisfactory completeness of the tools contained in\nmy English edition, is, I am firmly convinced, not too strong. Still, I do\nnot mean to say that a comparison with rich results might not be\ninstituted between such Coptic _roots_ (I do not admit it of the\ngrammatical _forms_) as have not yet been rediscovered among the\nhieroglyphics and the ancient Asiatic: some of them may be found again in\nancient Egyptian, almost unformed and not yet ground down; but that is\nmere pedantry in most cases. We have enough in what lies before us in the\noldest form in attested documents, to show us the right formula for the\nequation.\n\nAnd now for a few words about my family, which is so truly attached to\nyou, and watches your success with real affection. But no, I have\nsomething else to say first on the Niebelungen. Your delightful letter\nawoke a thought which has often crossed my mind, namely, that it does not\nappear to me that the historical and early national element, which is but\nthinly veiled under the poetical matter, has ever been sufficiently\nsearched out and distinguished. Grimm hates the historical elements which\nlie beyond his \u201cBeginnings of Nations,\u201d and my late dear friend Lachmann\noccupied himself with them most unwillingly. When, in 1825, I wrote that\nlittle treatise in French for Chateaubriand, which he printed in his\n\u201cM\u00e9langes,\u201d I went over what had been said on this point, as far as it\nconcerned me, and I was surprised to see how little had been done in it.\nSince that time I have heard of no investigations of the kind. But who can\nnow believe that the mention of Gunther and the Burgundians is the one\nisolated historical fact in the poem? Is it not evident, for instance,\nthat the myth of the contemporaneousness of Attila and the great Theodoric\nof the Ostrogoths has its historical root in the fact that _Theodoric,\nKing of the Visigoths_, fell in the great battle of Chalons, 451, fighting\nagainst Attila; but his son Thorismund, to revenge his father\u2019s death,\ndefeated the barbarians in a last assault, and gained the victory, on\nwhich the Franks pursued the Huns even across the Rhine. From this arose\nthe connection of Attila with _Theodoric, the great King of the\nOstrogoths_, who lived forty years later, and was intimately connected\nwith the royal family of the Visigoths, and with the kingdom of the\nVisigoths, but of course could never have had any dealings with Attila.\n\nIf one neglects such intimations, one arrives at last at the G\u00f6rres and\nGrimm clairvoyance, where not only everything is everything, but also\neverything again is nothing. Etzel, though, is not really Attila to Grimm,\nbut the fairy nature of the legend allows of no certain conclusions. But I\nfind that everywhere, where the tools are not wanting, the fermentation\nand decomposition process of the historical element can be proved; from\nwhich organically and by a process exactly analogous to that of the\nformation of languages in the first ages of the world, the epic legend\narises, which the genius of the epic poet lays hold of when the time\ncomes, with a consciousness of an historical destiny; as the tragic poet\ndoes in later times.\n\nIf you have time, follow up this idea. This is the weak side of your\ngeneration and guild. The whole national element has been kept too much in\nthe background in the conceit and high-stiltedness, not to say woodenness,\nof our critical researches. Instead of saying with the humorists of the\neighteenth century, \u201cSince Herman\u2019s death nothing new has happened in\nGermany,\u201d one ought to say \u201csince Siegfried\u2019s death.\u201d The genius of the\nnation which mourned over Herman\u2019s fall and murder was the same that in\nits sorrow gave shape to the legend of Sigurd. Must not the hearts of our\nancestors, whose blood flows in our veins, have felt as we do in like\ncircumstances? The princes and their relatives have betrayed and sold and\nmurdered the true prince of the German people, even to this day. And yet\nwere there now but a Siegfried-Herman! \u201cExsurget aliquando istis ex\nossibus ultor.\u201d\n\nI take this opportunity of calling your attention to a pamphlet by\nBethman-Hollweg, which has just appeared, \u201cThe Ancient Germans before the\nMigration of Nations.\u201d I send it to you to-day, and you must bring it back\nwhen you come. Send me word by George when you can and will come.\n\nThe Exhibition is, and will continue to be, the poetical and historical\nevent of the period. \u201cLes Anglais ont fait de la po\u00e9sie sans s\u2019en douter,\u201d\nas that excellent Jourdain said of his prose. Come and see it and us as\nsoon as you can.\n\n\n\n[17.]\n\n\n_Thursday, May 15, 1851_, 7 A. M.\n\nGeorge, in the hurry of his journey, begs you, through me, to be so kind\nas to be at the Oxford station when the Birmingham train arrives, Saturday\n(the day after to-morrow) at 12 o\u2019clock, and then kindly to help him in\nshowing Oxford to the _princeps juventutis_. They leave again at 8 o\u2019clock\nin the evening. The party will of course want some rooms in the best\nhotel, to rest themselves. So it might be well to bespeak some rooms for\nthe travellers as a _pied \u00e0 terre_. The party travel under the name of\nColonel Fischer or George Bunsen.\n\nI talked over the whole plan of the forms and roots with that good\nSteinschneider yesterday, and requested him to ask you further about it.\nHe willingly undertook to do the work in the course of the summer. Thus we\nhave certainly got one, perhaps two, for the Semitic work. I have given\nhim a copy of my \u201cEgypt.\u201d He seems to be getting _tame_.\n\n\n\n[18.]\n\n\nLONDON, _February 3, 1852._\n\nI have exactly a quarter of an hour before I must make myself grand for\nthe opening of Parliament, and I will spend it in chatting with you.\n\nI will write to Pococke notwithstanding. I cannot help believing that the\nGerman method of etymology, as applied to history by Schlegel, Lassen, and\nHumboldt, and of which I have endeavored to sketch the outline, _is the\nonly safe one_.\n\nYou have opened my eyes to the danger of their laying such dry and cheap\nravings to our account, unless we, \u201cas Germans,\u201d protest against it.\n\nI am rejoiced at your delight with the \u201cChurch Poetry.\u201d But Pauli never\nsent you what I intended; I wanted to send you the first edition of my\nHymn Book (no longer to be had at the booksellers\u2019), because it has\nhistorical and biographical notices about the composers, and contains in\nthe Preface and Introduction the first attempt to render the features of\ncontinuity and the epochs more conspicuous. (It is my only copy, so please\nfor this reason take great care of it.) Also I wish to draw your attention\nto _two translations_ from my collection. First by Miss Cox (daughter of\nthe Bedell in Oxford), _c._ 1840, small 8vo. Second by Arnold (Rugby), not\nDr. Arnold. This last I can send you. It contains _one_ translation by the\ngreat Arnold, first part. You will observe, among other points, that the\nmost animated hymns of praise and thanksgiving were composed amid the\nsufferings of the Thirty Years\u2019 War. My attention has been directed to\nHillebrand\u2019s \u201cHistory of German Literature,\u201d three volumes, as the _best_\nwork, and to Vilmar\u2019s ditto, one volume, as the _most popular_. I myself\nonly possess Gelzer\u2019s thoughtful \u201cLectures\u201d (from Lessing to Goethe), a\nbook which I prefer to Gervinus, as far as a just appreciation of the\nnational character and sentiment is concerned. (With many extracts.) I\nrejoice at your cheerful spirit. But now be satisfied, and make more use\nof the Romance languages. _Tutius ibis._ You have already sufficient\nmaterials. We can and will benefit this hospitable land, even without\ntheir desiring it; but _cautiously!_ You will laugh at this, and forgive\nme; but I know what I am about. Next Saturday Volume II., ready bound,\nwill lie on my table. The plan of the doctrine of the Trinity, critical\nand reconstructive, is a bold undertaking: the restoration of the genuine\nsubstance of the Apostolical constitutions and canons (in the second half\nof Volume II.) will probably have at present more success. But Volume\nIII., The Reconstruction and the Reform! \u201cThe two text-books of the Early\nChurch, The Church and House-Book and The Law-Book,\u201d in biblical\nphraseology and orthography, chiefly derived from documents never yet made\nknown, is my _pi\u00e8ce de r\u00e9sistance_; the sauce for it, in the Introduction,\ncontains three chapters (The Picture, The Mirror, The Practical\nReconstruction) for each section (Baptism, School, Constitution, Worship,\nLife).\n\nSo far I had written everything in English, _tant bien que mal_, without\nhesitating a moment for thoughts or words. But here the Muse refused,\u2014not\na single idea would flow into my pen. After three days I discovered that\nthe spirit _would_ and _could_ speak German. So I then hastily added the\nfirst half of the Introduction; and I hope that the first cast of the\nwhole will be ready this week; and a week later Cottrell will have it for\ntranslation, whilst the text-book (about 140 pages) is being printed in\nslips. I am afraid the English edition will not appear before the end of\nMarch; of the second I have already received Volume II. I think you will\napprove of the offspring. May Apollo and the Muses enlighten people about\nBernays. I might then hope that he would again come here to me in the\nsummer.\n\nGeorge has not yet announced his dissertation as \u201csent in to the faculty:\u201d\ntill then he is wisely silent. He appears to me to be too much there in\nthe fashion and in society. May the devil carry off all fashionable women!\n\nJohn calls. God bless you.\n\n_Wednesday._\u2014_Vivat M\u00fcller!_ I am just writing my congratulations to\nBernays. _Vivat Dean!_\n\nPauli\u2019s book appears in English without his doing anything to it.\n\nYou may recommend in Oxford, even to the most refined ladies and most\nChristian evangelicals, \u201cSpiritual Words\u201d from Goethe, by Lancizolle, 120\npages, 12mo (3_s_. beautifully bound). That is a German Bible.\n\nYou know Wackernagel\u2019s \u201cAnthology\u201d? It is useful, but gives too much of\nsecond rate. I will make my daughters copy out Arndt\u2019s German song for his\neighty-third birthday for you. Adieu.\n\n\n\n[19.]\n\n\n_Saturday, March 13, 1852._\n\nWhat in all the world is this undertaking to which Vaux asks my aid, the\nnew edition of Herbelot\u2019s \u201cBiblioth\u00e9que Orientale\u201d? It might be made a\ngood work, although I hate the form, but _everything depends on the\nmanagement_. It is otherwise a mere bookseller\u2019s speculation or Jesuit\u2019s\ntrick. I have answered provisionally that in case biblical literature is\nto be taken up (which is highly necessary), Ewald, Freytag, Bernays,\nR\u00f6diger, Hengstenberg, and Bernstein should be summoned to help. I don\u2019t\nquite trust the thing; but if it is possible to introduce the people to\ngood ideas, I am ready to aid.\n\nWhen are you coming? I have sent the last MS. to-day to the press, or\nrather to the translator. I have only now reached the point on which I can\nreally speak in a practical tone. Volume III. will contain 600 pages.\n\n\n\n[20.]\n\n\nLONDON, _November 13, 1852._\n\nThough late, I send you my hearty greetings on your return to England. I\nheard from Wilson that you were well, and that you had left your mother\nwell for the winter.\n\nHippolytus lies here _ready_ for you, on purpose that you may fetch it. I\nhope you will do so on the 18th, for which you have already received the\ninvitation. You will find Morier also here. Is not that furious and\nridiculous article in the \u201cMorning Chronicle\u201d on the second volume (the\nfirst article, as yet without a continuation) by the same man (of Jesus\nCollege?) on whose article in the \u201cEcclesiastic\u201d on Hippolytus\u2019 book I\nhave thrown some degree of light? The leading thought is exactly the same\nin both; the account of Calixtus\u2019 knavery is interpolated (by Novatianus),\nsays the writer in the \u201cChronicle.\u201d This is a proof that nothing can be\nsaid against my argument requiring a serious answer. Gladstone felt\nashamed of the review. It has helped the book; but it would be read even\nwithout this and the recommendation of the \u201cGuardian\u201d\u2014so Longman says.\n_One_ circulating library here has taken twenty-five copies, and wants\nmore. So the book cannot be ignored; and that is all I first of all wished\nfor, _aculeum reliqui_. As the people of this country, with a few\nexceptions that one can count upon one\u2019s fingers, do not understand the\nbook, not even the title, and have never had a conception of what it\nmeans, to reproduce the spirit of a century of which men as yet, with the\nexception of Iren\u00e6us, Tertullian, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen, know\nonly the names and enigmas (of which latter Hippolytus was one), their\nfault-finding with the composition of the book does not affect me at all.\nIn spite of the timidity of nearly _all_ English theologians, _inter muros\nacademicos et extra_, I have received very many hearty and manly letters\nfrom numerous and distinguished people. The King has, on my\nrecommendation, sent Dr. Boetticher to spend two years here and in Paris\nin order to bring to light the Syriac treasures which have not been laid\nclaim to by Cureton. I see that I have not been mistaken in him in spite\nof his sporadic many-sidedness. I am free from the 2d of December. There\nis a letter of mine just printing to Miss Winkworth, \u201cOn Niebuhr\u2019s\nPolitical Character,\u201d with extracts from letters.\n\n\n\n[21.]\n\n\nPRUSSIAN LEGATION, _Tuesday, November 30, 1852._\n\nGeneral von Scharnhorst, the worthy and highly educated son of his great\nfather, intends going to Oxford the day after tomorrow, Thursday, by the\nmorning express, perhaps to stay over the night. I will give him a line\nfor you, begging you to set him a little on his way. As to the\ncollections, geographical charts will be the most interesting to him; he\nhimself possesses the largest known collection (40,000).\n\nAs soon as this infernal game is played out in Paris, I hope to have a\nlittle leisure again. I have written a warning to Bernays: he is very much\nout of spirits, and still far behindhand; says he only received the proper\nappointment (from Gaisford) in February, and without mention of any fixed\ntime. He will write to you, and inclose what is done as a specimen. I am\ndelighted to hear from Lassen that Aufrecht is coming to England. Tell him\nto call on me. _Cura ut valeas._ Rawlinson has been preferred to Luynes\nand Wilson by the Berlin Academy.\n\n\n\n[22.]\n\n\n_Wednesday, December 15, 1852._\n\nTell Aufrecht I will try and arrange the affair for him without his paying\nany duty; and so at all events there will be a reduction. I was\nexcessively pleased with Aufrecht. Your parcels for Pertz will go safely\nand quickly if they are here on the 1st or 15th of the month.\n\nP. S. Aufrecht must be courageous, and keep in good spirits. Haupt is\ncalled to Berlin, which rather surprises me. Read the \u201cJournal des\nD\u00e9bats,\u201d Sunday, December 12, on Hippolytus. Do you know Laboulaye?\n\n\n\n[23.]\n\n\nPRUSSIAN LEGATION, _February 19, 1853._\n\nPlease tell me at leisure how Amestris (Herod, ix. 109) is to be explained\nas the wife of Xerxes? I am convinced that _Esther_ is hidden here, which\nname, according to the testimony of the Book of Esther, was her _Persian_\nname, as she was first called _Myrtle_, as her Jewish maiden name.\nTherefore _Am_ must mean \u201cqueen,\u201d \u201cmistress,\u201d \u201clady,\u201d or what you may\ndiscover. I find that the idea had occurred to one and the other even\nabout 100 years ago; but was given up, partly on account of its\n\u201cgodlessness;\u201d partly on account of the uncertainty whether Ahasuerus was\nreally Xerxes, as Scaliger declared. The Suabian simpletons (for they are\nso in historical matters) are the only people who now doubt this, and that\nthe book is historical,\u2014a book with a history on which depends the only\ngreat Jewish feast established since the days of Moses (till the\nPurification of the Temple, after the fall of Epiphanes). So, my dear M.,\nsend it to me. There can have been at that same time, in Persia, but one\nwoman so vindictive and clever as Esther is. The first volume of my\nProphets (from Abraham to Goethe) is ready, with a popular explanation of\nthe age of the so-called \u201cGreat Unknown\u201d (Isaiah) of Daniel, and _all the\nPsalms_, etc. I write _only German_ for this, but only _for the English_,\nand yet without any reserve.\n\nThe most remarkable of the thirteen articles which I have seen on\nHippolytus, is by Taylor (a Unitarian in Manchester), in the \u201cProspective\nReview\u201d (February). He confesses that I have made the principle of the\nTrinity, and the national blessing of the Episcopacy and the Liturgy,\nclear to him. I have never seen him, but he seems to me a deep thinker. I\nam again in correspondence with Bernays, who promises to work at Lucretius\nwith all diligence. I think he has more leisure, and his health is better.\n\nTo-morrow the new African expedition sets sail,\u2014Dr. Vogel, the botanical\nastronomer, and his army, two volunteers from the sappers and miners. I am\nfully occupied with this; and but for my curiosity about Esther, you would\nnot have had a line from me before Monday.\n\n\n\n[24.]\n\n\nPRUSSIAN LEGATION, _Monday_.\n\nMy best thanks. All hail to the \u201cGreat Esther.\u201d She was really called\nMyrtle, for Hadascha is in Hebrew the myrtle\u2014a name analogous to Susannah\n(the lily). That Esther is \u1f01\u03c3\u03c4\u1fc6\u03c1 has long been generally admitted, also\nthat Xerxes is Ahasverus. The analogy of Achasverosh and Kshayarsha has\nalso been proved. Finally, the chronology is equally decisive. The only\nthing still wanting is _Amestris_. What it is still important to know, is,\nwhether _Ama_, \u201cgreat,\u201d was a common designation of exalted personages, or\nspecially of _queens_ (in opposition to the _Pallakai_), or whether the\nname is to be considered as an adjective to _star, magna Stella_. The\nfirst interpretation would make the Jewish statement more clear. I think\ndecidedly it is the most natural. It is conceivable that Uncle Otanes,\nlike l\u2019oncle de Madame l\u2019Imp\u00e9ratrice, should have taken a distinguished\nname, just as the Hebrew _myrtle_ had been changed into a Persian _star_.\nBut there is not the least hurry about all this.\n\nI rejoice extremely over your extemporary lectures. You are now on the\nopen sea, and \u201cwill go on swimmingly.\u201d Always keep the _young men_ well in\nmind, and arrange your lectures entirely for them. I should think that the\nhistory of Greek literature (with glances backwards and forwards) after O.\nM\u00fcller\u2019s \u201cHistory of Greek Literature,\u201d would be a fine subject. Mure\u2019s\nbook gives many an impulse for further thought. In what concerns the Latin\ninscriptions, you must rely on _Gruter\u2019s_ \u201cThesaurus,\u201d after him on\nMorelli; of the more recent, only on Borghese and Sarti, and on the little\ndone by my dear Kellermann. There is nothing more rare than the power of\ncopying accurately.\n\nBe patient with \u2014\u2014, if he has an honest mind. I can fancy that such a\nmind, having been torn, wronged, and bothered, has become very\ncross-grained. Only patience and love can overcome this.\n\nOverweg has fallen a victim to his noble zeal; he lies buried in the Lake\nof Tsad. Vogel is happily already on the way to Malta and Tripoli.\n\n\n\n[25.]\n\n\nPRUSSIAN LEGATION, _March 21, 1853._\n\nMrs. Malcolm and Longman are as delighted as I am that Dr. Thomson will\nhave the great kindness to write a preface to the \u201cTheologia Germanica,\u201d\nand to look through the last proof-sheets. Longman has informed me this\nmorning that he makes over _half the net profits_ to Mrs. Malcolm, and\nleaves to her the future arrangements with Dr. Thomson. Mrs. Malcolm\nwishes for nothing for herself, but will hand over the profits to some\nreligious institution. Will you arrange the matter with Dr. Thomson?\nLongman wishes to begin on the 15th of May, or even earlier, if everything\nis ready for press. Of course Dr. Thomson knows the beautiful (though not\nexhaustive, for it is unfinished) treatment of the history of this school,\nin the last volume of Neander\u2019s \u201cChurch History,\u201d published after his\ndeath; in which that delightful little book by Dr. C. Schmidt, \u201cJohannes\nTauler\u201d (Heidelberg, 1841), is made use of. You know that the author has\nproved that the famous story of the conversion of Tauler by a layman is\n_real history_. The man was called Nicholas of Basle, and was in secret\none of the Waldenses, and was afterwards burnt as such in France. I can\nlend this little book to your excellent friend, as well as Martensen\u2019s\n\u201cMaster Eckhardt\u201d (1842), and the authentic copy of the rediscovered\nSouth-German MS. of the \u201cTheologia Germanica.\u201d\n\nMaster Eckhardt was the deepest thinker of his school. Does Dr. Thomson\never come to London? God bless you.\n\n\n\n[26.]\n\n\n_April 8, 1853._\n\n\u2014\u2014\u2019s attempt on \u201cSt. Hippolytus\u201d is a new proof that he no longer even\nunderstands Greek. The critical conjecture about the spuriousness of the\ntenth book is worthy of the champion of the false Ignatius as against\nCureton. Many thanks for your news about Dr. Thomson, which I have\nimparted to Mrs. Malcolm.\n\n\n\n[27.]\n\n\nLONDON, _May 12, 1853._\n\nI am going to-day to 77 Marina, St. Leonard\u2019s-on-Sea (near Hastings), till\nthe 21st or 23d, and do not see why you cannot pay me a visit there. Our\nhosts, the Wagners, would be delighted to give you a room, and\u2014the sea a\nbath.\n\nI take refuge there in order to write a new half-volume for the so-called\nsecond edition of Hippolytus. The whole will, however, really be a new\nwork in three separate works and six volumes.\n\nI hear that \u2014\u2014 has lost his father. In future, when you send such a shy\nEnglishman to me, let me know beforehand that he comes to talk over\nsomething with me. I had the greatest wish, and leisure too, to do all he\nwanted, but discovered only after he was gone that he came to ask me\nsomething.\n\nA young friend, Dr. Arnold\u2019s son, has translated Wiese\u2019s book on schools,\nand wishes to know whether the translation about which you have written to\nWiese, has been or will be really printed; otherwise he will publish his.\nOr has any other already appeared? I have been turning tables with\nBrewster. It is purely mechanical, the involuntary motion of the muscles\nof the hand to right or left, just like the ring on a thread with which\none can strike the hour. Every one is mad about it here. _Che razza di\ngente._\n\nNow comes an urgent private request. Bekker wishes to publish a grand\nwork, through the Clarendon Press, in return for a proper honorarium,\u2014a\ndefinitive edition of Homer, with every possible commentary that could be\nwished. This is a great work, worthy of the University and of Bekker. I\nshould like to learn through you what would be the Dean\u2019s opinion, who is,\nI think, favorably inclined to Bekker. It appears to me to be especially\nneedful to guard against the work appearing as a _rechauff\u00e9_ of Wolf, a\nparty-work, for which the sanction of the University is desired. The\nproposal is \u201cTo publish a definitive edition of Homer, with Scholia and\nCommentary, making it as complete and _absolutum_ as is wished.\u201d Please\ntake the first good opportunity. I wanted to speak to the excellent man\nmyself when he was in London, but came too late. Hearty greetings to\nAufrecht. B\u00f6tticher works famously.\n\n\n\n[28.]\n\n\nST. LEONARD\u2019S, _Saturday, May 22, 1853._\n\nI think incessantly of you, though I cannot fancy that you are in any\ndanger. I have written to my brotherly friend Philip Pusey to help you, if\nneedful. If you wish for good advice about the different parties, combined\nwith perfect acquaintance with the place and people, go to him. I know few\nmen so able to give good advice. Besides, he is very much attached to you.\n\nThe inclosed has just reached me through George. I will write to Bekker\naccording to your advice. That your intercourse with A. has become so\ndelightful and comfortable fulfills a hope I have cherished ever since I\nfirst saw him. I think that you have given him, in all respects, a\ndelightful position. The German cannot easily get over the idea that God\u2019s\nprovidence shows itself far less in the eternal government of the world,\nand in the care taken of every soul, than in an appointment to the civil\nservice. There are few such places in England for men of genius. But he\ncannot fail with us in Germany, if he distinguishes himself in England;\nonly he should in time undertake some important and great work.\n\nThe Cologne choir sing here from the 7th to the 21st of June. Eighty\nvoices. It will be a great treat. Arrange so as to hear something of it.\nCarl is Secretary of Legation and Charg\u00e9 d\u2019Affaires at Turin. George tills\nthe ground, but not yet his own; but that will come some day, like the\nkingdom of heaven. Henry is preparing to collate the \u201cCodex\nClaromontanus,\u201d and has already worked well on the imperfect text. Ernst\narranges his garden and house, and has made a bowling-green for me. I am\nnow translating my Hippolytus into historical language, in what I call a\nsecond edition. Write soon, as to how it is arranged about your\nprofessorship.\n\n\n\n[29.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Derby Day_.\n\nI received your letter here yesterday, from St. Leonard\u2019s, and wrote at\nonce to Pusey. I think it will all go right. In your place, I would go at\nonce to Pusey, after announcing myself the previous day.\n\nTell me why cannot you help that good A. to the \u00a3250 for the best treatise\non the Sankhya philosophy? I believe he has the right stuff in him for\nopposing Pantheism, which is what is desired.\n\nNow for a request. I am writing the second of my five works, which have\nbeen called into existence by Hippolytus.\n\nSketches on the Philosophy of the History of Mankind:\u2014\n\nA. On the Philosophy of Language.\nB. On the Philosophy of Religion.\n\nA. is a reproduction and improved arrangement of the lecture in Oxford,\nwhich now lies buried in the \u201cTransactions.\u201d In working over the\nhistorical part, I have put aside a chapter, \u201cThe Primitive Languages in\nIndia;\u201d but find out, just as I intended to make you the _heros eponymus_,\nthat you only dealt in your lecture with Bengali, the Sanskrit affinity of\nwhich requires to be demonstrated only to such wrong-headed men as the\nBuddhists are. Could you not write a little article on this for my book?\nThe original language in India _must_ have been Turanian, not Semitic; but\nwe are bound in honor to prove it.\n\n_Monday, May 30._\u2014My letter has been left unsent. I have just received\nyours. Let me repeat what I wrote and underlined on the first page. It is\na great trial of patience, but _be_ patient, that is, wise. One must never\nallow the toilsome labor of years of quiet reflection and of utmost\nexertion for the attainment of one\u2019s aim to be destroyed by an\nunpropitious event. It is most probable, and also the best for you, that\nthe affair should not now be hurried through. Your claims are stronger\nevery quarter, and will certainly become more so in the eyes of the\nEnglish through good temper and patience under trying circumstances. I\ndon\u2019t _for a moment doubt_ that you will be elected. Germany would suit\nyou now as little as it would me; and we both should not suit Germany.\n_Spartam quam nactus es orna_, your good genius cries to you. So patience,\nmy dear friend, and _with a good will_.\n\nB\u00f6tticher is on the eve of bringing to a successful issue his thesis,\n\u201cThat the triliteral roots have become biliteral, according to an organic\nlaw.\u201d He has advanced very much in critical research. I shall write a\n_reductio ad absurdum_ review on the Rev. \u2014\u2014 \u2014\u2014. It is really a book\nwritten _invita Minerva_.\n\nWrite soon again to me. With hearty sympathy and true friendship.\n\nCan you do anything for the good man in Naumburg?\n\n\n\n[30.]\n\n\nLONDON, _July 1, 1853._\n\nGood morning, my dear M. You were so good as to promise me _a chapter_ for\nmy \u201cSketch of the History of the Philosophy of Language;\u201d namely, the\nresults of the latest investigations concerning the unity and Turanian\ncharacter of the non-Sanskrit languages of India. The printing of _my_\nthree volumes goes on so fast that I am already revising the Celtic\nportion, of which Meyer is the Heros.\n\nIf, in your researches on the relationship of the Vedic language with\nZend, you have hit on new formulas, please gather these results together\ninto a separate chapter. Only one request,\u2014without any delay, for the\nprinting _presses_. I hope you are satisfied about your future in Oxford.\nGreet your friend and companion, whom we all liked very much. Again four\nnew men from Dessau among the arrivals! One is a famous actor from Berlin,\nand has brought a letter from Lepsius. Lucien Bonaparte (brother of\nCanino) is now writing a book here, \u201cSur l\u2019Origine des Langues.\u201d _No war!_\n\n\n\n[31.]\n\n\n_Monday, July 5, 1853._\n\nA word of explanation, with my best thanks. I do not want the\nEgyptian-Iranian work before September. I am just printing the treatise on\nthe \u201cOrigin of Languages\u201d as a part of my philosophical work, and in it I\nwould gladly have something _on you_, and _from you_, on the\nnon-Sanskritic languages. Both chapters can be quite short, only definite.\nYou must help me over these two chapters. I shall soon send you as a\nreminder the proof-sheets of what goes before, that you may see how I am\ndriven for it. So write away, regardless of consequences. You are by\ninstinct far too cautious for me to feel the least hesitation about saying\nthis.\n\nI am going on rapidly with the printing of my four volumes, and write _con\namore_ at the eighth (Hippolytus I.) The court goes on the 12th for a week\nto Dublin. All right. No war, only uplifted fists!\n\n\n\n[32.]\n\n\nLONDON, _Friday Evening, July 9, 1853_.\n\nHere follow the sheets, which I have just looked through, and where I wish\nto have two short chapters interpolated. We have one page for each, as the\nlast leaf remains blank. Besides this, there is room for many additions to\nthe other chapters, which I commend to your critical and sympathizing\nattention. Your Breslau friend has never called on me. He may have been at\nthe office whilst I was out. He would be welcome. Your opinion about\nSidney Pusey has set me at ease. Go soon to Pusey\u2019s, to see the old man\nhimself.\n\n\n\n[33.]\n\n\nLONDON, _Tuesday Morning, July 13, 1853_.\n\n\u201cWhat one desired in youth one obtains in old age.\u201d I felt this as I read\nyour chapter yesterday evening. It is exactly what I first wished to know\nmyself, in order to tell it to my readers. You have done it after my own\nheart,\u2014only a little too briefly, for a concluding sentence on the\nconnection of the language of the Ach\u00e6menian Inscriptions with Zend is\nwanting. Pray write for me at once just such a Turanian chapter. I have\nintroduced that chapter this morning as coming from you, and have placed\nyour name in the list of investigators mentioned in the title, where it\nbelongs. For the Turanian part, however, you must yourself write me such\nan Introduction as I shall only need to preface by a line. I mean, you\nshould give what you send me as the result of a portion of the\ninvestigations with which you have busied yourself in your Oxford\nLectures, and which you intend to publish in your \u201cVestiges.\u201d Never mind\nspace; it will all fit in. You have just hit the right tone and measure,\nand have written the little chapter just after my own heart, though I\nfirst learnt the matter from what you told me. Do you wish to see the list\nof examples to \u201cGrimm\u2019s Law\u201d again, which you made out for my lecture, and\nwhich I shall give in my Appendix in order to make any additions? I have\nas much space as you wish, even for new Appendices, if you will only give\nme some. This will be a pet book of mine, and a forerunner of my\n\u201cPhilosophy of History.\u201d I do not doubt but that it will be read in\nEngland, and indeed before all my other works on Hippolytus; for I give it\nas a philosophical key to Hippolytus. I find that though at first\ndespised, it has in the last few months become the favorite part of my\nHippolytus. Write me a line to say how you are, and what you are about.\nAgain, my dear M., my best thanks.\n\nP. S. Is there anything to be said in the text, or Appendix, or in both,\nabout the real results of Aufrecht\u2019s investigations on the Italian\nlanguages? I should like to take the opportunity of bringing his name\nbefore the English public.\n\n\n\n[34.]\n\n\n_Wednesday, July 14, 1853._\n\nThis will do, my dear M. To-morrow early I will send you the fifth\nchapter, printed, for correction, and expect your other chapter.\nConcerning A., it is clear _you_ must write that chapter, for A. can do it\nas little as I. So let me have that too. In the Catalogue of the examples\nfor \u201cGrimm\u2019s Law,\u201d get everything ready, and I will then send you the\nsheet, that you may enter the additions and corrections,\u2014or, better still,\nyou can send me the additions and corrections first, and I will have them\ninserted at once. Please do this.\n\n\n\n[35.]\n\n\nLONDON, _July 15, 1853_.\n\nYour MS., my dear friend, is just dispatched to the printer, with the\norder to send the proof of the whole chapter direct to you at Oxford. Send\nthe Mongolian chapter as soon as you conveniently can, but not sooner;\ntherefore, when your head is more free. The printing goes on, and it\ncannot be paged till _your_ chapters are ready, and also I hope the\nItalian one from Aufrecht, to whom I am writing about it to-day. He can\nsend it to me in German. You must give him some help as to the length and\nform. It is best for him, if I _personally_ introduce him to the English\npublic, amidst which he now lives, and to which he must look for the\npresent. So I hope to receive a real masterpiece from the Oxford Mission\nof German Science.\n\n_Vale. Cura ut valeas. Totus tuus._\n\n\n\n[36.]\n\n\n_Tuesday, July 20, 1853._ 10 o\u2019clock.\n\n\u201cAs to the language of the Ach\u00e6menians, represented to us by the Persian\ntexts of the Cuneiform inscriptions\u201d\u2014so I began this morning, determined\nto interpolate a paragraph which is wanting in your beautiful chapter,\nnamely, the relationship of the language of the inscriptions to that of\nthe Zend books, including the history of the deciphering with Grotefend in\nthe background, at the same time avoiding the sunken rocks of personal\nquarrels (Burnouf contra Lassen). My young house-pundit gives the credit\nto Burnouf (as he first informed Lassen of the idea about the satrapies).\nHowever, it seems to me only natural that you should write the conclusion\nof this chapter yourself. I shall also write a short chapter on Babylon,\nfor which I have still to read Hincks only, an uncomfortable author, as he\nhas no method or clearness, probably also therefore no principles.\n\nNow let us make this little book as attractive and useful to the English\nas we can; for that is really our mission.\n\nB\u00f6ticher asks if you do not wish to say something on the two dialects of\nZend, discovered by Spiegel,\u2014an inquiry which delights me, as B\u00f6tticher\nand Spiegel are at war, and in German fashion have abused each other.\n\n\n\n[37.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Friday Morning_, _July 23, 1853_.\n\nAnything so important, so new, and so excellent, as what you send me can\nnever be too long. Your table is already gone to the printer. With regard\nto the general arrangement, I would ask you to keep the plan in mind.\n\n1. That _all references_ (as for instance the table of the forty-eight\nlanguages) belong to the Appendix or Appendices.\n\n2. The arrangement of the leading ideas and facts to the text (Chapter\nX.).\n\n3. Nothing must be wanting that is necessary for the establishing a new\nopinion.\n\nYour _tact_ will in all cases show you what is right. The justification of\nthose principles you will assuredly find with me in the arrangement of all\nthe other chapters, and of the whole work, as also in the aim in view,\nnamely, to attract all educated Englishmen to these inquiries, and show\nthem what empty straw they have hitherto been threshing.\n\nGreet Aufrecht, and thank him for his parcel. I cannot arrange Chapter IV.\ntill I have his whole MS. before me. I can give him till Tuesday morning.\n\nThe separate chapters (twelve) I have arranged according to the chronology\nof the founders of the schools. What is still in embryo comes as a\nsupplement; as Koelle\u2019s sixty-seven African Languages, and Dietrich and\nB\u00f6tticher\u2019s Investigation of Semitic Roots. If your treatise is not so\nmuch a statement of Schott, Castr\u00e9n, and Co. as your own new work, you\nshall have the last chapter for yourself.\n\nAnd now, _last but not least_, pray send me a transliteration table, _in\nusum Delphini_. I will have it printed at the end of the Preface, that\neverybody may find his way, and I shall turn in future to it, and see that\nall transliterations in the book accord with it. I must ask for it\ntherefore by return. You understand what we want. \u201cA transliteration\nalphabet, for explaining the signs employed,\u201d would be a good precursor to\nyours and Lepsius\u2019 scientific work. We shall do well to employ in the text\nas few technical letters as possible.\n\nTo-day I am going to see the \u201cBride of Messina\u201d for the first time in my\nlife. I have no idea that the piece can possibly produce any effect; and I\nam afraid that it may fail. But Devrient is of good courage.\n\n\n\n[38.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _July 29, 1853_.\n\n\u201cWhat is long delayed must be good when it comes.\u201d So I would be patient\ntill you had really caught your Tartar, did I not fear that my dear friend\nwas suffering again from his wretched headaches. Meanwhile I worked up the\nItalica, and the summary of the sixty-seven African languages is getting\ninto shape, and the printer\u2019s devils are run off their legs. It would be\ndelightful if my dear M. were to send me soon the chapter on the Mongols;\nonly he must not work up a headache. You will have received my Schott last\nweek by book post.\n\nI have not been well. Theodora has had gastric fever, but is quite on the\nmend since this morning.\n\nAt last I have received Lassen III. (2) with the map.\n\n\n\n[39.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Tuesday, August 2, 1853_. Half-past eleven o\u2019clock.\n\nMy courier occupied me till nine. Since then I have read through your\nletter with intense delight; and now in a quarter of an hour I must go to\nthe railway for a country party with Grote. I hasten to thank you for this\nbeautiful gem for my Introduction and for my whole book. You shall have\nthe last word. Your treatise is the only one in the collection which\nextends beyond isolated types of speech and families, although it\npreserves throughout the scientific method of Indo-Germanic philology. It\nwas a double refreshment to me, as out of conscientiousness I had looked\nat and skimmed through L.\u2019s perverse books. What determined impudence\nthere is in that man!\n\nWhilst I am looking over my materials, among which Aufrecht\u2019s contribution\nlooks very well, I feel very strongly the want of a report of the last\nresults of the Caucasian languages. My two lines on Rosen look too\nmiserable; also new works have appeared on the subject. Samiel help!\n\nI am entirely of your opinion concerning the transliteration, but I\nmaintain that you must send me a table (key) to _your_ own\ntransliteration. For your table of the forty-eight is otherwise not easy\nfor my good English readers, or even for me; and to most it is\nunintelligible. With the others I shall soon find my way.\n\nI intend to insert a chapter on definite terminology. I think it must be\nsettled from the only tenable hypothesis, namely, the spreading abroad\nfrom one central point in mid-Asia,\u2014that is, from the great district which\n(originally) was bounded towards the north by the open Polar Sea, with the\nUral Island or Peninsula; to the west by the Caucasus and Ararat; east by\nthe Altai and Altan Mountains; and south by the continuation of the Taurus\nMountains, which stretch in the interior from west east, as far as the\nHindu-Kush.\n\nTherefore, for Turanian == Ural-Altaic, or the northeastern branch.\n\nFor Semitic == Aramean, from Aram, the Mesopotamian highland.\n\nFor Japhetic == Eastern highland, or southeastern branch.\n\nWhat do you think of this? I must get free from Semitie, etc., because\n_Chamitic_ appears to be primitive Semitic, just as Turanian leans towards\nIranian.\n\nThe carriage is there. Best thanks to Aufrecht.\n\nYou are indulging in a beautiful dream if you imagine that I have Dietrich\nhere. I have studied his two volumes. I wish I could summon him to help\nme. He was most anxious to come to England. I am afraid of a young scholar\nwhom I do not know personally.\n\n\n\n[40.]\n\n\n_August 4, 1853._\n\nOnly a word, my dear friend, to express to you my delight and admiration\nat your Turanian article. I was so carried away by it that I was occupied\nwith it till far into the night. It is exhaustive, convincing, and\nsuccinct.\n\nWhat do you feel about the present state of the investigations on the\nBasque? I have convinced myself by my extracts from the grammar and\ndictionary that Basque is Turanian, but I have nothing fit for printing. I\nhave never seen Rask\u2019s work. Do you know it, and can you make anything out\nof it?\n\nThere is only one point on which I do not agree with you. You say there is\nno purely monosyllabic language. But even that wretched modern Chinese has\nno dissyllabic word, as that would entail a loss of the accent. Or do you\ndeny this? I have covered the baldness of our German vulgarism, \u201cthief,\u201d\n\u201cliar,\u201d in B\u00f6htlingk versus Schott, and said, \u201cWith an animosity more\nGerman than Attic.\u201d Does that please you? Greetings to Aufrecht.\n\n\n\n[41.]\n\n\nABBEY LODGE, _August 22, 1853_.\n\n(Continuation of our conversation.) Before anything else, finish the\nIranian Chapter III. for me, a copy of which I gave you; that is to be\nprinted at once, as the Italic Chapter II. is printed, and needs only\nrevising. You will shake this at once out of your conjuring bag, won\u2019t\nyou?\n\n\n\n[42.]\n\n\nHIGHWOOD, _Friday, August 26, 1853_.\n\nIt strikes me, my dearest M., that we should be more correct in\nchristening your essay _Arian_, instead of _Iranian_. I have always used\n_Iranian_ as synonymous with _Indo-Germanic_ (which expresses too much and\ntoo little) or (which is really a senseless name) Indo-European: Arian for\nthe languages of Aria in the wider sense, for which Bactria may well have\nbeen the starting-point. Don\u2019t you think we may use Arian, when you\nconfine yourself to Sanskrit, Zend, and Parsi?\n\nI get more and more angry at L.\u2019s perverseness in doubting that the\nPersians are Aryans. One cannot trace foreign words in Persian, and just\nthese it must have carried off as a stigma, if there were any truth in the\nthing. One sees it in Pehlevi. But then, what Semitic _forms_ has Persian?\nThe curious position of the words in the _status constructus_ is very\nstriking. Yet you have explained that. Where, then, are the _Aram\u0153isms_ in\nthe Ach\u00e6menian Inscriptions, which surely are Persian in the strictest\nsense? Earlier the Persians may have been tormented by the Turanians, and\neven subjugated; but the Babylonian rule of Shemites over Persia cannot be\nof old date. About 2200 B. C., on the contrary, the Bactrians conquered\nBabylon, and kept it for a long time. But would not totally different\ncorruptions have appeared in Persian, if they had allowed their language\nto be so entirely ruined? A corruption, and then a later purification\nthrough the Medes, sounds Quixotic. Will you not prove this point?\n\nIf you can give some chronological landmarks for the epoch of the Veda\ndialect, pray do so. There is so much in Lassen, that one learns nothing.\nI fancied the age of the Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata and R\u00e2m\u00e2yana epoch was tolerably\nsettled, and that thus a firm footing had been gained, as the language is\nthat of the same people and the same religion. If you can say anything in\nthe language-chapter about the genealogy of the mythological ideas it\nwould be delightful for you to take possession of it, without encroaching\non your own future explanations. And so good luck to you!\n\n\n\n[43.]\n\n\nHIGHWOOD, _Friday Morning_, _August 26, 1853_.\n\nYour hearty and affectionate words for my birthday added to the happiness\nof the day, which I spent here in the quiet of the country, with my\nfamily. I have long looked on you as one of us; and when I look forward\ninto the future, I see your form as one of the bright points which there\npresent themselves to me. You groan now under the burden of a very heavy\nmountain, which you have taken on your shoulders as others would take a\nblock; only the further you advance, the more will you be satisfied that\nit is a part of the edifice which you will yet find time to finish; and at\nthe same time it will stand by itself as a \u03ba\u03c4\u1fc6\u03bc\u03b1 \u1f10\u03c2 \u1f00\u03b5\u03af.\n\nGeorge is well, and will be with us to-morrow week; Theodora a week later.\n\nPlace your essay where you will. I find the connection with the Gothic by\nmeans of \u201cGrimm\u2019s Law\u201d most natural. The foundation of my arrangement was\nthe purely external idea of progression from the nearer to the more\nremote,\u2014from the known to the unknown. I hope that next time Aufrecht\u2019s\nmuse will give us an intermediate chapter on the Hellenes, Pelasgians,\nThracians, \u00c6olians, Dorians, and Ionians; it is curious enough that these\nare entirely passed over. I do not know, though, what positive facts have\nresulted up to now from comparative philology as regards the Hellenic\nelement. An historical insight is needed here, such as Ottfried M\u00fcller had\njust begun to acquire when death robbed us of his noble mind. But M\u00fcller\nreally understood _nothing_ of comparative philology, as the Introduction\nto his Etruscans proves. The Pelasgians must have been a nearly connected\npeople; the Thracians were certainly so. But from the north comes Hellas,\nand from Hellas the Ionian Asia Minor. However, the history of the\nlanguage falls infinitely earlier than the present narrow chronologists\nfancy. The Trojan War, that is the struggle of the \u00c6olian settlers with\nthe Pelasgians, on and around the sea-coast, lies nearer 2000 than 1000 B.\nC. The synchronisms require it. It is just the same with Crete and Minos,\nwhere the early Ph\u0153nician period is out of all proportion older than\npeople imagine. Had we but monuments of Greek, like the Fratres Arvales in\nLatin! Homer is so modern; even though he certainly belongs to the tenth\nor eleventh century. That was a time in which the Hellenic mind sang the\nhistory of the creation in the deep myth of Prometheus, the son of\nIapetos, with his three brothers, the emblem of humanity; a poem which\nHomer no longer understood.\n\nNow cheer up, my dearest friend. The book must come out.\n\nTruly and cheerfully yours.\n\nMy wife sends her hearty greetings.\n\n\n\n[44.]\n\n\nLONDON, _September 2, 1853_.\n\nMy good wishes follow you to Wales, without knowing your address; so for\nmy letter I must apply to Aufrecht. I hope you will speedily send me the\nlinguistic proof that the noble Vedic hymn you sent us belongs to at least\n1,000 years\u2014not B. C., but before the language of the epic poets. Still\nthis cannot really be the oldest; for it already contains a perfect\nreflection of the old poetic age.\n\nHare thinks the translation excellent, as I do; only one expression,\n\u201cPoets in their hearts discerned,\u201d we can understand only if we make it\n\u201chave discerned\u201d (or seen)\u2014for otherwise it is only a continuation of the\nnarrative, which cannot be the meaning. Send it to me in German, for\nSchelling.\n\nIt is cold and rainy here; so don\u2019t find fault with Wales, if you are\nhaving bad weather there. _Cura ut valeas._ All the Muses be with you.\n\n\n\n[45.]\n\n\nLONDON, _Friday Morning_, _September 24, 1853_.\n\nYou have sent me the most beautiful thing you have yet written. I read\nyour Veda essay yesterday, first to myself, and then to my family circle\n(including Lady Raffles, your great friend _in petto_), and we were all\nenchanted with both matter and form. I then packed up the treasure at\nonce; at nine it goes to the printers. I think that the translation of the\nhymn is really improved; it is not yet quite clear to me whether instead\nof \u201cpoets discerned,\u201d it should not be \u201cpoets discern,\u201d or \u201chave\ndiscerned,\u201d which is at all events the meaning. And now, I hope the same\nfather of the Muses, with their mother, Mnemosyne, will accompany you into\nthe Turanian wilderness, and give you courage to adopt the poor Malays;\nthat in the next separate edition of this sketch, as Mithridates, we may\nalready have the links for joining on Australia and East Africa. We go on\nprinting valiantly. Dietrich has at once accepted my proposal with true\nGerman good-nature, although he has only been married for seven months to\na young and charming wife. His good mother-in-law tried to shorten the six\nmonths, which he at first offered; but that would neither suit me nor him:\nso I have written to him to come away at once\u2014to arrive here the 16th of\nOctober, instead of in November, that I may dismiss him with my blessing\nearly in April.\n\nJ. Mohl is here, and Rosen. Both go on Monday. I give them on Saturday\n(to-morrow) an evening party of _literati_, to which I have invited\nWilson, Norris, Loftus, Birch, etc., etc. Mohl, as well as Rosen, would\nlike to see you. Could not you by a stroke of genius fly here, rest\nyourself Sunday, and think on Monday if you really need go back again?\nTheodore is here, and George is expected. My household all share my wish\nto see you. Greetings to Aufrecht.\n\nB\u00f6tticher has discovered a fragment of Livy (palimpsest), and the Greek\ntranslation of Diocles, who, 120 B. C., wrote the \u201cFounding of Rome\u201d\n(fragment).\n\nAnother idea has just struck me. Could one not perhaps make the original\nunity of Aryans and Europeans clear, if one furnished the hymn written in\nLatin letters, with an interlinear translation, just as you once gave me\nan intuition of the first lines, which I have never forgotten. The\ntranslation would be best in Latin, with references to the other\nlanguages, according as the one or the other of them contains certain\nradicals with the same meaning as in Sanskrit. If you do not like this,\nyou must prepare for me a Vedic Paternoster, just as Lepsius devised for\nme a pyramido-Pharaonic, and now prepares a Nubian.\n\nI have announced you as a member of the Assyrian Society, and so saved you\nthree guineas. It is arranged that whoever pays two guineas should receive\nall reports, transactions, etc. I have therefore inserted your name, with\ntwo guineas, and paid it.\n\nLord Clarendon has, on my recommendation, attached Loftus to the embassy\nat Constantinople, so that he has a position at Bagdad and Mosul. He\nleaves on the 1st of October, and we give him a parting entertainment on\nthe 28th of this month. The plan is a secret, but we hope great things\nfrom it. I hope to secure the best duplicates for the Berlin Museum.\n\nA Cheruscan countryman, personally unknown to me, Sch\u00fctz from Bielefeld,\nthe Sanskritist, has asked, with antique confidence, for a bed for his\nyoung daughter, on her way to Liverpool as a governess, which we have\npromised him with real pleasure. This has again shown me how full Germany\nis of men of research and mind. O! my poor and yet wealthy Fatherland,\nsacrificed to the Gogym (heathen)!\n\n\n\n[46.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Monday, October 17, 1853_, 10 o\u2019clock.\n\nI have already admonished the printer most seriously. You have revised the\ntables _once_, but they had to be fresh printed on account of the\ninnumerable alterations. But that is no reason why you should not get\nthem. You would have had them long ago, had I had an idea of it. I am\nimpatiently awaiting yours and Aufrecht\u2019s revision of Chapters II., III.,\nand IV., which I sent you myself last week. This _presses_ very much.\n_You_ have not much to do to them. I will look after the correct English\nhere with Cottrell; but all the rest Aufrecht can shake out of his bag. In\nyour letter you say nothing of having received them. They were taken to\nthe book-post on Monday evening, the 16th, a week ago, and sent off.\n\n_Mi raccomanda, Signor Dottore, per il manuscritto._ I will arrange the\nprinting as much as possible according to your wishes. Much depends on the\nmanner in which you organize the whole. With short chapters, easily looked\nthrough, the whole can be brought forward as a treatise intended for _all_\nreaders. I have not, however, been so fortunate with my Semitic essay; I\nhave printed a good deal of it in small print, partly to save space (for\nthe volume on the \u201cPhilosophy of Religion\u201d must really not be even half as\nthick as the first), partly on account of the legibility.\n\nI am so sorry to hear from Pertz that you have been suffering from\nheadache. I hope you are quite well and brisk again.\n\n\n\n[47.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Saturday Morning, October 22, 1853_, 10 o\u2019clock.\n\nAll right, my dear friend. I have already sent everything off to the\nprinter. It is certainly better so. Where practicable you should have\n_two_ chapters instead of _one_.\n\nFfoulkes\u2019 book shall be taken care of, either on the 1st or 15th. The same\nwith the \u201cBampton Lectures,\u201d if it is wished. I shall receive Mr. Thomson\n_summo cum honore_.\n\nBut now, my dear friend, where does the great Turanian essay hide itself?\nPray let me soon receive something, not later than Monday or Tuesday; send\nit as a parcel by parcels\u2019 delivery, or, which is the cheapest and\nquickest, by book-post, which takes MS. (not letters) as well as printed\nmatter, and forwards both for 6_d._ the lb.\n\nI have sent my most difficult task to the printers, \u201cOrigin of the Three\nGospels as part of the Second Age, 66-100.\u201d I am longing for the promised\naddenda from Aufrecht on the Haruspex. The printing is stopped for it,\nalso for the answer about a hieroglyphic which is unintelligible in\nLondon, instead of the honest _am\u00e2_==mother, which is not good enough for\nhim.\n\n\n\n[48.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Monday Evening, October 24, 1853._\n\n\u201cIt has lightened\u2014on the Danube!\u201d\n\nIt is of too much importance to me to have my dear Turanian\u2019s thoughts\naccording to his own best way and form, for me not to be ready to wait\ntill the end of November. The entire work, in seven volumes, must come out\ntogether, and I can keep back till then the first part of the\n\u201cPhilosophy,\u201d which is entirely printed in slips up to your chapter, and\ngo on with the second. Just look once at that book by the Scotch\nmissionary, \u201cThe Karens, or Memoir of Ko-tha-bya,\u201d by Kincaid, on the\nKarens in Pegu. He maintains the unity of the Karens and Kakhyans, another\nform of the same, and of all the scattered branches of the same race,\nstarting from Thibet (five millions altogether) as the remnant of a once\nvery powerful people. To judge from the representations the race must be\n_very handsome_. Frau von Helfer told me the same, and she knows them.\nThere are extracts given in the \u201cChurch Missionary Intelligence,\u201d October,\n1853. Prichard says little about it, and has no specimens of the language.\nI have not got Latham at hand. Haruspex is printing; it waits for the\nconclusion. I have received Thomson\u2019s \u201cBampton Lectures.\u201d Where does\n_rife_ come from\u2014Anglo-Saxon _ryfe_? It means prevalent, abundant.\n\n\n\n[49.]\n\n\n_Friday Morning, October 28, 1853._\n\nHere is the printer\u2019s excuse. It is useless to think of printing at\nOxford. You had better now keep the tables, in case you make more\nalterations, till you have quite finished your work, that nothing more may\nrequire alteration, but what you change during your work. I will send you\nKincaid, if it is in London. Perhaps by a smile from the Muses you can get\nthe first part ready in November. Is the Dean back? Good-by.\n\n\n\n[50.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Monday, November 1, 1853._\n\nPlease send me the letter for Humboldt. I will inclose it. Write him (and\nme) word in English what are the name and object of the Taylor\nInstitution, and the name of the office. You will receive Kincaid from me.\nI will see after the tables. So courage.\n\n\n\n[51.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Tuesday Evening, November 2, 1853._\n\nI have written to Humboldt to announce your letter and request, so write\nat once direct to him. I have told Pertz to send me the treatise of Schott\nby the courier on the 15th. So you will receive it on the 20th of this\nmonth. I have again admonished the printer. God bless you.\n\n\n\n[52.]\n\n\nLONDON, _Wednesday, February 8, 1854._\n\nMy heartiest congratulations on your well-earned success (Taylorian\nProfessorship). Your position in life now rests on a firm foundation, and\na fine sphere of work lies before you; and that in this heaven-blest,\nsecure, free island, and at a moment when it is hard to say whether the\nthrones of princes or the freedom of nations is in greatest danger. I send\nyou the papers as they are. There is hope that the war may yet be rendered\nimpossible.\n\nWith true affection yours.\n\nThanks for your Schleswig communication.\n\n\n\n[53.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _April 14, 1854._\n\nDEAREST FRIEND,\u2014So it is. My father has not up to this moment received a\nrecall, and probably will not, in spite of the efforts of the Russians,\nwithin and without Berlin. On the other hand, we expect to-morrow the\nreply to an answer sent by my father in opposition to a renewed and very\nimpetuous offer of leave of absence. In this answer (of the 4th of this\nmonth) my father made his accepting leave of absence dependent on the\nfulfillment of certain conditions guaranteeing his political honor. If the\nreply expected to-morrow from Berlin does not contain those conditions,\nnothing remains but for my father to send in his resignation and leave the\nPrussian mock negotiations to be fought through by another Prussian\nambassador. If they are accorded to him, he will go on long leave of\nabsence. But in either case he will certainly remain provisionally in\nEngland. More I cannot tell, but this is enough to give you information\n_confidentially_.\n\nDietrich is gone, and begged me to tell you, that in spite of constant\nwork at it here, he could not finish your commission. He will have leisure\nin Marburg to make it all clear for you, and will send the packet here by\nthe next courier. I will send you a line to-morrow as to the events of the\nday. My father does not go into the country before Tuesday.\n\nGEORGE BUNSEN.\n\n\n\n[54.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Maundy Thursday, April, 1854._\n\nMY DEAR FRIEND,\u2014The bearer, Herr von Fennenberg from Marburg, has brought\nme greetings and a little book from Thiersch, and wishes to be introduced\nto you. He is a philologist, in particular a Sanskritist. He wishes to\nhave a place or employment that would make it possible for him to stay in\nEngland. I know no one who could better advise him than you. Before you\nreceive these lines you will hear from George about me. I am determined to\nfight through the crisis, and am quite calm.\n\n\n\n[55.]\n\n\nCARLTON TERRACE, _Wednesday, May 10, 1854._\n\nDEAR FRIEND,\u2014Of course Dietrich has sent nothing. The affair presses. My\nsummary of the Semitic alphabet (lithographed) gives the summary of the\nsystem of transliteration used in this work, and is also in the press. Set\naside then what is still wanting, and hurry on the matter for me. My\njourney to Heidelberg with my family, who at all events go on the 20th,\ndepends on the work being finished. To-day I take refuge at St.\nLeonard\u2019s-on-Sea, 77 Marina, till the telegraph calls me to London to\nreceive my letters of recall. I depend, therefore, on your friendly help\nin one of the most important parts of the book. All right here; the house\nis deserted, but the heart rejoices and the soul already spreads its\nwings. Truly yours.\n\nJust starting. Dear M., pray send the MS. Spottiswoode lays everything on\nyou.\n\n\n\n[56.]\n\n\n77 MARINA, ST. LEONARD\u2019S, _Monday Morning, May 15, 1854._\n\nYour despairing letter of Thursday has alarmed me very much. You had\noffered me the alternative of leaving out the Semitic tables, if Dietrich\ndoes not send them by the courier. I did _not_ write to him, as the\nomission of that list really did not seem to me a great misfortune. But\nnow you say something quite new to me, and most dreadful, that you cannot\nmake the _corrections_ without having what I am unable to procure for you.\nI must own I cannot make this out. Trusting to your goodwill to do the\n_utmost_, I wrote to Petermann to send you at once an impression of the\nSemitic paraphrase put together by me and B\u00f6tticher. The courier comes on\nFriday, only I have given up all dependence on Dietrich, since he could\ntake away the lists with him. He never said a word to me about it.\n\nI _must_ go to Germany on the 16th of June. Yesterday I sent _all the\nrest_ to Spottiswoode, and at the same time complained about Watts. Only\nwhat can they, and what can I do, if you do not enable us to finish the\nmost important book of the three works? I hope you have not worked\nyourself to death for Trevelyan, and that you will reserve a free hour for\nLondon to say good-by. Since last night I am at work at my German \u201cEgypt,\u201d\nto my inexpressible delight. _Friday_ I return to town, and stay probably\n(at Ernest\u2019s) till my things are sold. _Cura ut valeas._\n\nWhat is the original meaning of _glauben_, to believe?\n\n\n\n[57.]\n\n\nST. LEONARD\u2019S, _Wednesday, May 24, 1854._\n\nYou have done wonders; and I hope you will rest yourself. A thousand\nthanks. I have at once sounded an alarm. I go to-day to town; Fanny and\nher two daughters will embark on Sunday morning: we have taken a house\nfrom the 1st of July, on the Neckar. I hope you will soon make your\nappearance there. George goes into the country to-morrow on business. I\nstay with Ernest till Hippolytus is out.\n\nThe snare is broken, and the bird is free; for which let us bless the\nLord. As they once let me out of my cage, they shall not catch me again.\nMy fifth book is ready for printing, down to the general philosophical\narticle. Johannes Brandis, the Assyrian chronologist, arranges for me the\nsynchronistic tables from Menes to Alexander.\n\nGreetings to Aufrecht. I have not yet received the impression of the text,\nwhich he restored from the Codex.\n\n\n\n[58.]\n\n\nABBEY LODGE, REGENT\u2019S PARK, _Friday, June 9, 1854._\n\nYour letter came just when wanted, my dearest friend. My wife and children\nleave the house to-morrow; and I follow them a week later, on account of\nSpottiswoode. Come here then to-morrow morning, and stay at least till\nMonday: so my daughter-in-law Elizabeth begs, who herself goes to Upton.\nGeorge, Brandis, and I help Ernest to keep house this week.\n\nI have _to-day_ sent to press the \u201cResolutions and Statements on the\nAlphabet\u201d which you wrote, with Lepsius\u2019s not \u201camendments\u201d but certain\nexplanations on his part, and my now English \u201crecapitulations.\u201d I shall\nreceive the first impression to-morrow evening. Lepsius has sent a long\nEssay, of which I only print the \u201cExposition of the System,\u201d with some\n\u201cspecimens of application.\u201d\n\nYou should rejoice, as I do, over \u201cHippolytus VII., Christianity and\nMankind, their Beginnings and Prospects,\u201d in seven volumes (also as three\nseparate works).\n\nI shall easily finish it. Also \u201cEgypt II.\u201d is publishing; I have written a\nnew Preface to it. The \u201cTheologia Germanica\u201d is waiting for you; one copy\nfor my dear M., and one for Dr. Thomson, whose address I don\u2019t know.\nSpottiswoode has vowed to have _all_ ready next week. If you could stay\nhere, and revise your sheets at once, I might believe the vow.\n\nWe have secured a beautiful house in Heidelberg (Heidt-weiler), on the\nright bank, opposite the Castle.\n\n\n\n[59.]\n\n\n_Thursday Morning, June 15, 1854_, 9 o\u2019clock.\n\nImmediately saw about Venn: wrote urgently to him to send the order direct\nto Spottiswoode, and marked this on the sheet. I cannot send Lepsius,\nbecause the sheets are being printed; refer the printer to it. You\ndeceiver! the hymn is without the interlineal version for the\nnon-Iranians. Just as if you were a German professor! I personally beg\nearnestly for it, for myself and for those who are equally benighted. I\nhave everything now at press, except some Latin abuse for M. Your visit\nrefreshed me very much. Fanny had an exceedingly good journey, and will be\nto-morrow in Heidelberg.\n\n\n\n[60.]\n\n\n_Thursday, June 15, 1854._\n\nDEAREST FRIEND,\u2014All ready for the journey. Your slips come in. Thirty-two\nmen are day and night printing, composing, correcting, etc. I am ready.\nVenn will print nothing of yours, and will not even send Lepsius\u2019 Essay to\nthe missionaries, that they may not be driven mad.\n\nI do not know what books you have of mine: if I can have them by Saturday\nmorning, 9 o\u2019clock, good\u2014if not, you must bring them yourself. George goes\nwith me, instead of Ernest.\n\n\n\n[61.]\n\n\nHEIDELBERG, _June 23, 1854._\n\nDEAR MAX M.,\u2014Allow me, through this note, to recommend to you, in my own\nname, as well as in the name of the Duke of Coburg and Baron Stockmar, the\nbearer of this, Dr. Wilhelm Pertsch, who is going to England on Sanskrit\nbusiness, and needs kind advice and a little assistance in his\nundertaking. Bunsen, who sends you his heartiest greetings, had at first\noffered to give him a letter to Wilson, but thought afterwards a word from\nyou was worth more with Wilson than a letter from any one else.\n\nThe Bunsens have quite decided now to settle at Heidelberg for at least a\nyear, and are already hoping for a speedy visit from you, by which I hope\nalso to profit. He is studying upstairs with great delight your official\nand scientific _vade mecum_ on the Turanian languages. Yesterday, by means\nof a breakfast, I introduced him to most of the scientific and literary\ncelebrities here\u2014such as H. Gagern, Mohl, Dusch, Harper, Jolly, etc., etc.\nGeorge came with them, and helped in arranging things, but returns\nto-morrow.\n\nA thousand good wishes. And always keep in friendly remembrance\n\nYour true friend,\n\nK. MEYER.\n\n\n\n[62.]\n\n\nHEIDELBERG, CHARLOTTENBERG, _June 29, 1854._\n\nI cannot let George, who took care of me here, return without a token for\nyou of my being alive. I read your book for the English officers partly on\nthe road, and partly here, with real delight and sincere admiration. What\nan advance from a \u201cGuide Interpr\u00eate,\u201d or a \u201cTableau Statistique,\u201d to such\nan introduction to languages and nationalities. The map, too, is\nexcellent. The excellent Petermann must make us several, just of this\nkind, for our unborn Mithridates.\n\nI should like to scold your English reviser for several Gallicisms, for\nwhich I feel certain you are not to blame. Rawlinson\u2019s barbaric _d\u00e9bris_\ninstead of \u201cruins,\u201d and _fauteuil_ instead of \u201cchair,\u201d which in French as\nwell as in English is the right expression for a professor\u2019s chair; whilst\n_fauteuil_ is only used in French to denote the \u201cPresident\u2019s chair\u201d (for\ninstance, in the Institute), and is quite inadmissable in English, even by\nthe \u201cUpholsterer.\u201d The third I have forgotten but not forgiven.\n\nI cannot _even now_ give up my habit of using Iranian in opposition to\nTuranian, in deference to you. He who uses Turanian must use Iranian.\nArian is to me something belonging to the land of Aria, therefore Median,\npart of Bactria and Persia. It is decidedly a great step in advance to\nseparate the Indian from this. That the Indians acknowledge themselves to\nbe Arians, suits me as it does you. But Iranian is a less localized name,\nand one wants such a name in contradistinction to Turanian and Semitic. It\nis only despised by the German \u201cBrahmans and Indomaniacs.\u201d\n\nThere you have my opinions and criticisms.\n\nI have already written 67 of the 150 pages belonging to the fifth book,\nand cannot go on till I have my books. I am now occupied with the\nprinciples of the method for the historical treatment of mythology, with\nespecial reference to three points in the Egyptian:\u2014\n\n1. Age and relation of the Osiris-worship to the \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1f76 \u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03af and the\nastronomical gods (Ra, Horus, etc.).\n\n2. History of Seth in Asia and in Egypt, _ad vocem Adam_.\n\n3. Position and signification of animal worship.\n\nBook IV. goes to press on the 15th of July. Book V. must be ready (D. V.)\non the 24th of August.\n\nBoth the people and the country here please me. The land is enchantingly\nbeautiful, nay, fairy-like, and our house is in the best situation of all.\nFanny is almost more at home in Germany than I am, and the girls revel in\nthe German enjoyment of life. I count on your paying us a visit. Say a\ngood word for us to your mother, and persuade her to come with you to\nvisit us in Heidelberg. We should much like to make her acquaintance, and\ntell her how dear you are to us all. Meyer is _proxenus Anglorum_ and\n_Anglaram_, and does nothing. I hope to form here a little Academia\nNicorina. Shall I ever leave Heidelberg? God bless you. _Cura ut valeas._\nEver yours.\n\nP. S. I have worked through Steinschneider\u2019s sheet on the Semitic Roots in\nEgyptian with great advantage, and have sent it to Dietrich. The analogy\nof the consonants is unmistakable. Dietrich will certainly be able to fix\nthis. And now you must shake that small specimen Aricum out of your Dessau\nconjuring sleeve. You need only skim the surface, it is not necessary to\ndig deep where the gold lies in sight. But we must rub the German nose in\nVeda butter, that they may find the right track.\n\nWe shall have a hard battle to fight at first in the Universities. Were\nEgypt but firmly established as the primitive Asiatic settlement of the as\nyet undivided Arian and Semitic families, we should have won the game for\nthe recognition of historical truth.\n\nI hope the \u201cOutlines\u201d and \u201cEgypt\u201d will come over next week. Longman will\nsend them both to you; and also the copy of the Outlines for Aufrecht (to\nwhom I have written an ostensible letter such as he wished for). I wish\nsomething could be found in Oxford for that delightful and clever man\nJohannes Brandis. He would exert an excellent influence, and England would\nbe a good school for him. Will the Universities admit Dissenters to take a\ndegree?\n\n\n\n[63.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _December 12, 1854._\n\nMY DEAR VANISHED FRIEND,\u2014Where thou art and where thou hast turned since\nthy fleeting shadow disappeared, I have asked in vain on all sides during\nmy journey through Germany. No one whom I met had seen you, which Ewald\nparticularly deplored very much. At all events you are now in the\nsanctuary on the Isis, and I have long desired to communicate one thing\nand another to you. But first I will tell you what at this moment lies\nheavy on my heart\u2014\u201cGalignani\u201d brought me the news yesterday: my dear\nfriend Pusey lies seriously ill at his brother\u2019s house in Oxford; \u201chis\nlife is despaired of.\u201d Unfortunately there is nothing improbable in this\nsad intelligence. I had already been anxious before this, for ten days, as\nI had written to him, to Pusey, nearly three weeks ago, on the news of the\ndeath of his wife, entreating him most pressingly, for his own and his\nfamily\u2019s sake, to spend the winter here, and to live as much as possible\nwith us, his old friends. I know he would have answered the letter, were\nhe not ill. Perhaps he was not even able to read it.\n\nDr. Acland is our mutual friend, and without doubt attends the dear\ninvalid. At all events, he has daily access to him. My request therefore\nis, if he is not already taken from us, that you will let Acland tell you\nhow it really is with him, and let me hear by return of post, via Paris:\nif possible also, whether Pusey did receive my letter, and then how Sidney\nand the two daughters are; who is with them, whether Lady Carnarvon or\nonly the sisters of charity.\n\nNow to other things.\n\n1. Dietrich gave me the inclosed, of course _post festum_. I have marked\nat the back what he still wants in your Tables.\n\n2. Greet Dr. Aufrecht, and tell him I am very sorry that Dietrich has\nfound fault with his Paternoster. I was obliged in the hurry to leave the\nprinting of this section to him. I will let A.\u2019s metacritic go to him.\n\n3. I have a letter from Hodgson of Darjeling as an answer to the letter\nwritten here by you, very friendly and \u201cin spirits,\u201d otherwise but\nslightly intelligible. He refers me to a letter forty pages long which he\nhas sent to Mohl in Paris, an improved edition of the one he sent to\nWilson. He supposes that I received both; if not, I should ask for the one\nto Mohl.\n\nOf course I have received neither. But I have sent to Mohl through his\nniece, to beg he would send the said letter to _you_, and you would inform\nme of the particulars. I hope you have already received it. If not, see\nabout it, for we must not lose sight of the man.\n\nThe copy of the \u201cOutlines\u201d must now be in his hands. These \u201cOutlines,\u201d the\nchild of our common toil, begin now to be known in Germany. Ewald has\nalready taken a delight in them; he will review them. Meyer is quite\nenchanted with your Turanians, but would gladly, like many others, know\nsomething more of the Basques. For me it is a great event, having made a\n_friendship for life_ and an alliance with Ewald, over Isaiah\u2019s\n\n\u201cNo peace with the wicked;\u201d\n\nand on still higher grounds. Those were delightful days which I spent in\nG\u00f6ttingen and Bonn, as also with Bethman-Hollweg, Camphausen, and others.\nI see and feel the misery of our people far more deeply than I expected,\nonly I find more comfort than I hoped in the sympathy of my\ncontemporaries, who willingly give me a place among themselves.\n\nA proposal to enter the Upper House (of which, however, I do not care to\nspeak) I could of course only refuse, with many thanks. I have finished my\n\u201cEgypt,\u201d Volume. IV., with B\u00f6tticher, and sent it for press for the 1st\nJanuary.\n\nAs an intermezzo, I have begun a specimen for a work suggested to me in a\nwonderful manner from England, America, and Germany (particularly by Ewald\nand L\u00fccke),\u2014a real Bible for the people, that is, a sensible and sensibly\nprinted text, with a popular statement of the results of the\ninvestigations of historical criticism, and whatever the spirit may\ninspire besides.\n\nI am now working from Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Baruch, where, beyond all\nexpectation, I found new light on the road I was treading.\n\nWe live in the happiest retirement. Your visit, and that of your mother,\nof whom we all became very fond, was a great delight to us, though a short\none. Fanny and I have a plan to greet her at Christmas by a short letter.\nNow write me word how it fares with you.\n\n\n\n[64.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, BADEN, _January 11, 1855._\n\nMY DEAR FRIEND,\u2014I think you will not have misunderstood my silence since\nyour last letter. Your heart will have told you that no news could be\npleasanter to me than that you would undertake to bring the last sevenfold\nchild of my English love into public notice. This can of course only be\nduring the Parliamentary recess. You know better than any one what is the\nunity of the seven volumes, and what is the aim and result. Your own is a\ncertainly not unimportant, and an independent part of it. But you have\nwith old affection worked yourself and thought yourself into the whole,\neven where the particulars were of less interest to you. Lastly, as you\nhave told me to my delight, Jowett has begun to interest himself in the\nwork, and you have therefore one near at hand who, from one point of view,\ncan help you as reflecting English opinion. Ewald told me that I had\nwished to give a Cosmos of the mind in that work. At all events, this idea\nhas floated before me for many years, and is expressed in the Preface to\nthe \u201cGod Consciousness.\u201d Only it is not more than _a study_ for that which\nfloats before me. My two next volumes will give more of it. If I only knew\nwhat to do with the work for Germany! My task was arranged for England. It\nseemed to me important, under the guidance of the rediscovered Hippolytus,\nwhose form first rose clearly before me during the first work, to show the\norganic development of the leading ideas of Christendom in the teachers\nand heroes, beginning from the first Pentecostal feast; in order to sift\nthe ground, and show to my readers\u2014\n\n_a._ That the old system of inspiration and the Theodice of the Middle\nAges, that is to say, that of the seventeenth century, has no _support_ in\nancient Christianity, but just the _contrary_. That is now a fact.\n\n_b._ That we have something infinitely more reassuring to put in its\nplace. Truth instead of delusion; reality instead of child\u2019s play and\npictures.\n\n_c._ That it is high time to be in earnest about this.\n\n_d._ That for this, _clear insight_ and practical purpose, also reasoning\nand moral earnestness, will be required on the part of the spiritual\nguides.\n\n_e._ But that before all things Christianity must be introduced into the\nreality of the present; and that the corporation of the Church, the life\nof the community in its worship as in its mutually supporting work, must\nbecome the centre whence springs the consciousness of communion,\u2014_not_ a\nsystem of theology. Christianity is nothing to me but the restoration of\nthe ideal of humanity, and this will become especially clear through the\nantecedent forms (pr\u00e6formations) of the development in language and\nreligion. (See \u201cOutlines.\u201d) There is a natural history of both, which\nrests on laws as sure as those of the visible Cosmos. The rest is\nprofessional, philological,\u2014_legitimatio ad causam_.\n\nHow much of this idea can be presented to the English public, and in what\nmanner, you know much better than I. Therefore you know the one as well,\nand the other better than I do. This is the reason why I believe you would\nnot wait for my answer. Still I should have sent to you, if during this\ntime two passions had not filled my heart. For once the dreadful distress\nof our condition forced me to try, from the midst of my blessed Patmos, to\nhelp by letters as far and wherever I could, through advice and cry of\ndistress and summons to help. Now there is nothing more to be done but to\nwait the result. _Alea jacta esse_. Ernest is in Berlin.\n\nMy second passion is the carrying out of an idea by means of a Christian\nphilosophical People\u2019s Bible, from the historical point of view, to get\nthe lever which the development of the present time in Europe has denied\nme. That I should begin this greatest of all undertakings in the\nsixty-fifth year of my age, is, I hope, no sign of my speedy death. But I\nhave felt since as if a magic wall had been broken down between me and\nreality, and long flowing springs of life stream towards me, giving me the\ndiscernment and the prolific germ of that which I desired and still strive\nafter. The Popular Bible will contain in two volumes (of equal thickness),\n1st, the corrected and reasonably divided text; and 2d, the key to it. For\nthat purpose I must see whether I shall succeed in executing the most\ndifficult part, Isaiah and Jeremiah. And I have advanced so far with this\nsince yesterday evening, that I see the child can move, it can walk. The\noutward practicability depends on many things, but I have thoroughly\nworked through the plan of it.\n\nBy the end of 1856 all must be ready. My first letter is to you. Thanks\nfor your affection: it is so exactly like you, breaking away at once from\nLondon and going to Oxford, to talk over everything with Acland.\n\nMeyer has once more descended from Pegasus, to our prosaic sphere. I\nbelieve he is working at a review of our work for the Munich Literary\nJournal of the Academy. Laboulaye (Vice-President of the Academy) says I\nhave given him so much that is new to read, that he cannot be ready with\nhis articles before the end of February. We shall appear in the \u201cD\u00e9bats\u201d\nthe beginning of March.\n\nHolzmann is working at the proofs that the Celts were _Germans_. Humboldt\nfinds the unity of the Turanians not proved. (Never mind!) Osborn\u2019s\n\u201cEgypt\u201d runs on in one absurdity (the Hyksos period _never_ existed),\nwhich the \u201cAthen\u00e6um\u201d censures sharply.\n\nWhat is Aufrecht about? But above all, how are you yourself? God preserve\nyou. My family greet you. Heartily yours in old affection.\n\n\n\n[65.]\n\n\nHEIDELBERG, _February 26, 1855._\n\nIt was, my dear friend, in expectation of the inclosed that I did not\nsooner return an answer and my thanks for your affectionate and detailed\nletter. I wish you would take advantage of my communication to put\nyourself in correspondence with Benfey. He is well disposed towards you,\nand has openly spoken of you as \u201cthe apostle of German science in\nEngland.\u201d\n\nAnd then he stands _infinitely_ higher than the present learned men of his\ndepartment. He would also be very glad if you would offer yourself to him\nfor communications suitable for his Oriental Journal from England, to\nwhich he always has an eye. (Keep this copy, perhaps Jowett may read it.)\nHumboldt\u2019s letter says in reality two things:\u2014\n\n1. He does not approve of the sharply defined difference between nomadic\nand agricultural languages; the occupations may change, yet the language\nremains the same as before. That is against _you_. The good old man does\nnot consider that the language will or can become another without\nperishing in the root.\n\n2. He does not agree in opposing one language to all others as\n_inorganic_. This is against _me_. But _first_, this one language is still\nalmost the half of the human race, and _secondly_, I have said nothing\nwhich his brother has not said as strongly. It is only said as a sign of\nlife, and that \u201cmy praise and my admiration may appear honest.\u201d\n\nIn the fifth volume of my \u201cEgypt\u201d I call the languages sentence-languages\nand word-languages; that is without metaphor, and cannot be misunderstood.\nThe distinction itself is _right_. For _organic_ is (as Kant has already\ndefined it) an unity in parts. A granite mountain is not more thoroughly\ngranite than a square inch of granite, but a man without hands or head is\nno man.\n\nI am delighted to hear that your Veda gets on. If you would only not allow\nyourself to be frightened from the attempt to let others work for you in\nmere handicraft. Even young men have not time for everything. You have now\nfixed your impress on the work, and any one with the _will_ and with the\nnecessary knowledge of the tools, could not go far wrong under your eye. I\nshould so like to see you free for other work. _Only do not leave Oxford.\nSpartam quam nactus es orna._ You would not like Germany, and Germany\ncould offer you no sphere of activity that could be compared ever so\ndistantly with your present position. I have often said to you, Nature and\nEngland will not allow themselves to be changed from _without_, and\ntherein consists exactly their worth in the divine plan of development;\nbut they often alter themselves rapidly from within. Besides, the reform\nis gone too far to be smothered. Just now the Dons and other Philisters\ncan do what they like, for the _people_ has its eyes on other things. But\nthe war makes the classes who are pressing forwards more powerful than\never.\n\nThe old method of government is bankrupt forever. So do not be\nlow-spirited, my dear M., or impatient. It is not so much the fault of\nEngland, as of yourself, that you do not feel settled and at home. You\nhave now as good a position as a young man of intellect, and with a future\nbefore him, could possibly have anywhere, either in England or in Germany.\nMake a home for yourself. Since I saw your remarkable mother, I have been\nconvinced that, unlike most mothers, she would not stand in the way of\nyour domestic happiness, even were it contrary to her own views, but that\nshe must be the best addition to your household for any wife who was\nworthy of you. Oxford is London, and better than London; and London is the\nworld, and is _German_. How gladly would Pauli, that honest, noble German\nsoul, stay, if he had but an occupation. The subjection of the mind by the\ngovernment here becomes more vexatious, more apparent, more diabolical.\n_One_ form of tyranny is that of Augustus, the more thorough, because so\nsly. They will not succeed in the end, but meanwhile it is horrible to\nwitness. More firmly than ever I settle myself down here in Heidelberg,\nand will take the whole house, and say, \u201cYou must leave me my cottage\nstanding, and my hearth, whose glow you envy me.\u201d _We_ are now on the\npoint of binding ourselves, without binding ourselves; and the prudent man\nin P(aris) pretends not to observe it\u2014just like the devil, when a soul is\nmaking some additional conditions.\n\nStill, it is possible that the desire to aid in the councils of Vienna at\nany price may carry us so far that we may join in the march against Poland\nand Finland. After all, the rivers flow according to the laws of\ngravitation.\n\nI have definitely arranged my \u201cBiblework\u201d in two works:\u2014\n\nA. The Bible (People\u2019s Bible), corrected translation, with very short and\npurely historical notes below the text. One volume, large Bible-octavo.\n\nB. The Key, in three equally large volumes (each like the Bible). I.\nIntroduction; II. The restored documents in the historical books of the\nOld Testament, and restoration of the prophets Jeremiah and Isaiah, and of\nsome of the smaller prophets; III. The New Testament. (The life of Christ\nis a part of this.)\n\n_The work looks well._ I have now not only perfectly defined the Exodus\nand time of the Judges, but have put it so clearly and authentically\nbefore the public, that as long as the world of Europe and America lasts,\nthe theologians cannot make the _faithful_ crazy, nor the scoffers lead\nthem astray. It can be finished in three years. I can depend on _Ewald_\nand _Rothe_.\n\nWe have got through the winter. I, for the first time for twenty years,\nwithout cold or anything of that sort. The delicious air of Spring begins\nto blow, the almond-trees promise to be in blossom in a week. With true\nlove, yours.\n\n\n\n[66.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _Tuesday Morning, April 17, 1855._\n\n(The day when peace or war will be decided.)\n\nMY DEAR M.,\u2014I cannot delay any longer to tell you that your first article\nannounced to us by George, has reached me, and excited the delight and\nadmiration of us all. It is pleasant, as Cicero says, \u201claudari a viro\nlaudato;\u201d but still sweeter \u201claudari a viro amato.\u201d And you have so\nthoroughly adopted the English disguise, that it will not be easy for any\none to suspect you of having written this \u201ccurious article.\u201d It especially\ndelights me to see how ingeniously you contrive to say what you announce\nyou do not wish to discuss, namely, the purport of the theology. In short,\nwe are all of opinion that your aunt or cousin was right when she said in\nParis, to Neukomm, of you, that you ought to be in the diplomatic service.\nFrom former experience I have never really believed that the second\narticle would be printed; it would have appeared by last Saturday at the\nlatest, and would then have been already in my hands. But the article as\nit is has given me great pleasure, and all the greater because it is\nyours. I only wish you might soon give me the power of shaking your dear\nold hand, which I so often feel the want of.\n\nMeanwhile I will tell you that Brockhaus writes in a very friendly way, in\ntransmitting Ernst Schulze\u2019s biography (the unfortunate poet\u2019s journal,\nwith very pleasant affectionate descriptions of his friends, of me\nespecially), to ask if I would not make something out of the new\nHippolytus for Germany. This letter reached me just as I had blended my\npast and future together for a large double work, the finished parts of\nwhich are now standing before me in seven large portfolios, with completed\nContents, Preface, and Introduction.\n\n\u201cThe Bible of the Faithful,\u201d four volumes, large Bible-octavo; Volume I.\nthe Bible; Volumes II.-IV. (separated) Key.\n\n\u201cThe Faithful of the Bible.\u201d (A.) The _government_ and the _worship_ of\nthe faithful. Two books, one volume. (B.) The congregational and family\nbook (remodeling of the earlier devotional books for the faithful of the\nBible), two volumes.\n\nAt the same time \u201cEgypt\u201d was at last ready for press as two volumes; and\nso I took courage to take up again that old idea, especially that which we\nhad so often discussed. But first I can and will make a pretty little\nvolume from the historical portraits in Hippolytus: \u201cThe first seven\ngenerations of Christians.\u201d A translation (by Pauli) of the exact text of\nthe first English volume, preceded by the restoration of the line and the\nchronology of the Roman bishops down to Cornelius, since revised and much\napproved of by R\u00f6stell (quite clearly written out; about ten printed\nsheets with the documents).\n\nThis gives me hardly any trouble, and costs me very little thought. But\nsecondly, to use Ewald\u2019s expression: \u201cThe Kosmos of Language\u201d (in four\nvolumes). This is _your_ book, if it is to exist. It appears to me before\nanything else to be necessary to draw proper limits, with a wisdom worthy\nof Goethe.\n\nI do not think that the time has come for publishing in the German way a\ncomplete or uniformly treated book; I think it is much more important to\nfortify our view of language from within, and launch it forth armed with\nstings upon these inert and confused times. _Therefore_ method, and\nsatisfactory discussion of that on which everything depends; with a\ngeneral setting forth of _the_ points which it concerns us now to\ninvestigate. I could most easily make you perceive what I mean, by an\nabstract of the prospectus, which I have written off, in order to discuss\nit thoroughly with you as soon as you can come here. As you would have to\nundertake three fourths of the whole, you have only to consider all this\nas a proposal open to correction, or rather a handle for discussion.\n\nFIRST VOLUME. (Bunsen.)\n\n_General Division._\n\n_Introduction._ The Science of Language and its Epochs (according to\nOutlines, 35-60).\n\n1. The Phenomena of Language (according to Outlines, ii. 1-72).\n\n2. The Metaphysics of Language (according to Outlines, ii.\n73-122)\u2014manuscript attempt to carry out Kant\u2019s Categories, not according\nto Hegel\u2019s method.\n\n3. The Historical Development (Outlines, ii. 123-140; and Outlines of\nMetaphysics, second volume, in MS.). M\u00fcller _ad libitum._ (With this an\nethnographical atlas, colored according to the colors of the three\nfamilies.)\n\nSECOND VOLUME. (M\u00fcller:)\n\n_First Division._ The _sentence-languages_ of Eastern Asia (Chinese).\n\n_Second Division._ The _Turanian_ word-languages in Asia and Europe.\n\nTHIRD VOLUME. (M\u00fcller and Bunsen.)\n\n_First Division._ The _Hamitic-Semitic_ languages in Asia and Africa.\n(Bunsen.)\n\n_Second Division._ The _Iranian_ languages in Asia and Europe.\n\nFOURTH VOLUME. (M\u00fcller.)\n\nThe branching off of the Turanians and Hamites in Africa, America, and\nPolynesia.\n\n_a._ The colony of East Asiatic Turanians in South Africa (great Kaffir\nbranch).\n\n_b._ The colony of North Asiatic Turanians (Mongolians) in North America.\n\n_c._ The Turanian colonies in South America.\n\n_d._ The older colonies of the East Asiatic Turanians in Polynesia\n(Papuas).\n\n_e._ The newer ditto (light-colored Malay branch).\n\nPetermann or Kiepert would make the ethnographical atlas _beautifully_. I\nhave in the last few months discovered that the three Noachic families\nwere originally named according to the three colors.\n\n1. Ham is clear; it means _black_.\n\n2. Shem is an honorary name (the glorious, the famous), but the old name\nis Adam, that is, Edom, which means _red_, reddish == \u03c6\u03bf\u03af\u03bd\u03b9\u03be: this has\ngiven me great light. The Canaanites were formerly called Edomi, and\nmigrated about 2850, after the volcanic disturbance at the Dead Sea\n(Stagnum Assyrium, Justin, xviii. 3), towards the coast of Ph\u0153nicia, where\nSidon is the most ancient settlement, the first begotten of Canaan; and\nthe era of Tyre begins as early as 2760 (Herodotus, ii. 44).\n\n3. Japhet is still explained in an incredible way by Ewald according to\nthe national pun of Genesis x. as derived from Patah, \u201che who opens or\nspreads.\u201d It is really from Yaphat, \u201cto be shining\u201d == the light, _white_.\n\nIt would certainly be the wisest plan for us to fall back on this for the\nethnographical atlas, at least for the choice of the colors; and I believe\nit could easily be managed. For the _Semitic_ nations _red_ is naturally\nthe prevailing color, of a very deep shade in Abyssinia and Yemen; black\nin negro Khamites, and a light shade in Palestine and Northern Arabia. For\nthe _Turanians_, _green_ might be thought of as the prevailing color. For\nthe _Iranians_ there remains _white_, rising into a bluish tint. But that\ncould be arranged for us by my genial cousin Bunsen, the chemist.\n\nThat would be a work, my dearest M.! The genealogy of man, and the first\nparable, rising out of the infinite. Were you not half Anglicized, as I\nam, I should not venture to propose anything so \u201cimperfect\u201d\u2014that is,\nanything to be carried out in such unequal proportions. But this is the\nonly way in which it is possible to us, and, as I think, only thus really\nuseful for our Language-propaganda, whose apostles we must be \u201cin hoc\ntemporis momento.\u201d And now further, I think we should talk this over\ntogether. I give you the choice of Heidelberg or Nice. We have resolved\n(D. V.) to emigrate about the 1st of October, by way of Switzerland and\nTurin, to the lovely home of the palm-tree, and encamp there till March:\nthen I should like very much to see _Sicily_, but at all events to run\nthrough _Naples and Rome in April_; and then return here in the end of\nApril by Venice. It is _indescribably lovely_ here now; more enjoyable\nthan I have ever seen it. We shall take a house there, where I could get\ninto the open air four or five times every day. I fancy in the five\nworking months I could do more than in the eight dreary winter months\nhere. Much is already done, the _completion_ is certain. Were not Emma\n(who has become inexpressibly dear to us) expecting her confinement about\nthe 21st of September we should already at this time break up from here,\nin order to reach the heavenly Corniche Road (from Genoa to Nice) in the\nfinest weather. Theodore goes in ten days for a year to Paris. Of course\nEmilia and the other girls go with us. They all help me in a most\nremarkable way in my work. I thought of inviting Brockhaus here in the\nsummer to discuss with him the edition of the \u201cBiblework.\u201d Now we know\nwhat we have in view. Now write soon, how you are and what _you_ have in\nview. All here send most friendly greetings. Ever yours.\n\n\n\n[67.]\n\n\nBURG RHEINDORF, NEAR BONN, _December 2, 1855._\n\nMY DEAR FRIEND,\u2014I think you must now be sitting quietly again in Oxford,\nbehind the Vedas. I send you these lines from George\u2019s small but lovely\nplace, where we have christened his child, to stop, if possible, your\nwrath against Renan. He confesses in his letter that \u201cma plume m\u2019a trahi;\u201d\nhe has partly not said what he thinks, and partly said what he does not\nthink. But his note is not that of an enemy. He considers his book an\nhomage offered to German science, and had hoped that it would be estimated\nand acknowledged in the present position of French science, and that it\nwould be received in a friendly way. Though brought up by the Jesuits, he\nis entirely free from the priestly spirit, and in fact his remarkable\nessay in the \u201cRevue des Deux Mondes\u201d of the 15th of November on Ewald\u2019s\n\u201cHistory of the People of Israel\u201d deserves all our thanks in a\ntheological, national, and scientific point of view. We cannot afford to\nquarrel unnecessarily with such a man. You must deal gently with him. You\nwill do it, will you not, for my sake? I am persuaded it is best.\n\nBrockhaus will bring out the third unaltered edition of my \u201cSigns of the\nTimes,\u201d as the 2,500 and the 1,000 copies are all sent out, and more are\nconstantly asked for. I have, whilst here, got the first half of the\n\u201cWorld-Consciousness\u201d (Weltbewusstsein) ready to send off. The whole will\nappear in May, 1856, as the herald and forerunner of my work on the Bible.\nI have gone through this with H. Brockhaus, and reduced it to fifteen\ndelightful little volumes in common octavo, six of the People\u2019s Bible,\nwith a full Introduction, and nine of the Key with higher criticism. I am\nnow expecting three printed sheets of the Bible, Volume I., the Key,\nVolumes I. and VII. The fourth and fifth volumes of \u201cEgypt\u201d are being\nrapidly printed at the same time for May. The chronological tables appear\nin September. And now be appeased, and write again soon. George sends\nhearty greetings. Thursday I shall be in Charlottenberg again. Heartily\nyours.\n\n\n\n[68.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _March 10, 1856._\n\nI should long ago have told you, my dearest friend, how much your letter\nof last September delighted me, had I not been so plunged in the vortex\ncaused by the collision of old and new work, that I have had to deny\nmyself all correspondence. Since then I have heard from you, and of you\nfrom Ernst and some travelling friends, and can therefore hope that you\ncontinue well. As to what concerns me, I yesterday sent to press the MS.\nof the last of the _three_ volumes which are to come out almost together.\nVolumes III. and IV. (thirty-six sheets are printed) on the 1st of May;\nVolume V. on the 15th of July. I have taken the bold resolution of\nacquitting myself of this duty before anything else, that I may then live\nfor nothing but the \u201cBiblework,\u201d and the contest with knaves and\nhypocrites in the interest of the faithful.\n\nIn thus concluding \u201cEgypt,\u201d I found it indispensable to give _all_ the\ninvestigations on the beginnings of the human race in a compressed form.\nTherefore SET==YAHVEH and all discoveries connected with this down to\nAbraham. Also the Bactrian and Indian traditions. I have read on both\nsubjects all that is to be found here; above all Burnouf (for the second\ntime), and Lassen\u2019s \u201cIndian Antiquities,\u201d with _Diis minorum gentium_. I\nfind then in Lassen much which can be well explained by my discoveries in\nthe Egyptian, Babylonian, and Ph\u0153nician, but a huge chasm opens out for\neverything concerning the Vedas. I find in particular nothing analogous to\nthe history of the Deluge, of which you most certainly told me. I\ntherefore throw myself on your friendship, with the request that you will\nwrite out for me the most necessary points, so far as they do not exist in\nColebrooke and Wilson, which I can order from Berlin. (1.) On the Deluge\ntradition; (2.) On the Creation of Man, if there is any; (3.) On the Fall\nof Man; (4.) On recollections of the _Primitive Homes_ on the other side\nof Meru and Bactria, if such are to be found. I know of course what Lassen\nsays. I do not expect much, as you know, from these enthusiastic\nemigrants; but all is welcome.\n\nOne must oppose with all one\u2019s power, and in solemn earnest, such pitiful\nnihilism and stupid jokes as Schwenk has made of the Persian mythology. I\nhave done this in the \u201cDoctrine of Zoroaster;\u201d I am to-day applying to\nHaug about some _hard nuts_ in this subject. The number seven predominates\nhere also, of course, and in the symbolism depends on the time of each\nphase of the moon; but the Amshaspands have as little to do with it as\nwith the moon itself. The Gahanbar resemble the six days of creation, if\nthe Sanskrit translation by Neriosengh (which I don\u2019t understand) is more\nto be trusted than the Vispered. But at all events there is an ideal\nelement here, which has been fitted in with the old nature worship.\n\nThe sanctity of the Hom (havam?) must also be ideal, the plant can only be\na symbol to Zoroaster. Can it be connected with Om? As to the _date_,\nZoroaster the prophet _cannot_ have lived later than 3000 B. C. (250 years\nbefore Abraham therefore), but 6000 or 5000 before Plato may more likely\nbe correct, according to the statements of Aristotle and Eudoxus. Bactria\n(for that surely is Bakhdi) was the first settlement of the Aryans who\nescaped from the ice regions towards Sogd. The immigration, therefore, can\nhardly fall later than 10,000 or 9000 before Christ. Zoroaster himself\nmust be considered as _after_ the migration of the Aryans towards the\nPunjab, for his demons are your gods.\n\nNow will you please let me have, at latest at Easter, what you can give\nme, for on the 25th the continuation of the MS. must go off, and of this\nthe Indians form a part.\n\nI do not find the account by Megasthenes of Indian beginnings (Plinius and\nArrianus) at all amiss: the Kaliyuga computation of 3102 B. C. is purely\nhumbug, just like the statement about the beginning of the Chinese times,\nto which Lassen gives credit. How can Herodotus have arrived at a female\nMithra, Mylitta? Everything feminine is incompatible with the sun, yet\nnowhere, as far as I can see, does any deity corresponding to _Mater_\nappear among the Persians or Indians. Altogether _Mithra_ is a knotty\npoint in the system of Zoroaster, into which it fits like the fist into\nthe eye.\n\nAnd now I come to the subject of the inclosed Kuno Fischer has given a\nmost successful lecture in Berlin on Bacon, which has grown into a book, a\ncompanion to Spinoza and Leibnitz, but much more attractive through the\nreferences to the modern English philosophy and Macaulay\u2019s conception of\nBacon. The book is admirably written. Brockhaus is printing it, and will\nlet it appear in May or at latest in June, about twenty-five sheets. He\nreserves the right of translation. And now I must appeal to your\nfriendship and your influence, in order to find, 1st, the right\ntranslator, and 2d, the right publisher, who would give the author \u00a350 or\n\u00a3100, for Fischer is dependent on his own resources. The _clique_ opposes\nhis appearance: Raumer has declared to the faculty that \u201ca Privat-docent\nsuspended in any state of the Bund because of his philosophical opinions\nwhich were irreconcilable with Christianity, ought not to teach in\nBerlin.\u201d The faculty defends itself. I have written public and private\nletters to Humboldt, but what good does that do? Therefore it is now a\nmatter of consequence to enable this _very_ distinguished thinker and\nwriter, and remarkably captivating teacher (he had here 300 pupils in\nmetaphysics), to secure the means of subsistence. Miss Winkworth\u2019s\npublisher offered her \u00a3150 when she sent him the first chapter of my\n\u201cSigns;\u201d Longmans half profits, that is\u2014nothing! I only wish to have the\nmatter set going. The proof-sheets can be sent.\n\nWho wrote the foolish article in the \u201cQuarterly\u201d against Jowett? The book\nwill live and bear fruit. We are well, except that George has had scarlet\nfever. Frances is nursing him at Rheindorf. Heartily yours.\n\nI have myself undertaken the comparison of the Aryan with the Semitic, on\nLassen\u2019s plan. Two thirds of the stems can be authenticated. What a\nscandal is Roth\u2019s deciphering of the Cyprian inscriptions. Renan mourns\nover the \u201cMonthly Review,\u201d but is otherwise very grateful. I have made use\nof _your_ Alphabet in my \u201cEgypt.\u201d\n\n\n\n[69.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _March 12, 1856_.\n\nMY DEAREST M.,\u2014You receive at once a postscript. I have since read W.\u2019s\nessay on the Deluge of the Hind\u00fas, in the second volume of the \u201cIndian\nStudies;\u201d and can really say now that I understand a little Sanskrit, for\nthe essay is written in a Brahmanic jargon, thickly strewn with very many\nGerman and French foreign terms. O, what a style! I am still to-day\nreading _Roth_ (M\u00fcnchener Gelehrte Anzeigen). I know therefore what is in\nit; that is, a child\u2019s tale which came to India from the Persian Gulf, or\nat least from Babylonia, about Oannes, the man in the shape of a fish, who\ngives them their revelation and saves them. Have you really nothing\nbetter? It is just like the fable of Deucalion, from the backward-thrown\n\u03bb\u1fb6\u03c2, that is, stones! Or was it \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03b4\u03c1\u03c5\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f25 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 _\u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2_?\n\nFaith in the old beliefs sits very lightly on all the emigrant children of\nJaphet. Yet many historical events are clearly buried in the myths before\nthe P\u00e2_nd_avas. Wilson\u2019s statement (Lassen, i. 479 n.) of the contents of\na Pur\u00e2_n_a, shows still a consciousness of those epochs. There _must_ be\n(1) a dwelling in the primitive country (bordering on the ideal), quite\nobscure, historically; (2) expulsion, through a change of climate; (3)\nlife in the land of the Aryans (Iran.); (4) migration to and life in the\nPunjab.\n\nFor the western Aryans and _for southern Europe_, there is another epoch,\nbetween 6000 and 5000 B. C. at latest, namely, the march of the Cushite\n(Turanian) Nimrud (Memnon?) by Susiana, and then across Northern Africa to\nSpain. The discovery of Curtius, of the Ionians being Asiatics that had\nmigrated from Phrygia, who disputed with the Ph\u0153nicians for the world\u2019s\ncommerce long before the colonies started from Europe, is _very_\nimportant.\n\nWrite me word what you think of Weber\u2019s Indian-Semitic Alphabet.\n\nI have to-day written to Miss Winkworth, to speak to the publisher. If he\nwill undertake it and pay Fischer well, both editions would appear at the\nsame time; and she must then come here in April, to make the translation\nfrom the proof-sheets. The printing begins at Easter.\n\n\n\n[70.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _April 22, 1856_. (_Palilia anni urbis 2610._)\n\nSo there you are, my worthy Don, sitting as a Member of Committees, etc.;\nand writing reports, and agitating and canvassing _in Academicis_! This\ndelights me: for you have it in you, and feel the same longing, which\nseized me at your age\u2014to _act_ and to exert an influence on the God-given\nrealities of life. It inspirits me; for you, like me, will remain what you\nare\u2014a German, and will not become a \u201cPhilister.\u201d\n\nI have missed _you_ here very much, even more than your answers to my\nquestions. No one escapes his fate: so I cannot escape the temptation to\ntry my method and my insight on indirect chronology. I confess that such\nconfusion I have not seen as that of these investigations hitherto beyond\nColebrooke and Wilson, Lassen and Duncker. Something can already be made\nof Megasthenes\u2019 accounts in connection with the Brahmanic traditions, in\nthe way cleared up by Lassen (in the \u201cJournal\u201d). I believe in the 153\nkings before Sandrokottus and the 6402 years. The older tradition does not\ndream of ages of the world, the historical traditions begin with the\nTret\u00e2age, and point back to the life on the Indus; the first period is\nlike the divine dynasties of the Egyptians. The Kaliyuga is 1354 B. C., or\n1400 if you like, _but not a day older_. The so called cataclysms \u201cafter\nthe universe had thrice attained to freedom\u201d (what nonsense!) are nothing\nbut the short interregnums of freedom obtained by the poor Indian Aryans\nbetween the monarchies. They are 200 + 300 + 120. And I propose to you,\nmaster of the Vedas, the riddle, how do I know that the first republican\ninterregnum (anarchy, to the barbarians) was 200 years long? The Indian\ntraditions begin therefore with 7000, and that is the time of Zaradushta.\nI find _many_ reasons for adopting _your_ opinion on the origin of the\nZend books. The Zoroastrians came out of India; but tell me, do you not\nconsider this as a _return migration_? The schism broke out on the Indus,\nor on the movement towards the Jumna and lands of the Ganges. The dull,\nintolerable Zend books may be as late as they will, but they contain in\nthe Vendidad, Fargard I., an (interpolated) record of the oldest movements\nof our cousins, which reach back further than anything Semitic.\n\nAbout Uttara-Kuru and the like, you also leave me in the lurch; and so I\nwas obliged to see what Ptolemy and Co., and the books know and mention\nabout them. It seems then to me impossible to deny that the \u1f48\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03ba\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03b9 is\nthe same, and points out the most eastern land of the old north, now in or\nnear Shen-si, the first home of the Chinese; to me the _eastern_ boundary\nof _Paradise_. But how remarkable, not so much that the Aryans, faithful\npeople, have not forgotten their original home, but that the name should\nbe _Sanskrit_! Therefore Sanskrit in Paradise, in 10,000 or 9000. Explain\nthis to me, my dear friend. But first send me, within half an hour of\nreceiving these lines, in case you have them, as they assume here,\nLassen\u2019s maps of India (mounted), belonging to my copy of the book, and\njust now very necessary to me. You can have them again in July on the\nRighi. Madame Schwabe is gone to console that high-minded afflicted\nCobden, or rather his wife, on the death of his _only_ son, whom we have\nburied here. She passes next Sunday through London, on her return to her\nchildren, and will call at Ernst\u2019s. Send the maps to him with a couple of\nlines. If you have anything else new, send it also. I have read with great\ninterest your clever and attractive chapter on the history of the Indian\nHellenic mind, called mythology. Does John Bull take it in? With not less\npleasure your instructive essay on \u201cBurning and other Funereal\nCeremonies.\u201d How noble is all that is really old among the Aryans! Weber\nsent me the \u201cM\u00e2lavik\u00e2,\u201d a miserable thing, harem stories,\u2014I hope by a\ndissolute fellow of the tenth century, and surely not by the author of\n\u201cSakuntala.\u201d For your just, but sharply expressed and _nobly_ suppressed\nessay against \u2014\u2014, a thousand thanks. I have to-day received the last sheet\nof \u201cEgypt,\u201d Book IV., and the last but one of Book V. (a), and the second\nof Book V. (b). These three volumes will appear on the 1st of June. The\nsecond half of Book V. (b) (Illustrations, Chronological Tables, and\nIndex) I furnish subsequently for Easter, 1857, in order to have the last\nword against my critics.\n\nMeanwhile farewell.\n\n\n\n[71.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _Wednesday, April 23, 1856_.\n\nIt would be a great pleasure to you, my dear friend, if you could see the\nenthusiasm of my reawakened love for India, which possessed me in the\nyears 1811-14, and which now daily overpowers me. But it is well that you\nare not here, for I dare not follow the notes of the siren till I have\nfinished the \u201cSigns of the Times,\u201d and have the first volume of my five\nbooks of the \u201cBible\u201d before me. I see clearly, from my point of view, that\nwhen one has the right frame, the _real facts_ of the Indian life can be\ndug out from the exuberant wealth of poetry as surely as your Eros and the\nCharites, and the deepest thoughts from their ritual and mythology. True\nGermans and Anglo-Saxons are these Indian worthies. How grateful I am to\nLassen for his conscientious investigations; also to Duncker for his\nrepresentation of the history, made with the insight of a true historian.\nBut all this can aid me but little. I can nowhere find the materials for\n_filling up my frame-work_; or, in case this frame-work should not itself\nbe accurate, for destroying it and my whole chapter. Naturally all are\nignorant of the time which precedes the great fable,\u2014namely, the time of\nthe Vedas.\n\nAnd so I turn to you, with a request and adjuration which you cannot set\naside. I give you my frame-work, the _chronological canon_, as it has been\nshaped by me. It is clear that we cannot depend on anything that stands in\nthe noble Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata and the sentimental R\u00e2m\u00e2yana, as to kings and lines\nof kings, unless it is confirmed by the Vedas; but they generally say the\nvery opposite. All corruptions of history by our schoolmen and priests are\nbut as child\u2019s play compared to the systematic falsifying and destruction\nof all history by the Brahmans. Three things are possible; (1) you may\nfind my frame-work _wrong_ because facts are against it; (2) you may find\nit _useless_ because facts are missing; or (3) you may find the plan\ncorrect, and discover facts to support and further it. I hope for the\nlast; but _every_ truth is a gain. My scheme is this: The poets of the\nVeda have no chronological reckoning, the epic poets a false one. There\nremain the Greeks. To understand the narrative of Megasthenes, one must\nfirst restore the corrupted passages, which Lassen unfortunately has so\nentirely misunderstood.\n\nArr. Ind. ix., in Didot\u2019s \u201cGeographi,\u201d i. p. 320: \u1f08\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u03b4\u1f74 \u0394\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\n(Svayambh\u00fb) \u03b2\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bb\u03ad\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f20\u03c1\u03af\u03b8\u03bc\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd \u1f38\u03bd\u03b4\u03bf\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03a3\u03b1\u03bd\u03b4\u03c1\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03c4\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd \u03c4\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\n\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd, \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03b1 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1 (instead of \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03c4\u03ae\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1) \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f11\u03be\u03b1\u03ba\u03b9\u03c3\u03c7\u03af\u03bb\u03b9\u03b1 (6402, according to Pliny\u2019s text, confirmed by all MSS., and\nby Solinus Polyhist. 59; of Arrian we have but copies of one _codex_, and\nthe _lacuna_ is the same in all).\n\n\u1f18\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u0399\u03a3\u03a4\u0391\u039d\u0391\u0399 (instead of \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c0\u1fb6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2, Arr. writes only \u1f10\u03c2)\n\u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b7\u03bd (\u1f31\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 is Herodotean for \u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, as every rational prose\nwriter would have put).\n\n\u03a4\u0397\u039d \u039c\u0395\u039d \u0395\u03a3 \u0394\u0399\u0391\u039a\u039f\u03a3\u0399\u0391.\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03c2 \u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1,\n\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72 \u03b5\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03c3\u03af \u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03c4\u03ad\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f11\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03cc\u03bd.\n\nThe restoration is certain, because the omission is explained through the\n\u1f41\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, and gives a meaning to the \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76. The sense is made\nindubitable by Diodorus\u2019 rhetorical rendering of the same text of\nMegasthenes, ii. 38: \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03b1\u1fd6\u03bf\u03bd, \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u03b1\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f21\u03b3\u03b5\u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2; cf. 39, \u1f55\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03b4\u1f72\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u1f14\u03c4\u03b5\u03c3\u03b9 \u03c4\u1f70\u03c2 \u03c0\u03cc\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 \u03b4\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03ba\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9.\n\nFrom this it follows that the monarchy was thrice interrupted by\ndemocratic governments, and that there were _four_ periods. This is the\nIndian tradition. But the whole was conceived as one history, doubtless\nwith a prehistoric ideal beginning, like our Manus and Tuiskon. Therefore,\nno cosmic _periods_ (Brahmanical imposture), but four _generations_ of\nAryan history in India.\n\nThe Kaliyuga is a new world, just as much as Teutonic Christendom, but no\nmore. The Indians will probably have commenced it A. D. 410, as friend\nKingsley too (in his \u201cHypatia\u201d). Where is the starting-point? I hold to\n1015 years as the chronological computation up to the time of the Nandas.\n\nFor the Nandas, I hold to the 22 years.\n\nIf they say that K\u00e2l\u00e2\u1e63oka and his ten sons reigned 22 years; and Nanda,\nnine brothers in succession, 22 years; the 22 years is not wrong, either\nhere or there, but the 22 is correct and the ten kingly personages also,\nfor aught I care: but the _names_ are altered (and really to do away with\nthe plebeian Nanda), therefore it is neither 44, nor 88, nor 100 (which is\nnothing), but\n\n                            22\n                            \u2014\u2014\nFrom Parikshit to the       1037\nyear before Sandrakottus\nSandrak\u2019s first year 312    317\n(?), 317 (?), 320 (?). I\nhave no opinion on the\npoint, therefore take the\nmiddle number _about_\n                            \u2014\u2014\nBeginning of the fourth     1354 B. C.\nperiod\nInterregnum, popular        120\ngovernment\n                            \u2014\u2014\nEnd of the third period     1475\n\nNakshatra era 1476? (Weber, \u201cIndian Studies,\u201d ii. 240.)\n\n_This fourth period_ is that of the supremacy of the Brahmans in the\nbeginning, with its recoil in Buddha towards the end.\n\nIn the year 1250 B. C. about the one hundredth year of the era, Semiramis\ninvaded India (D\u00e2vpara).\n\n_Third period of the royal dynasties_, the great empire on the Jumna, not\nfar from the immortal Aliwal. Beginning with the _Dynasty of the Kurus_.\n(Here the names of the kings and their works, as canals, etc. _Seat of the\nempire_, the Du\u00e2b; Hastinapura, Ayodhy\u00e2; or still on the Sarasvat\u00ee)\n\n                           0 years\nInterregnum between III.   300\nand II. (Must have left\nits traces. A pasted up\nbreak is surely there.)\n_Second period of royal    0 years.\ndynasties_ (Tret\u00e2)\n\n(Is this the historical life in the Punjab, with already existing\nkingdoms?) N. B. What is the third of the pure flames? Is it the people?\nAtria, latria, patria?\n\nInterregnum between II.   200 years.\nand I.\n\n_First period_. Beginning of the history after first _x_ years, with an\nideally filled up unmeasured period.\n\nBeginning: Manu   6402\n                  317\n                  \u2014\u2014\n                  6719 B. C.\n\nDeduct from this a mythical beginning: a cycle of 5 \u00d7 12 = 60, or 600: at\nmost 60 \u00d7 60 = 3600, at least 12 \u00d7 60=720. Or about 6 kings of 400 years\neach. Mean time: 2160.\n\nTotal: 4559.\n\n(There remain, deducting 6 from 154 kings (with Dionysos), about 148.)\n\nLength of time: 4559 - 1354 = 3205 \u00f7 148 = 21-1/2 mean number of years for\neach historical government; which is very appropriate.\n\nZoroaster lived, according to Eudoxus and Aristotle (compared with\nHermippos) 6350 or 6300 B. C. This points to a time of Zoroastrians\nmigrating towards India, or _having migrated, returning_ again. Accept the\nlatter, and the beginning of the 6402 years lies very near the first\nperiod, and the Indianizing of the Aryans. Those accounts about Zoroaster\nare (as Eudoxus already proves) _pre_-Alexandrian, therefore not Indian,\nbut Aryan. Do not the hymns of the Rig-veda, of which several are\nattributed to the kings of the Tret\u00e2 period, contain hints on that schism?\nIf it really occurred in the Punjab some reminiscence would have been left\nthere of it. The Zend books (wretched things) only give negative evidence.\n\nThe Brahmans of the most sinful period have of course smothered all that\nis historical in prodigies, and _this_ wretched taste long appeared to the\nGermans as _wisdom;_ whilst they despised the (certainly superficial) but\nstill sensible English researches of Sir W. Jones and Co., as\nphilistering! One must oppose this more inflexibly than even that\nadmirable Lassen does. (N. B. Has Colbrooke anything on this? or Wilson?)\n\nThere may have been _two_ points of contact between the Aryans and the\nkingdoms on the Euphrates _before_ the expedition of Semiramis.\n\n_a._ By means of the Zoroastrian Medo-Babylonian kingdom, which had its\ncapital in Babylon from 2234 B. C. (1903 before Alexander) for about two\ncenturies.\n\n_b._ In the oldest primitive times, by the Turanian-Cushite or North\nAfrican kingdom of Nimrod, which cannot be placed later than in the\nseventh chiliad. The Egyptians had a tradition of this, as is proved\naccording to my interpretation by the historical germ in the story in the\nTim\u00e6os of the great combat of Europe and Asia against the so-called\nAtlantides: but these are uncertain matters.\n\nThat is a general sketch of my frame-work. If you are able to do anything\nwith it, I make you the following proposition: You will send me an _open\nletter_ in German (only without _your Excellency_, and as I beg you will\nalways write to me, as friend to friend), in which you will answer my\ncommunication. Send me beforehand a few reflections and doubts for my\ntext, which I must send away by the 15th of May. Your open letter must be\nsent in in June, if possible before the 15th, in order to appear before\nthe 15th of July as an Appendix to my text of Book V. b. (fourth division)\nfirst half. _I_ can do nothing in the matter; everything here is wanting.\nI cannot even find German books here. Therefore keep Lassen\u2019s maps, if you\nhave them. I have in the mean time helped myself by means of Ritter and\nKiepert to find the old kingdoms and the sacred Sarasvat\u00ee. That satisfies\nme for the present.\n\nSoon a sign of life and love to your sorely tormented but faithful B.\n\n\n\n[72.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _Sunday Morning, April, 27, 1856_.\n\nI have laid before you my restoration of the text of Megasthenes, and\nadded a few preliminary thoughts on the possibility of the restoration of\nhis traditions, and something of my restoring criticism. I have not\nhowever been able to rest since that time, without going to the very\nground of the matter, to see if I am on a side-path, or on the right road.\nI now send you the summary of the two chapters which I have written since\nthen.\n\nI. The restoration of the list of Megasthenes. (153 kings in 6402 years.)\n\n1. The list begins, like the Sanskrit tradition, with the first\ngeneration; three interregnums presuppose four periods.\n\n2. The whole fourfold divided chronology is _one_: three sections of\n_historical recollections_ lie before the Kali age. Lassen is therefore\nwrong in saying that Megasthenes began with the Tret\u00e2 age. The progress of\nthe gradual extension of the kingdom is organic.\n\n3. The foundation of the whole tradition of the four periods of time are\nthe _genealogical registers of the old royal families_, which must if\npossible be _localized_; of course with special reference to Magadha,\nwhich however begins late. As in Egypt, every branch tried somewhere to\nfind its place; we must therefore throw away or mark all names not\nsupported by the legend (that is, the Vedic traditions). The contemporary\ndynasties must be separated from those that follow each other.\n\n4. Each period was divided from the preceding by an _historical_ fact,\u2014a\ndissolution followed by a subjugation or a popular government. The first\nis divided from the second by Herakles\u2014K_r_ish_n_a. The third from the\nsecond by R\u00e2ma, the extirpator of the heroes and royal races (great rising\nof the people). The fourth from the third by purely historical\nrevolutions, caused or fostered by the Assyrian invasion.\n\n5. The mythical expression for these periods is _one thousand years_.\n\n6. The historical interregnums are 200, 300, 120.\n\n7. As both are the same, therefore 3 \u00d7 1000 years vanish, and there remain\nbut the 620.\n\n8. Therefore Megasthenes\u2019 list:\n\nMegasthenes\u2019 list           6402\n                            3000\n                            \u2014\u2014\nKings from the first        3402 years.\npatriarch to Sandrakottus\nInterregnums                620\n                            \u2014\u2014\n                            4022\n\nFIRST PERIOD.\n\nA. Aryan recollections. Megasthenes\u2019 list unites the traditions of the\nMoon-race (Budha) with that of the Sun-race (direct from Manu).\n\n(1.) Questions. First question. What do the names Ayus and Yay\u00e2ti mean? Is\nNahusha = man?\n\n(2.) I know king Ikshv\u00e2ku, _i.e._, the gourd. Who are the Asuras,\nconquered by P_r_ithu?\n\n(3.) Anu, one of the four sons of Yay\u00e2ti, is the North, not the Iranian,\nnor the Turanian, which is Turvasa, but the Semitic, _i.e._, _Assur_. Anu\nis the chief national god of the Assyrians, according to the cuneiform\ninscriptions. The cradle of the old dynasty was therefore called\nTelanu==hill of Anu. Salmanassar is called Salem-anu, _i.e._, face of Anu.\n\nB. Indian primitive times.\n\n1. Manu (primitive time)    1000\n2-14. Thirteen human        468\nkings in the Punjab, each\nreigns on an average\nthirty-six years\n15. K_r_ish_n_a,            1000\ndestruction\n\n2468 years, representing really only 268 + 200 years, with an unknown\nquantity representing Aryan migrations and settlements in the Punjab.\n\n(4.) Question. Is Jones\u2019 statement correct in his chronology (Works, i.\n299), that the fourth Avat\u00e2r must be placed between the first and second\nperiods?\n\nSECOND PERIOD.\n\nThe kingdom of the Puru, and the Bharata kings. Royal residence, province\nof the Sarasvat\u00ee. Epos, the R\u00e2m\u00e2yana.\n\nA. _Period from Puru to Dushyanta_.\n\nConquests from the Sarasvati on the north, and to Kalinga (Bengal) on the\nsouth. Conquerors: Tansu, Ilina, Bharata, Suh\u00f4tra (all Vedic names).\n\nB. _Period of destruction through the Pa\u00f1_k_\u00e2las._\u2014A_g_am\u00ee_dh_a (Suh\u00f4tra\u2019s\nson, according to the unfalsified tradition) is the human _R\u00e2ma_, the\ninstrument of destruction.\n\n(5.) Question. Why is he called in Lassen, i. 590, the son of Rikshu?\n(This is another thousand years.)\n\n_R_iksha is called in M. Bh. (Lassen, xxiii. note 17) son of A_g_am\u00ee_dh_a,\nand in another place, _wife_ of A_g_am\u00ee_dh_a, or both times _wife_!\n\nTHIRD PERIOD.\n\nThe Kurus; the Pa\u00f1_k_\u00e2las; the P\u00e2_nd_avas. Seats in Middle Hindostan.\nAdvance to the Vindhya (Epos, the Mah\u00e2bh\u00e2rata of the third period, as the\nR\u00e2m\u00e2ya_n_a of the second).\n\nA. Kingdoms of the Kurus.\n\nB. Kingdom of the Pa_\u00f1k_\u00e2las. Contemporary lists; but the Pa\u00f1_k_\u00e2las\noutlast the Kurus. Both are followed by\u2014\n\nC. Kingdom of the P\u00e2_nd_avas.\n\nAd. A. From Kuru to Dev\u00e2pi who retires (that is, is driven away),\n_S_\u00e2ntanu, Bahl\u00eeka, the Bactrian (?), there are eleven reigns. Then the\nthree generations to Duryodhana and Ar_g_una.\n\nParikshit represents the beginning of the Interregnum.\n\nThe list in the Vish_n_u-pur\u00e2_n_a of twenty-nine kings, from Parikshit to\nKshemaka, with whom the race becomes extinct in the Kali age, does not\nconcern us.\n\nThey are the lines of the pretenders, who did not again acquire the\nthrone. The oldest list is probably only of six reigns; for the son of\n_S_at\u00e2n\u00eeka, the third V. P. king of this list, is also called Udayana\n(Lassen, xxvi. note 23), and the same is the name of the twenty-fifth\nking, the son of _S_at\u00e2n\u00eeka II. Therefore B_r_ihadratha, Vasud\u00e2na, and\nSud\u00e2sa (21, 22, 23) are likewise the last of a Parikshit line. But they do\nnot count chronologically.\n\nFOURTH PERIOD.\n\nThe kingdom of Magadha. Chronological clews for Megasthenes. The first\npart of the Magadha list preserved to us (Lassen, xxxi.) from Kuru to\nSahadeva is an unchronological list of collateral lines of the third\nperiod, therefore of no value for the computation of time. The Kali list\nof Magadha begins with Som\u00e2pi to Ripun_g_aya, 20 kings. The numbers are\ncooked in so stupid a way that they neither agree with each other nor are\npossible. One can only find the right number from lower down.\n\n_Restoration of the Chronology._\n\nKali II. Pradyota, five    138 years.\nkings with\nKali III. Saisun\u00e2ga, ten   360 years.\nkings with\nKali IV. Nanda, father     22 years.\nwith eight or nine sons\n                           \u2014\u2014\nKali V. Kandragupta king   317 B. C.\n                           \u2014\u2014\n                           837 years.\n\nIf one deducts these 837 years from 1182, the first year of the Kali age,\nthere remain 345 years for the twenty kings from Som\u00e2pi to Ripun_g_aya\n(First Dynasty), averaging 17-1/2 years. (That will do!) I adopt 1182\nyears, because 1354 is _impossible_, but 1181 is the historical\nchronological beginning of a kingdom in Kashmir. Semiramis invaded India\nunder a _Sthavirapati_ (probably only a title), about 1250. This time must\ntherefore fall in the interregnum (120 years, after Megasthenes). The\nhistory of the war with Assyria (Asura?) is smothered by pushing forward\nthe Abh\u00eera, that is, the Naval War on the Indus (Diodorus).\n\nI pass over the approximate restoration of the first three periods. I have\ngiven you a scanty abstract of my treatise, which I naturally only look\nupon as a _frame-work_. But if the _frame-work_ be right, and of this I\nfeel convinced, if I have discovered the true grooves and the system\u2014then\nthe unfalsified remains of traditions in the Vedas must afford further\nconfirmation. The Kali can be fixed for about 1150/1190 by powerful\nsynchronisms. The three earlier ages can be approximately restored. One\nthus arrives, by adding 200 + 300 + 120 (=620) to each of the earlier and\nthus separated periods, to the beginning of the Tret\u00e2 (foundation of the\n_Bharata kingdom_ beginning with Puru). This leads to the following\ncomputation.\n\nI. Anarchy before Puru      200 years.\nII. From Puru to            200 years.\nBharata\u2019s father, 10\nreigns of 20 years\nFrom Bharata to             120 years.\nA_g_am\u00eedha\u2019s son, 6\nreigns\nEnd of II.                  300 years.\n                            \u2014\u2014\nIII. From Kuru to Bahlika   200 years.\n(migration towards\nBactria?) 10 reigns\n(Parikshit) apparently      120 years.\n6-7 reigns\n                            \u2014\u2014\nEnd of the oldest Indian    1340 years.\nkingdom, before Kali\n                            1182 years.\n                            \u2014\u2014\nBeginning of Tret\u00e2 =        1100 years.\n2522 B. C. (2234\nZoroaster invaded Babylon\nfrom Media) Second\ndynasties in Babylon\n                            \u2014\u2014\n                            3622 years.\n\nWe have still to account for the time of the _settlement in the Punjab_\nand formation of kingdoms there. This gives as the beginning approximately\n= 4339 B. C.\n\nAnd now I am very anxious to hear what you have made out, or whether you\nhave let the whole matter rest as it is. I have postponed everything, in\norder to clear up the way as far as I can. I shall try to induce Weber to\nvisit me in the Whitsun holidays, to look into the details for me, that I\nmay not lay myself open to attack. Before that I shall have received\nHaug\u2019s _entirely_ new _translation of the first Fargard_, which I shall\nprint as an Appendix, with his annotations. My _Chinese_ restoration has\nturned out _most_ satisfactory.\n\nI may now look forward to telling them: (1.) The rabbinical chronology is\nfalse, it is impossible; it has every tradition opposed to it, most of all\nso the biblical\u2014therefore away with it! (2.) Science has not to _turn\nback_, but now first to press really forward, and to restore: the question\nis not the fixing of abstract speculative formulas, but the employing of\nspeculation and philology for the _reconstruction of the history of\nhumanity_, of which revelation is only a portion, though certainly the\ncentre if we believe in our moral consciousness of God.\n\nThis is about what I shall say, as my last word, in the Preface to the\nsixth volume of \u201cEgypt.\u201d Volumes IV. and V. _are_ printed. _Deo soli\ngloria._\n\n\n\n[73.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _May 22, 1856._\n\nMY DEAR FRIEND,\u2014H. R. H. the Prince Regent, who starts for England\nto-morrow, wishes to see Oxford, and _quietly_ and _instructively_. I\ntherefore give these lines to his private secretary, Herr Ullmann, that he\nmay by letter, or (if the time allows) by word of mouth, apply to you, to\nfix _a day_. Herr Ullmann is the son of the famous Dr. U., the present\nprelate and chief church-councilor, and a man of good intentions.\n\nI have at last gone in for Vedic and Bactrian chronology, after having had\nDr. Haug of Bonn with me for eight days. He translated and read to me many\nhymns from your two quartos (which he does very fluently), and a little of\nS\u00e2yana\u2019s commentary. By this and by Lassen and Roth, and yours and Weber\u2019s\ncommunications, I believe I have saved myself from the breakers, and I\nhold my proofs as established:\u2014\n\nThat the oldest Vedas were composed 3000-2500 B. C., and that everything\nelse is written in a learned dead Brahmanical language, a precipitate of\nthe Veda language, and certainly _very late_: scarcely anything before 800\nB. C.\n\nManu takes his place after Buddha.\n\nThe ages of the world are the miserable system of the book of Manu, and\nnothing more than evaporated historical periods. These epochs can be\nrestored not by the aid, but in spite of the two epics and their\nchronology.\n\nPetermann sends me a beautiful map. The routes and settlements of the\nAryans from their primitive home to the land of the five rivers (or rather\nseven).\n\nHaug has worked out all the fourteen names. Kabul and Kandahar are hidden\namongst them. I hope he will settle in the autumn with me, and for the\nnext few years.\n\nIn haste, with hearty thanks for your affectionate and instructive\nanswers. God bless you.\n\nP. S. I shall take the liberty of sending you, about the 1st of July, the\nfirst five sheets of my _Aryans_, before they are printed off, and ten\ndays later the remaining three or four, and beg for your instructive\nremarks on them.\n\n\n\n[74.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _July 17, 1856_.\n\nMY DEARLY LOVED FRIEND,\u2014Yesterday evening at half-past seven o\u2019clock I\nwrote off my _last chapter_ of \u201cEgypt\u2019s Place\u201d for press, and so the work\nis finished, the first sheets of which were sent to Gotha from London in\n1843, the chief part of which however was written in 1838-39. You will\nreceive the two new volumes (Books IV., V. a) in a fortnight; they will be\npublished to-day. Of the third volume (the sixth of the German editions),\nor V. (b), twelve sheets are printed, and the other eighteen are ready,\nexcept a few sheets already at Gotha, including the index to I. to V. (a).\nI am in the main satisfied with the work.\n\nYou are the first with whom I begin paying off my debts of correspondence;\nand I rejoice that I can take this opportunity to thank you for all the\ndelightful news which your last dear letter (sent by that most amiable\nMuir) conveyed to me; especially for the completion of the _third big\nvolume of the Rig-veda_, and for the happy arrival of your mother and\ncousin, which has doubtless already taken place. You know it was a letter\nfrom the _latter_, which first told me _of you_, and made me wish to see\nyou. And then you came _yourself_; and all that I prophesied of you after\nthe first conversation in London and your first visit in the country, has\nbeen richly fulfilled\u2014yes, beyond my boldest hopes. You have won an\nhonorable position in the first English university, not only for yourself\nbut for the Fatherland, and you have richly returned the love which I felt\nfor you from the first moment, and have faithfully reciprocated a\nfriendship which constitutes an essential portion of my happiness. I\ntherefore thank you all the more for all the love and friendship of your\nlast letters. I can only excuse myself _by my book_ for not having sooner\nthanked you. I soon perceived that _you were quite right_, that the\nchronological researches on Indian antiquity have led to nothing more sure\nthan the conviction that the earlier views, with few exceptions, were\nwrong or without foundation. As soon as I acquired this conviction,\nthrough reading the last works on the subject (Lassen and Roth), I grew\nfurious, as it happens to me from time to time, and at the same time\nreawoke the longing after the researches which I had to lay aside in 1816,\nand which I now determined to approach again, in the course of my work,\nwhich is chronological in the widest sense. After I had read all that is\nwritten, I let Haug come to me in the Whitsun holidays. He brought with\nhim the translation I wished for of the _First Fargard of the Vendidad_;\nand you can imagine my delight, when in Books XII. and XIII. he discovered\nfor me (purely linguistically) the two countries, the non-appearance of\nwhich was the _only_ tenable counter-reason which opposed itself to the\nintuition to which I had held fast since 1814\u2014namely, that this document,\nso ancient in its primitive elements, contained nothing less than the\nhistory of the gradual invasion, founding of states, and peopling of Asia\nby the Aryans. How could Kandahar and Kabul be missing if this were true?\nWithout the least _suspicion_ of this historical opinion, Haug proved to\nme that they are not wanting. Petermann will make the whole clear in a\nlittle map, such as I showed him. You will find it in the sixth volume.\nThen he rejoiced my heart by translating some _single hymns of the\nRig-veda_, especially in Book VII., which I found threw great light on the\nGod-Consciousness, the faith in the moral government of the world. _He\ncomes to me_: from the 1st of August he is free in Bonn, and goes for the\nZend affairs to Paris, marries his bride in Ofterdingen, and comes here to\nme on the 1st of October for _Mithridates_ and the Old Testament, the\nprinting of which begins in January, 1857, with the _Pentateuch_. With him\n(in default of your personal presence) I have now gone through everything\nat which I arrived with regard to the period of the entry of the Aryans\n(4000 B. C.) in the Indus country (to which Sarasvat\u00ee does not belong\u2014one\ncan as easily count seven as five rivers from the eastern branch of the\nupper Indus to the west of the Satadru), and with regard to the difficult\nquestions of the connection of these migrations with Zoroaster. That is, I\n_must_ place Zoroaster _before_ the emigration; on the march (from\n5000-4000) the emigrants gradually break off. Three heresies, one after\nanother, are mentioned in the record itself. The not exterminated germs of\nthe nature-worship (with the adoration of fire) spring up again, but the\nmoral life remained. (1.) Therefore the Veda language is to me the\nprecipitate of the Old Bactrian (as the Edda language of the Old Norse).\n(2.) The _Zend language_ is the second step from the Northern Old\nBactrian. (3.) The Sanskrit is one still further advanced from the\nSouthern Old Bactrian, or from the Veda language. (4.) All _Indian\nliterature_, except the Vedas, is in the New South Bactrian, already\nbecome a learned language, which has been named the perfect or Sanskrit\nlanguage. The _epochs of the language_ are the three _great historical\ncatastrophes_.\n\nA. _Kingdom in the region of the Indus._\u20144000-3000. The Veda language as a\nliving popular language.\n\nB. _Second Period._\u2014On the Sarasvat\u00ee and in the Du\u00e2b. The Veda tongue\nbecomes the learned language. Sanskrit is the _popular_ language,\n3000-2000.\n\nC. _Third Period._\u2014Sanskrit _begins_ to be the learned language, at least\nat the end.\n\nD. Kali=1150 B. C. Sanskrit merely the learned language.\n\nTherefore the oldest Vedas, the purely popular, cannot be younger than\n3000; the _collection_ was made in the third period, the tenth book is\nalready in chief part written in a _dead language_. You see all depends on\nwhether I can authenticate the four periods with their three catastrophes;\nfor a new form of language presupposes a political change. Forms such as\nHar-aqaiti I can explain just as that the Norwegian names of places are\nyounger than the corresponding Icelandic forms; in the colony the old\nremains as a fixed form, in the mother country the language progresses.\n\nFor what concerns now seriously the _Mythology_, your spirited essay\nopening the way was a real godsend, for I had just arrived at the\nconviction which you will find expressed in the introduction to Book V.\n(a): That the so-called nature-religion can be nothing but the _symbol_ of\nthe primitive consciousness of God, which only gradually became\nindependent (through misunderstanding) and which already lies prefigured\nin organic speech. P\u2014\u2014, K\u2014\u2014 and Co., are on this point in great darkness,\nor rather in utter error. _You_ have kept yourself perfectly free from\nthis mistake. I however felt that I must proclaim what is positively true\nfar more sharply, and have drawn the outlines of a method which is to me\nthe more convincing, as it has stood the test of the whole history of old\nreligion. For in taking up the Aryan investigations, I closed the circle\nof my historical mythological inquiry. What will _you_ say to this? For I\nhave written the whole especially for you, to come to an understanding\nwith you. I arrive at the same point which you aim at, but without your\nroundabout way, which is but a make-shift. But in the fundamental\nconception of nature-religion, we do certainly agree altogether. If you\ncome to Germany, you will find here with me the proof-sheets of Book V.(b)\n(about pages 1-200) which treat of this section, as well as the analysis\nof the table of the Hebrew patriarchs. They will be looked through before\nHaug\u2019s journey to Paris and mine to Geneva (August 1), and will be\ntherefore all struck off when I return here on the 23d August.\n\nYour essay holds a beautiful place in the history of the subject. The work\non that section gave me inexpressible delight, and a despaired-of gap in\nmy life is filled up, as far as is necessary for my own knowledge; and I\nbelieve too not without advantage to the faithful.\n\nHow disgraceful it is that we do not instinctively understand the Veda\nlanguage, when we read it in respectable Roman letters, with a little\nprevious grammatical practice! Your Veda Grammar will be a closed book to\nme, as you print in the later Devanagari goose-foot character. Haug shall\ntransliterate for me the grammatical forms into _your_ alphabet. He is a\nnoble Suabian, and much attached to me; also a great admirer of yours.\n\nMy \u201cGod-Consciousness\u201d is printed (thirty-two sheets), twenty are\ncorrected (and fought through with Bernays). This work, too, will be\ncarried through the second revise before my journey. I wonder myself what\nwill come of the work. Its _extent_ remains unaltered (three volumes in\nsix books), but its contents are ever swelling. I hope it _will take_. I\nshall strike the old system _dead forever_, if we do not go to ruin; of\nthis I am sure; therefore I must all the more lay the foundations of the\nnew structure in the heart, the conscience, and the reason.\n\nO! what a hideous time! God be praised, who made us both free. So also is\nCarl now, through his official efficiency and his happy marriage. The\nwedding will take place in Paris between the 9th and 15th October. We\nshall go there.\n\nI take daily rides, and was never better. Please God I shall finish the\n\u201cGod-Consciousness\u201d (II. and III.) between the 25th August and the end of\nOctober (the third volume is nearly ready), and then I shall take up the\n\u201cBiblework,\u201d the proof-sheets of which lie before me, with _undivided_\nenergy. The contract with Brockhaus is concluded and exchanged. I shall\nperhaps come to England in October, 1857; that is to say _with_ the first\nvolume of the Bible, but _not without_ it.\n\nNeukomm and Joachim have been with us for six weeks, which gave us the\ngreatest enjoyment. Neukomm returns here at the end of August.\n\nMy children promise me (without saying it) to meet here for the 25th\nAugust, to introduce the amiable bride to me. I am rejoicing over it like\na child.\n\nWhy do you not make a journey to the Neckar valley with your mother and\ncousin? My people send hearty greetings. With true love, yours.\n\nI am purposely not reading your Anti-Renan all at once, that I may often\nread it over again before I finish it. I think it is admirably written.\nPerhaps a distinguished philologist, Dr. Fliedner (nephew of the head of\nthe Deaconesses), may call on you. He has been highly recommended to me,\nand is worthy of encouragement. What is Aufrecht about? I cannot cease to\nfeel interested about him.\n\n\n\n[75.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _October 7, 1856_.\n\nYesterday, my dearest friend, I sent off the close of the last volume of\n\u201cEgypt,\u201d together with the printed sheets 13-19, and at the same time to\nBrockhaus the last two revised sheets of the \u201cGod in History,\u201d Volume I.;\nand to-day I have again taken up the translation of the Bible (Exodus),\nwith Haug and Camphausen\u2014that is, Haug arrived the day before yesterday.\n(Between ourselves, I hope Bernays is coming to me for three years.) How I\nshould have liked to show you these sheets, 13-19 (the Bactrians and\nIndians and their chronology). You will find in them a thorough discussion\nof your beautiful essay (which has been admired everywhere as a perfect\nmasterpiece), not without some shakings of the head at K\u2014\u2014 and B\u2014\u2014. In\nfact I have gone in for it, and by New Year\u2019s Day you shall have it before\nyou. This, with the journey to Switzerland and three weeks of\nindisposition afterwards, are an excuse for my silence.\n\nIt always gives me great and inexpressible pleasure when you _talk_ to me\nby letter and _think aloud_. And this time I have been deeply touched by\nit. I am convinced you have since then yourself examined the\nconsiderations which oppose themselves to your bold and noble wish with\nregard to the Punjab. What would become of your great work? I will not\nhere say what shall we in Europe do without you? Also; do you mean to go\n_alone_ to Hapta Hendu, or as a married man? There you will never find a\nwife. And would your intended go with you? And the _children_? All\nEnglishmen tell me it is just as unbearably hot in Lahore as in Delhi; in\n_Umritsir_ there is no fresh air. No Sing goes to Cashmir because he who\nreigns there would soon dispatch him out of the world at the time of the\nfever.\n\nBy the by, what has become of your convert? Does he still smoke without\nany scruple?\n\nYour gorgeous Rig-veda at Brockhaus\u2019 frightens people here because of its\nextent (they would have given up the Sanhita, satisfied with various\nreadings) and the exorbitant price. Others would willingly have had your\nown Veda Grammar besides the Indian grammatical treatise, especially on\naccount of the Vedic forms. In fact you are admired, but criticised. You\nmust not allow this to annoy you. I find that Haug thinks about the\nmythology nearly as I do.\n\nEverything in Germany resolves itself more and more into pettinesses and\ncliques, and the pitiful question of subsistence. \u201cThe many princes are\nour good fortune, but poverty is our crime.\u201d Had not _Brunn_ offered\nhimself to take Braun\u2019s place, giving up his private tutorship, we must\nhave given up the Arch\u00e6ological Institute at Rome! With difficulty Gerhard\nhas found _one_ man in Germany who could undertake the Italian printing of\nthe \u201cAnnali\u201d (appearing, as you know, in Gotha). \u201cResta a vedere se lo\npu\u00f2!\u201d All who can, leave Prussia\u2014and only blockheads or hypocrites are let\nin, with the exception of physical science; whoever can do so turns\nengineer, or goes into a house of business, or emigrates. My decided\nadvice on this account therefore is, reserve yourself for better times,\nand stay at present in England, where you have really won a delightful\nposition for yourself.\n\nNow for various things about myself. Every possible thing is done to draw\nme away from here (my third capitol, the first of my own). The King quite\nrecently (which I could not in the least expect) received me here at the\nrailway station, in the most affectionate way, and demanded a promise from\nme that I would pay him a visit within a year and a day. But I have once\nfor all declared myself as the \u201chermit of Charlottenberg,\u201d and hermits and\nprophets should stay at home. I do not even go to Carlsruhe and Coblentz.\n_Cui bono?_ What avails good words, without good deeds? But the nation is\nnot dead. Don\u2019t imagine that. Before this month is out you will see what I\nhave said on this subject in the Preface to the \u201cGod in History.\u201d Within\nsix to ten years the nation will again be fit to act. Palmerston will cut\nhis throat if nothing comes of the Neapolitan business, and just the same\nif he cannot make \u201ca good case;\u201d the principle of intervention even\nagainst Bomba is self-destruction for England, and disgraceful in the\nhighest degree. The _fox_ cannot begin war in Italy at _the present\nmoment_ from want of money, and his accomplices are afraid of losing their\nstolen booty. So he tries to gain time. He will still live a few years.\n\nI have seen \u2014\u2014: he knows a great deal more than he allows to appear, but\nis the driest, and most despairing Englishman I have ever seen. He has\nsuffered shipwreck of everything on the T\u00fcbingen sand bank. The poor\nwretches! Religion and theology without philosophy is bad; philosophy\nwithout philosophy is a monster! So Comte is a trump-card with many in\nOxford! He is so in London. What a fall of intellect! what a decay of\nlife! what an abyss of ignorance! Jowett is a living shoot, and will\ncontinue so; but John Bull is my chief comfort, even for my \u201cGod in\nHistory.\u201d America is my greatest misery after my misery for Germany; but\nthe North _will_ prove itself in the right.\n\nWith hearty greetings of truest attachment and love to your mother, truly\nyours.\n\nWe expect George on the 18th. Ernst is here.\n\n\n\n[76.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _January 29, 1857_.\n\nYou have really inflicted it on me! For though I have but one leg to stand\nupon (I cannot _sit_ at all), as the other has been suffering for four\ndays from sciatica (let Dr. Acland explain that to you, whilst you at the\nsame time thank him heartily for his excellent book on the cholera), still\nI am obliged to place myself at the desk, to answer my dear friend\u2019s\nletter, received yesterday evening in bed. The last fortnight I have daily\nthought of you incessantly, and wished to write you a dunning letter, at\nthe same time thanking you for the third volume of the Veda, which already\ncontains some hymns of the seventh book, as the admiring Haug read it out\nto me. Out of this especially he promises me a great treasure for my Vedic\nGod-Consciousness, without prejudice to what the muse may perhaps prompt\nyou to send me in your beautiful poetical translation; for my young\nassistant will have nothing to do with that. You will certainly agree with\nhim, after you have read my first volume, that much is to be found in that\nVeda for the centre of my inquiries; the consciousness in the Indian\nIranians of the reality of the divine in human life. I find in all that\nhas yet come before me, almost the same that echoes through the Edda, and\nthat appears in Homer as popular belief; the godhead interferes in human\naffairs, when crime becomes too wanton, and thus evil is overcome and the\ngood gains more and more the upper hand. Of course that is kept in the\nbackground, when despair in realities becomes the keynote of the\nGod-Consciousness, as with the Brahmans, and then with the much-praised\napostles of annihilation, the Buddhists. You are quite right; it is a pity\nthat I could not let the work appear all at once, for even you\nmisunderstand me. When I say \u201c_we_ cannot pray with the Vedas and Homer\nand their heroes, not even with Pindar,\u201d I mean, we as worshippers, as a\ncommunity; and that you will surely allow. Of course the thoughtful\nphilosopher can well say with Goethe, \u201cworship and liturgy in the name of\nSt. Homer, not to forget \u00c6schylus and Shakespeare.\u201d But that matter is\nnevertheless true in history without any limitation. I have only tried it\nwith Confucius, but it is more difficult; it is as if an antediluvian\narmadillo tried to dance.\n\nBut what will my Old Testament readers say when I lead them into the glory\nof the Hellenic God-Consciousness? Crossing and blessing themselves won\u2019t\nhelp! My expressions therefore in the second volume are carefully\nconsidered and cautiously used. But the tragedy of my life will be the\nfourth book. Yet I write it, I have written it!\n\nYou are quite right about the English translation; all the three volumes\nat once, and the address at the beginning. But you must read the second\nbook for me. It is no good saying you don\u2019t understand anything about it.\nI have made it easy enough for you. I have asserted nothing simply,\nwithout making it easy for every educated person to form his own opinion,\nif he will only reflect seriously about the Bible. The _presuppositions_\nare either as good as granted, or where anything peculiar to me comes in,\nI have in the notes justified everything thoroughly, although apparently\nvery simply. Take the Lent Sundays for this, and you will keep Easter with\nme, and also your amiable mother (from whom you never send me even a word\nof greeting).\n\nBut now, how does it fare with \u201cEgypt?\u201d The closing volume, which, as you\nknow, I wrote partly out of despair, because you would not help me, and in\nwhich I most especially thought of you, and reckoned on your guiding\nfriendship, must surely now be in your hands (the two preceding volumes,\nof course, some time ago). Why don\u2019t you read them?\n\nI am not at all easy at what you tell me about yourself and your feelings;\neven though I feel deeply that you do not quite withdraw your inmost\nthoughts from me. But why are you unhappy? You have gained for yourself a\ndelightful position in life. You are getting on with your gigantic work.\nYou (like me) have won a fatherland in England, without losing your German\nhome, the ever excellent. You have a beautiful future before you. You can\nat any moment give yourself a comfortable and soul-satisfying family\ncircle. If many around you are Philisters, you knew that already; still\nthey are worth something in _their_ own line. Only step boldly forward\ninto life. Then Heidelberg would come again into your itinerary.\n\nOne thing more this time. I have not received Wilson\u2019s translation. I\npossess both the first and second volumes. Has he not continued his useful\nwork? What can I do to remind him of the missing part? The third volume,\ntoo, must contain much that is interesting for me.\n\nI cannot forget Aufrecht. Is he free from care and contented? The family\ngreet you and your dear mother. We expect Charles and his young wife next\nweek. Ernst is, as you will know, back at Abbey Lodge. With unaltered\naffection.\n\n\n\n[77.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _April 27, 1857_.\n\nThe month is nearly over, my dear friend, before the close of which I\nmust, according to agreement, deliver up my revised copy of the amendments\nand additions to the English edition of my \u201cEgypt.\u201d (They are already\nthere.) I hoped that in this interval you would have found a little\nleisure (as Lepsius and Bernays have done, who sent me the fruits of their\nreading already at the beginning of the month, in the most friendly way)\nto communicate to me your criticisms or doubts or thoughts or corrections\non that which I have touched on in your own especial territory, as I had\nexpressly and earnestly begged you to do. I have improved the arrangement\nvery much. As you have not done this, I can only entertain one of two\ndisagreeable suppositions, namely, that you are either ill or out of\nspirits, or that you have only what is disagreeable to say of my book, and\nwould rather spare yourself and me from this. But as from what I know of\nyou, and you know of me, I do not find in either the one or the other\nsupposition a sufficient explanation of your obstinate silence, I should\nhave forced myself to wait patiently, had I not to beg from you alone a\nsmall but indispensable gift for my \u201cGod in History.\u201d\n\nI have again in this interregnum taken up the interrupted studies of last\nyear on the Aryan God-Consciousness in the Asiatic world, and thanks to\nBurnouf\u2019s, yours, Wilson\u2019s, Roth\u2019s and Fausb\u00f6ll\u2019s books, and Haug\u2019s\nassistance and translations, I have made the way easy to myself for\nunderstanding the two great Aryan prophets Zaraduschtra and S\u0101kya, and (so\nfar as that is possible to one of us now) the Veda; and this not without\nsuccess and with inexpressible delight. My expectations are far exceeded.\nThe Vedic songs are by far the most glorious, which in first going through\nthat fearful translation of Wilson\u2019s, seemed to wish to hide themselves\nentirely from me. The difficulties of making them intelligible, even of a\nbare translation, are immense; the utter perverseness of S\u00e2ya_n_a is only\nexceeded by that of Wilson, to whom however one can never be grateful\nenough for his communications. I now first perceive what a difficult but\nalso noble work you have undertaken, and how much still remains doubtful;\neven after one has got beyond the collectors and near to the original\npoets. It is as if of the Hebrew traditions we only had the Psalms, and\nthat without an individual personality like David, without, in fact, any\none; on the contrary, allusions to Abraham\u2019s possible poems and the\ncosmical dreams of the Aram\u00e6ans. But yet how strong is the feeling of\nimmediate relation to God and nature, how truly human, and how closely\nrelated to our own! What a curious similarity to the Edda, Homer, and\nPindar, Hesiod, and the Hellenic primitive times! Nothing however gave me\ngreater delight than the dignity and solemnity of the funeral ceremonies,\nwhich you have made so really clear and easy to be understood. This is as\nyet the only piece of _real life_ of our blood relations in the land of\nthe five rivers. I have naturally taken possession of this treasure with\nthe greatest delight, and perfected the description for my problem by the\nexplanation of Yama (following on the whole Roth, who however overlooks\nthe demiurgic character), of the Ribhus (departing entirely, not only from\nN\u00e8ve\u2019s mistaken views, but also from what I have read elsewhere,\nrepresenting them as the three powers which divide and form matter,\nnamely, Air, Water, and Earth, to whom the fourth, Agni, was joined under\nthe guidance of Tvash\u2019ar), and of the funeral ceremonies as the condition\nof the laws of inheritance; where I return to my own beginning. And here\nit strikes me at once that in the Vedas, so far as they are accessible to\nme, there is not a trace to be found of the _joining together of the three\ngenerations_ (the departed and his father and grandfather), and making\nthem the unity of the race through the sacrificial oblations. And yet the\n_idea_ must be older than the Vedas, as this precise, though certainly not\naccidental limitation is found with Solon and the Twelve Tables, just as\nclearly as with Manu and all the books of laws, and the commentaries\ncollected by Colebrooke. You would of course have mentioned this in your\naccount if anything of the sort had existed in the tenth book. But even\nthe Pitris, the fathers, are not mentioned, but it passes on straight to\nYama the first ancestor. Haug, too, has discovered nothing; if you know\nanything about it, communicate it to me in the course of May, for my\nsecond volume goes to press on the 1st June. I shall read it aloud to\nGeorge and Miss Wynn here, between the 25th and 31st.\n\nBut my real desire is that you should send me one of your melodious and\ngraceful metrical translations of _your_ hymn, \u201cNor aught nor nought\nexisted.\u201d I must of course give it (it belongs with me to the period of\ntransition, therefore, comparatively speaking, late); and how can I\nventure to translate it? I have, to be sure, done so with about five\npoems, which Haug chose for me out of the first nine books, and translated\nliterally and then explained them to me; as well as with those which I\nworked out of Wilson\u2019s two first volumes by the help of Roth and Haug. But\nthat is _your_ hymn, and I have already written my thanks for your\ncommunication in my MS. and then left a space. That good Rowland Williams\nthinks it theistic, or at all events lets one of the speakers say so.\n\nRowland Williams\u2019 \u201cChrist and Hinduism\u201d has been a real refreshment to me,\nin this investigation of the Indian consciousness of God in the world. The\nmastery of the Socratic-Platonic dialogue, the delicacy and freedom of the\ninvestigation, and the deep Christian and human spirit of this man, have\nattracted me more than all other new English books, and even filled me\nwith astonishment. Muir, that good man, sent it me through Williams and\nNorgate, and I have not only thanked him, but Williams himself, in a full\nletter, and have pressingly invited him for his holidays to our little\nphilosophers\u2019 room. It is an especial pleasure to me that Mary and John,\nwhose neighbor he is in summer, have appreciated him, and loved and prized\nhim, and Henry also.\n\nHenry will bring me \u201cRational Godliness.\u201d This book, English as it is,\nshould be introduced into India, in order to convert the followers of\nBrahma and the English Christians! One sees what hidden energy lies in the\nEnglish mind, as soon as it is turned to a worthy object, but for this of\ncourse the fructifying influences of the German spirit are required. I\nhave, on the contrary, been much disappointed by G\u2014\u2014\u2019s communication\ncontained in Burnouf\u2019s classical works, on that most difficult but yet\nperfectly soluble point of the teaching of Buddha, the twelve points\n\u201cbeginning with ignorance and ending with death.\u201d G\u2014\u2014 leaves the rational\nway even at the first step, and perceives his error himself at the ninth,\nbut so far he finds Buddha\u2019s (that is his own) proofs unanswerable. How\ntotally different is Burnouf. He is fresh, self-possessed, and clear. I\ncan better explain why William von Humboldt went astray on this subject.\nBut I have already gossiped too much of my own thoughts to you. Therefore\nto Anglicis.\n\nWhat are you about in Oxford? According to Haug\u2019s account you have abused\nme well, or allowed me to be well abused in your \u201cSaturday Review,\u201d which\npasses as yours and Kingsley\u2019s mouthpiece. If it were criticism, however\nmistaken, but why personal aspersions? Pattison\u2019s article on the\n\u201cTheologia Germanica\u201d in the April number of the \u201cWestminster Review\u201d is\nvery brave, and deserves all thanks. He has learnt to prize Bleek: in all\nrespects he has opened himself more to me in the last few weeks, and I\nlike him. But the man who now writes the survey of foreign literature in\nthe \u201cWestminster Review\u201d might have just _read_ my book: this he cannot\nhave done, or else he is a thorough bungler; for he (1) understands me\nonly as representing the personal God (apparently the one in the clouds,\nas you once expressed it, _a-straddle_, riding) and leaving out everything\nbesides; (2) that the last twenty-seven chapters of the book of Isaiah are\nnot, as one has hitherto conceived, written by one man, but by Jeremiah,\nalthough he is already the glorified saint of the 53d chapter, _and_ by\nBaruch. Now thank God that the sheet is finished, and think occasionally\nin a friendly way of your true friend.\n\nI shall to-day finish the ante-Solonic God-Consciousness of the Hellenes.\nThat does one good.\n\n\n\n[78.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _Friday, May 8, 1857_.\n\nI must at least begin a letter to you to-day, because I feel I must thank\nyou, and express my delight at the letter and article. The _letter_\nconfirms my fears in the highest degree, namely, that _you are not well_,\nnot to say that you begin to be a hypochondriacal old bachelor. But that\nis such a natural consequence of your retired sulky Don\u2019s life, and of\nyour spleen, that I can only wonder how you can fight so bravely against\nit. But both letter and article show me how vigorous are both your mind\nand heart. It is quite right in you to defend Froude, though no one better\nknows that the general opinion is (as is even acknowledged by members of\nthe German romantic school) that Shakespeare intentionally counteracted\nthe corrupt instinct and depraved taste of his nation in the matter of\nOldcastle. Whatever strange saints there have been in all countries, yet\nthe Wycliffites, true to their great and noble master, were martyrs, and\nMilman has insisted on this most nobly. To misapprehend Wyeliffe himself,\nthat is, not to recognize him as the first and purest reformer, the man\nbetween the Waldenses, Tauler, and Luther, is, however, a heresy more\nworthy of condemnation than the ignoring of Germany in the Reformation,\nand doubly deplorable when one sees such blind faith in the bloody\nsentences of that most miserable court of judgment of Henry VIII. I must\ntherefore invert your formula thus, \u201cL\u2019histoire romanique (romantique) ne\nvaut pas le Roman historique.\u201d (I am not speaking of \u201cTwo Years Ago,\u201d for\nI only began to read the book yesterday.) _But_ I am very glad that you\nthink so highly of Froude personally, and therefore this matter does not\ndisturb me. On the other hand, I rejoice without any _but_, that you have\ntaken up Buddha so lovingly and courageously. (Do you know that extracts\nfrom the article have found their way into the papers, through \u201cGalignani\u201d\nas \u201cSigns of the Times.\u201d) You will soon see how nearly we agree together,\nalthough I cannot say so much of the humanizing influence of Buddhism: it\nmakes of the Turanians what the Jesuits make of the people of Paraguay,\n\u201cpraying machines.\u201d In _China_ the Buddhists are not generally respected;\nin _India_ they could not maintain their position, and would with\ndifficulty convert the people, if they tried to regain their lost ground.\nBut Buddha, _personally_, was a saint, a man who felt for mankind, a\nprofound man. I have said in my section, \u201cBuddha has not only found more\nmillions of followers than Jesus, but is also even more misunderstood than\nthe Son of Mary.\u201d Have you read _Dhammapadam_? What is the authority for\nBuddha\u2019s \u201cTen Commandments?\u201d I have always considered this as an invention\nof Klaproth\u2019s, confirmed by Prinsep. I do not find them on Asoka\u2019s\npillars, nor in that didactic poem; on the contrary, four or five _ad\nlibitum_. I shall, however, now read the sermons of the (really worthless)\nconvert Asoka at the fountain head, from Sprenger\u2019s library.\n\nYou have represented the whole as with a magic wand. We really _edified_\nourselves yesterday evening with it. Frances read aloud, and we listened;\nand this morning early my wife has made it into a beautiful little book in\nquarto, with which I this afternoon made _Tr\u00fcbner_ very happy for some\nhours. He is a remarkable man, and is _much_ devoted to you, and I have\nentered into business relations with him about my \u201cBiblework,\u201d the first\nvolume of which goes to press on the 1st of January; the other six stand\nbefore me as far finished as they can be, till I have the printed text of\n\u201cThe People\u2019s Bible\u201d in three volumes before me, on which the \u201cBiblical\nDocuments,\u201d three volumes, and the \u201cLife of Jesus and the Eternal Kingdom\nof God,\u201d one volume, are founded. He appears to me to be the right\nnegotiator between America, England, and Germany. He will before long call\non you some Saturday. (Write me word how you think of him as a\nbookseller.) The duty you pay for your place, by putting together a\nChresthomathy, is very fair; whether you are obliged to print your\nLectures I cannot decide. I shall curse them both if they prevent you from\ntearing yourself away from the Donnish atmosphere and bachelor life of\nOxford, and from throwing yourself into the fresh mental atmosphere of\nGermany and of German mind and life. You must take other journeys besides\nlake excursions and Highland courses. Why don\u2019t you go to Switzerland,\nwith an excursion (by Berlin) to Breslau, to the German Oriental Congress?\nThere is nothing like the German spirit, in spite of all its\none-sidedness. What a _l\u0153ta paupertas_! What a recognition of the\nsacerdocy of science! And then the strengthening air, free from fog, of\nour mountains and valleys! You bad fellow, to tell me nothing of your\nmother\u2019s leaving you, for you ought to know that I am _tenderly_ devoted\nto her; and it vexes me all the more, as I should long ago have sent her\nmy \u201cGod in History,\u201d had I known that she was in Germany. (Query where?\nAddress?) Therefore fetch her, instead of luring her away to the walks\nunder the lime-trees. _George_ is going too at the end of June from here\nto the Alps; we expect him in a fortnight. He is a great delight to me.\n\nNow something more about Yama. I think you are _perfectly_ right with\nregard to the origin. It is exactly the same with _Osiris_, the husband of\nIsis, the earth, and then the judge of the dead and first man. Only we do\nnot on this account explain _Anubis_ as a _symbol of the sun_, but as the\nwatchful Dog of Justice, the accuser. So there are features in Yama (and\nYima) which are not to be easily explained from the cosmogonic conception,\nalthough they can be from the idea of the divine, the first natural\nrepresentation of which is the astral one. I think, however, that Yama is\nGeminus, that is \u201cthe upper and lower sun,\u201d to speak as an Egyptian. _The\ntwo dogs_ must originally have been what their mother the old bitch Saram\u00e2\nis; but with the God of Death they are something different, and the lord\nof the dead is to be as little explained by the so-called nature-religion\n_without returning to the eternal factor_, as this first phase itself\ncould have arisen without it as cosmical\u2014_therefore_, as first symbol. How\nI long for your two translations! The hymn which you give in the article\nis _sublime_: the search after the God of the human heart is expressed\nwith indescribable pathos; and how much more will this be the case in your\nhands in a new Indian translation! For we are most surely now the Indians\nof the West. I am delighted that you so value Rowland Williams. We must\nnever forget that he has undertaken (as he himself most pointedly wrote to\nme) the difficult task \u201cto teach Anglican theology (and that to Anglican\nCymri).\u201d He has not yet quite promised to pay me a visit,\u2014he is evidently\nafraid of me as a German and freethinker, and is afraid \u201cto be\ncatechised.\u201d He, like all Englishmen, is wanting in _faith_. He seems to\noccupy himself profoundly with the criticism of the Old Testament. Poor\nfellow! But he will take to Daniel.\n\nThe Harfords are determined to keep him there, in which Henry has already\nencouraged them. I, however, think he _ought_ to go to Cambridge if they\noffer him a professorship. Muir has written to me again,\u2014an honest man;\nbut he has again taken a useless step, a prize, for which Hoffmann\n(superintendent-in-general) is to be the arbiter; and the three judges\nwill be named by him, Lehnert as theologian (Neander\u2019s unknown successor),\nH. Ritter as the historian of philosophy (very good,\u2014and who as\n_Orientalist_)! No magister will touch his pen, _his ducibus_ and _tali\nauspicio_. You should perform the Benares vow by a catechism drawn up for\nthe poor young Brahmans in the style of Rowland Williams, and yet quite\ndifferent, that is, in your own manner, telling and short. At all events,\nno one in Germany will write half as good a book for the Brahmans as\nWilliams has done. The Platonic dialogue requires a certain breadth,\nunless one is able and willing to imitate the Parmenides. At the same time\nthe ordinary missionaries may convert the lower classes through the Gospel\nand through Christian-English-German life, in which alone they prove their\nfaith. By the by, it seems that Williams hopes for an article from you in\nthe \u201cNorth British Review.\u201d That you intend to read my \u201cEgypt\u201d is\ndelightful; only not in the Long Vacation, when you ought to travel about.\nHave you read the friendly article on \u201cGod in History\u201d in the \u201cNational\nReview\u201d (April), which however certainly shows an ignorance bordering on\nimpudence. Even the man in the \u201cWestminster Review\u201d pleases me better,\nalthough he looked through my book fast asleep, and puts into my mouth the\nmost unbelievable discoveries of his own ignorance,\u2014Isaiah chapters\nxlix.-lxvi. are written by _Jeremiah_ and _Baruch_, and similar horrors!\nWhen will people learn something? But in four years I hope, with God\u2019s\nhelp, to state this, in spite of them, and force them at last to learn\nsomething through \u201cthe help of their masters and mine.\u201d With true love,\nyours.\n\n\n\n[79.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _Friday Morning, August 28, 1857_.\n\nSee there he remains in the centre of Germany for a month, and lets one\nhear and see nothing of him! Had I not soon after the receipt of your dear\nand instructive letter gone to Wildbad, and there fallen into\nindescribable idleness, I should long ago have written to Oxford; for the\nletter was a great delight to me. The snail had there crept out of his\nshell and spoke to me as the friend, but now \u201cYour Excellency\u201d appears\nagain; so the snail has drawn his head in again.\n\nNow, my dear friend, you ought to be thanked for the friendly thought of\npaying me a visit, and writing to me. Therefore you must know that I\nreturned here on the 19th, in order to greet, in his father\u2019s native\ncountry, Astor, my now sixty-three years old pupil, who proposed himself\nfor the 20th to the 25th, and who for my sake has left his money-bags in\norder to see me once again. And now Astor is really in Europe, and has\ncalled at Abbey Lodge; but his wife and granddaughter have stayed on in\nParis or Brussels, and Astor is _not_ yet here. This, however, has no\neffect on my movements, for I do not accompany him to Switzerland, where,\nI know, Brockhaus would send a hue and cry after me.\n\nThat the Oxford Don should ask him if I would afford him a \u201cfew hours,\u201d\nshows again the English leaven. For you well know that my hermit\u2019s life is\ndear to me for this reason,\u2014that it leaves me at liberty to receive here\nthe Muses and my friends. And what have we not to talk over? The \u201chours\u201d\nbelong to the Don\u2019s gown; for you know very well that we could in a \u201cfew\nhours\u201d only figure to ourselves _what_ we have to discuss by turns. So\ncome as soon as you can, and stay at least a week here. You will find my\nhouse to be sure rather lonely, as Henry has robbed me of the womankind,\nand Sternberg of Theodora; and that excellent princess keeps Emilia from\nme, who is faithfully nursing her benefactress in an illness that I hope\nis passing away. We two old people are, however, here and full of old\nlife. Perhaps you will also still find Theodore, who, however, soon after\nAstor\u2019s departure will be hurrying off to Falmouth for sea-bathing, in\nacceptance of his brother Ernst\u2019s invitation. Laboulaye has announced\nhimself for the 8th; Gerhard and his wife for the first or second week in\nSeptember; therefore, if you do find any one, they will be friends.\nBesides Meyer, there is Dr. Sprenger, the Arabic scholar, as house friend,\nwhose library I have at last secured for us,\u2014a delightful man, who is my\nguide in the Arabian desert, so that I may be certain of bringing the\nchildren of Israel in thirty months to the Jabbok, namely, in the fifth of\nthe eight volumes.\n\nI can give you no better proof of my longing to see you than by saying\nthat you shall _even_ be welcome without your mother, who is so dear and\nunforgotten to us all, although we by no means give up the hope that you\nwill bring her with you here. For I _must_ see her again in this life. I\nought to have thanked her before this for a charming letter, but I did not\nknow _where_ she had gone from Carlsbad; her son never sent me the\naddress. Should she _not_ come with you, you must pay toll for the delay,\nwhich, however, must not be longer than one year, with a photograph, for I\n_must_ soon see her.\n\nSo you have looked at my Genesis! I am pleased at this. But I hope you\nwill look at the chapters once again, when they are set _in pages_, after\nmy last amendments; also at my discussions on Genesis i. 1-4, ii. 4-7, as\ni. and ii. of the thirty thorns (in the Appendix, p. cxxxv.) which I have\nrun into the weak side of the Bible dragon, though less than one thirtieth\nof its heaviest sins. I feel as if I had got over three quarters of the\nwork since I sent the eleven chapters and the thirty thorns into the\nworld. My holidays last till the 21st of October. Haug is in the India\nHouse, over Minokhired and Parsi Bundehesh. If you have a moment\u2019s time,\nlook at my quiet polemic against you and Burnouf in favor of Buddha, in\nreference to the Nirv\u00e2na. Koeppen has given me much new material, although\nhe is of your opinion. I am quite convinced that Buddha thought on this\npoint like Tauler and the author of the \u201cGerman Theology;\u201d but he was an\nIndian and lived in desperate times. A thousand thanks for the dove which\nyou sent me out of the ark of the Rig-Veda. I had sinned against the same\nhymn by translating it according to Haug, as I had not courage enough to\nask you for more. And that leads me to tell you with what deep sympathy\nand melancholy pleasure your touching idyl has filled me. You will easily\nbelieve me that after the first five minutes I saw you vividly behind the\nmask. I thank you _very much_ for having ordered it to be sent to me. I am\nvery glad that you _have_ written it, for I would far rather see you\nmixing in the life of the present and future, with your innate freshness\nand energy. I must end. All love from me and Fanny to your incomparable\nmother. So to our speedy meeting. Truly yours.\n\nGeorge will have arrived in London yesterday with wife and child; his\ndarling Ella has a serious nervous affection, and they are to try sea air.\nHe is much depressed.\n\n\n\n[80.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _February 17, 1858_.\n\nYour affectionate letter, my dear friend, has touched me deeply. First\nyour unaltered love and attachment, and that you have perfectly understood\nme and my conduct in this affair. Naturally my fate will be very much\ninfluenced by it. I must be _every year_ in Berlin: this year I shall\nsatisfy myself with the last three weeks after Easter. In 1859 (as I shall\nspend the winter in Nice) I shall take my seat, when I return in April\nacross the Alps. But later (and perhaps from 1859) I must not only live in\nPrussia, which is prescribed by good feeling and by the constitution, but\nI must stay for some time in Berlin. They all wish to have me there. God\nknows how little effort it costs me not to seek the place of Minister of\nInstruction, to say nothing of declining it, for everything is daily going\nmore to _ruin_. But it could only be for a short time, and\nBethmann-Hollweg, Usedom, and others can do the right thing just as well,\nand have time and youth to drag away the heavy cart of a Chinese order of\nbusiness, which now consumes nine tenths of the time of a Prussian\nminister (who works twelve hours a day).\n\nWhat I wish and am doing with my \u201cBiblework,\u201d _you_ will see between the\nlines of my first volume; other people, twelve months later, when my first\nvolume of the Bible documents \u201ccomes out:\u201d and even then they will not see\nwhere the concluding volume tends,\u2014the world\u2019s history in the Bible, and\nthe Bible in the world\u2019s history. Already in the end of 1857 I finished\nall of the first volume: the stereotyping goes on fearfully slow. You will\nreceive one of the first copies which goes across the Channel; and you\nwill read it at once, will you not? I am delighted that you are absorbed\nin _Eckart_: he is the key to Tauler, and there is nothing better, _except\nthe Gospel of St. John_. For there stands still more clearly than in the\nother gospel writings, that the object of life in this world is to _found\nthe Kingdom of God on earth_ (as my friends the Taipings understand it\nalso). Of this, Eckart and his scholars had despaired, just as much as\nDante and his parody, Reineke Fuchs. You will find already many pious\nejaculations of this kind in my two volumes of \u201cGod in History;\u201d but I\nhave deferred the closing word till the sixth book, where _our_ tragedy\nwill be revealed, in order to begin boldly with a new epos. I send you\nto-day four sheets by book-post, \u201cThe Aryans in Asia;\u201d for I cannot finish\nit without your personal help. You will find that you have already\nfurnished a great portion of the matter. The same hymn which I translated\nwith difficulty and trouble from Haug\u2019s literal translation (in strophes\nwhich you however do not recognize?) (Ps. li.), you have translated for\nme, in your own graceful manner, on a fly-sheet, and sent to me from\nLeipzig. Of course I shall use this translation in place of my own. I\ntherefore venture to request that you will do the same with regard to the\nother examples which I have given. If you wish to add anything _new_, it\nwill suit perfectly, for everything fits in at the end of the chapter: the\nnumber of the pages does not come into consideration in the present stage.\nYou will receive the leaves on Saturday; it would be delightful if you\ncould finish them in the course of the following week, and send them back\nto me. (We have a contract here with France, which gives us a sort of\nbook-post.) I expect next week the continuation of the Brahmanism and\nBuddha. I should like to send both to you. The notes and _excursus_ will\nonly be printed at the close of the volume, therefore not before May. The\nrest (Books V., VI.) will be printed during the summer, to appear before I\ncross the Alps. In this I develop the tragedy of the Romano-Germanic\nworld, and shall both gain many and lose many friends by it. I have read\nyour brilliant article on Welcker with great delight. I possess it. Have\nyou sent it (if only anonymously) to the noble old man? He has deserved\nit. The article makes a great noise, and will please him very much. In\nfact, everything would give me undisturbed pleasure, did I not see (even\nwithout your telling me, which, however, you have done, as is the sacred\nduty between friends) that you are not happy in yourself. Of _one_ thing I\nam convinced,\u2014you would be just as little so, _even less_, in Germany, and\nleast of all among the sons of the Brahmans. If you continue to live as\nyou do now, you would everywhere miss England,\u2014perhaps also Oxford, if you\nwent to London. Of this I am not clear: in general a German lives far more\nfreely in the World-city than in the Don-city, where every English\nidiosyncrasy strengthens itself, and buries itself in coteries.\nUnfortunately I have neither read \u201cIndophilus\u201d nor \u201cPhilindus:\u201d please\ntell me the numbers of the \u201cTimes.\u201d I can get a copy of the \u201cTimes\u201d here\nfrom the library from month to month. Trevelyan is an excellent man,\noccasionally unpractical and mistaken, always meaning well and accessible\nto reason. But does any one _study_ in London? _Dubito!_ But I don\u2019t\nunderstand the plan of an Oriental College. Perhaps it is possible to\nundertake London without giving up Oxford entirely. The power of\ninfluencing the young men, who after ten or twenty years will govern the\nland, is far greater in Oxford or Cambridge than in London. I am curious\nabout your \u201cGerman Reading Book.\u201d\n\nI maintain one thing,\u2014you are not happy; and that comes from your bachelor\nlife. The progress of your Vedic work delights me: but how much in it is\nstill a riddle! Thus, for instance, the long hymn (2 Ash_t_aka, third\nAdhy\u00e2ya, S\u00fbkta viii. CLXIV.) p. 125. The hymn is first of all, as can be\nproved, beyond verse 41 _not genuine_; but even this older portion is\nlate, surely already composed on the Sarasvat\u00ee. The Veda is already a\nfinished book (verse 39), Brahma and Vish_n_u are gods (35, 36). The whole\nis really wearisome, because it wishes to be mysterious without an idea.\n(See 4 Ash_t_aka, seventh Adhy\u00e2ya, vol. iii. p. 463.) Is not Brahma there\na god like Indra?\n\nI depend on your marking all egregious blunders with a red pencil. Many\nsuch must still have remained, leaving out of view all differences of\nopinion. Tell me as much as you can on this point in a letter, for on the\nContinent only notes for press are allowed to go as a packet. (But of\nthese you can bring in as much as you wish: the copy is a duplicate.) At\nthe end I should much like to write something about the present\nimpossibility of enjoying the Rig-Veda, and of the necessity of a\nspiritual key. But I do not quite know, first of all, whether one can\nreally enter upon the whole: there is much that is conventional and mortal\nby the side of what is imperishable. An anthology in about two or three\nvolumes would find a rapid sale, and would only benefit a more learned and\nperfect edition. If you have arrived at the same conclusion, _I will blow\nthe trumpet_.\n\nGeorge greets you heartily, as do his mother and sisters. Perhaps I shall\nmove in April, 1859, to Bonn; _here_ I shall _not_ stay. _Deus\nprovidebit._ With truest affection, yours.\n\nBest remembrance to your mother. Have you read my preface to \u201cDebit and\nCredit?\u201d I have poured out my heart about Kingsley in the Introduction to\nthe German \u201cHypatia,\u201d and told him that everybody must say to himself,\nsooner or late, \u201cLet the dead bury the dead.\u201d\n\n\n\n[81.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _July 31, 1858_.\n\nWith threefold joy, my loved friend, have I heard the news through your\ngreat admirer Mme. Schwabe, of your charming intention of delighting us in\nAugust with a visit. _First_, on account of the plan itself: _then_\nbecause I can now compress into a few lines the endless letter I have so\nlong had in my thoughts, to develop it in conversation according to my\nheart\u2019s desire; _thirdly_, because really since yesterday the day has come\nwhen the one half of the concluding volume (iii.) of \u201cGod in History\u201d has\ngone to press, so that its appearing is secured. A letter to you, and a\nlike debt to Lepsius, therefore open the list. And now before anything\nelse receive my hearty _thanks_ for your friendly and instructive letter,\nand what accompanied it _in Vedicis_. It came just at the right time, and\nyou will see what use I made of it in the work.\n\nAnd now here first come my _congratulations_. Nothing could be more\nagreeable and suitable; it is personally and nationally an honor, and an\nunique acknowledgment. I can only add the wish that you may enjoy the\ndignity itself as short a time as possible, and take leave as soon as\npossible of the Fellow-celibates of All Souls\u2019. Your career in England\nwants nothing but this crowning-point. How prosperous and full of results\nhas it been! Without ceasing to be a German, you have appropriated all\nthat is excellent and superior in English life, and of that there is much,\nand it will last for life. I imagine you will bring your historical\n_Chrestomathy_ with you, and propose to you, as you most probably give\nsomething out of the Heliand and Ulphilas, to reserve my Woluspa for the\nnext edition, as I have just established the first tenable text of this\ndivine poem, on which the brothers Grimm would never venture. I have had\nthis advantage, of working on the good foundation of my studies (with a\nDanish translation) of 1815 from Copenhagen. Neither Magnusson, nor Munch,\nnor Bergmann has given the text of the only MS. (Cod. Regius); one has\ndisfigured it with the latest interpolations, another with unauthorized\ntranspositions. I have at last worked out the unity of the Helgi and the\nSigurd songs with each other, and the oldest purely mythological stratum\n(the solar tragedy) of both, as an important link in the chain of\nevidence, for the reality of the God-Consciousness of mankind and its\norganic laws. What people will say to the \u201cresults\u201d (Book VI.) which fall\ninto one\u2019s hands, I do not know.\n\nI have been obliged to postpone the journey to Italy from September to\nNovember. October (the 23d) is the great crisis for Prussia, and I ought\nnot to forsake the Fatherland then, and have willingly agreed not to do\nso. A brighter, better day is approaching. May God give his blessing.\nEvery one must help; it is the highest time.\n\nBut nothing disturbs me from the work of my life. The fourth volume of the\n\u201cBiblework\u201d goes to press the day after to-morrow; on the 1st of\nSeptember, the fifth (Documents I. a). I have now finished _my_\npreliminary work for the Old Testament in the main points, and only\nreserved the last word before the stereotyping; so I begin at once on the\nNew Testament and Life of Jesus. The friendly and clever notice of the\nfirst volume of the \u201cBiblework\u201d in the \u201cContinental Review\u201d gave me and my\nwhole family _great pleasure_: and Bernays is here since yesterday (for\nAugust and September), which helps the printing of the Pentateuch very\nmuch, as I always sent him a last revise, and now all can be worked off\nhere. I finish with Haug in the beginning of September; he will go\nprobably to Poonah with his very sensible bride. Charles and Theodore are\nwell. I expect George this week with Emilia for a visit. My family greet\nyou. Bernays sighs. He has again made some _beautiful discoveries_; that\nof Aristotle (about the tragedies) I have carried further philosophically.\nSuggest to that good Arthur Stanley (to whom I have sent my \u201cBiblework\u201d)\nto send me his \u201cPalestine.\u201d I cannot get it here, and should like to say\nsomething about it.\n\nWith most true love, yours.\n\n\n\n[82.]\n\n\nCHARLOTTENBERG, _July 23, 1859_.\n\nMy sons knew too well what delight they would give me through their\nconfidential communication, which has already given us all a foretaste of\nthe delight of your visit with your bride, and meanwhile has brought me\nyour expected and affectionate letter.\n\nI have felt all these years what was the matter with you, and I sympathize\nwith your happiness as if it concerned one of my own children. I therefore\nnow, my loved friend, wish you all the more happiness and blessing in the\nacquisition of the highest of life\u2019s prizes, because your love has already\nshown the right effect and strength, in that you have acquired courage for\nfinishing at _this present time_ your difficult and great work on the\nVedas. The work will also give you further refreshment for the future,\nwhilst the editing of the Veda still hangs on your hands.\n\nTherefore let us all wish you joy most heartily (my wife has received the\njoyful news in Wildbad), and accept our united thanks beforehand for your\nkind intention of visiting us shortly with your young wife. By that time\nwe shall all be again united here. Your remarkable mother will alone be\nwanting. Beg your bride beforehand to feel friendly towards me and towards\nus all. You know how highly I esteem her two aunts, though without\npersonal acquaintance with them, and how dear to me is the cultivated,\nnoble, Christian circle in which the whole family moves. I have as yet\ncarried out my favorite plan with a good hope of success; six months in\nCharlottenberg on the true spiritually historical interpretation of the\nOld Testament, in the first volumes of the second division of the work\n(the so-called documents); six months of the winter on the \u201cLife of\nJesus,\u201d and what in my view immediately joins on to that. The first volume\nof the Bible documents is printed, _the Pentateuch_. You will see that I\nhave handled Abraham and Moses as freely here as I did Zoroaster and\nBuddha in my last work; the explanation of the books and the history from\nJoram to Zedekiah is as good as finished.\n\nWe shall keep peace; Napoleon and Palmerston understand each other, and\nPalmerston is the _only_ statesman in England and Europe who conceives\nrightly the Italian question. Russia follows him. I still hope by the\nautumn to be able to bless the God of free Italy beside Dante\u2019s and\nMachiavelli\u2019s graves. With us (Prussia) matters move fairly forwards; here\nthey have been fools, and begin to feel ashamed of themselves. So a speedy\nand happy meeting.\n\nYour heartily affectionate friend,\n\nBUNSEN.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n    1 This article formed the preface to a collection of extracts\n      published in 1858, under the title of _German Classics_. The\n      extracts are arranged chronologically, and extend from the fourth to\n      the nineteenth century. They are given in the original Gothic, Old\n      High-German, and Middle High-German with translations, while in the\n      more modern portions the difficult words only are explained in\n      notes. A list of the principal works from which the extracts are\n      taken will be found at the end of the article, p. 44.\n\n    2 \u201cUt easdam homilias quisque (episcopus) aperte transferre studeat in\n      _rusticam romanam_ linguam aut _theodiscam_, quo facilius cuncti\n      possint intelligere qu\u00e6 dicantur.\u201d\u2014Conc. Tur. can. 17. Wackernagel,\n      _Geschichte der Deutschen Literatur_, \u00a7 26.\n\n_    3 Lateinische Gedichte des X. und XI. Jahrhunderts_, von J. Grimm und\n      A. Schmeller. G\u00f6ttingen, 1838.\n\n_    4 Reinhard Fuchs_, von Jacob Grimm. Berlin, 1834. _Sendschreiben_, an\n      Karl Lachmann. Leipzig, 1840.\n\n_    5 Poems of Grave Ruodolf von Fenis, Her Bernger von Horheim_; see\n      _Des Minnesangs Fr\u00fchling_, by Lachmann and Haupt. Leipzig, 1857.\n\n    6 Poem of the _K\u00fcrenberger_; see _Des Minnesangs Fr\u00fchling_, pp. 8 and\n      230.\n\n    7 See an account of the _Italian Guest_ of Thomasin von Zerclaria by\n      Eugene Oswald, in _Queene Elizabethe\u2019s Achademy_, edited by F. J.\n      Furnivall. London, 1869. This thoughtful essay contains some\n      important information on Thomasin.\n\n_    8 Des Minnesangs Fr\u00fchling._ Herausgegeben von Karl Lachmann und\n      Moritz Haupt. Leipzig, 1857.\n\n    9 Sebastian Brant\u2019s _Narrenschiff_. Herausgegeben von Friedrich\n      Zarncke. Leipzig, 1857.\n\n_   10 Rede auf Schiller_, von Jacob Grimm. Berlin, 1859. (Address on\n      Schiller, by Jacob Grimm.)\n\n      _Schiller-Buch_, von Tannenberg; Wien. From the Imperial Printing\n      Press, 1859.\n\n      _Schiller\u2019s Life and Works._ By Emil Palleske. Translated by Lady\n      Wallace. London, Longman and Co., 1860.\n\n      _Vie de Schiller._ Par Ad. Regnier, Membre de l\u2019Institut. Paris,\n      Hachette, 1859.\n\n   11 See _The Times\u2019_ Special Correspondent from Vienna, November 14.\n\n   12 The Prince of Holstein-Augustenburg was the grandfather of the\n      present Duke and of Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein.\n\n   13 Preface to a new edition of Wilhelm M\u00fcller\u2019s poems, published in\n      1868, in the _Bibliothek der Deutschen National-literatur des\n      achtzehnten und neunzehnten Jahrhunderts._ Leipzig, Brockhaus.\n      Translated from the German by G. A. M.\n\n         14 \u201cFree, and strong, and pure, and German,\n        On the German Rhine,\n      Nothing can be now discovered\n        Save alone our wine;\n      If the wine is not a rebel,\n        Then no more are we;\n      Mainz, thou proud and frowning fortress,\n        Let him wander free!\u201d\n\n   15 \u201cAnd let me have my full glass, and let me have my hearty laugh at\n      these wretched times! He who can sing and laugh with his wine, you\n      need not put under the ban, my lords: mirth is a harmless child.\u201d\n\n         16 \u201cEurope wants but peace and quiet: why hast thou disturbed her\n                  rest?\n      How with silly dreams of freedom dost thou dare to fill thy breast?\n      If thou rise against thy rulers, Hellas, thou must fight alone,\n      E\u2019en the bolster of a Sultan, loyal Europe calls a throne.\u201d\n\n   17 I am enabled through the kindness of Mr. Theodore Martin to supply\n      an excellent translation of these two poems, printed by him in 1863,\n      in a volume intended for private circulation only.\n\n   18 Ptol. ii. 11, \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c7\u03ad\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u039a\u03b9\u03bc\u03b2\u03c1\u03b9\u03ba\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03a7\u03b5\u03c1\u03c3\u03bf\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5 \u03a3\u03ac\u03be\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n   19 Grimm, _Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache_, p. 609. Strabo, Pliny,\n      and Tacitus do not mention the name of Saxons.\n\n   20 Grimm, l. c. p. 629.\n\n   21 See _Poeta Saxo_, anno 772, in Pertz, Monum. I. 228, line 36; Grimm,\n      l. c. p. 629.\n\n   22 See Grimm, _Deutsche Sprache_, p. 781.\n\n_   23 Germania_, c. 40. Grimm, l. c. p. 604.\n\n   24 Grimm, p. 641.\n\n   25 Beda, _Hist. Eccl._ I. 15. \u201cPorro de Anglis, hoc est, de ilia patria\n      qu\u00e6 Angulus dicitur,\u201d etc. Ethelwert, Chron. I., \u201cPorro Anglia vetus\n      sita est inter Saxones et Giotos, babens oppidum capitale, quod\n      sermone Saxonico Sleswic nuncupatur, secundum vero Danos,\n      _Haithaby_.\u201d\n\n   26 Grimm, l. c. p. 630.\n\n   27 \u201cGuti vero similiter cum veniunt (in regnum Britanni\u00e6) suscipi\n      debent, et protegi in regno isto sicut conjurati fratres, sicut\n      propinqui et proprii cives regni hujus. Exierunt enim quondam de\n      nobili sanguine Anglorum, scilicet de Engra civitate, et Angliei de\n      sanguine illorum, et semper efficiuntur populus unus et gens una.\n      Ita constituit optimus Ina Rex Anglorum.... Multi vero Angli\n      ceperunt uxores suas de sanguine et genere Anglorum Germani\u00e6, et\n      quidam Angli ceperunt uxores suas de sanguine et genere Scotorum;\n      proceres vero Scotorum, et Scoti fere omnes ceperunt uxores suas de\n      optimo genere et sanguine Anglorum Germani\u00e6, et itu fuerunt tunc\n      temporis per universum regnum Britanni\u00e6 duo in carne una....\n      Universi pr\u00e6dicti semper postea pro communi utilitate coron\u00e6 regni\n      in simul et in unum viriliter contra Danos et Norwegienses semper\n      steterunt; et atrocissime unanimi voluntate contra inimicos\n      pugnaverunt, et bella atrocissima in regno gesserunt.\u201d (_Die Gesetze\n      der Angelsachsen_, ed. Schmid, p. 296.)\n\n   28 Klaus Groth writes: \u201cThe island of Friesian speech on the continent\n      of Schleswig between Husum and Tondern is a very riddle and miracle\n      in the history of language, which has not been sufficiently noticed\n      and considered. Why should the two extreme ends only of the whole\n      Friesian coast between Belgium and Jutland have retained their\n      mother-speech? For the Ost Friesians in Oldenburg speak simply\n      Platt-Deutsch like the Westphalians and ourselves. Cirk Hinrich\n      St\u00fcremburg\u2019s so called Ost-Friesian Dictionary has no more right to\n      call itself Friesian than the Bremen Dictionary. Unless the whole\n      coast has sunk into the sea, who can explain that close behind\n      Husum, in a flat country as monotonous as a Hungarian Pussta,\n      without any natural frontier or division, the traveller, on entering\n      the next inn, may indeed be understood if he speaks High or Low\n      German, nay, may receive to either an answer in pure German, but\n      hears the host and his servants speak in words that sound quite\n      strange to him? Equally strange is the frontier north of the\n      Wiede-au, where Danish takes the place of Friesian. Who can explain\n      by what process the language has maintained itself so far and no\n      farther, a language with which one cannot travel beyond eight or ten\n      square miles? Why should these few thousand people not have\n      surrendered long ago this \u2018useless remnant of an unschooled\n      dialect,\u2019 considering they learn at the same time Low and High\n      German, or Low-German and Danish? In the far-stretching, straggling\n      villages a Low-German house stands sometimes alone among Friesian\n      houses, and _vice versa_, and that has been going on for\n      generations. In the Saxon families they do not find it necessary to\n      learn Friesian, for all the neighbors can speak Low-German; but in\n      the Friesian families one does not hear German spoken except when\n      there are German visitors. Since the seventeenth century German has\n      hardly conquered a single house, certainly not a village.\u201d\n      (_Illustrir__te__ Deutsche Monatshefte_, 1869, p. 330.)\n\n_   29 Histoire de St. Louis_, par Joinville. Texte rapproch\u00e9 du Fran\u00e7ais\n      Moderne par M. Natalis de Wailly, Membre de l\u2019Institut. Paris, 1865.\n\n      _\u0152uvres de Jean Sire de Joinville_, avec un texte rapproch\u00e9 du\n      Fran\u00e7ais Moderne, par M. Natalis de Wailly. Paris, 1867. M. Natalis\n      de Wailly has since published a new edition of Joinville, _Histoire\n      de Saint Louis_, par Jean Sire de Joinville, suivie du Credo et de\n      la lettre \u00e0 Louis X.; texte ramen\u00e9 \u00e0 l\u2019orthographe des Chartes du\n      Sire de Joinville. Paris, 1868. He has more fully explained the\n      principles according to which the text of Joinville has been\n      restored by him in his _M\u00e9moire sur la Langue de Joinville_. Paris,\n      1868.\n\n   30 See Paulin Paris, p. 175.\n\n   31 In his last edition of the text of Joinville, which was published in\n      1868, M. de Wailly has restored the spelling of Joinville on all\n      these points according to the rules which are observed in\n      Joinville\u2019s charters, and in the best MSS. of the beginning of the\n      fourteenth century. The fac-similes of nine of these charters are\n      published at the end of M. de Wailly\u2019s _M\u00e9moire sur la Langue de\n      Joinville_; of others an accurate transcript is given. The authentic\n      texts thus collected, in which we can study the French language as\n      it was written at the time of Joinville, amount to nearly one fifth\n      of the text of Joinville\u2019s History. To correct, according to these\n      charters, the text of Joinville so systematically as had been done\n      by M. de Wailly in his last edition may seem a bold undertaking; but\n      few who have read attentively his _M\u00e9moire_ would deny that the new\n      editor has fully justified his critical principles. Thus with regard\n      to the terminations of the nominative and the oblique cases, where\n      other MSS. of Joinville\u2019s History follow no principle whatever, M.\n      de Wailly remarks: \u201cPour plus de simplicit\u00e9 j\u2019appellerai r\u00e8gle du\n      sujet singulier et r\u00e8gle du sujet pluriel l\u2019usage qui consistait \u00e0\n      distinguer, dans beaucoup de mots, le sujet du regime par une\n      modification analogue \u00e0 celle de la d\u00e9clinaison latine. Or, j\u2019ai\n      constat\u00e9 que, dans les chartes de Joinville, la r\u00e8gle du sujet\n      singulier est observ\u00e9e huit cent trente-cinq fois, et viol\u00e9e sept\n      fois seulement; encore dois-je dire que cinq de ces violations se\n      rencontrent dans une m\u00eame charte, celle du mois de mai 1278, qui\n      n\u2019est connue que par une copie faite au si\u00e8cle dernier. Si l\u2019on fait\n      abstraction de ce texte, il reste deux violations contre huit cent\n      trente-cinq observations de la r\u00e8gle. La r\u00e8gle du sujet pluriel est\n      observ\u00e9e cinq cent quartre-vingt-huit fois, et viol\u00e9e six fois: ce\n      qui donne au total quatorze cent vingt-trois contre treize, en\n      tenant compte m\u00eame de six fautes commises dans le texte copi\u00e9 au\n      si\u00e8cle dernier. De ce resultat num\u00e9rique, il faut \u00e9videmment\n      conclure, d\u2019abord, que l\u2019une et l\u2019autre r\u00e8gle \u00e9taient parfaitement\n      connues et pratiqu\u00e9es \u00e0 la chancellerie de Joinville, ensuite qu\u2019on\n      est autoris\u00e9 \u00e0 modifier le texte de l\u2019Histoire, partout o\u00f9 ces\n      r\u00e8gles y sont viol\u00e9es. (D\u2019apr\u00e8s un calcul approximatif, on peut\n      croire que le copiste du quatorzi\u00e8me si\u00e8cle a viol\u00e9 ces r\u00e8gles plus\n      de quatre mille fois et qu\u2019il les respectait peut-\u00eatre une fois sur\n      dix.)\u201d\n\n_   32 Table M\u00e9thodique des M\u00e9moires de Tr\u00e9voux_ (1701-1775), pr\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9e\n      d\u2019une Notice Historique. Par le P\u00e9re P. C. Sommervogel, de la\n      Compagnie de J\u00e9sus. 3 vols. Paris, 1864-65.\n\n_   33 Chasot: a Contribution to the History of Frederic the Great and his\n      Time._ By Kurd von Schl\u00f6zer. Berlin. 1856.\n\n   34 Speech delivered at Stratford-on-Avon on the 23d of April, 1864, the\n      Tercentenary of Shakespeare\u2019s birth.\n\n   35 Franz Baco von Verulam: _Die Realphilosophie und ihr Zeitalter_. Von\n      Kuno Fischer. Leipzig. Brockhaus. 1856.\n\n_   36 Pauli Hentzneri J. C. Itinerarium Germani\u00e6, Galli\u00e6, Angli\u00e6,\n      Itali\u00e6_: cum Indice Locorum, Rerum, atque Verborum commemorabilium.\n      Huic libro access\u00eare nov\u00e2 h\u00e2c editione\u20141. Monita Peregrinatoria\n      duorum doctissimorum virorum; itemque Incerti auctoris Epitome\n      Pr\u00e6cognitorum Historicorum, antehac non edita. Noriberg\u00e6, Typis\n      Abrahami Wagenmanni, sumptibus sui ipsius et Johan. G\u00fcntzelii, anno\n      MDCXXIX.\n\n_   37 Antiquities, Historical and Monumental, of the County of Cornwall._\n      By William Borlase, LL. D. London, 1769.\n\n      _A Week at the Land\u2019s End._ By J. T. Blight. London, 1861.\n\n   38 Plin. _H. N._ xvi. c. 44. \u201cNon est omittenda in ea re et Galliarum\n      admiratio. Nihil habent Druid\u00e6 (ita suos appellant magos) visco et\n      arbore in qua gignatur (si modo sit robur) sacratius. Jam per se\n      roborum eligunt lucos, nec ulla sacra sine ea fronde conficiunt, ut\n      inde appellati quoque interpretatione Gr\u00e6ca possint Druid\u00e6 videri.\n      Enimvero quidquid adnascatur illis, e c\u0153lo missum putant signumque\n      esse elect\u00e6 ab ipso deo arboris. Est autem id rarum admodum inventu\n      et repertum magna religione petitur, et ante omnia sexta luna, qu\u00e6\n      principia mensium annorumque his facit, et seculi post tricesimum\n      annum, quia jam virium abunde habeat, nec sit sui dimidia. Omnia\n      sanantem appellantes suo vocabulo, sacrificiis epulisque rite sub\n      arbore pr\u00e6paratis, duos admovent candidi coloria tauros, quorum\n      cornua tune primum vinciantur. Sacerdos candida veste cultus arborem\n      scandit, falce aurea demetit; candido id excipitur sago. Tum deinde\n      victimas immolant, precantes ut suum donum deus prosperum facial his\n      quibus dederit.\u201d\n\n_   39 Tre_, homestead; _ros_, moor, peatland, a common; _pol_, a pool;\n      _lan_, an enclosure, church; _caer_, town; _pen_, head.\n\n   40 Cranmer\u2019s Works, ed. Jenkyns, vol. ii. p. 230.\n\n   41 Observations on an ancient Manuscript, entitled _Passio Christi_, by\n      \u2014\u2014 Scawen, Esq., 1777, p. 26.\n\n   42 Borlase\u2019s _Natural History of Cornwall_, p. 315.\n\n_   43 Ibid_.\n\n   44 Her age was certainly mythical, and her case forms a strong\n      confirmation of the late Sir G. C. Lewis\u2019s skepticism on that point.\n      Dolly Pentreath is generally believed to have died at the age of one\n      hundred and two. Dr. Borlase, who knew her, and has left a good\n      description of her, stated that, about 1774, she was in her\n      eighty-seventh year. This, if she died in 1778, would only bring her\n      age to ninety-one. But Mr. Haliwell, who examined the register at\n      Paul, found that Dolly Pentreath was baptized in 1714; so that,\n      unless she was baptized late in life, this supposed centenarian had\n      only reached her sixty-fourth year at the time of her death, and was\n      no more than sixty when Dr. Borlase supposed her to be eighty-seven.\n      Another instance of extraordinary old age is mentioned by Mr. Scawen\n      (p. 25), about a hundred years earlier. \u201cLet not the old woman be\n      forgotten,\u201d he says, \u201cwho died about two years since, who was one\n      hundred and sixty-four years old, of good memory, and healthful at\n      that age, living in the parish of Guithian, by the charity mostly of\n      such as came purposely to see her, speaking to them (in default of\n      English) by an interpreter, yet partly understanding it. She married\n      a second husband after she was eighty, and buried him after he was\n      eighty years of age.\u201d\n\n_   45 Specimens of Cornish Provincial Dialects_, by Uncle Jan Treenoodle.\n      London, 1846: p. 82.\n\n_   46 Greece, Ancient and Modern_, by C. C. Felton. Boston, 1867, vol.\n      ii. p. 314.\n\n_   47 The Races of the Old World: A manual of Ethnology._ By Charles L.\n      Brace. London, 1863, p. 362 _seq._\n\n   48 Cornish proverbs have lived on after the extinction of Cornish, and\n      even as translated into English they naturally continue to exercise\n      their own peculiar spell on the minds of men and children. Such\n      proverbs are:\u2014\n\n      \u201cIt is better to keep than to beg.\u201d\n\n      \u201cDo good; for thyself thou dost it.\u201d\n\n      \u201cSpeak little, speak well, and well will be spoken again.\u201d\n\n      \u201cThere is no down without eye, no hedge without ears.\u201d\n\n   49 A critical edition, with some excellent notes, was published by Mr.\n      Whitley Stokes under the title of _The Passion_. MSS. of it exist at\n      the British Museum and at the Bodleian. One of the Bodleian MSS.\n      (Gough, Cornwall, 3) contains an English translation by Keigwyn,\n      made in 1682.\n\n   50 In the MS. in the British Museum, the translation is said by Mr.\n      Norris to be dated 1693 (vol. ii. p. 440). It was published in 1827\n      by Davies Gilbert; and a critical edition was prepared by Mr.\n      Whitley Stokes, and published with an English translation in 1862.\n      Mr. Stokes leaves it doubtful whether William Jordan was the author,\n      or merely the copyist, and thinks the text may belong to an earlier\n      date, though it is decidedly more modern than the other specimens of\n      Cornish which we possess in the dramas, and in the poem of _The\n      Passion_.\n\n_   51 Guare_, in Cornish, means a play, a game; the Welsh _gware._\n\n   52 According to Lhuyd, _guirimir_ would be a corruption of\n      _guarimirkle_, _i.e._ a miracle-play. Norris, vol ii. p. 455.\n\n   53 In some lines written in 1693, on the origin of the Oxford _Terr\u00e6\n      filius_, we read:\u2014\n\n           \u201cThese undergraduates\u2019 oracles\n      Deduced from Cornwall\u2019s _guary_ miracles,\u2014\n      From immemorial custom there\n      They raise a turfy theatre!\n      When from a passage underground,\n      By frequent crowds encompassed round,\n      Out leaps some little Mephistopheles,\n      Who e\u2019en of all the mob the offal is,\u201d etc.\n\n   54 The following extract from a Cornish paper gives some curious words\n      still current among the people:\u2014\n\n      \u201cA few weeks since a correspondent in the _Cornish Telegraph_\n      remarked a few familiar expressions which we West country folks are\n      accustomed to use in so vague a sense that strangers are often\n      rather puzzled to know precisely what we mean. He might also have\n      added to the list many old Cornish words, still in common use, as\n      _skaw_ for the elder-tree; _skaw-dower_, water-elder; _skaw-coo_,\n      nightshade; _bannel_, broom; _skedgewith_, privet; _griglans_,\n      heath; _padzypaw_ (from _padzar_, four?), the small gray lizard;\n      _muryan_, the ant; _quilkan_, the frog (which retains its English\n      name when in the water); _pul-cronach_ (literally pool-toad) is the\n      name given to a small fish with a head much like that of a toad,\n      which is often found in the pools (_pulans_) left by the receding\n      tide among the rocks along shore; _visnan_, the sand-lance;\n      _bul-horn_, the shell-snail; _dumble-dory_, the black-beetle (but\n      this may be a corruption of the dor-beetle). A small, solid wheel\n      has still the old name of _drucshar_. Finely pulverized soil is\n      called _grute_. The roots and other light matter harrowed up on the\n      surface of the ground for burning we call _tabs_. The harvest-home\n      and harvest-feast, _guildize_. _Plum_ means soft; _quail_, withered;\n      _crum_, crooked; _bruyans_, crumbs; with a few other terms more\n      rarely used.\n\n      \u201cMany of our ordinary expressions (often mistaken for vulgar\n      provincialisms) are French words slightly modified, which were\n      probably introduced into the West by the old Norman families who\n      long resided there. For instance: a large apron to come quite round,\n      worn for the sake of keeping the under-clothing clean, is called a\n      _touser_ (_tout-serre_); a game of running romps, is a _courant_\n      (from _courir_). Very rough play is a regular _cow\u2019s courant_. Going\n      into a neighbor\u2019s for a spell of friendly chat is going _to cursey_\n      (_causer_) a bit. The loins are called the _cheens_ (old French,\n      _echine_). The plant sweet-leaf, a kind of St. John\u2019s wort, here\n      called _tutsen_, is the French _tout-saine_ (heal all). There are\n      some others which, however, are not peculiar to the West; as\n      _kickshaws_ (_quelque chose_), etc. We have also many inverted\n      words, as _swap_ for wasp, _cruds_ for curds, etc. Then again we\n      call a fly a _flea_; and a flea a _flay_; and the smallest stream of\n      water a river.\u201d\u2014W. B.\n\n   55 Quoted in Petrie, _Eccles. Architecture of Ireland_, p. 107.\n\n   56 Borlase, _Antiquities of Cornwall_, p. 162.\n\n   57 Strabo, iv. 197: \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u1fbd \u03bf\u1f34\u03ba\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03af\u03b4\u03c9\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ad\u1fe5\u1fe4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\n      \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03ac\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 \u03b8\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2, \u1f44\u03c1\u03bf\u03c6\u03bf\u03bd \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u1f7a\u03bd \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03ac\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2.\n\n   58 Cf. Photius, _Bibliotheca_, ed. Bekker, p. 148, 1. 32: \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1f70\n      \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u1f60\u03ba\u03b5\u03b1\u03bd\u1f78\u03bd \u0393\u03b9\u03b3\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c0\u03ad\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c2, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u1ff3 \u1f00\u03c3\u03c6\u03bf\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03bb\u1ff7 \u03ba\u03b9\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2\n      \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd \u03b2\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f56\u03c3\u1f70.\n\n   59 The following extract from a Cornish newspaper, July 15, 1869, shows\n      the necessity of imperial legislation on this subject to prevent\n      irreparable mischief:\u2014\n\n      \u201cThe ruthless destruction of the Tolmen, in the parish of\n      Constantine, which has been so much deplored, has had the effect, we\n      are glad to say, of drawing attention to the necessity of taking\n      measures for the preservation of the remaining antiquities and\n      objects of curiosity and interest in the county. In a recent number\n      of the _West Briton_ we called attention to the threatened overthrow\n      of another of our far-famed objects of great interest,\u2014the\n      Cheesewring, near Liskeard; and we are now glad to hear that the\n      committee of the Royal Institution of Cornwall have requested three\n      gentlemen who take great interest in the preservation of\n      antiquities\u2014Mr. William Jory Henwood, F. G. S., etc., Mr. N. Hare,\n      Jr., of Liskeard, and Mr. Whitley, one of the secretaries of the\n      Royal Institution\u2014to visit Liskeard for the purpose of conferring\n      with the agents of the lessors of the Cheesewring granite\n      quarries\u2014the Duchy of Cornwall\u2014and with the lessees of the works,\n      Messrs. Freeman, of Penryn, who are themselves greatly anxious that\n      measures should be taken for the preservation of that most\n      remarkable pile of rocks known as the Cheesewring. We have no doubt\n      that the measures to be adopted will prove successful; and with\n      regard to any other antiquities or natural curiosities in the\n      county, we shall be glad to hear from correspondents, at any time,\n      if they are placed in peril of destruction, in order that a public\n      announcement of the fact may become the means of preserving them.\u201d\n\n   60 See p. 245.\n\n   61 See Isaac Taylor\u2019s _Words and Places_, p. 212. The Ock joins the\n      Thames near Abingdon.\n\n   62 See the learned essay of M. Rossignol, \u201cDe l\u2019Orichalque: Histoire du\n      Cuivre et de ses Alliages,\u201d in his work, _Les M\u00e9taux dans\n      l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9_. Paris. 1863.\n\n   63 There is another Penny come quick near Falmouth.\n\n   64 Isaac Taylor, _Words and Places_, p. 402.\n\n   65 It has been objected that _Marchadyon_ could not be called the\n      original form, because by a _carta Alani comitis Britanni\u00e6_, sealed,\n      according to Dugdale\u2019s _Monasticon Anglicanum_, by Alan, anno\n      incarnationis domini MCXL., ten shillings per annum were granted to\n      the monks of St. Michael, due from a fair held at _Merdresem_ or\n      _Merdresein_. Until, however, it has been proved that _Merdresem_ is\n      the same place and the same name as _Marchadyon_, or that the latter\n      sprang from the former, _Marchadyon_ in the charter of Richard, Earl\n      of Cornwall, 1257, may for our immediate purpose be treated as the\n      root from which all the other names branched off. See Oliver,\n      _Monasticon Exon._ p. 32.\n\n   66 If a market was held on the \u201cdimidia terr\u00e6 hida\u201d granted by Robert\n      to the monks, this difficulty would disappear.\n\n   67 In the Additional Supplement (p. 4), Dr. Oliver gives the more\n      correct reading, \u201c_de Markesiou, de parvo Mercato, Brevannek,\n      Penmedel, Trewarbene_.\u201d It depends on the comma after _Markesiou_\n      whether _parvus Mercatus_ is a separate place or not.\n\n   68 Dr. Bannister remarks that _Markesion_ occurs as early as 1261, in\n      the taxation of Bishop Walter Bronescombe, as quoted in Bishop\n      Stapledon\u2019s register of 1313. If that be so, the original form and\n      its dialectic varieties would have existed almost contemporaneously,\n      but the evidence that _Markesion_ was used by Bishop Bronescombe is\n      indirect. See Oliver, _Monast. Exon._ p. 28.\n\n   69 On the termination of the plural in Cornish, see Mr. Whitley\n      Stokes\u2019s excellent remarks in his edition of _The Passion_, p. 79;\n      also in Kuhn\u2019s _Beitr\u00e4ge_, iii. 151; and Norris, _Cornish Drama_,\n      vol. ii. p. 229. My attention has since been called to the fact that\n      _marhas_ occurs in the plural as _marhasow_, in the _Cornish Drama_,\n      vol. i. p. 248; and as _s_under such circumstances may become _j_\n      (cf. _canhasawe_, Creat. line 29, but _canhajowe_, Creat. line 67),\n      _Marhajow_ would come still nearer to _Market Jew_. Dr. Bannister\n      remarks that in Armorican, market is _marchad_, plural _marchadou_,\n      corrupted into _marchajou_.\n\n   70 The following note from a Cornish paper gives some important facts\n      as to the date of the name of _Market Jew_:\u2014\n\n      \u201cAmong the State Papers at the Record Office, there is a letter from\n      Ralph Conway to Secretary Cope, dated 3d October, 1634, which\n      mentions the name of _Market-jew_.\n\n      \u201cIn another, dated 7th February, 1634-5, Sir James Bagg informs the\n      Lords of the Admiralty that the endeavors of Mr. Basset, and other\n      gentlemen in the west of Cornwall, to save the cargo of a wrecked\n      Spanish galleon which broke from her moorings in Gwavas Lake, near\n      Penzance, were opposed by a riotous multitude, consisting of the\n      inhabitants of Mousehole and _Marka-jew_, who maintained their\n      unlawful proceedings with the cry of \u2018One and All!\u2019 threatening with\n      death the servants of the Crown, and compelling them to avoid their\n      fury by leaping down a high cliff.\n\n      \u201cIn another of the same date, from Ralph Bird, of Saltram, to\n      Francis Basset, the rebels of Mousehole, with their fellow-rebels of\n      _Market Jew_, are spoken of, as having menaced the life of any\n      officer who should come to their houses to search for certain hides\n      that mysteriously disappeared from the deck of the galleon one\n      boisterous night, and were probably transferred to Mousehole in the\n      cock-boat of Mr. Keigwin, of that place; and various methods are\n      suggested for administering punishment to the outrageous barbarians.\n\n      \u201cIn consequence of these complaints, the Lords of the Admiralty\n      wrote to Sir Henry Marten, on the 12th of February of the same year,\n      concerning \u2018the insolency\u2019 committed by the inhabitants of Mousehole\n      and _Markaiew_ requesting that the offenders may be punished, and,\n      if necessary, the most notorious of them sent to London for trial.\n\n      \u201cIn _Magna Britannia et Hibernia_, 1720, p. 308, _Merkju_ is\n      mentioned as being \u2018a little market-town which takes its name from\n      the market on Thursdays, it being a contraction of _Market-Jupiter_,\n      _i.e._ as \u2019tis now called _Market Jew_, or rather _Ju_.\u2019\n\n      \u201cNorden, who was born about 1548, says in his _Specul. Britanni\u00e6_,\n      which was published in 1728, that _Marca-iewe_ (_Marca-iew_ in\n      margin) signifies in English, \u2018market on the Thursday.\u2019 In an old\n      map, apparently drawn by hand, which appears to have been inserted\n      in this book after it was published, _Market Iew_ is given, and in\n      the map issued with the book _Market Jew_.\n\n      \u201cThe map of Cornwall, contained in _Camden\u2019s Britannia_, by Gibson,\n      1772, gives _Market-Jew_. The edition 1789, by Gough, states at page\n      3, that \u2018_Merkiu_ signifies the _Market of Jupiter_, from the market\n      being held on a Thursday, the day sacred to Jupiter.\u2019\n\n      \u201cCarew\u2019s _Survey of Cornwall_, ed. 1769, p. 156, has the\n      following:\u2014\u2018Over against the Mount fronteth a towne of petty\n      fortune, pertinently named _Marcaiew_, or _Marhas diow_, in English\n      \u201cthe Thursdaies market.\u201d \u2019 In the edition published in 1811, p. 378,\n      it is stated in a foot-note that _Marazion_ means \u2018market on the\n      Strand,\u2019 the name being well adapted to its situation, \u2018for _Zion_\n      answers to the Latin _litus_.\u2019 \u201d\n\n   71 H. B. C. Brandes, _Kelten und Germanen_, p. 52.\n\n   72 Capgrave, _Legenda Angli\u00e6_, fol. 269.\n\n   73 \u201cWithin the land of Meneke or Menegland, is a paroch chirche of S.\n      Keveryn, otherwise Piranus.\u201d\u2014Leland. \u201cPiran and Keveryn were\n      different persons.\u201d See Gough\u2019s edition of _Camden_, vol. i. p. 14.\n\n   74 Carew, _Survey_ (ed. 1602), p. 58. \u201cFrom which civility, in the\n      fruitful age of Canonization, they stepped a degree farder to\n      holines, and helped to stuffe the Church Kalender with divers\n      saints, either made or borne Cornish. Such was Keby, son to Solomon,\n      prince of Cor.; such _Peran_, who (if my author the Legend lye not)\n      after that (like another Johannes de temporibus) he had lived two\n      hundred yeres with perfect health, took his last rest in a Cornish\n      parish, which there-through he endowed with his name.\u201d\n\n   75 Hunt\u2019s _Popular Romances_, vol. ii. p. 19.\n\n_   76 Saxon Chronicle_, ed. Earle, p. 14, and his note, Preface, p. ix.\n\n   77 This _how_, according to Professor Earle, appears again in the\n      _Hoe_, a high down at Plymouth, near the citadel; in _Hooton_\n      (Cheshire), in _How-gate_, _Howe of Fife_, and other local names.\n      See also Halliwell, _s. v._ Hoes, and Hogh; Kemble\u2019s _Codex\n      Diplomaticus_, Nos. 563, 663, 784.\n\n   78 Hunt, vol. i. p. 187.\n\n   79 Matthew Paris, _Opera_, ed. Wats, p. 902.\n\n   80 See _Reymeri F\u0153dera_, A. D. 1255, tom. i. p. 543.\n\n   81 See Adam Bremensis\u2019 _De Situ Dani\u00e6_ ed. Lindenbruch, p. 136;\n      Buckle\u2019s _History of Civilization_, vol. i. p. 275.\n\n   82 Carew, _Surrey_ (ed. 1602), p. 8: \u201cand perhaps under one of those\n      Flavians, the Jewish workmen made here their first arrival.\u201d\n\n   83 Gibbon, chap. i. \u201cThe name which, used by Ptolemy and Pliny in a\n      more confined, by Ammianus and Procopius in a larger sense, has been\n      derived, ridiculously, from Sarah, the wife of Abraham, obscurely\n      from the village of Saraka, more plausibly from the Arabic words,\n      which signify a _thievish_ character, or _Oriental_ situation. Yet\n      the last and most popular of these etymologies is refuted by\n      Ptolemy, who expressly remarks the western and southern position of\n      the Saracens, then an obscure tribe on the borders of Egypt. The\n      appellation cannot therefore allude to any _national_ character;\n      and, since it was imported by strangers, it must be found, not in\n      the Arabic, but in a foreign language.\u201d\n\n   84 See R. Williams, _Lexicon Cornu. Britannicum_, s. v.\n\n   85 \u201cIt may be given as a rule, without exception, that words ending\n      with _t_ or _d_ in Welsh or Briton, do, if they exist in Cornish,\n      turn _t_ or _d_ to _s_.\u201d\u2014Norris, vol. ii. p. 237.\n\n   86 \u201cThe frequent use of _th_ instead of _s_ shows that (in Cornish) the\n      sound was not so definite as in English.\u201d\u2014Norris, vol. ii. p. 224.\n\n      Another explanation of _Attal Sarazin_ has been suggested by an\n      eminent Cornish scholar: \u201cI should explain _sarazin_,\u201d he writes,\n      \u201cas from _saratin_, a Med. Lat. _saritinus_, cf. _ex-saritum_,\n      _ex-saritare_ in Diez, E. W. ii. 283, s. v. _Essart_. _Atal_ cannot\n      be W. _adhail_. I would identify it with the Fr. _attelle_, splint.\n      It occurs in O. 427, meaning \u2018fallow.\u2019 _Atal sarazin_ I should\n      explain as \u2018dug-up splinters or shingle,\u2019 and _towle_ (_toll_)\n      _sarazin_ as a \u2018dug-up hole or excavation.\u2019 \u201d\n\n   87 See p. 311, l. 30.\n\n   88 \u201cHistory of the Exchequer,\u201d London, 1711, p. 168: \u201cEt quod nullus\n      Jud\u00e6us receptetur in aliqua Villa sine speciali licentia Regis, nisi\n      in Villis illis in quibus Jud\u00e6i manere consueverunt\u201d (37 Henry III).\n\n   89 Read before the Ashmolean Society, Oxford, November 25, 1867.\n\n   90 In Gough\u2019s edition of Camden the name is given \u201cCareg cowse in\n      clowse, _i.e._ the heavy rock in the wood.\u201d\n\n_   91 Baronii Annales_, anno 493.\n\n_   92 Baronii Annales_, anno 709.\n\n   93 I have added _church_, for Mr. Munro, who kindly collated this\n      passage for me, informs me that the C. C. C. MS. gives distinctly\n      _\u00e6dem_ where the editor has left a lacuna.\n\n   94 Thomas Crammer sends a dispensation, in 1537, to the Rev. John\n      Arscott, archpresbyter of the ecclesia St. Michaelis in Monte Tumba\n      Exoniensis diocesis. (_Monasticon Dioc. Exon._ p. 30.) Dr. Oliver\n      remarks, \u201cIt may be worth while to observe, that when St. Michael\n      \u2018in procella,\u2019 or \u2018in periculo maris,\u2019 is named in the old records,\n      the foreign house is meant. But St. Michael \u2018in Tumb\u00e2,\u2019 or \u2018Monte\n      Tumb\u00e2,\u2019 is a name occasionally applied to both houses.\u201d It would\n      have been interesting to determine the exact date when this latter\n      name is for the first time applied to the Cornish Mount.\n\n_   95 Passion_, ed. W. S. p. 95. Coth, Bret. k\u00f4z=O. Celtic cottos\n      (Atecotti \u201cperantiqui\u201d).\n\n   96 It was suggested to me that the _opacissima sylva_ may even have a\n      more distant origin. There seems as little evidence of a dense\n      forest having surrounded Mont St. Michel in Normandy as there was in\n      the case of St. Michael\u2019s Mount in Cornwall. Now as the first\n      apparition of St. Michael is supposed to have taken place in Mount\n      Garganus, _i.e._ Monte Gargano or Monte di S. Angelo, in Apulia, may\n      not \u201cthe dense forest\u201d have wandered with the archangel from the\n      \u201cquerceta Gargani\u201d (Hor. _Od._ ii. 9, 7) to Normandy, and thence to\n      Cornwall?\n\n_   97 A Memoir of Baron Bunsen_, by his widow, Baroness Bunsen. 2 vols.\n      8vo. Longmans, 1868.\n\n      _Christian Carl Josias Freiherr von Bunsen_. Aus seinen Briefen und\n      nach eigener Erinnerung geschildert, von seiner Wittwe. Deutsche\n      Ausgabe, durch neue Mittheilungen vermehrt von Friedrich Nippold.\n      Leipzig, 1868.\n\n   98 Translated by G. A. M.\n\n   99 No date, but about December, 1849.","title":"Chips from a German Workshop, Volume 3: Essays on Literature, Biography, and Antiquities","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":157622}