This is a modern-English version of The Prose Writings of Heinrich Heine, originally written by Heine, Heinrich. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.



The Camelot Series.

The Camelot Series.

Edited by Ernest Rhys.

Edited by Ernest Rhys.







HEINE'S PROSE WRITINGS.







THE PROSE WRITINGS OF
HEINRICH HEINE:
EDITED, WITH AN INTRO-
DUCTION, BY HAVELOCK
ELLIS.









decorative bar

decorative bar









WALTER SCOTT
LONDON: 24 WARWICK LANE
PATERNOSTER ROW
1887

WALTER SCOTT
LONDON: 24 WARWICK LANE
PATERNOSTER ROW
1887









TABLE OF CONTENTS.
decorative bar
PAGE
REISEBILDER 1
LONDON47
WELLINGTON52
THE LIBERATION57
JAN STEEN65
THE ROMANTIC SCHOOL68
RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY    142
FLORENTINE NIGHTS179
DON QUIXOTE243
GODS IN EXILE268
CONFESSIONS290





HEINE.

decorative bar

decorative bar

I.

HEINE gathers up and focuses for us in one vivid point all those influences of his own time which are the forces of to-day. He appears before us, to put it in his own way, as a youthful and militant Knight of the Holy Ghost, tilting against the spectres of the past and liberating the imprisoned energies of the human spirit. His interest from this point of view lies, largely, apart from his interest as a supreme lyric poet, the brother of Catullus and Villon and Burns; we here approach him on his prosaic—his relatively prosaic—side.

HEINE gathers and focuses for us in one vivid point all the influences of his time that shape today's forces. He presents himself, as he puts it, as a youthful and active Knight of the Holy Ghost, battling against the ghosts of the past and freeing the trapped energies of the human spirit. His interest, from this perspective, primarily lies apart from his role as a supreme lyric poet, a contemporary of Catullus, Villon, and Burns; here we approach him on his more practical—his relatively practical—side.

One hemisphere of Heine's brain was Greek, the other Hebrew. He was born when the genius of Goethe was at its height; his mother had absorbed the frank earthliness, the sane and massive Paganism, of the Roman elegies, and Heine's ideals in all things, whether he would or not, were always Hellenic—using that word in the large sense in which Heine himself used it—even while he was the first in rank and the last in time of the Romantic poets of Germany. He sought, even consciously, to mould the modern emotional spirit into classic forms. He wrought his art simply and lucidly, the aspirations that pervade it are everywhere sensuous, and yet it recalls oftener the turbulent temper of Catullus than any serener ancient spirit.

One side of Heine's brain was influenced by Greek culture, while the other was shaped by Hebrew traditions. He was born at a time when Goethe was at his peak; his mother had embraced the straightforward earthy quality and robust Paganism of the Roman elegies. Whether he intended it or not, Heine's ideals in everything were always Hellenic—using that term in the broad way he himself understood it—even as he stood as both the foremost figure and the last representative of Germany's Romantic poets. He consciously aimed to shape the modern emotional spirit into classic forms. His art was crafted simply and clearly, filled with sensuous aspirations, yet it often echoes more the passionate nature of Catullus than any calmer ancient spirit.

For Heine arose early in active rebellion against a merely passive classicism; just as fiercer and more ardent cries, as from the Orient, pierce through the songs of Catullus. The mischievous Hermes was irritated by the calm and quiet activities of the aged Zeus of Weimar. And then the earnest Hebrew nature within him, liberated by Hegel's favourite thought of the divinity of man, came into play with its large revolutionary thirsts. Thus it was that he appeared before the world as the most brilliant leader of a movement of national or even world-wide emancipation. The greater part of his prose works, from the youthful Reisebilder onwards, and a considerable portion of his poetic work, record the energy with which he played this part.

For Heine woke up early in active defiance of a purely passive classicism; much like louder and more passionate voices, as from the East, cutting through the songs of Catullus. The mischievous Hermes was annoyed by the calm and quiet activities of the elderly Zeus of Weimar. And then the serious Hebrew aspect within him, set free by Hegel's favorite idea of the divinity of man, came into play with its strong revolutionary desires. This is how he appeared to the world as the most brilliant leader of a movement for national or even global liberation. Most of his prose works, starting from the youthful Reisebilder and a significant portion of his poetry, reflect the energy with which he embraced this role.

But whether the Greek or the Hebrew element happened to be most active in Heine, the ideal that he set up for life generally was the equal activity of both sides—in other words, the harmony of flesh and spirit. It is this thought which dominates The History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany, his finest achievement in this kind. That book was written at the moment when Heine touched the highest point of his enthusiasm for freedom and his faith in the possibility of human progress. It is a sort of programme for the immediate future of the human spirit, in the form of a brief and bold outline of the spiritual history of Germany and Germany's great emancipators, Luther, Lessing, Kant, and the rest. It sets forth in a fresh and fascinating shape that Everlasting Gospel which, from the time of Joachim of Flora downwards, has always gleamed in dreams before the minds of men as the successor of Christianity. Heine's vision of a democracy of cakes and ale, founded on the heights of religious, philosophical, and political freedom, still spurs and thrills us—even now-a-days, when we have wearied of stately bills of fare for a sulky humanity that will not feed at our bidding, no, not on cakes and ale. Heine is wise enough to see, however imperfectly, that it is unreasonable to expect the speedy erection of any New Jerusalem; for, as he expresses it in his own way, the holy vampires of the middle ages have sucked away so much of our life-blood that the world has become a hospital. A sudden revolution of fever-stricken or hysterical invalids can effect little of permanent value; only a long and invigorating course of the tonics of life can make free from danger the open-air of nature. "Our first duty," he asserted in this book, "is to become healthy."

But whether the Greek or the Hebrew influence was more prominent in Heine, his overall vision for life was about the balanced activity of both sides—in other words, the harmony of body and spirit. This idea is central to The History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany, his greatest work in this regard. That book was written at the peak of Heine's enthusiasm for freedom and his belief in the possibility of human advancement. It's like a blueprint for the immediate future of the human spirit, presented as a concise and bold summary of Germany's spiritual history and its great emancipators, like Luther, Lessing, Kant, and others. It showcases in a fresh and compelling way that Everlasting Gospel, which, since the time of Joachim of Flora, has continuously shone in people's dreams as the successor to Christianity. Heine's vision of a democracy filled with joy and abundance, rooted in the heights of religious, philosophical, and political freedom, still inspires and excites us—even today, when we've grown tired of elaborate meals for a reluctant humanity that won’t indulge us, not even with cakes and ale. Heine is perceptive enough to recognize, albeit imperfectly, that it’s unreasonable to expect the quick establishment of any New Jerusalem; as he puts it, the holy vampires of the middle ages have drained so much of our lifeblood that the world has turned into a hospital. A sudden uprising by fevered or hysterical invalids can achieve little of lasting significance; only a prolonged and revitalizing regimen of life’s tonics can make safe from the dangers of nature. "Our first duty," he declared in this book, "is to become healthy."

Heine confesses that he too was among the sick and decrepit souls. In reality he was at no period so full of life and health, so harmoniously inspired and upborne by a great enthusiasm. He laughs a little at Goethe; he fails to see that the Phidian Zeus, at whose confined position he jests, was the greatest liberator of them all; but for the most part his mocking sarcasm is here silent. It was not until ten years later, when the subtle seeds of disease had begun to appear, and when, too, he had perhaps gained a clearer insight into the possibilities of life, that Heine realised that the practical reforming movements of his time were not those for which his early enthusiasm had been aroused. And then he wrote Atta Troll.

Heine admits that he was one of the sick and weary souls. In reality, he was never more full of life and health, more inspired and lifted by a great enthusiasm. He chuckles a bit at Goethe; he doesn't recognize that the confined Phidian Zeus he mocks was the greatest liberator of them all; but for the most part, his sarcastic humor is absent here. It wasn’t until ten years later, when the early signs of illness began to show, and when he may have gained a clearer understanding of life's possibilities, that Heine realized the practical reform movements of his time were not the ones that had sparked his early enthusiasm. And then he wrote Atta Troll.

With the slow steps of that consuming disease, and after the revolution of 1848, Heine ceased to recognise as of old any common root for his various activities, or to insist on the fundamental importance of religion. Everything in the world became the sport of his intelligence. The brain still functioned brilliantly in the atrophied body; the lightning-like wit still struck unerringly; it spared not even himself. The Confessions are full of irony, covering all things with laughter that is half reverence, or with reverence that is more than half laughter—and woe to the reader who is not at every moment alert! In the romantic, satirical poem of Atta Troll, written at the commencement of this last period, this, his final altitude, is most completely revealed. It needs a little study to-day, even for a German, but it is well worth that study.

With the gradual progression of that debilitating disease, and after the revolution of 1848, Heine stopped recognizing any common thread among his various activities, or insisting on the fundamental importance of religion. Everything in the world became a target for his intellect. His mind still operated brilliantly in his atrophied body; his lightning-fast wit still struck accurately, and he didn't hold back even when poking fun at himself. The Confessions are filled with irony, draping everything in laughter that is half respect, or in reverence that is more than half laughter—and woe to the reader who isn’t on their toes at every moment! In the romantic, satirical poem Atta Troll, written at the start of this last period, this final perspective of his is revealed most completely. It does require a bit of study today, even for a German, but that study is definitely worthwhile.

Atta Troll, the history of a dancing bear who escapes from servitude, is a protest against the radical party, with their narrow conceptions of progress, their tame ideal of bourgeois equality, their little watchwords, their solemnity, their indignation at the human creatures who smile "even in their enthusiasm." All these serious concerns of the tribunes of the people are bathed in soft laughter as we listen to the delicious childlike monotonous melody in which the old bear, surrounded by his family, mumbles or mutters of the future. Atta Troll is not, as many have thought, a sneer at the most sacred ideals of men. It is, rather, the assertion of those ideals against the individuals who would narrow them down to their own petty scope. There are certain mirrors, Heine said, so constructed that they would present even Apollo as a caricature. But we laugh at the caricature, not at the god. It is well to show, even at the cost of some misunderstanding, that above and beyond the little ideals of our political progress, there is built a yet larger ideal city, of which also the human spirit claims citizenship. The defence of the inalienable rights of the spirit, Heine declares, had been the chief business of his life.

Atta Troll, the story of a dancing bear who breaks free from captivity, is a critique of the radical party, with their limited views on progress, their tame vision of bourgeois equality, their trivial slogans, their seriousness, and their outrage towards people who smile "even in their enthusiasm." All these serious concerns from the self-proclaimed representatives of the people are cloaked in gentle laughter as we listen to the delightful, childlike, monotonous tune in which the old bear, surrounded by his family, mumbles or mutters about the future. Atta Troll is not, as many have assumed, a mockery of the most sacred ideals of humanity. Instead, it asserts those ideals against individuals who would shrink them down to their own trivial perspectives. There are certain mirrors, Heine suggested, that are designed to depict even Apollo as a caricature. Yet we laugh at the caricature, not at the god. It is important to show, even if it leads to some misunderstandings, that beyond the small ideals of our political progress, there exists a much larger ideal city, to which the human spirit also claims membership. The defense of the inalienable rights of the spirit, Heine declared, has been the main focus of his life.

In the history of Germany it was her two great intellectual liberators, Luther and Lessing, to whom Heine looked up with the most unqualified love and reverence. By his later vindication of the rights of the spirit, not less than by his earlier fight for religious and political progress, he may be said to have earned for himself a place below, indeed, but not so very far below, those hearty and sound-cored iconoclasts.

In Germany's history, it was her two major intellectual liberators, Luther and Lessing, whom Heine admired with deep love and respect. Through his later defense of the rights of the spirit, as well as his earlier struggle for religious and political progress, he can be said to have earned himself a spot just below, though not too far behind, those passionate and genuinely principled iconoclasts.

II.

To reach the root of the man's nature we must glance at the chief facts of his life. He was born at Düsseldorf on the Rhine, then occupied by the French, probably on the 13th of December 1799.[1] He came, by both parents, of that Jewish race which is, as he said once, the dough whereof gods are kneaded. The family of his mother, Betty van Geldern, had come from Holland a century earlier; Betty herself received an excellent education; she shared the studies of her brother, who became a physician of repute; she spoke and read English and French; her favourite books were Rousseau's Emile and Goethe's elegies. Some letters written during her twenty-fourth year reveal a frank, brave and sweet nature; she was a bright, attractive little person, and had many wooers. In the summer of 1796 Samson Heine, bearing a letter of introduction, entered the house of the Van Gelderns. He was the son of a Jewish merchant settled in Hanover, and he had just made a campaign in Flanders and Brabant, in the capacity of commissary with the rank of officer, under Prince Ernest of Cumberland. He was a large and handsome man, with soft blond hair and beautiful hands; there was something about him, said his son, a little characterless and feminine. After a brief courtship he married Betty and settled at Düsseldorf as an agent for English velveteens. Harry (so he was named after an Englishman) was the first child. While from his rather weak and romantic father came whatever was loose and unbalanced in Heine's temperature, it was his mother, with her strong and healthy nature, well developed both intellectually and emotionally, who, as he himself said, played the chief part in the history of his evolution.

To understand the essence of the man, we need to look at the main facts of his life. He was born in Düsseldorf on the Rhine, which was then under French occupation, likely on December 13, 1799.[1] Both of his parents were from the Jewish heritage, which he once described as the dough from which gods are made. His mother, Betty van Geldern's family had moved from Holland a century earlier. Betty herself received a great education; she and her brother, who became a well-known physician, studied together. She spoke and read English and French and loved Rousseau's Emile and Goethe's elegies. Some letters from her twenty-fourth year show her to be frank, brave, and sweet; she was a lively and charming person with many admirers. In the summer of 1796, Samson Heine, carrying a letter of introduction, arrived at the Van Geldern household. He was the son of a Jewish merchant based in Hanover and had just returned from a military campaign in Flanders and Brabant, serving as a commissary with the rank of officer under Prince Ernest of Cumberland. He was a tall and attractive man with soft blond hair and lovely hands; his son noted that there was something a bit characterless and feminine about him. After a short courtship, he married Betty and settled in Düsseldorf as an agent for English velveteens. Harry (named after an Englishman) was their first child. While Heine inherited the more whimsical and unstable traits from his rather weak and romantic father, it was his mother, with her strong and healthy nature, well-developed both intellectually and emotionally, who, as he himself stated, played the key role in shaping his growth.

Harry was a quick child; his senses were keen, though he was not physically strong; he loved reading, and his favourite books were Don Quixote and Gulliver's Travels. He used to make rhymes with his only and much-loved sister Lotte, and at the age of ten he wrote a ghost-poem which his teachers considered a masterpiece. At the Lyceum he worked well, at night as well as by day. Only once, at the public ceremony at the end of a school year, he came to grief; he was reciting a poem, when his eyes fell on a beautiful, fair-haired girl in the audience; he hesitated, stammered, was silent, fell down fainting. So early he revealed the extreme cerebral irritability of a nature absorbed in dreams and taken captive by visions. It was not long after this, at the age of seventeen, when his rich uncle at Hamburg was trying in vain to set him forward on a commercial career, that Heine met the woman who aroused his first and last profound passion, always unsatisfied except in so far as it found exquisite embodiment in his poems. He never mentioned her name; it was not till after his death that the form standing behind this Maria, Zuleima, Evelina of so many sweet, strange, or melancholy songs was known to be that of his cousin, Amalie Heine.

Harry was a bright kid with sharp senses, although he wasn't very strong physically. He loved reading, and his favorite books were Don Quixote and Gulliver's Travels. He used to make up rhymes with his beloved sister Lotte, and by the time he was ten, he wrote a ghost poem that his teachers considered a masterpiece. He did well at the Lyceum, working hard both day and night. However, there was one public ceremony at the end of the school year where he stumbled. While reciting a poem, he spotted a beautiful blonde girl in the crowd, hesitated, stammered, went silent, and fainted. This moment showcased the intense sensitivity of a dreamer consumed by visions. Not long after, at seventeen, when his wealthy uncle in Hamburg was unsuccessfully trying to push him into a business career, Heine met the woman who sparked his first and last deep passion, which was always unfulfilled except for the way it inspired his exquisite poetry. He never mentioned her name; it was only after his death that it was revealed that the figure behind these inspirations—Maria, Zuleima, Evelina from so many sweet, strange, or melancholy songs—was actually his cousin, Amalie Heine.

With his uncle's help he studied law at Bonn, Göttingen and Berlin. At Berlin he fell under the dominant influence of Hegel, the vanquisher of the romantic school of which Schelling was the philosophic representative. Heine afterwards referred to this period as that in which he "herded swine with the Hegelians;" it is certain that Hegel exerted great and permanent influence over him. At Berlin, in 1821, appeared his first volume of poems, and then he began to take his true place.

With his uncle's help, he studied law in Bonn, Göttingen, and Berlin. In Berlin, he was strongly influenced by Hegel, who challenged the romantic school represented by Schelling. Heine later described this time as one where he "herded swine with the Hegelians;" it's clear that Hegel had a significant and lasting impact on him. In Berlin in 1821, his first volume of poems was published, and that's when he started to find his true voice.

At this period Heine is described as a good-natured and gentle youth, but reserved, not caring to show his emotions. He was of middle height and slender, with rather long light brown hair (in childhood it was red, and he was called "Rother Harry") framing the pale and beardless oval face, the bright blue short-sighted eyes, the Greek nose, the high cheek-bones, the large mouth, the full—half cynical, half sensual—lips. He was not a typical German; like Goethe, he never smoked; he disliked beer, and until he went to Paris he had never tasted sauerkraut.

At this time, Heine is described as a good-natured and gentle young man, but he was reserved and didn’t like to show his feelings. He was of average height and slim, with somewhat long light brown hair (which was red in childhood, earning him the nickname "Rother Harry") framing his pale, beardless oval face, bright blue glasses-wearing eyes, a Greek nose, high cheekbones, a large mouth, and full lips that had a mix of cynicism and sensuality. He wasn’t a typical German; like Goethe, he never smoked, he didn’t like beer, and until he moved to Paris, he had never tried sauerkraut.

For some years he continued, chiefly at Göttingen, to study law. But he had no liking and no capacity for jurisprudence, and his spasmodic fits of application at such moments as he realised that it was not good for him to depend on the generosity of his rich and kind-hearted uncle Solomon, failed to carry him far. A new idea, a sunny day, the opening of some flower-like lied, a pretty girl—and the Pandects were forgotten.

For a few years, he continued studying law, mainly at Göttingen. However, he had no interest or talent for it, and his sporadic efforts, especially when he realized it wasn’t wise to rely on the kindness of his wealthy and caring uncle Solomon, didn’t get him very far. A new idea, a sunny day, the first verse of a lovely song, a pretty girl—and the legal texts were soon forgotten.

Shortly after he had at last received his doctor's diploma he went through the ceremony of baptism in hope of obtaining an appointment from the Prussian Government. It was a step which he immediately regretted, and which, far from placing him in a better position, excited the enmity both of Christians and Jews, although the Heine family had no very strong views on the matter; Heine's mother, it should be said, was a Deist, his father indifferent, but the Jewish rites were strictly kept up. He still talked of becoming an advocate, until, in 1826, the publication of the first volume of the Reisebilder gave him a reputation throughout Germany by its audacity, its charming and picturesque manner, its peculiarly original personality. The second volume, bolder and better than the first, was received with delight very much mixed with horror, and it was prohibited by Austria, Prussia, and many minor states. At this period Heine visited England;[2] he was then disgusted with Germany and full of enthusiasm for the "land of freedom," an enthusiasm which naturally met with many rude shocks, and from that time dates the bitterness with which he usually speaks of England. He found London—although, owing to a clever abuse of uncle Solomon's generosity, exceedingly well supplied with money—"frightfully damp and uncomfortable;" only the political life of England attracted him, and there were no bounds to his admiration of Canning. He then visited Italy, to spend there the happiest days of his life; and having at length realised that his efforts to obtain any government appointment in Germany would be fruitless, he emigrated to Paris. There, save for brief periods, he remained until his death.

Shortly after finally getting his medical degree, he went through a baptism ceremony hoping to get a position with the Prussian Government. It was a decision he quickly regretted, and instead of improving his situation, it drew hostility from both Christians and Jews, even though the Heine family didn't have very strong opinions on the matter; Heine's mother was a Deist, his father was indifferent, but they strictly followed Jewish customs. He still considered becoming a lawyer until, in 1826, the release of the first volume of Reisebilder earned him fame across Germany for its boldness, charm, picturesque style, and uniquely original personality. The second volume, even bolder and better than the first, was met with a mix of delight and horror, leading to its ban in Austria, Prussia, and several smaller states. During this time, Heine visited England; he was disillusioned with Germany and full of enthusiasm for the "land of freedom," an enthusiasm that faced many rude awakenings, marking the beginning of his bitterness towards England. He found London—despite cleverly exploiting uncle Solomon's generosity for financial support—"frightfully damp and uncomfortable;" only the political scene in England interested him, and he greatly admired Canning. He then visited Italy, where he spent the happiest days of his life; realizing that any attempts to secure a government position in Germany would be pointless, he moved to Paris. There, except for short periods, he stayed until his death.

This entry into the city which he had called the New Jerusalem was an important epoch in Heine's life. He was thirty-one years of age, still youthful, and eager to receive new impressions; he was apparently in robust health, notwithstanding constant headaches; Gautier describes him as in appearance a sort of German Apollo. He was still developing, as he continued to develop, even up to the end; the ethereal loveliness of the early poems vanished, it is true, but only to give place to a closer grasp of reality, a larger laughter, a keener cry of pain. He was now heartily welcomed by the extraordinarily brilliant group then living and working in Paris, including Victor Hugo, George Sand, Balzac, Michelet, Alfred de Musset, Gautier, Chopin, Louis Blanc, Dumas, Sainte-Beuve, Quinet, Berlioz, and many others, and he entered with eager delight into their manifold activities. For a time also he attached himself rather closely to the school of Saint-Simon, then headed by Enfantin; he was especially attracted by their religion of humanity, which seemed the realisation of his own dreams. Heine's book on Religion and Philosophy in Germany was written at Enfantin's suggestion, and the first edition dedicated to him; Enfantin's name was, he said, a sort of Shibboleth, indicating the most advanced party in the "liberation war of humanity." In 1855 he withdrew the dedication; it had become an anachronism; Enfantin was no longer ransacking the world in search of la femme libre; the martyrs of yesterday no longer bore a cross—unless it were, he added characteristically, the cross of the Legion of Honour.

This entrance into the city that he called the New Jerusalem marked a significant moment in Heine's life. He was thirty-one, still youthful and eager for new experiences; he appeared to be in good health despite his ongoing headaches. Gautier described him as a kind of German Apollo. He was still evolving, and would continue to do so until the end; while the ethereal beauty of his early poems disappeared, it was replaced by a better understanding of reality, a broader sense of humor, and a sharper expression of pain. He was warmly welcomed by an exceptionally talented group of people living and working in Paris at the time, including Victor Hugo, George Sand, Balzac, Michelet, Alfred de Musset, Gautier, Chopin, Louis Blanc, Dumas, Sainte-Beuve, Quinet, Berlioz, and many others, and he eagerly participated in their various activities. For a while, he also closely aligned himself with the Saint-Simon school, led by Enfantin; he was particularly drawn to their religion of humanity, which seemed to fulfill his own dreams. Heine's book on Religion and Philosophy in Germany was written at Enfantin's suggestion, and the first edition was dedicated to him; he said Enfantin's name was a kind of Shibboleth, signifying the most progressive faction in the "liberation war of humanity." In 1855, he withdrew the dedication; it had become outdated; Enfantin was no longer scouring the world for la femme libre; the martyrs of yesterday no longer carried a cross—unless, he added with characteristic wit, it was the cross of the Legion of Honour.

A few years after his arrival in Paris Heine entered on a relationship which occupied a large place in his life. Mathilde Mirat, a lively grisette of sixteen, was the illegitimate daughter of a man of wealth and position in the provinces, and she had come up from Normandy to serve in her aunt's shoe-shop. Heine often passed this shop, and an acquaintance, at first carried on silently through the shop window, gradually ripened into a more intimate relationship. Mathilde could neither read nor write; it was decided that she should go to school for a time; after that they established a little common household, one of those ménages parisiens, recognised as almost legitimate, for which Heine had always had a warm admiration, because, as he said, he meant by "marriage" something quite other than the legal coupling effected by parsons and bankers. As in the case of Goethe, it was not until some years later that he went through the religious ceremony, as a preliminary to a duel in which he had become involved by his remarks on Börne's friend, Madame Strauss; he wished to give Mathilde an assured position in case of his death. After the ceremony at St. Sulpice he invited to dinner all those of his friends who had contracted similar relations, in order that they might be influenced by his example. That they were so influenced is not recorded.

A few years after he arrived in Paris, Heine began a relationship that was a big part of his life. Mathilde Mirat, a lively sixteen-year-old, was the illegitimate daughter of a wealthy man from the provinces, and she had come up from Normandy to help out at her aunt's shoe shop. Heine often walked past this shop, and an acquaintance that started off quietly through the shop window gradually developed into a closer bond. Mathilde couldn’t read or write, so it was decided she would go to school for a while; after that, they set up a little shared household, one of those ménages parisiens that was seen as almost legitimate. Heine had always admired those, because, as he said, he meant by "marriage" something very different from the legal union created by clergymen and bankers. Like Goethe, it wasn’t until years later that he went through a religious ceremony, which he did as a prelude to a duel he got into due to his remarks about Börne's friend, Madame Strauss; he wanted to secure Mathilde’s position in case something happened to him. After the ceremony at St. Sulpice, he invited all his friends who had similar arrangements to dinner, hoping they would be inspired by his example. There’s no record of whether they were.

It is not difficult to understand the strong and permanent attraction that drew the poet, who had so many intellectual and aristocratic women among his friends, to this pretty, laughter-loving grisette. It lay in her bright and wild humour, her childlike impulsiveness, not least in her charming ignorance. It was delightful to Heine that Mathilde had never read a line of his books, did not even know what a poet was, and loved him only for himself. He found in her a continual source of refreshment.

It’s easy to see why the poet, who had many intelligent and sophisticated women in his circle, was drawn to this attractive, fun-loving young woman. It was her vibrant and untamed sense of humor, her childlike spontaneity, and especially her endearing cluelessness. He found it delightful that Mathilde had never read any of his work, didn’t even know what a poet was, and loved him just for who he was. She provided him with a constant source of refreshment.

He had need of every source of refreshment. In the years that followed his formal marriage in 1841, the dark shadows, within and without, began to close round him. Although he was then producing his most mature work, chiefly in poetry—Atta Troll, Romancero, Deutschland—his income from literary sources remained small. Mathilde was not a good housekeeper; and even with the aid of a considerable allowance from his uncle Solomon, Heine was frequently in pecuniary difficulties, and was consequently induced to accept a small pension from the French government, which has sometimes been a matter of concern to those who care for his fame. As years passed, the enmities that he suffered from or cherished increased rather than diminished, and his bitterness found expression in his work. Even Mathilde was not an unalloyed source of joy; the charming child was becoming a middle-aged woman, and was still like a child. She could not enter into Heine's interests; she delighted in theatres and circuses, to which he could not always accompany her; and he experienced the pangs of an unreasonable jealousy more keenly than he cared to admit. Then uncle Solomon died, and his son refused, until considerable pressure was brought to bear on him, to continue the allowance which his father had intended Heine to receive. This was a severe blow, and the excitement it produced developed the latent seeds of his disease. It came on with alarming symptoms of paralysis, which even in a few months gave him, he says, the appearance of a dying man. During the next two years, although his brain remained clear, the long pathological tragedy was unfolded.

He needed every source of relief. In the years that followed his formal marriage in 1841, the dark shadows, both inside and outside, began to close in on him. Although he was producing his most mature work, mainly in poetry—Atta Troll, Romancero, Deutschland—his income from writing was still low. Mathilde wasn’t a great housekeeper; and even with a substantial allowance from his uncle Solomon, Heine often struggled financially, which led him to accept a small pension from the French government—something that has concerned those who care about his reputation. As time went on, the resentments he faced or held onto only grew stronger, and his bitterness found its way into his work. Even Mathilde didn’t bring him unqualified happiness; the charming girl was turning into a middle-aged woman, yet still acted like a child. She couldn't relate to Heine's interests; she loved going to theaters and circuses, which he couldn’t always attend with her; and he felt an unreasonable jealousy more intensely than he wanted to admit. Then uncle Solomon passed away, and his son was reluctant to continue the allowance that his father had intended for Heine until significant pressure was applied. This hit him hard, and the stress triggered the underlying issues of his illness. It began with alarming signs of paralysis, which, he says, made him look like a dying man within just a few months. Over the next two years, even though his mind remained sharp, a long tragic health decline unfolded.

He went out for the last time in May 1848. Half blind and half lame, he slowly made his way out of the streets, filled with the noise of revolution, into the silent Louvre, to the shrine dedicated to "the goddess of beauty, our dear lady of Milo." There he sat long at her feet; he was bidding farewell to his old gods; he had become reconciled to the religion of sorrow; tears streamed from his eyes, and she looked down at him, compassionate but helpless: "Dost thou not see, then, that I have no arms, and cannot help thee?"

He stepped outside for the last time in May 1848. Half blind and half lame, he slowly made his way from the bustling streets filled with the sounds of revolution into the quiet Louvre, to the shrine devoted to "the goddess of beauty, our dear lady of Milo." There, he sat for a long time at her feet; he was saying goodbye to his old gods; he had accepted the religion of sorrow. Tears streamed down his face as she looked down at him, compassionate yet powerless: "Can't you see that I have no arms and can't help you?"

On eût dit un Apollon germanique—so Gautier said of the Heine of 1835; twenty years later an English visitor wrote of him—"He lay on a pile of mattresses, his body wasted so that it seemed no bigger than a child under the sheet which covered him—his eyes closed, and the face altogether like the most painful and wasted 'Ecce Homo' ever painted by some old German painter."

He looked like a German Apollo—that’s what Gautier said about Heine in 1835; twenty years later, an English visitor described him—"He lay on a stack of mattresses, his body so emaciated it seemed no larger than a child's under the sheet covering him—his eyes shut, and his face resembling the most anguished and gaunt 'Ecce Homo' ever painted by some old German artist."

His sufferings were only relieved by ever larger doses of morphia; but although still more troubles came to him, and the failure of a bank robbed him of his small savings, his spirit remained unconquered. "He is a wonderful man," said one of his doctors; "he has only two anxieties—to conceal his condition from his mother, and to assure his wife's future." His literary work, though it decreased in amount, never declined in power; only, in the words of his friend Berlioz, it seemed as though the poet was standing at the window of his tomb, looking around on the world in which he had no longer a part.

His pain was only eased by increasingly larger doses of morphine; yet even as more troubles piled up, and a bank failure took away his small savings, his spirit stayed strong. "He's an amazing man," one of his doctors said; "he has just two worries—keeping his condition hidden from his mother, and ensuring his wife's future." His writing, although it lessened in quantity, never lost its strength; instead, as his friend Berlioz put it, it felt like the poet was at the window of his tomb, gazing out at a world he no longer belonged to.

He saw a few friends, of whom Ferdinand Lassalle, with his exuberant power and enthusiasm, was the most interesting to him, as the representative of a new age and a new social faith; and the most loved, that girl-friend who sat for hours or days at a time by the "mattress-grave" in the Rue d' Amsterdam, reading to him or writing his letters or correcting proofs. To the last the loud, bright voice of Mathilde, when he chanced to hear it, scolding the servants or in other active exercise, often made him stop speaking, while a smile of delight passed over his face. He died on the 16th of February 1856. He was buried, silently, in Montmartre, according to his wish; for, as he said, it is quiet there.

He saw a few friends, among them Ferdinand Lassalle, who fascinated him the most with his vibrant energy and enthusiasm, symbolizing a new era and social belief. He also cherished the girl who spent hours or even days by the "mattress-grave" on Rue d'Amsterdam, reading to him, writing his letters, or correcting proofs. The loud, bright voice of Mathilde, whenever he happened to hear it scolding the servants or engaging in some other activity, would often make him pause, bringing a smile of joy to his face. He passed away on February 16, 1856. He was buried quietly in Montmartre, as he wished; after all, he said, it’s peaceful there.

III.

Throughout and above all Heine was a poet. From first to last he was led by three angels who danced for ever in his brain, and guided him, singly or together, always. They were the same as in Atta Troll he saw in the moonlight from the casement of Uraka's hut—the Greek Diana, grown wanton, but with the noble marble limbs of old; Abunde, the blond and gay fairy of France; Herodias, the dark Jewess, like a palm of the oasis, and with all the fragrance of the East between her breasts: "O, you dead Jewess, I love you most, more than the Greek goddess, more than that fairy of the North."[3]

Throughout, Heine was a poet above all else. From beginning to end, he was guided by three angels who danced endlessly in his mind, leading him, either individually or together, at all times. They were the same as those he saw in Atta Troll in the moonlight from Uraka's hut—the Greek goddess Diana, now a bit lusty, yet retaining the noble marble form of old; Abunde, the cheerful and fair fairy of France; Herodias, the dark Jewish woman, like a palm tree in the oasis, holding all the fragrance of the East between her breasts: "O, you dead Jewish woman, I love you the most, more than the Greek goddess, more than that Northern fairy."[3]

Those genii of three ideal lands danced for ever in his brain, and that is but another way of indicating the opposition that lay at the root of his nature. From one point of view, it may well be, he continued the work of Luther and Lessing, though he was less great-hearted, less sound at core, though he had not that element of sane Philistinism which marks the Shakespeares and Goethes of the world. But he was, more than anything else, a poet, an artist, a dreamer, a perpetual child. The practical reformers among whom at one time he placed himself, the men of one idea, were naturally irritated and suspicious; there was a flavour of aristocracy in such idealism. In the poem called "Disputation" a Capuchin and a Rabbi argued before the King and Queen at Toledo concerning the respective merits of the Christian and Jewish religions. Both spoke at great length and with great fervour, and in the end the King appealed to the beautiful Queen by his side. She replied that she could not tell which of them was right, but that she did not like the smell of either; and Heine was generally of the Queen's mind. He sighed for the restoration of Barbarossa, the long-delayed German Empire, and his latest biographer asserts that he would have greeted the discovery of Barbarossa under the disguise of the King of Prussia, with Bismarckian insignia of blood and iron, as the realisation of all his dreams. It is doubtful, however, whether the meeting would be very cordial on either side. It would probably be the painful duty of the Emperor, as of the Emperor of the vision in Deutschland, to tell Heine, in very practical language, that he was wanting in respect, wanting in all sense of etiquette; and Heine would certainly reply to the Emperor, as under the same circumstances he replied to the visionary Barbarossa, that that venerable gentleman had better go home again, that during his long absence Emperors had become unnecessary, and that, after all, sceptres and crowns made admirable playthings for monkeys.

Those geniuses from three perfect lands kept dancing in his mind, which shows the conflict that was at the core of his nature. From one perspective, he might have continued the work of Luther and Lessing, though he was less noble, less solid at heart, and lacked the element of practical realism that defines figures like Shakespeare and Goethe. Above all, he was a poet, an artist, a dreamer, and forever a child. The practical reformers he associated with at one point, the ones focused on a single idea, were understandably irritated and suspicious; there was an air of elitism in such idealism. In the poem titled "Disputation," a Capuchin monk and a Rabbi debated in front of the King and Queen in Toledo about the merits of Christianity and Judaism. Both spoke at length and passionately, and in the end, the King turned to the beautiful Queen beside him. She responded that she couldn't decide who was right, but she definitely didn’t like the smell of either one; and Heine generally shared the Queen's view. He longed for the return of Barbarossa and the long-anticipated German Empire, and his latest biographer claims he would have welcomed the discovery of Barbarossa disguised as the King of Prussia, complete with Bismarck's symbols of blood and iron, as the fulfillment of all his dreams. However, it’s uncertain whether the encounter would be very friendly from either side. It would likely fall to the Emperor, just like the Emperor in Deutschland, to tell Heine, in very straightforward terms, that he was lacking in respect and all sense of etiquette; and Heine would definitely respond to the Emperor, as he did to the visionary Barbarossa, that the old gentleman should head home, because during his long absence, Emperors had become unnecessary, and after all, scepters and crowns made excellent toys for monkeys.

"We are founding a democracy of gods," he wrote in 1834, "all equally holy, blessed and glorious. You desire simple clothing, ascetic morals, and unseasoned enjoyments; we, on the contrary, desire nectar and ambrosia, purple mantles, costly perfumes, pleasure and splendour, dances of laughing nymphs, music and plays.—Do not be angry, you virtuous republicans; we answer all your reproaches in the words of one of Shakespeare's fools: 'Dost thou think that because thou art virtuous there shall be no more cakes and ale?'" What could an austere republican, a Puritanic Liberal, who scorned the vision of roses and myrtles and sugar-plums all round, say to this? Börne answered, "I can be indulgent to the games of children, indulgent to the passions of a youth, but when on the bloody day of battle a boy who is chasing butterflies gets between my legs; when at the day of our greatest need, and we are calling aloud on God, the young coxcomb beside us in the church sees only the pretty girls, and winks and flirts—then, in spite of all our philosophy and humanity, we may well grow angry.... Heine, with his sybaritic nature, is so effeminate that the fall of a roseleaf disturbs his sleep; how, then, should he[Pgxix] rest comfortably on the knotty bed of freedom? Where is there any beauty without a fault? Where is there any good thing without its ridiculous side? Nature is seldom a poet and never rhymes; let him whom her rhymeless prose cannot please turn to poetry!" Börne was right; Heine was not the man to plan a successful revolution, or defend a barricade, or edit a popular democratic newspaper, or represent adequately a radical constituency—all this was true. Let us be thankful that it was true; Börnes are ever with us, and we are grateful: there is but one Heine.

"We're creating a democracy of gods," he wrote in 1834, "all equally holy, blessed, and glorious. You want simple clothes, strict morals, and bland pleasures; we, on the other hand, want nectar and ambrosia, luxurious robes, expensive perfumes, joy and grandeur, dances of laughing nymphs, music and theater.—Don't be upset, you virtuous republicans; we respond to all your accusations with the words of one of Shakespeare's jesters: 'Do you think that just because you are virtuous, there will be no more cakes and ale?'" What could an austere republican, a Puritan Liberal who rejected visions of roses, myrtles, and sweets, say to this? Börne replied, "I can be forgiving towards children's games, indulgent to youthful passions, but when on the bloody day of battle, a boy chasing butterflies trips me up; when at our greatest moment of need, and we're calling out to God, the young dandy beside us in church only sees the pretty girls and flirts—then, despite all our philosophy and compassion, we may justifiably get angry.... Heine, with his hedonistic nature, is so delicate that the fall of a rose petal disturbs his sleep; how can he then rest comfortably on the rough bed of freedom? Where is there any beauty without a flaw? Where is there anything good that doesn't have its silly side? Nature isn't often a poet and never rhymes; let anyone whom her unrhymed prose doesn't please turn to poetry!" Börne was right; Heine wasn't the kind of person to lead a successful revolution, defend a barricade, edit a popular democratic newspaper, or accurately represent a radical constituency—all of this was true. Let's be thankful that it's true; there are always Börnes among us, and we are grateful: there is only one Heine.

The same complexity of nature that made Heine an artist made him a humorist. But it was a more complicated complexity now, a cosmic game between the real world and the ideal world; he could go no further. The young Catullus of 1825, with his fiery passions crushed in the wine-press of life and yielding such divine ambrosia, soon lost his faith in passion. The militant soldier in the liberation-war of humanity of 1835 soon ceased to flourish his sword. It was only with the full development of his humour, when his spinal cord began to fail and he had taken up his position as a spectator of life, that Heine attained the only sort of unity possible to him—the unity that comes of a recognised and accepted lack of unity. In the lambent flames of this unequalled humour he bathed all the things he counted dearest; to its service he brought the secret of his poet's nature, the secret of speaking with a voice that every heart leaps up to answer. It is scarcely the humour of Aristophanes, though it is a greater force, even in moulding our political and social ideals, than Börne knew; it is oftener a modern development of the humour of the mad king and the fool in Lear—that humour which is the last concentrated word of the human organism under the lash of Fate.

The same complexity of nature that turned Heine into an artist also made him a humorist. But it was a more complicated complexity now, a cosmic play between reality and the ideal; he couldn't go further. The young Catullus of 1825, with his intense passions crushed by life's challenges and producing such divine inspiration, soon lost faith in passion. The determined soldier in the fight for humanity in 1835 eventually stopped waving his sword. It was only when his humor fully developed, as his health began to decline and he took on the role of an observer of life, that Heine found the only kind of unity possible for him—the unity that comes from recognizing and accepting a lack of unity. In the bright flames of this unmatched humor, he immersed everything he cherished; he poured the essence of his poet's nature into it, the ability to speak with a voice that resonates in every heart. It's not quite the humor of Aristophanes, although it's a stronger force, even in shaping our political and social ideals, than Börne realized; it's more often a modern spin on the humor of the mad king and the fool in Lear—that humor which is the ultimate expression of the human spirit under the pressure of Fate.

And if it is still asked why Heine is so modern, it can only be said that these discords out of which his humour exhaled are those which we have nearly all of us known, and that he speaks with a voice that seems to arise from the depth of our own souls. He represents our period of transition; he gazed, from what[Pgxx] appeared the vulgar Pisgah of his day, behind on an Eden that was for ever closed, before on a promised land he should never enter. While with clear sight he announced things to come, the music of the past floated up to him; he brooded wistfully over the vision of the old Olympian gods, dying, amid faint music of cymbals and flutes, forsaken, in the mediæval wilderness; he heard strange sounds of psaltries and harps, the psalms of Israel, the voice of Princess Sabbath, sounding across the remote waters of Babylon.—In a few years this significance of Heine will be lost; that it is not yet lost the eagerness with which his books are read and translated sufficiently testifies.

And if people still wonder why Heine feels so modern, it's simply because the conflicts from which his humor arises are experiences that many of us have shared, and he speaks with a voice that echoes from the depths of our own souls. He embodies our time of change; he looked back from what seemed like the ordinary viewpoint of his era toward an Eden that was forever closed, while looking ahead to a promised land he would never reach. With clear vision, he foretold what was to come, while melodies from the past drifted up to him; he ruminated sadly over the image of the old Olympian gods, fading away amid soft sounds of cymbals and flutes, abandoned in the medieval wilderness; he heard the unusual sounds of psalteries and harps, the psalms of Israel, the voice of Princess Sabbath, resonating across the distant waters of Babylon. In a few years, the significance of Heine might be forgotten; the fact that it isn’t lost yet is clearly shown by the enthusiasm with which his books are read and translated.

HAVELOCK ELLIS.

Havelock Ellis.

HEINE'S PROSE WORKS.

decorative bar

decorative bar

REISEBILDER.

IDEAS, OR THE BOOK LE GRAND.

[The Ideas, of which the chief portion is here presented, was published in 1826 in the second volume of the Reisebilder, or Travel-Pictures. The German title has been retained, as Heine himself retained it in the French translation. The translation here given is founded on Mr. Leland's; it has been carefully revised.]

[The Ideas, which is primarily presented here, was published in 1826 in the second volume of the Reisebilder, or Travel-Pictures. The original German title has been kept, just as Heine maintained it in the French translation. The translation provided here is based on Mr. Leland's work and has been carefully revised.]

CHAPTER I.

She was lovable, and he loved her. But he was not lovable, and she
did not love him.—Old Play.

She was lovable, and he loved her. But he wasn't lovable, and she
did not love him.—Old Play.

MADAME, do you know the old play? It is quite an extraordinary play, only a little too melancholy. I once played the leading part in it myself, so that all the ladies wept; only one did not weep, not even a single tear, and that was the point of the play, the whole catastrophe.

MADAME, are you familiar with the old play? It’s a remarkable play, just a bit too sad. I once played the main role, and it made all the women cry; except for one who didn’t shed a single tear, and that was the crux of the play, the entire disaster.

Oh, that single tear! it still torments my thoughts. When Satan wishes to ruin my soul, he hums in my ear a ballad of that unwept tear, a deadly song with a more deadly tune. Ah! such a tune is only heard in Hell!

Oh, that single tear! It still haunts my thoughts. When Satan wants to destroy my soul, he whispers in my ear a song about that uncried tear, a deadly melody with an even deadlier tune. Ah! Such a tune is only heard in Hell!

You can readily form an idea, Madame, of what life is like in Heaven, the more readily as you are married. There people amuse themselves altogether superbly, every sort of entertainment is provided, and one lives in mere desire and delight. One eats from morning to night, and the cookery is as good as Jagor's; roast geese fly round with gravy-boats in their bills, and feel flattered if any one eats them; tarts gleaming with butter grow wild like sunflowers; everywhere there are brooks of bouillon and champagne, everywhere trees on which napkins flutter, and you eat and wipe your lips and eat again without injury to your stomach; you sing psalms, or flirt and joke with the dear, delicate little angels, or take a walk on the green Hallelujah-Meadow, and your white flowing garments fit very comfortably, and nothing disturbs the feeling of blessedness, no pain, no vexation—even when one accidentally treads on another's corns and exclaims, "Excusez!" he smiles as if enraptured, and assures, "Thy foot, brother, did not hurt in the least, quite au contraire, a deeper thrill of heavenly rapture shoots through my heart!"

You can easily imagine, Madame, what life is like in Heaven, especially since you're married. There, people have an incredible time; there's every kind of entertainment provided, and everything is filled with desire and joy. You eat from morning until night, and the cooking is as good as Jagor's; roast geese fly around with gravy boats in their beaks and feel honored if someone eats them; tarts shining with butter grow wild like sunflowers; everywhere there are streams of bouillon and champagne, everywhere trees where napkins flutter, and you eat and wipe your lips and eat again without any harm to your stomach; you sing hymns, or flirt and joke with the lovely little angels, or take a walk on the beautiful Hallelujah Meadow, and your flowing white garments fit perfectly, and nothing interrupts your feeling of bliss, no pain, no annoyance—even when someone accidentally steps on another's foot and says, "Excusez!" the other smiles as if in bliss and assures, "Your foot, my friend, didn’t hurt at all; on the contrary, a deeper thrill of heavenly joy rushes through my heart!"

But of Hell, Madame, you have no idea. Of all the devils you know, perhaps, only the little Amor, the pretty Croupier of Hell, Beelzebub, and you know him only from Don Juan, and doubtless think that for such a betrayer of innocence Hell can never be made hot enough, though our praiseworthy theatre directors spend upon him as much flame, fiery rain, powder, and colophonium as any Christian could desire in Hell.

But, Madame, you have no idea about Hell. Of all the devils you’re familiar with, maybe just the little Amor, the charming Croupier of Hell, Beelzebub, and you only know him from Don Juan. You probably think that for such a deceiver of innocence, Hell could never be hot enough, even though our dedicated theater directors put in as much fire, fiery rain, powder, and colophonium as any Christian could wish for in Hell.

But things in Hell look much worse than our theatre directors know, or they would not bring out so many bad plays. For in Hell it is infernally hot, and when I was there, in the dog-days, it was past endurance. Madame, you can have no idea of Hell! We have very few official returns from that place. Still, it is rank calumny to say that down there all the poor souls are compelled to read, the whole day long, all the dull sermons that are printed on earth. Bad as Hell is, it has not come to that; Satan will never invent such refinements of torture. On the other hand, Dante's description is too mild on the whole, too poetic. Hell appeared to me like a great kitchen, with an endlessly long stove, on which stood three rows of iron pots, and in these sat the damned, and were cooked. In one row were placed Christian sinners, and, incredible as it may seem, their number was anything but small, and the devils poked the fire up under them with especial good-will. In the next row were Jews, who continually screamed and cried, and were occasionally mocked by the fiends, which sometimes seemed very amusing, as, for instance, when a fat, wheezy old pawnbroker complained of the heat, and a little devil poured several buckets of cold water on his head, that he might realise what a refreshing benefit baptism was. In the third row sat the heathen, who, like the Jews, could take no part in salvation, and must burn forever. I heard one of these, as a burly devil put fresh coals under his kettle, cry out from his pot, "Spare me! I was Socrates, the wisest of mortals. I taught Truth and Justice, and sacrificed my life for Virtue." But the stupid, burly devil went on with his work, and grumbled, "Oh, shut up, there! All heathens must burn, and we can't make an exception for the sake of a single man." I assure you, Madame, the heat was terrible, with such a screaming, sighing, groaning, quacking, grunting, squealing—and through all these terrible sounds rang distinctly the deadly tune of the song of the unwept tear.

But things in Hell look way worse than our theater directors realize, or they wouldn't keep putting on so many terrible plays. It's incredibly hot in Hell, and when I was there during the dog days of summer, it was unbearable. Ma'am, you have no idea what Hell is like! We have very few official reports from that place. Still, it’s a complete lie to say that down there, all the poor souls are forced to read all the boring sermons printed on Earth. As bad as Hell is, it hasn't reached that point; Satan would never come up with such cruel forms of torture. On the other hand, Dante's description is too gentle overall, too poetic. Hell seemed to me like a massive kitchen, with an endlessly long stove, where three rows of iron pots were placed, and in those pots sat the damned, being cooked. In one row were Christian sinners, and as unbelievable as it seems, there weren’t just a few of them, and the devils tended the fire under them with particular enthusiasm. In the next row were Jews, who were constantly screaming and crying, and sometimes mocked by the demons, which could be pretty amusing, like when a fat, wheezy old pawnbroker complained about the heat, and a little devil dumped several buckets of cold water on his head so he could understand how refreshing baptism was. In the third row were the heathens, who, like the Jews, had no chance of salvation and had to burn forever. I heard one of them, as a hefty devil shoved fresh coals under his pot, cry out, “Spare me! I was Socrates, the wisest of mortals. I taught Truth and Justice, and laid down my life for Virtue.” But the dim-witted, bulky devil just kept working and grumbled, “Oh, shut up! All heathens must burn, and we can’t make an exception for just one guy.” I assure you, Ma'am, the heat was unbearable, with all the screaming, sighing, moaning, quacking, grunting, squealing—and through all those horrific sounds rang clearly the deadly melody of the song of the unwept tear.

CHAPTER II.

"She was lovable, and he loved her. But he was not lovable, and she
did not love him."—Old Play.

"She was lovable, and he loved her. But he was not lovable, and she
did not love him."—Old Play.

Madame! that old play is a tragedy, though the hero in it is neither killed nor commits suicide. The eyes of the heroine are beautiful—very beautiful—Madame, do you smell the perfume of violets?—very beautiful, and yet so piercing that they struck like poignards of glass through my heart and probably came out through my back—and yet I was not killed by those treacherous, murderous eyes. The voice of the heroine was also sweet—Madame, did you hear a nightingale just then?—a soft, silken voice, a sweet web of the sunniest tones, and my soul was entangled in it, and choked and tormented itself. I myself—it is the Count of Ganges who now speaks, and the story goes on in Venice—I myself soon had enough of these tortures, and had thoughts of putting an end to the play in the first act, and of shooting myself through the head, fool's-cap and all. I went to a fancy shop in the Via Burstah, where I saw a pair of beautiful pistols in a case—I remember them perfectly well—near them stood many pleasant playthings of mother-of-pearl and gold, steel hearts on gilt chains, porcelain cups with delicate devices, and snuff-boxes with pretty pictures, such as the divine history of Susannah, the Swan Song of Leda, the Rape of the Sabines, Lucretia, a fat, virtuous creature, with naked bosom, in which she was lazily sticking a dagger; the late Bethmann, la belle Ferronière—all enrapturing faces—but I bought the pistols without much ado, and then I bought balls, then powder, and then I went to the restaurant of Signor Somebody, and ordered oysters and a glass of Hock.

Madam! that old play is a tragedy, even though the hero isn’t killed or takes his own life. The eyes of the heroine are stunning—truly stunning—Madam, do you smell the scent of violets?—so beautiful, and yet so piercing that they stabbed through my heart like glass daggers and probably came out my back—and yet I wasn’t killed by those treacherous, murderous eyes. The voice of the heroine was also sweet—Madam, did you just hear a nightingale?—a soft, silky voice, a sweet web of the sunniest tones, and my soul got tangled in it, choking and tormenting itself. I myself—it’s the Count of Ganges speaking to you now, and the story continues in Venice—I myself quickly grew tired of these torments and considered ending the play in the first act, thinking about shooting myself in the head, fool's cap and all. I went to a fancy shop on Via Burstah, where I saw a pair of beautiful pistols in a display case—I remember them perfectly—beside them were many charming trinkets made of mother-of-pearl and gold, steel hearts on gilded chains, porcelain cups with delicate designs, and snuff-boxes with pretty pictures, like the divine history of Susannah, the Swan Song of Leda, the Rape of the Sabines, Lucretia, a plump, virtuous woman, with her bare chest lazily sticking a dagger; the late Bethmann, la belle Ferronière—all captivating faces—but I bought the pistols without much hesitation, then I purchased bullets, then powder, and then I went to the restaurant of Signor Somebody and ordered oysters and a glass of Hock.

I could eat nothing, and still less could I drink. The warm tears fell in the glass, and in that glass I saw my dear home, the holy, blue Ganges, the ever-gleaming Himalaya, the giant banyan woods, amid whose broad arcades calmly wandered wise elephants and white-robed pilgrims, strange dream-like flowers gazed on me with meaning glance, wondrous golden birds sang wildly, flashing sun-rays and the sweet, silly chatter of monkeys pleasantly mocked me, from far pagodas sounded the pious prayers of priests, and amid all rang the melting, wailing voice of the Sultana of Delhi—she ran impetuously around in her carpeted chamber, she tore her silver veil, with her peacock fan she struck the black slave to the ground, she wept, she raged, she cried. I could not, however, hear what she said; the restaurant of Signor Somebody is three thousand miles distant from the Harem of Delhi, besides the fair Sultana had been dead three thousand years—and I quickly drank up the wine, the clear, joy-giving wine, and yet my soul grew darker and sadder—I was condemned to death.

I couldn't eat anything, and drinking was even harder. Warm tears fell into my glass, and in that glass, I saw my beloved home, the sacred, blue Ganges, the always-shimmering Himalayas, the massive banyan trees where wise elephants and robed pilgrims strolled calmly. Strange, dream-like flowers looked at me with meaningful glances, and wonderful golden birds sang wildly, flashing sun rays everywhere. The silly chatter of monkeys amused me, while distant pagodas echoed with the prayers of priests. Amid all this was the heart-wrenching, mournful voice of the Sultana of Delhi—she dashed around in her carpeted room, tore her silver veil, struck a black slave to the ground with her peacock fan, weeping and raging. I couldn't hear what she was saying, though; Signor Somebody's restaurant was three thousand miles away from the Harem of Delhi, and the beautiful Sultana had been dead for three thousand years. I quickly downed the wine, the clear, joy-bringing wine, but my soul only grew darker and sadder—I was doomed.

As I left the restaurant I heard the "bell of poor sinners" ring, a crowd of people swept by me; but I placed myself at the corner of the Strada San Giovanni, and recited the following monologue:—

As I left the restaurant, I heard the "bell of poor sinners" ringing, and a crowd of people rushed past me; but I stood at the corner of Strada San Giovanni and recited the following monologue:—

"In ancient tales they tell of golden castles,
Where harps are sounding, lovely ladies dance,
And gay attendants gleam, and jessamine,
Myrtle, and roses spread their soft perfume—
And yet a single word of sad enchantment
Sweeps all the glory of the scene to naught,
And there remain but ruins old and grey,
And screaming birds of night and foul morass.
Even so have I, with but a single word,
Enchanted Nature's blooming loveliness.
There lies she now, lifeless and cold and pale,
Just like a monarch's corse laid out in state,
The royal deathly cheeks fresh stained with rouge,
And in his hand the kingly sceptre laid,
Yet still his lips are yellow and most changed,
For they forgot to dye them, as they should,
And mice are jumping o'er the monarch's nose,
And mock the golden sceptre in his grasp."

"In ancient tales, they talk about golden castles, __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__,
Where harps play, lovely ladies dance,
And joyful attendants glow, while jasmine,
Myrtle and roses give off their soft scent—
Yet one word of sorrowful magic
Cleans all the beauty of the scene away,
Leaving only behind ancient, gray ruins,
And screeching night birds and dirty swamps.
Just like that, I have, with one word,
Enchant the captivating beauty of Nature in full bloom.
Now she lies here, motionless, cold, and pale,
Like a king's corpse on display,
The royal pale cheeks just painted,
And in his hand, he holds the royal scepter,
Yet still his lips are yellow and different,
For they forgot to color them the way they should have,
And mice are bouncing over the king's nose,
"And laugh at the golden scepter he's holding."

It is everywhere agreed, Madame, that one should deliver a soliloquy before shooting himself. Most men, on such occasions, use Hamlet's "To be, or not to be." It is an excellent passage, and I would gladly have quoted it—but charity begins at home, and when a man has written tragedies himself, in which such farewell-to-life speeches occur, as, for instance, in my immortal Almansor, it is very natural that one should prefer his own words even to Shakespeare's. At any rate, the delivery of such speeches is a very useful custom; one gains at least a little time. And so it came to pass that I remained a rather long time standing at the corner of the Strada San Giovanni—and as I stood there like a condemned criminal awaiting death, I raised my eyes, and suddenly beheld her.

It’s universally recognized, Madame, that a person should deliver a soliloquy before taking their own life. Most people, in such moments, recite Hamlet’s “To be, or not to be.” It’s a great excerpt, and I would have happily quoted it—but self-preservation comes first, and when someone has penned tragedies where such farewell speeches occur, like in my timeless Almansor, it's only natural to prefer one’s own words over Shakespeare’s. In any case, delivering such speeches is a really useful practice; at least it buys some time. So it happened that I stood at the corner of the Strada San Giovanni for quite a while—and as I stood there like a condemned criminal facing execution, I lifted my eyes and suddenly saw her.

She wore her blue silk dress and rose-red hat, and her eyes looked at me so mildly, so death-conqueringly, so life-givingly—Madame, you well know, out of Roman history, that when the vestals in ancient Rome met on their way a malefactor led to death, they had the right to pardon him, and the poor rogue lived. With a single glance she saved me from death, and I stood before her revived, and dazzled by the sunbeams of her beauty, and she passed on—and left me alive.

She wore her blue silk dress and rose-red hat, and her eyes looked at me so gently, so powerfully, so upliftingly—Madame, you know well from Roman history, that when the vestals in ancient Rome encountered a condemned criminal on their way, they had the power to pardon him, and the poor guy lived. With just one look, she saved me from death, and I stood before her revived, dazzled by the sunlight of her beauty, and then she moved on—and left me alive.

CHAPTER III.

And she left me alive, and I live, which is the main point.

And she left me alive, and I'm still here, which is the main point.

Others may, if they choose, enjoy the good fortune of having their lady-love adorn their graves with garlands and water them with the tears of fidelity. Oh, women! hate me, laugh at me, jilt me—but let me live! Life is all too laughably sweet, and the world too delightfully bewildered; it is the dream of an intoxicated god, who has taken French leave of the carousing multitude of immortals, and has laid himself down to sleep in a solitary star, and knows not himself that he creates all that he dreams—and the dream images form themselves in such a mad variegated fashion, and often so harmoniously reasonable—the Iliad, Plato, the battle of Marathon, Moses, Medician Venus, Strasburg Cathedral, the French Revolution, Hegel, the steamboat, etc., etc., are single good thoughts in this divine dream—but it will not last long, and the god awakes and rubs his sleepy eyes, and smiles—and our world has run to nothing—yes, has never been.

Others might choose to enjoy the luck of having their beloved decorate their graves with flowers and water them with tears of loyalty. Oh, women! Hate me, laugh at me, reject me—but let me live! Life is just too amusingly sweet, and the world too wonderfully confusing; it’s the dream of a drunken god who’s wandered off from the partying crowd of immortals, laid down to sleep in a lonely star, and doesn’t even realize that he creates everything he dreams—and the dream images come together in such a crazy, varied way, and often so beautifully sensible—the Iliad, Plato, the battle of Marathon, Moses, Medician Venus, Strasburg Cathedral, the French Revolution, Hegel, the steamboat, etc., etc., are all just single good thoughts in this divine dream—but it won’t last long, and the god wakes up, rubs his tired eyes, and smiles—and our world has turned into nothing—yes, has never existed.

No matter! I live. If I am but a shadowy image in a dream, still this is better than the cold, black, void annihilation of Death. Life is the greatest good and death the worst evil. Berlin lieutenants of the guard may sneer and call it cowardice, because the Prince of Homburg shudders when he beholds his open grave. Henry Kleist[4] had, however, as much courage as his high-breasted, tightly-laced colleagues, and has, alas! proved it. But all strong men love life. Goethe's Egmont does not part willingly from "the cheerful wont of being and working." Immermann's Edwin clings to life "like a little child to its mother's breast," and though he finds it hard to live by stranger mercy, he still begs for mercy: "For life and breath is still the highest."

No worries! I'm alive. Even if I'm just a shadow in a dream, that's still way better than the cold, dark nothingness of death. Life is the greatest good, and death is the worst evil. The Berlin lieutenants of the guard might mock and call it cowardice because the Prince of Homburg flinches at the sight of his open grave. Henry Kleist[4] had just as much courage as his high-status, tightly-laced peers, and sadly, he showed it. But all strong people cherish life. Goethe's Egmont doesn't want to part from "the cheerful way of being and working." Immermann's Edwin holds onto life "like a little child clings to its mother's breast," and even though he finds it hard to live relying on the mercy of others, he still asks for mercy: "For life and breath is still the highest."

When Odysseus in the under-world sees Achilles as the leader of dead heroes, and extols his renown among the living, and his glory even among the dead, Achilles answers:—

When Odysseus sees Achilles in the underworld as the leader of dead heroes and praises his fame among the living and his glory even among the dead, Achilles replies:—

"No more discourse of death, consolingly, noble Odysseus!
Rather would I in the field as daily labourer be toiling,
Slave to the meanest of men, a pauper and lacking possessions,
Than mid the infinite host of long-vanished mortals be ruler."

"Let's stop discussing death, comforting, noble Odysseus!
I would prefer to be working in the fields every day,
A servant to the lowest of people, broke and with nothing to my name,
"Rather than being a ruler among the countless spirits of the dead."

Yes, when Major Duvent challenged the great Israel Lyon to fight with pistols and said to him, "If you do not meet me, Mr. Lyon, you are a dog;" the latter replied, "I would rather be a live dog than a dead lion!" and he was right. I have fought often enough, Madame, to dare to say this—God be praised! I live! Red life pulses in my veins, earth yields beneath my feet, in the glow of love I embrace trees and statues, and they live in my embrace. Every woman is to me the gift of a world. I revel in the melody of her countenance, and with a single glance of my eye I can enjoy more than others with their every limb through all their lives. Every instant is to me an eternity. I do not measure time with the ell of Brabant or of Hamburg, and I need no priest to promise me a second life, for I can live enough in this life, when I live backwards in the life of those who have gone before me, and win myself an eternity in the realm of the past.

Yes, when Major Duvent challenged the great Israel Lyon to a duel with pistols and told him, "If you don't face me, Mr. Lyon, you're a coward," Lyon replied, "I’d rather be a live dog than a dead lion!" and he was right. I've fought often enough, Madame, to say this—thank God! I'm alive! Vivid life courses through my veins, the ground gives way beneath my feet, and in the warmth of love, I embrace trees and statues, and they come alive in my arms. Every woman is to me a world unto itself. I delight in the beauty of her face, and with just one glance, I can experience more than others do with all their senses throughout their lives. Every moment is an eternity for me. I don’t measure time with the yardstick of Brabant or Hamburg, and I don’t need a priest to assure me of an afterlife because I can live fully in this life, reliving the experiences of those who came before me, and find my eternity in the memories of the past.

And I live! The great pulsation of nature beats too in my breast, and when I carol aloud, I am answered by a thousand-fold echo. I hear a thousand nightingales. Spring has sent them to awaken Earth from her morning slumber, and Earth trembles with ecstasy; her flowers are hymns, which she sings in inspiration to the sun—the sun moves far too slowly; I would fain lash on his steeds that they might advance more rapidly. But when he sinks hissing in the sea, and the night rises with her great passionate eyes, oh! then true pleasure first thrills through me, the evening breezes lie like flattering maidens on my wild heart, and the stars wink to me, and I rise and sweep over the little earth and the little thoughts of men.

And I'm alive! The powerful rhythm of nature beats in my chest too, and when I sing out loud, I get a thousand times the response. I hear countless nightingales. Spring has sent them to wake up Earth from her morning sleep, and Earth shivers with joy; her flowers are hymns that she sings in praise to the sun—the sun moves way too slowly; I want to urge his horses on so they can move faster. But when he sinks hissing into the sea and the night rises with her passionate eyes, oh! that's when true pleasure first sweeps over me, the evening breezes caress my wild heart like flattering maidens, and the stars wink at me, and I rise and soar over the little earth and the little thoughts of men.

CHAPTER IV.

But a day will come when the fire in my veins will be quenched, when winter will dwell in my heart, when his snow flakes will whiten my locks, and his mists will dim my eyes. Then my friends will lie in their lonely graves, and I alone shall remain like a solitary stalk forgotten by the reaper. A new race will have sprung up with new desires and new ideas; full of wonder I shall hear new names and listen to new songs, for the old names will be forgotten, and I myself forgotten, perhaps still honoured by a few, scorned by many and loved by none! And then the rosy-cheeked boys will spring around me and place the old harp in my trembling hand, and say, laughing, "You have been long silent, you greybeard; sing us again songs of your youthful dreams!"

But a day will come when the fire in my veins will be extinguished, when winter will settle in my heart, when his snowflakes will gray my hair, and his mists will cloud my vision. Then my friends will be resting in their lonely graves, and I will remain alone like a forgotten stalk in a field. A new generation will have emerged with new desires and new ideas; I will listen in wonder to new names and new songs, for the old names will fade away, and I may be forgotten, perhaps still remembered by a few, scorned by many, and loved by none! And then the rosy-cheeked boys will gather around me and put the old harp in my shaky hands, laughing, "You've been silent for so long, you old man; sing us again the songs of your youthful dreams!"

Then I will grasp the harp, and my old joys and sorrows will awake, tears will again spring from my dead eyes; there will be Spring again in my breast, sweet tones of sorrow will tremble on the harpstrings, I shall see again the blue stream and the marble palaces and the lovely faces of women and girls—and I will sing a song of the flowers of Brenta.

Then I will take up the harp, and my old joys and sorrows will come alive, tears will once again flow from my lifeless eyes; there will be Spring again in my heart, sweet notes of sadness will resonate on the harp strings, I will see once more the blue river and the marble palaces and the beautiful faces of women and girls—and I will sing a song about the flowers of Brenta.

It will be my last song; the stars will gaze on me as in the nights of my youth, the loving moonlight will once more kiss my cheeks, the spirit chorus of nightingales long dead will sound from afar, my sleep-drunken eyes will close, my soul will echo with the notes of my harp; I shall smell the flowers of Brenta.

It will be my last song; the stars will look down on me like they did in my youth, the gentle moonlight will once again touch my cheeks, and the ghostly chorus of nightingales long gone will resonate in the distance. My sleepy eyes will shut, my soul will resonate with the notes of my harp; I will breathe in the fragrance of the flowers by Brenta.

A tree will shadow my grave. I would gladly have it a palm, but that tree will not grow in the North. It will be a linden, and on summer evenings lovers will sit there and caress; the green-finch, who rocks himself on the branches, will be listening silently, and my linden will rustle tenderly over the heads of the happy ones, who will be so happy that they will have no time to read what is written on the white tombstone. But when later the lover has lost his love, then he will come again to the well-known linden, and sigh, and weep, and gaze long and oft upon the stone, and read the inscription—"He loved the flowers of Brenta."

A tree will shade my grave. I would happily choose a palm, but that tree doesn’t grow in the North. It will be a linden, and on summer evenings, lovers will sit there and cuddle; the greenfinch, swaying on the branches, will listen quietly, and my linden will rustle gently above the heads of the happy couple, who will be so caught up in their joy that they won't notice what's written on the white tombstone. But later, when the lover has lost his beloved, he will return to the familiar linden, sighing, crying, and gazing long and often at the stone, reading the inscription—"He loved the flowers of Brenta."

CHAPTER V.

Madame! I have deceived you. I am not the Count of the Ganges. Never in my life have I seen the holy stream, nor the lotus flowers which are mirrored in its sacred waves. Never did I lie dreaming under Indian palms, nor in prayer before the Diamond Deity Juggernaut, who with his diamonds might have easily aided me out of my difficulties. I have no more been in Calcutta than the turkey, of which I ate yesterday at dinner, had ever been in the realms of the Grand Turk. Yet my ancestors came from Hindostan, and therefore I feel so much at my ease in the great forest of song of Valmiki. The heroic sorrows of the divine Ramo move my heart like familiar griefs; from the flower lays of Kalidasa the sweetest memories bloom; and when a few years ago a gentle lady in Berlin showed me the beautiful pictures which her father, who had been Governor in India, had brought from thence, the delicately-painted, holy, calm faces seemed as familiar to me as though I were gazing at my own family gallery.

Madame! I've tricked you. I'm not the Count of the Ganges. I’ve never seen the holy river or the lotus flowers reflected in its sacred waters. I've never dreamed under Indian palms or prayed before the Diamond Deity Juggernaut, who with his diamonds could have easily helped me out of my troubles. I've never been to Calcutta any more than the turkey I ate at dinner yesterday has been to the lands of the Grand Turk. Yet my ancestors came from Hindostan, which is why I feel so at home in the great forest of songs by Valmiki. The heroic sorrows of the divine Ramo touch my heart like familiar pains; the beautiful verses of Kalidasa bring back the sweetest memories; and when a few years ago a kind lady in Berlin showed me the lovely pictures her father, who had been Governor in India, brought back, the delicately painted, serene faces felt so familiar to me as if I were looking at my own family portraits.

Franz Bopp—Madame, you have of course read his Nalus and his System of Sanscrit Conjugations—gave me much information relative to my ancestry, and I now know with certainty that I am descended from Brahma's head, and not from his corns. I have also good reason to believe that the entire Mahabarata, with its two hundred thousand verses, is merely an allegorical love-letter which my first fore-father wrote to my first fore-mother. Oh! they loved dearly, their souls kissed, they kissed with their eyes, they were both but one single kiss.

Franz Bopp—Madam, you have of course read his Nalus and his System of Sanskrit Conjugations—shared a lot of information about my ancestry, and I now know for sure that I am descended from Brahma's head, and not from his feet. I also have good reason to believe that the entire Mahabarata, with its two hundred thousand verses, is just an allegorical love letter that my first ancestor wrote to my first ancestor. Oh! they loved deeply, their souls connected, they kissed with their eyes, they were both just one single kiss.

An enchanted nightingale sits on a red coral bough in the silent sea, and sings a song of the love of my ancestors; the pearls gaze eagerly from their shells, the wonderful water-flowers tremble with sorrow, the cunning sea-snails, bearing on their backs many-coloured porcelain towers, come creeping onwards, the ocean-roses blush with shame, the yellow, sharp-pointed starfish, and the thousand-hued glassy jelly-fish quiver and stretch, and all swarm and listen.

An enchanted nightingale sits on a red coral branch in the quiet sea, singing a song about the love of my ancestors; the pearls watch eagerly from their shells, the beautiful water flowers tremble with sadness, the crafty sea snails, carrying colorful porcelain towers on their backs, creep forward, the ocean roses blush with shame, the pointed yellow starfish, and the brightly colored glassy jellyfish quiver and stretch, and everyone swarms in to listen.

Unfortunately, Madame, this nightingale song is far too long to be set down here; it is as long as the world itself, even its dedication to Anangas, the God of Love, is as long as all Scott's novels, and there is a passage referring to it in Aristophanes, which in German[5] reads thus:—

Unfortunately, Madame, this nightingale song is way too long to be written down here; it's as long as the world itself. Even its dedication to Anangas, the God of Love, is as long as all of Scott's novels, and there's a passage about it in Aristophanes, which in German[5] reads as follows:—

"Tiotio, tiotio, tiotinx,
Totototo totototo tototinx."
(Voss's Translation.)

"Tiotio, tiotio, tiotinx, Totototo totototo tototinx." (Voss's *Translation.*)

No, I was not born in India. I first beheld the light of the world on the shores of that beautiful stream, in whose green hills folly grows and is plucked in Autumn, laid away in cellars, poured into barrels, and exported to foreign lands. In fact, only yesterday I heard some one speaking a piece of folly which, in the year 1811, was imprisoned in a bunch of grapes, which I myself then saw growing on the Johannisburg. But much folly is also consumed at home, and men are the same there as everywhere: they are born, eat, drink, sleep, laugh, cry, slander each other, are greatly troubled about the propagation of their race, try to seem what they are not and to do what they cannot, never shave until they have a beard, and often have beards before they get discretion, and when they at last have discretion, they drink it away in white and red folly.

No, I wasn’t born in India. I first saw the light of day on the banks of that beautiful river, where folly grows in its green hills and is harvested in autumn, stored in cellars, poured into barrels, and shipped off to other countries. In fact, just yesterday I heard someone talking about a piece of folly that, back in 1811, was trapped in a bunch of grapes that I saw growing in Johannisburg. But plenty of folly is also consumed at home, and people are the same there as they are everywhere: they are born, eat, drink, sleep, laugh, cry, gossip about each other, worry a lot about having kids, try to act like something they’re not and do things they can’t, never shave until they have a beard, often having beards before they have common sense, and when they finally get some common sense, they drink it away in white and red folly.

Mon dieu! if I had faith, so that I could remove mountains—the Johannisburg would be just the mountain which I would carry with me everywhere. But as my faith is not strong enough, imagination must aid me, and she quickly sets me by the beautiful Rhine.

My God! If I had enough faith to move mountains, the Johannisburg would be the mountain I’d take with me everywhere. But since my faith isn't strong enough, I have to rely on my imagination, and it quickly takes me to the beautiful Rhine.

Oh, that is a fair land, full of loveliness and sunshine. In the blue stream are mirrored the mountain shores, with their ruined towers, and woods, and ancient towns. There, before the house-door, sit the good townspeople, of a summer evening, and drink out of great cans, and gossip confidentially about how the wine—the Lord be praised!—thrives, and how justice should be free from all secrecy, and how Marie Antoinette's being guillotined is none of our business, and how dear the tobacco tax makes tobacco, and how all mankind are equal, and what a glorious fellow Gœrres is.

Oh, that is a beautiful land, full of charm and sunshine. In the blue stream, the mountain shores are reflected, complete with their crumbling towers, forests, and ancient towns. There, in the evening, the friendly townspeople sit outside their homes, drinking from large mugs and chatting openly about how the wine—the Lord be praised!—is flourishing, how justice should be transparent, how Marie Antoinette being executed isn’t our concern, how expensive the tobacco tax makes cigarettes, how all people are equal, and what a wonderful guy Gœrres is.

I have never troubled myself about such conversation, and sat rather with the maidens in the arched window, and laughed at their laughter, and let them throw flowers in my face, and pretended to be ill-natured until they told me their secrets, or some other important stories. Fair Gertrude was half wild with delight when I sat by her. She was a girl like a flaming rose, and once, as she fell on my neck, I thought that she would burn away into perfume in my arms. Fair Katharine flamed into sweet music when she talked with me, and her eyes were of a pure, internal blue, which I have never seen in men or animals, and very seldom in flowers—one gazed so gladly into them, and could then think such sweet things. But the beautiful Hedwig loved me, for when I came to her she bowed her head till her black curls fell down over her blushing face, and her bright eyes shone like stars from the dark heaven. Her bashful lips spoke not a word, and I too could say nothing to her. I coughed and she trembled. She often begged me, through her sisters, not to climb the rocks so rashly, or to bathe in the Rhine when I was hot with running or drinking wine. Once I overheard her pious prayer before the Virgin Mary, which she had adorned with gold leaf and illuminated with a lamp, and which stood in a corner at the entrance. I plainly heard her pray to the Mother of God to keep him from climbing, drinking, and bathing. I should certainly have been desperately in love with her if she had been indifferent to me, and I was indifferent to her because I knew that she loved me.—Madame, to win my love, I must be treated en canaille.

I never really worried about conversations like that. I usually sat with the girls at the arched window, laughing at their jokes, letting them throw flowers in my face, and pretending to be grumpy until they shared their secrets or other important stories with me. Fair Gertrude was completely overjoyed when I sat next to her. She was like a blazing rose, and once, when she fell into my arms, I thought she might dissolve into perfume. Fair Katharine lit up like sweet music when she spoke to me, and her eyes were a pure, internal blue that I've never seen in men or animals, and very rarely in flowers—looking into them made me think such lovely thoughts. But the beautiful Hedwig loved me; when I approached her, she would lower her head until her black curls fell over her blushing face, and her bright eyes sparkled like stars in a dark sky. Her shy lips didn’t say a word, and I found myself at a loss for words too. I coughed, and she would tremble. She often asked her sisters to tell me not to climb the rocks so boldly or to bathe in the Rhine when I was hot from running or drinking wine. Once, I overheard her earnest prayer to the Virgin Mary, which she decorated with gold leaf and lit with a lamp, placed in a corner by the entrance. I clearly heard her ask the Mother of God to keep me from climbing, drinking, and bathing. I would have definitely been head over heels for her if she hadn’t seemed so indifferent to me, and I felt indifferent to her because I knew she loved me. —Madame, if you want to win my love, I need to be treated en canaille.

Johanna was the cousin of the three sisters, and I was glad to be with her. She knew the most beautiful old legends, and when she pointed with her white hand through the window out to the mountains where all had happened which she narrated, I became enchanted; the old knights rose visibly from the ruined castles and hewed away at each other's iron clothes, the Lorely sat again on the mountain summit, singing a-down her sweet, seductive song, and the Rhine rippled so reasonably soothing—and yet so mockingly horrible—and the fair Johanna looked at me so strangely, with such enigmatic tenderness, that she seemed herself one with the legend that she told. She was a slender, pale girl, sickly and musing, her eyes were clear as truth itself, her lips piously arched, in her face lay a great story—was it a love legend? I know not, and I never had the courage to ask. When I looked at her long, I grew calm and cheerful—it seemed to me as though it was Sunday in my heart and the angels held service there.

Johanna was the cousin of the three sisters, and I was happy to be with her. She knew the most beautiful old legends, and when she pointed her delicate hand through the window towards the mountains where everything she talked about happened, I became enchanted; the old knights seemed to rise visibly from the ruined castles, clashing their armor, the Loreley sat again on the mountaintop, singing her sweet, seductive song, and the Rhine flowed soothingly yet mockingly terrible—and the lovely Johanna looked at me in such a strange way, with such enigmatic tenderness, that she felt like a part of the legend she was telling. She was a slender, pale girl, frail and contemplative, her eyes were as clear as truth itself, her lips gently curved, and in her face was a great story—was it a love legend? I don’t know, and I never had the courage to ask. When I looked at her for a long time, I felt calm and cheerful—it felt as though it was Sunday in my heart and the angels were holding a service there.

In such happy hours I told her tales of my childhood, and she listened earnestly, and, strangely, when I could not think of the names she remembered them. When I then asked her with wonder how she knew the names, she would answer with a smile that she had learned it of the birds that had built a nest on the sill of her window—and she tried to make me believe that these were the same birds which I once bought with my pocket-money from a hard-hearted peasant boy, and then let fly away. But I believed that she knew everything because she was so pale, and really soon died. She knew, too, when she would die, and wished that I would leave Andernach the day before. When I bade her farewell she gave me both her hands—they were white, sweet hands, and pure as the Host—and she said, You are very good, and when you are not, think of the little dead Veronica.

In those happy moments, I shared stories from my childhood with her, and she listened intently. Strangely, when I couldn't remember certain names, she would recall them. When I asked her in amazement how she remembered, she would smile and say she learned it from the birds that had built a nest on her window sill—and she tried to convince me that these were the same birds I once bought with my pocket money from a hard-hearted peasant boy, only to let them fly away. But I believed she knew everything because she was so pale, and she did pass away soon after. She even knew when she would die and wished that I would leave Andernach the day before. When I said goodbye, she took both my hands—her hands were white, delicate, and pure like the Host—and she said, "You are very kind, and when you aren't, think of little dead Veronica."

Did the chattering birds also tell her this name? Often in hours of remembrance I had wearied my brain in trying to think of that dear name, but could not.

Did the chattering birds also tell her this name? Often, during hours of reflection, I exhausted myself trying to recall that beloved name, but I couldn’t.

And now that I have it again, my earliest infancy shall bloom into memory again—and I am again a child, and play with other children in the Castle Court at Düsseldorf on the Rhine.

And now that I have it back, my early childhood will come back to memory—and I am a child again, playing with other kids in the Castle Court at Düsseldorf on the Rhine.

CHAPTER VI.

Yes, Madame, there was I born, and I am particular in calling attention to the fact, lest after my death seven cities—those of Schilda, Krähwinkel, Polkwitz, Bockum, Dülken, Göttingen, and Schöppenstadt[6]—should contend for the honour of being my birthplace. Düsseldorf is a town on the Rhine; sixteen thousand people live there, and many hundred thousands besides are buried there. And among them are many of whom my mother says it were better if they were still alive—for example, my grand-father and my uncle, the old Herr von Geldern, and the young Herr von Geldern, who were both such celebrated doctors, and saved the lives of so many men, and yet must both die themselves. And pious Ursula, who carried me as a child in her arms, also lies buried there, and a rose-bush grows over her grave—she loved rose-perfume so much in her life, and her heart was all rose-perfume and goodness. And the shrewd old Canonicus also lies there buried. Lord, how miserable he looked when I last saw him! He consisted of nothing but soul and plasters, and yet he studied night and day as though he feared lest the worms might find a few ideas missing in his head. Little William also lies there—and that is my fault. We were schoolmates in the Franciscan cloister, and were one day playing on that side of the building where the Düssel flows between stone walls, and I said, "William, do get the kitten out, which has just fallen in!" and he cheerfully climbed out on the board which stretched over the brook, and pulled the cat out of the water, but fell in himself, and when they took him out he was cold and dead. The kitten lived to a good old age.

Yes, Madame, that’s where I was born, and I want to point this out so that after I die, seven cities—those of Schilda, Krähwinkel, Polkwitz, Bockum, Dülken, Göttingen, and Schöppenstadt—don’t argue over the honor of being my birthplace. Düsseldorf is a town by the Rhine; it has sixteen thousand residents, and many hundreds of thousands are buried there. Among them are several people my mother says would have been better off alive—like my grandfather and my uncle, the old Herr von Geldern, and the young Herr von Geldern, both of whom were renowned doctors who saved many lives but still had to die themselves. And pious Ursula, who carried me in her arms as a child, is also buried there, with a rose bush growing over her grave—she loved rose perfume so much in life, and her heart was filled with fragrance and kindness. Also resting there is the clever old Canonicus. Lord, he looked so miserable the last time I saw him! He was nothing but spirit and bandages, yet he studied day and night as if he feared the worms would find some ideas missing in his head. Little William is buried there too—and that’s my fault. We were schoolmates at the Franciscan cloister, and one day while playing on the side of the building where the Düssel flows between stone walls, I said, "William, please get the kitten out that just fell in!" He cheerfully climbed out onto the board that stretched over the brook and pulled the cat out of the water, but he fell in himself, and when they pulled him out, he was cold and lifeless. The kitten lived to a ripe old age.

The town of Düsseldorf is very beautiful, and if you think of it when in foreign lands, and happen at the same time to have been born there, strange feelings come over the soul. I was born there, and feel as if I must go directly home. And when I say home, I mean the Volkerstrasse and the house where I was born. This house will be some day very remarkable, and I have sent word to the old lady who owns it, that she must not for her life sell it. For the whole house she would now hardly get as much as the present which the green-veiled distinguished English ladies will give the servant when she shows them the room where I was born, and the hen-house wherein my father generally imprisoned me for stealing grapes, and also the brown door on which my mother taught me to write with chalk. Ah me! should I ever become a famous author, it has cost my poor mother trouble enough.

The town of Düsseldorf is really beautiful, and if you're thinking about it while you're abroad, and you happen to have been born there, it brings up some strange feelings in the soul. I was born there, and I feel like I need to go straight home. And when I say home, I mean Volkerstrasse and the house where I was born. This house will someday be very special, and I've told the old lady who owns it that she absolutely can't sell it. She wouldn't get much for the entire house, probably less than the gift those distinguished English ladies in green veils will give to the maid when she shows them the room where I was born, the hen-house where my dad usually locked me up for stealing grapes, and the brown door where my mom taught me to write with chalk. Oh dear! If I ever become a famous author, my poor mother has definitely put in enough effort.

But my fame still slumbers in the marble quarries of Carrara; the waste paper laurel with which they have bedecked my brow has not yet spread its perfume through the wide world, and when the green-veiled distinguished English ladies visit Düsseldorf, they leave the celebrated house unvisited, and go direct to the Market Place, and there gaze on the colossal black equestrian statue which stands in its midst. This represents the Prince Elector, Jan Wilhelm. He wears black armour and a long, hanging wig. When a boy, I was told that the artist who made this statue observed with terror while it was being cast that he had not metal enough, and then all the citizens of the town came running with all their silver spoons, and threw them in to fill the mould; and I often stood for hours before the statue puzzling my head as to how many spoons were sticking in it, and how many apple-tarts all that silver would buy. Apple-tarts were then my passion—now it is love, truth, freedom, and crab-soup—and not far from the statue of the Prince Elector, at the theatre corner, generally stood a curiously constructed sabre-legged rascal with a white apron, and a basket girt around him full of smoking apple-tarts, which he knew how to praise with an irresistible treble voice. "Apple tarts! quite fresh! so delicious!" Truly, whenever in my later years the Evil One sought to win me, he always cried in just such an enticing treble, and I should certainly have never remained twelve hours by the Signora Giulietta, if she had not thrilled me with her sweet, fragrant, apple-tart-tones. And, in fact, the apple-tarts would never have so enticed me, if the crooked Hermann had not covered them up so mysteriously with his white apron—and it is aprons, you know, which—but I wander from the subject. I was speaking of the equestrian statue which has so many silver spoons in its body and no soup, and which represents the Prince Elector, Jan Wilhelm.

But my fame still sleeps in the marble quarries of Carrara; the waste paper laurel they've placed on my head hasn't spread its fragrance around the world yet, and when distinguished English ladies in green veils visit Düsseldorf, they skip the famous house and head straight to the Market Place, where they look at the massive black equestrian statue in the center. This statue represents the Prince Elector, Jan Wilhelm. He wears black armor and a long, flowing wig. When I was a kid, I heard that the artist who created this statue watched in horror as it was being cast, realizing he didn’t have enough metal. Then all the townspeople rushed in with their silver spoons, throwing them in to fill the mold; I often stood for hours in front of the statue, wondering how many spoons were used and how many apple tarts all that silver would buy. Apple tarts were my passion back then—now it’s love, truth, freedom, and crab soup—and not far from the Prince Elector's statue, at the theater corner, there was usually a strangely shaped, sabre-legged rascal in a white apron, with a basket full of steaming apple tarts, which he knew how to promote with an irresistible high-pitched voice. "Apple tarts! Fresh! So delicious!" Honestly, whenever the Devil tried to tempt me in later years, he always cried out in that same enticing tone, and I definitely wouldn’t have managed to stay twelve hours with Signora Giulietta if she hadn't thrilled me with her sweet, fragrant, apple-tart tones. And really, the apple tarts wouldn’t have tempted me so much if the crooked Hermann hadn’t covered them up so mysteriously with his white apron—and you know how aprons are—but I’m getting off track. I was talking about the equestrian statue, which has so many silver spoons in its structure and no soup, representing the Prince Elector, Jan Wilhelm.

He must have been a brave gentleman, very fond of art, and skilful himself. He founded the picture gallery in Düsseldorf, and in the observatory there they show a very artistic piece of woodwork, which he, himself, had carved in his leisure hours, of which latter he had every day four-and-twenty.

He must have been a courageous guy, really passionate about art and talented himself. He established the art gallery in Düsseldorf, and in the observatory there’s a beautifully crafted piece of woodwork that he carved during his free time, which he had a full twenty-four hours of every day.

In those days princes were not the persecuted wretches which they now are; the crowns grew firmly on their heads, and at night they drew their night-caps over it and slept peacefully, and their people slumbered peacefully at their feet, and when they awoke in the morning they said, "Good morning, father!" and he replied, "Good morning, dear children!"

In those days, princes were not the tormented souls they’ve become; the crowns fit snugly on their heads, and at night they pulled on their nightcaps and slept soundly, while their people rested peacefully at their feet. When they woke up in the morning, they said, "Good morning, father!" and he responded, "Good morning, dear children!"

But there came a sudden change over all this. One morning when we awoke in Düsseldorf and would say, "Good morning, father!" the father had travelled away, and in the whole town there was nothing but dumb sorrow. Everywhere there was a funeral-like expression, and people slipped silently to the market and read the long paper on the door of the Town Hall. It was bad weather, yet the lean tailor Kilian stood in his nankeen jacket, which he generally wore only at home, and his blue woollen stockings hung down so that his little bare legs peeped out in a troubled way, and his thin lips quivered as he murmured the placard. An old invalid soldier from the Palatine read it rather louder, and at some words a clear tear ran down his white honourable old moustache. I stood near him, crying too, and asked why we were crying? And he replied "The Prince Elector has abdicated." And then he read further, and at the words, "for the long manifested fidelity of my subjects," "and hereby release you from allegiance," he wept still more. It is a strange sight to see, when an old man, in faded uniform, and scarred veteran's face, suddenly bursts into tears. While we read, the Princely Electoral coat of arms was being taken down from the Town Hall, and everything began to appear as anxiously dreary as though we were waiting for an eclipse of the sun. The town councillors went about at an abdicating, wearisome gait; even the omnipotent beadle looked as though he had no more commands to give, and stood calmly indifferent, although the crazy Aloysius stood upon one leg and chattered the names of French generals with foolish grimaces, while the tipsy, crooked Gumpertz rolled around in the gutter, singing ça ira! ça ira!

But then everything suddenly changed. One morning when we woke up in Düsseldorf and said, "Good morning, Dad!" Dad was gone, and there was nothing but silent sorrow in the whole town. There was a funeral-like expression everywhere, and people slipped quietly to the market to read the long notice on the door of the Town Hall. It was bad weather, yet the thin tailor Kilian stood in his house jacket, which he usually only wore at home, and his blue wool stockings sagged so much that his little bare legs peeked out in a troubled way, his thin lips trembling as he mumbled the notice. An old disabled soldier from the Palatine read it a bit louder, and at certain words, a single tear rolled down his white, honorable moustache. I stood near him, crying too, and asked why we were crying. He replied, "The Prince Elector has abdicated." He continued reading, and when he got to the words, "for the long demonstrated loyalty of my subjects," "and hereby release you from allegiance," he cried even more. It’s a strange sight to see an old man in a faded uniform and a scarred veteran’s face suddenly break down in tears. While we read, they were taking down the Princely Electoral coat of arms from the Town Hall, and everything started to feel anxiously bleak, as if we were waiting for a solar eclipse. The town councillors moved around in a slow, tired manner; even the powerful beadle looked like he had no more orders to give, standing there calmly indifferent, while the crazy Aloysius balanced on one leg and chattered the names of French generals with silly faces, and the drunken, crooked Gumpertz rolled in the gutter, singing ça ira! ça ira!

But I went home crying and lamenting, "The Prince Elector has abdicated." My mother might do what she would, I knew what I knew, and went crying to bed, and in the night dreamed that the world had come to an end—the fair flower gardens and green meadows of the world were taken up and rolled away like carpets from the floor, the beadle climbed up on a high ladder and took down the sun, and the tailor Kilian stood by and said to himself, "I must go home and dress myself neatly, for I am dead and am to be buried this afternoon." And it grew darker and darker—a few stars glimmered on high, and even these fell down like yellow leaves in autumn, men gradually vanished, and I, poor child, wandered in anguish around, until before the willow fence of a deserted farm-house I saw a man digging up the earth with a spade, and near him an ugly, spiteful-looking woman, who held something in her apron like a human head, but it was the moon, and she laid it carefully in the open grave—and behind me stood the Palatine soldier sobbing, and spelling, "The Prince Elector has abdicated."

But I went home crying and upset, "The Prince Elector has stepped down." My mother could do whatever she wanted; I knew what I knew, and went to bed in tears. That night, I dreamed that the world had come to an end—the beautiful flower gardens and green meadows were rolled up like carpets from the floor. The beadle climbed a tall ladder and took down the sun, and the tailor Kilian stood by, saying to himself, "I need to go home and dress nicely because I'm dead and I'm being buried this afternoon." It kept getting darker and darker—a few stars sparkled in the sky, and even they fell like yellow leaves in the autumn. People gradually disappeared, and I, poor child, wandered around in anguish until I saw a man digging up the earth with a spade near the willow fence of an abandoned farmhouse. Beside him was an ugly, spiteful-looking woman holding something in her apron that looked like a human head, but it was the moon, which she carefully placed in the open grave. Behind me stood the Palatine soldier, sobbing and saying, "The Prince Elector has stepped down."

When I awoke the sun shone as usual through the window, there was a sound of drums in the street, and as I entered our sitting-room and wished my father—who sat in his white dressing-gown—good morning, I heard the little light-footed barber, as he made up his hair, narrate very minutely that homage would that morning be offered at the Town Hall to the Arch Duke Joachim. I heard, too, that the new ruler was of excellent family, that he had married the sister of the Emperor Napoleon, and was really a very respectable man, that he wore his beautiful black hair in curls, that he would shortly enter the town, and would certainly please all the ladies. Meanwhile, the drumming in the streets continued, and I stood before the house-door and looked at the French troops marching, those joyous and famous people who swept over the world, singing and playing, the merry, serious faces of the grenadiers, the bearskin shakoes, the tri-coloured cockades, the glittering bayonets, the voltigeurs full of vivacity and point d'honneur, and the giant-like silver-laced Tambour Major, who cast his bâton with the gilded head as high as the first storey, and his eyes to the second, where pretty girls gazed from the windows. I was so glad that soldiers were to be quartered in our house—my mother was not glad—and I hastened to the market-place. There everything looked changed; it was as though the world had been new whitewashed. A new coat of arms was placed on the Town Hall, its iron balconies were hung with embroidered velvet drapery, French grenadiers stood as sentinels, the old town councillors had put on new faces and Sunday coats, and looked at each other French fashion, and said, "Bon jour!" ladies peeped from every window, inquisitive citizens and soldiers filled the square, and I, with other boys, climbed on the shining Prince Elector's great bronze horse, and looked down on the motley crowd.

When I woke up, the sun was shining through the window as always, and I could hear drums in the street. As I walked into our living room and greeted my father, who was sitting in his white robe, I listened to the little light-footed barber, who was fixing his hair, tell in great detail that homage was going to be paid that morning at the Town Hall to Arch Duke Joachim. I also heard that the new ruler came from an excellent family, that he had married the sister of Emperor Napoleon, and that he was a very respectable man. He wore his beautiful black hair in curls and would soon be entering the town, and he would definitely please all the ladies. Meanwhile, the drumming in the streets continued, and I stood in front of our door watching the French troops march by—those joyful and famous people who swept across the world, singing and playing, with the merry yet serious faces of the grenadiers, the bearskin hats, the tri-coloured cockades, glimmering bayonets, the lively and proud voltigeurs, and the giant silver-laced Drum Major, who tossed his bâton high enough to reach the first floor while his eyes landed on the second, where pretty girls were peeking out the windows. I was really excited that soldiers were going to be staying in our house—my mother wasn't so thrilled—and I hurried to the market square. Everything there looked different; it was as if the world had just been freshly painted. A new coat of arms had been put up on the Town Hall, its iron balconies were adorned with embroidered velvet drapery, French grenadiers stood as sentinels, and the old town councilors had put on new faces and Sunday coats, looking at each other like the French do and saying, "Bon jour!" Ladies peered out of every window, curious citizens and soldiers filled the square, and I, along with other boys, climbed onto the shining bronze horse of the Prince Elector, looking down at the colorful crowd below.

Neighbour Peter and Long Conrad nearly broke their necks on this occasion, and that would have been well, for the one afterwards ran away from his parents, enlisted as a soldier, deserted, and was finally shot in Mayence, while the other, having made geographical researches in strange pockets, became a working member of a public tread-mill institute. But having broken the iron bands which bound him to his fatherland, he passed safely beyond sea, and eventually died in London, in consequence of wearing a much too long cravat, one end of which happened to be firmly attached to something, just as a royal official removed a plank from beneath his feet.

Neighbor Peter and Long Conrad nearly broke their necks this time, which might have been a good thing, because afterward, one ran away from home, joined the military, deserted, and ended up shot in Mayence, while the other, after exploring some unusual locations, became a working member of a public treadmill institute. However, having broken free from the ties that bound him to his homeland, he safely crossed the ocean and eventually died in London, due to wearing an excessively long cravat, one end of which got stuck to something just as a royal official removed a plank from beneath his feet.

Long Conrad told us there was no school to-day on account of the homage. We had to wait a long time till this was over. At last the balcony of the Council House was filled with gay gentlemen, flags and trumpets, and our burgomaster, in his celebrated red coat, delivered an oration, which stretched out like India rubber, or like a night-cap into which one has thrown a stone—only that it was not the stone of wisdom—and I could distinctly understand many of his phrases, for instance, that "we are now to be made happy"—and at the last words the trumpets and drums sounded, and the flags waved, and the people cried Hurrah!—and as I myself cried Hurrah! I held fast to the old Prince Elector. And that was necessary, for I began to grow giddy; it seemed to me that the people were standing on their heads while the world whizzed around, and the Prince Elector, with his long wig, nodded and whispered, "Hold fast to me!"—and not till the cannon re-echoed along the wall did I become sobered, and climbed slowly down from the great bronze horse.

Long Conrad told us there was no school today because of the celebration. We had to wait a long time for it to finish. Eventually, the balcony of the Council House was filled with cheerful gentlemen, flags, and trumpets, and our mayor, in his famous red coat, gave a speech that stretched on like rubber or like a nightcap into which someone has thrown a stone—only it wasn't the stone of wisdom—and I could clearly understand many of his phrases, like "we are now to be made happy"—and at those last words, the trumpets and drums played, the flags waved, and the crowd cheered Hurrah!—and as I shouted Hurrah! I clung tightly to the old Prince Elector. That was necessary because I was starting to feel dizzy; it looked to me like the people were standing on their heads while the world spun around, and the Prince Elector, with his long wig, nodded and whispered, "Hold on to me!"—and it wasn't until the cannons echoed along the wall that I started to feel steady again and climbed down slowly from the great bronze horse.

As I went home I saw crazy Aloysius again dancing on one leg, while he chattered the names of French generals, and crooked Gumpertz was rolling in the gutter drunk, and growling ça ira, ça ira—and I said to my mother that we were all to be made happy, and so there was no school to-day.

As I was heading home, I saw wild Aloysius again, dancing on one leg and shouting out the names of French generals, while crooked Gumpertz was sprawled in the gutter, drunk, and mumbling ça ira, ça ira—I told my mother that we were all going to be happy, so there wasn't any school today.

CHAPTER VII.

The next day the world was again all in order, and we had school as before, and things were got by heart as before—the Roman kings, chronology—the nomina in im, the verba irregularia—Greek, Hebrew, geography, German, mental arithmetic—Lord! my head is still giddy with it!—all must be learnt by heart. And much of it was eventually to my advantage. For had I not learnt the Roman kings by heart, it would subsequently have been a matter of perfect indifference to me whether Niebuhr had or had not proved that they never really existed. And had I not learnt chronology, how could I ever, in later years, have found out anyone in Berlin, where one house is as like another as drops of water, or as grenadiers, and where it is impossible to find a friend unless you have the number of his house in your head. Therefore I associated with every friend some historical event which had happened in a year corresponding to the number of his house, so that the one recalled the other, and some curious point in history always occurred to me whenever I met an acquaintance. For instance, when I met my tailor I at once thought of the Battle of Marathon; if I saw the well-dressed banker, Christian Gumpel, I remembered the destruction of Jerusalem; if a Portuguese friend, deeply in debt, of the flight of Mahomet; if the University Judge, a man whose probity is well known, of the death of Haman; and if Wadzeck, I was at once reminded of Cleopatra.—Ach, lieber Himmel! the poor creature is dead now, our tears are dry, and we may say of her, with Hamlet, "Take her for all in all, she was a hag—we oft shall look upon her like again!" As I said, chronology is necessary. I know men who have nothing in their heads but a few years, yet who know exactly where to look for the right houses, and are, moreover, regular professors. But oh, the trouble I had at school with dates!—and it went even worse with arithmetic. I understood subtraction best, and for this I had a very practical rule—"Four from three won't go, I must borrow one"—but I advise everyone, in such a case, to borrow a few extra shillings, for one never knows.

The next day, everything was back to normal, and we had school just like before. We learned things by heart again—the Roman kings, chronology—the nomina in im, the verba irregularia—Greek, Hebrew, geography, German, mental math—oh my, my head is still spinning from it!—everything had to be memorized. Much of it ended up being useful for me. If I hadn’t memorized the Roman kings, it wouldn’t have mattered to me whether Niebuhr proved they ever existed. And without learning chronology, how could I have ever, later on, found anyone in Berlin, where every house looks just like another, like drops of water or soldiers, and where it's impossible to find a friend without knowing their house number? So, I linked each friend to a historical event that happened in a year corresponding to their house number, making it easier to remember both. For instance, when I saw my tailor, I immediately thought of the Battle of Marathon; if I ran into the well-dressed banker, Christian Gumpel, I thought of the destruction of Jerusalem; if a Portuguese friend, who was deep in debt, reminded me of the flight of Mahomet; if I encountered the University Judge, known for his integrity, I thought of Haman’s death; and if Wadzeck showed up, Cleopatra came to mind. Oh, dear heaven! The poor thing is gone now, our tears have dried, and we can say of her, like Hamlet, "Take her for all in all, she was a hag—we often shall look upon her kind again!" As I said, chronology is essential. I know people who only remember a few years, yet they know exactly where to find the right houses and are regular professors. But oh, did I struggle with dates in school!—and arithmetic was even worse. I grasped subtraction best, thanks to a practical rule—"You can’t take four from three; I need to borrow one"—but I suggest that everyone in such situations borrow a few extra coins, because you never know.

But as for the Latin, Madame, you can really have no idea how muddled it is. The Romans would never have found time to conquer the world if they had been obliged first to learn Latin. Those happy people knew in their cradles the nouns with an accusative in im. I, on the contrary, had to learn them by heart, in the sweat of my brow, but still it is well that I knew them. For if, for example, when I publicly disputed in Latin, in the College Hall of Göttingen, on the 20th of July 1825—Madame, it was well worth while to hear it—if, I say, I had said sinapem instead of sinapim, the blunder would have been evident to the Freshmen, and an endless shame for me. Vis, buris, sitis, tussis, cucumis, amussis, cannabis, sinapis—these words, which have attracted so much attention in the world, effected this, because they belonged to a determined class, and yet were exceptions; on that account I value them highly, and the fact that I have them ready at my finger's ends when I perhaps need them in a hurry affords me in many dark hours of life much internal tranquillity and consolation. But, Madame, the verba irregularia—they are distinguished from the verbis regularibus by the fact that in learning them one gets more whippings—are terribly difficult. In the damp arches of the Franciscan cloister near our school-room there hung a large crucified Christ of grey wood, a dismal image, that even yet at times marches through my dreams and gazes sorrowfully on me with fixed bleeding eyes—before this image I often stood and prayed, "Oh thou poor and equally tormented God, if it be possible for thee, see that I get by heart the irregular verbs!"

But as for the Latin, Madame, you really can't imagine how confusing it is. The Romans would never have had time to conquer the world if they had first needed to master Latin. Those fortunate folks knew the accusative nouns with an im from a young age. I, on the other hand, had to memorize them, sweating over my brow, but I’m glad I learned them. For instance, if I had mistakenly said sinapem instead of sinapim during my Latin debate in the College Hall of Göttingen on July 20, 1825—Madame, it was definitely worth hearing—it would have been obvious to the Freshmen and would have brought me endless shame. Vis, buris, sitis, tussis, cucumis, amussis, cannabis, sinapis—these words, which have drawn so much attention in the world, accomplished this because they belong to a specific category, yet are exceptions; for that reason, I value them highly, and the fact that I can recall them quickly when I might need them brings me much peace and comfort during difficult times. But, Madame, the verba irregularia—they stand apart from the verbis regularibus because learning them often results in more whippings—are incredibly tough. In the damp arches of the Franciscan cloister near our classroom, there hung a large crucified Christ made of grey wood, a dreary image that still sometimes appears in my dreams, looking at me sorrowfully with its fixed bleeding eyes—before this image, I often stood and prayed, "Oh you poor and equally tormented God, if it’s possible for you, please help me memorize the irregular verbs!"

I will say nothing of Greek; I should irritate myself too much. The monks of the Middle Ages were not so very much in the wrong when they asserted that Greek was an invention of the Devil. Lord knows what I suffered through it. It went better with Hebrew, for I always had a great predilection for the Jews, although they to this very hour have crucified my good name; but I never could get so far in Hebrew as my watch, which had an intimate intercourse with pawnbrokers, and in consequence acquired many Jewish habits—for instance, it would not go on Saturday—and learned the holy language, and was subsequently occupied with its grammar, for often when sleepless in the night I have to my amazement heard it industriously repeating: katal, katalta, katalkikittel, kittalta, kittaltipokat, pokadetipikatpikpik.

I won't say anything about Greek; it would just frustrate me too much. The monks of the Middle Ages weren't entirely wrong when they claimed that Greek was the Devil's creation. God knows what I went through with it. Hebrew was easier for me because I always had a strong liking for the Jews, even though they still have tarnished my reputation to this day; but I could never get further in Hebrew than my watch, which had a close relationship with pawnbrokers and, as a result, picked up many Jewish habits—for instance, it wouldn’t work on Saturdays—and learned the holy language, eventually getting into its grammar. Often, when I couldn't sleep at night, I was amazed to hear it diligently repeating: katal, katalta, katalkikittel, kittalta, kittaltipokat, pokadetipikatpikpik.

Meanwhile I learned much more German, and that is not such child's play. For we poor Germans, who have already been sufficiently plagued with soldiers quartered on us, military duties, poll-taxes, and a thousand other exactions, must needs, over and above all this, torment each other with accusatives and datives. I learned much German from the old Rector Schallmeyer, a brave, clerical gentleman, whose protégé I was from childhood. Something of the matter I also learned from Professor Schramm, a man who had written a book on Eternal Peace, and in whose class my school-fellows fought with especial vigour.

Meanwhile, I learned a lot more German, and it's not as easy as it sounds. We poor Germans, who have already been burdened with soldiers staying with us, military duties, poll taxes, and countless other demands, also have to complicate things by tormenting each other with accusatives and datives. I learned a lot of German from the old Rector Schallmeyer, a brave, kind gentleman, who had been my mentor since childhood. I also picked up some of the language from Professor Schramm, a man who wrote a book on Eternal Peace, and in whose class my classmates fought especially hard.

And while thus dashing on in a breath, and thinking of everything, I have unexpectedly found myself back among old school stories, and I avail myself of this opportunity to show you, Madame, that it was not my fault if I learned so little geography, that later in life I could not make my way in the world. For in those days the French had deranged all boundaries, every day countries were recoloured; those which were once blue suddenly became green, many even blood-red; the old established rules were so confused and confounded that no Devil would recognise them. The products of the country also changed, chickory and beets now grew where only hares and hunters running after them were once to be seen; even the characters of different races changed—the Germans became pliant, the French paid compliments no longer, the English ceased making ducks and drakes of their money, and the Venetians were not subtle enough; there was promotion among princes, old kings obtained new uniforms, new kingdoms were cooked up and sold like hot cakes, many potentates, on the other hand, were chased from house and home, and had to find some new way of earning their bread, while others went at once at a trade, and manufactured, for instance, sealing-wax, or—Madame, this sentence must be brought to an end, or I shall be out of breath—in short, it is impossible in such times to advance far in geography.

And while rushing forward and thinking about everything, I unexpectedly found myself back in old school stories, and I want to take this opportunity to show you, Madame, that it wasn't my fault for learning so little geography that later in life I couldn't navigate the world. Back then, the French had messed up all the boundaries; countries were being re-colored every day—those that were once blue suddenly became green, many even turned blood-red; the established rules were so jumbled that no one would recognize them. The products of the land also changed; chicory and beets now grew where only hares and hunters used to be seen; even the characteristics of different races shifted—the Germans became flexible, the French stopped giving compliments, the English stopped wasting their money, and the Venetians were not subtle enough; there were promotions among princes, old kings got new uniforms, new kingdoms were created and sold like hot cakes, while many rulers were chased from their homes and had to find new ways to make a living, while others jumped into trades, manufacturing things like sealing-wax, or—Madame, I need to wrap this up, or I'll be out of breath—in short, it's impossible to get very far in geography during such times.

I succeeded better in natural history, for there we find fewer changes, and we always have standard engravings of apes, kangaroos, zebras, rhinoceroses, etc. And having many such pictures in my memory, it often happens that at first sight many mortals appear to me like old acquaintances.

I did better in natural history because there are fewer changes, and we always have reliable illustrations of apes, kangaroos, zebras, rhinoceroses, and so on. With so many of these images in my memory, I often find that at first glance, a lot of people seem like old friends.

I did well in mythology; I took real delight in the mob of gods and goddesses who ruled the world in joyous nakedness. I do not believe that there was a schoolboy in ancient Rome who knew the chief articles of his catechism—that is, the loves of Venus—better than I. To tell the truth, it seems to me that if we must learn all the heathen gods by heart, we might as well have kept them from the first, and we have not perhaps made so much out of our New Roman Trinity or even our Jewish monotheism. Perhaps that mythology was not in reality so immoral as we imagine, and it was, for example, a very decent thought of Homer's to give the much-loved Venus a husband.

I excelled in mythology; I genuinely enjoyed the crowd of gods and goddesses who ruled the world in joyful nudity. I don’t think there was a schoolboy in ancient Rome who understood the key aspects of his catechism—that is, the loves of Venus—better than I did. To be honest, it seems to me that if we have to memorize all the pagan gods, we might as well have kept them from the start, and perhaps we haven’t gained much from our New Roman Trinity or even our Jewish monotheism. Maybe that mythology wasn’t as immoral as we think, and it was, for example, a commendable idea from Homer to give the beloved Venus a husband.

But I succeeded best of all in the French class of the Abbé d'Aulnoi, a French emigré who had written a number of grammars, and wore a red wig, and jumped about very nervously when he recited his Art poétique, and his Histoire Allemande. He was the only one in the whole gymnasium who taught German history. Still French has its difficulties, and to learn it there must be much quartering of troops, much drumming in, much apprendre par cœur, and above all, no one should be a bête allemande. Thus many bitter words came in. I remember still, as though it happened yesterday, the scrapes I got into through la réligion. Six times came the question:—"Henry, what is the French for 'the faith?'" And six times, ever more tearfully, I replied, "It is called le crédit." And at the seventh question, with a deep cherry-red face, my furious examiner cried, "It is called la réligion"—and there was a rain of blows, and all my school-fellows laughed. Madame!—since that day I can never hear the word réligion but my back turns pale with terror, and my cheeks red with shame. And to speak truly, le crédit has during my life stood me in better stead than la réligion. It occurs to me at this moment that I still owe the landlord of the Lion, in Bologna, five thalers. And I pledge you my word of honour that I would owe him five thalers more if I could only be certain that I should never again hear that unlucky word, la réligion.

But I did the best in the French class taught by Abbé d'Aulnoi, a French emigré who had written several grammars, wore a red wig, and tended to jump around nervously when reciting his Art poétique and Histoire Allemande. He was the only one in the entire gymnasium who taught German history. Still, French has its challenges, and to learn it, there had to be a lot of drills, plenty of repetition, lots of apprendre par cœur, and above all, no one should be a bête allemande. This led to many harsh words. I still remember, as if it were yesterday, the trouble I got into because of la réligion. Six times I was asked: "Henry, what is the French word for 'the faith?'" And six times, increasingly tearfully, I answered, "It is called le crédit." Then at the seventh question, with my face bright red, my angry examiner shouted, "It is called la réligion"—and I got a barrage of blows, while all my classmates laughed. Madame!—since that day, I can't hear the word réligion without my back going cold with fear and my cheeks burning with shame. To be honest, le crédit has been more useful to me throughout my life than la réligion. It just occurred to me that I still owe the landlord of the Lion in Bologna five thalers. And I swear on my honor that I'd owe him five thalers more if I could just be sure I would never have to hear that dreaded word, la réligion, again.

Parbleu, Madame! I have succeeded well in French! I understand not only patois, but even aristocratic nurse-maid French. Not long ago, when in noble society, I understood full one-half of the conversation of two German countesses, each of whom could count at least sixty-four years, and as many ancestors. Yes, in the Café Royal, at Berlin, I once heard Monsieur Hans Michel Martens talking French, and understood every word, though there was no understanding in it. We must know the spirit of a language, and this is best learned by drumming. Parbleu! how much do I not owe to the French Drummer who was so long quartered in our house, who looked like a Devil, and yet had the heart of an angel, and who drummed so excellently.

Goodness, Madame! I've done really well in French! I understand not just slang, but even the fancy French of aristocratic nannies. Not too long ago, while in high society, I grasped at least half of the conversation between two German countesses, each of whom was at least sixty-four years old with a long line of ancestors. Yes, at the Café Royal in Berlin, I once heard Monsieur Hans Michel Martens speaking French, and I understood every word, even though it made no sense. We need to get the essence of a language, and the best way to learn that is by drumming. Goodness! How much do I owe to the French Drummer who stayed with us for so long, who looked like a devil, but had the heart of an angel, and who drummed so incredibly well.

He was a little, nervous figure, with a terrible black moustache, beneath which the red lips turned suddenly outwards, while his fiery eyes glanced around.

He was a small, anxious figure, with a terrible black mustache, beneath which his red lips curled outwards, while his fiery eyes darted around.

I, a youngster, stuck to him like a burr, and helped him to rub his military buttons like mirrors, and to pipe-clay his vest—for Monsieur Le Grand liked to look well—and I followed him to the watch, to the roll-call, to the parade—in those times there was nothing but the gleam of weapons and merriment—les jours de fête sont passés! Monsieur Le Grand knew only a little broken German, only the chief expressions—"Bread," "Kiss," "Honour"—but he could make himself very intelligible with his drum. For instance, if I did not know what the word liberté meant, he drummed the Marseillaise—and I understood him. If I did not understand the word egalité, he drummed the march, "Ca ira, ... les aristocrats à la lanterne!" and I understood him. If I did not know what bêtise meant, he drummed the Dessauer March, which we Germans, as Goethe also declares, have drummed in Champagne—and I understood him. He once wanted to explain to me the word l'Allemagne, and he drummed the all too simple primeval melody, which on market days is played to dancing dogs—namely, dum—dum—dum.[7] I was vexed, but I understood him.

I, a kid, stuck to him like glue and helped him polish his military buttons until they shined like mirrors, and cleaned his vest—Monsieur Le Grand liked to look sharp—and I followed him to the watch, to roll-call, to the parade—in those days, it was all about the shine of weapons and laughter—les jours de fête sont passés! Monsieur Le Grand only knew a bit of broken German, just the key phrases—"Bread," "Kiss," "Honor"—but he could communicate really well with his drum. For example, if I didn’t know what the word liberté meant, he would drum the Marseillaise, and I got it. If I didn’t understand the word egalité, he drummed the march, "Ca ira, ... les aristocrats à la lanterne!" and I understood him. If I was confused by the word bêtise, he drummed the Dessauer March, which we Germans, as Goethe also said, have beaten out in Champagne—and I got it. He once tried to explain the word l'Allemagne to me, and he drummed the simple, primal melody that’s played for dancing dogs on market days—namely, dum—dum—dum.[7] I was annoyed, but I understood him.

In the same way he taught me modern history. I did not understand the words, it is true, but as he constantly drummed while speaking, I knew what he meant. At bottom this is the best method. The history of the storming of the Bastille, of the Tuilleries, and the like, we understand first when we know how the drumming was done. In our school compendiums of history we merely read: "Their excellencies, the Baron and Count, with the most noble spouses of the aforesaid, were beheaded. Their highnesses the Dukes, and Princes, with the most noble spouses of the aforesaid, were beheaded. His Majesty the King, with his most sublime spouse, the Queen, was beheaded." But when you hear the red guillotine march drummed, you understand it correctly, for the first time, and you know the how and the why. Madame, that is indeed a wonderful march! It thrilled through marrow and bone when I first heard it, and I was glad that I forgot it. One forgets so much as one grows older, and a young man has now-a-days so much other knowledge to keep in his head—whist, Boston, genealogical tables, parliamentary data, dramaturgy, the liturgy, carving—and yet, notwithstanding all jogging up of my brain, I could not for a long time recall that tremendous tune! But, only think, Madame! not long ago I sat at table with a whole menagerie of Counts, Princes, Princesses, Chamberlains, Court-marshallesses, Seneschals, Upper Court Mistresses, Court-keepers-of-the-royal-plate, Court-hunters' wives, and whatever else these aristocratic domestics are termed, and their under-domestics ran about behind their chairs and shoved full plates before their mouths—but I, who was passed by and neglected, sat without the least occupation for my jaws, and I kneaded little bread-balls, and drummed for ennui with my fingers—and, to my astonishment, I suddenly drummed the red, long-forgotten guillotine march!

In the same way he taught me modern history. I didn’t understand the words, it's true, but since he kept drumming while he spoke, I knew what he meant. At the core, this is the best method. We really grasp the history of the storming of the Bastille, the Tuileries, and similar events once we understand how the drumming was done. In our school history books, we only read: "Their Excellencies, the Baron and Count, along with the most noble spouses of the former, were beheaded. Their Highnesses the Dukes and Princes, along with the most noble spouses of the former, were beheaded. His Majesty the King, along with his most sublime spouse, the Queen, was beheaded." But when you hear the red guillotine march drummed, you truly understand it, for the first time, and you grasp the how and the why. Madame, that is indeed a fantastic march! It thrilled me to the core when I first heard it, and I was relieved that I forgot it. You forget so much as you get older, and a young man these days has so much other knowledge to keep in his head—whist, Boston, family trees, parliamentary information, dramaturgy, the liturgy, carving—and yet, despite all the mental jogging, I couldn’t recall that powerful tune for a long time! But, just think, Madame! Not long ago, I sat at a table with a whole collection of Counts, Princes, Princesses, Chamberlains, Court Marshals, Seneschals, Upper Court Mistresses, and others with fancy titles, while their servants rushed around behind their chairs, placing full plates in front of them—but I, who was overlooked and ignored, sat there with nothing to occupy my mouth, kneading little bread balls and drumming out of boredom with my fingers—and, to my surprise, I suddenly started drumming the long-forgotten red guillotine march!

"And what happened?" Madame, the good people were not disturbed in their eating, nor did they know that other people, when they have nothing to eat, suddenly begin to drum, and that, too, very queer marches, which people thought long forgotten.

"And what happened?" Madame, the good people weren’t bothered while they ate, nor did they realize that some people, when they have nothing to eat, suddenly start drumming, playing very strange marches that others thought were long forgotten.

Is drumming, now, an inborn talent, or was it early developed in me?—enough, it lies in my limbs, in my hands, in my feet, and often manifests itself involuntarily. I once sat at Berlin in the lecture-room of the Privy Councillor Schmaltz, a man who had saved the state by his book on the "Red and Black Coat Danger."—You remember, perhaps, Madame, out of Pausanias, that by the braying of an ass an equally dangerous plot was once discovered, and you also know from Livy, or from Becker's History of the World, that geese once saved the capitol, and you must certainly know from Sallust that a loquacious putain, the Lady Livia, brought the terrible conspiracy of Cataline to light. But to return to the mutton aforesaid. I listened to international law in the lecture-room of the Herr Privy Councillor Schmaltz, and it was a sleepy summer afternoon, and I sat on the bench and heard less and less—my head had gone to sleep—when all at once I was wakened by the noise of my own feet, which had stayed awake, and had probably observed that the exact opposite of international law and constitutional tendencies was being preached, and my feet which, with the little eyes of their corns, had seen more of how things go in the world than the Privy Councillor with his Juno-eyes—these poor dumb feet, incapable of expressing their immeasurable meaning by words, strove to make themselves intelligible by drumming, and they drummed so loudly, that I thereby nearly came to grief.

Is drumming an innate talent, or was it developed in me from an early age? Either way, it’s in my limbs, in my hands, in my feet, and often comes out involuntarily. I once sat in Berlin in the lecture room of Privy Councillor Schmaltz, a man who had saved the state with his book on the "Red and Black Coat Danger." You might remember, Madame, from Pausanias, that a dangerous plot was once uncovered by the braying of a donkey, and you also know from Livy, or from Becker's History of the World, that geese once saved the Capitol. And surely, you know from Sallust that a garrulous putain, Lady Livia, exposed the terrible conspiracy of Catiline. But back to my previous point. I was listening to international law in the lecture room of Herr Privy Councillor Schmaltz on a sleepy summer afternoon, sitting on the bench and hearing less and less—my head had dozed off—when suddenly I was jolted awake by the sound of my own feet, which had stayed alert and were likely noticing that the opposite of international law and constitutional tendencies was being preached. My feet, with the little eyes of their corns, had seen more about how things work in the world than the Privy Councillor with his Juno-like gaze. These poor mute feet, unable to express their profound feelings in words, tried to communicate by drumming, and they drummed so loudly that I nearly got into trouble.

Cursed, unreflecting feet! They once played me a similar trick, when I on a time in Göttengen sponged without subscribing on the lectures of Professor Saalfeld, and as, with his angular activity, he jumped about here and there in his pulpit, and heated himself in order to curse the Emperor Napoleon in regular set style,—no, my poor feet, I cannot blame you for drumming then; indeed, I would not have blamed you if in your dumb naïveté you had expressed yourselves by still more energetic movements. How could I, the scholar of Le Grand, hear the Emperor cursed? The Emperor! the Emperor! the great Emperor!

Cursed, thoughtless feet! They once played me a similar trick when I, back in Göttingen, took advantage of the lectures of Professor Saalfeld without actually signing up. As he jumped around in his pulpit with his angular energy, getting heated as he cursed Emperor Napoleon in his usual style—no, my poor feet, I can’t blame you for drumming back then; honestly, I wouldn’t have blamed you if you had expressed yourselves with even more energetic movements. How could I, the student of Le Grand, listen to the Emperor being cursed? The Emperor! The Emperor! The great Emperor!

When I think of the great Emperor, my thoughts again grow summer-green and golden; a long avenue of lindens rises blooming around, on the leafy twigs sit singing nightingales, the water-fall rustles, flowers are growing from full round beds, dreamily nodding their fair heads—I was once wondrously intimate with them; the rouged tulips, proud as beggars, condescendingly greeted me, the nervous sick lilies nodded with melancholy tenderness, the drunken red roses laughed at me from afar, the night-violets sighed—with the myrtles and laurels I was not then acquainted, for they did not entice with a shining bloom, but the mignonette, with whom I now stand so badly, was very intimate. I am speaking of the court garden of Düsseldorf, where I often lay upon the bank, and piously listened while Monsieur Le Grand told of the warlike feats of the great Emperor, beating meanwhile the marches which were drummed during the deeds, so that I saw and heard all to the life. I saw the passage over the Simplon—the Emperor in advance and his brave grenadiers climbing on behind him, while the scream of frightened birds of prey sounded around, and avalanches thundered in the distance—I saw the Emperor with flag in hand on the bridge of Lodi—I saw the Emperor in his grey cloak at Marengo—I saw the Emperor mounted in the battle of the Pyramids—naught around save powder-smoke and Mamelukes—I saw the Emperor in the battle of Austerlitz—ha! how the bullets whistled over the smooth, icy road!—I saw, I heard the battle of Jena—dum, dum, dum.—I saw, I heard the battles of Eylau, of Wagram—— ah, I could hardly bear it! Monsieur Le Grand drummed so that the drums of my ears nearly burst.

When I think of the great Emperor, my mind fills with summer greens and golds; a long avenue of linden trees blooms around me, with nightingales singing on the leafy branches, the waterfall gently rustling, flowers growing from full, round beds, dreamily nodding their beautiful heads—I used to be wonderfully close to them; the vibrant tulips, proud like beggars, greeted me with condescension, the delicate lilies nodded with a melancholic kindness, the bold red roses laughed at me from a distance, and the night violets sighed—back then, I wasn't familiar with the myrtles and laurels, as they didn't allure with bright blooms, but the mignonette, whom I now find difficult to meet, was once a close friend. I’m talking about the court garden in Düsseldorf, where I often lay on the bank and listened reverently while Monsieur Le Grand recounted tales of the Emperor’s heroic feats, drumming along to the marches played during those events, making me see and hear it all vividly. I witnessed the crossing over the Simplon—the Emperor leading the way, his brave grenadiers climbing up behind him, with the cries of scared birds of prey echoing around and avalanches rumbling in the distance—I saw the Emperor with the flag in hand on the bridge of Lodi—I saw him in his grey cloak at Marengo—I saw the Emperor mounted during the battle of the Pyramids—nothing around him but gunpowder smoke and Mamelukes—I saw the Emperor in the battle of Austerlitz—oh! how the bullets whistled over the smooth, icy road!—I saw, I heard the battle of Jena—dum, dum, dum.—I saw, I heard the battles of Eylau and Wagram—ah, it was almost too much to bear! Monsieur Le Grand drummed so intensely that my eardrums nearly burst.

CHAPTER VIII.

But what were my feelings when I saw with my own highly-graced eyes himself? Hosannah! the Emperor!

But what were my feelings when I saw him with my own privileged eyes? Hosanna! The Emperor!

It was in that very avenue of the Court Garden at Düsseldorf. As I pressed through the gaping crowd, thinking of the doughty deeds and battles which Monsieur Le Grand had drummed to me, my heart beat the "general march"—yet at the same time I thought of the police regulation, that no one should dare ride through the avenue under penalty of a fine of five thalers. And the Emperor with his retinue rode directly down the avenue. The trembling trees bowed towards him as he advanced, the sunbeams quivered, frightened, yet curious, through the green leaves, and in the blue heaven above there swam visibly a golden star. The Emperor wore his invisible-green uniform and the little world-renowned hat. He rode a white steed, which stepped with such calm pride, so confidently, so nobly—had I then been Crown Prince of Prussia I would have envied that steed. Carelessly, almost lazily, sat the Emperor, holding his rein with one hand, and with the other good-naturedly patting the horse's neck. It was a sunny, marble hand, a mighty hand—one of those two hands which bound fast the many-headed monster of anarchy, and ordered the war of races—and it good-naturedly patted the horse's neck. Even the face had that hue which we find in the marble of Greek and Roman busts; the traits were as nobly cut as in the antique, and on that face was written, "Thou shalt have no Gods before me." A smile, which warmed and soothed every heart, flitted over the lips—and yet all knew that those lips needed but to whistle—et la Prusse n'existait plus—those lips needed but to whistle—and the entire clergy would have stopped their ringing and singing—those lips needed but to whistle—and the entire holy Roman empire would have danced. And those lips smiled and the eye smiled too. It was an eye clear as Heaven; it could read the hearts of men, it saw at a glance all the things of this world, while we others see them only one by one and by their coloured shadows. The brow was not so clear, the phantoms of future battles were nestling there; there was a quiver which swept over that brow, and those were the creative thoughts, the great seven-mile-boot thoughts, wherewith the spirit of the Emperor strode invisibly over the world—and I believe that every one of those thoughts would have given to a German author full material wherewith to write, all the days of his life.

It was on that very avenue of the Court Garden in Düsseldorf. As I pushed through the bustling crowd, recalling the brave exploits and battles that Monsieur Le Grand had shared with me, my heart beat in rhythm with the “general march”—yet I also remembered the police rule that no one was allowed to ride down the avenue or face a fine of five thalers. The Emperor, along with his entourage, rode straight down the avenue. The trembling trees bowed to him as he approached, the sunbeams flickered, scared yet intrigued, through the green leaves, and a golden star visibly floated in the blue sky above. The Emperor wore his eye-catching green uniform and the famous little hat. He rode a white horse that moved with calm pride, confidence, and nobility—had I been the Crown Prince of Prussia, I would have envied that horse. The Emperor sat casually, almost lazily, holding the reins in one hand while gently patting the horse’s neck with the other. It was a sunny, marble-like hand, a powerful hand—one of the two hands that firmly controlled the many-headed monster of anarchy and managed the race wars—and it kindly patted the horse’s neck. Even his face had that color found in the marble of Greek and Roman busts; his features were as classically defined as in ancient art, and that face seemed to command, “You shall have no gods before me.” A smile, warm and comforting to all, flickered across his lips—and still, everyone knew that those lips needed only to whistle—et la Prusse n'existait plus—those lips needed only to whistle—and the entire clergy would have silenced their bells and hymns—those lips needed only to whistle—and the whole Holy Roman Empire would have danced. And those lips smiled, and his eyes smiled too. His eyes were as clear as Heaven; they could read the hearts of men, perceiving the world at a glance, while the rest of us see things one by one and only through their colored shadows. His brow wasn’t as clear; the specters of future battles lingered there; a tremor swept across that brow, representing the creative thoughts, the grand seven-league boot ideas, with which the Emperor’s spirit strode invisibly across the world—and I believe each of those thoughts could have given a German author ample material to write about for the rest of his life.

The Emperor rode quietly straight through the avenue. No policeman opposed him; proudly, on snorting horses and laden with gold and jewels, rode his retinue; the drums were beating, the trumpets were sounding; close to me the wild Aloysius was muttering his general's name; not far away the drunken Gumpertz was grumbling, and the people shouted with a thousand voices, "Long live the Emperor!"

The Emperor rode smoothly down the avenue. No police stopped him; proudly, on snorting horses loaded with gold and jewels, rode his entourage; the drums were beating, the trumpets were blaring; nearby, the wild Aloysius was muttering his general's name; not far away, the drunken Gumpertz was grumbling, and the crowd shouted with a thousand voices, "Long live the Emperor!"

CHAPTER IX.

The Emperor is dead. On a waste island in the Atlantic ocean is his lonely grave, and he for whom the world was too narrow lies quietly under a little hillock, where five weeping willows hang their green heads, and a little brook, murmuring sorrowfully, ripples by. There is no inscription on his tomb; but Clio, with a just pen, has written thereon, invisible words, which will resound, like spirit-tones, through thousands of years.

The Emperor is dead. On a desolate island in the Atlantic Ocean lies his lonely grave, and he, for whom the world was too small, rests quietly under a small hill, where five weeping willows bow their green heads, and a little brook, sadly murmuring, flows by. There’s no inscription on his tomb; but Clio, with her fair pen, has written there invisible words that will echo, like ghostly sounds, through thousands of years.

Britannia! the sea is thine. But the sea has not water enough to wash away the shame with which the death of that Mighty One has covered thee. Not thy windy Sir Hudson—no, thou thyself wert the Sicilian bravo with whom perjured kings bargained, that they might revenge on the man of the people that which the people had once inflicted on one of themselves.—And he was thy guest, and had seated himself by thy hearth.

Britannia! the sea belongs to you. But the sea doesn't have enough water to wash away the shame that the death of that Great One has brought upon you. Not your breezy Sir Hudson—no, you yourself were the Sicilian thug with whom dishonest kings colluded, so they could take revenge on the man of the people for what the people had once done to one of their own. —And he was your guest, and had made himself comfortable by your fireside.

Until far ages the boys of France will sing and tell of the terrible hospitality of the Bellerophon, and when those songs of mockery and tears resound across the Channel, the cheeks of every honourable Briton will blush. Some day, however, this song will ring thither, and Britannia will be no more; the people of pride will be humbled to the earth, Westminster's monuments will be broken, and the royal dust which they enclosed forgotten.—And St. Helena is the Holy Grave, whither the races of the East and of the West will make their pilgrimage in ships with flags of many a colour, and their hearts will grow strong with great memories of the deeds of the worldly Saviour, who suffered and died under Hudson Lowe, as it is written in the evangelists, Las Cases, O'Meara, and Autommarchi.

Until long into the future, the boys of France will sing and talk about the terrible hospitality of the Bellerophon, and when those songs of mockery and tears echo across the Channel, the faces of every honorable Briton will turn red. However, someday this song will reach across, and Britannia will cease to exist; the proud people will be brought low, Westminster's monuments will be shattered, and the royal remains they housed will be forgotten. And St. Helena will be the Holy Grave, where people from the East and the West will voyage in ships adorned with flags of many colors, and their hearts will grow strong with the great memories of the worldly Savior, who suffered and died under Hudson Lowe, as written by the evangelists, Las Cases, O'Meara, and Autommarchi.

Strange! A terrible destiny has already overtaken the three greatest enemies of the Emperor. Londonderry has cut his throat, Louis XVIII. has rotted away on his throne, and Professor Saalfeld is still Professor in Göttingen.

Strange! A terrible fate has already befallen the three greatest enemies of the Emperor. Londonderry has slit his throat, Louis XVIII has decayed on his throne, and Professor Saalfeld is still a Professor in Göttingen.

CHAPTER X.

On a clear, frosty autumn morning, a young man of student-like appearance slowly loitered through the avenue of the Düsseldorf Court Garden, often, with childlike pleasure, kicking aside the leaves which covered the ground, and often sorrowfully gazing towards the bare trees, on which a few golden-hued leaves still hung. As he thus gazed up, he thought on the words of Glaucus—

On a clear, chilly autumn morning, a young man who looked like a student wandered slowly through the Düsseldorf Court Garden, frequently kicking aside the leaves on the ground with a childlike joy and often sadly looking at the bare trees where a few golden leaves still clung. As he gazed up, he remembered the words of Glaucus—

"Like the leaves in the forests, so are the races of mortals;
Leaves are blown down to the earth by the wind, while others are shooting
Again in the green budding wood, when fresh up-liveth the spring-tide;
So are the races of man—this grows and the other departeth."

"Just like the leaves in the forests, so are the various races of people;
Some leaves are blown to the ground by the wind, while others are starting to grow.
Once more in the lush green woods, as spring awakens;
"Just like the races of humanity—some succeed while others disappear."

In earlier days the youth had gazed with far different eyes on the same trees. He was then a boy, and sought birds' nests or summer insects, which delighted him as they merrily hummed around, and were glad in the beautiful world, and contented with a sap-green leaf and a drop of water, with a warm sunbeam and the sweet perfumes of the grass. In those times the boy's heart was as gay as the fluttering insects. But now his heart had grown older, its little sunbeams were quenched, all its flowers had faded, even its beautiful dream of love had grown dim; in that poor heart was nothing but pride and care, and, saddest of all, it was my heart.

In earlier days, the youth looked at the same trees with very different eyes. Back then, he was just a boy, searching for birds' nests or summer bugs that brought him joy as they buzzed around, happy in the beautiful world, content with a fresh green leaf and a drop of water, a warm sunbeam, and the sweet scents of the grass. During those times, the boy's heart was as carefree as the fluttering insects. But now his heart has grown older; its little sunbeams have been snuffed out, all its flowers have withered, and even his once-beautiful dream of love has dimmed. In that poor heart, there is nothing but pride and worry, and, saddest of all, it is my heart.

I had returned that day to my old father-town, but I would not remain there over night, and I longed for Godesberg, that I might sit at the feet of my girl-friend and tell of the little Veronica. I had visited the dear graves. Of all my living friends I had found but an uncle and an aunt. Even when I met once known forms in the street they knew me no more, and the town itself gazed on me with strange glances. Many houses were coloured anew, strange faces gazed on me through the window-panes, worn-out old sparrows hopped on the old chimneys, everything looked dead and yet fresh, like a salad growing in a graveyard; where French was once spoken I now heard Prussian; even a little Prussian court had taken up its retired dwelling there, and the people bore court titles. My mother's old hair dresser had now become the Court Hair dresser, and there were Court-Tailors, Court-Shoemakers, Court-Bed-Bug-Destroyers, Court-Grog-Shops—the whole town seemed to be a Court-Asylum for Court-lunatics. Only the old Prince Elector knew me, he still stood in the same old place; but he seemed to have grown thinner. For just because he stood in the Market Place, he had had a full view of all the miseries of the time, and people seldom grow fat on such sights. I was in a dream, and thought of the legend of the enchanted city, and hastened out of the gate, lest I should awake too soon. I missed many a tree in the Court Garden, and many had grown crooked with age, and the four great poplars, which once seemed to me like green giants, had become smaller. Pretty girls were walking here and there, dressed as gaily as wandering tulips. And I had known these tulips when they were but little buds; for ah! they were the neighbours' children with whom I had once played "Princes in the Tower." But the fair maidens, whom I had once known as blooming roses, were now faded roses, and in many a high brow whose pride had once thrilled my heart, Saturn had cut deep wrinkles with his scythe. And now for the first time, and alas! too late, I understood what those glances meant, which they had once cast on the adolescent boy; for I had meanwhile in other lands fathomed the meaning of similar glances in other lovely eyes. I was deeply moved by the humble bow of a man whom I had once known as wealthy and respectable, and who had since become a beggar. Everywhere in the world we see that men when they once begin to fall, do so according to Newton's law, ever faster and faster as they descend to misery. One, however, who did not seem to be in the least changed was the little baron, who tripped merrily as of old through the Court Garden, holding with one hand his left coat-skirt on high, and with the other swinging hither and thither his light cane;—he still had the same genial face as of old, its rosy bloom now somewhat concentrated towards the nose, but he had the same comical hat and the same old queue behind, only that the hairs which peeped from it were now white instead of black. But merry as the old baron seemed, it was still evident that he had suffered much sorrow—his face would fain conceal it, but the white hairs of his queue betrayed him behind his back. Yet the queue itself seemed striving to lie, so merrily did it shake.

I had gone back that day to my hometown, but I wouldn’t stay there overnight, and I longed for Godesberg so I could sit at my girl-friend’s feet and talk about little Veronica. I had visited the dear graves. Of all my living friends, I only found an uncle and an aunt. Even when I recognized familiar faces in the street, they didn’t recognize me anymore, and the town itself looked at me with strange glances. Many houses were freshly painted, unfamiliar faces looked at me through the windows, worn-out old sparrows hopped around on the old chimneys, everything seemed dead yet fresh, like a salad growing in a graveyard; where French used to be spoken, I now heard Prussian; even a small Prussian court had set up a retirement home there, and people had court titles. My mother’s old hairdresser had become the Court Hairdresser, and there were Court Tailors, Court Shoemakers, Court Bedbug Exterminators, Court Grog Shops—the whole town felt like a Court Asylum for Court Lunatics. Only the old Prince Elector recognized me, still standing in the same old spot; but he seemed to have become thinner. Because he was in the Market Place, he had witnessed all the miseries of the time, and people rarely gain weight from such sights. I was in a dream, thinking of the legend of the enchanted city, and hurried out of the gate to avoid waking up too soon. I noticed many trees missing from the Court Garden, and many had grown crooked with age, and the four tall poplars, which once seemed like green giants to me, had gotten smaller. Pretty girls wandered here and there, dressed as brightly as wandering tulips. I had known these tulips when they were just little buds; they were the neighbor’s kids with whom I once played “Princes in the Tower.” But the lovely maidens, whom I had once known as blooming roses, were now faded roses, and on many high brows that once thrilled my heart, Saturn had carved deep wrinkles with his scythe. And now for the first time, and unfortunately too late, I understood what those glances meant, which they had once cast on the adolescent boy; for meanwhile, in other lands, I had figured out the meaning of similar glances in other lovely eyes. I was deeply moved by the humble bow of a man I had once known as wealthy and respected, who had since become a beggar. Everywhere in the world, we see that when men begin to fall, they do so according to Newton’s law, ever faster and faster as they descend into misery. However, one person who didn’t seem to change at all was the little baron, who merrily skipped as he used to through the Court Garden, holding his left coat-skirt up with one hand while swinging his light cane with the other; he still had the same cheerful face as before, its rosy hue now somewhat concentrated towards the nose, but he wore the same comical hat and the same old queue, only the hairs that peeked from it were now white instead of black. But as cheerful as the old baron seemed, it was clear he had endured much sorrow—his face tried to hide it, but the white hairs of his queue gave it away. Yet the queue itself seemed to strive to lie, so merrily did it shake.

I was not weary, but a fancy seized me to sit once more on the wooden bench, on which I had once carved the name of my love. I could hardly discover it there, so many new names were cut around. Ah! once I slept upon this bench, and dreamed of happiness and love. "Dreams are foam." And the old games of childhood came again to my memory, and with them old and beautiful stories; but a new treacherous game, and a new terrible tale ever resounded through them, and it was the story of two poor souls who were untrue to each other, and went so far in their untruth, that they were at last untrue to the dear God himself. It is a sad story, and when one has nothing better to do, one can weep over it. Oh, Lord! once the world was so beautiful, and the birds sang thy eternal praise, and little Veronica looked at me with silent eyes, and we sat by the marble statue before the castle court; on one side lies an old ruined castle, wherein ghosts wander, and at night a headless lady in long, trailing black-silken garments sweeps around, and on the other side is a high, white dwelling, in whose upper rooms gay pictures gleamed beautifully in their golden frames, while below stood thousands of mighty books, which Veronica and I beheld with longing when the good Ursula lifted us up to the window. In later years, when I had become a great boy, I climbed every day to the very top of the library ladder, and brought down the topmost books, and read in them so long, that finally I feared nothing—least of all ladies without heads—and became so wise that I forgot all the old games and stories and pictures and little Veronica, even her name.

I wasn't tired, but I suddenly had the urge to sit again on the wooden bench where I had once carved the name of my love. I could hardly find it there because so many new names had been inscribed around it. Ah! I once slept on this bench and dreamed of happiness and love. "Dreams are just illusions." The old childhood games came back to me, along with beautiful old stories; but a new, deceitful game and a terrible new tale echoed through them—it was the story of two lost souls who were unfaithful to one another, going so far in their betrayal that they ultimately turned away from dear God himself. It's a sad story, and when you have nothing better to do, you can weep over it. Oh, Lord! Once the world was so beautiful, and the birds sang your eternal praise, and little Veronica looked at me with silent eyes while we sat by the marble statue in front of the castle courtyard; on one side lay an old ruined castle where ghosts roamed, and at night a headless lady in long, flowing black silk garments glided around, and on the other side stood a tall, white house, in whose upper rooms colorful paintings shone beautifully in their golden frames, while below stood thousands of mighty books that Veronica and I gazed at longingly when the kind Ursula lifted us to the window. In later years, when I had become quite grown up, I climbed every day to the very top of the library ladder, bringing down the highest books and reading them for so long that eventually, I feared nothing—least of all headless ladies—and became so wise that I forgot all the old games and stories and pictures, even little Veronica and her name.

But while I sat upon the old bench in the Court Garden, and dreamed my way back into the past, there was a sound behind me of the confused voices of men lamenting the ill-fortune of the poor French soldiers, who, having been taken prisoners in the Russian war and sent to Siberia, had there been kept prisoners for many a long year, though peace had been re-established, and who now were returning home. As I looked up, I beheld in reality these orphan children of Fame. Through their tattered uniforms peeped naked misery, deep sorrowing eyes were couched in their desolate faces, and though mangled, weary, and mostly lame, something of the military manner was still visible in their mien. Singularly enough, they were preceded by a drummer who tottered along with a drum, and I shuddered as I recalled the old legend of soldiers, who had fallen in battle, and who by night rising again from their graves on the battle-field, and with the drummer at their head, marched back to their native city. And of them the old ballad sings thus—

But as I sat on the old bench in the Court Garden, lost in memories, I heard a mix of voices behind me lamenting the bad luck of the poor French soldiers. They had been captured during the Russian war and sent to Siberia, where they remained prisoners for many long years even after peace was restored, and now they were returning home. When I looked up, I actually saw these orphaned children of Fame. Their torn uniforms revealed raw misery, and deep sorrow filled their tired eyes, etched into their worn faces. Although they were battered, exhausted, and mostly limping, you could still see hints of their military bearing. Interestingly, they were led by a drummer who stumbled along with a drum, and I felt a chill remembering the old legend of soldiers who fell in battle—who at night would rise from their graves on the battlefield, with the drummer at the front, marching back to their hometown. The old ballad sings about them like this—

"He beat on the drum with might and main,
 To their old night-quarters they go again;
 Through the lighted street they come;
 Trallerie—trallerei—trallera,
 They march before Sweetheart's home.

 And their bones lie there at break of day,
 As white as tombstones in cold array,
 And the drummer he goes before;
 Trallerie—trallerei—trallera,
 And we see them come no more."

"He hit the drum with all his strength,
They're going back to their old nightlife spot;
They stroll down the illuminated street;
Trallerie—trallerei—trallera,
They walk past Sweetheart's house.

And their bodies are there at dawn,
As white as tombstones in a chilly display,
And the drummer sets the pace;
Trallerie—trallerei—trallera,
"And we don't see them again."

Truly the poor French drummer seemed to have risen but half repaired from the grave. He was but a little shadow in a dirty patched grey capote, a dead yellow countenance, with a great moustache which hung down sorrowfully over his faded lips, his eyes were like burnt-out tinder, in which but a few sparks still gleamed, and yet by one of those sparks I recognised Monsieur Le Grand.

Truly, the poor French drummer looked like he had barely come back to life. He was just a shadow in a dirty, patched-up gray coat, with a sickly yellow face and a big mustache that drooped sadly over his faded lips. His eyes were like burnt-out coals, with only a few sparks still shining, and yet, from one of those sparks, I recognized Monsieur Le Grand.

He too recognised me and drew me to the turf, and we sat down together as of old, when he taught me French and Modern History on the drum. He had still the well-known old drum, and I could not sufficiently wonder how he had preserved it from Russian plunderers. And he drummed again as of old, but without speaking a word. But though his lips were firmly pressed together, his eyes spoke all the more, flashing fiercely and victoriously as he drummed the old marches. The poplars near us trembled, as he again thundered forth the red guillotine march. And he drummed as before the old war of freedom, the old battles, the deeds of the Emperor, and it seemed as though the drum itself were a living creature which rejoiced to speak out its inner soul. I heard once more the thunder of cannon, the whistling of balls, the riot of battle; I saw once more the death rage of the Guards,—the waving flags, again, the Emperor on his steed—but little by little there fell a sad tone in amid the most stirring confusion, sounds rang from the drum, in which the wildest hurrahs and the most fearful grief were mysteriously mingled; it seemed a march of victory and a march of death. Le Grand's eyes opened spirit-like and wide, and I saw in them nothing but a broad white field of ice covered with corpses—it was the battle of Moscow.

He recognized me too and pulled me down to the grass, and we sat together like we used to when he taught me French and Modern History on the drum. He still had that familiar old drum, and I couldn't help but wonder how he had kept it safe from Russian looters. He drummed again just like before, but didn't say a word. Even though his lips were pressed tightly together, his eyes spoke volumes, flashing fiercely and triumphantly as he played the old marches. The poplar trees nearby trembled as he thundered out the red guillotine march again. He drummed of the old war for freedom, the past battles, the deeds of the Emperor, and it felt as if the drum itself were a living being that was joyfully expressing its deepest soul. I once more heard the thunder of cannon fire, the whistling of bullets, the chaos of battle; I saw again the death struggle of the Guards—the waving flags, the Emperor on his horse—but gradually a sad tone crept in amidst the stirring commotion, sounds from the drum that strangely mingled wild cheers and deep sorrow; it felt like both a march of victory and a march of death. Le Grand's eyes opened wide and ghostly, and I saw in them nothing but a vast white field of ice littered with corpses—it was the battle of Moscow.

I had never thought that the hard old drum could give forth such wailing sounds as Monsieur Le Grand had drawn from it. They were tears which he drummed, and they sounded ever softer and softer, and, like a troubled echo, deep sighs broke from Le Grand's breast. And he became ever more languid and ghost-like, his dry hands trembled, as if from frost, he sat as in a dream, and stirred with his drum-stick nothing but the air, and seemed listening to voices far away, and at last he gazed on me with a deep, entreating glance—I understood him—and then his head sank down on the drum.

I never imagined that the old, worn-out drum could produce such haunting sounds as Monsieur Le Grand made with it. They were like tears he drummed, growing softer and softer, and deep sighs escaped from Le Grand's chest like a troubled echo. He appeared increasingly weak and ghostly, his dry hands trembling as if from the cold. He sat as if lost in a dream, moving his drumstick through nothing but air, seemingly listening to distant voices. Finally, he looked at me with a deep, pleading gaze—I understood him—and then he let his head drop onto the drum.

In this life Monsieur Le Grand never drummed more. And his drum never gave forth another sound; it was not destined to serve the enemies of liberty for their servile roll calls. I had well understood Le Grand's last entreating glance, and at once drew the sword from my cane, and pierced the drum.

In this life, Monsieur Le Grand never drummed again. And his drum never made another sound; it was not meant to serve the enemies of freedom for their forced roll calls. I clearly understood Le Grand's final pleading glance, and immediately pulled the sword from my cane and pierced the drum.

CHAPTER XI.

Du sublime au ridicule il n'y a qu'un pas, Madame!

From the sublime to the ridiculous, there's only a step, madam!

But life is in reality so terribly serious, that it would be insupportable without such union of the pathetic and the comic; as our poets well know. The most harrowing forms of human madness Aristophanes exhibits only in the laughing mirror of wit; Goethe only presumes to set forth the fearful pain of thought comprehending its own nothingness in the doggerel of a puppet show; and Shakespeare puts the most deadly lamentation over the misery of the world into the mouth of a fool, who rattles his cap and bells in agony.

But life is really so incredibly serious that it would be unbearable without the mix of the sad and the funny, as our poets understand well. The most intense forms of human madness are presented by Aristophanes only through the humorous lens of wit; Goethe dares to express the deep pain of realizing one's own insignificance in the playful style of a puppet show; and Shakespeare delivers the harshest lament about the world's suffering through the voice of a fool, who shakes his bells in despair.

They have all learned from the great First Poet, who, in his World Tragedy in thousands of acts, knows how to carry humour to the highest point, as we see every day. After the departure of the heroes, the clowns and graciosos enter with their baubles and wooden swords, and after the bloody scenes of the Revolution there came waddling on the stage the fat Bourbons, with their stale jokes and tender "legitimate" bon mots, and the old noblesse with their starved laughter hopped merrily before them, while behind all swept the pious Capuchins with candles, cross, and banners of the Church. Yes, even in the highest pathos of the World Tragedy, bits of fun slip in. The desperate republican, who, like Brutus, plunged a knife to his heart, perhaps smelt it first to see whether some one had not split a herring with it—and on this great stage of the world all passes exactly the same as on our beggarly boards. On it, too, there are tipsy heroes, kings who forget their part, scenes which obstinately stay up in the air, prompters' voices sounding above everything, danseuses who create astonishing effects with the poetry of their legs, and costumes which are the main thing. And high in Heaven, in the first row of the boxes, sit the dear little angels, and keep their lorgnettes on us comedians here down below, and the blessed Lord himself sits seriously in his great box, and, perhaps, finds it dull, or calculates that this theatre cannot be kept up much longer because this one gets too high a salary, and that one too little, and that they all play much too badly.

They’ve all learned from the great First Poet, who, in his World Tragedy spanning thousands of acts, knows how to take humor to the highest level, as we see every day. After the heroes leave, the clowns and graciosos come on stage with their props and wooden swords, and following the bloody scenes of the Revolution, the fat Bourbons waddle onto the stage with their corny jokes and tender "legitimate" bon mots, while the old noblesse, with their starved laughter, hop merrily in front of them, and behind them parade the pious Capuchins with candles, crosses, and banners of the Church. Yes, even amidst the intense emotions of the World Tragedy, bits of humor creep in. The desperate republican, who, like Brutus, plunged a knife into his heart, might have first sniffed it to check if someone had split a herring with it—and on this grand stage of the world, everything unfolds just like on our shabby boards. Here too, there are tipsy heroes, kings who forget their lines, scenes that stubbornly hang in the air, prompters' voices soaring above everything, dancers who create astonishing effects with the poetry of their legs, and costumes that steal the show. And high in Heaven, in the first row of the boxes, sit the dear little angels, watching us comedians down below with their lorgnettes, while the blessed Lord himself sits seriously in his grand box, perhaps finding it dull or calculating that this theater can't last much longer because one is getting paid too much, another too little, and they all perform poorly.

Du sublime au ridicule il n'y a qu'un pas, Madame! As I ended the last chapter, narrating to you how Monsieur Le Grand died, and how I conscientiously executed the testamentum militaire which lay in his last glance, some one knocked at my door, and there entered a poor old lady, who asked if I were not a Doctor. And as I assented, she kindly asked me to go home with her and cut her husband's corns.

From the sublime to the ridiculous is just a step, Madame! As I finished the last chapter, telling you how Monsieur Le Grand died, and how I dutifully carried out the testamentum militaire that was in his final look, someone knocked at my door, and in walked a poor old lady who asked if I was a doctor. When I confirmed, she politely asked me to come home with her and help with her husband's corns.

LAST WORDS (Travel photos).

Written 29th November 1830.

It was a depressed, an arrested time in Germany when I wrote the second volume of the Reisebilder, and had it printed as I wrote. But before it appeared something was whispered about it; it was said that my book would awaken and encourage the cowed spirit of freedom, and that measures were being taken to suppress it. When such rumours were afloat, it was advisable to advance the book as quickly as possible, and drive it through the press. As it was necessary, too, that it should contain a certain number of leaves, to escape the requisitions of the estimable censorship, I followed the example of Benvenuto Cellini, who, in founding his Perseas, was short of bronze, and to fill up the mould threw into the molten metal all the tin plates he could lay his hands on. It was certainly easy to distinguish between the tin—especially the tin termination of the book—and the better bronze; anyone, however, who understands the craft will not betray the workman.

It was a grim, stifling time in Germany when I wrote the second volume of the Reisebilder and had it printed as I went along. But before it came out, there were whispers about it; people said my book would inspire and revive the suppressed spirit of freedom, and that steps were being taken to block its release. When such rumors were circulating, it was wise to rush the book to publication and push it through the printing process. It was also necessary to make sure it had a certain number of pages to avoid the scrutiny of the strict censorship, so I took a page from Benvenuto Cellini’s playbook, who, when working on his Perseas, was short on bronze, and to fill the mold, he tossed in all the tin plates he could find. It was definitely easy to tell the difference between the tin—especially the tin at the end of the book—and the higher-quality bronze; however, anyone who knows the craft won’t expose the artisan.

But as everything in this world is liable to turn up again, so it came to pass that, in this very volume, I found myself again in the same scrape, and I have been obliged to again throw some tin into the mould—let me hope that this renewed melting of baser metal will simply be attributed to the pressure of the times.

But just like everything in this world tends to resurface, I found myself in the same situation again in this very book, and I’ve had to once more put some money into the mix—let’s hope that this fresh blending of lower quality material will just be seen as a response to the pressures of the time.

Alas! the whole book sprang from the pressure of the times, as well as the earlier writings of similar tendency. The more intimate friends of the writer, who are acquainted with his private circumstances, know well how little his own vanity forced him to the tribune, and how great were the sacrifices which he was obliged to make for every independent word which he has spoken since then and—if God will!—which he still means to speak. Now-a-days, a word is a deed whose consequences cannot be measured, and no one knows whether he may not in the end appear as witness to his words in blood.

Unfortunately, the entire book emerged from the pressures of the times, as well as earlier writings with a similar focus. The writer's close friends, who understand his personal circumstances, know how little his own pride pushed him to the public platform, and how significant the sacrifices he had to make for every independent word he has spoken since then—and, God willing!—still intends to speak. Nowadays, a word is an action with consequences that can't be measured, and no one knows if they might ultimately bear witness to their words in blood.

For many years I have waited in vain for the words of those bold orators, who once in the meetings of the German Burschenschaft so often claimed a hearing, who so often overwhelmed me with their rhetorical talent, and spoke a language spoken so oft before; they were then so forward in noise—they are now so backward in silence. How they then reviled the French and the foreign Babel, and the un-German frivolous betrayers of the Fatherland, who praised French-dom. That praise verified itself in the great week!

For many years, I’ve waited in vain for the words of those bold speakers who used to demand attention at the gatherings of the German Burschenschaft. They used to impress me with their speaking skills and would often repeat ideas that had been said many times before. Back then, they were so loud and outspoken, but now they’re silent. They used to criticize the French and the confusing foreign influences, along with those un-German, shallow traitors who praised French culture. That praise proved itself during that significant week!

Ah, the great week of Paris! The spirit of freedom, which was wafted thence over Germany, has certainly upset the night-lamps here and there, so that the red curtains of several thrones took fire, and golden crowns grew hot under blazing night-caps; but the old catch-polls, in whom the royal police trusted, are already bringing out the fire-buckets, and now scent around all the more suspiciously, and forge all the more firmly their secret chains, and I mark well that a still thicker prison vault is being invisibly arched over the German people.

Ah, the amazing week in Paris! The spirit of freedom that spread over Germany has definitely caused some chaos, igniting the night lamps here and there, setting the red curtains of various thrones on fire, and making golden crowns feel the heat under blazing nightcaps. However, the old enforcers, whom the royal police trust, are already pulling out the fire extinguishers, sniffing around with increasing suspicion, and tightening their secret chains. I can clearly see that an even thicker prison vault is being quietly constructed over the German people.

Poor imprisoned people! be not cast down in your need. Oh, that I could speak catapults! Oh, that I could shoot falarica from my heart!

Poor imprisoned people! Don't be discouraged in your time of need. Oh, how I wish I could speak catapults! Oh, how I wish I could launch a falarica from my heart!

The distinguished ice-rind of reserve melts from my heart, a strange sorrow steals over me—is it love, and love for the German people? Or is it sickness?—my soul quivers and my eyes burn, and that is an unfortunate occurrence for a writer, who should command his material, and remain charmingly objective, as the art school requires, and as Goethe has done—he has grown to be eighty years old in so doing, and a minister, and portly—poor German people! that is thy greatest man!

The cold barrier around my heart melts away, and a strange sadness washes over me—is it love, love for the German people? Or is it just illness?—my soul trembles and my eyes ache, which is unfortunate for a writer, who should control his emotions and stay delightfully objective, as the art world expects, and as Goethe has managed to do—he’s lived to eighty while doing it and has become a minister, and quite round—poor German people! That is your greatest man!

I still have a few octavo pages to fill, and I will therefore tell a story—it has been floating in my head since yesterday—a story from the life of Charles the Fifth.[8] But it is now a long time since I heard it, and I no longer remember its details exactly. Such things are easily forgotten, if one does not receive a regular salary for reading them every half-year from his lecture books. But what does it matter if places and dates are forgotten, so long as one holds their significance, their moral meaning, in his memory. It is this which stirs my soul and moves me even to tears. I fear I am getting ill.

I still have a few pages left to fill, so I’m going to tell a story—it's been on my mind since yesterday—a story from the life of Charles the Fifth.[8] But it’s been a long time since I heard it, and I can’t remember the details exactly. Things like that are easy to forget if you’re not getting paid to read them regularly from your textbooks. But does it really matter if the places and dates are forgotten as long as you remember their significance and moral meaning? That’s what touches my heart and even brings me to tears. I’m starting to think I might be getting sick.

The poor emperor was taken prisoner by his enemies, and lay in stern imprisonment. I believe it was in Tyrol. There he sat in solitary sorrow, forsaken by all his knights and courtiers, and no one came to his help. I know not if he had even in those days that cheese-yellow complexion with which Holbein painted him. But the misanthropic under-lip certainly protruded, even more then than in his portraits. He must have despised the people who fawned around him in the sunshine of prosperity, and who left him alone in his bitter need. Suddenly the prison door opened, and there entered a man wrapped in a cloak, and as he cast it aside, the emperor recognised his trusty Kunz von der Rosen, the court-fool. One brought him consolation and counsel—and it was the court-fool.

The poor emperor was captured by his enemies and was stuck in a harsh prison. I think it was in Tyrol. There he sat in lonely sorrow, abandoned by all his knights and courtiers, with no one coming to his aid. I’m not sure if he had that cheese-yellow complexion that Holbein painted him with back then. But his misanthropic lower lip definitely stuck out even more than in his portraits. He must have looked down on the people who catered to him in the sunshine of success and then left him alone in his time of need. Suddenly, the prison door swung open, and a man entered wrapped in a cloak. As he revealed himself, the emperor recognized his loyal Kunz von der Rosen, the court jester. He was the one who brought him comfort and advice—and it was the court jester.

O, German Fatherland! dear German people! I am thy Kunz von der Rosen. The man whose real office was pastime, and who should only make thee merry in happy days, forces his way into thy prison, in time of need; here, beneath my mantle, I bring thee thy strong sceptre and the beautiful crown—dost thou not remember me, my emperor? If I cannot free thee, I will at least console thee, and thou shalt have some one by thee who will talk with thee about thy most pressing oppressions, and will speak courage to thee, and who loves thee, and whose best jokes and best blood are ever at thy service. For thou, my people, art the true emperor, the true lord of the land—thy will is sovereign and more legitimate than that purple Tel est notre plaisir, which grounds itself upon divine right, without any better guarantee than the quackery of shaven jugglers—thy will, my people, is the only righteous source of all power. Even though thou liest down there in fetters, thy good right will arise in the end, the day of freedom draws near, a new time begins—my emperor, the night is over, and the dawn shines outside.

O, German Fatherland! Dear German people! I am your Kunz von der Rosen. The person whose real job was to entertain you and who should only bring you joy on happy days now forces his way into your prison in your time of need; here, under my cloak, I bring you your strong scepter and beautiful crown—do you not remember me, my emperor? If I cannot free you, I will at least console you, and you will have someone by your side who will discuss your most urgent oppressions, speak encouragement to you, and who loves you and whose best jokes and best blood are always at your service. For you, my people, are the true emperor, the true ruler of the land—your will is sovereign and more legitimate than that purple Tel est notre plaisir, which bases itself on divine right, lacking any better support than the trickery of smooth-talking jugglers—your will, my people, is the only just source of all power. Even if you lie down there in chains, your rightful claim will rise in the end, the day of freedom is approaching, a new era begins—my emperor, the night is over, and the dawn shines outside.

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, thou errest. Thou hast perhaps mistaken a bright axe for the sun, and the dawn is nothing but blood."

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, you are wrong. You might have confused a shiny axe for the sun, and the dawn is really just blood."

"No, my Emperor, it is the sun, though it rises in the west—for six thousand years men have always seen it rise in the east—it is high time that it for once made a change in its course."

"No, my Emperor, it’s the sun, even though it rises in the west— for six thousand years people have always seen it rise in the east—it's about time it changed its course."

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, thou hast lost the bells from thy red cap, and it now has such a strange look, that red cap!"

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, you've lost the bells from your red cap, and it now looks so unusual, that red cap!"

"Ah, my Emperor, I have shaken my head in such mad earnest over your distress that the fool's bell fell from my cap; but it is none the worse for that!"

"Ah, my Emperor, I've shaken my head in such deep concern over your troubles that the fool's bell fell from my cap; but it's no worse for that!"

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, what is that breaking and cracking outside there?"

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, what’s that breaking and cracking out there?"

"Hush! it is the saw and the carpenter's axe; the doors of your prison will soon be broken in, and you will be free, my Emperor!"

"Hush! It’s the sound of the saw and the carpenter's axe; the doors of your prison will soon be broken down, and you will be free, my Emperor!"

"Am I then really Emperor? Alas! it is only the Fool who tells me so!"

"Am I really the Emperor? Unfortunately, it’s just the Fool who says that!"

"Oh, do not sigh, my dear lord, it is the air of the dungeon which so dispirits you; when you have once regained your power, you will feel the bold imperial blood in your veins, and you will be proud as an emperor, and arrogant, and gracious, and unjust, and smiling, and ungrateful as princes are."

"Oh, don't sigh, my dear lord, it's the dungeon air that's getting you down; once you regain your strength, you'll feel the fierce royal blood in your veins, and you'll be as proud as an emperor, and arrogant, and gracious, and unfair, and smiling, and ungrateful like all princes are."

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, when I am free again, what wilt thou be doing?"

"Kunz von der Rosen, my Fool, when I'm free again, what will you be doing?"

"I will sew new bells on my cap."

"I'll sew new bells onto my hat."

"And how shall I reward thy fidelity?"

"And how should I reward your loyalty?"

"Ah! dear master—do not let me be put to death!"

"Ah! dear master—please don’t let me be killed!"

ENGLISH FRAGMENTS.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[The English Fragments, from which three chapters have been selected for this volume, were published in 1828 in a German magazine of which Heine was one of the editors. They were collected and published with important additions (including the following chapters) in 1831. Mr. Leland's translation, revised throughout, has been here used.]

[The English Fragments, from which three chapters have been selected for this volume, were published in 1828 in a German magazine that Heine helped edit. They were collected and published with significant additions (including the following chapters) in 1831. Mr. Leland's translation, revised throughout, has been used here.]

LONDON.

I HAVE seen the greatest wonder which the world can show to the astonished spirit; I have seen it, and am more astonished then ever—and still there remains fixed in my memory that stone forest of houses, and amid them the rushing stream of faces, of living human faces, with all their motley passions, all their terrible impulses of love, of hunger, and of hate—I am speaking of London.

I HAVE seen the greatest wonder that the world can offer to the amazed spirit; I’ve seen it, and I’m more astonished than ever—and still etched in my memory is that stone forest of buildings, and among them the swift current of faces, of living human faces, with all their diverse emotions, all their intense drives of love, hunger, and hatred—I am talking about London.

Send a philosopher to London, but no poet! Send a philosopher there, and stand him at a corner of Cheapside, he will learn more there than from all the books of the last Leipzig fair; and as the human waves roar around him, so will a sea of new thoughts rise before him, and the Eternal Spirit which moves upon the face of the waters will breathe upon him; the most hidden secrets of social harmony will be suddenly revealed to him, he will hear the pulse of the world beat audibly, and see it visibly—for, if London is the right hand of the world—its active, mighty right hand—then we may regard that that which leads from the Exchange to Downing Street is the world's radial artery.

Send a philosopher to London, but definitely not a poet! If you send a philosopher there and have him stand at a corner of Cheapside, he'll learn more in that moment than from all the books at the last Leipzig fair. As the human waves rush around him, a whole ocean of new ideas will rise up in front of him, and the Eternal Spirit that moves over the surface of the waters will inspire him. The deepest secrets of social harmony will suddenly be revealed to him; he'll hear the pulse of the world beating loudly and see it clearly—because if London is the world's right hand—its strong, powerful right hand—then we can think of the path from the Exchange to Downing Street as the world's essential artery.

But send no poet to London! This downright earnestness of all things, this colossal uniformity, this machine-like movement, this moroseness even in pleasure, this exaggerated London, smothers the imagination and rends the heart. And should you ever send a German poet thither—a dreamer, who stands staring at every single phenomenon, even a ragged beggar-woman, or a shining jeweller's shop—why, then he will find things going badly with him, and he will be hustled about on every side, or even be knocked over with a mild "God damn!" God damn!—the damned pushing! I soon saw that these people have much to do. They live on a large scale, and though food and clothes are dearer with them than with us, they must still be better fed and clothed than we are—as gentility requires. Moreover, they have enormous debts, yet occasionally in a vain-glorious mood they make ducks and drakes of their guineas, pay other nations to fight for their pleasure, give their respective kings a handsome douceur into the bargain—and, therefore, John Bull must work day and night to get the money for such expenses; by day and by night he must tax his brain to discover new machines, and he sits and reckons in the sweat of his brow, and runs and rushes without looking about much from the Docks to the Exchange, and from the Exchange to the Strand, and, therefore, it is quite pardonable if, when a poor German poet, gazing into a print-shop window, stands in his way at the corner of Cheapside, he should knock him aside with a rather rough "God damn!"

But don’t send any poets to London! This sheer seriousness of everything, this massive uniformity, this robotic movement, this gloom even in enjoyment, this exaggerated version of London, stifles the imagination and breaks the heart. And if you ever send a German poet there—a dreamer who stops to stare at every single thing, even a ragged beggar-woman or a glittering jeweler’s shop—well, he’s going to struggle and get jostled all around, or even be brushed aside with a casual “God damn!” God damn!—the pushing! I quickly realized that these people have a lot going on. They live on a grand scale, and even though food and clothing cost more than they do for us, they must still be better fed and dressed than we are—as social status demands. Plus, they have massive debts, yet sometimes in a moment of foolish pride, they waste their money, pay other countries to fight for their enjoyment, and slip their kings a generous tip on top of it—and so John Bull has to work around the clock to cover these expenses; day and night he has to rack his brain to invent new machines, and he’s constantly calculating, sweating it out, running from the Docks to the Exchange, and from the Exchange to the Strand. So, it’s understandable if a poor German poet, gazing into a print shop window, gets shoved aside rather roughly with a “God damn!” at the corner of Cheapside.

But the picture at which I was gazing as I stood at the corner of Cheapside, was that of the passage of the French across the Beresina.

But the picture I was looking at as I stood at the corner of Cheapside was that of the French crossing the Beresina.

And when, jolted out of my gazing, I looked again on the raging street, where a parti-coloured coil of men, women, and children, horses, stage-coaches, and with them a funeral, whirled groaning and creaking along, it seemed to me as though all London were such a Beresina Bridge, where every one presses on in mad haste to save his scrap of life, where the daring rider stamps down the poor pedestrian, where every one who falls is lost forever; where the best friends rush, without feeling, over each other's corpses, and where thousands, weak and bleeding, grasp in vain at the planks of the bridge, and slide down into the ice-pit of death.

And when I was jolted out of my staring and looked again at the chaotic street, where a colorful mix of men, women, children, horses, stagecoaches, and even a funeral twisted and creaked along, it felt to me as if all of London was like a Beresina Bridge, where everyone rushes madly to save their piece of life, where the reckless rider tramples the unfortunate pedestrian, where anyone who falls is lost forever; where the closest friends rush, without emotion, over each other's bodies, and where thousands, weak and bleeding, reach in vain for the wooden planks of the bridge and slide down into the icy pit of death.

How much more pleasant and homelike it is in our dear Germany! How dreamily comfortable, how Sabbatically quiet all things glide along here! Calmly the sentinels are changed, uniforms and houses shine in the quiet sunshine, swallows flit over the flag-stones, fat court-councilloresses smile from the windows, while along the echoing streets there is room enough for the dogs to sniff at each other, and for men to stand at ease and chat about the theatre, and bow low—oh, how low!—when some small aristocratic scamp or vice-scamp, with coloured ribbons on his shabby coat, or some powdered and gilded court-marshal struts by, graciously returning salutations!

How much more pleasant and homey it is in our beloved Germany! Everything here moves along so comfortably and peacefully! The guards change calmly, uniforms and buildings shine in the gentle sunlight, swallows dart over the cobblestones, plump court ladies smile from the windows, while there’s plenty of space in the echoing streets for dogs to sniff each other and for men to stand relaxed and chat about the theater, bowing low—oh, so low!—when some little aristocrat or petty official, sporting colorful ribbons on his worn coat, or some powdered and gilded court marshal struts by, graciously returning the greetings!

I had made up my mind not to be astonished at that immensity of London of which I had heard so much. But it happened to me as to the poor school-boy, who had made up his mind not to feel the whipping he was to receive. The facts of the case were, that he expected to get the usual blows with the usual stick in the usual way on the back, whereas he received a most unusually severe thrashing on an unusual place with a slender switch. I anticipated great palaces, and saw nothing but mere small houses. But their very uniformity and their limitless extent are wonderfully impressive.

I had decided not to be amazed by the vastness of London that I had heard so much about. But it turned out to be like that poor schoolboy who promised himself he wouldn’t feel the punishment he was about to get. The reality was that he expected the usual hits in the usual way on his back, but instead, he got an unexpectedly harsh beating in an unusual spot with a thin switch. I expected grand palaces and saw nothing but ordinary small houses. But their uniformity and endlessness are surprisingly impressive.

These houses of brick, owing to the damp atmosphere and coal smoke, become uniform in colour, that is to say, of a brown olive green; they are all of the same style of building, generally two or three windows wide, three storeys high, and adorned above with small red tiles, which remind one of newly-extracted bleeding teeth; so that the broad and accurately-squared streets seem to be bordered by endlessly long barracks. This has its reason in the fact that every English family, though it consist of only two persons, must still have a house to itself for its own castle, and rich speculators, to meet the demand, build wholesale entire streets of these dwellings, which they retail singly. In the principal streets of the city, where the business of London is most at home, where old-fashioned buildings are mingled with the new, and where the fronts of the houses are covered with names and signs, yards in length, generally gilt, and in relief, this characteristic uniformity is less striking—the less so, indeed, because the eye of the stranger is incessantly caught by the new and brilliant articles exposed for sale in the windows. And these articles do not merely produce an effect because the Englishman completes so perfectly everything which he manufactures, and because every article of luxury, every astral lamp and every boot, every tea kettle and every woman's dress, shines out so invitingly and so "finished;" there is a peculiar charm in the art of arrangement, in the contrast of colours, and in the variety of the English shops; even the most commonplace necessaries of life appear in a startling magic light through this artistic power of setting forth everything to advantage. Ordinary articles of food attract us by the new light in which they are placed, even uncooked fish lie so delightfully dressed that the rainbow gleam of their scales attracts us; raw meat lies, as if painted, on neat and many-coloured porcelain plates, garlanded about with parsley—yes, everything seems painted, reminding us of the brilliant, yet modest pictures of Franz Mieris. Only the people are not so cheerful as in the Dutch paintings; they sell the most delightful playthings with the most serious faces, and the cut and colour of their clothes is as uniform as that of their houses.

These brick houses, due to the damp atmosphere and coal smoke, all end up looking the same, which means they have a brownish olive green color. They're all built in a similar style, typically two or three windows wide, three stories high, and topped with small red tiles that look a bit like freshly pulled bleeding teeth. This makes the wide, neatly squared streets feel like they're lined with endless barracks. The reason for this is that every English family, even if it only has two people, insists on having its own house as its castle. To meet this demand, wealthy developers build entire streets of these homes and sell them off individually. In the main streets of the city, where London's business thrives, older buildings mix with newer ones, and the facades are covered in long, often gold, relief names and signs. The uniformity is less pronounced here, particularly because the eye of an outsider is constantly drawn to the new and eye-catching products displayed in the windows. These products stand out not only because every Englishman crafts things to perfection, but also because each luxury item—whether it's an astral lamp, a pair of boots, a teapot, or a woman's dress—shines with an inviting, polished look. There’s a unique charm in the way the items are arranged, the color contrasts, and the variety found in English shops; even the most ordinary necessities look surprisingly appealing thanks to this artistic presentation. Everyday food items catch our attention for the fresh perspective in which they are displayed; even raw fish appears so beautifully presented that the shimmering colors of their scales attract us. Raw meat is laid out, as if painted, on neat, multi-colored porcelain plates, garnished with parsley—everything looks almost like a painting, reminiscent of the bright yet understated works of Franz Mieris. Only the people don’t seem as cheerful as those in the Dutch paintings; they sell the most delightful toys with serious expressions, and the style and color of their clothing are as uniform as that of their houses.

At the opposite side of the town, which they call the West End, where the more aristocratic and less-occupied world lives, this uniformity is still more dominant; yet here there are very long and very broad streets, where all the houses are large as palaces, though outwardly anything but distinguished, unless we except the fact that in these, as in all the better class of houses in London, the windows of the first storey are adorned with iron-barred balconies, and also on the ground floor there is a black railing protecting the entrance to certain cellar apartments buried in the earth. In this part of the city there are also great squares, where rows of houses, like those already described, form a quadrangle, in whose centre there is a garden enclosed by a black iron railing, and containing some statue or other. In all of these squares and streets the eye is never shocked by the dilapidated huts of misery. Everywhere we are stared down on by wealth and respectability, while crammed away in retired lanes and dark, damp alleys poverty dwells with her rags and her tears.

On the other side of town, known as the West End, where the more upscale and less crowded community lives, this uniformity is even more pronounced; however, there are very long and wide streets here, lined with houses as large as palaces, though they don’t look particularly impressive from the outside. The only exception is that, like many of the nicer homes in London, the first-floor windows have iron-barred balconies, and on the ground floor, there’s a black railing protecting the entrance to some cellar apartments that are below ground. This area of the city also features large squares where rows of houses, similar to those described earlier, create a courtyard with a garden in the middle, enclosed by a black iron fence, often containing some kind of statue. In all these squares and streets, you won’t see the rundown shacks of poverty. Everywhere you look, wealth and respectability loom over us, while poverty, with her rags and tears, is pushed away into hidden lanes and dark, damp alleys.

The stranger who wanders through the great streets of London, and does not chance right into the regular quarters of the people, sees little or nothing of the misery there. Only here and there, at the mouth of some dark alley, stands a ragged woman with a suckling babe at her wasted breast, and begs with her eyes. Perhaps if those eyes are still beautiful, one glances into them and shrinks back at the world of wretchedness within them. The common beggars are old people, generally blacks, who stand at the corners of the streets cleaning pathways—a very necessary thing in muddy London—and ask for "coppers" in reward. It is in the dusky twilight that Poverty with her mates, Vice and Crime, glide forth from their lairs. They shun daylight the more anxiously, the more cruelly their wretchedness contrasts with the pride of wealth which glitters everywhere; only Hunger sometimes drives them at noonday from their dens, and then they stand with silent, speaking eyes, staring beseechingly at the rich merchant who hurries along, busy and jingling gold, or at the lazy lord who, like a surfeited god, rides by on his high horse, casting now and then an aristocratically indifferent glance at the mob below, as though they were swarming ants, or, at all events, a mass of baser beings, whose joys and sorrows have nothing in common with his feelings. Yes, over the vulgar multitude which sticks fast to the soil, soar, like beings of a higher nature, England's nobility, who regard their little island as only a temporary resting-place, Italy as their summer garden, Paris as their social saloon, and the whole world as their inheritance. They sweep along, knowing nothing of sorrow or suffering, and their gold is a talisman which conjures into fulfilment their wildest wish.

The stranger wandering through the busy streets of London, who doesn’t venture into the usual neighborhoods of the locals, sees very little of the suffering there. Occasionally, near the entrance of a dark alley, a ragged woman holds a hungry baby to her wasted breast and silently pleads with her eyes. If her eyes are still beautiful, one might glance into them and recoil from the depth of despair within. The typical beggars are older people, often Black, who stand at street corners cleaning the paths—a necessary task in muddy London—and ask for small change in return. It's in the dim twilight that Poverty, along with her companions, Vice and Crime, emerge from their hiding spots. They avoid daylight because their misery starkly contrasts with the shining wealth surrounding them; only Hunger sometimes pulls them out during the day, where they stand with silent, pleading eyes, gazing imploringly at the wealthy merchant rushing by, occupied and jingling with gold, or at the idle lord who, like a gluttonous god, rides past on his high horse, occasionally casting a dismissive glance at the crowd below as if they were mere ants or, in any case, lesser beings whose joys and sorrows have nothing to do with him. Yes, looming over the common crowd, which is rooted to the ground, is England's nobility, who see their little island as just a temporary stop, Italy as their summer retreat, Paris as their social hub, and the entire world as their ownership. They glide by, oblivious to pain or hardship, and their wealth acts as a magic key that turns their wildest dreams into reality.

Poor Poverty! how agonising must thy hunger be where others swell in scornful superfluity! And when some one casts with indifferent hand a crust into thy lap, how bitter must the tears be wherewith thou moistenest it! Thou poisonest thyself with thine own tears. Well art thou in the right when thou alliest thyself to Vice and Crime. Outlawed criminals often bear more humanity in their hearts than those cold, blameless citizens of virtue, in whose white hearts the power of evil is quenched; but also the power of good. I have seen women on whose cheeks red vice was painted, and in whose hearts dwelt heavenly purity. I have seen women—I would I saw them again!——

Poor Poverty! How agonizing must your hunger be while others indulge in scornful excess! And when someone carelessly tosses a crust into your lap, how bitter must be the tears you shed to moisten it! You poison yourself with your own tears. You are justified in aligning yourself with Vice and Crime. Outlawed criminals often have more compassion in their hearts than those cold, blameless citizens of virtue, in whom the capacity for evil is suppressed; but so is the capacity for good. I have seen women with red vice painted on their cheeks, yet in their hearts, there was heavenly purity. I have seen women—I wish I could see them again!——

WELLINGTON.

This man has the bad fortune to meet with good fortune wherever the greatest men in the world were unfortunate, and that angers us, and makes him hateful. We see in him only the victory of stupidity over genius—Arthur Wellington triumphant where Napoleon Bonaparte was overwhelmed! Never was a man more ironically gifted by Fortune, and it seems as though she would exhibit his empty littleness by raising him high on the shield of victory. Fortune is a woman, and perhaps, in womanly wise, she cherishes a secret grudge against the man who overthrew her former darling, though the very overthrow came from her own will. Now she lets him conquer again on the Catholic Emancipation question—yes, in the very fight in which George Canning was overwhelmed. It is possible that he might have been loved had the wretched Londonderry been his predecessor in the ministry; but he is the successor of the noble Canning, of the much-wept, adored, great Canning—and he conquers where Canning was overwhelmed. Without so unlucky a luck, Wellington would perhaps pass for a great man; people would not hate him, would not measure him too accurately, at least not with the heroic measure with which a Napoleon and a Canning is measured, and consequently it would never have been discovered how small a man he is.

This guy has the unfortunate luck of finding good fortune where the greatest people in the world have failed, which makes us angry and causes us to dislike him. We only see him as proof that stupidity can win over genius—Arthur Wellington succeeds where Napoleon Bonaparte was defeated! Never has anyone been so ironically favored by Fortune, as if she wants to showcase his shallow smallness by raising him high on the shield of victory. Fortune is a woman, and maybe, in a feminine way, she holds a secret grudge against the man who took down her previous favorite, even though that downfall was her own doing. Now she allows him to win again on the Catholic Emancipation issue—yes, in the exact battle where George Canning was defeated. It's possible that he might have been liked if that unfortunate Londonderry had been his predecessor in the ministry; but instead, he follows in the footsteps of the noble Canning, the much-mourned, adored, great Canning—and he succeeds where Canning was overwhelmed. Without such misplaced luck, Wellington might be seen as a great man; people wouldn’t hate him, wouldn’t judge him too harshly—or at least not with the same heroic standards used to measure a Napoleon or a Canning—and therefore, it would never be revealed how small a man he truly is.

He is a small man, and less than small. The French could say nothing more sarcastic of Polignac than that he was a Wellington without celebrity. In fact, what remains when we strip from a Wellington the field-marshal's uniform of celebrity?

He is a short man, and even shorter than that. The French couldn't be more sarcastic about Polignac than by calling him a Wellington without the fame. Really, what is left when we take away a Wellington's famous uniform?

I have here given the best apology for Lord Wellington—in the English sense of the word. My readers will be astonished, however, when I honourably confess that I once clapped on all sail in praise of this hero. It is a good story, and I will tell it here.

I’ve provided the best apology for Lord Wellington—in the English sense of the term. However, my readers will be surprised when I honestly admit that I once wholeheartedly praised this hero. It’s a great story, and I will share it here.

My barber in London was a radical named Mr. White, a poor little man in a shabby black dress, worn until it almost shone white; he was so lean that even his full face looked like a profile, and the sighs in his bosom were visible before they rose. These sighs were caused by the misfortunes of Old England, and by the impossibility of paying the National Debt.

My barber in London was a radical named Mr. White, a small, shabby man in a worn black outfit that was almost shiny; he was so thin that even his round face looked like a side view, and you could see the sighs building in his chest before they escaped. These sighs were due to the troubles of Old England and the struggle to pay off the National Debt.

"Ah!" I often heard him sigh, "why need the English people trouble themselves as to who reigns in France, and what the French are doing at home? But the nobility, sir, and the Church were afraid of the principles of liberty of the French Revolution, and, to keep down these principles, John Bull must give his gold and his blood, and make debts into the bargain. We've got all we wanted out of the war—the revolution has been put down, the French eagles of liberty have had their wings cut, and the Church may be quite sure that none of them will come flying over the Channel; and now the nobility and the Church ought to pay for the debts which were made for their own good, and not for any good of the poor people. Ah!—the poor people!"

"Ah!" I often heard him sigh, "why do the English care about who rules France and what the French are doing at home? But the nobility and the Church were worried about the ideas of freedom from the French Revolution, and to suppress these ideas, John Bull has to spend his money and spill his blood, racking up debts in the process. We've gotten everything we wanted from the war—the revolution has been crushed, the French ideals of liberty have been clipped, and the Church can be sure that none of those ideas will come flying over the Channel; and now the nobility and the Church should cover the debts made for their own benefit, not for the sake of the poor people. Ah!—the poor people!"

Whenever Mr. White came to the "poor people," he always sighed more deeply than ever, and the refrain then was, that bread and beer were so dear that the poor people must starve to feed fat lords, stag-hounds, and priests, and that there was only one remedy. At these words he was wont to whet his razor, and as he drew it murderously up and down the strop, he muttered grimly to himself, "Lords, priests, hounds."

Whenever Mr. White visited the "poor people," he always sighed more heavily than before, and his refrain was that bread and beer were so expensive that the poor had to starve to support wealthy lords, hunting dogs, and priests, and that there was only one solution. As he spoke these words, he would sharpen his razor, and while he pulled it menacingly up and down the strop, he muttered to himself, "Lords, priests, hounds."

But his radical rage boiled most fiercely against the Duke of Wellington; he spat gall and poison whenever he alluded to him, and as he lathered me, he himself foamed with rage. Once I was fairly frightened, when he, while barbering just at my neck, burst out against Wellington, murmuring all the while, "If I only had him so under my razor, I'd save him the trouble of cutting his own throat, as his brother in office and fellow-countryman, Londonderry, did, who killed himself that way at North Cray, in Kent—God damn him!"

But his intense anger was directed most fiercely at the Duke of Wellington; he spewed out bitterness and venom every time he mentioned him, and as he worked on me, he himself seethed with rage. I was genuinely scared once when, while trimming my neck, he erupted against Wellington, mumbling all the while, "If I only had him right under my razor, I’d save him the trouble of cutting his own throat, just like his office colleague and fellow countryman, Londonderry, did, who killed himself that way in North Cray, in Kent—God damn him!"

I felt already that the man's hand trembled, and fearing lest he might imagine in his excitement that I really was the Duke of Wellington, I endeavoured to allay his violence, and in an underhanded manner, to soothe him, I called up his national pride, I represented to him that the Duke of Wellington had advanced the glory of the English, that he had always been an innocent tool in the hands of others, that he was fond of beefsteak, and that he—but the Lord only knows what fine things I said of Wellington as that razor tickled my throat.

I could feel the man's hand shaking, and worried that in his excitement he might actually believe I was the Duke of Wellington, I tried to calm him down. To subtly ease his aggression, I appealed to his national pride, reminding him that the Duke of Wellington had elevated the glory of the English, that he had always been an innocent tool in the hands of others, that he loved beefsteak, and that he—but only God knows what great things I said about Wellington while that razor grazed my throat.

What vexes me most is the reflection that Arthur Wellington will be as immortal as Napoleon Bonaparte. It is true that in like manner the name of Pontius Pilate is as little likely to be forgotten as that of Christ. Wellington and Napoleon! It is a wonderful phenomenon that the human mind can at the same time think of both these names. There can be no greater contrast than these two, even in their external appearance. Wellington, the dull ghost, with an ashy grey soul in a buckram body, a wooden smile on his freezing face—and by the side one thinks of the figure of Napoleon, every inch a god!

What bothers me the most is the thought that Arthur Wellington will be just as unforgettable as Napoleon Bonaparte. It’s true that just like that, the name of Pontius Pilate is just as unlikely to be forgotten as that of Christ. Wellington and Napoleon! It’s amazing that the human mind can simultaneously think of both these names. There is no greater contrast between them, even in how they look. Wellington, the dull ghost, with a lifeless gray soul in a stiff body, a wooden smile on his cold face—while alongside, you picture Napoleon, every bit a god!

That figure never disappears from my memory. I still see him, high on his horse, with eternal eyes in his marble, imperial face, gazing down calm as destiny on the Guards defiling past—he was then sending them to Russia, and the old grenadiers glanced up at him, so terribly devoted, so consciously serious, so proud in death—

That image never leaves my mind. I still see him, high on his horse, with everlasting eyes in his marble, imperial face, calmly looking down like fate at the Guards marching by—he was sending them to Russia then, and the old grenadiers glanced up at him, so deeply devoted, so aware of the gravity of the moment, so proud in death—

"Te, Cæsar, morituri salutant!"

"Hey, Caesar, those who are about to die salute you!"

There often steals over me a secret doubt whether I ever really saw him, if we were really his contemporaries, and then it seems to me as if his portrait, torn from the little frame of the present, vanished away more proudly and imperiously in the twilight of the past. His name even now sounds to us like a word of the early world, as antique and heroic as those of Alexander and Cæsar. It has become a rallying word among races, and when the East and the West meet, they fraternise through that single name.

I often find myself secretly doubting whether I ever truly saw him, whether we were really living in the same time. Then it feels like his image, pulled from the small frame of the present, disappears even more proudly and commanding into the shadows of the past. Even now, his name sounds to us like something from ancient times, as classic and heroic as those of Alexander and Caesar. It has become a unifying name among different races, and when the East and the West meet, they connect through that one name.

How significant and magical that name can sound I once felt in the deepest manner in the harbour of London, at the India Docks, as I stood on board an East Indiaman just arrived from Bengal. It was a giant-like ship, fully manned with Hindoos. The grotesque forms and groups, the singularly variegated dresses, the enigmatical expressions, the strange gestures, the wild and foreign ring of their language, their shouts of joy and their laughter, and the seriousness ever rising and falling on certain soft, yellow faces, their eyes like black flowers which looked at me as with melancholy woe—all this awoke in me a feeling like that of enchantment; I was suddenly as if transported into Scheherezade's story, and I thought that broad-leaved palms, and long-necked camels, and gold-covered elephants, and other fable-like trees and animals, must forthwith appear. The supercargo who was on the vessel, and who understood as little of the language as I myself, could not, in his genuine English narrowness, narrate to me enough of what a ridiculous race they were, nearly all Mahometans collected from every land of Asia, from the limits of China to the Arabian sea, even jet black, woolly-haired Africans.

How significant and magical that name can sound I once felt deeply in the harbor of London, at the India Docks, as I stood on board an East Indiaman just arrived from Bengal. It was a massive ship, fully crewed by Hindus. The strange shapes and groups, the uniquely colorful clothing, the enigmatic expressions, the odd gestures, the wild and foreign tone of their language, their shouts of joy and laughter, and the seriousness that rose and fell on certain soft, yellow faces, their eyes like black flowers gazing at me with a sense of melancholy—all of this filled me with a feeling of enchantment; I felt as if I had been transported into Scheherazade's story, and I imagined that broad-leaved palms, long-necked camels, golden-covered elephants, and other fable-like trees and creatures would soon appear. The supercargo on the ship, who understood the language no better than I did, could not, in his genuine English narrow-mindedness, tell me enough about how ridiculous they were, nearly all Muslims gathered from every corner of Asia, from the borders of China to the Arabian Sea, even including jet black, woolly-haired Africans.

To one whose whole soul was weary of the spiritless West, and who was as sick of Europe as I then was, this fragment of the East which moved cheerfully and changingly before my eyes was a refreshing solace, my heart enjoyed at least a few drops of that draught which I had so often longed for in gloomy Hanoverian or Prussian winter nights, and it is very possible that the foreigners saw how agreeable the sight of them was to me, and how gladly I would have spoken a kind word to them. It was also plain from the depths of their eyes that I pleased them well, and they would also have willingly said something pleasant to me, and it was a vexation that neither understood the other's language. At length a means occurred to me of expressing to them with a single word my friendly feelings, and stretching forth my hands reverently, as if in loving greeting, I cried the name, "Mahomed!" Joy suddenly flashed over the dark faces of the foreigners; they folded their arms reverently in turn, and greeted me back with the exclamation, "Bonaparte!"

To someone whose entire being was tired of the lifeless West, and who was as fed up with Europe as I was at that time, this piece of the East that moved happily and dynamically in front of me was a refreshing comfort. My heart savored at least a few drops of the drink I had often desired during gloomy nights in Hanover or Prussia, and it’s very possible the foreigners noticed how much I enjoyed seeing them and how much I would have loved to say something kind to them. It was also clear from the depths of their eyes that I made them happy, and they would have gladly said something nice to me too, which was frustrating since neither of us understood the other’s language. Eventually, I found a way to express my friendly feelings to them with just one word. Extending my hands reverently, as if in a loving greeting, I called out, "Mahomed!" Joy suddenly lit up the dark faces of the foreigners; they folded their arms reverently in return and greeted me back with the exclamation, "Bonaparte!"

THE LIBERATION.

SHOULD the time for leisurely research ever return to me, I will prove in the most tiresomely fundamental manner that it was not India, but Egypt which originated that system of castes which has for two thousand years disguised itself in the garb of every country, and has deceived every age in its own language, which is now perhaps dead, yet which, counterfeiting the appearance of life, wanders about among us evil-eyed and mischief-making, poisoning our blooming life with its corpse vapour—yes, like a vampire of the Middle Ages, sucking the blood and the light from the heart of nations. From the mud of the Nile sprang not merely crocodiles which well could weep, but also priests who understand it far better, and that privileged hereditary race of warriors, who in their lust of murder and ravenous appetites far surpass any crocodiles.

If I ever get the chance for some relaxed research again, I’ll show in the most frustratingly basic way that it was not India, but Egypt that created the caste system, which has for two thousand years disguised itself in the clothing of every nation and tricked every era in its own language. This language may now be dead, yet it wanders among us, looking sinister and causing trouble, poisoning our vibrant lives with its putrid essence—like a vampire from the Middle Ages, draining the blood and light from the hearts of nations. From the mud of the Nile arose not just crocodiles that could weep, but also priests who understand it far better, along with that privileged hereditary class of warriors who, in their thirst for blood and insatiable desires, far exceed any crocodiles.

Two deeply-thinking men of the German nation discovered the soundest counter-charm to the worst of all Egyptian plagues, and by the black art—by gunpowder and the art of printing—they broke the force of that spiritual and worldly hierarchy which had formed itself from the union of the priesthood and the warrior caste—that is to say, from the so-called Catholic Church, and from the feudal nobility, which enslaved all Europe, body and spirit. The printing-press burst asunder the dogma-structure in which the archpriest of Rome had imprisoned souls, and Northern Europe again breathed free, delivered from the nightmare of that clergy which had indeed abandoned the form of Egyptian inheritance of rank, but which remained all the truer to the Egyptian priestly spirit, since it presented itself, with greater sternness and asperity, as a corporation of old bachelors, continued not by natural propagation, but unnaturally by a Mameluke system of recruiting. In like manner we see how the warlike caste has lost its power since the old routine of the business is worth nothing in the modern methods of war. For the strongest castles are now thrown down by the trumpet-tones of the cannon as of old the walls of Jericho; the iron harness of the knight is no better protection against the leaden rain than the linen blouse of the peasant; powder makes men equal; a citizen's musket goes off just as well as a nobleman's—the people rise.

Two thoughtful men from Germany found the best counter to the worst of all Egyptian plagues, and through black magic—specifically gunpowder and the printing press—they broke the grip of the spiritual and worldly hierarchy formed by the alliance of the priesthood and the warrior class—that is, the so-called Catholic Church and the feudal nobility, which had enslaved all of Europe, both body and soul. The printing press shattered the dogma that the archpriest of Rome had used to imprison people's souls, and Northern Europe again breathed freely, liberated from the nightmare of the clergy, which although it had shed the outward signs of Egyptian rank, remained deeply tied to the Egyptian priestly spirit, presenting itself with even greater severity as a corporation of old bachelors, sustained not by natural means, but unnaturally through a Mameluke-style recruitment system. Similarly, we can see how the warrior class has lost its power since the old ways are no longer effective in modern warfare. Now, the strongest castles are brought down by cannon fire just like the walls of Jericho were; a knight's heavy armor offers no better protection against bullets than a peasant's linen shirt; gunpowder levels the playing field; a citizen's musket fires just as effectively as a nobleman's—the people are rising.

The earlier efforts of which we read in the history of the Lombard and Tuscan republics, of the Spanish communes, and of the free cities in Germany and other countries, do not deserve the honour of being classed as movements on the part of the people; they were not efforts to attain liberty, but merely liberties; not battles for right, but for municipal rights; corporations fought for privileges, and all remained fixed in the bonds of gilds and trades unions.

The earlier efforts we read about in the history of the Lombard and Tuscan republics, the Spanish communes, and the free cities in Germany and other countries don't deserve to be recognized as movements by the people; they weren't attempts to achieve freedom, but just freedoms; not fights for justice, but for local rights; groups fought for privileges, and everything stayed bound by guilds and trade unions.

Not until the days of the Reformation did the battle assume general and spiritual proportions, and then liberty was demanded, not as an imported, but as an aboriginal right; not as inherited, but as inborn. Principles were brought forward instead of old parchments; and the peasants in Germany, and the Puritans in England, fell back on the gospel whose texts then were of as high authority as the reason, even higher, since they were regarded as the revealed reason of God. There it stood legibly written that men are of equal birth, that the pride which exalts itself will be damned, that wealth is a sin, and that the poor are summoned to enjoyment in the beautiful garden of God, the common Father.

Not until the Reformation did the struggle take on a broader and more spiritual aspect, and at that point, freedom was demanded not as something borrowed, but as a natural right; not as something passed down, but as something inherent. Ideas were put forward instead of old documents, and the peasants in Germany and the Puritans in England turned to the gospel, whose texts held as much authority as reason, even more so, since they were seen as God's revealed reason. It clearly stated that all men are born equal, that prideful arrogance will be punished, that wealth is a sin, and that the poor are invited to enjoy the beautiful garden of God, our common Father.

With the Bible in one hand and the sword in the other, the peasants swept over South Germany, and announced to the insolent burghers of high-towered Nuremberg, that in future no house should be left standing which was not a peasant's house. So truly and so deeply had they comprehended equality. Even at the present day in Franconia and in Suabia we see traces of this doctrine of equality, and a shuddering reverence of the Holy Spirit creeps over the wanderer when he sees in the moonshine the dark ruins of the days of the Peasant's War. It is well for him, who, in sober, waking mood, sees naught besides; but if one is a "Sunday child"—and every one familiar with history is that—he will also see the high hunt in which the German nobility, the rudest and sternest in the world, pursued their victims. He will see how unarmed men were slaughtered by thousands: racked, speared, and martyred; and from the waving corn-fields one will see the bloody peasant-heads nodding mysteriously, and above one hears a terrible lark whistling, piping revenge, like the Piper of Helfenstein.

With the Bible in one hand and a sword in the other, the peasants surged through South Germany, telling the arrogant townspeople of tall-towered Nuremberg that from now on, no house would remain standing that wasn’t a peasant’s house. They truly understood equality on such a deep level. Even today in Franconia and Swabia, we see remnants of this equality doctrine, and a shuddering respect for the Holy Spirit washes over travelers when they glimpse the dark ruins from the Peasant's War in the moonlight. It’s fortunate for those who, in a sober, waking state, see nothing beyond; but for those who are "Sunday children"—and anyone familiar with history knows this—there’s also the hunt where the German nobility, the most ruthless and sternest in the world, chased their victims. They will witness how unarmed men were slaughtered by the thousands: tortured, speared, and martyred; and from the waving cornfields, one can see the bloody peasant heads nodding ominously, while above, a dreadful lark whistles, singing of vengeance, like the Piper of Helfenstein.

The brothers in England and Scotland were rather more fortunate; their defeat was not so disgraceful and so unproductive, and even now we see there the results of their rule. But they did not obtain a firm foundation for their principles, the dainty cavaliers ruled again just as before, and amused themselves with merry tales of the stiff old Roundheads, which a friendly bard had written so prettily to entertain their leisure hours. No social overthrow took place in Great Britain, the framework of civil and political institutions remained undisturbed, the tyranny of castes and of corporations has remained there till the present day, and though drunken with the light and warmth of modern civilisation, England is still congealed in a mediæval condition, or rather in the condition of a fashionable Middle Age. The concessions which have there been made to liberal ideas, have been with difficulty wrested from this mediæval rigidity, and all modern improvements have there proceeded, not from a principle, but from actual necessity, and they all bear the curse of that halfness system which inevitably makes necessary new exertion and new conflicts to the death, with all their attendant dangers. The religious reformation in England is consequently but half completed, and one finds himself much worse off between the four bare prison walls of the Episcopal Anglican Church than in the large, beautifully-painted, and softly-cushioned spiritual dungeon of Catholicism. Nor has the political reformation succeeded much better; popular representation is in England as faulty as possible, and if ranks are no longer distinguished by their coats, they are at least divided by differences in legal standing, patronage, rights of court presentation, prerogatives, customary privileges, and similar misfortunes; and if the rights of person and property depend no longer upon aristocratic caprice, but upon laws, still these laws are nothing but another sort of teeth with which the aristocratic brood seizes its prey, and another sort of daggers wherewith it assassinates people. For in reality, no tyrant upon the Continent squeezes, by his own arbitrary will, so many taxes out of his subjects as the English people are obliged to pay by law; and no tyrant was ever so cruel as England's Criminal Law, which daily commits murder for the amount of one shilling, and that with the coldest formality. Although many improvements have recently been made in this melancholy state of affairs in England; although limits have been placed to temporal and clerical avarice, and though the great falsehood of a popular representation is, to a certain degree, occasionally modified by transferring the perverted electoral voice of a rotten borough to a great manufacturing town; and although the harshest intolerance is here and there softened by giving certain rights to other sects, still it is all a miserable patching up which cannot last long, and the stupidest tailor in England can foresee that, sooner or later, the old garment of state will be rent asunder into wretched rags.

The brothers in England and Scotland had a bit more luck; their defeat was not as shameful or fruitless, and even now we can see the results of their leadership. However, they didn't establish a solid foundation for their beliefs; the elegant cavaliers ruled once more just like before and entertained themselves with cheerful stories about the stern old Roundheads, which a friendly poet had beautifully crafted to amuse their free time. No social upheaval happened in Great Britain; the structure of civil and political institutions stayed the same, and the oppression of classes and corporations has persisted to this day. Even though England is intoxicated by the light and warmth of modern civilization, it remains stuck in a medieval state, or rather in a stylish version of the Middle Ages. The concessions to liberal ideas have been hard-won from this medieval rigidity, and all modern advancements have come not from principle, but from necessity, carrying the burden of a compromised system that inevitably leads to new struggles and life-or-death conflicts, with all their associated dangers. The religious reform in England is therefore only half-finished, and one finds themselves in a worse situation within the four bare walls of the Episcopal Anglican Church than in the large, beautifully decorated, and comfortably cushioned spiritual prison of Catholicism. The political reform hasn't fared much better; popular representation in England is as flawed as it can be, and although social classes are no longer defined by their attire, they are still separated by differences in legal status, patronage, court rights, privileges, and other unfortunate circumstances. While personal and property rights no longer depend on aristocratic whims but on laws, these laws are just another form of tools that the aristocratic elite use to control their victims, and another type of weapon with which they harm people. In reality, no tyrant on the continent extracts as many taxes from his subjects through sheer will as the English people are forced to pay by law; and no tyrant is as cruel as England's criminal law, which carries out executions with chilling formality for just one shilling. Although there have been some improvements in this grim situation in England; although limits have been placed on the greed of the temporal and clerical powers, and although the great lie of popular representation has somewhat been altered by shifting the corrupted electoral influence of a rotten borough to a major manufacturing town; and although the harshest intolerances have been eased by granting some rights to other sects, it remains a miserable stopgap that will not endure for long. Even the most foolish tailor in England can see that, sooner or later, the old system will tear apart into sorry tatters.

"No man seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment; else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred; but new wine must be put into new bottles."

"No one sews a patch of new fabric onto an old garment; otherwise, the new patch pulls away from the old fabric, making the tear worse. And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the new wine will burst the wineskins, spilling the wine and ruining the skins; new wine must be put into new wineskins."

The deepest truth blooms only out of the deepest love, and hence comes the harmony of the views of the elder Preacher in the Mount, who spoke against the aristocracy of Jerusalem; and those later preachers of the mountain, who, from the summit of the Convention in Paris, preached a tri-coloured gospel, according to which, not merely the form of the State, but all social life should be, not patched, but formed anew, newly founded; yes, born again.

The deepest truth can only come from the deepest love, which explains the harmony between the teachings of the Elder Preacher on the Mount, who spoke against the elite of Jerusalem, and those later preachers from the Convention in Paris, who preached a three-colored gospel. According to this message, it’s not enough to just change the form of the State; all social life needs to be completely recreated, freshly established; yes, born again.

I speak of the French Revolution, that epoch of the world in which the doctrines of freedom and of equality rose so triumphantly from those universal sources of knowledge which we call reason, and which must, as an unceasing revelation which repeats itself in every human head, and founds a distinct branch of knowledge, be far preferable to that transmitted revelation which makes itself known only in a few elect, and which, by the multitude, can only be believed. The privileged aristocracy, the caste-system with their peculiar rights, were never able to combat this last-mentioned sort of revelation (which is itself of an aristocratic nature) so safely and surely as reason, which is democratic by nature, now does. The history of the Revolution is the military history of this strife, in which we have all taken a greater or lesser part; it is the death-struggle with Egyptianism.

I'm talking about the French Revolution, a time in history when the ideas of freedom and equality emerged powerfully from the universal source of knowledge we call reason. This must be a continuous revelation that occurs within every human mind, establishing a unique field of knowledge, and it is certainly more valuable than the revealed knowledge that is only understood by a select few and can only be believed by the masses. The privileged elite and the caste system, with their special rights, could never effectively resist this last type of revelation (which is inherently elitist) as well as reason, which is inherently democratic. The history of the Revolution is a military account of this struggle, in which each of us has participated to varying degrees; it represents the final battle against oppression.

Though the swords of the enemies grow duller day by day, and though we have already conquered the best positions, still we cannot raise the song of victory until the work is perfected. We can only during the night, when there are armistices, go forth with the lantern on the field of death to bury the dead. Little avails the short burial service! Calumny, the vile insolent spectre, sits upon the noblest graves.

Though the enemies' swords become duller every day, and even though we've already taken the best positions, we can't celebrate victory until the job is done. At night, during the ceasefires, we can only go out with a lantern into the battlefield to bury the dead. A brief burial service doesn't do much good! Slander, that despicable, arrogant ghost, stands over the noblest graves.

Oh, that the battle were only with those hereditary foes of truth who so treacherously poison the good name of their enemies, and who even humiliated that first Preacher of the Mount, the purest hero of freedom; for as they could no longer deny that he was the greatest of men, they made of him the least of gods. He who fights with priests may make up his mind to have his poor good name torn and befouled by the most infamous lies and the most cutting slanders. But as those flags which are most rent by shot, or blackened by powder-smoke, are more highly honoured than the whitest and soundest recruiting banners, and as they are at last laid up as national relics in cathedrals, so at some future day the names of our heroes, the more they are torn and blackened, will be all the more enthusiastically honoured in the holy St. Geneviève of Freedom.

Oh, if only the battle were just with those long-standing enemies of truth who sneakily slander the good name of their opponents, and who even belittled that first Preacher of the Mount, the purest hero of freedom; because when they could no longer deny he was the greatest of men, they turned him into the least of gods. Anyone who stands up against priests should be prepared for their good name to be shredded and smeared by the worst lies and harshest slanders. But just like the flags that are most torn by bullets or stained by gunpowder smoke are more revered than the cleanest and strongest recruiting banners, in the future, the names of our heroes, no matter how much they are assaulted and tarnished, will be celebrated even more passionately in the holy St. Geneviève of Freedom.

The Revolution itself has been slandered, like its heroes, and represented as a terror to princes, and as a popular scare-crow, in libels of every description. All the so-called "horrors of the Revolution" have been learned by heart by children in the schools, and at one time nothing was seen in the public fairs but harshly-coloured pictures of the guillotine. It cannot be denied that this machine, which was invented by a French physician, a great world orthopædist, Monsieur Guillotin, and with which stupid heads are easily separated from evil hearts, this wholesome machine has indeed been applied rather frequently, but still only in incurable diseases, in such cases, for example, as treachery, falsehood, and weakness, and the patients were not long tortured, not racked and broken on the wheel as thousands upon thousands of roturiers and vilains, citizens and peasants were tortured, racked, and broken on the wheel in the good old time. It is, of course, terrible that the French, with this machine, once even amputated the head of their State, and no one knows whether they ought to be accused, on that account, of parricide or of suicide; but on more thorough reflection, we find that Louis of France was less a sacrifice to passion than to circumstances, and that those men who forced the people on to such a sacrifice, and who have themselves, in every age, poured forth princely blood far more abundantly, should not appear solely as accusers. Only two kings, both of them rather kings of the nobility than of the people, were sacrificed by the people, and that not in a time of peace, or to subserve petty interests, but in the extremest needs of war, when they saw themselves betrayed, and when they least spared their own blood. But certainly more than a thousand princes were treacherously slain, on account of avarice or frivolous interests, by the dagger, by the sword, and by the poison of nobility and priests. It really seems as though these castes regarded regicide as one of their privileges, and therefore bewail the more selfishly the death of Louis the XVI. and of Charles I. Oh! that kings at last would perceive that they could live more safely as kings of the people, and protected by the law, than under the guard of their noble body-murderers.

The Revolution has been spoken about negatively, just like its heroes, and has been portrayed as a threat to kings and a source of fear for the public through various slanderous writings. All the so-called "horrors of the Revolution" have been memorized by children in school, and at one time, the only thing seen at public fairs were harshly colored images of the guillotine. It can’t be denied that this device, invented by a French doctor, a notable orthopedist named Monsieur Guillotin, which easily separates foolish heads from wicked hearts, has indeed been used quite frequently, but only for incurable issues like treachery, lies, and weakness. The individuals who faced it were not long tormented or tortured endlessly as countless commoners and peasants had been in the past. It is certainly shocking that the French once used this machine to remove the head of their State, and it’s unclear whether they should be seen as committing treason or self-destruction. However, on closer examination, it's clear that Louis of France was less a victim of passion and more of circumstance, and those who pushed the people toward such a sacrifice, and who themselves have shed princely blood throughout history, shouldn’t just be seen as accusers. Only two kings, who were more kings of the nobility than of the people, were executed by the populace, and that was not during peaceful times or for petty reasons, but in the direst moments of war, when they felt betrayed and were unwilling to spare their own blood. But certainly, more than a thousand princes were treacherously murdered out of greed or trivial interests by the dagger, the sword, and the poison of the nobility and priests. It seems as if these classes view regicide as one of their entitlements and therefore lament the deaths of Louis XVI and Charles I more self-servingly. Oh! if only kings would realize that they could live more securely as rulers of the people, supported by the law, than relying on their noble bodyguards who turn to murder.

But not only have the heroes of our revolution and the revolution itself been slandered, but even our entire age has been parodied with unheard-of wickedness; and if one hears or reads our vile traducers and scorners, then he will learn that the people are the canaille—the vile mob—that freedom is insolence, and with heaven-bent eyes and pious sighs, our enemies complain and bewail that we were frivolous and had, alas! no religion. Hypocritical, sneaking souls, who creep about bent down beneath the burden of their secret vices, dare to vilify an age which is, perhaps, holier than any of its predecessors or successors, an age that sacrifices itself for the sins of the past and for the happiness of the future, a Messiah among centuries, which could hardly endure its bloody crown of thorns and heavy cross, did it not now and then trill a merry vaudeville, and crack a joke at the modern Pharisees and Sadducees. Its colossal pains would be intolerable without such jesting and persiflage! Seriousness shows itself more majestically when laughter leads the way. And the age in this shows itself exactly like its children among the French, who have written very terribly wanton books, and yet have been very strong and serious when strength and seriousness were necessary, as, for instance, Laclos, and even Louvet de Couvray, who both fought for freedom with the self-sacrifice and boldness of martyrs, and yet who wrote in a very frivolous and indecent way, and, alas! had no religion!

But not only have the heroes of our revolution and the revolution itself been slandered, but even our entire era has been mocked with unprecedented wickedness; and if one listens to or reads the vile slanders and insults from our critics, they will find that the people are the canaille—the vile mob—that freedom is just arrogance, and with self-righteous eyes and pious sighs, our enemies lament that we were frivolous and, unfortunately, had no religion. Hypocritical, sneaky souls, who skulk around burdened by their secret vices, dare to criticize an era that may be more pure than any that came before or will come after, an era that sacrifices itself for the sins of the past and for the well-being of the future, a Messiah among centuries, which could barely endure its bloody crown of thorns and heavy cross without sometimes singing a cheerful tune and cracking jokes at the modern Pharisees and Sadducees. Its immense suffering would be unbearable without such jesting and banter! Seriousness shines more majestically when laughter leads the way. And this era reflects this exactly like its children among the French, who have written some extremely lascivious books, yet have been very strong and serious when strength and seriousness were needed, as seen in Laclos and even Louvet de Couvray, who both fought for freedom with the selflessness and bravery of martyrs, and yet wrote in a very frivolous and indecent manner, and, alas, had no religion!

As if freedom were not as good a religion as any other! And since it is ours, we may, meeting with the same measure, declare its contemners to be themselves frivolous and irreligious.

As if freedom weren't just as valid a belief as any other! And since it belongs to us, we can, with the same reasoning, call those who disrespect it themselves shallow and without faith.

Yes, I repeat the words with which I began these pages: freedom is a new religion, the religion of our age. If Christ is not the God of this religion, he is still one of its high-priests, and his name shines consolingly in the hearts of its children. But the French are the chosen people of the new religion, the first gospels and dogmas were penned in their language. Paris is the New Jerusalem, and the Rhine is the Jordan which separates the land of Freedom from the land of the Philistines.

Yes, I’ll repeat the words I started with: freedom is a new religion, the religion of our time. If Christ isn’t the God of this religion, he is still one of its high priests, and his name brings comfort to the hearts of its followers. But the French are the chosen people of this new religion; the first gospels and doctrines were written in their language. Paris is the New Jerusalem, and the Rhine is the Jordan that separates the land of Freedom from the land of the Philistines.

JAN STEEN.

[This fragment—newly translated—is taken from the Memoiren des Herrn von Schnabelwopski, which was written in 1831, and published in 1834, in the first volume of the Salon. The Memoirs of Schnabelwopski consist simply of the hero's light sketches of Hamburg, Amsterdam, and Leyden, and his experiences in those towns; they have generally excited the anger of Heine's German critics and biographers, who appear to detect a tone of irreverent levity about them, which they attribute to Parisian influences. Wagner obtained the story of his Flying Dutchman from a chapter of Schnabelwopski's Memoirs.]

[This fragment—newly translated—is taken from the Memoirs of Mr. Schnabelwopski, which was written in 1831 and published in 1834, in the first volume of the Salon. The Memoirs of Schnabelwopski consist simply of the hero's light sketches of Hamburg, Amsterdam, and Leiden, and his experiences in those towns; they have generally angered Heine's German critics and biographers, who seem to detect a tone of irreverent lightness about them, which they blame on Parisian influences. Wagner got the story for his Flying Dutchman from a chapter of Schnabelwopski's Memoirs.]

IN the house I lodged at in Leyden there once lived Jan Steen, the great Jan Steen, whom I hold to be as great as Raphael. Even as a sacred painter Jan was as great, and that will be clearly seen when the religion of sorrow has passed away, and the religion of joy has torn off the thick veil that covers the rose-bushes of the earth, and the nightingales dare at last to sing joyously out their long-concealed raptures.

IN the house I stayed at in Leyden, there once lived Jan Steen, the great Jan Steen, who I consider just as great as Raphael. Even as a sacred painter, Jan was exceptional, and this will be evident when the religion of sorrow fades away, and the religion of joy lifts the heavy curtain that hides the beauty of the earth, allowing the nightingales to finally sing joyfully their long-hidden delights.

But no nightingale will ever sing so joyously as Jan Steen painted. No one has understood so profoundly as he that there shall be an eternal festival on the earth; he comprehended that our life is only the pictured kiss of God, and he felt that the Holy Ghost is revealed most gloriously in light and in laughter.

But no nightingale will ever sing as joyfully as Jan Steen painted. No one has understood as deeply as he that there will be an everlasting celebration on earth; he realized that our life is just the depicted kiss of God, and he sensed that the Holy Spirit is revealed most beautifully in light and laughter.

His eye laughed into the light, and the light mirrored itself in his laughing eye. And Jan remained always a dear, good child. The stern old Pastor of Leyden sat near him by the hearth, and delivered a lengthy discourse concerning his jovial life, his laughing, unchristian conduct, his love of drinking, his disorderly domestic affairs, his obdurate gaiety; and Jan listened quietly for two long hours, and betrayed not the slightest impatience at the lengthy sermon; only once he broke in with the words—"Yes, Domine, that light is far better; yes, Domine, I beg of you to draw your stool a little nearer to the fire, so that the flame may cast its red gleam over your whole face, and leave the rest of the figure in shade——"

His eye sparkled in the light, and the light reflected back in his sparkling eye. Jan always remained a sweet, good child. The strict old Pastor of Leyden sat beside him by the fire and delivered a long lecture about his cheerful lifestyle, his laughing, un-Christian behavior, his love for drinking, his messy home life, and his stubborn happiness; Jan listened quietly for two long hours, showing no signs of impatience at the lengthy sermon; only once did he interject with, "Yes, Domine, that light is much better; yes, Domine, please pull your stool a little closer to the fire, so the flame can cast its red glow over your whole face, leaving the rest in shadow——"

The Domine stood up wrathful and departed. But Jan seized his palate and painted the stern old man, just as in that sermon on vice he had unconsciously furnished a model. The picture is excellent, and hung in my bed-room at Leyden.

The Domine stood up in anger and left. But Jan captured his likeness and painted the serious old man, just like he had unknowingly provided a reference during that sermon on vice. The painting is great and is displayed in my bedroom in Leyden.

Now that I have seen so many of Jan Steen's pictures in Holland, I seem to know the whole life of the man. I know all his relations, his wife, his children, his mother, all his cousins, his enemies, his various connections—yes, I know them all by sight. These faces greet us out of all his pictures, and a collection of them would be a biography of the painter. He has often with a single stroke revealed the deepest secrets of his soul. As I think, his wife reproached him far too often about drinking too much. For in the picture which represents the bean-feast, where Jan and his family are sitting at table, we see his wife with a large jug of wine in her hand, and eyes beaming like a Bacchante's. I am convinced, however, that the good lady never indulged in too much wine; only the rogue wanted us to believe that it was his wife, and not he, who was too fond of drinking. That is why he laughs so joyously out of the picture. He is happy; he sits in the midst of his family; his little son is bean-king, and, with his tinsel crown, stands upon a stool; his old mother, with the happiest smirk of satisfaction in the wrinkles of her countenance, carries the youngest grandchild upon her arm; the musicians play their maddest dance melodies; and the frugal, sulky housewife is painted in, an object of suspicion to all posterity, as though she were inebriated.

Now that I’ve seen so many of Jan Steen's paintings in Holland, I feel like I know the whole life of the man. I’m familiar with all his family—the wife, the kids, his mother, all his cousins, his enemies, and his various connections—yes, I recognize them all by sight. Their faces greet us in all his artworks, and a collection of them would serve as a biography of the painter. He often reveals the deepest secrets of his soul with just one brushstroke. I think his wife scolded him way too much for drinking too much. In the painting that shows the bean-feast, where Jan and his family are gathered around the table, we see his wife holding a large jug of wine, her eyes sparkling like a Bacchante's. I’m convinced, though, that the good lady never overindulged in wine; it was just the rogue who wanted us to believe it was her, not him, who was too fond of drinking. That’s why he looks so joyfully at us from the painting. He’s happy; he’s sitting in the middle of his family; his little son is the bean-king, standing on a stool with his tinsel crown; his old mother wears the happiest smirk of satisfaction in her wrinkled face, holding the youngest grandchild in her arms; the musicians are playing their liveliest dance tunes; and the frugal, grumpy housewife is depicted suspiciously, as if she were drunk.

How often, during my stay at Leyden, did I think myself back for whole hours into the household scenes in which the excellent Jan must have lived and suffered. Many a time I thought I saw him bodily, sitting at his easel, now and then grasping the great jug, "reflecting and therewith drinking, and then again drinking without reflecting." It was no gloomy Catholic spectre that I saw, but a modern bright spirit of joy, who after death still visited his old work-room to paint merry pictures and to drink. Only such ghosts will our children sometimes see, in the light of day, while the sun shines through the windows, and from the spire no black, hollow bells, but red, exulting trumpet tones, announce the pleasant hour of noon.

How often, during my time in Leyden, did I find myself lost for hours in the family scenes that the great Jan must have experienced and endured. Many times, I imagined him there, sitting at his easel, occasionally reaching for the big jug, "thinking and drinking, and then just drinking without thinking." It wasn't a gloomy Catholic ghost that I saw, but a modern, bright spirit of joy who, after death, still came back to his old studio to create cheerful paintings and enjoy a drink. Only such spirits might be what our children occasionally see, in the bright light of day, while sunlight pours through the windows, and from the spire, there aren't any dark, hollow bells, but vibrant, joyful trumpet tones announcing the happy hour of noon.

THE ROMANTIC SCHOOL.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[The Romantic School, one of Heine's chief works, of which the most interesting portions are here given, was published in 1833. It was first written in French, as a counterblast to Madame de Staël's De l'Allemagne, forming a series of articles in the Europe Littéraire. Notwithstanding many errors of detail, and some occasional injustice, it remains by far the best account of the most important aspect of German literature. Indirectly Heine wished to lay down the programme of the future, for he regarded himself as the last of the Romantic poets, and the inaugurator of a new school. The following translation is Mr. Fleishman's; it has been carefully revised.]

[The Romantic School, one of Heine's major works, of which the most interesting sections are provided here, was published in 1833. It was originally written in French as a response to Madame de Staël's De l'Allemagne, consisting of a series of articles in the Europe Littéraire. Despite some inaccuracies and occasional biases, it remains the best account of the most significant aspects of German literature. Indirectly, Heine intended to establish the direction for the future, as he saw himself as the last of the Romantic poets and the founder of a new school. The following translation is by Mr. Fleishman; it has been carefully revised.]

MADAME de Staël's work, De l'Allemagne, is the only comprehensive account of the intellectual life of Germany which has been accessible to the French; and yet since her book appeared a considerable period has elapsed, and an entirely new school of literature has arisen in Germany. Is it only a transitional literature? Has it already reached its zenith? Has it already begun to decline? Opinions are divided concerning it. The majority believe that with the death of Goethe a new literary era begins in Germany; that with him the old Germany also descended to its grave; that the aristocratic period of literature was ended, and the democratic just beginning; or, as a French journal recently phrased it, "The intellectual dominion of the individual has ceased,—the intellectual rule of the many has commenced."

MADAME de Staël's work, De l'Allemagne, is the only detailed account of Germany's intellectual life that's been available to the French. However, a significant amount of time has passed since her book was published, and a completely new literary movement has emerged in Germany. Is this just a temporary phase in literature? Has it already reached its peak? Is it starting to decline? There's a divide in opinions about it. Most people believe that with Goethe's death, a new literary era has begun in Germany; that the old Germany has also come to an end; that the aristocratic literary period is over, and the democratic one is just starting; or, as a recent French journal put it, "The intellectual power of the individual has ended—the intellectual influence of the many has begun."

So far as I am concerned, I do not venture to pass so decided an opinion as to the future evolutions of German intellect. I had already prophesied many years in advance the end of the Goethean art-period, by which name I was the first to designate that era. I could safely venture the prophecy, for I knew very well the ways and the means of those malcontents who sought to overthrow the Goethean art-empire, and it is even claimed that I took part in those seditious outbreaks against Goethe. Now that Goethe is dead, the thought of it fills me with an overpowering sorrow.

As far as I'm concerned, I don’t feel comfortable making a strong judgment about the future direction of German intellect. I had already predicted many years in advance the end of the Goethean art period, which I was the first to call that era. I could make that prediction confidently, because I understood the tactics of those discontented individuals who wanted to undermine the Goethean art empire, and it’s even said that I was involved in those rebellious movements against Goethe. Now that Goethe is gone, just thinking about it overwhelms me with sadness.

While I announce this book as a sequel to Madame de Staël's De l'Allemagne, and extol her work very highly as being replete with information, I must yet recommend a certain caution in the acceptance of the views enunciated in that book, which I am compelled to characterise as a coterie-book. Madame de Staël, of glorious memory, here opened, in the form of a book, a salon in which she received German authors and gave them an opportunity to make themselves known to the civilised world of France. But above the din of the most diverse voices, confusedly discoursing therein, the most audible is the delicate treble of Herr A. W. Schlegel. Where the large-hearted woman is wholly herself,—where she is uninfluenced by others, and expresses the thoughts of her own radiant soul, displaying all her intellectual fireworks and brilliant follies,—there the book is good, even excellent. But as soon as she yields to foreign influences, as soon as she begins to glorify a school whose spirit is wholly unfamiliar and incomprehensible to her, as soon as through the commendation of this school she furthers certain Ultramontane tendencies which are in direct opposition to her own Protestant clearness, just so soon her book becomes wretched and unenjoyable. To this unconscious partisanship she adds the evident purpose, through praise of the intellectual activity, the idealism, of Germany, to rebuke the realism then existing among the French, and the materialistic splendours of the Empire. Her book De l'Allemagne resembles in this respect the Germania of Tacitus, who perhaps likewise designed his eulogy of the Germans as an indirect satire against his countrymen. In referring to the school which Madame de Staël glorified, and whose tendencies she furthered, I mean the Romantic School. That this was in Germany something quite different from that which was designated by the same name in France, that its tendencies were totally diverse from those of the French Romanticists, will be made clear in the following pages.

While I present this book as a sequel to Madame de Staël's De l'Allemagne, and highly praise her work for its wealth of information, I must advise some caution in accepting the views expressed in that book, which I must describe as somewhat of a niche publication. Madame de Staël, of blessed memory, created a kind of literary salon in this book where she welcomed German authors and gave them a platform to introduce themselves to the cultured world of France. However, amidst the clamor of various voices, the most prominent is the delicate tone of Herr A. W. Schlegel. In sections where the generous woman is truly herself—uninfluenced by anyone else, sharing the thoughts that come from her radiant soul, showcasing all her intellectual brilliance and eccentricities—the book is good, even outstanding. But as soon as she succumbs to outside influences, begins to praise a school whose spirit is completely foreign and incomprehensible to her, and, through the admiration of , promotes certain Ultramontane trends that contradict her own Protestant clarity, her book quickly becomes miserable and unenjoyable. To this unconscious bias, she adds a clear intention to criticize the realism prevalent in France and the materialistic glitter of the Empire by praising the intellectual efforts and idealism in Germany. Her book De l'Allemagne parallels Tacitus's Germania, which may also have aimed at indirectly satirizing his fellow countrymen. When I refer to the school that Madame de Staël praised and supported, I mean the Romantic School. It will become clear in the following pages that this was something quite different in Germany than what was known by the same name in France, with entirely divergent tendencies from those of the French Romanticists.

But what was the Romantic School in Germany?

But what was the Romantic movement in Germany?

It was nothing else than the reawakening of the poetry of the middle ages as it manifested itself in the poems, paintings, and sculptures, in the art and life of those times. This poetry, however, had been developed out of Christianity; it was a passion-flower which had blossomed from the blood of Christ. I know not if the melancholy flower which in Germany we call the passion-flower is known by the same name in France, and if the popular tradition has ascribed to it the same mystical origin. It is that motley-hued, melancholic flower in whose calyx one may behold a counterfeit presentment of the tools used at the crucifixion of Christ—namely, hammer, pincers, and nails. This flower is by no means unsightly, but only spectral: its aspect fills our souls with a dread pleasure, like those convulsive, sweet emotions that arise from grief. In this respect the passion-flower would be the fittest symbol of Christianity itself, whose most awe-inspiring charm consists in the voluptuousness of pain.

It was nothing less than the revival of medieval poetry as it appeared in the poems, paintings, and sculptures, in the art and life of those times. This poetry, however, had grown out of Christianity; it was a passion flower that had bloomed from the blood of Christ. I don't know if the melancholy flower we call the passion flower in Germany is known by the same name in France, or if the local tradition has given it the same mystical origin. It is that colorful, melancholic flower that, in its petals, reveals a depiction of the tools used in the crucifixion of Christ—namely, hammer, pliers, and nails. This flower is not unattractive, but rather ghostly: its appearance fills our souls with a haunting pleasure, like those intense, bittersweet feelings that come from grief. In this way, the passion flower would be the most fitting symbol of Christianity itself, whose deepest allure lies in the bittersweetness of suffering.

Although in France Christianity and Roman Catholicism are synonymous terms, yet I desire to emphasise the fact, that I here refer to the latter only. I refer to that religion whose earliest dogmas contained a condemnation of all flesh, and not only admitted the supremacy of the spirit over the flesh, but sought to mortify the latter in order thereby to glorify the former. I refer to that religion through whose unnatural mission vice and hypocrisy came into the world, for through the odium which it cast on the flesh the most innocent gratification of the senses were accounted sins; and, as it was impossible to be entirely spiritual, the growth of hypocrisy was inevitable. I refer to that religion which, by teaching the renunciation of all earthly pleasures, and by inculcating abject humility and angelic patience, became the most efficacious support of despotism. Men now recognise the nature of that religion, and will no longer be put off with promises of a Heaven hereafter; they know that the material world has also its good, and is not wholly given over to Satan, and now they vindicate the pleasures of the world, this beautiful garden of the gods, our inalienable heritage. Just because we now comprehend so fully all the consequences of that absolute spirituality, we are warranted in believing that the Christian-Catholic theories of the universe are at an end; for every epoch is a sphinx which plunges into the abyss as soon as its problem is solved.

Although in France Christianity and Roman Catholicism are considered the same, I want to make it clear that I’m only referring to the latter. I mean that religion whose earliest doctrines condemned all physical pleasure, emphasizing the spirit’s dominance over the flesh, while actively seeking to suppress the latter to elevate the former. I refer to that religion which, through its unnatural mission, brought vice and hypocrisy into the world, casting shame on the physical body so that even the most innocent pleasures were labeled as sins. Since it was impossible to be completely spiritual, hypocrisy inevitably grew. I refer to that religion that, by preaching the renunciation of all earthly joys and promoting extreme humility and angelic patience, became the strongest support for tyranny. People now see the true nature of this religion and will no longer be satisfied with promises of a Heaven in the afterlife; they understand that the material world has its own value and isn't entirely given over to evil, and now they reclaim the pleasures of this world, the beautiful garden of the gods, our inalienable right. Just because we now fully understand all the implications of that absolute spirituality, we can rightly believe that the Christian-Catholic theories of the universe are at an end; for each era is a sphinx that disappears into the abyss once its riddle is solved.

We by no means deny the benefits which the Christian-Catholic theories effected in Europe. They were needed as a wholesome reaction against the terrible colossal materialism which was developed in the Roman Empire, and threatened the annihilation of all the intellectual grandeur of mankind. Just as the licentious memoirs of the last century form the pièces justificatives of the French Revolution; just as the reign of terror seems a necessary medicine when one is familiar with the confessions of the French nobility since the regency; so the wholesomeness of ascetic spirituality becomes manifest when we read Petronius or Apuleius, books which may be considered as pièces justificatives of Christianity. The flesh had become so insolent in this Roman world that Christian discipline was needed to chasten it. After the banquet of a Trimalkion, a hunger-cure, such as Christianity, was required.

We definitely acknowledge the benefits that Christian-Catholic theories brought to Europe. They were necessary as a healthy response to the overwhelming materialism that developed in the Roman Empire, which threatened to destroy all the intellectual greatness of humanity. Just as the scandalous memoirs of the last century serve as the justifying documents of the French Revolution; just as the reign of terror seems like a necessary remedy when you consider the confessions of the French nobility since the regency; so the value of ascetic spirituality becomes clear when we read Petronius or Apuleius, works that can be seen as justifying documents of Christianity. The indulgence of the flesh had become so brazen in this Roman world that Christian discipline was needed to temper it. After a banquet hosted by Trimalkion, a cure for hunger, like Christianity, was essential.

Or did, perhaps, the hoary sensualists seek by scourgings to stimulate the cloyed flesh to renewed capacity for enjoyment? Did aging Rome submit to monkish flagellations in order to discover exquisite pleasure in torture itself, voluptuous bliss in pain?

Or maybe the old sensualists tried to use whips to awaken their jaded bodies for a new level of enjoyment? Did aging Rome willingly endure monkish beatings to find intense pleasure in torture itself, experiencing a hedonistic bliss in pain?

Unfortunate excess! it robbed the Roman body-politic of its last energies. Rome was not destroyed by the division into two empires. On the Bosphorus as on the Tiber, Rome was eaten up by the same Judaic spiritualism, and in both Roman history became the record of a slow dying-away, a death agony that lasted for centuries. Did perhaps murdered Judea, by bequeathing its spiritualism to the Romans, seek to avenge itself on the victorious foe, as did the dying centaur, who so cunningly wheedled the son of Jupiter into wearing the deadly vestment poisoned with his own blood? In truth, Rome, the Hercules among nations, was so effectually consumed by the Judaic poison that helm and armour fell from its decaying limbs, and its imperious battle tones degenerated into the prayers of snivelling priests and the trilling of eunuchs.

Unfortunate excess! It drained the Roman political system of its final strength. Rome wasn't destroyed by splitting into two empires. On the Bosphorus as well as on the Tiber, Rome was consumed by the same Judaic spiritualism, and in both instances, Roman history became a record of gradual decline, a death struggle that lasted for centuries. Did the murdered Judea, by passing on its spiritualism to the Romans, seek revenge on the victorious enemy, like the dying centaur, who cleverly manipulated Jupiter's son into wearing the deadly garment soaked in his own blood? In truth, Rome, the Hercules among nations, was so thoroughly affected by the Judaic poison that its helmet and armor fell from its decaying limbs, and its once mighty battle cries turned into the prayers of whimpering priests and the melodies of eunuchs.

But that which enfeebles the aged strengthens the young. That spiritualism had a wholesome effect on the over-robust races of the north; the ruddy barbarians became spiritualised through Christianity; European civilisation began. This is a praiseworthy and sacred phase of Christianity. The Catholic Church earned in this regard the highest title to our respect and admiration. Through grand, genial institutions it controlled the bestiality of the barbarian hordes of the North, and tamed their brutal materialism.

But what weakens the old strengthens the young. That spiritualism had a positive impact on the overly strong races of the North; the fierce barbarians became more spiritual through Christianity; European civilization began. This is a commendable and holy aspect of Christianity. The Catholic Church deserves our utmost respect and admiration in this regard. Through impressive, caring institutions, it managed the savagery of the barbarian tribes of the North and softened their brutal materialism.

The works of art in the middle ages give evidence of this mastery of matter by the spirit; and that is often their whole purpose. The epic poems of that time may be easily classified according to the degree in which they show that mastery. Of lyric and dramatic poems nothing is here to be said; for the latter do not exist, and the former are comparatively as much alike in all ages as are the songs of the nightingales in each succeeding spring.

The artwork from the Middle Ages shows how the spirit mastered material, which is often its main purpose. The epic poems from that era can be easily categorized based on how much they reflect that mastery. There's nothing to say about lyric and dramatic poems here; the latter don't exist, and the former are pretty similar across all ages, much like the songs of nightingales every spring.

Although the epic poetry of the middle ages was divided into sacred and secular, yet both classes were purely Christian in their nature; for if the sacred poetry related exclusively to the Jewish people and its history, which alone was considered sacred; if its themes were the heroes of the Old and the New Testaments, and their legends—in brief, the Church—still all the Christian views and aims of that period were mirrored in the secular poetry. The flower of the German sacred poetry of the middle ages is, perhaps, Barlaam and Josaphat, a poem in which the dogma of self-denial, of continence, of renunciation, of the scorn of all worldly pleasures, is most consistently expressed. Next in order of merit I would rank Lobgesang auf den Heiligen Anno, but the latter poem already evinces a marked tendency towards secular themes. It differs in general from the former somewhat as a Byzantine image of a saint differs from an old German representation. Just as in these Byzantine pictures, so also do we find in Barlaam and Josaphat the greatest simplicity; there is no perspective, and the long, lean, statue-like forms, and the grave, ideal countenances, stand severely outlined, as though in bold relief against a background of pale gold. In the Lobgesang auf den Heiligen Anno, as in the old German pictures, the accessories seem almost more prominent than the subject; and, notwithstanding the bold outlines, every detail is most minutely executed, and one knows not which to admire most, the giant-like conception or the dwarf-like patience of execution. Ottfried's Evangeliengedicht, which is generally praised as the masterpiece of this sacred poetry, is far inferior to both of these poems.

Although epic poetry from the Middle Ages was divided into sacred and secular categories, both types were fundamentally Christian in nature. The sacred poetry was focused exclusively on the Jewish people and its history, considered sacred; it highlighted the heroes of the Old and New Testaments and their legends—in essence, the Church. Nonetheless, the Christian perspectives and goals of that time were also reflected in secular poetry. The pinnacle of German sacred poetry from the Middle Ages is likely Barlaam and Josaphat, a poem that consistently expresses the principles of self-denial, moderation, renunciation, and disdain for worldly pleasures. Following that, I would rank Lobgesang auf den Heiligen Anno, which shows a noticeable shift towards secular themes. It differs from the former much like a Byzantine image of a saint differs from an old German depiction. In both Barlaam and Josaphat and Byzantine artwork, we see a great simplicity; there's no perspective, and the long, lean, statue-like figures with their serious, idealistic expressions stand out sharply against a pale gold background. In Lobgesang auf den Heiligen Anno, similar to the old German paintings, the details appear almost more significant than the main subject; and despite the bold outlines, each detail is executed with great precision, making it hard to decide whether to admire the grand concept or the meticulous craftsmanship more. Ottfried's Evangeliengedicht, often hailed as the masterpiece of this sacred poetry, falls significantly short compared to both of these works.

In the secular poetry we find, as intimated above, first, the cycle of legends called the Nibelungenlied, and the Book of Heroes. In these poems all the ante-Christian modes of thought and feelings are dominant; brute force is not yet moderated into chivalry; the sturdy warriors of the North stand like statues of stone, and the soft light and moral atmosphere of Christianity have not yet penetrated their iron armour. But dawn is gradually breaking over the old German forests, the ancient Druid oaks are being felled, and in the open arena Christianity and Paganism are battling: all this is portrayed in the cycle of traditions of Charlemagne; even the Crusades with their religious tendencies are mirrored therein. But now from this Christianised, spiritualised brute force is developed the peculiar feature of the middle ages, chivalry, which finally becomes exalted into a religious knighthood. The earlier knighthood is most felicitously portrayed in the legends of King Arthur, which are full of the most charming gallantry, the most finished courtesy, and the most daring bravery. From the midst of the pleasing, though bizarre, arabesques, and the fantastic, flowery mazes of these tales, we are greeted by the gentle Gawain, the worthy Lancelot of the Lake, by the valiant, gallant, and honest, but somewhat tedious, Wigalois. By the side of this cycle of legends we find the kindred and connected legends of the Holy Grail, in which the religious knighthood is glorified, and in which are to be found the three grandest poems of the middle ages, Titurel, Parcival, and Lohengrin. In these poems we stand face to face, as it were, with the muse of romantic poetry; we look deep into her large, sad eyes, and ere we are aware she has ensnared us in her network of scholasticism, and drawn us down into the weird depths of mediæval mysticism. But further on in this period we find poems which do not unconditionally bow down to Christian spirituality; poems in which it is even attacked, and in which the poet, breaking loose from the fetters of an abstract Christian morality, complacently plunges into the delightful realm of glorious sensuousness. Nor is it an inferior poet who has left us Tristan and Isolde, the masterpiece of this class. Verily, I must confess that Gottfried von Strasburg, the author of this, the most exquisite poem of the middle ages, is perhaps also the loftiest poet of that period. He surpasses even the grandeur of Wolfram von Eschilbach, whose Parcival, and fragments of Titurel, are so much admired. At present, it is perhaps permissible to praise Meister Gottfried without stint, but in his own time his book and similar poems, to which even Lancelot belonged, were considered Godless and dangerous. Francesca da Polenta and her handsome friend paid dearly for reading together such a book;—the greater danger, it is true, lay in the fact that they suddenly stopped reading.

In the secular poetry we find, as mentioned earlier, first, the cycle of legends called the Nibelungenlied and the Book of Heroes. In these poems, pre-Christian ways of thinking and feeling dominate; brute force hasn't yet evolved into chivalry; the tough warriors of the North stand like statues, and the gentle light and moral influence of Christianity have not yet reached their iron-clad souls. But dawn is slowly breaking over the old German forests, the ancient Druid oaks are being chopped down, and in the open arena, Christianity and Paganism are clashing: all this is captured in the tradition surrounding Charlemagne; even the Crusades, with their religious motives, are reflected there. Now, from this Christianized brute force emerges a unique aspect of the Middle Ages: chivalry, which ultimately evolves into a religious knighthood. The earlier knighthood is wonderfully depicted in the legends of King Arthur, filled with charming gallantry, exceptional courtesy, and bold bravery. From the midst of these delightful yet bizarre tales, we meet the gentle Gawain, the noble Lancelot of the Lake, and the valiant, dashing, but somewhat tedious, Wigalois. Alongside this cycle of legends, we find related stories of the Holy Grail, which glorify the religious knighthood and include the three greatest poems of the Middle Ages: Titurel, Parcival, and Lohengrin. In these poems, we come face to face with the muse of romantic poetry; we gaze deeply into her large, sorrowful eyes, and before we know it, we find ourselves ensnared in her web of complex thoughts, drawn into the enigmatic depths of medieval mysticism. Yet further into this period, we encounter poems that do not simply submit to Christian spirituality; poems that even challenge it, where the poet, breaking free from the constraints of abstract Christian morals, happily dives into the delightful realm of vibrant sensuality. Nor is it a lesser poet who gifted us Tristan and Isolde, the masterpiece of this genre. Truly, I must admit that Gottfried von Strasburg, the author of this exquisite work, is perhaps the greatest poet of that era. He even surpasses the magnificence of Wolfram von Eschilbach, whose Parcival and fragments of Titurel are highly praised. Nowadays, it's perhaps acceptable to celebrate Meister Gottfried openly, but in his own time, his book and similar works, including Lancelot, were viewed as godless and dangerous. Francesca da Polenta and her handsome companion paid dearly for reading such a book together; the greater danger, true enough, was that they suddenly stopped reading.

All the poetry of the middle ages has a certain definite character, through which it differs from the poetry of the Greeks and Romans. In reference to this difference the former is called Romantic, the latter Classic. These names, however, are misleading, and have hitherto caused the most vexatious confusion, which is even increased when we call the antique poetry plastic as well as classic. In this, particularly, lay the germ of misunderstandings; for artists ought always to treat their subject-matter plastically. Whether it be Christian or pagan, the subject ought to be portrayed in clear contours. In short, plastic configuration should be the main requisite in the modern romantic as well as in antique art. And, in fact, are not the figures in Dante's Divine Comedy or in the paintings of Raphael just as plastic as those in Virgil or on the walls of Herculaneum?

All the poetry of the Middle Ages has a distinct character that sets it apart from the poetry of the Greeks and Romans. This difference is why the former is labeled as Romantic and the latter as Classic. However, these labels can be misleading and have caused a lot of confusion, especially when we also refer to ancient poetry as plastic. This particularly sowed the seeds of misunderstandings since artists should always approach their subjects in a plastic way. Whether Christian or pagan, the subject should be depicted with clear outlines. In short, plastic representation should be a key requirement in both modern romantic art and ancient art. And, in fact, aren’t the figures in Dante's Divine Comedy or in Raphael's paintings just as plastic as those in Virgil’s works or on the walls of Herculaneum?

The difference consists in this,—that the plastic figures in antique art are identical with the thing represented, with the idea which the artist seeks to communicate. Thus, for example, the wanderings of the Odyssey mean nothing else than the wanderings of the man who was a son of Laertes and the husband of Penelope, and was called Ulysses. Thus, again, the Bacchus which is to be seen in the Louvre is nothing more than the charming son of Semele, with a daring melancholy look in his eyes, and an inspired voluptuousness on the soft arched lips. It is otherwise in romantic art: here the wanderings of a knight have an esoteric signification; they typify, perhaps, the mazes of life in general. The dragon that is vanquished is sin; the almond-tree, that from afar so encouragingly wafts its fragrance to the hero, is the Trinity, the God-Father, God-Son, and God-Holy-Ghost, who together constitute one, just as shell, fibre, and kernel together constitute the almond. When Homer describes the armour of a hero, it is naught else than a good armour, which is worth so many oxen; but when a monk of the middle ages describes in his poem the garments of the Mother of God, you may depend upon it, that by each fold of those garments he typifies some special virtue, and that a peculiar meaning lies hidden in the sacred robes of the immaculate Virgin Mary; as her Son is the kernel of the almond, she is quite appropriately described in the poem as an almond-blossom. Such is the character of that poesy of the middle ages which we designate romantic.

The difference lies in this: the sculpted figures in ancient art are identical to what they represent, reflecting the idea the artist wants to convey. For instance, the adventures in the Odyssey are simply the journeys of the man who was the son of Laertes and the husband of Penelope, known as Ulysses. Similarly, the Bacchus displayed in the Louvre is just the charming son of Semele, with a daring, melancholic look in his eyes and an inspired sensuousness on his soft, arched lips. In contrast, romantic art operates differently: here, a knight's adventures have deeper meanings, possibly symbolizing the twists and turns of life itself. The dragon that is defeated represents sin; the almond tree, which sweetly offers its fragrance to the hero from a distance, symbolizes the Trinity—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit—who together make one, just as the shell, fiber, and kernel form the almond. When Homer describes a hero's armor, it’s simply good armor that’s worth a number of oxen; however, when a medieval monk describes the garments of the Mother of God in his poem, you can be sure that each fold represents a special virtue, hiding a unique meaning in the sacred robes of the immaculate Virgin Mary; just as her Son is the kernel of the almond, she is aptly depicted in the poem as an almond blossom. This is the nature of the poetry from the Middle Ages that we call romantic.

Classic art had to portray only the finite, and its forms could be identical with the artist's idea. Romantic art had to represent, or rather to typify, the infinite and the spiritual, and therefore was compelled to have recourse to a system of traditional, or rather parabolic, symbols, just as Christ himself had endeavoured to explain and make clear his spiritual meaning through beautiful parables. Hence the mystic, enigmatical, miraculous, and transcendental character of the art-productions of the middle ages. Fancy strives frantically to portray through concrete images that which is purely spiritual, and in the vain endeavour invents the most colossal absurdities; it piles Ossa on Pelion, Parcival on Titurel, to reach heaven.

Classic art could only represent the finite, aligning closely with the artist's vision. Romantic art, on the other hand, had to convey, or rather symbolize, the infinite and the spiritual, which meant relying on a set of traditional, or more accurately, parabolic symbols, much like how Christ sought to clarify his spiritual teachings through beautiful parables. This gives rise to the mystical, mysterious, miraculous, and transcendent nature of art from the Middle Ages. Imagination desperately tries to represent purely spiritual concepts with concrete images and, in this futile attempt, creates the most ridiculous absurdities; it stacks Ossa on Pelion, Parcival on Titurel, in an effort to reach the heavens.

Similar monstrous abortions of imagination have been produced by the Scandinavians, the Hindoos, and the other races which likewise strive through poetry to represent the infinite; among them also do we find poems which may be regarded as romantic.

Similar monstrous failures of imagination have been created by the Scandinavians, the Hindus, and other cultures that also try to express the infinite through poetry; within these groups, we also find poems that can be seen as romantic.

Concerning the music of the middle ages little can be said. All records are wanting. It was not until late in the sixteenth century that the masterpieces of Catholic Church music came into existence, and, of their kind, they cannot be too highly prized, for they are the purest expression of Christian spirituality. The recitative arts, being spiritual in their nature, quite appropriately flourished in Christendom. But this religion was less propitious for the plastic arts, for as the latter were to represent the victory of spirit over matter, and were nevertheless compelled to use matter as a means to carry out this representation, they had to accomplish an unnatural task. Hence sculpture and painting abounded with such revolting subjects as martyrdoms, crucifixions, dying saints, and physical sufferings in general. The treatment of such subjects must have been torture for the artists themselves; and when I look at those distorted images, with pious heads awry, long, thin arms, meagre legs, and graceless drapery, which are intended to represent Christian abstinence and ethereality, I am filled with an unspeakable compassion for the artists of that period. It is true the painters were somewhat more favoured, for colour, the material of their representation, in its intangibility, in its varied lights and shades, was not so completely at variance with spirituality as the material of the sculptors; But even they, the painters, were compelled to disfigure the patient canvas with the most revolting representations of physical suffering. In truth, when we view certain picture galleries, and behold nothing but scenes of blood, scourgings, and executions, we are fain to believe that the old masters painted these pictures for the gallery of an executioner.

There isn't much to say about the music of the Middle Ages. All records are missing. It wasn't until late in the sixteenth century that masterpieces of Catholic Church music were created, and these works are invaluable since they represent the purest expression of Christian spirituality. The expressive arts, being spiritual in nature, naturally thrived in Christendom. However, this religion was less favorable for plastic arts because they aimed to show the victory of spirit over matter, yet they had to use matter to achieve this, making their task difficult. As a result, sculpture and painting were filled with distressing subjects like martyrdoms, crucifixions, dying saints, and general physical suffering. Dealing with such subjects must have been torturous for the artists themselves; when I look at those twisted images, with pious heads tilted awkwardly, long thin arms, skinny legs, and clumsy drapery, meant to convey Christian restraint and ethereality, I feel an overwhelming compassion for the artists of that time. It's true that painters had it a bit easier; color, the medium they worked with, was less at odds with spirituality, given its intangibility and varied lights and shades. But even they had to mar their canvases with the most horrifying depictions of physical pain. Honestly, when we visit certain art galleries and see nothing but scenes of blood, beatings, and executions, we might believe that the old masters painted these works for an executioner's gallery.

But human genius can transfigure deformity itself, and many painters succeeded in accomplishing the unnatural task beautifully and sublimely. The Italians, in particular, glorified beauty,—it is true, somewhat at the expense of spirituality,—and raised themselves aloft to an ideality which reached its perfection in the many representations of the Madonna. Where it concerned the Madonna, the Catholic clergy always made some concessions to sensuality. This image of an immaculate beauty, transfigured by motherly love and sorrow, was privileged to receive the homage of poet and painter, and to be decked with all the charms that could allure the senses. For this image was a magnet, which was to draw the great masses into the pale of Christianity. Madonna Maria was the pretty dame du comptoir of the Catholic Church, whose customers, especially the barbarians of the North, she attracted and held fast by her celestial smiles.

But human creativity can transform even deformity, and many artists have managed to achieve this unnatural task beautifully and profoundly. The Italians, in particular, celebrated beauty—though, it's true, somewhat at the expense of spirituality—and elevated themselves to an ideal that reached its highest form in the many depictions of the Madonna. When it came to the Madonna, the Catholic clergy often made some allowances for sensuality. This image of perfect beauty, uplifted by a mother's love and sorrow, was honored by poets and painters alike, adorned with all the charms that could captivate the senses. This image served as a magnet, designed to draw the large masses into the fold of Christianity. Madonna Maria was the charming dame du comptoir of the Catholic Church, whose patrons, especially the barbarians from the North, she attracted and held close with her heavenly smiles.

During the middle ages architecture was of the same character as the other arts; for, indeed, at that period all manifestations of life harmonised most wonderfully. In architecture, as in poetry, this parabolising tendency was evident. Now, when we enter an old cathedral, we have scarcely a hint of the esoteric meaning of its stony symbolism. Only the general impression forces itself on our mind. We feel the exaltation of the spirit and the abasement of the flesh. The interior of the cathedral is a hollow cross, and we walk here amid the instruments of martyrdom itself. The variegated windows cast on us their red and green lights, like drops of blood and ichor; requiems for the dead resound through the aisles; under our feet are gravestones and decay; in harmony with the colossal pillars, the soul soars aloft, painfully tearing itself away from the body, which sinks to the ground like a cast-off garment. When one views from without these Gothic cathedrals, these immense structures, that are built so airily, so delicately, so daintily, as transparent as if carved, like Brabant laces made of marble, then only does one realise the might of that art which could achieve a mastery over stone, so that even this stubborn substance should appear spectrally etherealised, and be an exponent of Christian spiritualism.

During the Middle Ages, architecture was similar to other arts; in fact, during that time, all forms of expression were beautifully harmonious. In architecture, just like in poetry, this tendency to create deeper meanings was clear. Nowadays, when we visit an old cathedral, we barely catch a glimpse of the hidden significance behind its stone symbolism. Instead, we are struck by a general feeling. We sense the uplifting of the spirit and the lowering of the flesh. The interior of the cathedral forms a hollow cross, and we walk among the very tools of martyrdom. The colorful windows cast red and green lights on us, resembling drops of blood and ichor; requiems for the dead echo through the aisles; beneath our feet lie gravestones and decay; in sync with the massive pillars, the soul rises up, painfully breaking free from the body, which falls to the ground like an old garment. From the outside, when one looks at these Gothic cathedrals—these enormous structures that are built so lightly, delicately, and beautifully, as if they were carved out of air, like Brabant lace made of marble—only then do we truly grasp the power of that art which could dominate stone to the point where this stubborn material appears almost ethereal, serving as a symbol of Christian spirituality.

But the arts are only the mirror of life; and when Catholicism disappeared from daily life, so also it faded and vanished out of the arts. At the time of the Reformation Catholic poetry was gradually dying out in Europe, and in its place we behold the long-buried Grecian style of poetry again reviving. It was, in sooth, only an artificial spring, the work of the gardener and not of the sun; the trees and flowers were stuck in narrow pots, and a glass sky protected them from the wind and cold weather.

But the arts are just a reflection of life; and when Catholicism faded from everyday life, it also disappeared from the arts. During the Reformation, Catholic poetry was slowly declining in Europe, and in its place, we saw the long-buried Grecian style of poetry making a comeback. It was, in fact, just an artificial revival, crafted by the gardener rather than the sun; the trees and flowers were planted in small pots, and a glass ceiling shielded them from the wind and cold.

In the world's history every event is not the direct consequence of another, but all events mutually act and react on one another. It was not alone through the Greek scholars who, after the conquest of Constantinople, immigrated over to us, that the love for Grecian art, and the striving to imitate it, became universal among us; but in art as in life, there was stirring a contemporary Protestantism. Leo X., the magnificent Medici, was just as zealous a Protestant as Luther; and as in Wittenburg protest was offered in Latin prose, so in Rome the protest was made in stone, colours, and ottava rime. For do not the vigorous marble statues of Michael Angelo, Giulio Romano's laughing nymph-faces, and the life-intoxicated merriment in the verses of Master Ludovico,[9] offer a protesting contrast to the old, gloomy, withered Catholicism? The painters of Italy combated priestdom more effectively, perhaps, than did the Saxon theologians. The glowing flesh in the paintings of Titian,—all that is simple Protestantism. The limbs of his Venus are much more fundamental theses than those which the German monk nailed to the church door of Wittenburg. Mankind felt itself suddenly liberated, as it were, from the thraldom of a thousand years; the artists, in particular, breathed freely again when the Alp-like burden of Christianity was rolled from off their breasts; they plunged enthusiastically into the sea of Grecian mirthfulness, from whose foam the goddess of beauty again rose to meet them; again did the painters depict the ambrosial joys of Olympus; again did the sculptors, with the olden love, chisel the heroes of antiquity from out the marble blocks; again did the poets sing of the house of Atreus and of Laios; a new era of classic poetry arose.

In world history, not every event is a direct result of another, but all events influence each other in various ways. It wasn't just the Greek scholars who immigrated to us after the conquest of Constantinople that sparked a widespread appreciation for Greek art; there was also a contemporary Protestant movement in art and life. Leo X, the magnificent Medici, was as passionate a Protestant as Luther was; just as protests in Wittenberg were expressed in Latin prose, in Rome, the protests took shape in stone, colors, and ottava rime. The powerful marble statues by Michelangelo, Giulio Romano's lively nymphs, and the exuberant verses of Master Ludovico[9] stand in vibrant contrast to the old, somber, exhausted Catholicism. Italian painters may have fought against priesthood more effectively than the Saxon theologians did. The radiant flesh in Titian's paintings embodies simple Protestantism. The limbs of his Venus represent fundamental ideas far more than the theses that the German monk nailed to the door of the Wittenberg church. Humanity felt as if it were suddenly freed from a thousand years of bondage; artists, in particular, breathed easier when the heavy weight of Christianity was lifted from their chests. They eagerly dove into the sea of Greek joy, where the goddess of beauty re-emerged to greet them; once again, painters depicted the heavenly delights of Olympus; sculptors lovingly chiseled the heroes of antiquity from marble blocks; and poets sang anew of the house of Atreus and Laios, ushering in a new era of classic poetry.

In France, under Louis XIV., this neo-classic poetry exhibited a polished perfection, and, to a certain extent, even originality. Through the political influence of the grand monarque this new classic poetry spread over the rest of Europe. In Italy, where it was already at home, it received a French colouring; the Anjous brought with them to Spain the heroes of French tragedy; it accompanied Madame Henriette to England; and, as a matter of course, we Germans modelled our clumsy temple of art after the bepowdered Olympus of Versailles. The most famous high priest of this temple was Gottsched, that old periwigged pate, whom our dear Goethe has so felicitously described in his memoirs.

In France, during the reign of Louis XIV, this neo-classical poetry displayed a refined perfection and, to some degree, even originality. Thanks to the political influence of the grand monarque, this new classic poetry spread throughout Europe. In Italy, where it was already established, it took on a French flair; the Anjous brought the heroes of French tragedy to Spain; it traveled with Madame Henriette to England; and naturally, we Germans modeled our clumsy temple of art after the elegant Olympus of Versailles. The most famous high priest of this temple was Gottsched, that old periwigged fellow, whom our beloved Goethe described so brilliantly in his memoirs.

Lessing was the literary Arminius who emancipated our theatre from that foreign rule. He showed us the vapidness, the ridiculousness, the tastelessness, of those apings of the French stage, which itself was but an imitation of the Greek. But not only by his criticism, but also through his own works of art, did he become the founder of modern German original literature. All the paths of the intellect, all the phases of life, did this man pursue with disinterested enthusiasm. Art, theology, antiquarianism, poetry, dramatic criticism, history,—he studied these all with the same zeal and with the same aim. In all his works breathes the same grand social idea, the same progressive humanity, the same religion of reason, whose John he was, and whose Messiah we still await. This religion he preached always, but alas! often quite alone and in the desert. Moreover, he lacked the skill to transmute stones into bread. The greater portion of his life was spent in poverty and misery—a curse which rests on almost all the great minds of Germany, and which probably will only be overcome by the political emancipation. Lessing was more deeply interested in political questions than was imagined,—a characteristic which we entirely miss in his contemporaries. Only now do we comprehend what he had in view by his description of the petty despotisms in Emilia Galotti. At that time he was considered merely a champion of intellectual liberty and an opponent of clerical intolerance; his theological writings were better understood. The fragments "Concerning the Education of the Human race," which have been translated into French by Eugene Rodrigue, will perhaps suffice to give the French an idea of the wide scope of Lessing's genius. His two critical works which have had the most influence on art are his Hamburger Dramaturgie and his Laocoön, or Concerning the Limits of Painting and Poetry. His best dramatic works are Emilia Galotti, Minna von Barnhelm, and Nathan the Wise.

Lessing was the literary figure who freed our theatre from foreign control. He revealed the emptiness, absurdity, and lack of taste in those imitations of the French stage, which itself was just a copy of the Greek. But not only through his critiques, but also through his own artistic works, did he become the founder of modern German original literature. This man pursued all intellectual paths and life phases with selfless enthusiasm. Art, theology, antiquarianism, poetry, dramatic criticism, history—he studied all these with the same fervor and purpose. In all his works, there’s a consistent grand social idea, a progressive humanism, and a rational religion that he championed, and whose Messiah we still await. He preached this religion consistently, but sadly, often entirely alone and in isolation. Moreover, he didn’t have the ability to turn stones into bread. Most of his life was spent in poverty and hardship—a curse that hangs over almost all of Germany's great minds and can probably only be lifted by political liberation. Lessing was more deeply engaged with political issues than people realized—a trait that we completely miss in his contemporaries. Only now do we understand what he intended with his portrayal of the petty tyrants in Emilia Galotti. At the time, he was seen merely as a proponent of intellectual freedom and a critic of clerical intolerance; his theological writings were better received. The fragments "Concerning the Education of the Human Race," which have been translated into French by Eugene Rodrigue, might give the French a glimpse into the wide scope of Lessing's genius. His two critical works that have most influenced art are Hamburger Dramaturgie and Laocoön, or Concerning the Limits of Painting and Poetry. His best dramatic works are Emilia Galotti, Minna von Barnhelm, and Nathan the Wise.

Gotthold Ephraim Lessing was born January 22nd, 1729, at Kamenz, in Upper Lusatia, and died February 15th, 1781, at Brunswick. He was a whole man, who; while with his polemics waging destructive battle against the old, at the same time created something newer and better. "He resembled," says a German author, "those pious Jews, who, at the second building of the temple, were often disturbed by the attacks of their enemies, and with one hand would fight against the foe, while with the other hand they continued to work at the house of God." This is not the place to discuss Lessing more fully, but I cannot refrain from saying that, in the whole range of literary history, he is the author whom I most love.

Gotthold Ephraim Lessing was born on January 22, 1729, in Kamenz, Upper Lusatia, and died on February 15, 1781, in Brunswick. He was a complete person who, while engaging in heated debates against the old ways, simultaneously built something newer and better. "He resembled," says a German author, "those devout Jews who, during the second construction of the temple, were frequently interrupted by their enemies; with one hand they fought against the foe while with the other they continued to work on God's house." This isn't the right place to discuss Lessing in more depth, but I can't help mentioning that he is the author I admire most in the whole expanse of literary history.

I desire here to call attention to another author, who worked in the same spirit and with the same aim, and who may be regarded as Lessing's most legitimate successor. It is true, a criticism of this author would be out of place here, for he occupies a peculiarly isolated place in the history of literature, and his relation to his epoch and contemporaries cannot even now be definitely pronounced. I refer to Johann Gottfried Herder, born in 1744, at Morungen, in East Prussia; died in 1803, at Weimar, in Saxony.

I’d like to highlight another author who worked with the same spirit and purpose and can be seen as Lessing's most legitimate successor. It’s true that a critique of this author wouldn't fit here, as he holds a uniquely isolated position in literary history, and his connection to his time and contemporaries can't be clearly defined even now. I'm talking about Johann Gottfried Herder, born in 1744 in Morungen, East Prussia, and died in 1803 in Weimar, Saxony.

The history of literature is a great morgue, wherein each seeks the dead who are near or dear to him. And when, among the corpses of so many petty men, I behold the noble features of a Lessing or a Herder, my heart throbs with emotion. How could I pass you without pressing a hasty kiss on your pale lips?

The history of literature is like a vast graveyard, where everyone looks for the deceased who are close to their heart. And when I see the remarkable faces of a Lessing or a Herder among the many ordinary people, my heart fills with emotion. How could I walk by without giving a quick kiss to your pale lips?

But if Lessing effectually put an end to the servile apings of Franco-Grecian art, yet, by directing attention to the true art-works of Grecian antiquity, to a certain extent he gave an impetus to a new and equally silly species of imitation. Through his warfare against religious superstition he even advanced a certain narrow-minded jejune enlightenment, which at that time vaunted itself in Berlin; the sainted Nicolai was its principal mouthpiece, and the German Encyclopædia its arsenal. The most wretched mediocrity began again to raise its head, more disgustingly than ever. Imbecility, vapidity, and the commonplace distended themselves like the frog in the fable.

But while Lessing effectively ended the mindless imitations of Franco-Grecian art, by highlighting the genuine masterpieces of Greek antiquity, he also fueled a new and equally foolish form of imitation. His battle against religious superstition even led to a rather narrow-minded, simplistic form of enlightenment that was being flaunted in Berlin at that time; the revered Nicolai was its main spokesperson, and the German Encyclopaedia was its tool. The most pathetic mediocrity once again began to rise up, more repulsively than ever. Ignorance, blandness, and banality swelled like the frog in the fable.

It is an error to believe that Goethe, who at that time had already appeared upon the scene, had met with general recognition. His Goetz von Berlichingen and his Werther were received with enthusiasm, but the works of the most ordinary bungler not less so, and Goethe occupied but a small niche in the temple of literature. It is true, as said before, that the public welcomed Goetz and Werther with delight, but more on account of the subject matter than their artistic merits, which few were able to appreciate. Of these masterpieces, Goetz von Berlichingen was a dramatised romance of chivalry, which was the popular style at that time. In Werther the public saw only an embellished account of an episode in real life—namely, the story of young Jerusalem, a youth who shot himself from disappointed love, thereby creating quite a commotion in that dead-calm period. Tears were shed over his pathetic letters, and it was shrewdly observed that the manner in which Werther had been ostracised from the society of the nobility must have increased his weariness of life. The discussion concerning suicide brought the book still more into notice; a few fools hit upon the idea of shooting themselves in imitation of Werther, and thus the book made a marked sensation. But the romances of August Lafontaine were in equal demand, and as the latter was a voluminous writer, it followed that he was more famous than Wolfgang Goethe. Wieland was the great poet of that period, and his only rival was Herr Ramler of Berlin. Wieland was worshipped idolatrously, more than Goethe ever was. Iffland, with his lachrymose domestic dramas, and Kotzebue's farces, with their stale witticisms, ruled the stage.

It's a mistake to think that Goethe, who had already emerged at that time, was widely recognized. His *Goetz von Berlichingen* and *Werther* were met with enthusiasm, but so were the works of many mediocre authors, and Goethe had only a small place in the literary world. It's true, as stated earlier, that the public loved Goetz and Werther, but primarily because of their subject matter rather than their artistic qualities, which few could truly appreciate. Of these masterpieces, *Goetz von Berlichingen* was a dramatized tale of chivalry, which was the popular style back then. In *Werther*, the public saw just a romanticized account of a real-life event—the story of young Jerusalem, a young man who took his own life due to unrequited love, causing quite a stir in that otherwise quiet period. People wept over his moving letters, and it was cleverly pointed out that Werther's exclusion from noble society likely increased his despair. The conversation about suicide drew even more attention to the book; a few misguided individuals even attempted to mimic Werther's fate, leading to a significant sensation. However, the romances of August Lafontaine were equally popular, and since he was a prolific writer, he became more famous than Wolfgang Goethe. Wieland was seen as the great poet of that time, with only Herr Ramler from Berlin as a rival. Wieland was idolized even more than Goethe ever was. Iffland, with his tearful domestic dramas, and Kotzebue's farces, filled with tired jokes, dominated the stage.

It was against this literature that, in the closing years of the last century, there arose in Germany a new school, which we have designated the Romantic School. At the head of this school stand the brothers August William and Frederic Schlegel. Jena, where these two brothers, together with many kindred spirits, were wont to come and go, was the central point from which the new æsthetic dogma radiated. I advisedly say dogma, for this school began with a criticism of the art productions of the past, and with recipes for the art works of the future. In both of these fields the Schlegelian school has rendered good service to æsthetic criticism. In criticising the art works of the past, either their defects and imperfections were set forth, or their merits and beauties illustrated. In their polemics, in their exposure of artistic shortcomings and imperfections, the Schlegels were entirely imitators of Lessing; they seized upon his great battle-sword, but the arm of August William Schlegel was far too feeble, and the sight of his brother Frederic too much obscured by mystic clouds; the former could not strike so strong, nor the latter so sure and telling a blow as Lessing. In reproductive criticism, however, where the beauties of a work of art were to be brought out clearly; where a delicate perception of individualities was required; and where these were to be made intelligible, the Schlegels are far superior to Lessing. But what shall I say concerning their recipes for producing masterpieces? Here the Schlegels reveal the same impotency that we seem to discover in Lessing. The latter also, strong as he is in negation, is equally weak in affirmation; seldom can he lay down any fundamental principle, and even more rarely, a correct one. He lacks the firm foundation of a philosophy, or a synthetic system. In this respect the Schlegels are still more woefully lacking. Many fables are rife concerning the influence of Fichtean idealism and Schelling's philosophy of nature upon the romantic school, and it is even asserted that the latter is entirely the result of the former. I can, however, at the most discover the traces of only a few stray thoughts of Fichte and Schelling, but by no means the impress of a system of philosophy. It is true that Schelling, who at that time was delivering lectures at Jena, had personally a great influence upon the romantic school. Schelling is also somewhat of a poet, a fact not generally known in France, and it is said that he is still in doubt whether he shall not publish his entire philosophical works in poetical, yes, even in metrical form. This doubt is characteristic of the man.

It was against this backdrop that, in the late years of the last century, a new movement emerged in Germany, which we now call the Romantic School. Leading this movement are the brothers August William and Frederic Schlegel. Jena, where they and many like-minded thinkers frequently gathered, was the hub from which this new aesthetic doctrine spread. I mention "doctrine" for a reason; this movement began by critiquing the art of the past and offering guidelines for future artworks. In both areas, the Schlegel school has contributed significantly to aesthetic criticism. When examining past artworks, they either pointed out their flaws or highlighted their merits and beauties. In their critiques of artistic shortcomings, the Schlegels closely followed Lessing; they took up his metaphorical sword, but August William Schlegel lacked the strength, and Frederic's vision was too clouded in mysticism; the former could not deliver as powerful a strike, nor could the latter land a decisive blow like Lessing. However, in the realm of reproductive criticism, where the beauty of a work of art should be clearly articulated, and where a keen perception of individuality is necessary, the Schlegels surpassed Lessing. But what can I say about their methods for creating masterpieces? Here, the Schlegels show the same impotence that we find in Lessing. The latter, while strong in negation, is equally weak in affirmation; he rarely lays down any fundamental principle, and even more rarely one that is correct. He lacks a solid philosophical foundation or a cohesive system. In this regard, the Schlegels are even more lacking. There are many stories about the influence of Fichtean idealism and Schelling's philosophy of nature on the Romantic School, with some claiming that the latter is entirely derived from the former. However, I can only spot traces of a few stray thoughts from Fichte and Schelling, but not a systematic philosophy. It's true that Schelling, who was giving lectures in Jena at the time, had a significant influence on the Romantic School. Schelling is also somewhat of a poet, a fact that is not widely known in France, and it's said that he's still undecided about whether to publish his entire philosophical works in poetic, even metrical form. This uncertainty is characteristic of him.

But if the Schlegels could give no definite, reliable theory for the masterpieces which they bespoke of the poets of their school, they atoned for these shortcomings by commending as models the best works of art of the past, and by making them accessible to their disciples. These were chiefly the Christian-Catholic productions of the middle ages. The translation of Shakespeare, who stands at the frontier of this art and with Protestant clearness smiles over into our modern era, was solely intended for polemical purposes, the present discussion of which space forbids. It was undertaken by A. W. Schlegel at a time when the enthusiasm for the middle ages had not yet reached its most extravagant height. Later, when this did occur, Calderon was translated and ranked far above Shakespeare. For the works of Calderon bear most distinctly the impress of the poetry of the middle ages—particularly of the two principal epochs of knight-errantry and monasticism. The pious comedies of the Castilian priest-poet, whose poetical flowers had been besprinkled with holy water and canonical perfumes, with all their pious grandezza, with all their sacerdotal splendour, with all their sanctimonious balderdash, were now set up as models, and Germany swarmed with fantastically-pious, insanely-profound poems, over which it was the fashion to work one's self into a mystic ecstasy of admiration, as in The Devotion to the Cross, or to fight in honour of the Madonna, as in The Constant Prince. Zacharias Werner carried the nonsense as far as it might be safely done without being imprisoned by the authorities in a lunatic asylum.

But although the Schlegels couldn’t provide a clear, reliable theory for the masterpieces they commissioned from the poets of their school, they compensated for these gaps by praising the best works of art from the past and making them available to their followers. These were mainly the Christian-Catholic productions of the Middle Ages. The translation of Shakespeare, who stands at the edge of this art and with Protestant clarity gazes into our modern era, was intended solely for argumentative purposes, which this space doesn’t allow for discussion. It was done by A. W. Schlegel at a time when enthusiasm for the Middle Ages hadn’t yet peaked. Later, when it did, Calderon was translated and placed far above Shakespeare. Calderon's works clearly reflect the poetry of the Middle Ages—especially the two main periods of chivalry and monasticism. The pious comedies of the Castilian priest-poet, whose poetic creations were sprinkled with holy water and sacred fragrances, with all their religious grandeur, their priestly brilliance, and their sanctimonious nonsense, were now held up as examples, and Germany was filled with fantastically devout, profoundly absurd poems. It became popular to get lost in a mystical ecstasy of admiration for works like The Devotion to the Cross, or to engage in battles in honor of the Madonna, as seen in The Constant Prince. Zacharias Werner took the absurdity as far as it could safely go without being locked up by the authorities in a mental institution.

Our poetry, said the Schlegels, is superannuated; our muse is an old and wrinkled hag; our Cupid is no fair youth, but a shrunken, grey-haired dwarf. Our emotions are withered; our imagination is dried up: we must re-invigorate ourselves. We must seek again the choked-up springs of the naïve, simple poetry of the middle ages, where bubbles the elixir of youth. When the parched, thirsty multitude heard this, they did not long delay. They were eager to be again young and blooming, and, hastening to those miraculous waters, quaffed and gulped with intemperate greediness. But the same fate befell them as happened to the aged waiting-maid who noticed that her mistress possessed a magic elixir which restored youth. During her lady's absence she took from the toilet drawer the small flagon which contained the elixir, but, instead of drinking only a few drops, she took a long deep draught, so that through the power of the rejuvenating beverage she became not only young again, but even a puny, puling babe. In sooth, so was it with our excellent Ludwig Tieck, one of the best poets of this school; he drank so deeply of the mediæval folk tales and ballads that he became almost as a child again, and dropped into that childlike lisping which it cost Madame de Staël so much painstaking to admire. She confesses that she found it rather strange to have one of the characters in a drama make his début with a monologue, which begins with the words:—"I am the brave Bonifacius, and I come to tell you," etc.

"Our poetry," said the Schlegels, "is outdated; our muse is just an old, wrinkled hag; our Cupid isn't a handsome young man, but a shriveled, gray-haired dwarf. Our feelings are dried up; our creativity is exhausted: we need to refresh ourselves. We must look for the buried springs of the naive, simple poetry of the Middle Ages, where the elixir of youth flows. When the thirsty crowd heard this, they didn't hesitate. They were eager to reclaim their youth and bloom again, rushing to those miraculous waters, drinking deeply with unrestrained greed. But what happened to them was similar to the fate of the aged maid who noticed her mistress had a magical elixir that restored youth. While her lady was away, she took the small bottle from the drawer that contained the elixir, but instead of taking just a few drops, she gulped down a large draught, which made her not only young again but even a frail, whimpering baby. Indeed, that was the case with our excellent Ludwig Tieck, one of the best poets of this school; he immersed himself so deeply in the medieval folk tales and ballads that he became almost like a child again and adopted that childish lisping that required so much effort for Madame de Staël to admire. She admits that she found it rather odd to have one of the characters in a play make his debut with a monologue that starts with the words:—'I am the brave Bonifacius, and I come to tell you,' etc."

By his romance, Sternbald's Wanderungen, and through his publication of the Herzensergies sungen eines Kunstliebenden Klosterbruders, written by a certain Wackenroder, Ludwig Tieck sought to set up the naïve, crude beginnings of art as models. The piety and childishness of these works, which are revealed in their technical awkwardness, were recommended for imitation. Raphael was to be ignored entirely; his teacher, Perugino, fared almost as badly, although rated somewhat higher, for it was claimed that he showed some traces of those beauties which were to be found in their full bloom in the immortal masterpieces of Fra Giovanno Angelico da Fiesole, and were so devoutly admired. If the reader wishes to form an idea of the taste of the art-enthusiasts of that period, let him go to the Louvre, where the best pictures of those masters, who were then worshipped without bounds, are still on exhibition; and if the reader wishes to form an idea of the great mass of poets who at that time, in all possible varieties of verse, imitated the poetry of the middle ages, let him visit the lunatic asylum at Charenton.

By his romance, Sternbald's Wanderungen, and through his publication of Herzensergies sungen eines Kunstliebenden Klosterbruders, written by a certain Wackenroder, Ludwig Tieck aimed to establish the simple, rough beginnings of art as examples to follow. The devotion and innocence of these works, evident in their technical clumsiness, were recommended for imitation. Raphael was to be completely overlooked; his teacher, Perugino, was almost as disregarded, though rated slightly higher, as it was said he showed some signs of the beauties that fully bloomed in the timeless masterpieces of Fra Giovanni Angelico da Fiesole, which were greatly admired. If the reader wants to understand the taste of the art enthusiasts of that time, they should visit the Louvre, where the finest paintings of those masters, who were then worshiped without limit, are still on display; and if they wish to grasp the sheer volume of poets who at that time, in every imaginable form of verse, imitated medieval poetry, let them visit the lunatic asylum at Charenton.

I believe, however, that those pictures in the first salon of the Louvre are still too graceful to give the observer a correct idea of the art ideals of that period. The pictures of the old Italian school must be imagined translated into the old German, for the works of the old German painters were considered more artless and childlike, and therefore more worthy of imitation than the old Italian. It was claimed that we Germans, with our Gemüth, a word for which the French language has no equivalent, have been able to form a more profound conception of Christianity than other nations, and Frederic Schlegel, and his friend, Joseph Görres, rummaged among the ancient Rhine cities for the remains of old German pictures and statuary, which were superstitiously worshipped as holy relics.

I believe, however, that the paintings in the first salon of the Louvre are still too elegant to give viewers an accurate understanding of the artistic ideals of that time. The works of the old Italian school should be thought of as if they were transformed into the old German style, as the creations of the old German painters were seen as more naïve and childlike, making them more worthy of imitation than those of the old Italian artists. It was said that we Germans, with our Gemüth, a term that has no direct equivalent in French, have developed a deeper understanding of Christianity than other nations. Frederic Schlegel and his friend, Joseph Görres, searched through the ancient cities along the Rhine for remnants of old German paintings and sculptures, which were fervently revered as holy relics.

I have just likened the German Parnassus of that period to Charenton. Even that, however, is too mild a comparison. A French madness falls far short of a German lunacy in violence, for in the latter, as Polonius would say, there is method. With a pedantry without its equal, with an intense conscientiousness, with a profundity of which a superficial French fool can form no conception, this German folly was pursued.

I just compared the German Parnassus of that time to Charenton. Even that is too gentle a comparison. A French madness is nothing compared to a German lunacy in terms of severity, because, as Polonius would say, there’s a method to the madness in the latter. With an unmatched level of pedantry, an intense sense of duty, and a depth that a shallow French fool can't even imagine, this German folly was carried out.

The political condition of Germany was particularly favourable to those Christian old German tendencies. "Need teaches prayer," says the proverb; and truly never was the need greater in Germany. Hence the masses were more than ever inclined to prayer, to religion, to Christianity. No people is more loyally attached to its rulers than are the Germans. And more even than the sorrowful condition to which the country was reduced through war and foreign rule did the mournful spectacle of their vanquished princes, creeping at the feet of Napoleon, afflict and grieve the Germans. The whole nation resembled those faithful old servants in once great but now reduced families, who feel more keenly than even their masters all the humiliations to which the latter are exposed, and who in secret weep most bitterly when the family silver is to be sold, and who clandestinely contribute their pitiful savings, so that patrician wax candles and not plebeian tallow dips shall grace the family table—just as we see it so touchingly depicted in the old plays. The universal sadness found consolation in religion, and there ensued a pious resignation to the will of God, from whom alone help could come. And, in fact, against Napoleon none could help but God Himself. No reliance could be placed on the earthly legions; hence all eyes were religiously turned to Heaven.

The political situation in Germany was especially favorable to those traditional Christian values. "Desperation inspires prayer," goes the saying, and truly the need was greater than ever in Germany. As a result, the masses were more inclined towards prayer, religion, and Christianity. No nation is more loyal to its rulers than the Germans. Even more than the sorrowful state the country endured due to war and foreign control, the painful sight of their defeated princes bowing to Napoleon troubled and saddened the Germans. The entire nation resembled those loyal old servants in once-great but now diminished households, who feel every humiliation experienced by their masters even more acutely and who secretly weep most bitterly when the family silver has to besold, contributing their meager savings to ensure that the dining table is graced with fine wax candles instead of cheap tallow ones—just as we see so movingly portrayed in the old plays. This widespread sadness found solace in religion, leading to a devout acceptance of God's will, from whom alone help could come. Indeed, against Napoleon, only God Himself could offer assistance. There was no trust in earthly armies; therefore, everyone's gaze was devotedly directed towards Heaven.

We would have submitted to Napoleon quietly enough, but our princes, while they hoped for deliverance through Heaven, were at the same time not unfriendly to the thought, that the united strength of their subjects might be very useful in effecting their purpose. Hence they sought to awaken in the German people a sense of homogeneity, and even the most exalted personages now spoke of a German nationality, of a common German fatherland, of a union of the Christian-Germanic races, of the unity of Germany. We were commanded to be patriotic, and straightway we became patriots,—for we always obey when our princes command.

We would have easily accepted Napoleon's rule, but our princes, while they hoped for divine intervention, also saw the potential benefit in uniting the strength of their people to achieve their goals. So, they aimed to instill a sense of unity among the German people, and even the highest-ranking figures began talking about a German nationality, a shared German homeland, a union of the Christian-Germanic races, and the unity of Germany. We were told to be patriotic, and right away we became patriots—because we always follow our princes' orders.

But it must not be supposed that the word "patriotism" means the same in Germany as in France. The patriotism of the French consists in this: the heart warms; through this warmth it expands; it enlarges so as to encompass, with its all-embracing love, not only the nearest and dearest, but all France, all civilisation. The patriotism of the Germans, on the contrary, consists in narrowing and contracting the heart, just as leather contracts in the cold; in hating foreigners; in ceasing to be European and cosmopolitan, and in adopting a narrow-minded and exclusive Germanism. We beheld this ideal empire of churlishness organised into a system by Herr Jahn; with it began the crusade of the vulgar, the coarse, the great unwashed—against the grandest and holiest idea ever brought forth in Germany, the idea of humanitarianism; the idea of the universal brotherhood of mankind, of cosmopolitanism—an idea to which our great minds, Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe, Jean Paul, and all people of culture in Germany, have ever paid homage.

But you can't assume that the word "patriotism" means the same thing in Germany as it does in France. French patriotism is all about the heart warming up; through this warmth, it expands to embrace not just family and friends, but all of France and all of civilization. On the other hand, German patriotism tends to narrow and contract the heart, similar to how leather shrinks in the cold; it involves hating foreigners, rejecting European and cosmopolitan identity, and adopting a narrow and exclusive German nationalism. We witnessed this ideal of churlishness being systematized by Herr Jahn; with it came the crusade of the vulgar, the coarse, the great unwashed—against the greatest and most sacred idea ever proposed in Germany, the idea of humanitarianism; the idea of universal brotherhood, of cosmopolitanism—an idea that our greatest thinkers, Lessing, Herder, Schiller, Goethe, Jean Paul, and all cultured people in Germany, have always revered.

With the events that speedily followed you are only too familiar. After God, the snow, and the Cossacks had destroyed the best portion of Napoleon's forces, we Germans received the command from those highest in authority to free ourselves from the foreign yoke, and we straightway flamed with manly wrath at the bondage too long endured; and we let ourselves be excited to enthusiasm by the fine melodies, but bad verses, of Köerner's ballads, and we fought until we won our freedom—for we always do what our princes command.

You're well aware of the events that quickly followed. After God, the snow, and the Cossacks had decimated the best part of Napoleon's forces, we Germans were ordered by those in power to shake off the foreign oppression, and we immediately ignited with righteous anger at the oppression we had suffered for too long; we were inspired to enthusiasm by the beautiful melodies, but poor lyrics, of Köerner's ballads, and we fought until we achieved our freedom—for we always follow our princes' commands.

At a period when the crusade against Napoleon was forming, a school which was inimical to everything French, and which exalted everything in art and life that was Teutonic, could not help achieving great popularity. The Romantic School at that time went hand in hand with the machinations of the government and the secret societies, and A. W. Schlegel conspired against Racine with the same aim that Minister Stein plotted against Napoleon. This school of literature floated with the stream of the times; that is to say, with the stream that flowed backwards to its source. When finally German patriotism and nationality were victorious, the popular Teutonic-Christian-romantic school, "the new-German-religious-patriotic art-school," triumphed also. Napoleon, the great classic, who was as classic as Alexander or Cæsar, was overthrown, and August William and Frederic Schlegel, the petty romanticists, who were as romantic as Tom Thumb and Puss in Boots, strutted about as victors.

At a time when the campaign against Napoleon was taking shape, a movement that was hostile to everything French and celebrated everything Teutonic in art and life naturally gained a lot of popularity. The Romantic School was closely aligned with the government's schemes and secret societies, and A. W. Schlegel conspired against Racine with the same goals that Minister Stein had against Napoleon. This literary movement flowed with the current of the times, meaning it was moving back toward its origins. When German nationalism and patriotism ultimately triumphed, the popular Teutonic-Christian-romantic school, "the new-German-religious-patriotic art-school," also emerged victorious. Napoleon, the great classic figure, as classic as Alexander or Caesar, was defeated, and August William and Frederic Schlegel, the minor romanticists, who were as romantic as Tom Thumb and Puss in Boots, strutted around as if they were winners.

But the reaction which always follows excess was in this case not long in coming. As the spiritualism of Christianity was a reaction against the brutal rule of imperial Roman materialism; as the revival of the love for Grecian art and science was a reaction against the extravagances of Christian spiritualism; as the romanticism of the middle ages may also be considered as a reaction against the vapid apings of antique classic art; so also do we now behold a reaction against the re-introduction of that catholic, feudal mode of thought, of that knight-errantry and priestdom, which were being inculcated through literature and the pictorial arts, under bewildering circumstances. For when the artists of the middle ages were recommended as models, and were so highly praised and admired, the only explanation of their superiority that could be given was that these men believed in that which they depicted, and that, therefore, with their artless conceptions they could accomplish more than the later sceptical artists, notwithstanding that the latter excelled in technical skill. In short, it was claimed that faith worked wonders, and, in truth, how else could the transcendent merits of a Fra Angelico da Fiesole or the poems of Brother Ottfried be explained? Hence the artists who were honest in their devotion to art, and who sought to imitate the pious distortions of those miraculous pictures, the sacred uncouthness of those marvel-abounding poems, and the inexplicable mysticisms of those olden works—these artists determined to wander to the same hippocrene whence the old masters had derived their supernatural inspiration. They made a pilgrimage to Rome, where the vicegerent of Christ was to re-invigorate consumptive German art with asses' milk. In brief, they betook themselves to the lap of the Roman-Catholic-Apostolic Church, where alone, according to their doctrine, salvation was to be secured. Many of the adherents of the romantic school—for instance, Joseph Görres and Clemens Brentano—were Catholics by birth, and required no formal ceremony to mark their re-adhesion to the Catholic faith; they merely renounced their former free-thinking views. Others, however, such as Frederic Schlegel, Ludwig Tieck, Novalis, Werner, Schütz, Carové, Adam Müller, etc., were born and bred Protestants, and their conversion to Catholicism required a public ceremony. The above list of names includes only authors; the number of painters, who in swarms simultaneously abjured Protestantism and reason, was much larger.

But the reaction that always follows excess didn't take long to show up here. Just as the spiritualism of Christianity was a response to the harsh materialism of imperial Rome; as the revival of interest in Grecian art and science was a reaction against the excesses of Christian spiritualism; and as the romanticism of the Middle Ages can also be seen as a response to the bland imitations of ancient classic art, we now see a reaction against the reintroduction of that Catholic, feudal way of thinking, that knightly and priestly mindset, which was being promoted through literature and the visual arts in confusing circumstances. When the artists of the Middle Ages were put forward as examples and were praised and admired so highly, the only explanation for their greatness was that these men truly believed in what they depicted. Because of this, with their simple concepts, they could achieve more than the later skeptical artists, even though the latter were technically superior. In short, it was said that faith worked wonders, and honestly, how else could we explain the extraordinary talents of Fra Angelico da Fiesole or the poems of Brother Ottfried? Thus, the artists who were sincere in their dedication to art, and who aimed to imitate the pious distortions of those miraculous paintings, the sacred roughness of those wondrous poems, and the unfathomable mysticism of those ancient works—these artists set out to find the same source from which the old masters drew their supernatural inspiration. They took a pilgrimage to Rome, where the representative of Christ was to revive struggling German art with inspiration. In short, they turned to the embrace of the Roman-Catholic-Apostolic Church, where, according to their beliefs, salvation could only be found. Many of the followers of the romantic school—for instance, Joseph Görres and Clemens Brentano—were Catholics by birth and didn’t need any formal ceremony to confirm their return to the Catholic faith; they simply abandoned their earlier free-thinking ideas. Others, however, like Frederic Schlegel, Ludwig Tieck, Novalis, Werner, Schütz, Carové, Adam Müller, and others, were born and raised Protestants, and their conversion to Catholicism required a public ceremony. The names mentioned above are just authors; the number of painters who, in large numbers, simultaneously rejected Protestantism and reason was much greater.

When it was seen how these young people made obeisance, as it were, to the Roman Catholic Church, and pressed their way into ancient prisons of the mind, from which their fathers had so valiantly liberated themselves, much misgiving was felt in Germany. But when it was discovered that this propaganda was the work of priests and aristocrats, who had conspired against the religious and political liberties of Europe; when it was seen that it was Jesuitism itself which was seeking, with the dulcet tones of Romanticism, to lure the youth of Germany to their ruin, after the manner of the mythical rat-catcher of Hamelin; when all this became known, there was great excitement and indignation in Germany among the friends of Protestantism and intellectual freedom.

When people saw how these young individuals seemed to bow down to the Roman Catholic Church and pushed their way back into the old mental prisons from which their ancestors had bravely freed themselves, there was a lot of concern in Germany. But when it became clear that this movement was driven by priests and aristocrats who were plotting against the religious and political freedoms of Europe; when it was recognized that it was Jesuitism itself trying to lure the youth of Germany to their downfall, much like the legendary rat-catcher of Hamelin; when all this was revealed, there was considerable excitement and outrage in Germany among supporters of Protestantism and intellectual freedom.

I have mentioned intellectual freedom and Protestantism together; although, in Germany, I profess the Protestant religion, yet I trust no one will accuse me of a prejudice in its favour. It is entirely without partiality that I have named Protestantism and free-thought together, for in Germany they really stand on a friendly footing towards one another. At all events they are akin, and that as mother and daughter. Even if the Protestant Church may be charged with a certain odious narrow-mindedness, yet to its immortal honour be it said, that by allowing the right of free investigation in the Christian religion, and by liberating the minds of men from the yoke of authority, it made it possible for free-thought to strike root in Germany, and for science to develop an independent existence. Although German philosophy now proudly takes its stand by the side of the Protestant Church; yes, even assumes an air of superiority; yet it is only the daughter of the latter, and as such owes her filial respect and consideration; and when threatened by Jesuitism, the common foe of them both, the bonds of kindred demanded that they should combine for mutual defence. All the friends of intellectual freedom and the Protestant Church, sceptics as well as orthodox, simultaneously arose against the restoration of Catholicism, and, as a matter of course, the Liberals, who were not specially concerned either for the welfare of the Protestant Church or of philosophy, but for the interests of civil liberty, also joined the ranks of this opposition. In Germany, however, the Liberals had always, up to the present time, been students both of philosophy and theology, and the idea of liberty for which they fought was always the same, whether the subject under discussion was exclusively political, philosophical, or theological. This is most clearly manifest in the life of the man, who, at the very outset of the romantic school in Germany, undermined its foundation, and contributed the most to its overthrow. I refer to Johann Heinrich Voss.

I have talked about intellectual freedom and Protestantism together; even though I practice the Protestant faith in Germany, I hope no one will accuse me of bias in its favor. I have mentioned Protestantism and free thought together without any favoritism because, in Germany, they really coexist harmoniously. They are closely related, like a mother and daughter. Even if the Protestant Church may be criticized for being somewhat narrow-minded, it deserves credit for allowing the freedom to explore Christianity and for freeing people’s minds from authoritative control, which made it possible for free thought to take root in Germany and for science to develop independently. Although German philosophy now takes pride in standing alongside the Protestant Church—or even claiming superiority—it is actually its offspring and thus owes it respect and consideration. When both were threatened by Jesuitism, their shared interests demanded that they unite for mutual defense. All supporters of intellectual freedom and the Protestant Church, whether skeptics or orthodox believers, rose up against the resurgence of Catholicism, and naturally, the Liberals, who were primarily focused on civil liberties rather than on the Protestant Church or philosophy specifically, also joined this opposition. In Germany, however, the Liberals had always been students of both philosophy and theology, and the idea of freedom they fought for was consistent, whether the discussion was about political, philosophical, or theological matters. This is most clearly evident in the life of the man who, at the very beginning of the Romantic movement in Germany, undermined its foundations and contributed the most to its downfall. I’m talking about Johann Heinrich Voss.

This writer is altogether unknown in France, and yet there are few to whom the German people are more indebted for their intellectual development. After Lessing, he is probably the greatest citizen in German literature. He certainly was a great man, and deserves more than a mere passing mention.

This writer is completely unknown in France, yet there are few to whom the German people owe more for their intellectual growth. After Lessing, he is likely the greatest figure in German literature. He truly was a remarkable man and deserves more than just a brief mention.

The biography of this man is that of nearly all German authors of the old school. He was the son of poor parents, and was born at Mecklenberg in 1751. He studied theology, but did not pursue it as a career. When, however, he became acquainted with poetry and Greek, he devoted himself zealously to both. In order not to starve he took to teaching, and became schoolmaster at Otterndorf, in Hadeln. He translated the ancients, and lived to the age of seventy-five, poor, frugal, and industrious. He enjoyed an excellent reputation among the poets of the old school, but the poets of the new romantic school were continually plucking at his laurels, and they scoffed not a little at the honest, old-fashioned Voss, who, however, went on in his straight-forward way, picturing the life on the lower Elbe, sometimes even writing in the Platt-Deutsch dialect. He selected no mediæval knights or madonnas as the heroes and heroines of his works, but chose for his theme the life of a simple Protestant parson and his virtuous family. Voss was so thoroughly wholesome, so bourgeois, so natural; while they, the new troubadours, were so morbid and somnambulistic, so high-flown and aristocratic, and altogether so unnatural. To Frederic Schlegel, the intoxicated poet of the dissolute, romantic Lucinde, the staid and sober Voss, with his "chaste Louise" and his "aged and venerable parson of Grunau," must have been very obnoxious. August Wilhelm Schlegel, who never was so sincere as his brother in his glorification of profligacy and of Catholicism, harmonised much better with old Voss, and between the two there existed only the rivalry of translators, a rivalry which has been very beneficial for German literature. Even before the rise of the new school, Voss had translated Homer; now, with an unprecedented industry, he translated the other heathen poets of antiquity, while August Wilhelm Schlegel translated the Christian poets of the romantic-Catholic period. Secret polemical motives inspired them both. Voss aimed to advance classic poetry and modes of thought through his translations, while A. W. Schlegel sought, through good translations, to make the Christian-romantic poets accessible to the public for imitation and culture. In sooth, this antagonism manifested itself even in the forms of speech used by the two translators. While Schlegel became ever more fastidious and finical in his style, Voss grew more brusque and rugged. The language in the latter's later translations is as rough as a file, and at times almost unpronounceable. If one is liable to slip on the smooth, highly-polished, mahogany-like surface of Schlegel's poems, there is equal danger of stumbling over Voss's versified blocks of granite. In a spirit of rivalry, Voss finally attempted a translation of Shakespeare, a work which Schlegel had accomplished so successfully in his earlier years. In this undertaking Voss fared very badly, and his publisher still worse; the translation was a total failure. If Schlegel's translation, perhaps, reads too smoothly; if his verses sometimes give the impression of whipped cream, and leave the reader in doubt whether it is to be eaten or be drunk;—Voss's, on the other hand, is as hard as stone, and reading his verses aloud makes one fear a dislocation of the jaw-bone. But that which especially distinguished Voss was the energy with which he battled against all difficulties; he not only wrestled with the German language, but also with that aristocratic Jesuitic monster, which at that period raised its unsightly head from amidst the dark forest depths of German literature: and Voss dealt the monster a telling blow.

The biography of this man mirrors that of almost all older German authors. He was born in 1751 to poor parents in Mecklenburg. He studied theology but didn’t follow it as a career. However, once he discovered poetry and Greek, he dedicated himself eagerly to both. To avoid starving, he became a teacher and took on the role of schoolmaster in Otterndorf, Hadeln. He translated ancient works and lived to the age of seventy-five, remaining poor, frugal, and hardworking. He enjoyed a great reputation among the poets of his time, but the new romantic poets constantly envied his success and often mocked the honest, traditional Voss. Nonetheless, he continued in his straightforward manner, portraying life along the lower Elbe, sometimes even writing in the Platt-Deutsch dialect. He didn't choose medieval knights or madonnas as the heroes and heroines of his stories; instead, he focused on the life of a simple Protestant parson and his virtuous family. Voss was completely wholesome, middle-class, and natural, while the new troubadours were often morbid and out of touch, overly dramatic and aristocratic, and altogether unnatural. To Frederic Schlegel, the intoxicated poet of the decadent, romantic "Lucinde," the grounded and sensible Voss, with his "chaste Louise" and "aged and venerable parson of Grunau," must have been very irritating. August Wilhelm Schlegel, who was never as sincere as his brother in celebrating debauchery and Catholicism, got along much better with old Voss, and there existed only a rivalry among translators, which ended up benefiting German literature. Even before the new school emerged, Voss had translated Homer; now, with remarkable diligence, he translated other ancient poets, while August Wilhelm Schlegel translated Christian poets from the romantic-Catholic period. Both had hidden competitive motives. Voss aimed to promote classical poetry and ways of thinking through his translations, while A.W. Schlegel sought to make Christian-romantic poets accessible to the public for inspiration and culture through good translations. This rivalry even showed in their styles. Schlegel's language became increasingly fussy and pretentious, whereas Voss's grew more direct and rough. The language in Voss's later translations is as coarse as a file and sometimes nearly unpronounceable. While it's easy to slide over the smooth, polished surface of Schlegel's poems, there's just as much risk of tripping over Voss's rocky verses. In a spirit of competition, Voss eventually attempted a translation of Shakespeare, a work Schlegel had already completed successfully in his earlier years. Voss struggled with this task, and his publisher fared even worse; the translation was a complete failure. If Schlegel’s translation reads too smoothly, giving off the impression of whipped cream and leaving the reader unsure whether to eat or drink it, Voss's is as hard as stone, making reading his verses aloud feel like a jaw-dislocating workout. But what really set Voss apart was his determination in facing all challenges; he not only grappled with the German language but also fought against the elitist Jesuit monster that had begun to rise from the murky depths of German literature at that time, delivering a significant blow to that monster.

Herr Wolfgang Menzel, a German author, who is known as one of the bitterest opponents of Voss, dubs him "a Saxon boor." Notwithstanding the unfriendly sense in which this epithet is applied, it is nevertheless very fitting. In truth, Voss is "a Saxon boor," just as Luther was one: he lacks all that is chivalrous, courteous, and gracious; he was every inch one of that rude, rough, sturdy race, to whom Christianity could be preached only by fire and sword, and who only submitted to that religion after losing three battles, but who in their customs and ways still retain much of the old Norse pagan doggedness, and in their material and intellectual combats show themselves as valiant and as stubborn as their ancient gods. When I contemplate Johann Heinrich Voss in his polemics and in his whole manner, I seem to see before me the ancient one-eyed Odin himself, who has left Asgard and has become a school-teacher in the province of Hadeln, and there teaches Latin declination and the Christian catechism to the little flaxen-haired Holsteiners; in his leisure hours he translates the Greek poets into German, and borrows from Thor his great hammer to beat the verses into shape; but after a while, becoming tired of the tedious work, he takes the hammer and cracks poor Fritz Stolberg on the head.

Herr Wolfgang Menzel, a German writer known as one of Voss's strongest critics, calls him "a Saxon boor." Even though this term is used in a negative way, it’s actually quite fitting. In reality, Voss is "a Saxon boor," just like Luther was: he lacks all the qualities of chivalry, courtesy, and grace; he embodies that rough, sturdy race who could only be converted to Christianity through fire and sword, and who only accepted that religion after losing three battles. Yet, in their customs and ways, they still hold onto a lot of the old Norse stubbornness, proving to be as brave and tenacious in their material and intellectual struggles as their ancient gods. When I think about Johann Heinrich Voss in his arguments and overall demeanor, I can almost see the one-eyed Odin himself, who has left Asgard to become a schoolteacher in the Hadeln region, teaching Latin grammar and the Christian catechism to the little flaxen-haired Holsteiners. In his free time, he translates Greek poets into German, using Thor’s great hammer to shape the verses, but after a while, he grows tired of the tedious task and uses the hammer to crack poor Fritz Stolberg on the head.

That was a famous affair. Frederick, Count of Stolberg, was a poet of the old school, and was remarkably popular in Germany, not, perhaps, so much on account of his poetic talents as for his title of count, which at that time counted for more in German literature than it does now. Fritz Stolberg, however, was a liberal man and had a noble heart, and he was a friend of those less patrician youths, who in Göttingen were seeking to found a poetic school. I recommend French literary men to read the preface to the poems of Hölty, in which Johann Heinrich Voss describes the idyllic life of the band of poets of which he and Fritz Stolberg were members. Time passed, and these two only were left of all that galaxy of youthful poets. When Fritz Stolberg, with great éclat, joined the Catholic Church, abjuring reason and the love of freedom, becoming a promoter of intellectual darkness, and by his aristocratic example drawing many weaklings after him—then Johann Heinrich Voss, the venerable man of three-score and ten, publicly entered the lists against the friend of his youth, and wrote the little book, Wie Ward Fritz Stolberg ein Unfreier? In it he analysed Stolberg's whole life, and showed how the aristocratic tendency in the nature of his old comrade had always existed, and that after the events of the French Revolution that tendency had steadily become more pronounced; that Stolberg had secretly joined an association of the nobility, which had for its purpose to counteract the French ideas of liberty; that these nobles entered into a league with the Jesuits; that they sought, through the re-establishment of Catholicism, to advance also the interests of the nobility: he exposed in general the ways and means by which the reactionists were seeking to bring about the restoration of the Christian-Catholic-feudal middle ages, and the destruction of Protestant intellectual freedom and the political rights of the commonalty. Once, ere the era of revolutions, good fellowship existed between German democracy and German aristocracy; the former hoped for nothing, the latter feared nothing; but now as grey-beards, they faced each other, and fought a duel for life or death.

That was a well-known incident. Frederick, Count of Stolberg, was an old-fashioned poet and was quite popular in Germany, not necessarily because of his poetic skills but mainly due to his title, which held more weight in German literature back then than it does now. Fritz Stolberg, however, was progressive and had a noble heart. He was a friend to the less aristocratic young men who were trying to establish a poetic movement in Göttingen. I recommend that French literary figures read the preface to Hölty's poems, where Johann Heinrich Voss describes the idyllic life of the group of poets that he and Fritz Stolberg were part of. Time went by, and only these two remained from that group of young poets. When Fritz Stolberg, with much fanfare, converted to Catholicism, abandoning reason and the ideals of freedom, and became a supporter of ignorance, leading many impressionable people to follow his aristocratic example—then Johann Heinrich Voss, the esteemed man of seventy, publicly opposed his old friend and wrote the short book, Wie Ward Fritz Stolberg ein Unfreier? In it, he analyzed Stolberg's entire life, demonstrating that the aristocratic tendencies in his old comrade had always been present, and that following the French Revolution, these tendencies had become even more pronounced; that Stolberg had secretly joined a nobility association aimed at countering French ideas of liberty; that these nobles allied themselves with the Jesuits; seeking, through the revival of Catholicism, to promote the interests of the nobility: he generally exposed the methods by which reactionaries were attempting to bring back the Christian-Catholic-feudal middle ages and to destroy Protestant intellectual freedom and the political rights of the common people. Once, before the era of revolutions, there was camaraderie between German democracy and German aristocracy; the former expected nothing, while the latter feared nothing; but now, as elderly men, they faced off against each other in a duel for survival.

That portion of the German public which did not comprehend the significance and terrible necessity of this struggle blamed poor Voss for the ruthless revelation of confidential relations and private affairs, which, however, taken as a whole, conclusively proved the correctness of his charges. Then certain so-called æsthetic souls, far too exalted and refined for such petty gossip, raised an outcry, and accused poor Voss of being a scandal-monger. Other good citizens, who feared that the curtain might be drawn from them, and their own miserable shortcomings be exposed, waxed indignant over the violation of the established rules of literary polemics, which strictly forbid all personalities and disclosures of private affairs. It so happened that Fritz Stolberg died soon after, and his death was attributed to grief; and when, immediately after his death, his Liebesbüchlein was published, in which he assumes the true Jesuitic tone, and speaks of his poor deluded friend in terms of pious Christian forgiveness—then the tears of German compassion fell thick and fast, and the German Michel[10] assumed his most lugubrious expression, and all this flood of sentimentality was turned into wrath against poor Voss; and most of the abuse heaped upon him came from the very ones for whose intellectual and material welfare he had battled.

That part of the German public that didn’t understand the importance and harsh necessity of this struggle blamed poor Voss for exposing confidential relationships and personal matters, which, overall, convincingly supported his claims. Then a few so-called sophisticated individuals, way too refined for such trivial gossip, raised a fuss and accused poor Voss of being a troublemaker. Other decent citizens, who worried that the truth might come to light and their own flaws be revealed, were outraged over the breach of the established rules of literary debate, which strictly prohibit personal attacks and private disclosures. Shortly after, Fritz Stolberg died, and his death was linked to grief; when, right after his passing, his Liebesbüchlein was published, in which he adopted a truly Jesuit tone and spoke of his misguided friend with pious Christian forgiveness—then the tears of German sympathy flowed abundantly, and the German Michel[10] wore his most mournful expression. All this sentimental outpouring turned into anger directed at poor Voss, and most of the criticism aimed at him came from those he had fought for, both intellectually and materially.

When one gets soundly thrashed in Germany one can always count on the pity and tears of the multitude. In this respect the Germans resemble those old crones who never miss an opportunity of witnessing an execution, and who eagerly press to the front of the curious spectators, setting up a bitter lamentation at sight of the poor wretch, and even taking his part. The snivelling old women who attend literary executions, and put on such grief-stricken airs, would nevertheless be very much disappointed if the poor sinner was suddenly to receive a pardon, and they be sent trudging homeward without beholding the anticipated flogging. Their worst fury would then be directed against the one who had balked their expectation.

When someone gets completely beaten down in Germany, you can always rely on the sympathy and tears of the crowd. In this way, the Germans are like those old women who never miss a chance to watch an execution. They eagerly push to the front of the curious onlookers, wailing bitterly at the sight of the poor victim and even defending him. The crying old ladies who show up for literary executions and pretend to be so heartbroken would be very disappointed if the poor sinner suddenly received a pardon, leaving them to walk home without seeing the expected punishment. Their anger would then be directed at the one who ruined their expectations.

Meanwhile Voss's polemical writings exerted a powerful influence upon the masses, and turned the current of public opinion against that predilection for mediævalism which had been all the fashion. His writings aroused Germany; many declared for Voss personally; a greater portion supported his cause alone. The controversy waxed fiercer and fiercer; attacks and rejoinders followed in quick succession, and the last days of the old man were embittered by these quarrels. He had to deal with the most dangerous opponents, the priesthood, who attacked him under the most-varied guises. Not only the Crypto-Catholic, but also the Pietists, the Quietists, the Lutheran Mystics; in brief, all the supernaturalistic sects of the Protestant church, no matter how decidedly they differed from one another in their creeds, yet they all agreed in their great hatred of Johann Heinrich Voss, the rationalist. This name is in Germany applied to those who hold that the claims of reason should not be put aside in matters of religion, in opposition to the supernaturalists, who to a greater or less degree discard reason in religion. The latter, in their furious hate of the poor rationalists, resemble the inmates of a lunatic asylum, who, although they will not believe in each other's hallucinations, yet in a measure tolerate one another. But with all the fiercer hate do they turn against the man whom they consider their common enemy, who is no other than the physician who seeks to restore their reason.

Meanwhile, Voss's controversial writings had a strong impact on the public and shifted opinion against the popular fascination with medievalism. His work sparked a reaction in Germany; many rallied around Voss personally, while a larger group supported his ideas alone. The debate intensified; attacks and responses came one after another, and the final days of the old man were overshadowed by these disputes. He faced formidable opponents, the clergy, who attacked him in various ways. Not just the Crypto-Catholic, but also the Pietists, the Quietists, the Lutheran Mystics; in short, all the supernatural sects of the Protestant church, despite their significant differences in beliefs, united in their intense hatred of Johann Heinrich Voss, the rationalist. In Germany, this term refers to those who believe that reason should not be dismissed in matters of faith, in contrast to the supernaturalists, who reject reason to varying extents in religious contexts. The latter, in their furious disdain for the rationalists, resemble the residents of a mental institution who, although they don’t believe in each other's delusions, tolerate one another to some extent. However, their collective animosity is directed fiercely towards the man they view as their common adversary, who is, in fact, the doctor trying to restore their reason.

While the romantic school was severely damaged in public opinion by the discovery of its Catholic tendencies, about the same time it received an utterly crushing blow in its own temple, and that, too, from one of those gods whom itself had enshrined there. For it was Wolfgang Goethe who descended from his pedestal to pronounce the doom of the Schlegels, the same high-priests who had offered him so much incense. That voice annihilated the whole pack of hobgoblins; the spectres of the middle ages fled; the owls crept again into their obscure castle-ruins, and the ravens fluttered back to their old church-steeples. Frederic Schlegel went to Vienna, where he attended mass daily and ate broiled fowl; A. W. Schlegel withdrew into the pagoda of Brahma.

While the romantic school faced significant backlash in public opinion due to its Catholic tendencies, it also suffered a devastating blow from one of its own idols. Wolfgang Goethe, who had been venerated by the movement, stepped down from his pedestal to condemn the Schlegels, the very high-priests who had praised him lavishly. His voice dismantled the entire collection of illusions; the ghosts of the middle ages retreated, the owls returned to their hidden ruins, and the ravens made their way back to their old church steeples. Frederic Schlegel went to Vienna, where he attended mass daily and ate broiled chicken; A. W. Schlegel withdrew into the pagoda of Brahma.

Frankly confessed, Goethe at that time played a very ambiguous rôle, and cannot be unconditionally praised. It is true, the Schlegels never were sincere with him; perhaps they built him an altar, and offered him incense, and taught the multitude to kneel before him, only because, in their warfare against the old school, they needed a living poet to set up as a model, and found none more suited for their purpose than Goethe; and, perhaps, also, because they expected some literary favours from him. Moreover, he was at such an easy distance from them. The road from Jena to Weimar leads through an avenue of fine plum trees, and the luscious fruit is very acceptable to the wayfarer when parched with the summer heat. The Schlegels often travelled this road, and in Weimar they had many an interview with Herr Geheimrath von Goethe, who was always a finished diplomat. He listened quietly to what the Schlegels had to say, smiled approvingly, occasionally dined them, showed them various favours, etc. They also approached Schiller, but the latter was an honest, straight-forward man, and would have nothing to do with them. The correspondence between Schiller and Goethe, which was published three years ago, throws considerable light on the relations between these two poets and the Schlegels. Goethe, haughtily and contemptuously, mocks at them; Schiller is angry at their impertinent scandal-mongering, and at their passion for notoriety, and he calls them "puppies."

Honestly, Goethe played a pretty ambiguous role back then and can’t be purely praised. It’s true that the Schlegels were never honest with him; maybe they built him up and offered him praise, teaching the masses to idolize him, simply because they needed a living poet as a model in their fight against the old school and found no one better than Goethe. They probably thought they could gain some literary favors from him too. Plus, he was conveniently close. The road from Jena to Weimar goes through a beautiful avenue of plum trees, and the delicious fruit is very welcome to travelers suffering in the summer heat. The Schlegels often traveled this route, and in Weimar, they had many meetings with Herr Geheimrath von Goethe, who was always a skilled diplomat. He listened patiently to what the Schlegels had to say, smiled approvingly, sometimes dined with them, and showed them various favors, etc. They also reached out to Schiller, but he was an honest and straightforward man, and wanted nothing to do with them. The correspondence between Schiller and Goethe, published three years ago, sheds light on the relationships between these two poets and the Schlegels. Goethe mocks them haughtily and contemptuously; Schiller is angry about their rude gossiping and their desire for fame, calling them "puppies."

But although Goethe assumed such haughty airs towards them, it is nevertheless true that he was indebted to the Schlegels for the greater portion of his fame, for it was they who introduced and promoted the study of his writings. The contemptuous and insulting manner with which he eventually cast them off has a very strong flavour of ingratitude. Perhaps Goethe, with his clear insight, was vexed that the Schlegels should seek to use him as an instrument to accomplish their projects. Perhaps those projects threatened to compromise him as the minister of a Protestant state. Perhaps it was the ancient pagan godlike wrath that awoke in him at sight of the mouldy Catholic follies. For as Voss resembled the stalwart one-eyed Odin, so did Goethe, in form and figure, resemble great Jupiter. The former was compelled to pound long and vigorously with his Thor's hammer; the latter needed but angrily to shake his majestic head, with its ambrosial locks, and the Schlegels trembled and crept out of sight. A public statement of Goethe's opposition to the romantic school appeared in his journal, Kunst und Alterthum, and bore the title, Concerning the Christian-Patriotic-New-German School of Art. With this article Goethe made his eighteenth brumaire in German literature, for by chasing the Schlegels so summarily out of the temple, and attaching to himself so many of their young and zealous disciples, and being hailed with acclamations by the public, to whom the Schlegelian directory had long been obnoxious, he established his autocratic sovereignty in German literature. From that hour nothing more was heard of the Schlegels. Only now and then their names were mentioned, just as one sometimes casually speaks of Barras or of Gohier. Neither romantic nor classic poetry was henceforth spoken of; everywhere it was nothing but Goethe. It is true that several other poets arose in the meantime, who, in power and imagination, were but little inferior to Goethe. But out of courtesy they acknowledged him as their chief; they paid homage to him, they kissed his hand, they knelt before him. These grandees of Parnassus differed from the common multitude in being permitted to wear their laurel-wreaths in Goethe's presence. Sometimes they even attacked him; but they were always vexed when one of the lesser ones ventured to assail him. No matter how angry aristocrats are with their sovereign, they are always displeased when plebeians also dare to revolt. And, in truth, the aristocrats of intellect had, during the last twenty years, very good reasons to be irritated against Goethe. As I myself unreservedly remarked at the time, not without bitterness, "Goethe resembled Louis XI. of France, who abased the powerful nobility and exalted the tiers état."

But even though Goethe acted arrogantly towards them, it’s still true that he owed much of his fame to the Schlegels, as they were the ones who introduced and promoted his work. The dismissive and insulting way he eventually cast them aside feels quite ungrateful. Perhaps Goethe, with his keen insight, was annoyed that the Schlegels wanted to use him to achieve their own goals. Maybe those goals threatened to compromise him as the minister of a Protestant state. Or perhaps it was an ancient, godlike rage that arose in him at the sight of outdated Catholic nonsense. Just as Voss resembled the strong one-eyed Odin, Goethe, in form and figure, looked like great Jupiter. The former had to hit hard and repeatedly with his Thor's hammer; the latter needed only to furiously shake his majestic head, with its divine locks, and the Schlegels would cower and disappear. A public statement of Goethe's opposition to the romantic school appeared in his journal, Kunst und Alterthum, titled Concerning the Christian-Patriotic-New-German School of Art. With this article, Goethe made his own dramatic shift in German literature, as he swiftly drove the Schlegels out of the temple, gathered many of their young and passionate followers, and was cheered by the public, who had long resented the Schlegelian faction. He established his autocratic dominance in German literature. After that, nothing more was heard from the Schlegels. Occasionally, their names would come up, much like how one sometimes mentions Barras or Gohier. From then on, romantic or classic poetry was no longer discussed; it was all about Goethe everywhere. It’s true that several other poets emerged during this time, whose power and imagination were nearly on par with Goethe's. But out of respect, they acknowledged him as their leader; they paid tribute to him, kissed his hand, knelt before him. These literary elites differed from the average crowd only in that they were allowed to wear their laurels in Goethe’s presence. Sometimes they even criticized him; however, they were always annoyed when one of the lesser poets dared to challenge him. No matter how upset the aristocrats are with their ruler, they always disapprove when commoners also attempt to rebel. And indeed, the intellectual elite had plenty of reasons to be frustrated with Goethe over the last twenty years. As I openly remarked at the time, not without some bitterness, "Goethe resembled Louis XI of France, who brought down the powerful nobility and elevated the tiers état."

That was despicable. Goethe feared every writer of independence and originality, but glorified and praised all the petty authorlings. He carried this so far, that to be praised by Goethe came at last to be considered a brevet of mediocrity.

That was contemptible. Goethe was afraid of any writer with independence and originality, yet he glorified and praised all the insignificant authors. He took it so far that being praised by Goethe eventually became seen as a certificate of mediocrity.

Later I shall speak of the new poets who grew up during the Goethean imperialism. They constitute a forest of young trees, whose true magnitude has become perceptible only since the fall of that century-old oak by whose branches they had been so completely overtopped and overshadowed. As already stated, there was not lacking a bitter and zealous opposition against Goethe, that giant oak. Men of the most diverse opinions were banded together in this opposition. The orthodox were vexed that in the trunk of this great tree there was no niche provided for the statuettes of the saints, but that, on the contrary, even the nude dryads of heathendom were permitted to carry on their witchery beneath it. The pietists would gladly have imitated Saint Boniface, and with consecrated axe have felled this magic oak. The liberals, on the other hand, were indignant that they could not use it as a liberty tree and as a barricade. But, in truth, the tree was too lofty to have a red cap placed on its top, or a carmagnole danced beneath it. But the public at large honoured it just because it was so stately and independent; because it filled the whole world with its delicious fragrance; because its branches towered majestically to the heavens, so that the stars seemed to be merely the golden fruit of the great and wonderful tree.

Later, I will talk about the new poets who emerged during the era of Goethe's influence. They represent a forest of young trees, whose true size has only become obvious since the fall of that century-old oak that had overshadowed them completely. As previously mentioned, there was a strong and passionate opposition to Goethe, that giant oak. People with very different opinions came together in this opposition. The traditionalists were frustrated that there was no place in this great tree's trunk for the statues of saints, and instead, even the nude dryads from paganism were allowed to thrive beneath it. The pietists would have loved to imitate Saint Boniface and take a holy axe to this enchanted oak. On the other hand, the liberals were angry that they couldn't use it as a symbol of freedom or as a barricade. But, really, the tree was too tall to have a red cap placed on its top or for a revolutionary dance to take place beneath it. However, the general public respected it precisely because it was so grand and independent; because it filled the whole world with its lovely scent; because its branches soared majestically toward the heavens, making the stars seem like the golden fruit of this great and magnificent tree.

It is true, the opposition against Goethe began with the appearance of the so-called pseudo Wanderjahre, which was published by Gottfried Basse of Quedlinburg, under the title of Wilhelm Meister's Wanderjahre, in 1821; that is, soon after the downfall of the Schlegels. Goethe had announced a sequel to his Wilhelm Meister's Lehrjahre, under this title, and very strangely it appeared simultaneously with its literary double, in which not only was Goethe's style imitated, but the hero of Goethe's original novel was represented as the leading personage. This parody evinced much talent, and still greater tact, for as the author managed to maintain his anonymity for a considerable period, baffling all endeavours to discover his personality, public interest was artificially stimulated. Finally it transpired that the author was a hitherto unknown village parson, by the name of Pustkuchen, which translated into French would be omelette soufflée, a name which aptly describes the very essence of his book. It was nothing else than the old, stale, sour dough of the pietists, æsthetically kneaded over. In this book it was cast up to Goethe, as a reproach, that his poems had no moral aim; that he could create no lofty characters, but only low, vulgar creatures; that Schiller, on the contrary, had produced the most ideal and exalted conceptions, and that therefore the latter was a greater poet.

It's true, the criticism of Goethe started with the release of the so-called pseudo Wanderjahre, published by Gottfried Basse of Quedlinburg, titled Wilhelm Meister's Wanderjahre, in 1821; this was shortly after the decline of the Schlegels. Goethe had announced a sequel to his Wilhelm Meister's Lehrjahre under this title, and oddly enough, it was released at the same time as its literary counterpart, which not only imitated Goethe's style but also featured the hero from Goethe's original novel as the main character. This parody showed a lot of talent and even more skill, as the author managed to keep his identity hidden for a long time, frustrating all attempts to uncover his identity and artificially sparking public interest. Eventually, it was revealed that the author was an unknown village vicar named Pustkuchen, which translates to omelette soufflée in French, a name that perfectly captures the essence of his book. It was nothing more than the old, stale, sour dough of the pietists, aesthetically reworked. In this book, it was criticized that Goethe’s poems lacked a moral purpose; that he could only create low, vulgar characters, while Schiller, on the other hand, had produced the most ideal and elevated ideas, making him the greater poet.

That Schiller was a greater poet than Goethe was the special point which Pustkuchen's book sought to establish, and for which it was written. It became the fashion to institute comparisons between the writings of the two poets, and the public divided into partisan camps. The admirers of Schiller enthusiastically praised the purity and nobility of a Max Piccolomini, of a Thekla, of Posa, and other of Schiller's dramatic heroes; on the other hand, they stigmatised Goethe's Philine, Käthchen, Clärchen, and the like pretty creatures, as immoral jades. Goethe's adherents would smilingly admit that neither Goethe's heroes nor his heroines could be called moral, but they claimed that the promotion of morality in nowise came within the province of art. In art, asserted they, as in the universe itself, there is no ulterior purpose; it is only man who introduces the conceptions of end and means. Art, like the universe, said they, exists for itself alone. Although the opinions of mankind concerning the universe are continually changing, the universe itself remains ever the same; so also must art remain uninfluenced by the temporary views of mankind. Art must be kept especially independent of systems of morality, for these change on earth as often as a new religion arises, and supersedes an older faith. In fact, as after the lapse of a number of centuries a new religion always makes its appearance, influences the customs, and thus makes itself felt as a new system of morality, so in every period the art works of the past would be branded as heretical and immoral, were they to be judged by the temporary standard of morality. We have, in truth, lived to see good Christians, who condemn the flesh as of Satan, experience a feeling of anger at sight of the Greek mythological statues. Chaste monks have put an apron on the antique Venus; the ridiculous custom of bestowing a fig leaf on nude figures has continued even up to the present. A pious Quaker went so far as to sacrifice his whole fortune in buying up and burning Giulo Romano's most beautiful mythological paintings; truly he deserves for his pains to reach heaven, and there to be flogged daily. A religion which should recognise God in matter only, and should regard the flesh only as divine, would, when it had impressed itself upon the customs of men, give rise to a system of morality, according to which those works of art which glorify the flesh would be alone deemed worthy of praise; and on the contrary, those Christian art works which depict the nothingness of the flesh would be considered as immoral. The works of art which are accepted as moral in one land would be considered immoral in another country, where a different religion had generated different customs. Thus, our pictorial arts awaken the disgust of a strict Mahometan, while much that in the harems of the Orient is regarded as quite innocent would be an abomination in the eyes of Christians. In India the occupation of a Bayadere is not regarded as dishonourable; hence, the drama of "Vasantasena," the heroine of which is a courtesan, is there not at all considered immoral. If, however, the Théâtre Français ventured to produce this play, the whole pit would raise the cry of "immorality"—the same pit that witnesses with delight plays whose plots are amorous intrigues, and whose heroines are young widows who remarry at the end of the play, instead of having themselves burned to death on their deceased husband's funeral pyre, as required by Hindoo morality.

That Schiller was a greater poet than Goethe was the main point Pustkuchen's book aimed to prove. Comparisons between the two poets’ works became popular, dividing the public into opposing camps. Schiller's fans enthusiastically praised the nobility and integrity of characters like Max Piccolomini, Thekla, and Posa, while they criticized Goethe’s Philine, Käthchen, and Clärchen as immoral. Goethe's supporters would agree that neither Goethe's heroes nor heroines could be called moral, but they argued that promoting morality is not the role of art. They asserted that, like the universe, art exists without any ulterior purpose; it’s only humans who impose ideas of ends and means. They believed art, like the universe, should stand alone. Just as people's opinions about the universe change over time, the universe itself remains constant; similarly, art should not be swayed by transient moral views. Art must especially remain independent of moral systems, which change as frequently as new religions arise and displace older beliefs. In fact, just as new religions emerge after centuries, influencing customs and establishing new moral systems, so too would the artistic works of the past be deemed heretical and immoral if judged by the current moral standards. We have seen devout Christians who condemn the flesh as satanic, express anger upon seeing Greek mythological statues. Chaste monks have dressed the ancient Venus; the absurd practice of covering nude figures with a fig leaf continues even today. A devout Quaker once went so far as to spend his entire fortune acquiring and burning Giulio Romano's finest mythological paintings; truly, he deserves to reach heaven, only to be flogged daily. A religion recognizing God only in matter and viewing the flesh as divine would, when it shapes customs, create a moral system where artworks glorifying the flesh would be the only ones praised, while Christian artworks that depict the insignificance of the flesh would be labeled immoral. Art considered moral in one country might be judged immoral in another, where a different religion has created different customs. Thus, our visual arts might disgust a strict Muslim, while much that is deemed completely innocent in Eastern harems would be abominable in the eyes of Christians. In India, being a bayadere isn't seen as dishonorable; therefore, the play "Vasantasena," featuring a courtesan as the heroine, isn’t considered immoral there. However, if the Théâtre Français dared to stage this play, the entire audience would cry "immorality"—the same audience that delights in plays featuring romantic intrigues with heroines who remarry at the end, instead of following the Hindu custom of being cremated with their deceased husbands.

Starting with this idea, the Goetheans viewed art as a separate, independent world, which they would rank so high, that all the changing and changeable doings of mankind, their religions and systems of morality, should surge far below it. I cannot unconditionally endorse this view; but the Goetheans were led so far astray by it as to proclaim art in and of itself as the highest good. Thus they were induced to hold themselves aloof from the claims of the world of reality, which, after all, is entitled to precedence.

Starting with this idea, the Goetheans saw art as its own independent world, one they valued so highly that all of humanity's changing actions, their religions, and moral systems should rank far below it. I can't completely agree with this perspective; however, the Goetheans were so misled by it that they declared art itself to be the highest good. As a result, they distanced themselves from the demands of the real world, which, after all, deserves priority.

Schiller united himself to the world of reality much more decidedly than did Goethe; and he deserves praise for this. The living spirit of the times thrilled through Frederic Schiller; it wrestled with him; it vanquished him; he followed it to battle; he bore its banner, and, lo! it was the same banner under which the conflict was being enthusiastically waged across the Rhine, and for which we are always ready to shed our heart's best blood. Schiller wrote for the grand ideas of the Revolution; he razed the bastilles of the intellect; he helped to erect the temple of freedom, that colossal temple which shelters all nations like a single congregation of brothers: in brief, he was a cosmopolitan. He began his career with that hate of the past which we behold in The Robbers. In this work he resembles a diminutive Titan who has run away from school, got tipsy with schnapps, and throws stones at Jupiter's windows. He ended with that love for the future which already in his Don Carlos blossoms forth like a field of flowers. Schiller is himself that Marquis Posa who is simultaneously prophet and soldier, and battles for that which he foretells. Under that Spanish cloak throbs the noblest heart that ever loved and suffered in Germany.

Schiller connected with the reality of his time much more decisively than Goethe did, and he deserves recognition for this. The vibrant spirit of the era flowed through Frederic Schiller; it pushed him, it defeated him, and he followed it into battle; he carried its banner, and, indeed, it was the same banner under which passionate conflicts were waged across the Rhine, for which we are always ready to give our very best. Schiller wrote for the grand ideals of the Revolution; he demolished the barriers of the mind; he contributed to building the temple of freedom, that enormous sanctuary which embraces all nations like a single family: in short, he was a cosmopolitan. He started his journey with a disdain for the past, as seen in The Robbers. In this work, he resembles a small Titan who has escaped from school, gotten tipsy on schnapps, and thrown stones at Jupiter's windows. He concluded with a love for the future that blossoms forth like a field of flowers even in his Don Carlos. Schiller is like that Marquis Posa who is both a prophet and a warrior, fighting for what he predicts. Beneath that Spanish cloak beats the noblest heart that has ever loved and suffered in Germany.

The poet is, on a small scale, but the imitator of the Creator, and also resembles God in creating his characters after his own image. If, therefore, Carl Moor and the Marquis Posa are wholly Schiller himself, so in like manner does Goethe resemble his Werther, his Wilhelm Meister, and his Faust, in whom the different phases of his intellect can be studied. While Schiller devotes himself to the history of the race, and becomes an enthusiast for the social progress of mankind, Goethe, on the other hand, applies himself to the study of the individual, to nature and to art. The physical sciences must of necessity have finally become a leading branch of study with Goethe, the pantheist, and in his poems, as well as in his scientific works, he gave us the result of his researches. His indifferentism was to a certain extent the result of his pantheistic views. Alas! we must confess that pantheism has often led men into indifferentism. They reasoned thus: if everything is God; if everything is divine, then it is indifferent whether man occupies himself with clouds or ancient gems; with folk-songs or the anatomy of apes; with real human beings or play-actors. But that is just the mistake. Everything is not God, but God is everything. He does not manifest himself equally in all things, but He shows himself in different degrees according to the various matters. Everything bears within itself an impulse to strive after a higher degree of divinity, and that is the great law of progress throughout all nature. The recognition of this law, which has been most profoundly revealed by the disciples of St. Simon, now makes pantheism a cosmic, universal theory, which not only does not lead to indifferentism, but, on the contrary, induces the most self-sacrificing endeavours. No, God does not manifest himself in all things equally, as Wolfgang Goethe believed, who through such a belief became an indifferentist, and, instead of devoting himself to the highest interests of humanity, occupied himself with art, anatomy, theories of colour, botanical studies, and observations of the clouds. No, God is manifest in some things to a greater degree than in others. He lives in motion, in action, in time. His holy breath is wafted through the pages of history, which is God's true book of record. Frederic Schiller felt this, and became an historian, a "prophet of the past," and wrote the Revolt of the Netherlands, the Thirty Years' War, the Maid of Orleans, and William Tell.

The poet is, in a small way, like the Creator, and also reflects God by creating characters in his own image. So, if Carl Moor and the Marquis Posa are entirely Schiller himself, then Goethe similarly reflects his Werther, his Wilhelm Meister, and his Faust, where the different aspects of his intellect can be examined. While Schiller focuses on the history of humanity and passionately supports social progress, Goethe, on the other hand, studies the individual, nature, and art. The physical sciences must have become a major area of study for Goethe, the pantheist, and in his poems, as well as in his scientific work, he shared the results of his research. His indifference was partly a result of his pantheistic beliefs. Unfortunately, we must admit that pantheism has often led people to indifference. They think: if everything is God; if everything is divine, then it doesn't matter whether one engages with clouds or ancient gems; with folk songs or the anatomy of apes; with real people or actors. But that is the mistake. Not everything is God, but God is everything. He doesn’t show himself equally in all things, but He reveals Himself in different ways depending on the subject. Everything carries an impulse to strive for a higher level of divinity, and that is the great law of progress throughout all nature. The understanding of this law, most deeply expressed by the followers of St. Simon, makes pantheism a cosmic, universal theory, which not only does not lead to indifference but actually encourages the most selfless efforts. No, God doesn’t reveal Himself in all things equally, as Wolfgang Goethe believed, which led him to become indifferent, spending his time on art, anatomy, color theories, botanical studies, and cloud observations instead of dedicating himself to humanity's highest interests. No, God is more present in some things than in others. He exists in motion, in action, in time. His divine breath flows through the pages of history, which is God's true record. Frederic Schiller understood this and became a historian, a "prophet of the past," writing the Revolt of the Netherlands, the Thirty Years' War, the Maid of Orleans, and William Tell.

It is true Goethe also depicted a few of the great struggles of freedom, but he portrayed them as an artist. Christian zeal was odious to him, and he angrily turned from it; and the enthusiasm for philosophy, which is characteristic of our epoch, he either could not understand or purposely avoided understanding, for fear of ruffling his customary tranquillity of mind; so he treated all enthusiasm objectively and historically; as a datum, as a subject to be written about. In his hands the living spirit became dead matter, and he invested it with a lovely and pleasing form. He became thus the greatest artist of our literature, and all that he wrote was a finished work of art.

It’s true that Goethe captured some of the significant struggles for freedom, but he did it as an artist. He found Christian enthusiasm distasteful and turned away from it in anger; he either couldn’t grasp or intentionally avoided the philosophical enthusiasm typical of our time, fearing it would disturb his usual calm mindset. So he approached all forms of enthusiasm with objectivity and historical context, treating it as a fact to be discussed. In his hands, the vibrant spirit turned into lifeless material, which he adorned with beautiful and pleasing shapes. This made him the greatest artist of our literature, and everything he wrote became a polished piece of art.

The example of the master misled the disciples, and there arose in Germany that literary epoch which I once designated as the "art period," and which, as I then showed, had a most disastrous influence on the political development of the German people. At the same time, I by no means deny the intrinsic worth of the Goethean masterpieces. They adorn our beloved fatherland just as beautiful statues embellish a garden; but they are only statues after all. One may fall in love with them, but they are barren. Goethe's poems do not, like Schiller's, beget deeds. Deeds are the offspring of words; but Goethe's pretty words are childless. That is the curse of all that which has originated in mere art. The statue which Pygmalion wrought was a beautiful woman, and even the sculptor himself fell in love with her. His kisses warmed her into life, but, so far as we know, she never bore children. I believe a similar idea has been suggested by Charles Nodier, and this thought came into my mind while wandering through the Louvre, as my glance alighted on the statues of the ancient gods. There they stood, with their white, expressionless eyes, a mysterious melancholy in their stony smiles. Perhaps they are haunted by sad memories of Egypt, that land of the dead from which they came; or perhaps it is a mournful longing for the life from which other divinities have expelled them, or a grieving over their immortality of death. They seem to be awaiting the word that shall liberate them from their cold, motionless rigidity and bring them back to life. How strange that these antique statues should remind me of the Goethean creations, which are likewise so perfect, so beautiful, so motionless, and which also seem oppressed with a dumb grieving that their rigidity and coldness separate them from our present warm, restless life—that they cannot speak and rejoice with us, and that they are not human beings, but unhappy mixtures of divinity and stone.

The example set by the master misled the disciples, leading to a literary era in Germany that I once designated as the "art period," which I previously showed had a very negative impact on the political development of the German people. At the same time, I don’t deny the intrinsic value of Goethe's masterpieces. They enhance our beloved homeland just like beautiful statues beautify a garden; but, in the end, they are just statues. One can fall in love with them, but they are barren. Goethe's poems do not, like Schiller's, inspire action. Actions are the results of words; however, Goethe's charming words are childless. This is the curse of everything that originated from mere art. The statue that Pygmalion created was a beautiful woman, and even the sculptor himself became infatuated with her. His kisses brought her to life, but, as far as we know, she never had children. I believe a similar idea has been suggested by Charles Nodier, and this thought came to me while wandering through the Louvre, as my gaze fell upon the statues of ancient gods. There they stood, with their white, expressionless eyes, a mysterious sadness in their stone smiles. Perhaps they are haunted by sad memories of Egypt, that land of the dead from which they came; or maybe it is a sorrowful longing for the life from which other deities have cast them out, or a lamentation for their immortality of death. They seem to be waiting for the word that will free them from their cold, motionless state and bring them back to life. How strange that these ancient statues remind me of Goethe's creations, which are also so perfect, so beautiful, and so still, yet seem burdened by a silent sorrow that their rigidity and coldness separate them from our current warm, restless life—that they cannot speak and share in our joy, and that they are not human beings, but unhappy blends of divinity and stone.

These few hints will explain the publicly-expressed opposition of the various parties in Germany to Goethe. The orthodox were highly incensed against the great heathen, as Goethe was generally called in Germany; they feared his influence upon the people, whom he indoctrinated with his manner of viewing the world through merry verses, even through the simplest and most unpretentious ballads. They saw in him the most dangerous foe of the Cross, which, as he expressed himself, was as odious to him as vermin, garlic, and tobacco; at least, that is about the purport of the Xenie which Goethe dared to publish in Germany, the very country where vermin, garlic, tobacco, and the Cross form a holy alliance, and are supreme over all. But it was not this that displeased us, the party of action. As previously stated, we found fault with Goethe for the barrenness of his writings; for the engrossing devotion to art, which through him was diffused over Germany; for his influence in creating among the German youth an apathy which was a hindrance to the political regeneration of our fatherland. Hence the indifferentist and pantheist was assailed from the most diverse sides. To use an illustration from French parliamentary life, the extreme right and the extreme left formed an alliance against him. While the cassocked priests brandished the crucifix over him, furious sans-culottes simultaneously assaulted him with the pike.

These few hints will clarify the public opposition from various groups in Germany to Goethe. The traditionalists were very upset with the great pagan, as Goethe was often referred to in Germany; they worried about his influence on the people, whom he swayed with his cheerful verses, even in the simplest and most humble ballads. They saw him as the most dangerous enemy of the Cross, which he stated he found as repulsive as pests, garlic, and tobacco; at least, that’s the gist of the Xenie that Goethe dared to publish in Germany, the very place where pests, garlic, tobacco, and the Cross form a holy alliance and dominate everything. But this was not what bothered us, the activists. As mentioned before, we criticized Goethe for the emptiness of his writings; for the overwhelming devotion to art that spread across Germany through him; for his role in fostering a sense of apathy among German youth that hindered the political revival of our homeland. Therefore, the indifferentist and pantheist were attacked from many angles. To illustrate with a reference from French politics, the far-right and far-left joined forces against him. While the priests waved the crucifix at him, furious sans-culottes simultaneously attacked him with their pikes.

Wolfgang Menzel, who had carried on the war against Goethe with a display of talent worthy of a better cause, evinced in his polemics that he was not merely a one-sided spiritualistic Christian, or a discontented patriot; he rather based a portion of his attacks on the latest remark of Frederic Schlegel, who, after his fall, from the recesses of his Catholic cathedral, gave utterance to his woe concerning Goethe; Goethe, "whose poetry lacked a central point." Menzel went still further, and showed that Goethe was not a man of genius, but only of talent; Schiller, however, was a genius, etc. This was some time before the July Revolution; Menzel was at that time a great admirer of the middle ages, of mediæval art as well as of institutions; he was incessantly attacking Johann Heinrich Voss, and praising Joseph Görres with an enthusiasm hitherto unheard of. These facts prove that Menzel was sincere in his hatred of Goethe, and that he did not write against him merely to make himself conspicuous, as many thought. Although I, myself, was at that time an opponent of Goethe, yet I was displeased at the harshness with which Menzel criticised him, and I complained of this want of respect. I said, Goethe is nevertheless the king of our literature, and in applying the knife of criticism to such a one, it always behoves us to show a proper courtesy, just as the executioner who was to behead Charles I., before performing the duties of his office, knelt before the king and begged his royal forgiveness.

Wolfgang Menzel, who waged his battle against Goethe with a flair worthy of a better cause, demonstrated in his critiques that he was not just a narrow-minded spiritualistic Christian or a disgruntled patriot; he based part of his attacks on Frederic Schlegel's latest statement, who, after his downfall, lamented from the depths of his Catholic cathedral about Goethe—who “lacked a central point” in his poetry. Menzel went even further, claiming that Goethe was not a genius but merely talented; Schiller, on the other hand, was a genius, and so on. This was some time before the July Revolution; at that period, Menzel was a huge fan of the Middle Ages, both its art and institutions. He relentlessly criticized Johann Heinrich Voss while praising Joseph Görres with unprecedented enthusiasm. These facts show that Menzel's hatred of Goethe was genuine and that he didn’t attack him just to get attention, as many believed. Although I was also opposed to Goethe at the time, I was taken aback by the severity of Menzel's criticism and expressed my discontent with this lack of respect. I said, after all, Goethe is the king of our literature, and when critiquing such a figure, we must always show proper courtesy, just like the executioner who was to behead Charles I., who knelt before the king and asked for his royal forgiveness before carrying out his duty.

Among the opponents of Goethe was the famous Hofrath Müllner, and his only remaining friend, Professor Schütz. There were several others of less celebrity—Herr Spann, for instance, who had been imprisoned for a long time on account of political offences—belonged to the public adversaries of Goethe. In confidence, dear reader, it was a very motley crowd. The ostensible reasons I have sufficiently indicated, but it is more difficult to guess what special motive influenced each individual to give publicity to his anti-Goethean sentiments. I know the secret motives of only one of these persons, and as that one is myself, I will frankly confess that I was envious of Goethe. To my credit I must say that I assailed in Goethe only the man, never the poet. Unlike those critics who, with their finely-polished glasses, claim to have also detected spots upon the moon, I could never discern blemishes in Goethe's works. What these sharp-sighted people consider spots are blooming forests, silvery streams, lofty mountains, and smiling valleys.

Among Goethe's opponents was the famous Hofrath Müllner, along with his only remaining friend, Professor Schütz. There were several others, less well-known—like Herr Spann, for example, who had spent a long time in prison for political offenses—who were public critics of Goethe. To be honest, dear reader, it was a very mixed group. I've mentioned the obvious reasons, but it's harder to figure out what personal motivation drove each person to publicly express their anti-Goethean views. I know the secret motivations of only one of these individuals, and since that person is me, I will admit that I was envious of Goethe. I must acknowledge that I only attacked in Goethe the man, never the poet. Unlike those critics who, with their polished lenses, claim to have seen flaws on the moon, I could never find faults in Goethe's works. What these sharp-eyed individuals see as blemishes are actually blooming forests, silvery streams, towering mountains, and smiling valleys.

Nothing is more foolish than to depreciate Goethe in order thereby to exalt Schiller, whom it was always customary to praise in order to disparage Goethe. Do such critics really not know that those highly-extolled, highly-idealised figures, those sacred pictures of virtue and morality which Schiller produced, were much easier to construct than those frail, worldly beings of whom Goethe gives us a glimpse in his works? Do they not know that mediocre painters generally select sacred subjects, which they daub in life-size on the canvas? But it requires a great master to paint with lifelike fidelity and technical perfection a Spanish beggar-boy scratching himself, or a Netherlandish peasant having a tooth extracted, or some hideous old woman such as we see in Dutch cabinet pictures. In art it is much easier to picture large tragic subjects than those which are small and droll. The Egyptian sorcerers could imitate Moses in many of his tragic feats: they could make serpents, and blood, and frogs; but when Moses created vermin, which would seemingly be less difficult to copy, then they confessed their impotence, and said, "It is the finger of God." Rail as you will at the coarseness of certain portions of Faust, at the scenes on the Brocken and in Auerbach's cellar, inveigh against the licentiousness in Wilhelm Meister, it is nevertheless more than you can do; it is the finger of Goethe! But I hear you say, with disgust, "We do not wish to create such things. We are no sorcerers; we are good Christians." I know quite well that you are no sorcerers.

Nothing is more foolish than putting down Goethe to lift up Schiller, who has always been praised just to put Goethe down. Do these critics really not realize that those exalted, idealized figures—those holy images of virtue and morality that Schiller created—were much easier to make than the fragile, worldly characters that Goethe depicts in his works? Don't they understand that mediocre painters usually choose sacred subjects, which they paint in life-size on canvas? But it takes a true master to paint with lifelike accuracy and technical skill a Spanish beggar-boy scratching himself, or a Dutch peasant getting a tooth pulled, or some ugly old woman like those in Dutch cabinet paintings. In art, it's much simpler to depict grand tragic themes than to portray smaller, humorous ones. The Egyptian sorcerers could mimic Moses in many of his dramatic acts; they could make snakes, blood, and frogs. But when Moses created lice, which should seem easier to replicate, they admitted defeat and said, "It is the finger of God." Criticize all you want the rough parts of Faust, the scenes on the Brocken and in Auerbach's cellar, or complain about the licentiousness in Wilhelm Meister; it still surpasses what you can do. It is the finger of Goethe! But I hear you say in disgust, "We don’t want to create such things. We are no sorcerers; we are good Christians." I know perfectly well that you are no sorcerers.

Goethe's greatest merit consists in the perfection of all his works. Here are no portions that are strong while others are weak; here no one part is painted in detail while another is merely sketched; here is no confusion, nor any of the customary padding, nor any undue partiality for certain special characters. Goethe treats every person that appears in his romances and dramas as if he or she were the leading character. So it is with Homer, so with Shakespeare. In the works of all great poets there are, in fact, no minor characters at all; every character in its place is the chief personage. Such poets are absolute monarchs, and resemble the Emperor Paul of Russia, who, when the French ambassador remarked that a man of importance in his empire was interested in a certain matter, sharply interrupted the speaker with the memorable words—"In my empire there is no man of importance except he to whom I may happen to be speaking; and he is of importance only so long as I address him." An absolute poet, who also holds power by the grace of God, in like manner views that person in his intellectual realm as the most important who at that particular moment is speaking through his pen. From this art-despotism arises that wonderful perfection of the most trivial and unimportant figures which we find in the works of Homer, Shakespeare, and Goethe.

Goethe's greatest achievement lies in the perfection of all his works. There are no sections that are strong while others are weak; no part is elaborately detailed while another is just a quick sketch; there is no confusion, no unnecessary filler, and no favoritism for specific characters. Goethe treats every person in his novels and plays as if they were the main character. This is true for Homer and Shakespeare as well. In the works of all great poets, there are really no minor characters; every character plays a crucial role. Such poets are absolute rulers, much like Emperor Paul of Russia, who, when the French ambassador pointed out that a notable figure in his empire was interested in something, sharply interrupted him with the memorable words—"In my empire, there is no one of importance except for the person I am currently speaking to; and that person is important only as long as I am addressing them." An absolute poet, who also possesses power by the grace of God, similarly views the individual who is currently being expressed through his writing as the most significant at that moment. This artistic despotism results in the remarkable perfection of even the most trivial and seemingly unimportant figures in the works of Homer, Shakespeare, and Goethe.

If I have spoken rather harshly of Goethe's adversaries, I should have cause to criticise his defenders still more severely, for most of the latter, in their zeal, have been guilty of even greater follies. At the head of those who have made themselves ridiculous in this respect is one by the name of Eckermann, a writer not generally lacking in talent. In the campaign against Pustkuchen, Carl Immermann, who is now our greatest dramatic poet, won his spurs as a critic by publishing an excellent brochure. Berlin chiefly distinguished itself on this occasion. Goethe's leading champion, at all times, was Varnhagen von Ense, a man whose heart is filled with thoughts grand as the universe, and who expresses them in words as precious and as dainty as cut jewels. He is the noble-minded man in whose judgment Goethe ever placed the most reliance. Perhaps it may be well to mention here that Wilhem von Humboldt once wrote an excellent book concerning Goethe. During the last ten years every Leipsic Fair has brought to light a large number of works on Goethe. Herr Schubart's studies of Goethe are among the marvels of fine criticism. Herr Häring, whose nom de plume is Willibald Alexis, has written for various periodicals clever and valuable articles on Goethe. Herr Zimmermann, professor at Hamburg, has, in his oral lectures, given some most excellent criticisms of Goethe; in his writings on dramaturgy we find similar thoughts, more briefly expressed, perhaps, but more profound. At various German universities there were courses of lectures on Goethe, and of all his works the public chiefly devoted itself to the study of Faust. It was the theme of endless dissertations and commentaries, and became the secular Bible of the Germans.

If I have been pretty harsh about Goethe's critics, I should be even more critical of his supporters, as many of them, in their enthusiasm, have committed even bigger mistakes. At the forefront of those who have embarrassed themselves in this way is one named Eckermann, a writer who usually has talent. In the fight against Pustkuchen, Carl Immermann, who is now our greatest playwright, made his mark as a critic by publishing an excellent brochure. Berlin particularly stood out during this time. Goethe's primary supporter, at all times, was Varnhagen von Ense, a man whose mind is filled with thoughts as grand as the universe, and who expresses them in words as precious and delicate as cut jewels. He is the noble-hearted person whose judgment Goethe always trusted the most. It’s worth noting that Wilhelm von Humboldt once wrote an excellent book about Goethe. Over the last decade, every Leipzig Fair has revealed a large number of works about Goethe. Herr Schubart's studies on Goethe are considered marvels of fine criticism. Herr Häring, who writes under the name Willibald Alexis, has contributed clever and valuable articles on Goethe to various journals. Herr Zimmermann, a professor in Hamburg, has given outstanding critiques of Goethe in his oral lectures; in his writings on dramaturgy, similar ideas can be found, perhaps expressed more briefly but still more profoundly. Various German universities offered courses on Goethe, and of all his works, the public mainly focused on studying Faust. It became the subject of countless dissertations and commentaries, turning into the secular Bible for the Germans.

I would be no true German if I wrote of Faust without giving expression to some explanatory thoughts concerning it, for from the greatest thinker down to the most insignificant penny-a-liner, from philosophers down to professors of philosophy, every one tries his wit on this book. It is, in fact, as wide in its compass as the Bible; like the latter, it embraces heaven and earth, mankind and its exegesis. The subject matter of Faust is the chief reason of its popularity, and its selection from among the many folk-legends is a proof of Goethe's profound judgment and genius, which ever seized on that which was nearest and best. I may assume that the story of Faust is familiar to my readers, for the book has recently become celebrated in France also; but I know not if the original legend itself is known here. I know not if at your annual rustic fairs there is hawked for sale a little book of grey, fleecy paper, badly printed, with rude woodcuts, containing a circumstantial account of how the arch-sorcerer, Johannes Faustus, a learned scholar who had studied all the sciences, finally threw away his books and made a compact with the devil, by which he was enabled to enjoy all the material pleasures of the earth, but in return for which his soul was to be given up to the powers of hell. During the middle ages the populace attributed all extraordinary intellectual powers to a compact with the devil, and Albertus Magnus, Raimond Lullus, Theophrastus Paracelsus, Agrippa von Nettesheim, and Roger Bacon in England, were held to be magicians, sorcerers, and conjurers. But the ballads and romances tell much stranger stories concerning Doctor Faustus, who is reputed to have demanded from the devil not only a knowledge of the profoundest secrets of nature, but also the most realistic physical pleasures. This is the self-same Faust who invented printing,[11] and who lived at a time when people began to inveigh against the strictness of church authority, and to make independent researches. With Faust the mediæval epoch of faith ends, and the modern era of critical, scientific investigation begins. It is, in fact, of the greatest significance that Faust should have lived, according to popular tradition, at the very beginning of the Reformation, and that he himself should have invented printing, the art which gave science the victory over faith; an art, however, which has also robbed us of the catholic peace of mind, and plunged us into doubts and revolutions, and had finally delivered us into the power of Satan. But no! knowledge, science, the comprehension of nature through reason, eventually gives us the enjoyments of which faith, that is, Catholic Christianity, has so long defrauded us; we now recognise the truth that mankind is destined to an earthly, as well as to a heavenly equality. The political brotherhood which philosophy inculcates is more beneficial to us than the purely spiritual brotherhood, for which we are indebted to Christianity. The thought becomes transformed into words, the words become deeds, and we may yet be happy during our life on this earth. If in addition to this, we also attain after death that heavenly felicity which Christianity promises so assuredly, so much the better.

I wouldn't be a true German if I talked about Faust without sharing some thoughts about it. From the greatest thinkers to the most minor writers, everyone tries to express their views on this book. It’s as vast in scope as the Bible, covering everything from heaven and earth to humanity and its interpretations. The reason Faust is so popular is its subject matter, and its choice from many folk legends shows Goethe's deep insight and talent, as he consistently chose what was most relevant and profound. I assume my readers are familiar with the story of Faust, which has gained popularity in France too; however, I’m unsure if the original legend is known here. I wonder if at your local fairs there’s a small book with grey, flimsy paper, poorly printed and filled with crude woodcuts, telling the story of the arch-sorcerer Johannes Faustus—a learned scholar who studied all the sciences—who ultimately discarded his books and made a deal with the devil. This pact allowed him to enjoy all earthly pleasures, but in return, he had to surrender his soul to hell. During the Middle Ages, people believed that extraordinary intellectual abilities came from deals with the devil, considering figures like Albertus Magnus, Raimond Lullus, Theophrastus Paracelsus, Agrippa von Nettesheim, and Roger Bacon in England as magicians and sorcerers. But the ballads and stories tell even stranger tales about Doctor Faustus, who supposedly asked the devil not only for the deepest secrets of nature but also for the greatest physical pleasures. This is the same Faust who invented printing and lived in a time when people started criticizing church authority and conducting independent research. With Faust, the medieval age of faith ends, and the modern era of critical, scientific inquiry begins. It’s very significant that Faust supposedly lived right at the start of the Reformation and that he invented printing, the art that allowed science to triumph over faith; however, this art has also robbed us of the peaceful mindset of the Catholic Church, leading us into doubt and upheaval, ultimately leaving us vulnerable to Satan's power. But no! Knowledge, science, and understanding nature through reason ultimately provide us with the enjoyment that faith, particularly Catholic Christianity, has long denied us. We now recognize the truth that humanity is meant for both earthly and heavenly equality. The political unity that philosophy encourages is more beneficial to us than the purely spiritual brotherhood we owe to Christianity. Thoughts become words, words turn into actions, and we can indeed find happiness in our lives on this earth. If we also achieve the heavenly happiness that Christianity promises after death, that would be even better.

The German people had, for a long time, felt a profound presentiment of this, for the Germans themselves are that learned Doctor Faust; they themselves are that spiritualist, who, having at last comprehended the inadequateness of the spiritual life alone, reinstates the flesh in its rights. But still biassed by the symbolism of Catholic poetry, in which God is pictured as the representative of the spirit, and the devil as that of the flesh, the rehabilitation of the flesh was characterised as an apostasy from God, and a compact with the devil.

The German people had long had a strong feeling about this because the Germans are like that learned Doctor Faust; they are the spiritualists who, after finally realizing that spiritual life alone isn't enough, restore the rights of the flesh. However, still influenced by the symbolism found in Catholic poetry, where God represents the spirit and the devil represents the flesh, the restoration of the flesh was seen as a betrayal of God and a deal with the devil.

But some time must yet elapse ere the deeply-significant prophecy of that poem will be fulfilled as regards the German people, and the spirit itself, comprehending the usurpation of spiritualism, become the champion of the rights of the flesh. That will be the Revolution, the great daughter of the Reformation.

But some time must pass before the deeply significant prophecy of that poem will come true for the German people, and the spirit itself, which includes the takeover of spiritualism, will become the defender of the rights of the body. That will be the Revolution, the great offspring of the Reformation.

Less known in France than Faust is Goethe's West-Ostlichen Divan, a later work with which Madame de Staël was unacquainted, and which demands especial notice. It reveals the peculiar thoughts and feelings of the Orient in graceful ballads and pithy proverbs, which exhale an atmosphere of fragrance and passion, like a harem of love-sick odalisques, with the dark eyes of gazelles, and amorous white arms. The reader is filled with a mixed sensation of shuddering and desire, like lucky Caspar Debureau, when he stood at the top of a ladder in Constantinople, and beheld de haut en bas what the Commander of the Faithful is wont to see only de bas en haut. At times a feeling steals o'er the reader as if he lay comfortably stretched upon a Persian carpet, smoking a long Turkish pipe, filled with the yellow tobacco of Turkestan, while a negress slave gently waves over him a variegated fan of peacock feathers, and a handsome boy serves a cup of Mocha coffee—the sweetest and most blissful sense of life and its pleasures has Goethe expressed in these verses—in verses so dainty, so felicitous, so airy, so ethereal, that one is lost in astonishment that such things are possible in the German language. In addition to all this, the book contains the most beautiful prose descriptions and explanations of the customs and manners of the Orient, the patriarchal life of the Arabs; and withal Goethe is as easy, merry, and harmless as a child, and yet as full of wisdom as a greybeard. Goethe's prose in this work is as translucent as the green sea, when, on a bright, calm summer afternoon, we can look far down into the depths below, and catch glimpses of ancient drowned cities, and all their fabulous splendours. Then, at times, that prose is as magical and as mysterious as the firmament, when the darkness of twilight has lifted, and the grand Goethean thoughts appear, pure and golden, like the stars. The charm of this book is indescribable; it is a salaam sent by the Occident to the Orient, and many a quaint and curious flower is gathered there; passionate red roses, snowdrops white as a maiden's bosom, comical dandelions, purple digitalis like long human fingers, contorted crocuses, and peeping slyly forth, in the midst, modest German violets. The meaning of this salaam is that the Occident, grown weary of its frigid, meagre spiritualism, seeks again to refresh itself amid the wholesome physical pleasures of the Orient. After Goethe had expressed in Faust his aversion to abstract spiritualism, and his desire for realistic enjoyments, in writing the West-Ostlichen Divan he threw himself with his whole soul, as it were, into the arms of sensualism.

Less known in France than Faust is Goethe's West-Eastern Divan, a later work that Madame de Staël wasn’t familiar with, and which deserves special attention. It showcases the unique thoughts and feelings of the Orient in elegant ballads and concise proverbs, exuding an atmosphere of fragrance and passion, like a harem filled with lovesick odalisques, with gazelle-like dark eyes and alluring white arms. The reader experiences a mixed feeling of trepidation and longing, similar to lucky Caspar Debureau, standing at the top of a ladder in Constantinople, looking de haut en bas at what the Commander of the Faithful typically sees only de bas en haut. At times, it feels as if the reader is comfortably stretched out on a Persian carpet, smoking a long Turkish pipe filled with yellow Turkestan tobacco, while a Black slave gently waves a colorful peacock-feather fan over him, and a charming boy serves a cup of Mocha coffee—the sweetest and most blissful sense of life and its pleasures is captured by Goethe in these verses—in verses so delicate, so joyful, so light, so ethereal, that one marvels at the possibility of such beauty in the German language. Additionally, the book includes beautiful prose descriptions and explanations of Eastern customs and Arab patriarchal life; and throughout, Goethe remains as carefree, cheerful, and innocent as a child, while possessing the wisdom of a sage. Goethe's prose in this work is as clear as the green sea on a bright, calm summer afternoon, allowing us to see deep into the depths below, catching glimpses of ancient sunken cities and their legendary splendors. At times, that prose is magical and mysterious like the sky when the twilight lifts, and the grand Goethean thoughts emerge, pure and golden, like stars. The charm of this book is indescribable; it is a salaam sent by the Occident to the Orient, gathering many quaint and curious flowers; passionate red roses, snow-white snowdrops, comical dandelions, purple foxgloves that resemble long human fingers, twisted crocuses, and modest German violets peeking slyly in the midst. The meaning of this salaam is that the Occident, tired of its cold, sparse spiritualism, seeks to rejuvenate itself among the wholesome physical pleasures of the Orient. After expressing his aversion to abstract spiritualism and desire for tangible pleasures in Faust, Goethe fully embraced sensualism in writing the West-Eastern Divan.

Hence it is of the utmost significance that this work appeared soon after Faust. It was the last phase of Goethe's genius, and his example was of the greatest influence upon literature. The Orient was now the theme of our lyric poets. It may be worthy of mention, that while Goethe so rapturously celebrated Persia and Arabia in his verses, he expressed the most decided aversion to India. The bizarre and confused characteristics of that country were repugnant to him, and perhaps this dislike originated in the suspicion that some Catholic stratagem was at the bottom of the Sanscrit studies of the Schlegels and their friends. These men regarded Hindostan as the cradle of Catholicism; they claimed to have discovered there the model of the Catholic hierarchy, the doctrine of the trinity, of the incarnation, of penance, of atonement, of the maceration of the flesh, and all their other favourite crotchets. Goethe's antipathy towards India nettled these people not a little, and A. W. Schlegel, with transparent malice, called him "a heathen converted to Mahometanism."

Hence, it’s extremely important that this work came out soon after Faust. It was the final phase of Goethe's genius, and his influence on literature was immense. The East became the focus for our lyric poets. It’s worth mentioning that while Goethe passionately celebrated Persia and Arabia in his poetry, he had a strong dislike for India. The strange and chaotic aspects of that country disgusted him, and perhaps this aversion stemmed from the suspicion that there was some Catholic agenda behind the Sanskrit studies of the Schlegels and their associates. These individuals viewed Hindostan as the birthplace of Catholicism; they claimed to have found the blueprint for the Catholic hierarchy there, along with the doctrines of the Trinity, the incarnation, penance, atonement, the mortification of the flesh, and all their other quirky ideas. Goethe's disdain for India clearly irritated these people, and A. W. Schlegel, with obvious malice, referred to him as "a pagan converted to Islam."

Amongst the most noteworthy writings on Goethe which have appeared this year is a posthumous work by Johannes Falk, entitled Goethe aus Persönlichen Umgange Dargestellt. With the exception of a detailed treatise on Faust, which, of course, must not be omitted, the author of this book has given us most excellent sketches of Goethe; he has depicted him in all the walks of life, naturally, impartially, with all his virtues and all his failings. In this book we behold Goethe in his relations to his mother, whose temperament was so wonderfully reflected in that of her son; we see him as the naturalist, watching a caterpillar developing into a butterfly; we see the great Herder expostulating with him against the indifferentism with which he let the development of humanity itself pass before him, unregarded; we behold him at the court of the Grand Duke of Weimar, seated among the blonde court dames, making merry improvisations, like Apollo guarding the flocks of King Admetus; again we see him, with the haughtiness of a Dalai-Lama, refusing to recognise Kotzebue; then we see the latter giving a public celebration in honour of Schiller, in order thereby to depreciate Goethe; we see him in all things, wise, handsome, amiable, a blessed and inspiring figure, like the eternal gods.

Among the most notable writings on Goethe that came out this year is a posthumous work by Johannes Falk, titled Goethe aus Persönlichen Umgange Dargestellt. Aside from a detailed analysis of Faust, which absolutely should not be overlooked, the author of this book has provided us with excellent portraits of Goethe; he has portrayed him in various aspects of life, fairly and without bias, highlighting both his strengths and weaknesses. In this book, we see Goethe in his relationship with his mother, whose temperament reflected so beautifully in her son; we observe him as a naturalist, watching a caterpillar transform into a butterfly; we see the great Herder arguing with him about the indifference with which he observed humanity's development passing by unnoticed; we witness him at the court of the Grand Duke of Weimar, surrounded by the blonde court ladies, making cheerful improvisations, like Apollo tending the flocks of King Admetus; again, we see him, with the pride of a Dalai Lama, refusing to acknowledge Kotzebue; then we see the latter hosting a public celebration in honor of Schiller, trying to diminish Goethe’s importance; we see him in all aspects, wise, handsome, kind, a blessed and inspiring figure, like the timeless gods.

In fact, that harmony of personal appearance with genius, which we demand in eminent men, existed in its fullest degree in Goethe. His outward appearance was as impressive as the thoughts that live in his writings. His figure was symmetrical and majestic, and in that noble form Grecian art might be studied as in an ancient statue. That stately form was never bent in Christian humility; the features of that noble countenance were never distorted with Christian self-reproach; those eyes were never downcast with Christian remorse, nor turned devoutly and tremulously towards heaven. No, his eyes had a godlike steadfastness, for it is in general the distinctive mark of a god, that his look is unmoved. Hence when Agni, Varuna, Yama, and Indra assume the form of Nala at Damayanti's wedding, the latter recognises her lover by the twitching of his eyes, for, as I have said, the eyes of a god are always steadfast and unmoved.

In fact, the harmony between personal appearance and genius that we expect from great individuals was fully present in Goethe. His outward appearance was as striking as the thoughts that resonate in his writings. His figure was symmetrical and impressive, and you could study Grecian art in that noble form like you would in an ancient statue. That dignified form was never bent in Christian humility; the features of his noble face were never twisted with self-reproach; his eyes were never cast down with remorse nor turned devoutly and nervously toward heaven. No, his eyes had a divine steadiness because it’s generally a defining trait of a god that their gaze remains unshaken. Therefore, when Agni, Varuna, Yama, and Indra take on the form of Nala at Damayanti's wedding, she recognizes her lover by the twitching of his eyes, because, as I mentioned, a god's eyes are always steady and unwavering.

Napoleon's eyes possessed this peculiarity, and hence I am convinced that he also was a god. Goethe's eyes, even at an advanced age, remained just as godlike as in his youth, and although time could whiten, it could not bow that noble head. He always bore himself proudly and majestically, and when he spoke he seemed to grow statelier still, and when he stretched out his hand it seemed as though he could prescribe to the stars the paths they should traverse. It is said that a cold, egotistic twitching might be observed around the corners of his mouth. But this trait is also peculiar to the eternal gods, and especially to the father of gods, great Jupiter, to whom I have already likened Goethe. When I visited him at Weimar I involuntarily glanced around to see if I might not behold at his side the eagle with the thunderbolt in its beak. I was about to address him in Greek, but, as I noticed that he understood German, I told him in the latter language that the plums along the roadside from Jena to Weimar were excellent. Many a long winter's night I had pondered on the exalted and profound remarks I should make to Goethe if I should ever see him. And now that I did at last see him face to face, I told him that the plums of Saxony were delicious. And Goethe smiled. He smiled with the same lips with which he had once kissed the beautiful Leda, Europa, Danaë, Semele, and many another princess or ordinary nymph.

Napoleon's eyes had this unique quality, which makes me believe he was a god. Goethe's eyes, even in his old age, were just as godlike as they were in his youth, and although time could silver his hair, it couldn't lessen his noble presence. He always carried himself with pride and majesty, and when he spoke, he seemed to stand even taller. When he reached out his hand, it felt as though he could command the stars on their journeys. Some might say there was a cold, selfish twitch at the corners of his mouth. But this trait is also typical of eternal gods, especially Jupiter, the king of the gods, to whom I have already compared Goethe. When I visited him in Weimar, I found myself glancing around, half-expecting to see the eagle with the thunderbolt at his side. I considered greeting him in Greek, but when I realized he understood German, I simply mentioned that the plums along the road from Jena to Weimar were fantastic. Many long winter nights, I had thought about the brilliant and profound things I wanted to say to Goethe if I ever met him. And now that I finally stood before him, I could only tell him how delicious the plums from Saxony were. And Goethe smiled. He smiled with the same lips that had once kissed the beautiful Leda, Europa, Danaë, Semele, and many other princesses or everyday nymphs.

Les Dieux s'en vont. Goethe is dead. He died on March 22nd, last year, that memorable year in which the world lost its greatest celebrities. It is as if death had become suddenly aristocratic, and sought to designate particularly the great ones of this earth by sending them contemporaneously to the grave. Perhaps death wished to found a pairie in the shadowy realms of Hades, in which case its fournée were well chosen. Or, perhaps, on the contrary, death sought during the past year to favour democracy by destroying these great celebrities, and their authority over the minds of men, and thus to bring about an intellectual equality. Was it out of respect or from irreverence that death spared the crowned heads during the past year? In a fit of abstraction death did raise his scythe over the King of Spain, but he recollected himself in time, and spared his life. During the past twelve months not a single king has died. Les Dieux s'en vont—but the kings are still with us.

The Gods Are Departing. Goethe is dead. He passed away on March 22nd of last year, that unforgettable year when the world lost its most celebrated figures. It feels like death suddenly became elite, aiming to choose specifically the great ones of this world and sending them all to the grave at the same time. Maybe death wanted to create a pairie in the shadowy realms of Hades, in which case its fournée was well-selected. Or perhaps, on the contrary, death aimed to promote democracy by wiping out these renowned figures and their influence on people's minds, thus fostering intellectual equality. Was it out of respect or irreverence that death spared the crowned heads last year? In a moment of distraction, death did raise his scythe over the King of Spain but regained his senses just in time and spared his life. In the past twelve months, not a single king has died. The Gods Are Departing—but the kings are still with us.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Schelling's influence on the romantic school was chiefly of a personal nature, but in addition to this, by the philosophy of nature which came into vogue through him, the poets have elevated themselves to much more profound conceptions of nature. One portion let themselves be absorbed with all their human emotions into nature; others remembered a few magic formulas, with which to conjure out of nature something that possessed human form and speech. The former were the genuine mystics, and resembled in many respects the devotees of India, who dissolve in nature, and at last begin to feel as if they and nature were one. The latter were rather sorcerers, who by their own will summoned forth even hostile spirits; they resembled those Arabian magicians, who, at their caprice, could endow stones with life, and turn living beings into stone. Novalis belonged to the first class, Hoffman to the latter. Novalis saw marvels in everything, and charming marvels they were. He listened to the language of the plants, he knew the secret of every young rose, finally he identified himself with all nature, and when autumn came and the leaves began to fall, then he died. Hoffman, on the contrary, saw spectres in everything; they nodded to him from every Chinese tea-pot, and from under each Berlin periwig. He was a sorcerer who transformed human beings into beasts, and beasts into human beings, even into royal Prussian court-counsellors. He would raise the dead from their graves, but life itself turned away from him, as from some gloomy spectre. He realised this; he felt that he himself had become a ghost. All nature was to him an imperfect mirror, in which he saw, distorted in a thousand ways, the cast of his own dead face; and his works are naught else than a horrible shriek of terror in twenty volumes.

Schelling's impact on the romantic movement was mainly personal, but thanks to the nature philosophy that gained popularity through him, poets reached much deeper understandings of nature. Some completely immersed themselves in nature with all their human emotions; others relied on a few magical phrases to bring forth something from nature that had human form and speech. The first group were true mystics, resembling the devotees of India, who merge with nature and eventually feel as if they are one with it. The latter were more like sorcerers, who, through their own will, summoned even hostile spirits; they were akin to Arabian magicians who could whimsically give life to stones and turn living beings into stone. Novalis was part of the first group, while Hoffman belonged to the latter. Novalis found wonders in everything, and they were truly enchanting. He listened to the language of plants, knew the secrets of every young rose, and ultimately became one with nature; when autumn came and the leaves began to fall, he too passed away. Hoffman, on the other hand, saw spirits everywhere; they greeted him from every Chinese teapot and lurked beneath every Berlin wig. He was a sorcerer who turned humans into animals and animals into humans, even transforming them into royal Prussian court counselors. He could raise the dead from their graves, but life itself shunned him, like a gloomy specter. He realized this; he felt that he had become a ghost. All of nature was to him an imperfect mirror, reflecting his own dead face in a thousand distorted ways; his works are nothing but a horrific scream of terror spread across twenty volumes.

Hoffman does not belong to the romantic school. He did not come into contact with the Schlegels, and was in no way affected by their tendencies. I only mention him in contrast to Novalis, who was peculiarly a poet of that school. Novalis is less known here than Hoffman, who has been introduced to the French public by Loeve-Veimars in a very attractive form, and thus has acquired a great reputation in France. In Germany, Hoffman is by no means en vogue, but he was so formerly. In their time his works were much read, but only by persons whose nerves were either too strong or too weak to be affected by less violent accords. The minds that were really intellectual, and the natures that were truly poetical, would have nothing to do with him. Such as these much preferred Novalis. But frankly confessed, Hoffman was a much greater poet than Novalis, for the latter with his idealistic pictures ever floats in the blue skies; while Hoffman, notwithstanding all his grotesque bogies, still clings fast to earthly realities. Just as the giant Anteus remained strong and invincible so long as his feet rested on mother earth, and lost his strength the moment Hercules held him aloft; so also the poet is strong and mighty as long as he does not forsake the terra firma of reality, but becomes powerless as soon as he attempts to float enraptured in the blue ether.

Hoffman doesn’t belong to the romantic school. He didn’t interact with the Schlegels and wasn’t influenced by their ideas at all. I mention him to contrast with Novalis, who is distinctly a poet of that school. Novalis isn’t as well known here as Hoffman, who was introduced to the French audience by Loeve-Veimars in a very appealing way, and has thus gained a significant reputation in France. In Germany, Hoffman isn’t currently popular, although he once was. In his time, his works were widely read, but only by people whose nerves were either too strong or too weak to be affected by more subtle tones. Those who were truly intellectual and had a genuine poetic nature wanted nothing to do with him. They much preferred Novalis. But truthfully, Hoffman was a much greater poet than Novalis, because while Novalis with his idealistic imagery always drifts in the blue skies, Hoffman, despite all his bizarre creations, remains firmly connected to earthly realities. Just as the giant Anteus stayed strong and unbeatable as long as his feet were on solid ground, losing his strength the moment Hercules lifted him up, the poet is powerful and impactful as long as he doesn’t abandon the solid ground of reality, but becomes powerless as soon as he tries to float, enraptured, in the blue ether.

The great resemblance between these two poets lies in the fact that their poetry was really a disease. It has been said that it does not come within the province of the critic, but of the physician, to pass judgment on their writings. The rosy glow in Novalis's poems is not the hue of health, but the hectic flush of consumption; and the brilliant light in Hoffman's fantastic conceptions is not the flame of genius, but of fever.

The striking similarity between these two poets is that their poetry was like a sickness. Some say it's not up to a critic, but a doctor, to evaluate their work. The rosy tone in Novalis's poems isn't a sign of good health, but rather the flushed cheeks of someone unwell; and the vivid imagery in Hoffman's fantastical ideas isn’t the spark of genius, but the glow of illness.

But have we a right thus to criticise—we, who are ourselves not blest with robust health? and especially now, when all literature appears like one vast hospital? or is poetry, perhaps, a disease of humanity, as the pearl is the morbid matter of the diseased oyster?

But do we really have the right to criticize—us, who aren't even blessed with good health? Especially now, when all literature seems like one huge hospital? Or is poetry, maybe, a sickness of humanity, just like the pearl is the unhealthy result of the sick oyster?

Novalis was born May 2nd, 1772. His real name was Hardenberg. He loved a young lady who was afflicted with consumption, and died of that dread disease. This sad experience left its impress upon all his writings. His life was but a dreamy, lingering death, and he also died of consumption in 1801, before he had completed his twenty-ninth year, or his romance. This romance, in its present shape, is only the fragment of a great allegorical poem, which, like the divine comedy of Dante, was to embrace all earthly and celestial matters. Heinrich von Ofterdingen, the celebrated poet, is the hero of this romance. We see him as a youth in Eisenach, the pretty little village which lies at the foot of the ancient Wartburg, which has been the scene of some of the greatest, as well as some of the most stupid, deeds; for here Luther translated his Bible, and here, also, a few silly Teuto-maniacs burned Kamptz's Gendarmerie-Codex. At this burg was held the famous tournament of minstrelsy, at which, among other poets, Heinrich von Ofterdingen met Klingsohr of Hungary in the perilous duel of poetry, an account of which has been handed down to us in the Manessa collection. The head of the vanquished was to be forfeited to the executioner, and the Landgraf of Thuringia was the judge. Wartburg, the scene of his later glory, towers ominously over the hero's cradle, and we behold him, in the beginning of Novalis's romance, under the paternal roof at Eisenach. "The parents are abed and asleep, the old clock on the wall keeps up its monotonous ticking, the wind howls and the windows rattle; ever and anon the room is lit up by fitful glimpses of the moon.

Novalis was born on May 2, 1772. His actual name was Hardenberg. He loved a young woman who was suffering from tuberculosis and died from that terrible illness. This tragic experience left a lasting mark on all his writings. His life felt like a slow, dreamy death, and he also succumbed to tuberculosis in 1801, before reaching his twenty-ninth birthday or finishing his romance. This story, in its current form, is just a fragment of a larger allegorical poem that was meant to encompass all earthly and heavenly matters, similar to Dante's divine comedy. Heinrich von Ofterdingen, the renowned poet, is the hero of this story. We first see him as a young man in Eisenach, the charming little village at the foot of the ancient Wartburg, which has witnessed both significant and foolish events; it’s where Luther translated the Bible and where a few misguided Teuto-maniacs burned Kamptz's Gendarmerie-Codex. This castle hosted the famous tournament of minstrels, where Heinrich von Ofterdingen faced Klingsohr of Hungary in a dangerous duel of poetry, a tale recorded in the Manessa collection. The head of the defeated poet was to be handed to the executioner, with the Landgraf of Thuringia serving as the judge. Wartburg, which later became a symbol of his fame, looms ominously over the hero's beginnings, and we find him, at the start of Novalis's tale, beneath his parents' roof in Eisenach. "The parents are in bed and asleep, the old clock on the wall ticks monotonously, the wind howls and the windows rattle; now and then, the room is illuminated by fleeting glimpses of the moon."

"The youth lay tossing restlessly on his couch, thinking of the stranger and his narratives. 'It is not the treasures that have awakened within me such an unspeakable longing,' said he to himself; 'far from me is all avarice; but I yearn to behold the blue flower. It is always in my thoughts, and of nought else can I think or muse. I never felt so strangely before. It is as if until now I had been dreaming, or as if in my sleep I had passed into another world; for in the world in which I formerly dwelt, who would there have concerned themselves about flowers? And so strange a passion for a flower, I never heard of there.'"

The young man lay restless on his couch, thinking about the stranger and his stories. "It's not the treasures that have stirred such an indescribable longing in me," he said to himself; "I'm not greedy, but I long to see the blue flower. It's always on my mind, and I can't think or ponder about anything else. I've never felt this way before. It's as if I've been dreaming until now, or like I've slipped into another world while I was asleep; because in the world I used to live in, who would care about flowers? And to have such a strange passion for a flower, I've never heard of that there."

These are the opening words of Heinrich von Ofterdingen, and the whole romance is full of the fragrance and the radiance of the blue flower. It is remarkable and significant that the most fabulous personages in this book seem as well known to us, as though in earlier times we had lived in friendly, confidential intercourse with them. Old memories awaken, Sophia's features are so familiar, and memory brings back long avenues of beech trees, the scene of so many promenades and tender caresses. But all this lies dimly back of us, like some half-forgotten dream.

These are the opening words of Heinrich von Ofterdingen, and the entire story is filled with the beauty and light of the blue flower. It's striking and meaningful that the most incredible characters in this book feel so familiar to us, as if we’d once shared close, friendly moments with them. Old memories resurface; Sophia’s face feels so recognizable, and I remember long pathways lined with beech trees, where we spent so many strolls and tender embraces. Yet all of this feels distant, like a half-forgotten dream.

The muse of Novalis was a fair and slender maiden, with earnest blue eyes, golden hyacinthine tresses, smiling lips, and a small mole on the left side of the chin, for I imagine his muse to be the self-same maid through whom I first became acquainted with his works, as I saw the red morocco-bound, gilt-edged volume, containing Heinrich von Ofterdingen, in her dainty fingers. She always dressed in blue, and her name was Sophia. She lived a few stations from Göttingen with her sister, the postmistress—a merry, buxom, ruddy-cheeked dame, whose full bust, surmounted with stiff white lace, resembled a fortress. This fortress, however, was impregnable; the good dame was a very Gibraltar of virtue. She was an industrious, practical housewife, and yet her only pleasure consisted in reading Hoffman's romances. Hoffman was just the writer who could agitate her coarse-grained nature and awaken pleasant emotions. But her pale, delicate sister was disagreeably affected at the mere sight of one of Hoffman's books, and if she accidentally laid hands on one, she shrank from the touch. She was as delicate as a sensitive plant, and her words were so fragrant and melodious, that, taken together, they were poetry. I have written down some of her sayings, and they are poems wholly after the manner of Novalis, only more tuneful and ethereal. One of them, which she recited to me as I bade her farewell ere setting out on my travels to Italy, is an especial favourite of mine. The time is autumn; the scene, a garden wherein there had been an illumination, and we hear the conversation between the last glimmering taper, the last rose, and a wild swan. The morning mists approach, the solitary light flickers and dies out, the rose leaves fall, and the swan unfolds its white wings and flies away to the south.

The muse of Novalis was a lovely and slender young woman, with sincere blue eyes, golden hair like hyacinths, smiling lips, and a small mole on the left side of her chin. I imagine his muse to be that same girl through whom I first discovered his works, as I saw the red leather-bound, gilt-edged book containing Heinrich von Ofterdingen in her delicate hands. She always wore blue, and her name was Sophia. She lived a few stops from Göttingen with her sister, the postmistress—a cheerful, plump woman with rosy cheeks, whose full figure, topped with stiff white lace, looked like a fortress. This fortress, however, was impenetrable; the good woman was a stronghold of virtue. She was a hardworking, practical housewife, yet her only joy came from reading Hoffman's stories. Hoffman was exactly the author who could stir her coarse nature and bring up pleasant feelings. But her pale, sensitive sister was uncomfortably affected by just seeing one of Hoffman's books, and if she accidentally touched one, she recoiled. She was as fragile as a sensitive plant, and her words were so fragrant and melodious that, together, they formed poetry. I've written down some of her sayings, and they are poems entirely in the style of Novalis, just more melodic and ethereal. One of them, which she recited to me as I said goodbye before heading off on my travels to Italy, is a particular favorite of mine. The time was autumn; the setting was a garden where there had been lights, and we hear a conversation among the last flickering candle, the last rose, and a wild swan. The morning mists draw closer, the solitary light flickers and goes out, the rose petals fall, and the swan spreads its white wings and flies south.

For Hanover abounds with wild swans that seek the warm south in autumn, and return again in summer. They probably spend the winter in Africa, for in the breast of a dead swan an arrow was once found, which Professor Blumenbach recognised as of African origin. The poor bird, with the arrow in its breast, had returned to its northern nest to die. But many a swan, when pierced by such an arrow, may not have the strength for such a journey, and is left helpless in the burning deserts, or with wearied pinions is perched on some Egyptian pyramid, gazing with longing eyes towards the north, towards the cool summer home in Hanover.

For Hanover is full of wild swans that head south for the winter and come back in the summer. They likely spend the winter in Africa because a dead swan was once found with an arrow in its breast that Professor Blumenbach identified as African. That poor bird, with the arrow still inside, had returned to its northern home to die. But many swans struck by such an arrow may not have the strength to make that journey and end up helpless in the scorching deserts, or, exhausted, they might perch on some Egyptian pyramid, gazing longingly toward the north, toward their cool summer home in Hanover.

Late in the autumn of 1828, as I returned from the south, also with a burning arrow in my heart, my route led through the vicinity of Göttingen, and I stopped over at the dwelling-place of my old friend, the postmistress, in order to change horses. A long time had elapsed since I last saw her, and a woeful change had taken place in the good dame. Her buxom form still resembled a fortress,—but a ruined and dismantled fortress. The bastions were razed, no sentinels were on guard, and her heart, the citadel, was broken. The postillion, Pieper, informed me that she had even lost her relish for Hoffman's novels, but, as a substitute, she indulged all the more freely in brandy at bedtime. The latter is a much simpler plan, for the brandy is always at hand, whereas the novels must be procured at the Deurlich circulating library at Göttingen, at some hours' distance. Postillion Pieper was quite diminutive, and looked as sour as if the contraction in his size was the result of drinking vinegar. When I asked the fellow concerning the postmistress's sister, he answered, "She will soon die; she is already an angel," How good a being must she have been to draw from such a churlish person the remark, "She is an angel." While saying this, he was driving off the fluttering, cackling poultry, by kicking at them with his high top-boots. The house, once so white and cheerful, had changed for the worse, like its mistress; its colour was now a sickly yellow, and the walls were wrinkled with fissures. In the court-yard lay broken vehicles, and a postillion's scarlet mantle, soaking wet, was hanging on a post to dry. Mademoiselle Sophia stood by the window, reading, and when I approached her, I found it was a gilt-edged volume, bound in red morocco; it was Novalis's Heinrich von Ofterdingen. She had read and re-read this book, until its pages had inoculated her with consumption, and now she looked like a luminous shadow. But her beauty was now so ethereal, that the sight of it touched me most painfully. I took both of her pale, thin hands in mine, and looked steadily into her blue eyes, and then I asked, "Mademoiselle Sophia, how are you?" "I am well," she answered, "and I shall soon be still better!" Then she pointed out of the window to a little hillock, in the new churchyard, not far from the house. On this barren mound stood a small, thin, solitary poplar, almost leafless, and it swayed to and fro in the autumn winds, not like a living plant, but like the ghost of a tree.

Late in the autumn of 1828, as I was coming back from the south with a burning sorrow in my heart, my path took me near Göttingen, and I stopped by the home of my old friend, the postmistress, to change horses. It had been a long time since I last saw her, and a sad change had occurred in the good lady. Her once plump figure still resembled a fortress, but a ruined and dismantled one. The bastions were gone, there were no sentinels standing guard, and her heart, the citadel, was broken. The postillion, Pieper, told me that she had even lost her taste for Hoffman's novels, but instead, she turned to drinking brandy at bedtime. The latter is a much simpler option, as the brandy is always available, while the novels had to be fetched from the Deurlich circulating library in Göttingen, which was quite a distance away. Postillion Pieper was quite small and looked as sour as if his stature had been shrunk by drinking vinegar. When I asked him about the postmistress's sister, he replied, "She will soon die; she is already an angel." How kind must she have been to elicit such a remark from such a grumpy person. While saying this, he was shooing away the fluttering, cackling poultry by kicking at them with his high top-boots. The house, which had once been bright and cheerful, had changed for the worse, just like its owner; its color was now a sickly yellow, and the walls were cracked and wrinkled. In the courtyard lay broken vehicles, and a postillion's red mantle, soaking wet, was hanging on a post to dry. Mademoiselle Sophia stood by the window, reading, and when I approached her, I saw it was a gilt-edged book bound in red morocco; it was Novalis's Heinrich von Ofterdingen. She had read and re-read this book until its pages seemed to have consumed her, and now she looked like a faint shadow. Her beauty had become so ethereal that seeing it hurt me deeply. I took both of her pale, thin hands in mine and gazed into her blue eyes, then I asked, "Mademoiselle Sophia, how are you?" "I am well," she replied, "and I will soon be even better!" Then she pointed out the window to a small hillock in the new graveyard, not far from the house. On that barren mound stood a small, thin, solitary poplar, almost leafless, swaying in the autumn winds, not like a living tree, but like the ghost of one.

Mademoiselle Sophia now lies under that poplar, and the gilt-edged, red morocco volume, Novalis's Heinrich von Ofterdingen, which she left me as a souvenir, lies on the desk before me as I write. I have used it in the composition of this chapter.

Mademoiselle Sophia now lies under that poplar, and the gilt-edged, red morocco volume, Novalis's Heinrich von Ofterdingen, which she left me as a keepsake, is on the desk in front of me as I write. I’ve used it in the creation of this chapter.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Jean Paul Richter anticipated the Young Germany school in its most marked tendency. The latter, however, occupied with practical questions, avoided the abstract intricacies, the abrupt mannerisms, and the unenjoyable style of Jean Paul Richter. No Frenchman with a clear, well-regulated mind can form a conception of that peculiar style. Jean Paul's style is a structure consisting entirely of very small compartments, which are sometimes so narrow that when one thought encounters another, their heads collide and bruise each other. From the ceiling are suspended hooks, on which Jean Paul hangs all sorts of ideas, and the walls are full of secret drawers, in which he conceals emotions. No German author is so rich as Jean Paul in ideas and in emotions; but he never permits them to ripen; and, notwithstanding his wealth of mind and heart, he excites more astonishment than pleasure. Thoughts and sentiments which would grow into colossal trees, if permitted to strike root properly and develop all their branches, blossoms, and leaves—these he uproots while they are still insignificant shrubs, mere sprouts even; and whole intellectual forests are thus served up to us as an ordinary dish. Now, although curious, this is decidedly unpalatable fare, for not every stomach can digest such a mess of young oaks, cedars, palms, and banana trees. Jean Paul is a great poet and philosopher; but no one can be more inartistic than he in his modes of thought and work, In his romances he has brought to light some truly poetical creations, but all his offspring carry with them a long umbilical cord in which they become entangled and choke.

Jean Paul Richter anticipated the Young Germany movement and its key tendencies. However, the latter, focused on practical issues, steered clear of the abstract complexities, abrupt quirks, and off-putting style of Jean Paul Richter. No Frenchman with a clear, organized mind can grasp that unique style. Jean Paul's style is like a structure made up of tiny compartments that are sometimes so small that when one thought meets another, they bump into each other and hurt themselves. From the ceiling hang hooks, where Jean Paul hangs various ideas, and the walls are filled with secret drawers, hiding his emotions. No German writer is as rich in ideas and emotions as Jean Paul; yet, he never lets them mature. Despite his mental and emotional wealth, he provokes more astonishment than pleasure. Thoughts and feelings that could grow into massive trees, if they were allowed to take root and develop fully with all their branches, flowers, and leaves—he uproots them while they are still tiny shrubs or mere sprouts. Whole intellectual forests are thus presented to us as a regular dish. Now, while this is interesting, it's definitely hard to digest because not every mind can handle such a mix of young oaks, cedars, palms, and banana trees. Jean Paul is a great poet and philosopher; but no one can be more unartistic than he in his thinking and work. In his novels, he has revealed some truly poetic creations, but all his works come with a long umbilical cord that entangles them and strangles their potential.

Instead of thought he gives us his thinking itself. We see the material activity of his brain; he gives us, as it were, more brain than thought, and meanwhile the flashes of his wit skip about, like the fleas of his heated imagination. He is the merriest, and, at the same time, the most sentimental of authors. In fact, sentimentality always finally overcomes him, and his laughter abruptly turns into tears. He sometimes disguises himself as a gross, beggarly fellow; but then, like stage princes, he suddenly unbuttons the coarse overcoat and reveals the glittering insignia of his rank.

Instead of just sharing his thoughts, he gives us his actual thinking process. We can see his brain in action; it’s like he provides us with more of his brain than his thoughts, and meanwhile, the sparks of his humor jump around, like the fleas of his fiery imagination. He is both the happiest and the most sentimental of writers. In fact, his sentimentality often takes over, and his laughter suddenly turns to tears. Sometimes he pretends to be a crude, destitute person; but then, like actors on stage, he quickly sheds the rough exterior and reveals the shining symbols of his true status.

In this respect Jean Paul resembles Laurence Sterne, with whom he has been often compared. The author of Tristram Shandy, when apparently sunk in the most vulgar trivialities, possesses the art of rising by sudden transitions to the sublime, reminding us that he is of princely rank and the countryman of Shakespeare. Jean Paul, like Laurence Sterne, reveals in his writings his own personality, and lays bare his own human frailties; but yet with a certain awkward bashfulness, especially in sexual matters. Laurence Sterne parades before the public entirely unrobed, quite naked; but Jean Paul has only holes in his trousers. A few critics erroneously believe that Jean Paul possessed more true feeling than Sterne, because the latter, whenever the subject under treatment reaches a tragic elevation, suddenly assumes a merry, jesting tone. Jean Paul, on the contrary, if the subject verges in the least towards the serious, gradually becomes lachrymose, and composedly lets his tears trickle. Sterne probably felt more deeply than Jean Paul, for he is a greater poet. Laurence Sterne, like Shakespeare, was fostered by the muses on Parnassus. After the manner of women, they early spoiled him with their caresses. He was the special pet of the pale Goddess of Tragedy. Once, in a paroxysm of fierce tenderness, she kissed him so passionately, with such fervour, with so ardent a pressure of her lips, that his young heart began to bleed, and at once understood all earthly sorrows, and was filled with a boundless compassion. Poor young poet-heart! But the younger sister, the rosy Goddess of Mirth, sprang quickly to his side, took the suffering lad into her arms, and sought to cheer him with song and merriment. She gave him as playthings the mask of comedy and the jingling bells, and pressed a soothing kiss upon his lips; and with that kiss she imbued him with all her levity, all her frolicsome mirth, all her sportive wit.

In this regard, Jean Paul is similar to Laurence Sterne, with whom he has often been compared. The author of Tristram Shandy, while seemingly caught up in the most trivial details, has the ability to leap unexpectedly to profound thoughts, reminding us that he is of noble descent and a countryman of Shakespeare. Like Laurence Sterne, Jean Paul reveals his personality in his writing and exposes his own human weaknesses, but does so with a certain awkwardness, especially regarding sexual topics. Laurence Sterne presents himself completely unfiltered, entirely exposed; whereas Jean Paul has only a few rips in his pants. Some critics mistakenly believe that Jean Paul feels more deeply than Sterne, simply because Sterne, when discussing something tragic, often shifts to a playful tone. In contrast, Jean Paul, if the topic turns even slightly serious, slowly becomes teary-eyed and lets his tears flow. Sterne likely felt more intensely than Jean Paul, as he is a greater poet. Laurence Sterne, like Shakespeare, was fostered by the muses on Parnassus. They spoiled him early on with their affection, much like women do. He was particularly favored by the pale Goddess of Tragedy. Once, in a moment of intense tenderness, she kissed him so passionately, with such fervor and pressing intensity, that his young heart started to ache, and he immediately understood all of life's sorrows, filling him with deep compassion. Poor young poet-heart! But the younger sister, the rosy Goddess of Mirth, quickly rushed to his side, took the suffering lad in her arms, and tried to uplift him with song and laughter. She gave him playful distractions like the mask of comedy and the jingling bells, and pressed a comforting kiss on his lips; with that kiss, she filled him with all her lightheartedness, her playful joy, and her witty spirit.

And since then Sterne's heart and Sterne's lips have drifted into a strange contradiction. Sometimes, when his soul is most deeply agitated with tragic emotion, and he seeks to give utterance to the profound sorrows of his bleeding heart, then, to his own astonishment, the merriest, most mirth-provoking words will flutter from his lips.

And since then, Sterne's heart and lips have ended up in a strange contradiction. Sometimes, when his soul is most intensely stirred by tragic feelings, and he tries to express the deep sorrows of his aching heart, he is surprised to find the funniest, most entertaining words coming out of his mouth.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Baron de la Motte-Fouqué was formerly a major in the Prussian military service, and is one of the most conspicuous of those poet-heroes, or hero-poets, whose lyre and sword won renown during the so-called war of liberation.

The Baron de la Motte-Fouqué was previously a major in the Prussian military and is one of the most notable poet-heroes, or hero-poets, whose poetry and bravery gained fame during the so-called war of liberation.

His laurels are of the genuine kind. He is a true poet, and the inspiration of poetry is on his brow. Few authors receive such universal homage as did our good Fouqué. Now his readers consist only of the patrons of the circulating libraries. But that public is still large enough, and Fouqué may boast that he was the only one of the romantic school who was also received with favour by the lower classes. At the time when at the aesthetic tea-gatherings in Berlin it was the fashion to sneer at the fallen knight, in a little Hartz village I became acquainted with a lovely maiden, who spoke of Fouqué with a charming enthusiasm, and blushingly confessed that she would gladly give a year of her life if she might but once kiss the author of "Undine"—and this maiden had the prettiest lips that I have ever seen.

His achievements are truly remarkable. He is a genuine poet, and the essence of poetry shines in him. Few writers receive as much widespread admiration as our beloved Fouqué. Now, his audience mainly consists of the patrons of circulating libraries. But that audience is still substantial, and Fouqué can proudly say that he was the only one from the romantic school who was also appreciated by the working class. Back when it was trendy at the artistic tea gatherings in Berlin to mock the fallen knight, I met a beautiful girl in a small Hartz village who spoke of Fouqué with delightful enthusiasm and shyly admitted that she would gladly trade a year of her life for just one kiss from the author of "Undine"—and this girl had the prettiest lips I have ever seen.

"Undine" is indeed a charming poem. This poem is itself a kiss! The genius of poetry kissed the sleeping spring, and as it opened its laughing eyes all the roses exhaled their sweetest perfumes, and all the nightingales sang; and the fragrance of the roses and the songs of the nightingales, all this did our good Fouqué clothe in words, and called it "Undine."

"Undine" is truly a delightful poem. This poem is like a kiss! The brilliance of poetry awakened the sleeping spring, and as it opened its joyful eyes, all the roses released their sweetest scents, and all the nightingales sang; and the aroma of the roses and the songs of the nightingales, all of this was beautifully expressed in words by our talented Fouqué, and he named it "Undine."

I know not if this novel has been translated into French. It is the story of a lovely water-fairy who has no soul, and who only acquires one by falling in love with an earthly knight. But, alas! with this soul she also learns human sorrows. Her knightly spouse becomes faithless, and she kisses him dead. For in this book death also is only a kiss.

I don't know if this novel has been translated into French. It's the story of a beautiful water fairy who has no soul, and she only gets one by falling in love with a mortal knight. But, unfortunately! with this soul she also learns about human sadness. Her knightly husband becomes unfaithful, and she kisses him to death. Because in this book, death is just a kiss.

This "Undine" may be regarded as the muse of Fouqué's poetry. Although she is indescribably beautiful, although she suffers as we do, and earthly sorrows weigh full heavily upon her, she is yet no real human being. But our age turns away from all fairy-pictures, no matter how beautiful. It demands the figures of actual life; and least of all will it tolerate water-fays who fall in love with noble knights. This reactionary tendency, this continual praise of the nobility, this incessant glorification of the feudal system, this everlasting knight-errantry balderdash, became at length distasteful to the educated portion of the German middle classes, and they turned their backs on the minstrel who sang so out of time. In fact, this everlasting sing-song of armours, battle-steeds, high-born maidens, honest guild-masters, dwarfs, squires, castles, chapels, minnesingers, faith, and whatever else that rubbish of the middle ages may be called, wearied us; and as the ingenuous hidalgo Friedrich de la Motte-Fouqué became more and more immersed in his books of chivalry, and, wrapped up in the reveries of the past, he ceased to understand the present, and then even his best friends were compelled to turn away from him with dubious head-shakings.

This "Undine" can be seen as the muse of Fouqué's poetry. Though she is incredibly beautiful and experiences suffering like we do, weighed down by earthly sorrows, she is still not a real human being. However, our era turns its back on all fairy-tale images, no matter how lovely they are. It demands figures from real life and, even less so, will it accept water spirits who fall in love with noble knights. This backward-looking trend, this constant praise of the nobility, this never-ending glorification of the feudal system, this perpetual knight-errantry nonsense, became increasingly off-putting to the educated part of the German middle class, and they distanced themselves from the minstrel who sang out of sync with the times. In fact, this endless rambling about armor, battle horses, highborn maidens, honest guild masters, dwarfs, squires, castles, chapels, minnesingers, faith, and all that medieval junk exhausted us. As the naive nobleman Friedrich de la Motte-Fouqué became more and more absorbed in his chivalric books and lost himself in the fantasies of the past, he stopped understanding the present, and even his closest friends had to turn away from him, shaking their heads in doubt.

His later writings are unenjoyable. The faults of his earlier works are repeated, only more glaringly. His knights are combinations of iron and sentimentality; they have neither flesh nor common-sense. His heroines are mere semblances of women; they are dolls, whose golden tresses daintily curl over features that are as pretty and as expressionless as flowers. Like the works of Walter Scott, so also do Fouqué's romances of chivalry remind us of the fantastic tapestries known as gobelins, whose rich texture and brilliant colours are more pleasing to our eyes than edifying to our souls. We behold knightly pageantry, shepherds engaged in festive sports, hand to hand combats, and ancient customs, charmingly intermingled. It is all very pretty and picturesque, but shallow, brilliant superficiality. Among the imitators of Fouqué, as among the imitators of Walter Scott, this mannerism of portraying—not the inner nature of men and things, but merely the outward garb and appearance—was carried to still greater extremes. This shallow art and frivolous style is still in vogue in Germany, as well as in England and France. Even if the portrayal no longer attempts to glorify the age of chivalry, but is directed to our modern affairs, it is still the same mannerism, which grasps not the essential points of phenomena, but merely the superficial and the accidental. In lieu of a knowledge of mankind, our recent novelists evince a profound acquaintance with clothes; they perhaps justify themselves by the old saying: "The tailor makes the man." How different from the older, especially the English, novelists! Richardson gives us the anatomy of the emotions. Goldsmith treats of the affections of his heroes pragmatically. The author of Tristram Shandy reveals to us the profoundest depths of the human soul; he opens, as it were, a crevice of the soul; permits us to take one glance into its abysses, into its paradise and into its filthiest recesses; then quickly lets the curtain fall over it. We have had a front view of that marvellous theatre, the soul; the arrangements of lights and the perspective have not failed in their effects, and while we imagined that we were gazing upon the infinite, our own hearts have been exalted with a sense of infinity and poetry. Fielding at once takes us behind the scenes, and there shows us all the emotions covered with deceitful rouge; the gross motives that underlie the most generous deeds; the colophony that is afterwards to blaze aloft into enthusiasm; the bass drum, while on it repose the drumsticks, which are destined to sound the furious thunder of passion. In short, he shows us the whole interior machinery by which theatrical effects are produced; he exposes the colossal deceit by which men assume an appearance far different from the reality, and through which the truth and gladness of life are lost. But what need to cite the English as an example, since our own Goethe has given us in his Wilhelm Meister the best model of a novel?

His later writings are unenjoyable. The flaws of his earlier works are even more obvious now. His knights mix tough exteriors with sentimentality; they lack real substance and common sense. His heroines are just facades of women; they are dolls with golden hair that curls delicately over features that are pretty yet expressionless, like flowers. Similar to the works of Walter Scott, Fouqué's chivalric romances remind us of fantastical tapestries known as gobelins, whose rich texture and vibrant colors are more pleasing to our eyes than enriching for our souls. We witness knightly pageantry, shepherds in festive sports, hand-to-hand combat, and ancient customs, all charmingly mixed together. It all looks nice and picturesque, but it's shallow and merely a brilliant surface. Among those who mimic Fouqué and Walter Scott, this tendency to portray—not the true essence of people and things, but just their outer appearance—has become even more exaggerated. This shallow art and frivolous style still thrive in Germany, as well as in England and France. Even if the portrayal no longer seeks to glorify the age of chivalry, but focuses on modern life, it remains the same approach, which captures only the superficial and incidental details. Instead of understanding humanity, our recent novelists demonstrate an impressive knowledge of fashion; they might excuse themselves with the old saying: "The tailor makes the man." How different from the earlier, especially the English, novelists! Richardson gives us a deep look into emotions. Goldsmith examines the feelings of his heroes in a practical way. The author of Tristram Shandy reveals the deepest aspects of the human soul; it's like he opens a crevice of the soul, allowing us to glimpse its abysses, its paradise, and its darkest corners, then quickly pulls the curtain down. We have had a front-row view of that magnificent theater, the soul; the lighting and perspective have done their job, and while we thought we were gazing at the infinite, our hearts felt uplifted with a sense of boundlessness and poetry. Fielding takes us behind the scenes, where he shows us all the emotions hidden under false appearances; the crude motives behind the most generous actions; the excitement that is later to erupt into passionate enthusiasm; the bass drum, which holds the drumsticks, ready to make the furious sound of passion. In short, he reveals the whole inner workings that create theatrical effects; he exposes the massive deception that causes people to wear an appearance very different from reality, and through which the truth and joy of life are lost. But why cite the English as an example when our own Goethe has given us the best model of a novel in his Wilhelm Meister?

Fouqué's romances are a legion in number; he is one of the most prolific of authors. The Magic Ring and Thiodolph the Icelander merit a specially favourable mention. His metrical dramas, which were not intended for the stage, contain great beauties. Sigurd the Serpent-slayer is a bold work, in which the ancient Scandinavian mythology is mirrored with all its gigantesque and magical characteristics. Sigurd, the chief personage of the drama, is a colossal creation. He is as strong as the rocky crags of Norway, and as fierce as the sea that beats around their base. He has as much courage as a hundred lions, and as much sense as two asses.

Fouqué's love stories are numerous; he's one of the most prolific authors out there. The Magic Ring and Thiodolph the Icelander deserve special mention. His poetic dramas, which weren’t meant for performance, have a lot of beauty. Sigurd the Serpent-slayer is a bold piece that reflects ancient Scandinavian mythology in all its grand and magical traits. Sigurd, the main character of the drama, is a larger-than-life creation. He's as strong as the rugged cliffs of Norway and as fierce as the ocean crashing against them. He has the courage of a hundred lions and the wisdom of two donkeys.

Herr Ludwig Uhland is the true lyric poet. He was born in Tübingen in 1787, and is now an advocate at Stuttgard. This author has written a volume of poems, two tragedies, and two treatises on Walther von der Vogelweide, and on the French troubadours. The latter are two small historical researches, and give evidence of a diligent study of the middle ages. The tragedies are entitled Louis the Bavarian, and Duke Ernest of Suabia. I have not read the former, nor is it considered the better of the two. The latter, however, contains many beauties, and pleases by its noble and exalted sentiments. It is fragrant with the sweet breath of poetry, such as we fail to find in the pieces that reap so much applause on the stage at the present day. German fidelity is the theme of the drama, and we see it here strong as an oak, defying all storms. German love blossoms, scarcely visible, in the far distance, but its violet-perfume appeals the more touchingly to our hearts. This drama, or rather this poem, contains passages which are among the most precious pearls of our literature; notwithstanding which, the theatre-going public received, or rather rejected, the piece with indifference. I will not censure the good people of the pit too severely for that. These people have certain needs, which they demand that the poet shall gratify. The poet's productions must not merely express the sympathies of his own heart, but must accord with the desires of the audience. The latter resembles the hungry Bedouin in the desert, who thinks he has found a sack of peas, and opens it eagerly, but, alas! they are only pearls.

Herr Ludwig Uhland is the true lyric poet. He was born in Tübingen in 1787 and is now a lawyer in Stuttgart. This author has written a collection of poems, two tragedies, and two essays on Walther von der Vogelweide and the French troubadours. The latter two are small historical studies that demonstrate a thorough understanding of the Middle Ages. The tragedies are titled Louis the Bavarian and Duke Ernest of Suabia. I haven’t read the first one, nor is it considered the better of the two. The latter, however, contains many beautiful moments and is appreciated for its noble and elevated sentiments. It is filled with the sweet scent of poetry that we often don’t find in the works that receive so much applause on today’s stage. German fidelity is the theme of the drama, standing strong like an oak, defying all storms. German love blooms, barely noticeable, in the far distance, but its violet perfume touches our hearts even more. This drama, or rather this poem, contains passages that are among the finest treasures of our literature; yet the theater audience received—or rather dismissed—the piece with indifference. I won’t judge the good people in the audience too harshly for that. They have certain expectations that they want the poet to fulfill. A poet's work must not only express their own feelings but also align with the desires of the audience. The latter is like a hungry Bedouin in the desert who thinks he’s found a sack of peas and opens it eagerly, only to find it’s full of pearls.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

...Twenty years ago I was a lad, and what overflowing enthusiasm would I then have lavished upon Uhland! At that time I could better appreciate his merits than now; we were then more akin in modes of thought and feeling. But so much has happened since then! What then seemed to me so grand: all that chivalry and Catholicism; those cavaliers that hack and hew at each other in knightly tournaments; those gentle squires and virtuous dames of high degree; the Norseland heroes and minnesingers; the monks and nuns; ancestral tombs thrilling with prophetic powers; colourless passion, dignified by the high-sounding title of renunciation, and set to the accompaniment of tolling bells; a ceaseless whining of the Miserere; how distasteful all that has become to me since then! But once, it was, oh! so different. How often have I sat on the ruins of the old castle at Düsseldorf on the Rhine, declaiming the loveliest of all Uhland's poems:—

...Twenty years ago, I was a young guy, and how much enthusiasm I would have poured into Uhland! Back then, I could appreciate his talent better than I do now; we shared more in terms of thoughts and feelings. But so much has happened since! What once seemed so grand to me—all that chivalry and Catholicism; those knights fighting it out in tournaments; those noble squires and virtuous ladies; the heroes of Norseland and minnesingers; the monks and nuns; ancestral tombs filled with prophetic power; passion drained of color, dignified by the lofty title of renunciation, accompanied by the sound of tolling bells; a constant whimpering of the Miserere—how distasteful all that has become to me now! But there was a time when it was, oh! so different. How often I sat on the ruins of the old castle in Düsseldorf on the Rhine, reciting the loveliest of all Uhland's poems:—

A wandering shepherd, young and fair,
Beneath the royal castle strayed;
And when the princess saw him there,
Love's longing thrilled the maid.

And then with accents sweet, she said,
"Oh! would that I might come to thee!
How white the lambkins there; how red
The flowerets on the lea."

The youth made answer from below,
"If thou would'st but come down to me!
How rosy red thy cheeks do glow,
How white those arms I see."

And every morn, with silent pain,
He drove his flock the castle by,
And gazed aloft, until again
His love appeared on high.

"Oh, welcome! welcome! princess sweet!"
His joyous tones rang bright and clear.
Then softly she in turn did greet,
"Kind thanks, my shepherd dear."

Cold winter fled, spring came again,
The flowerets blossomed far and near.
The shepherd sought his love;—in vain!
No more did she appear.

"Oh, welcome! welcome! princess fair!"
His words were mournful now, and drear.
A spirit voice rang through the air,
"Farewell, my shepherd dear."

A young and attractive shepherd who roams around,
Walked under the royal castle;
And when the princess saw him standing there,
A wave of yearning filled her heart.

Then, in a sweet voice, she said,
"Oh! I wish I could come with you!"
Look at how white the lambs are over there; how bright!
The flowers in the field.

The young person replied from below,
"If only you would come down to me!"
Your cheeks look so rosy,
"How beautiful your arms are."

And every morning, with a silent ache,
He led his sheep past the castle,
And looked up, hoping to see
His love appears once more.

"Oh, welcome! Welcome, dear princess!"
His cheerful voice sounded bright and clear.
She gently greeted him back,
"Thanks, my dear shepherd."

The cold winter was over, and spring came back,
The flowers bloomed all over.
The shepherd searched for his love;—without success!
She stopped showing up.

"Oh, welcome! welcome! lovely princess!"
His words now seemed sad and gloomy.
A haunting voice echoed through the air,
"Goodbye, my dear shepherd."

And as I sat on the ruins of the old castle and recited this poem, at times I heard the water-fays of the Rhine mockingly, and with comic pathos, take up my refrain, and from amidst the sighing and the moaning of the river that ran below I could hear in faint tones——

And as I sat on the ruins of the old castle and recited this poem, sometimes I heard the water spirits of the Rhine mockingly, and with a funny sadness, echo my words. From the sighing and moaning of the river flowing below, I could faintly hear—

"A spirit voice ring through the air,
'Farewell, my shepherd dear.'"

A ghostly voice echoed through the air,
'Goodbye, my dear shepherd.'

But I would not let myself be disturbed by the bantering of the mermaids, even when at some of the most beautiful passages in Uhland's poems they tittered ironically. At that time I modestly ascribed the tittering to myself, particularly when the twilight was sinking into darkness, and I raised my voice somewhat to overcome the mysterious feeling of awe with which the old castle ruins inspired me, for there was a legend that the ruins were haunted by a headless woman. At times I seemed to hear the rustling of her silken gown, and my heart beat quickly;—that was the time, and that the place, to be an enthusiast over the poems of Ludwig Uhland.

But I refused to let the mermaids' teasing bother me, even when they giggled ironically during some of the most beautiful passages in Uhland's poems. At those moments, I modestly thought the laughter was directed at me, especially as dusk turned to darkness, and I raised my voice a bit to push back the mysterious awe that the old castle ruins inspired in me, since there was a legend that the ruins were haunted by a headless woman. Sometimes I thought I could hear the rustling of her silken gown, and my heart would race;—it was then, and it was there, that I truly felt enthusiastic about Ludwig Uhland's poems.

I hold the same volume again in my hands, but twenty years have flown since then, and I have seen much and learned much. I no longer believe in headless human beings, and the old ghost story has no longer power to move me. The house wherein I sit and read is situated on the Boulevard Montmartre; the fiercest turmoil of the day breaks in tumultuous billows around this spot, and loud and shrill are heard the voices of the modern epoch. First, a burst of laughter; then a heavy rumbling; next, drums beating quick time; and then, like a flash, the national guards dash by in quick march; and every one speaks French. And is this the place to read Uhland's poems? Thrice have I again declaimed the concluding lines of the same poem, but I do not feel the keen, unspeakable pain that once thrilled me when the little princess died, and the handsome shepherd lad so pathetically calls to her, "Oh, welcome! welcome! princess fair!"

I hold this book in my hands again, but twenty years have passed since then, and I've seen and learned a lot. I no longer believe in headless humans, and the old ghost story no longer affects me. The house where I sit and read is on Boulevard Montmartre; the intense chaos of the day crashes around me in waves, and the voices of the modern era are loud and piercing. First, there's a burst of laughter; then a heavy rumble; next, drums beating steadily; and then, in a flash, the national guards rush by in quick step, and everyone speaks French. Is this really the place to read Uhland's poems? I've recited the final lines of the same poem three times, but I don’t feel the intense, indescribable pain that once struck me when the little princess died, and the handsome shepherd boy calls out to her so sadly, “Oh, welcome! welcome! princess fair!”

"A spirit voice rang through the air,
'Farewell, my shepherd dear.'"

A ghostly voice resonated in the air,
'Goodbye, my dear shepherd.'

Perhaps my lack of enthusiasm for this class of poems also partly arises from my experience that the most painful love is not that which fails to win possession of the object of its affections, or loses her through death. In truth, it is more painful to fold the loved one in our arms, and yet have her worry us with her contrariness, and her silly caprices, until night and day are rendered unendurable, and we are finally forced to close our heart against her who is most precious, and send the dear plague of a woman off in a post chaise—

Perhaps my lack of enthusiasm for this type of poetry also comes from my belief that the most painful love isn't the kind that fails to win the object of its affection or loses it to death. In reality, it hurts more to hold the person we love in our arms and still be tormented by her stubbornness and silly whims, until both day and night become unbearable. Eventually, we end up shutting our hearts against the one who is most precious to us, and sending that dear headache of a woman away in a carriage—

"Farewell, oh! princess fair!"

"Goodbye, oh! beautiful princess!"

Verily, more grievous than the loss through death is the loss through life; for instance, when the loved one in the spirit of mischievous coquetry turns away from us; when she insists upon going to a masked ball, to which no respectable person dare escort her; and when there, with jaunty dress and roguish curls, takes the arm of the first scamp that comes along, and leaves you all alone.

Truly, more painful than losing someone to death is losing them in life; for example, when a loved one, in a playful flirtation, turns away from you; when she insists on going to a masked ball that no decent person would dare take her to; and when there, in her stylish outfit and playful curls, she takes the arm of the first troublemaker who comes her way, leaving you all alone.

"Farewell, my shepherd dear!"

"Goodbye, my dear shepherd!"

Perhaps Herr Uhland himself fared no better than ourselves. Perhaps his temperament has changed since then. With a few exceptions, he has produced no new poems in twenty years. I cannot believe that this beautiful poet soul was so stingily endowed by Nature, and had but one spring-time. No, I explain Uhland's silence as the result of the contradiction between the tendencies of his muse and his political position. The elegiac poet, in whose ballads and romances the praises of the Catholic-feudal past were sung so beautifully; the Ossian of the middle ages has since then become a member of the assembly of notables in Wurtemburg, a zealous champion of popular rights, and a bold advocate of the equality of all citizens, and of freedom of opinion. Herr Uhland has proved the absolute sincerity of his democratic and Protestant convictions by the great personal sacrifices that he has made in their behalf. In his earlier days he fairly earned the poet's laurels, and now he has also won the bays of civic virtue. But just because he was so honest in his sympathy for the modern epoch, he could no longer sing the olden songs of the olden time with the former fervour. His Pegasus was a knightly steed that gladly trotted back to the past, but obstinately refused to budge when urged forward into modern life; and so our worthy Uhland smilingly dismounted, quietly unsaddled the unruly steed, and led it back to the stable. There it remains to this very day; like its colleague, the famous war-horse Bayard, it possesses all possible virtues, and only one fault; it is dead.

Maybe Herr Uhland himself isn't doing any better than we are. Maybe his temperament has changed since then. With a few exceptions, he hasn't written any new poems in twenty years. I find it hard to believe that this beautiful poet's soul was so stingily blessed by Nature, only having one spring. No, I see Uhland's silence as a result of the conflict between his muse's tendencies and his political stance. The elegiac poet, whose ballads and romances beautifully celebrated the Catholic-feudal past, the Ossian of the Middle Ages, has since become a member of the notable assembly in Württemberg, a passionate champion of people's rights, and a strong advocate for the equality of all citizens and freedom of opinion. Herr Uhland has shown the absolute sincerity of his democratic and Protestant beliefs through the great personal sacrifices he has made for them. In his earlier days, he earned the poet's laurels, and now he has also gained the recognition of civic virtue. But just because he was so genuine in his support for the modern era, he could no longer sing the old songs with the same passion. His Pegasus was a noble steed that gladly trotted back to the past but stubbornly refused to move when prompted to embrace modern life; and so our good Uhland smiled as he dismounted, quietly unsaddled the unruly steed, and led it back to the stable. It remains there to this day; like its counterpart, the famous war-horse Bayard, it possesses all possible virtues, and only one flaw: it is dead.

It will not have escaped keener eyes than mine, that the stately war-horse, decked with its brilliant coat of arms and proudly-waving plumes, was never rightly suited to its bourgeois rider, who, instead of boots with golden spurs, wore shoes with silk stockings; and who, instead of helm, wore the hat of a Tübingen professor. Some claim to have discovered that Herr Ludwig Uhland never was wholly in sympathy with his theme; that in his writings, the naïve, rude, powerful tones of the middle ages are not reproduced with idealised fidelity, but rather they are dissolved into a sickly, sentimental melancholy. It is claimed that Uhland has taken up into his temperament the strong, coarse strains of the heroic legends and folk-songs, and boiled them down, as it were, to make them palatable to our modern public. And in truth, when we closely observe the women in Uhland's poems, we find that they are only beautiful shadows, embodied moonshine; milk flows in their veins, and sweet tears in their eyes; that is, tears which lack salt. If we compare Uhland's knights with the knights in the old ballads, it seems to us as if the former were composed of suits of leaden armour, which were entirely filled with flowers, instead of flesh and bones. Hence Uhland's knights are more pleasing to delicate nostrils than the old stalwarts, who wore heavy iron trousers, and were huge eaters, and still greater drinkers.

It hasn't escaped sharper eyes than mine that the impressive war horse, adorned with its vibrant coat of arms and proudly waving plumes, was never really suited to its bourgeois rider, who, instead of boots with golden spurs, wore shoes with silk stockings; and instead of a helmet, sported the hat of a Tübingen professor. Some argue that Herr Ludwig Uhland was never fully in tune with his theme; that in his writings, the naive, raw, powerful tones of the Middle Ages aren't reproduced with idealized accuracy but are rather diluted into a sickly, sentimental melancholy. It's said that Uhland absorbed the strong, coarse elements of heroic legends and folk songs and refined them, so to speak, to make them acceptable to our modern audience. And indeed, when we closely examine the women in Uhland's poems, we find they are merely beautiful shadows, personified moonlight; milk flows in their veins, and sweet tears fill their eyes; that is, tears that lack salt. If we compare Uhland's knights with those in the old ballads, it seems that the former are made of suits of leaden armor, completely filled with flowers instead of flesh and bones. Thus, Uhland's knights are more appealing to delicate sensitivities than the old warriors, who wore heavy iron trousers, were massive eaters, and even greater drinkers.

But that is no reason for finding fault with Herr Uhland; he did not seek to give an exact copy of the German past; perhaps he only wished to please us with a fanciful reflection, and so he mirrored a flattering picture by the crepuscular lights of his genius. This perhaps lends an especial charm to his poems, and wins for them the admiration and affection of many gentle and worthy persons. The pictures of the past cast some of their magic glamour over us, even in the feeblest conjuration. Even the men who have warmly espoused the cause of modernism always retain a secret sympathy for the heritages of the olden time. Those ghostly voices of the past, no matter how faint their re-echo, marvellously stir our souls. Hence it is to be readily understood that the ballads and romances of our worthy Uhland not only received the most cordial applause from the patriots of 1813, from pious youths and sentimental maidens, but also from more powerful and more modern minds.

But that doesn’t mean we should criticize Herr Uhland; he didn’t try to recreate an exact replica of Germany’s past. Perhaps he only aimed to entertain us with a whimsical reflection, and so he created a flattering image through the twilight of his creativity. This might give his poems a special charm and earn them the admiration and affection of many kind and deserving people. The images of the past cast some of their magic over us, even when presented in the weakest form. Even those who strongly support modernism still hold a secret appreciation for the legacies of earlier times. Those faint echoes from the past beautifully resonate with our hearts. So, it’s easy to see why the ballads and romances of our esteemed Uhland not only received enthusiastic praise from the patriots of 1813, from devout youths and sentimental young women, but also from more influential and modern thinkers.

RELIGION AND PHILOSOPHY IN GERMANY.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[A considerable portion of this, which is one of Heine's most important works, marked by luminous exposition and bold and brilliant ideas, is here presented. It was published in French, under the title De l'Allemagne depuis Luther, in the Revue des Deux Mondes for 1834, and shortly afterwards it appeared in German, terribly mutilated by the censor, like nearly everything that Heine wrote. It was written at the suggestion of Prosper Enfantin, and dedicated to him, as at that time, in Heine's opinion, the foremost champion of human progress. The translation here given is Mr. Fleishman's; it has been revised and brought closer to the original.]

[A significant part of this, which is one of Heine's most important works, characterized by clear explanations and bold, brilliant ideas, is presented here. It was published in French under the title De l'Allemagne depuis Luther in the Revue des Deux Mondes for 1834, and shortly after, it appeared in German, heavily censored, like almost everything Heine wrote. It was created at the suggestion of Prosper Enfantin and dedicated to him, as Heine considered him the leading advocate for human progress at that time. The translation provided here is by Mr. Fleishman; it has been revised to align more closely with the original.]

Preface to the Second Edition (1852).

...THE book which lies before you is a fragment, and shall remain a fragment. To be candid, I would prefer to leave the book wholly unprinted; for since its first publication my views concerning many subjects, particularly those which relate to religious questions, have undergone a marked change, and much that I then asserted is now in opposition to my better convictions. But the arrow belongs not to the archer when once it has left the bow, and the word no longer belongs to the speaker when once it has passed his lips, especially when it has been multiplied by the press.... At that time I was yet well and hearty; I was in the zenith of my prime, and as arrogant as Nebuchadnezzar before his downfall.

...THE book in front of you is only a fragment, and it will stay that way. Honestly, I would rather leave the book completely unpublished; since its first release, my views on many topics, especially those related to religious matters, have changed significantly, and much of what I said then contradicts my current beliefs. But once an arrow leaves the bow, it no longer belongs to the archer, and once a word is spoken, it isn't the speaker's anymore, especially after it's been printed.... At that time, I was still healthy and strong; I was at the height of my youth and as arrogant as Nebuchadnezzar before his fall.

Alas! a few years later, a physical and spiritual change occurred. How often since then have I mused over the history of that Babylonian king who thought himself a god, but who was miserably hurled from the summit of his self-conceit, and compelled to crawl on the earth like a beast, and to eat grass (probably it was only salad). This legend is contained in the grand and magnificent book of Daniel; and I recommend all godless self-worshippers to lay it devoutly to heart. There are, in fact, in the Bible many other beautiful and wonderful narrations, well deserving their consideration; for instance, the story of the forbidden fruit in Paradise, and the serpent which already six thousand years before Hegel's birth promulgated the whole Hegelian philosophy. This footless blue-stocking demonstrates very sagaciously how the absolute consists in the identity of being and knowing; how man becomes God through knowledge, or, what amounts to the same thing, how God arrives at the consciousness of himself through man. To be sure, this formula is not so clear as in the original words: "If ye eat of the tree of knowledge, ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil." Dame Eve understood of the whole demonstration only this—that the fruit was forbidden; and because it was forbidden she ate of it. But no sooner had she eaten of the tempting apple than she lost her innocence, her naïve guilelessness, and discovered that she was far too scantily dressed for a person of her quality, the mother of so many future kings and emperors, and she asked for a dress—truly, only a dress of fig-leaves, because at that time there were as yet no Lyons silk fabrics in existence, and because there were in Paradise no dressmakers or milliners—oh, Paradise! Strange, that as soon as a woman arrives at self-consciousness her first thought is of a new dress!

Unfortunately, a few years later, I experienced a physical and spiritual change. How often since then have I reflected on the story of that Babylonian king who believed he was a god but was cruelly brought down from his high horse and forced to live on the ground like a beast, eating grass (though it was probably just greens). This tale is found in the grand and magnificent book of Daniel, and I urge all arrogant, godless self-worshippers to take it seriously. In fact, the Bible is full of other beautiful and fascinating stories that deserve their attention; for example, the narrative of the forbidden fruit in Paradise and the serpent that preached the entire Hegelian philosophy six thousand years before Hegel was born. This clever blue-stocking wisely shows how the absolute is the unity of being and knowing; how humanity becomes divine through knowledge, or, in other words, how God comes to know Himself through humanity. Admittedly, this idea isn’t as clear as the original words: "If you eat from the tree of knowledge, you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." Eve understood only this—that the fruit was off-limits; and because it was forbidden, she decided to eat it. But as soon as she took a bite of that tempting apple, she lost her innocence, her naïve simplicity, and realized she was far too underdressed for someone of her stature, the mother of so many future kings and emperors, and she asked for a dress—truly, just a dress of fig leaves, since back then there were no luxurious silk fabrics and no dressmakers or seamstresses in Paradise—oh, Paradise! It’s strange that as soon as a woman becomes self-aware, her first thought is about a new outfit!

...Officious, pious Christian souls seem very anxious to know how my conversion was brought about, and seem desirous that I should impose upon them an account of some wonderful miracle. With true Christian importunity they inquire if I did not, like Saul, behold a light when on the way to Damascus; or if, like Balaam, the son of Beor, I was not riding a restive ass, which suddenly opened its mouth and discoursed like a human being. No, ye credulous souls, I never journeyed to Damascus. Even the name would be unknown to me if I had not read the "Song of Songs," wherein King Solomon compares the nose of his beloved to a tower looking towards Damascus. Nor have I ever seen an ass—that is, no four-footed one—that spoke like a human being; whereas I have met human beings in plenty that every time they opened their mouths spoke like asses. In fact, it was neither a vision, nor a seraphic ecstasy, nor a voice from heaven, nor a remarkable dream, nor any miraculous apparition, that brought me to the path of salvation. I owe my enlightenment simply to the reading of a book! one book! yes, it is a plain old book, as modest as nature, and as simple; a book that appears as work-day-like and as unpretentious as the sun that warms, as the bread that nourishes us; a book that looks on us as kindly and benignly as an old grandmother, who, with her dear tremulous lips, and spectacles on nose, reads in it daily: this book is briefly called the book—the Bible. With good reason it is also called the Holy Scriptures: he that has lost his God can find Him again in this book, and towards him who has never known Him it wafts the breath of the divine word. The Jews, who are connoisseurs of precious things, well knew what they were about when, at the burning of the second temple, they left in the lurch the gold and silver sacrificial vessels, the candlesticks and lamps, and even the richly-jewelled breast-plate of the high-priest, to rescue only the Bible....

...Eager, devout Christian people seem very curious about how I came to my conversion and want me to tell them some amazing story of a miracle. With genuine Christian persistence, they ask if I, like Saul, saw a light on my way to Damascus; or if, like Balaam, the son of Beor, I was riding a stubborn donkey that suddenly spoke like a human. No, you gullible souls, I never traveled to Damascus. I wouldn't even know the name if I hadn't read the "Song of Songs," where King Solomon compares his beloved's nose to a tower looking toward Damascus. And I’ve never seen a donkey—that is, no four-legged one—that talked like a human; yet I have met plenty of humans who, every time they open their mouths, sound like donkeys. In truth, it wasn’t a vision, a heavenly ecstasy, a voice from above, a remarkable dream, or any miraculous sight that led me to the path of salvation. I owe my enlightenment simply to reading a book! Just one book! Yes, it’s a plain old book, as humble as nature and as straightforward; a book that seems as ordinary and unassuming as the sun that warms us, as the bread that nourishes us; a book that looks at us as kindly and kindly as an old grandmother, who, with her dear trembling lips and glasses on her nose, reads it daily: this book is simply called the book—the Bible. It is rightly called the Holy Scriptures: anyone who has lost sight of God can find Him again in this book, and it brings the breath of the divine word to those who have never known Him. The Jews, who appreciate valuable things, knew exactly what they were doing when, at the destruction of the second temple, they abandoned the gold and silver sacrificial vessels, the candlesticks and lamps, and even the richly jeweled breastplate of the high priest, to save only the Bible....

——

Understood! Please provide the text you'd like modernized.

...DISTINGUISHED German philosophers who may accidentally cast a glance over these pages will superciliously shrug their shoulders at the meagreness and incompleteness of all that which I here offer. But they will be kind enough to bear in mind that the little which I say is expressed clearly and intelligibly, whereas their own works, although very profound, unfathomably profound—very deep, stupendously deep—are in the same degree unintelligible. Of what benefit to the people is the grain locked away in the granaries to which they have no key? The masses are famishing for knowledge, and will thank me for the portion of intellectual bread, small though it be, which I honestly share with them. I believe it is not lack of ability that holds back the majority of German scholars from discussing religion and philosophy in proper language. I believe it is a fear of the results of their own studies, which they dare not communicate to the masses. I do not share this fear, for I am not a learned scholar; I, myself, am of the people. I am not one of the seven hundred wise men of Germany. I stand with the great masses at the portals of their wisdom. And if a truth slips through, and if this truth falls in my way, then I write it with pretty letters on paper, and give it to the compositor, who sets it in leaden type and gives it to the printer; the latter prints it, and then it belongs to the whole world.

...DISTINGUISHED German philosophers who might casually glance at these pages will likely dismiss them, shaking their heads at the simplicity and incompleteness of what I present here. However, they should remember that the little I share is communicated clearly and understandably, while their own works, despite being profound—very deep, incredibly deep—are equally unintelligible. What use is the grain stored away in granaries if people don’t have access to it? The masses are starving for knowledge and will appreciate the small bit of intellectual nourishment I genuinely share with them. I believe it's not a lack of skill that keeps most German scholars from discussing religion and philosophy in accessible language, but rather a fear of the implications of their own studies, which they don’t dare to share with the public. I don’t share this fear because I am not an academic; I come from the people. I am not one of the seven hundred wise men of Germany. I stand with the great masses at the threshold of their understanding. And if a truth emerges, and if that truth comes my way, then I write it in nice letters on paper and give it to the typesetter, who creates the type and hands it to the printer; the latter prints it, and then it becomes the property of the whole world.

The religion of Germany is Christianity. Therefore I shall have to relate what Christianity is, how it became Roman Catholicism, how out of this sprang Protestantism, and out of the latter German philosophy. Inasmuch as I am about to speak of religion, I beg beforehand of all pious souls not to be uneasy. Fear naught, ye pious ones! No profane witticisms shall offend your ears. It is true that these are yet necessary in Germany, where, at this juncture, it is important to neutralise ecclesiastical power. For there we are now in the same situation that you in France were before the Revolution, when Christianity was yet in the closest union with the old régime. The latter could not be overthrown so long as the former maintained its sway over the masses. Voltaire's keen ridicule was needed ere Samson could let his axe descend. But neither the ridicule nor the axe proved anything; they only effected something. Voltaire could only wound the body of Christianity. All his jests gathered from the annals of the Church, all his witticisms against the doctrines and public worship of the Church, against the Bible, this holiest book of humanity, against the Virgin Mary, that loveliest flower of poesy, the whole encylclopædia of philosophical shafts which he launched against the clergy and priesthood, wounded only the outward, mortal body of Christianity, not its inner being, not its profound spirit, nor its eternal soul.

The main religion in Germany is Christianity. So, I need to explain what Christianity is, how it led to Roman Catholicism, how Protestantism emerged from that, and how German philosophy came from Protestantism. Since I'm about to discuss religion, I ask all devout individuals not to feel anxious. Fear not, dear believers! No offensive jokes will reach your ears. It’s true that these are still necessary in Germany, where it’s currently important to challenge religious authority. We are now in a situation similar to France before the Revolution, when Christianity was tightly linked to the old regime. The latter couldn't be dismantled as long as the former held power over the people. Voltaire's sharp satire was necessary before Samson could bring down his axe. But neither the satire nor the axe changed anything fundamentally; they merely had an effect. Voltaire could only harm the external, physical aspect of Christianity. All his barbs drawn from Church history, all his jokes about the Church's doctrines and public worship, against the Bible, this sacred book of humanity, against the Virgin Mary, that beautiful symbol of poetry, all the philosophical jabs he aimed at clergy and the priesthood only hurt the outer, mortal body of Christianity, not its inner essence, not its deep spirit, nor its eternal soul.

For Christianity is an idea, and as such is indestructible and immortal, like every idea. But what is this idea?

For Christianity is an idea, and as such is unbreakable and eternal, like every idea. But what exactly is this idea?

Just because this idea has not yet been clearly comprehended, and because the essential has been mistaken for the fundamental, there is as yet no history of the Church. Two antagonistic factions write the history of the Church, and contradict each other incessantly. But the one as little as the other will ever distinctly state what that idea really is which is the underlying principle of Christianity, of its symbolism, of its dogma, of its public worship, and which strives to reveal itself throughout its whole history, and has manifested itself in the actual life of Christian nations.

Just because this idea hasn’t been fully understood yet, and because people have confused the essential with the fundamental, there isn’t a clear history of the Church. Two opposing groups are writing the history of the Church, constantly contradicting each other. However, neither side can clearly explain what the core idea really is that underlies Christianity—its symbolism, its doctrines, its public worship—and which aims to reveal itself throughout its entire history, and has shown itself in the real lives of Christian nations.

...How this idea was historically evolved, and disclosed itself in the world of phenomena, may be discovered as early as the first centuries after the birth of Christ, if we study impartially the history of the Manicheans and the Gnostics. Although the first were branded as heretics, and the latter defamed, and both anathematised by the Church, yet their influence on the doctrines of the Church was lasting. Out of their symbolism Catholic art was developed, and their modes of thought penetrated the whole life of Christendom. The First Cause of the Manicheans does not differ much from that of the Gnostics. The doctrine of the two principles, the good and the evil, constantly opposing each other, is common to both. The Manicheans derived this doctrine from the ancient Persian religion, in which Ormuz, the light, is at enmity with Ahriman, the darkness. The others, the real Gnostics, believed in the pre-existence of the good principle, and accounted for the rise of the evil through emanation, through the generation of Æons, which, the farther they are removed from their origin, the more vicious and evil do they become.

...The historical development of this idea and how it revealed itself in the world can be traced back to the early centuries after Christ's birth, especially if we examine the history of the Manicheans and the Gnostics without bias. Although the first group was labeled as heretics and the latter faced defamation, both were condemned by the Church, yet their impact on Church doctrines was enduring. Catholic art was influenced by their symbolism, and their ways of thinking permeated the entire life of Christendom. The concept of the First Cause among the Manicheans is quite similar to that of the Gnostics. The belief in two opposing principles, good and evil, is shared by both. The Manicheans took this idea from the ancient Persian religion, where Ormuz, the embodiment of light, is in conflict with Ahriman, the embodiment of darkness. The true Gnostics, on the other hand, believed in the pre-existence of the good principle and explained the emergence of evil through emanation, meaning that as Æons are generated farther from their source, they become increasingly corrupted and malevolent.

...This Gnostic theory of the universe originated in ancient India, and brought with it the doctrine of the incarnation of God, of the mortification of the flesh, of spiritual introspection and self-absorption. It gave birth to the ascetic, contemplative, monkish life, which is the most logical outgrowth of the Christian principle. This principle has become entangled among the dogmas of the Church, and has been able to express itself but very obscurely in the public worship. But everywhere we find the doctrine of the two principles prominent; the wicked Satan is always contrasted with the good Christ. Christ represents the spiritual world, Satan the material; to the former belong our souls, to the latter our bodies. Accordingly, the whole visible world, which constitutes nature, is originally evil, and Satan, the prince of darkness, through it seeks to lure us to ruin. Therefore it behoves us to renounce all the sensuous joys of life, to torture the body, which is Satan's portion, in order that the soul may the more majestically soar aloft to the bright heavens, to the radiant kingdom of Christ.

...This Gnostic view of the universe started in ancient India and introduced the idea of God incarnating, the discipline of the flesh, and the practices of spiritual reflection and self-focus. It led to the ascetic, contemplative, monastic lifestyle, which logically follows from the Christian principle. This principle has become tangled in the Church’s dogmas and has managed to express itself only very obscurely in public worship. However, we consistently see the doctrine of the two principles standing out; the evil Satan is always set against the good Christ. Christ stands for the spiritual realm, while Satan represents the material; our souls belong to the former, and our bodies to the latter. Thus, the entire visible world that makes up nature is fundamentally evil, and Satan, the prince of darkness, uses it to try to lead us to destruction. Therefore, we must reject all the sensory pleasures of life and inflict suffering on the body, which belongs to Satan, so that our souls can rise majestically to the bright heavens, to the glorious kingdom of Christ.

This theory of the universe, which is the true fundamental idea of Christianity, spread itself with incredible rapidity, like a contagious disease, over the whole Roman empire. These sufferings, at times strung to fever-pitch, then again relaxing into exhaustion, lasted all through the middle ages; and we moderns still feel in our limbs those convulsions and that debility. And if among us, here and there, there be one who is already convalescent, he cannot flee from the universal hospital, and feels himself unhappy as the only healthy person among invalids.

This theory of the universe, which is the core idea of Christianity, spread incredibly fast, like an epidemic, throughout the entire Roman Empire. These sufferings, sometimes intense to the point of fever, then easing into fatigue, lasted throughout the Middle Ages; and we modern individuals still experience those tremors and that weakness in our bodies. And if there’s someone among us who is already recovering, they can’t escape the collective struggle and feel miserable as the only healthy person among the sick.

When once mankind shall have recovered its perfect life, when peace shall be again restored between body and soul, and they shall again interpenetrate each other with their original harmony, then it will be scarcely possible to comprehend the factitious feud which Christianity has instigated between them. Happier and more perfect generations, begot in free and voluntary embraces, blossoming forth in a religion of joy, will then smile sadly at their poor ancestors, who held themselves gloomily aloof from all the pleasures of this beautiful world, and through the deadening of all warm and cheerful sensuousness almost paled into cold spectres. Yes, I say it confidently, our descendants will be more beautiful, more happy, than we; for I have faith in progress; mankind is destined to be happy, and I have a more favourable opinion of the Divinity than those pious souls who imagine that He created mankind only to suffer. Already here on earth, through the blessings of free political and industrial institutions, would I seek to found that millennium which, according to the belief of the pious, is not to be until the day of judgment. The one is perhaps as visionary a hope as the other, and possibly there will be no resurrection of humanity, either in the politico-moral or in the apostolic-Catholic sense. Perhaps mankind is doomed to eternal misery; the masses are perhaps condemned to be for ever trodden under foot by despots, to be plundered by their accomplices, and to be jeered at by their lackeys. Alas! in that case we must seek to maintain Christianity, even if we recognise it to be an error. Barefoot, and clad in monkish cowls, we must traverse Europe, preaching the vanity of all earthly good, and inculcating resignation. We must hold up the consoling crucifix before scourged and derided humanity, and promise, after death, all the seven heavens above.

When humanity finally regains its ideal state, when peace is restored between body and soul, and they once again connect with their original harmony, it will be hard to understand the artificial conflict that Christianity has created between them. Happier and more perfect generations, born from free and loving relationships, flourishing in a joyful religion, will look back with sadness at their ancestors, who distanced themselves from the pleasures of this beautiful world and, through the suppression of all warm and joyful sensations, turned into cold specters. Yes, I confidently say that our descendants will be more beautiful and happier than we are; I believe in progress; humanity is meant to be happy, and I have a more positive view of the Divine than those faithful souls who think that He created humanity just to suffer. Here on earth, through the benefits of free political and economic systems, I would seek to establish that millennium which, according to the faithful, won’t come until Judgment Day. Maybe one hope is as unrealistic as the other, and perhaps there will be no resurrection of humanity, either in the political-moral or in the apostolic-Catholic sense. Perhaps humanity is doomed to eternal misery; the masses are likely condemned to be forever trampled by tyrants, exploited by their allies, and mocked by their servants. Alas! In that case, we must strive to uphold Christianity, even if we recognize it as misguided. Barefoot and dressed in monk’s robes, we must travel across Europe, preaching the futility of all earthly good, and teaching acceptance. We must hold up the comforting crucifix before suffering and ridiculed humanity, promising all seven heavens after death.

...The final fate of Christianity is dependent upon our need of it. This religion has for eighteen centuries been a blessing to suffering humanity; it was providential, divine, holy. All that it has benefited civilisation, by taming the strong and strengthening the weak, by uniting the nations through like emotions and a like language, by all that its panegyrists extol—all these are insignificant in comparison with that great consolation which in itself is bestowed upon mankind. Eternal praise is due to that symbol of a suffering God, the Saviour with the crown of thorns, the Christ crucified, whose blood was a soothing balsam dripping into humanity's wounds. The poet, in particular, will reverently recognise the solemn grandeur of that symbol. The whole system of allegory, as expressed in the life and art of the middle ages, will in all times excite the admiration of poets. What colossal consistency in the Christian art!—that is, in architecture! How harmoniously those Gothic cathedrals are adapted to the religious services of the Church, and how the fundamental idea of the Church itself is revealed in them! Everything towers upward; everything transubstantiates itself; the stone blossoms into branches and foliage and becomes a tree; the fruits of the vine and of the wheat-stalk become blood and flesh; man becomes God, and God becomes a pure, abstract spirit. The Christian life during the middle ages is for the poet a rich, inexhaustible store-house of precious materials. Only through Christianity could, in this world, such varied phases arise—contrasts so striking, sorrows so diverse, beauties so strange, that one is inclined to believe that they never did exist in reality, and that all was but a colossal fever-dream, a delirious fantasy of an insane God. Nature herself appeared in those times fantastically disguised; but notwithstanding that man, occupied with abstract metaphysical speculations, turned peevishly away from her, yet at times she awoke him with a voice so solemnly sweet, so deliciously terrible, so enchanting, that he involuntarily listened and smiled, then shrank back with terror, and sickened even unto death. The story of the nightingale of Basle here comes to my mind, and, as it is probably unknown to you, I will relate it.

...The ultimate fate of Christianity relies on our need for it. This religion has been a blessing to suffering humanity for eighteen centuries; it was providential, divine, and holy. All the ways it has improved civilization—by taming the strong and empowering the weak, by uniting nations through shared emotions and a common language, by everything its supporters boast about—are trivial compared to the deep consolation it offers humanity. Eternal praise is owed to that symbol of a suffering God, the Savior with the crown of thorns, Christ

In May 1433, at the time of the Ecumenical Council, a party of ecclesiastics, prelates, learned scholars, and monks of every shades took a walk in a grove near Basle, wrangling over theological disputations, drawing hair-splitting distinctions, or arguing concerning annates, expectatives, and reservations, debating whether Thomas of Aquinas was a greater philosopher than Bonaventura, and what not! But suddenly, in the midst of their abstract and dogmatical discussions, they paused, transfixed, before a blooming linden-tree, on which sat a nightingale, trilling and trolling the sweetest and tenderest strains. The learned men were ravished with delight. The glowing melodies of spring penetrated to their scholastic, musty, bookworm hearts, their souls awoke from the mouldy, wintry sleep, they looked at one another in astonished ecstasy. But finally one of them made the sagacious remark that such things could not come of good, that the nightingale might be a devil, and that this devil might be seeking through its sweet music to decoy them from their pious conversations and to lure them to voluptuousness and similar pleasant sins; and then he began to exorcise, probably with the usual formula—"Adjuro te per cum, qui venturus est, judicare vivos et mortuos," etc. It is said that at this conjuration the bird replied, "Yes, I am an evil spirit!" and flew away, laughing. But those who heard its song sickened that very night, and soon after died.

In May 1433, during the Ecumenical Council, a group of church officials, prelates, learned scholars, and monks of all kinds took a stroll in a grove near Basle, arguing over theological debates, making fine distinctions, and discussing issues like annates, expectatives, and reservations, debating whether Thomas Aquinas was a better philosopher than Bonaventura, and so on! But suddenly, in the middle of their abstract and dogmatic discussions, they stopped, transfixed, in front of a blooming linden tree, where a nightingale sat, singing the sweetest and most tender melodies. The learned men were captivated with delight. The vibrant spring melodies reached into their scholarly, musty, bookworm hearts, awakening their souls from a moldy, wintry slumber, and they looked at each other in astonished ecstasy. But eventually, one of them made the wise remark that such things couldn’t come to any good, suggesting that the nightingale might be a devil, trying to entice them away from their pious conversations and lead them to indulgence and other tempting sins; and then he began to perform an exorcism, probably using the usual formula—"Adjuro te per cum, qui venturus est, judicare vivos et mortuos," etc. It’s said that in response to this conjuration, the bird replied, "Yes, I am an evil spirit!" and flew away laughing. But those who heard its song fell ill that very night, and soon after died.

This legend needs no commentary. It bears distinctly the horrible impress of a time when all that was sweet and lovely was denounced as diabolical. Even the nightingale was slandered, and it was customary to make the sign of the cross when she sang. The true Christian, like an abstract spectre, walked timorously, with closed senses, amidst the loveliness of nature.

This legend speaks for itself. It clearly shows the dreadful mark of a time when everything beautiful and lovely was labeled as evil. Even the nightingale was falsely accused, and people would make the sign of the cross when she sang. The true Christian, like a ghost, moved cautiously, shutting out the beauty of nature.

...As regards the good principle, the same conception prevailed over all the Christian countries of Europe. The Roman Catholic Church took care of that, and whoever deviated from the prescribed faith was a heretic. But in relation to the evil principle and the empire of Satan, different views were held in different countries, and the Germanic North had quite different conceptions from the Latin South. This was caused by the fact that the Christian priesthood did not reject the previously existing national gods as baseless fantasies of the brain, but conceded to them an actual existence; asserting, however, that all these gods were nothing but male and female devils, who, through the victory of Christ, had lost their power over mankind, and now sought through wiles and stratagems to lure them to sin. All Olympus was now transformed into an airy hell; and if a poet of the middle ages sang of Grecian mythology ever so beautifully, the pious Christian would persist in seeing therein only devils and hobgoblins. The gloomy fanaticism of the monks alighted with special severity on poor Venus: she was considered a daughter of Beelzebub, and the good knight Tannhäuser tells her to her face—

...Regarding the good principle, this idea was widespread across all Christian countries in Europe. The Roman Catholic Church made sure of that, and anyone who deviated from the accepted faith was considered a heretic. However, when it came to the evil principle and the empire of Satan, different perspectives existed in different countries, with the Germanic North having a much different understanding than the Latin South. This was due to the fact that the Christian priesthood did not dismiss the pre-existing national gods as merely fantasies of the mind, but rather acknowledged their actual existence; they insisted, however, that all these gods were nothing but male and female devils, who, in the triumph of Christ, had lost their power over humanity and were now trying to tempt people into sin with tricks and schemes. All of Olympus had turned into a kind of airy hell; and if a medieval poet sang beautifully about Grecian mythology, the devout Christian would still see only devils and goblins in it. The somber fanaticism of the monks particularly targeted poor Venus: she was labeled a daughter of Beelzebub, and the noble knight Tannhäuser tells her directly—

"O Venus, lovely wife of mine,
You are but a she-devil!"

"O Venus, my gorgeous wife,
"You’re just a she-devil!"

Tannhäuser had been enticed by her into that wondrous mountain-cavern called the Venusburg, where, according to tradition, dwelt the beautiful goddess with her nymphs and her paramours, beguiling the hours with the most wanton carousings and dancing. Even poor Diana was not spared, and, notwithstanding her previous reputation for chastity, similar scandals were fastened on her good name. It is said that she, together with her nymphs, indulged in nightly rides through the forest; hence the legend of a strange midnight chase, by wild and furious hunters. This legend reveals clearly the then pervading Gnostic theory of the degeneration of the former divinities. In this transformation of the ancient national religion the underlying principle of Christianity is most fully manifested. The national religion of Europe in the North, even more than in the South, was pantheism. All the mysteries and symbols of that religion were founded on and had reference to a worship of nature; each of the elements was regarded as the embodiment of some mysterious being, and as such was revered and worshipped; in every tree dwelt a divinity, and all nature swarmed with gods and goddesses. Christianity exactly reversed this, and in place of gods it substituted devils and demons. The cheerful figures of Grecian mythology, beautified as they were by art, had taken root in the South along with Roman civilisation, and were not so easily to be displaced by the hideous, weird, and satanic divinities of the German North. The latter seemed to have been fashioned without any particular artistic design, and even before the advent of Christianity they were as sombre and as gloomy as the North itself. Hence there could not arise in France so frightful a devil-dom as among us in Germany, and even the witchcraft and sorcery of the former assumed a cheerful guise. How lovely, fair, and picturesque are the popular superstitions of France as compared with the bloody, hazy, and misshapen monsters which loom gloomily and savagely from out the mists of German legendary lore!

Tannhäuser had been lured by her into that amazing mountain cave called Venusburg, where, according to legend, the beautiful goddess lived with her nymphs and lovers, spending their time in wild parties and dancing. Even poor Diana couldn't escape this, and despite her previous reputation for purity, similar scandals were attached to her name. It's said that she, along with her nymphs, enjoyed nightly rides through the forest; hence the tale of a strange midnight chase by wild and furious hunters. This legend clearly reveals the prevailing Gnostic theory of the decline of former deities. In this transformation of the ancient national religion, the core principle of Christianity is most fully shown. The national religion of Northern Europe, even more than in the South, was pantheism. All the mysteries and symbols of that religion were based on and related to a worship of nature; each element was seen as the embodiment of some mysterious being, revered and worshipped; in every tree lived a deity, and all of nature was filled with gods and goddesses. Christianity completely reversed this, replacing gods with devils and demons. The cheerful figures of Greek mythology, enhanced by art, took root in the South alongside Roman civilization and were not so easily displaced by the grotesque, eerie, and satanic deities of the German North. The latter seemed to have been created without any particular artistic design and even before the arrival of Christianity were as dark and gloomy as the North itself. Thus, a frightful devil imagery could not arise in France as it did in Germany, and even the witchcraft and sorcery there took on a cheerful appearance. How lovely, beautiful, and picturesque are the popular superstitions of France compared to the bloody, hazy, and misshapen monsters that loom fearfully and savagely from the mists of German legendary lore!

Those German poets of the middle ages who chose such themes as had originated, or been first treated, in Brittany and Normandy, thereby invested their poems with somewhat of the cheerfulness of the French temperament. But the old Northern sombreness, of whose gloom we can now scarcely form any idea, exercised full sway over such of our literature as was distinctly national, and over such popular traditions as have been orally transmitted. The superstitions of the two countries offer as striking a contrast as that which exists between a Frenchman and a German. The supernatural beings that figure in old French fabliaux and legends are bright and cheerful creations, and remarkable for a cleanliness which is noticeably lacking in our filthy rabble of German hobgoblins. French fairies and sprites are as distinguishable from German spectres as a spruce and daintily-gloved dandy, jauntily promenading the Boulevard Coblence, is different from a burly German porter, carrying a heavy load upon his shoulders. A French nixen, such as a Melusina, is to a German elf as a princess to a washerwoman. The fay Morgana would stand aghast at sight of a German witch, her body naked and besmeared with ointment, riding on a broom-stick to the Brocken. The Brocken is no merry Avalon, but a rendezvous for all that is weird and hideous. On the very summit of the mountain sits Satan, in the shape of a black goat. The infamous sisterhood form a circle around him and dance, and sing, "Donderemus! Donderemus!" Mingled in the infernal din are heard the bleating of the goat and the shouting of the demoniac crew. If, during the dance, a witch happens to drop a shoe, it is an evil omen, and portends that she will be burned at the stake ere the year ends. But all the terror which such a portent inspires is forgotten amid the wild and maddening Berlioz-like music of the witches' sabbath—and when in the morning the poor witch awakens from her delirium, she finds herself lying, stark naked and tired, by the glimmering embers of her hearth.

Those German poets from the Middle Ages who focused on themes that originated or were first explored in Brittany and Normandy infused their poems with some of the cheerfulness associated with the French temperament. However, the old Northern gloom, which we can barely imagine today, completely dominated the literature that was distinctly national and the popular traditions that have been passed down orally. The superstitions of the two countries present a striking contrast, much like the difference between a French person and a German. The supernatural beings that appear in old French fabliaux and legends are bright and cheerful figures, known for a cleanliness that is noticeably absent in our dirty crowd of German hobgoblins. French fairies and sprites are as different from German specters as a well-dressed dandy walking the Boulevard Coblence is from a burly German porter carrying a heavy load. A French nixen, like Melusina, is to a German elf what a princess is to a washerwoman. The fay Morgana would be horrified at the sight of a German witch, naked and smeared with ointment, riding a broomstick to the Brocken. The Brocken is not a joyful Avalon but a meeting place for everything strange and terrifying. At the very top of the mountain sits Satan in the guise of a black goat. The infamous sisterhood forms a circle around him, dancing and singing, "Donderemus! Donderemus!" Amid the chaotic noise, you can hear the bleating of the goat and the shouts of the demonic crowd. If, during the dance, a witch happens to drop a shoe, it is an ominous sign, indicating that she will be burned at the stake before the year is out. Yet all the terror such a sign brings is forgotten in the wild and maddening music of the witches' sabbath, and when the poor witch wakes up in the morning from her delirium, she finds herself lying naked and exhausted by the glowing embers of her hearth.

The most complete account of witches we find in the learned Dr. Nicolai Remigius's Demonology. This sagacious man had the best opportunity to learn the tricks of witches, as he officiated at their trials, and during his time, in Lotharingia alone, eight hundred women were burned at the stake, after trial and conviction. The trial was generally as follows:—Their hands and feet were tied together, and then they were thrown into the water. If they went under and were drowned, it was a proof that they were innocent, but if they floated on the surface, they were recognised as guilty and burned. Such was the logic of those times.... When the learned Dr. Remigius had completed his great work on witchcraft, he deemed himself so great a master of his subject as to be able to work magic, and, conscientious man that he was, did not fail to accuse himself before the courts; in consequence of which accusation he was burned as a sorcerer.

The most complete account of witches can be found in the scholarly work of Dr. Nicolai Remigius's Demonology. This insightful man had the best chance to learn about the tricks of witches since he oversaw their trials, and during his time in Lotharingia alone, eight hundred women were executed by burning after being tried and convicted. The trials usually went like this: their hands and feet were tied together, and then they were thrown into the water. If they sank and drowned, it proved their innocence; but if they floated, they were considered guilty and burned. Such was the reasoning of that era.... When Dr. Remigius finished his significant work on witchcraft, he thought he was such an expert on the subject that he could perform magic himself. Being a conscientious man, he didn’t hesitate to confess to the courts, and as a result of his confession, he was burned as a sorcerer.

...I must confess that Luther did not understand the real nature of Satan. Whatever evil may be said of the devil, it cannot be denied that he is a spiritualist. Still less did Luther understand the real nature of Catholicism. He did not comprehend that the fundamental idea of Christianity, the deadening of the senses, was too antagonistic to human nature to be ever entirely practicable in life; he did not comprehend that Catholicism was a concordat between God and the devil—that is to say, between the spirit and the senses, in which the absolute reign of the spirit was promulgated in theory, but in which the senses were nevertheless practically reinstated in the enjoyment of their rights. Hence a wise system of concessions allowed by the Church to the senses, always, however, under formalities which cast a slur on every act of the senses, and maintained the sham usurpation of the spirit. You might yield to the tender impulses of your heart and embrace a pretty girl, but you must confess that it was a flagrant sin, and for this sin you must make atonement. That this atonement might be made with money was as beneficial to humanity as useful to the Church. The Church imposed fines, so to say, for every indulgence of the flesh; hence there arose taxes on all sorts of sins, and there were pious colporteurs who, in the name of the Roman Catholic Church, hawked for sale through the land absolutions for every taxed sin. Such a one was that Tetzel against whom Luther first entered the field.

...I have to admit that Luther didn’t really grasp the true nature of Satan. No matter how much evil is attributed to the devil, it can’t be denied that he is a spiritual being. Even more so, Luther didn’t understand the true nature of Catholicism. He failed to recognize that the core idea of Christianity, which involves numbing the senses, is too opposed to human nature to ever be fully practical in real life; he didn’t realize that Catholicism was a compromise between God and the devil—essentially between the spirit and the senses—where the complete dominance of the spirit was declared in theory, but the senses were still allowed to enjoy their rights in practice. As a result, the Church created a sensible system of concessions for the senses, always, however, wrapped in formalities that tarnished every act of the senses while maintaining the illusion of the spirit’s control. You could give in to the tender feelings of your heart and embrace a beautiful girl, but you had to admit that it was a serious sin, and for that sin, you had to make amends. The fact that this atonement could be done with money was as beneficial to humanity as it was useful to the Church. The Church essentially imposed penalties for every indulgence of the flesh; thus, taxes on all types of sins emerged, and there were devout sellers who, in the name of the Roman Catholic Church, traveled the land selling pardons for every taxed sin. One such person was Tetzel, whom Luther first confronted.

...Leo X., the keen Florentine, the pupil of Politian, the friend of Raphael, the Greek philosopher with the triple crown, bestowed by the Conclave, probably because he suffered from a disease, nowise due to Christian abstinence, which was then very dangerous, Leo of Medici, how he must have smiled at the poor, chaste, simple-minded monk who imagined that the evangelic gospels were the chart of Christianity, and that this chart must be a truth! Perhaps he never comprehended what Luther was aiming at, for at that time he was busily occupied with the building of St. Peter's Cathedral, the cost of which was defrayed by the money derived from these sales of absolutions, so that sin actually furnished the means wherewith to build this church, which became thereby, as it were, a monument to the lusts of the flesh, like that pyramid which an Egyptian girl built with the money she had earned by prostitution. Of this house of God it perhaps might be said more truly than of Cologne Cathedral, that it was built by the devil. This triumph of spiritualism, compelling sensualism itself to build its most beautiful temple—this reaping from the multitude, by concessions made to the flesh, the means wherewith to beautify spiritualism, was not understood in the German North. For there, more easily than under the burning skies of Italy, was it possible to practice a Christianity that should make the fewest concessions to the senses. We Northerners are cold-blooded, and needed not so many price-lists of absolution for sins of the flesh as the fatherly Leo sent us. The climate makes the exercise of Christian virtues easier for us; and when, on the 31st of October 1517, Luther nailed to the door of St Augustine's Church his thesis against indulgences, the city moat of Wittenberg was, perhaps, already frozen over with ice thick enough for skating, which is a chilly pleasure, and therefore no sin.

...Leo X, the astute Florentine, a student of Politian, a friend of Raphael, the Greek philosopher with the triple crown, granted by the Conclave, probably because he was afflicted with a disease not caused by Christian abstinence, which was quite dangerous at the time. Leo of Medici must have chuckled at the poor, chaste, simple-minded monk who believed that the gospels were the true guide to Christianity and that this guide had to be absolute truth! He might never have grasped what Luther was getting at, as he was preoccupied with the construction of St. Peter's Cathedral, the funding for which came from the sale of indulgences, meaning that sin actually provided the resources to build this church, making it, in a way, a monument to earthly desires, much like the pyramid an Egyptian girl built with money she earned through prostitution. It might be said of this house of God, more accurately than of Cologne Cathedral, that it was built by the devil. This victory of spiritualism, compelling sensualism itself to create its most magnificent temple—gathering from the masses, through concessions to the flesh, the means to enhance spiritualism—was not understood in the German North. There, it was easier than under Italy's scorching skies to practice a Christianity that made fewer compromises with the senses. We Northerners are cold-blooded and didn’t need as many price-lists of indulgences for sins of the flesh as the fatherly Leo sent us. The climate makes it easier for us to practice Christian virtues; and when, on October 31, 1517, Luther nailed his theses against indulgences to the door of St. Augustine's Church, the city moat of Wittenberg was likely already frozen solid enough for skating, a chilly pleasure, and therefore not a sin.

...In Germany the battle against Catholicism was nothing else than a war begun by spiritualism when it perceived that it only reigned nominally and de jure; whereas sensualism, through conventional subterfuges, exercised the real sovereignty and ruled de facto. When this was perceived, the hawkers of indulgences were chased off, the pretty concubines of the priests were exchanged for plain but honest wedded wives, the charming Madonna pictures were demolished, and there reigned in certain localities a puritanism inimical to every gratification of the senses. In France, on the contrary, during the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries, the war was begun by sensualism against Catholicism, when it saw that while it, sensualism, reigned de facto, yet every exercise of its sovereignty was restrained in the most aggravating manner by spiritualism, and stigmatised as illegitimate. While in Germany the battle was fought with chaste earnestness, in France it was waged with licentious witticisms, and while there theological disputations were in vogue, here many satires were the fashion.

...In Germany, the struggle against Catholicism was essentially a war started by spiritualism when it realized that it only had nominal and legal power; meanwhile, sensualism, through conventional tricks, exercised real authority and ruled in practice. When this was recognized, the sellers of indulgences were driven away, the attractive mistresses of the priests were swapped for plain but honest wives, the beautiful depictions of the Madonna were destroyed, and in certain areas, a strict puritanism took over that was hostile to any indulgence of the senses. In France, however, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the attack was launched by sensualism against Catholicism when it noticed that although sensualism wielded real power, its authority was constantly challenged in a very frustrating way by spiritualism, which labeled it as illegitimate. While in Germany the fight was conducted with pure seriousness, in France it was carried out with lewd humor, and while theological debates were popular there, here, many satirical pieces were in vogue.

...Truly, Jansenism had much more cause than Jesuitism to feel aggrieved at the delineation of Tartuffe, and Molière would be as obnoxious to the Methodists of to-day as to the Catholic devotees of his own time. It is just because of this that Molière is so great, for, like Aristophanes and Cervantes, he levelled his persiflage not only at temporary follies, but also against that which is ever ridiculous—the inherent frailties of mankind. Voltaire, who always attacked only the temporary and the unessential, is in this respect inferior to Molière.

...Honestly, Jansenism had much more reason than Jesuitism to be upset about the portrayal of Tartuffe, and Molière would be just as offensive to today’s Methodists as he was to the Catholic followers of his time. It is exactly for this reason that Molière is so remarkable, for, like Aristophanes and Cervantes, he directed his persiflage not only at fleeting foolishness, but also against what is always laughable—the fundamental weaknesses of humanity. Voltaire, who only criticized the temporary and the superficial, is in this regard not as great as Molière.

...Then why my aversion to spiritualism? Is it something so evil? By no means. Attar of roses is a precious article, and a small vial of it is refreshing, when one is doomed to pass one's days in the closely-locked apartments of the harem. But yet we would not have all the roses of life crushed and bruised in order to gain a few drops of the attar of roses, be they ever so consoling. We are like the nightingales, that delight in the rose itself, and derive as delicious a pleasure from the sight of the blushing, blooming flower as from its invisible fragrance.

...Then why do I have such a dislike for spiritualism? Is it really that bad? Not at all. Rose oil is a valuable item, and just a small bottle of it can be refreshing when you're stuck in the tightly shut rooms of the harem. But we wouldn’t want to crush and damage all of life’s roses just to get a few drops of rose oil, no matter how comforting it may be. We're like nightingales that find joy in the rose itself, enjoying the beautiful sight of the blooming flower as much as its unseen fragrance.

...But there was one man at the Diet of Worms who, I am convinced, thought not of himself, but only of the sacred interests which he was there to champion. That man was Martin Luther, the poor monk whom Providence had selected to shatter the world-controlling power of the Roman Catholic Church, against which the mightiest emperors and most intrepid scholars had striven in vain. But Providence knows well on whose shoulders to impose its tasks; here not only intellectual but also physical strength was required. It needed a body steeled from youth through chastity and monkish discipline to bear the labour and vexations of such an office.

...But there was one man at the Diet of Worms who, I truly believe, thought not of himself, but only of the sacred interests he was there to support. That man was Martin Luther, the humble monk whom fate had chosen to break the world-dominating power of the Roman Catholic Church, against which the mightiest emperors and bravest scholars had fought in vain. But fate knows well whom to assign its tasks; here not only intellectual but also physical strength was needed. It required a body hardened from youth through chastity and monastic discipline to endure the burden and challenges of such a role.

...Luther was not only the greatest, but also the most thoroughly German hero of our history. In his character are combined, on the grandest scale, all the virtues and all the faults of the Germans, so that, in his own person, he was the representative of that wonderful Germany. For he possessed qualities which we seldom find united, and which we usually even consider to be irreconcilably antagonistic. He was simultaneously a dreamy mystic and a practical man of action. His thoughts possessed not only wings, but also hands; he could speak and could act. He was not only the tongue, but also the sword of his time. He was both a cold, scholastic word-caviller, and an enthusiastic, God-inspired prophet. When, during the day, he had wearily toiled over his dogmatic distinctions and definitions, then in the evening he took his lute, looked up to the stars, and melted into melody and devotion. The same man who could scold like a fish-wife could be as gentle as a tender maiden. At times he was as fierce as the storm that uproots oaks; and then again he was mild as the zephyr caressing the violets. He was filled with a reverential awe of God. He was full of the spirit of self-sacrifice for the honour of the Holy Ghost; he could sink his whole personality in the most abstract spirituality, and yet he could well appreciate the good things of this earth, and from his mouth blossomed forth the famous saying—

...Luther was not only the greatest but also the most quintessentially German hero in our history. He embodied, on a grand scale, all the strengths and weaknesses of the Germans, making him a true representative of that remarkable Germany. For , he had qualities that we rarely see combined and often consider completely opposite. He was both a dreamy mystic and a practical go-getter. His thoughts had not only wings but also hands; he was able to speak and take action. He was both the voice and the sword of his time. He could be a cold, academic debater, yet also an enthusiastic, God-inspired prophet. During the day, after laboring over his complex arguments and definitions, he would pick up his lute in the evening, look up at the stars, and lose himself in melody and devotion. The same man who could argue fiercely could also be as gentle as a delicate maiden. At times he was as fierce as a storm that uproots trees; at other times, he was as gentle as a soft breeze caressing the flowers. He was filled with a deep reverence for God. He had a spirit of self-sacrifice for the honor of the Holy Spirit; he could immerse himself in the most abstract spirituality while still appreciating the best things in life, and from his mouth came the famous saying—

"Who loves not wine, women, and song,
 Will be a fool all his life long."

"Who doesn’t enjoy wine, women, and music,
"Will be a fool for his entire life."

He was a complete man—I would say an absolute man, in whom spirit and matter were not antagonistic. To call him a spiritualist would, therefore, be as erroneous as to call him a sensualist. How shall I describe him? He had in him something aboriginal, incomprehensible, miraculous.

He was a whole person—I would say a fully developed person, where spirit and body didn't oppose each other. To label him a spiritualist would be just as wrong as calling him a sensualist. How can I describe him? He had something primitive, mysterious, and extraordinary about him.

...All praise to Luther! Eternal honour to the blessed man to whom we owe the salvation of our most precious possessions, and whose benefactions we still enjoy. It ill becomes us to complain of the narrowness of his views. The dwarf, standing on the shoulders of the giant, particularly if he puts on spectacles, can, it is true, see farther than the giant himself; but for noble thoughts and exalted sentiments a giant heart is necessary. It were still more unseemly of us to pass a harsh judgment on his faults, for those very faults have benefited us more than the virtues of thousands of other men. The refinement of Erasmus, the mildness of Melanchthon, could never have brought us so far as the godlike brutality of Brother Martin.

...All praise to Luther! Eternal honor to the blessed man to whom we owe the salvation of our most precious possessions, and whose contributions we still enjoy. It’s not right for us to complain about the limitations of his views. The dwarf, standing on the shoulders of the giant, particularly if he wears glasses, can indeed see farther than the giant himself; but for noble thoughts and elevated sentiments, a giant heart is essential. It would be even more inappropriate for us to pass harsh judgment on his faults, as those very faults have benefited us more than the virtues of thousands of other men. The refinement of Erasmus and the gentleness of Melanchthon could never have brought us as far as the godlike brutality of Brother Martin.

...From the day on which Luther denied the authority of the Pope, and publicly declared in the Diet "that his teachings must be controverted through the words of the Bible itself, or with sensible reasons," there begins a new era in Germany. The fetters with which Saint Boniface had chained the German Church to Rome are broken. This Church, which has hitherto formed an integral part of the great hierarchy, now splits into religious democracies. The character of the religion itself is essentially changed: the Hindoo-Gnostic element disappears from it, and the Judaic-theistic element again becomes prominent. We behold the rise of evangelical Christianity. By recognising and legitimising the most importunate claims of the senses, religion becomes once more a reality. The priest becomes man, takes to himself a wife, and begets children, as God desires.

...From the day Luther rejected the Pope's authority and publicly stated at the Diet "that his teachings must be challenged using the words of the Bible itself or with reasonable arguments," a new era begins in Germany. The chains that Saint Boniface had used to tie the German Church to Rome are shattered. This Church, which had previously been a key part of the grand hierarchy, now splits into various religious communities. The very nature of religion itself undergoes a significant transformation: the Hindoo-Gnostic influence fades away, and the Judaic-theistic aspect comes back into focus. We witness the emergence of evangelical Christianity. By acknowledging and validating the most pressing claims of the senses, religion once again becomes a tangible reality. The priest becomes more human, takes a wife, and has children, as God intended.

...If in Germany we lost through Protestantism, along with the ancient miracles, much other poetry, we gained manifold compensations. Men became nobler and more virtuous. Protestantism was very successful in effecting that purity of morals and that strictness in the fulfilment of duty which is generally called morality. In certain communities, indeed, Protestantism assumed a tendency which in the end became quite identical with morality, and the gospels remained as a beautiful parable only. Particularly in the lives of the ecclesiastics is a pleasing change now noticeable. With celibacy disappeared also monkish obscenities and vices. Among the Protestant clergy are frequently to be found the noblest and most virtuous of men, such as would have won respect from even the ancient Stoics. One must have wandered on foot, as a poor student, through Northern Germany, in order to learn how much virtue—and in order to give virtue a complimentary adjective, how much evangelical virtue—is to be found in an unpretentious-looking parsonage. How often of a winter's evening have I found there a hospitable welcome,—I, a stranger, who brought with me no other recommendation save that I was hungry and tired! When I had partaken of a hearty meal, and, after a good night's rest, was ready in the morning to continue my journey, then came the old pastor, in his dressing-gown, and gave me a blessing on the way,—and it never brought me misfortune; and his good-hearted, gossipy wife placed several slices of bread-and-butter in my pocket, which I found not less refreshing; and silent in the distance stood the pastor's pretty daughters, with blushing cheeks and violet eyes, whose modest fire in the mere recollection warmed my heart for many a whole winter's day.

...If in Germany we lost a lot to Protestantism, including the ancient miracles and much poetry, we also gained many compensations. People became nobler and more virtuous. Protestantism was very successful in fostering a purity of morals and a strictness in fulfilling duties that is generally referred to as morality. In some communities, Protestantism developed a tendency that ultimately became quite similar to morality, reducing the gospels to a beautiful parable. One can especially see a pleasing change in the lives of church leaders. With celibacy, monastic obscenities and vices also disappeared. Among Protestant clergy, you can often find the noblest and most virtuous individuals, worthy of respect even from the ancient Stoics. You have to have traveled on foot, like a poor student, through Northern Germany to appreciate how much virtue—and to give virtue a complimentary adjective, how much evangelical virtue—is found in a modest-looking parsonage. How often on a winter evening have I found a warm welcome there—I, a stranger with no other recommendation than my hunger and tiredness! After enjoying a hearty meal, and after a good night's sleep, when I was ready to continue my journey in the morning, the old pastor, dressed in his robe, would come to bless me on my way—and it never brought me misfortune; and his kind, chatty wife would tuck several slices of bread-and-butter into my pocket, which I found equally refreshing; and standing silently in the distance were the pastor's lovely daughters, with blushing cheeks and violet eyes, whose modest warmth in mere recollection warmed my heart for many winter days.

...How strange! We Germans are the strongest and wisest of nations; our royal races furnish princes for all the thrones of Europe; our Rothschilds rule all the exchanges of the world; our learned men are pre-eminent in all the sciences; we invented gunpowder and printing;—and yet if one of us fires a pistol he must pay a fine of three thalers; and if we wish to insert in a newspaper, "My dear wife has given birth to a little daughter, beautiful as Liberty," then the censor grasps his red pencil and strikes out the word "Liberty."

...How strange! We Germans are the strongest and wisest nation; our royal families provide princes for all the thrones in Europe; our Rothschilds control all the financial markets in the world; our scholars excel in every field of science; we invented gunpowder and printing;—and yet, if one of us fires a gun, he has to pay a fine of three thalers; and if we want to announce in a newspaper, "My dear wife has given birth to a little daughter, as beautiful as Liberty," then the censor grabs his red pencil and crosses out the word "Liberty."

...I have said that we gained freedom of thought through Luther. But he gave us not only freedom of movement, but also the means of movement; to the spirit he gave a body; to the thought he gave words. He created the German language.

...I have said that we gained freedom of thought through Luther. But he gave us not only freedom of movement, but also the means to move; he provided the spirit with a body; he gave words to thought. He created the German language.

This he did by his translation of the Bible.

This he accomplished through his translation of the Bible.

In fact, the divine author of that book seems to have known, as well as we others, that the choice of a translator is by no means a matter of indifference; and so He himself selected His translator, and bestowed on him the wonderful gift to translate from a language which was dead and already buried, into another language that as yet did not exist.

In fact, the divine author of that book seems to have known, as well as we others, that the choice of a translator is by no means a matter of indifference; and so He himself selected His translator and granted him the incredible ability to translate from a language that was dead and buried into another language that didn't even exist yet.

...The knowledge of the Hebrew language had entirely disappeared from the Christian world. Only the Jews, who kept themselves hidden here and there in stray corners of the world, yet preserved the traditions of this language. Like a ghost keeping watch over a treasure which had been confided to it during life, so in its dark and gloomy ghettos sat this murdered nation, this spectre-people, guarding the Hebrew Bible.

...The knowledge of the Hebrew language had completely vanished from the Christian world. Only the Jews, who remained hidden in various corners of the world, managed to preserve the traditions of this language. Like a ghost watching over a treasure that was entrusted to it during its lifetime, this oppressed nation, this spectral people, sat in its dark and gloomy ghettos, protecting the Hebrew Bible.

...Luther's Bible is an enduring spring of rejuvenation for our language. All the expressions and phrases contained therein are German, and are still in use by writers. As this book is in the hands of even the poorest people, they require no special learned education in order to be able to express themselves in literary forms. When our political revolution breaks out, this circumstance will have remarkable results. Liberty will everywhere be gifted with the power of speech, and her speech will be biblical.

...Luther's Bible is a lasting source of renewal for our language. All the expressions and phrases it contains are in German and are still used by writers today. Since this book is accessible to even the poorest people, they don’t need any special education to express themselves in literary forms. When our political revolution happens, this will have significant effects. Liberty will everywhere be empowered to speak, and its language will be biblical.

...More noteworthy and of more importance than his prose writings are Luther's poems, the songs which in battle and in trouble blossomed forth from his heart. Sometimes they resemble a floweret that grows on a rocky crag, then again a ray of moonlight trembling over a restless sea. Luther loved music, and even wrote a treatise on the art; hence his songs are particularly melodious. In this respect he merits the name, Swan of Eisleben. But he is nothing less than a wild swan in those songs wherein he stimulates the courage of his followers and inflames himself to the fiercest rage of battle. A true battle-song was that martial strain with which he and his companions marched into Worms. The old cathedral trembled at those unwonted tones, and the ravens, in their dark nests in the steeple, startled with affright. That song, the Marseillaise of the Reformation, preserves to this day its inspiriting power.

...More notable and significant than his written works are Luther's poems, the songs that emerged from his heart during times of battle and trouble. Sometimes they resemble a delicate flower growing from a rocky cliff, and other times they are like a ray of moonlight flickering over a restless sea. Luther had a deep love for music and even wrote a treatise on the art; that’s why his songs are especially melodic. In this sense, he deserves the title, Swan of Eisleben. However, he is also like a wild swan in those songs where he boosts the courage of his followers and ignites his own fierce battle rage. A true battle hymn was that martial tune with which he and his companions marched into Worms. The old cathedral trembled at those unusual sounds, and the ravens in their dark nests in the steeple were startled in fear. That song, the Marseillaise of the Reformation, still holds its inspiring power to this day.

...The expressions "classic" and "romantic" refer only to the spirit and the manner of the treatment. The treatment is classic when the form of that which is portrayed is quite identical with the idea of the portrayer, as is the case with the art-works of the Greeks, in which, owing to this identity, the greatest harmony is found to exist between the idea and its form. The treatment is romantic when the form does not reveal the idea through this identity, but lets this idea be surmised parabolically. (I use the word "parabolically" here in preference to "symbolically.") The Greek mythology had an array of god-figures, each of which, in addition to the identity of form and idea, was also susceptible of a symbolic meaning. But in this Greek religion only the figures of the gods were clearly defined; all else, their lives and deeds, was left to the arbitrary treatment of the poet's fancy. In the Christian religion, on the contrary, there are no such clearly-defined figures, but stated facts—certain definite holy events and deeds, into which the poetical faculty of man could place a parabolic signification. It is said that Homer invented the Greek gods and goddesses. That is not true. They existed previously in clearly-defined outlines; but he invented their histories. The artists of the middle ages, on the other hand, never ventured the least addition to the historical part of their religion. The fall of man, the incarnation, the baptism, the crucifixion, and the like, were matters of fact, which were not to be intermeddled with, and which it was not permissible to remould in the least, but to which poetry might attach a symbolic meaning. All the arts during the middle ages were treated in this parabolic spirit, and this treatment is romantic. Hence we find in the poetry of the middle ages a mystic universality; the forms are all so shadowy, what they do is so vaguely indicated, all therein is as if seen through a hazy twilight intermittently illumined by the moon. The idea is merely hinted at in the form, as in a riddle; and we dimly see a vague, indefinite figure, which is the peculiarity of spiritual literature. There is not, as among the Greeks, a harmony, clear as the sun, between form and meaning, but occasionally the meaning overtops the given form, and the latter strives desperately to reach the former, and then we behold bizarre, fantastic sublimity; then, again, the form has overgrown itself, and is out of all proportion to the meaning. A silly, pitiful thought trails itself along in some colossal form, and we witness a grotesque farce: misshapenness is nearly always the result.

...The terms "classic" and "romantic" only refer to the spirit and the way something is presented. The treatment is classic when the form of what's represented perfectly matches the idea of the creator, like in the artworks of the Greeks, where this alignment creates a great harmony between the idea and its form. The treatment is romantic when the form doesn’t directly express the idea through this match but allows the idea to be inferred metaphorically. (I prefer the term "metaphorically" here to "symbolically.") Greek mythology had a variety of god figures, each of which, alongside the matching of form and idea, could also carry a symbolic meaning. However, in this Greek religion, only the figures of the gods were clearly defined; everything else, like their lives and actions, was left to the poet's imagination. In contrast, the Christian religion lacks these clearly defined figures but instead has concrete facts—certain specific holy events and actions, into which human creativity could inject a metaphorical significance. It’s said that Homer invented the Greek gods and goddesses, which isn’t true. They already existed in well-defined forms, but he created their stories. However, the artists of the Middle Ages never dared to add anything to the historical aspects of their religion. The fall of man, the incarnation, the baptism, the crucifixion, and similar events were facts that shouldn’t be altered at all, and poetry could only attach a symbolic meaning to them. All the arts during the Middle Ages were created in this metaphorical spirit, making this treatment romantic. Thus, we see in medieval poetry a mystical universality; the forms are all so vague, their actions so ill-defined, everything appears as if viewed through a hazy twilight occasionally brightened by the moon. The idea is subtly suggested through the form, like a riddle; we can faintly glimpse a vague, unclear figure, which is typical of spiritual literature. Unlike the Greeks, where there is a clarity of harmony between form and meaning, here the meaning sometimes overshadows the form, and the latter struggles to catch up, resulting in bizarre, fantastical sublimity. At other times, the form outgrows itself and becomes disproportionate to the meaning. A silly, pitiful thought is dragged along in a colossal form, leading to a grotesque farce: awkwardness is almost always the outcome.

The universal characteristic of that literature was that in all its productions it manifested the same firm, unshaken faith which in that period reigned over worldly as well as spiritual matters. All the opinions of that time were based on authorities. The poet journeyed along the abysses of doubt as free from apprehension as a mule, and there prevailed in the literature of that period a dauntless composure and blissful self-confidence such as became impossible in after-times, when the influence of the Papacy, the chief of those authorities, was shattered, and with it all the others were overthrown. Hence the poems of the middle ages have all the same characteristics, as if composed not by single individuals, but by the whole people en masse: they are objective, epic, naïve.

The common trait of that literature was that every piece showed the same strong, unwavering faith that dominated both worldly and spiritual aspects during that era. All the beliefs of that time relied on established authorities. The poet navigated through deep doubts without fear, much like a mule, and there was a fearless calm and joyful self-assurance in the literature of that time that became impossible later on when the influence of the Papacy, the main authority, was disrupted, leading to the collapse of all other authorities. As a result, the poems of the Middle Ages share the same features, as if they were created not by individuals but by the entire population en masse: they are objective, epic, and naïve.

In the literature that blossomed into life with Luther we find quite opposite tendencies.

In the literature that emerged with Luther, we see very different trends.

Its material, its subject, is the conflict between the interests and views of the Reformation and the old order of things. To the new spirit of the times, that hodge-podge religion which arose from the two elements already referred to—Germanic nationality and the Hindoo-Gnostic Christendom—was altogether repugnant. The latter was considered heathen idol-worship, which was to be replaced by the true religion of the Judaic-theistic Gospel. A new order of things is established; the spirit makes discoveries which demand the well-being of matter. Through industrial progress and the dissemination of philosophical theories, spiritualism becomes discredited in popular opinion. The tiers-état begins to rise; the Revolution already rumbles in the hearts and brains of men, and what the era feels, thinks, needs, and wills is openly spoken; and that is the stuff of which modern literature is made. At the same time the treatment is no longer romantic, but classic.

Its material, its subject, is the conflict between the interests and views of the Reformation and the old ways. The new spirit of the times found that mixed-up religion, which came from the two elements already mentioned—Germanic nationality and the Hindoo-Gnostic version of Christianity—completely unacceptable. The latter was seen as pagan idol-worship that needed to be replaced by the true religion of the Judaic-theistic Gospel. A new order is being established; the spirit is making discoveries that require the well-being of matter. Through industrial progress and the spread of philosophical ideas, spiritualism loses credibility among the public. The tiers-état starts to rise; the Revolution is already stirring in the hearts and minds of people, and what the era feels, thinks, needs, and wants is openly expressed; and that is the essence of modern literature. At the same time, the approach is no longer romantic, but classic.

...The universal characteristic of modern literature consists in this, that now individuality and scepticism predominate. Authorities are overthrown; reason is now man's sole lamp, and conscience his only staff in the dark mazes of life. Man now stands alone, face to face with his Creator, and chants his songs to Him. Hence this literary epoch opens with hymns. And even later, when it becomes secular, the most intimate self-consciousness, the feeling of personality, rules throughout. Poetry is no longer objective, epic, and naïve, but subjective, lyric, and reflective.

...The defining feature of modern literature is that individuality and skepticism are now in the spotlight. Traditional authorities have been challenged; reason is now humanity's only guide, and conscience is the only support in the confusing journey of life. People now stand alone, directly facing their Creator, expressing their thoughts and feelings in song. This literary era begins with hymns. And even later, when it shifts to a secular focus, a deep self-awareness and sense of individuality remain dominant. Poetry is no longer objective, epic, and straightforward, but rather personal, lyrical, and introspective.

...The God of the pantheists differs from the God of the theists in so far that the former is in the world itself, while the latter is external to, or, in other words, is over the world. The God of the theists rules the world from above as a quite distinct establishment. Only in regard to the manner of that rule do the theists differ among themselves. The Hebrews picture God as a thunder-hurling tyrant; the Christians regard him as a loving father; the disciples of Rousseau and the whole Genevese school portray him as a skilful artist, who has made the whole world somewhat in the same manner as their papas manufacture watches; and as art-connoisseurs, they admire the work and praise the Maker above.

...The God of pantheists is different from the God of theists in that the former is seen as part of the world itself, while the latter exists outside of it, or, in other words, is above the world. The God of theists governs the world from a distinct position above it. The way that God rules is where theists have different views. The Hebrews depict God as a thunderous tyrant; Christians see Him as a loving father; followers of Rousseau and the whole Genevese school view Him as a skilled artist who created the world similarly to how their fathers make watches, and as art lovers, they admire the creation and praise the Creator above.

...From the moment that religion seeks assistance from philosophy her downfall is unavoidable. She strives to defend herself, and always talks herself deeper into ruin. Religion, like all other absolutisms, may not justify herself. Prometheus is bound to the rock by a silent power. Æschylus represents the personification of brute force as not speaking a single word. It must be dumb.

...From the moment religion looks to philosophy for help, its downfall is inevitable. It tries to defend itself and ends up digging a deeper hole. Religion, like all other forms of absolute authority, can’t justify its existence. Prometheus is chained to the rock by a silent force. Æschylus portrays the embodiment of brute force as having nothing to say. It must remain mute.

...Moses Mendelssohn was the reformer of the German Israelites, his companions in faith. He overthrew the prestige of Talmudism, and founded a pure Mosaism. This man, whom his contemporaries called the German Socrates, and whose nobleness of soul and intellectual powers they so admired, was the son of a poor sexton of the synagogue at Dessau. Besides this curse of birth, Providence made him a hunchback, in order to teach the rabble in a very striking manner that men are to be judged not by outward appearance but by inner worth. As Luther overthrew the Papacy, so Mendelssohn overthrew the Talmud; and that, too, by a similar process. He discarded tradition, declared the Bible to be the well-spring of religion, and translated the most important parts of it. By so doing he destroyed Jewish Catholicism, for such is the Talmud. It is a Gothic dome which, although overladen with fanciful, childish ornamentation, yet amazes us by the immensity of its heaven-aspiring proportions.

...Moses Mendelssohn was the reformer of the German Jews, his fellow believers. He challenged the influence of Talmudism and established a purer form of Judaism. This man, whom his contemporaries referred to as the German Socrates, and whose nobility of spirit and intellectual abilities they greatly admired, was the son of a poor synagogue sexton in Dessau. In addition to this misfortune of birth, fate made him a hunchback, to powerfully demonstrate that people should be judged not by their outward appearance but by their inner character. Just as Luther challenged the Papacy, Mendelssohn challenged the Talmud; and he did this through a similar approach. He rejected tradition, proclaimed the Bible as the source of religion, and translated its most significant parts. By doing so, he put an end to Jewish Catholicism, as represented by the Talmud. It is like a Gothic dome which, although burdened with fanciful, childish decorations, still amazes us with its grand, soaring proportions.

...No German can pronounce the name of Lessing without a responsive echo in his breast. Since Luther, Germany has produced no greater and better man than Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. These two are our pride and joy. In the troubles of the present we look back at their consoling figures, and they answer with a look full of bright promise. The third man will come who will perfect what Luther began and what Lessing carried on—the third Liberator.

...No German can say the name of Lessing without feeling a deep connection. Since Luther, Germany hasn’t produced anyone greater or better than Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. These two are our pride and joy. In today’s challenges, we look back at their comforting figures, and they respond with a look full of hope. The third person will come who will complete what Luther started and what Lessing continued—the third Liberator.

Like Luther, Lessing's achievements consisted not only in effecting something definite, but in agitating the German people to its depths, and in awakening through his criticism and polemics a wholesome intellectual activity. He was the vivifying critic of his time, and his whole life was a polemic. His critical insight made itself felt throughout the widest range of thought and feeling—in religion, in science, and in art. His polemics vanquished every opponent, and grew stronger with every victory. Lessing, as he himself confessed, needed conflict for the full development of his powers. He resembled that fabulous Norman who inherited the skill, knowledge, and strength of those whom he slew in single combat, and in this manner became finally endowed with all possible excellencies and perfections. It is easily conceivable that such a contentious champion should stir up not a little commotion in Germany,—in that quiet Germany which was then even more sabbatically quiet than now. The majority were stupefied at his literary audacity. But this was of the greatest assistance to him, for oser! is the secret of success in literature, as it is in revolutions,—and in love. All trembled before the sword of Lessing. No head was safe from him. Yes, many heads he struck off from mere wantonness, and was moreover so spiteful as to lift them up from the ground and show to the public that they were hollow inside. Those whom his sword could not reach he slew with the arrows of his wit. His friends admired the pretty feathers of those arrows; his enemies felt their barbs in their hearts. Lessing's wit does not resemble that enjouement, that gaîté, those lively saillies, which are so well known here in France. His wit was no petty French greyhound, chasing its own shadow: it was rather a great German tom-cat, who plays with the mouse before he throttles it.

Like Luther, Lessing's achievements weren’t just about making specific changes; he also stirred the German people to their core and sparked a vibrant intellectual movement through his critiques and debates. He was the dynamic critic of his time, and his entire life was a series of arguments. His sharp insights impacted a vast range of ideas and emotions—in religion, science, and art. His arguments defeated every opponent, growing stronger with each triumph. Lessing admitted that he needed conflict to fully develop his abilities. He was like that legendary Norman who gained the skills, knowledge, and strength of those he defeated in battle, thereby acquiring all possible virtues and perfections. It's easy to imagine that such a contentious figure would cause quite a stir in Germany—particularly in that quiet Germany, which was even more tranquil back then than it is now. Most people were stunned by his literary boldness. But this was a huge advantage for him, because oser! is the secret to success in literature, just as it is in revolutions—and in love. Everyone feared Lessing’s sharp criticism. No one was safe from him. Yes, he beheaded many simply out of sheer wantonness, and was spiteful enough to pick them up off the ground and show the public that they were empty inside. Those who weren’t pierced by his sword were taken down by the arrows of his wit. His friends admired the beautiful feathers on those arrows; his enemies felt their sharp points in their hearts. Lessing’s wit isn’t like the lighthearted quips and cheerfulness that are so familiar here in France. His wit was no petty French greyhound, chasing its own shadow; it was more like a great German tomcat, toying with the mouse before it finally strikes.

Yes, polemics were our Lessing's delight, and so he never reflected long whether an opponent was worthy of him,—thus through his controversies he has saved many a name from well-merited oblivion. Around many a pitiful authorling he has spun a web of the wittiest sarcasm, the most charming humour; and thus they are preserved for all time in Lessing's works, like insects caught in a piece of amber. In slaying his enemies he made them immortal. Who of us would have ever heard of that Klotz on whom Lessing wasted so much wit and scorn? The huge rocks which he hurled at, and with which he crushed, that poor antiquarian, are now the latter's indestructible monument.

Yes, polemics were our Lessing's passion, and he never took long to consider whether an opponent was worthy of his time—through his debates, he has saved many names from well-deserved obscurity. Around many a pitiful author, he has woven a web of sharp sarcasm and delightful humor; and thus they are immortalized in Lessing's works, like insects trapped in a piece of amber. By defeating his enemies, he made them eternal. Who among us would have ever heard of that Klotz, on whom Lessing spent so much wit and scorn? The huge stones he threw, which crushed that poor antiquarian, are now the latter's timeless monument.

It is noteworthy that this wittiest man of all Germany was also the most honourable. There is nothing equal to his love of truth. Lessing made not the least concession to falsehood, even if thereby, after the manner of the worldly-wise, he could advance the victory of truth itself. He could do everything for truth, except lie for it. Whoever thinks, he once said, to bring Truth to man, masked and rouged, may well be her pander, but he has never been her lover.

It’s important to note that the wittiest man in all of Germany was also the most honorable. His love of truth was unmatched. Lessing didn't make any concessions to falsehood, even if, like some clever people, it could help advance the cause of truth. He would do anything for truth, except lie for it. "Whoever thinks," he once said, "that they can bring Truth to people wearing a mask and makeup may well be her pimp, but they have never been her true lover."

...It is heart-rending to read in his biography how fate denied this man every joy, and how it did not even vouchsafe to him to rest with his family from his daily struggles. Once only fortune seemed to smile on him; she gave him a loved wife, a child—but this happiness was like the rays of the sun gilding the wings of a swift-flying bird: it vanished as quickly. His wife died in consequence of her confinement, the child soon after birth. Concerning the latter, he wrote to a friend the horribly-witty words, "My joy was brief. And I lost him so unwillingly, that son! For he was so wise, so wise! Do not think that the few hours of my fatherhood have already made a doting parent of me. I know what I say. Was it not wisdom that he had to be reluctantly dragged into the world with iron tongs, and that he so soon discovered his folly? Was it not wisdom that he seized the first opportunity to leave it? For once I have sought to be happy like other men; but I have made a miserable failure of it."

...It’s heart-wrenching to read in his biography how fate denied this man every joy, and how it didn’t even allow him to rest with his family from his daily struggles. Only once did fortune seem to smile on him; she gave him a beloved wife and a child—but this happiness was like sunlight briefly shining on the wings of a fast-flying bird: it disappeared just as quickly. His wife died during childbirth, and the child soon after. Regarding the latter, he wrote to a friend the darkly humorous words, "My joy was short-lived. And I lost him so reluctantly, that son! For he was so wise, so wise! Don’t think that the few hours of my fatherhood have already turned me into a doting parent. I know what I’m saying. Was it not wisdom that he had to be painfully pulled into the world with iron tongs, and that he quickly realized his folly? Was it not wisdom that he took the first chance to leave it? For once I tried to be happy like other men; but I completely failed at it."

...Lessing was the prophet who from the New Testament pointed towards the Third Testament. I have called him the successor of Luther; and it is in this character that I have to speak of him here. Of his influence on German art I shall speak hereafter. On this he effected a wholesome reform, not only through his criticism, but also through his example; and this latter phase of his activity is generally made the most prominent, and is the most discussed. But, viewed from our present standpoint, his philosophical and theological battles are to us more important than all his dramas, or his dramaturgy. His dramas, however, like all his writings, have a social import, and Nathan the Wise is in reality not only a good play, but also a philosophical, theological treatise in support of the doctrine of a pure theism. For Lessing, art was a tribune, and when he was thrust from the pulpit or the professor's chair he sprang on to the stage, speaking out more boldly, and gaining a more numerous audience.

...Lessing was the visionary who pointed from the New Testament towards the Third Testament. I've referred to him as the successor of Luther; and it's in this role that I need to talk about him here. I'll discuss his impact on German art later. He brought about a positive change, not just through his criticism but also by setting an example; and this latter aspect of his work is usually the most highlighted and debated. However, from our current perspective, his philosophical and theological struggles are more significant to us than all his plays or his approach to drama. His plays, though, like all his writings, carry social significance, and Nathan the Wise is truly not just a great play but also a philosophical and theological argument in favor of pure theism. To Lessing, art was a platform, and when he was removed from the pulpit or the professor's chair, he jumped onto the stage, speaking out more boldly and reaching a larger audience.

I say that Lessing continued the work of Luther. After Luther had freed us from the yoke of tradition and had exalted the Bible as the only well-spring of Christianity, there ensued a rigid word-service, and the letter of the Bible ruled just as tyrannically as once did tradition. Lessing contributed the most to the emancipation from the tyranny of the letter.

I believe that Lessing carried on the work of Luther. After Luther liberated us from the constraints of tradition and elevated the Bible as the sole source of Christianity, a strict literalism took over, and the words of the Bible dominated just as oppressively as tradition once did. Lessing played a significant role in freeing us from the tyranny of literal interpretation.

Lessing died in Brunswick, in the year 1781, misunderstood, hated, and denounced. In the same year there was published at Königsberg the Critique of Pure Reason, by Immanuel Kant. With this book there begins in Germany an intellectual revolution, which offers the most wonderful analogies to the material revolution in France, and which to the profound thinker must appear equally important. It develops the same phases, and between the two there exists a very remarkable parallelism. On both sides of the Rhine we behold the same rupture with the past: it is loudly proclaimed that all reverence for tradition is at an end. As in France no privilege, so in Germany no thought is tolerated without proving its right to exist: nothing is taken for granted. And as in France fell the monarchy, the keystone of the old social system, so in Germany fell theism, the keystone of the intellectual ancien régime.

Lessing passed away in Brunswick in 1781, misunderstood, despised, and condemned. That same year, Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason was published in Königsberg. With this book, an intellectual revolution begins in Germany, offering astonishing parallels to the material revolution in France, which must seem equally significant to deep thinkers. It goes through similar phases, and there's a striking parallelism between the two. On both sides of the Rhine, there's a clear break from the past: it's loudly announced that all respect for tradition is over. Just as in France no privilege is tolerated, in Germany no idea is accepted without proving its validity: nothing is taken for granted. And just as the monarchy, the cornerstone of the old social system, fell in France, so too did theism, the cornerstone of the intellectual ancien régime, in Germany.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

It is horrible when the bodies which we have created ask of us a soul. But it is still more horrible, more terrible, more uncanny, to create a soul, which craves a body and pursues us with that demand. The idea which we have thought is such a soul, and it allows us no peace until we have given it a body, until we have brought it into actual being. The thought seems to become deed; the word, flesh. And, strange! man, like the God of the Bible, needs but to speak his thought, and the world shapes itself accordingly: light dawns, or darkness descends; the waters separate themselves from the dry land, and even wild beasts appear. The universe is but the signature of the word.

It's terrifying when the beings we've created demand a soul from us. But it's even more horrifying, more unsettling, to create a soul that longs for a body and relentlessly pursues us with that request. The idea we conceive is such a soul, and it gives us no rest until we have provided it a body, until we have truly brought it to life. The thought seems to turn into action; the word becomes real. And, oddly enough, just like the God of the Bible, man only needs to voice his thought, and the world aligns itself with it: light emerges, or darkness falls; the waters separate from the dry land, and even wild animals come forth. The universe is merely the imprint of the word.

Mark this, ye haughty men of action. Ye are naught but the unconscious servants of the men of thought, who, oftentimes in the humblest obscurity, have marked out your tasks for you with the utmost exactitude. Maximilian Robespierre was only the hand of Jean Jacques Rousseau—the bloody hand that from the womb of time drew forth the body whose soul Rousseau had created. Did the restless anxiety that embittered the life of Jean Jacques arise from a foreboding that his thoughts would require such a midwife to bring them into the world?

Mark this, you arrogant doers. You are nothing but the unaware servants of the thinkers, who, often in the humblest obscurity, have outlined your tasks for you with great precision. Maximilian Robespierre was merely the tool of Jean Jacques Rousseau—the violent tool that from the depths of time brought forth the body whose spirit Rousseau had created. Did the constant unease that plagued Jean Jacques's life come from a fear that his ideas would need such a forceful hand to bring them to life?

Old Fontenelle was perhaps in the right when he declared, "If I carried all the ideas of this world in my closed hand, I should take good heed not to open it." For my part, I think differently. If I held all the ideas of the world in my hand, I might perhaps implore you to hew off my hand at once, but in no case would I long keep it closed. I am not adapted to be a jailor of thoughts. By Heaven! I would set them free. Even if they assumed the most threatening shapes and swept through all lands like a band of mad Bacchantes; even if with their thyrsus staffs they should strike down our most innocent flowers; even if they should break into our hospitals and chase the sick old world from its bed! It would certainly grieve me sadly, and I myself should come to harm. For, alas! I too belong to that sick old world; and the poet says rightly that scoffing at our own crutches does not enable us to walk any the better. I am the most sick among you all, and the most to be pitied, for I know what health is. But you know it not, you enviable ones. You can die without noticing it yourselves. Yes, many of you have already been dead for these many years, and you think that now only does the true life begin. When I contradict such madness, then they become enraged against me, and rail at me, and, horrible! the corpses spring on me and reproach me; and more even than their revilings does their mouldy odour oppress me. Avaunt, ye spectres! I am speaking of one whose very name possesses an exorcising power: I speak of Immanuel Kant.

Old Fontenelle was probably right when he said, "If I held all the ideas of this world in my closed hand, I should be careful not to open it." However, I think differently. If I had all the ideas of the world in my hand, I might beg you to cut off my hand right away, but I wouldn't keep it closed for long. I'm not meant to be a jailer of thoughts. By Heaven! I would set them free. Even if they took on the most terrifying forms and rushed through the lands like a group of wild Bacchantes; even if they used their thyrsus staffs to crush our most innocent flowers; even if they broke into our hospitals and chased the sick old world from its bed! It would certainly sadden me, and I would suffer too. For, alas! I also belong to that sick old world; and the poet is right that mocking our own crutches doesn't help us walk any better. I am the sickest among you all, and the most to be pitied, because I know what health is. But you don’t, you enviable ones. You can die without even realizing it. Yes, many of you have been dead for years, and you think that true life is just beginning. When I contradict such madness, you get angry with me and insult me, and worse! the corpses rise against me and blame me; and more than their insults, their stale scent overwhelms me. Away with you, spectres! I am talking about someone whose very name has the power to exorcise: I speak of Immanuel Kant.

It is said that the spirits of darkness tremble with affright when they behold the sword of an executioner. How, then, must they stand aghast when confronted with Kant's Critique of Pure Reason! This book is the sword with which, in Germany, theism was decapitated.

It is said that the spirits of darkness tremble in fear when they see the sword of an executioner. How, then, must they be shocked when faced with Kant's Critique of Pure Reason! This book is the sword that, in Germany, took down theism.

To be candid, you French are tame and moderate compared with us Germans. At the most, you have slain a king; and he had already lost his head before he was beheaded. And withal you must drum so much, and shout, and stamp, so that the whole world was shaken by the tumult. It is really awarding Maximilian Robespierre too much honour to compare him with Immanuel Kant. Maximilian Robespierre, the great citizen of the Rue Saint Honoré, did truly have an attack of destructive fury when the monarchy was concerned, and he writhed terribly enough in his regicidal epilepsy; but as soon as the Supreme Being was mentioned, he wiped the white foam from his mouth and the blood from his hands, put on his blue Sunday coat with the bright buttons, and attached a bouquet of flowers to his broad coat-lapel.

To be honest, you French are pretty tame and moderate compared to us Germans. At most, you've killed a king; and he had already lost his head before he was executed. Plus, you have to make so much noise, drum, shout, and stomp, that it shook the whole world. It's really giving Maximilian Robespierre too much credit to compare him to Immanuel Kant. Maximilian Robespierre, the great citizen of Rue Saint Honoré, really did have a moment of destructive rage when it came to the monarchy, and he struggled quite a bit in his murderous frenzy; but as soon as the Supreme Being was mentioned, he wiped the white foam from his mouth and the blood from his hands, put on his blue Sunday coat with the bright buttons, and pinned a bouquet of flowers to his wide coat lapel.

The life-history of Immanuel Kant is difficult to write, for he had neither a life nor a history. He lived a mechanical, orderly, almost abstract, bachelor life, in a quiet little side-street of Königsberg, an old city near the north-east boundary of Germany. I believe that the great clock of the cathedral did not perform its daily work more dispassionately, more regularly, than its countryman, Immanuel Kant. Rising, coffee-drinking, writing, collegiate lectures, dining, walking—each had its set time. And when Immanuel Kant, in his grey coat, cane in hand, appeared at the door of his house, and strolled towards the small linden avenue, which is still called "the philosopher's walk," the neighbours knew it was exactly half-past four. Eight times he promenaded up and down, during all seasons; and when the weather was gloomy, or the grey clouds threatened rain, his old servant Lampe was seen plodding anxiously after, with a large umbrella under his arm, like a symbol of Providence.

The life story of Immanuel Kant is hard to write because he had neither a personal life nor a dramatic history. He lived a mechanical, orderly, almost abstract bachelor life in a quiet little side street of Königsberg, an old city near the northeast border of Germany. I believe the great clock of the cathedral did not perform its daily duties more dispassionately or regularly than its fellow townsman, Immanuel Kant. Rising, drinking coffee, writing, giving lectures at college, dining, and walking—each had its set time. And when Immanuel Kant, dressed in his grey coat and with cane in hand, appeared at the door of his house and strolled toward the small linden avenue, still called "the philosopher's walk," the neighbors knew it was exactly half-past four. He walked back and forth eight times, in all seasons; and when the weather was gloomy or grey clouds threatened rain, his old servant Lampe could be seen following him anxiously, with a large umbrella under his arm, like a symbol of Providence.

What a strange contrast between the outer life of the man and his destructive, world-convulsing thoughts! Had the citizens of Königsberg surmised the whole significance of these thoughts, they would have felt a more profound awe in the presence of this man than in that of an executioner, who merely slays human beings. But the good people saw in him nothing but a professor of philosophy; and when at the fixed hour he sauntered by, they nodded a friendly greeting, and regulated their watches.

What a strange contrast between the man's outward life and his chaotic, world-shaking thoughts! If the citizens of Königsberg had understood the full weight of these thoughts, they would have felt a deeper sense of awe in his presence than they would have felt in front of an executioner, who just takes lives. But the good people saw nothing more than a philosophy professor; and when he strolled by at the usual time, they nodded a friendly hello and adjusted their watches.

But if Immanuel Kant, that arch-destroyer in the realms of thought, far surpassed Maximilian Robespierre in terrorism, yet he had certain points of resemblance to the latter that invite a comparison of the two men. In both we find the same inflexible, rigid, prosaic integrity. Then we find in both the same instinct of distrust,—only that the one exercises it against ideas, and names it a critique, while the other applies it to men, and calls it republican virtue. In both, however, the narrow-minded shopkeeper type is markedly manifest. Nature had intended them to weigh out sugar and coffee, but fate willed it otherwise, and into the scales of one it laid a king, into those of the other, a God. And they both weighed correctly.

But if Immanuel Kant, that ultimate disruptor in the world of ideas, far surpassed Maximilian Robespierre in terms of intimidation, he still had certain similarities with the latter that make it worthwhile to compare the two. In both, we see the same inflexible, rigid, straightforward integrity. We also observe in both a similar instinct of distrust—only that one directs it toward ideas and calls it critique, while the other focuses it on people and refers to it as republican virtue. In both cases, however, the narrow-minded, shopkeeper mentality is clearly evident. Nature intended them to measure out sugar and coffee, but fate had other plans, placing a king in one scale and a God in the other. And they both measured accurately.

...Pantheism had already in Fichte's time interpenetrated German art; even the Catholic Romanticists unconsciously followed this current, and Goethe expressed it most unmistakably. This he already does in Werther. In Faust he seeks to establish an affinity between man and nature by a bold, direct, mystic method, and conjures the secret forces of nature through the magic formula of the powers of hell. But this Goethean pantheism is most clearly and most charmingly disclosed in his short ballads. The early philosophy of Spinoza has shed its mathematical shell, and now flutters about us as Goethean poetry. Hence the wrath of our pietists, and of orthodoxy in general, against the Goethean ballads. With their pious bear-paws they clumsily strike at this butterfly, which is so daintily ethereal, so light of wing, that it always flits out of reach. These Goethean ballads have a tantalising charm that is indescribable. The harmonious verses captivate the heart like the tenderness of a loving maiden; the words embrace you while the thought kisses you.

...Pantheism had already influenced German art during Fichte's time; even the Catholic Romanticists unknowingly followed this trend, and Goethe expressed it most clearly. He does this in Werther. In Faust, he tries to create a connection between man and nature through a bold, direct, mystical approach, calling forth the hidden forces of nature with the magic words of hell's powers. However, this Goethean pantheism is revealed most distinctly and charmingly in his short ballads. The early philosophy of Spinoza has shed its mathematical form and now flits around us as Goethean poetry. This has caused frustration among our pietists and orthodoxy in general, who clumsily try to strike at this delicate butterfly with their heavy hands, but it is so light and ethereal that it always slips away. These Goethean ballads have an indescribable allure. The harmonious verses enchant the heart like the tenderness of a loving maiden; the words wrap around you while the thoughts kiss you.

...This giant was minister in a lilliputian German state, in which he could never move at ease. It was said of Phidias's Jupiter seated in Olympus, that were he ever to stand erect the sudden uprising would rend asunder the vaulted roof. This was exactly Goethe's situation at Weimar; had he suddenly lifted himself up from his peaceful, sitting posture, he would have shattered the gabled canopy of state, or, more probably, he would have bruised his own head. But the German Jupiter remained quietly seated, and composedly accepted homage and incense.

...This giant was a minister in a tiny German state, where he could never feel comfortable. It was said about Phidias's Jupiter sitting in Olympus that if he ever stood up, he would break the vaulted roof. This was exactly Goethe's situation at Weimar; if he had suddenly lifted himself up from his relaxed, seated position, he would have smashed the gabled roof of state, or more likely, he would have hurt his own head. But the German Jupiter stayed calmly seated and gracefully accepted praise and flattery.

...When it was seen that such saddening follies were budding out of philosophy and ripening into a baleful maturity—when it was observed that the German youth were generally absorbed in metaphysical abstractions, thereby neglecting the most important questions of the time and unfitting themselves for practical life,—it was quite natural that patriots and lovers of liberty should be led to conceive a justifiable dislike to philosophy; and a few went so far as to condemn it utterly and entirely, as idle, useless, chimerical theorising.

...When it became clear that these troubling mistakes were emerging from philosophy and maturing into something harmful—when it was noted that German youth were mostly preoccupied with abstract metaphysical ideas, neglecting the crucial issues of the time and making themselves unfit for practical life—it was only natural for patriots and lovers of freedom to develop a reasonable dislike for philosophy; some even went as far as to completely condemn it as idle, useless, and unrealistic theorizing.

We shall not be so foolish as to attempt seriously to refute these malcontents. German philosophy is a matter of great weight and importance, and concerns the whole human race. Only our most remote descendants will be able to decide whether we deserve blame or praise for completing first our philosophy and afterwards our revolution. To me it seems that a methodical people, such as we Germans are, must necessarily have commenced with the Reformation, could only after that proceed to occupy ourselves with philosophy, and not until the completion of the latter could we pass on to the political revolution. This order I find quite sensible. The heads which philosophy has used for thinking, the revolution can afterwards, for its purposes, cut off. But philosophy would never have been able to use the heads which had been decapitated by the revolution, if the latter had preceded.

We won't be so foolish as to seriously try to argue against these troublemakers. German philosophy is very important and affects everyone. Only our far-off descendants will be able to judge whether we deserve blame or praise for first completing our philosophy and then our revolution. It seems to me that a methodical people, like us Germans, must have started with the Reformation; only after that could we focus on philosophy, and only after finishing that could we move on to the political revolution. I find this order quite reasonable. The ideas that philosophy has generated can later be used by the revolution, but philosophy could never have used the ideas that were chopped off by the revolution if that had come first.

...Christianity—and this is its fairest service—has to a certain degree moderated that brutal lust of battle, such as we find it among the ancient Germanic races, who fought, not to destroy, not yet to conquer, but merely from a fierce, demoniac love of battle itself; but it could not altogether eradicate it. And when once that restraining talisman, the cross, is broken, then the smouldering ferocity of those ancient warriors will again blaze up; then will again be heard the deadly clang of that frantic Berserkir wrath, of which the Norse poets say and sing so much. The talisman is rotten with decay, and the day will surely come when it will crumble and fall. Then the ancient stone gods will arise from out the ashes of dismantled ruins, and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes; and finally Thor, with his colossal hammer, will leap up, and with it shatter into fragments the Gothic Cathedrals.

...Christianity—and this is its best contribution—has somewhat softened that brutal desire for battle, like we see among the ancient Germanic tribes, who fought not to destroy or to conquer, but out of a fierce, almost demonic love for fighting itself; but it couldn’t completely get rid of it. And once that restraining symbol, the cross, is broken, the smoldering ferocity of those ancient warriors will rise again; then we'll hear once more the deadly clash of that frantic Berserkir rage, which the Norse poets talk and sing about so much. The symbol is decaying, and the day will definitely come when it crumbles and falls. Then the ancient stone gods will emerge from the ashes of shattered ruins and wipe the dust of a thousand years from their eyes; and finally Thor, with his massive hammer, will leap up and smash the Gothic Cathedrals into pieces.

And when ye hear the rumbling and the crumbling, take heed, ye neighbours of France, and meddle not with what we do in Germany. It might bring harm on you. Take heed not to kindle the fire; take heed not to quench it. Ye might easily burn your fingers in the flame. Smile not at my advice as the counsel of a visionary warning you against Kantians, Fichteans, and natural philosophers. Scoff not at the dreamer who expects in the material world a revolution similar to that which has already taken place in the domains of thought. The thought goes before the deed, as the lightning precedes the thunder. German thunder is certainly German, and is rather awkward, and it comes rolling along tardily; but come it surely will, and when ye once hear a crash the like of which in the world's history was never heard before, then know that the German thunderbolt has reached its mark. At this crash the eagles will fall dead in mid air, and the lions in Afric's most distant deserts will cower and sneak into their royal dens. A drama will be enacted in Germany in comparison with which the French Revolution will appear a harmless idyl. To be sure, matters are at present rather quiet, and if occasionally this one or the other rants and gesticulates somewhat violently, do not believe that these are the real actors. These are only little puppies, that run around in the empty arena, barking and snarling at one another, until the hour shall arrive when appear the gladiators, who are to battle unto death.

And when you hear the rumbling and the crumbling, pay attention, you neighbors of France, and don’t interfere with what we’re doing in Germany. It could bring trouble your way. Be careful not to start the fire; be careful not to put it out. You could easily get burned. Don’t dismiss my advice as just the opinion of a dreamer warning you against Kantians, Fichteans, and natural philosophers. Don’t mock the dreamer who expects to see a revolution in the material world similar to what has already happened in the realm of ideas. Thought comes before action, like lightning comes before thunder. German thunder may be a bit clumsy and rolls in slowly, but it will definitely come, and when you hear a crash unlike anything in history, know that the German thunderbolt has hit its target. At this crash, eagles will drop dead in mid-air, and lions in the farthest deserts of Africa will shrink back and retreat into their royal dens. A drama will unfold in Germany that will make the French Revolution seem like a harmless tale. Sure, things seem pretty calm right now, and if occasionally someone rants and raves a bit, don't think they are the real players. These are just small pups running around in an empty arena, barking and snarling at each other, until the time comes for the gladiators who will fight to the death.

And that hour will come. As on the raised benches of an amphitheatre the nations will group themselves around Germany to behold the great tournament. I advise you, ye French, keep very quiet then: on your souls take heed that ye applaud not. We might easily misunderstand you, and in our blunt manner roughly quiet and rebuke you, for if in our former servile condition we could sometimes overcome you, much more easily can we do so in the wantonness and delirious intoxication of freedom. Ye yourselves know what one can do in such a condition—and ye are no longer in that condition. Beware! I mean well with you, therefore I tell you the bitter truth. You have more to fear from emancipated Germany than from the whole Holy Alliance, with all its Croats and Cossacks. For, in the first place, you are not loved in Germany,—which is almost incomprehensible, for you are so very amiable, and during your sojourn in Germany took much pains to please at least the better and lovelier half of the Germans. But even if that half should love you, it is just the half that does not bear arms, and whose friendship would therefore avail you but little.

And that hour will come. Just like in the raised seats of an amphitheater, the nations will gather around Germany to watch the grand event. I advise you, French, to stay very quiet then: make sure you don’t applaud. We might easily misinterpret you, and in our blunt way might rudely silence and scold you. If we could sometimes overcome you in our previous submissive state, we can do so even more easily in the reckless thrill and intoxication of freedom. You know what can happen in such a state—and you are no longer in that position. Be cautious! I mean well for you, so I’m telling you the harsh truth. You have more to fear from a free Germany than from the entire Holy Alliance, with all its Croats and Cossacks. First of all, you are not liked in Germany—which is quite baffling, because you are so charming, and during your time in Germany, you tried hard to win over at least the better and more attractive half of the Germans. But even if that half were to love you, it’s precisely the half that doesn’t bear arms, and their friendship wouldn’t help you much.

What they really have against you, I could never make out. Once in a beer-cellar at Göttingen, a young Teuton said that revenge must be had on the French for Conrad von Stauffen, whom they beheaded at Naples. You have surely long since forgotten that. But we forget nothing. You see that if we should once be inclined to quarrel with you, good reasons will not be wanting. At all events, I advise you to be on your guard. Let what will happen in Germany, whether the Crown Prince of Prussia or Dr. Wirth hold sway, be always armed, remain quietly at your post, musket in hand. I mean well with you; and I almost stood aghast when I learned lately that your ministry propose to disarm France.

What they really have against you, I could never figure out. Once in a beer cellar in Göttingen, a young German said that the French must pay for the beheading of Conrad von Stauffen in Naples. You’ve probably forgotten that by now. But we don’t forget anything. You see, if we ever decided to fight with you, we’d have plenty of reasons. In any case, I advise you to stay alert. No matter what happens in Germany, whether the Crown Prince of Prussia or Dr. Wirth is in charge, always be prepared, and keep your weapon ready. I mean well for you, and I was shocked to learn recently that your government plans to disarm France.

As, notwithstanding your present Romanticism, you are inborn classics, you know Olympus. Among the naked gods and goddesses who there make themselves merry with nectar and ambrosia, you behold one goddess who, although surrounded with mirth and sport, yet wears always a coat of mail, and keeps helm on head and spear in hand.

As, despite your current Romanticism, you are natural classics, you know Olympus. Among the naked gods and goddesses who are enjoying nectar and ambrosia, you see one goddess who, even though surrounded by laughter and fun, still wears a suit of armor, with a helmet on her head and a spear in her hand.

It is the goddess of wisdom.

It is the goddess of wisdom.

FLORENTINE NIGHTS.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[Heine wrote the fragment entitled Florentine Nights in 1835, and published it two years later in the third volume of the Salon. It is a series of brilliant pictures united by a very slight thread of connection. There is unquestionably an additional element of autobiographical interest; Maximilian's visits to Potsdam and London correspond to Heine's, and throughout this various record of impressions we frequently hear Heine's own voice. The translation here given has not been previously published.]

[Heine wrote the piece titled Florentine Nights in 1835 and published it two years later in the third volume of the Salon. It consists of a series of vivid images connected by a very loose thread. There's definitely a personal touch; Maximilian's trips to Potsdam and London mirror Heine's own experiences, and throughout this varied collection of impressions, we often hear Heine's voice. The translation provided here hasn't been published before.]

FIRST NIGHT.

IN the ante-room Maximilian found the doctor just as he was drawing on his black gloves. "I am greatly pressed for time," the latter hurriedly said to him. "Signora Maria has not slept during the whole night; she has only just now fallen into a light slumber. I need not caution you not to wake her by any noise; and when she wakes on no account must she be allowed to talk. She must lie still, and not disturb herself; mental excitement will not be salutary. Tell her all kinds of odd stories, so that she must listen quietly."

In the waiting room, Maximilian found the doctor just as he was putting on his black gloves. "I'm really short on time," the doctor said quickly to him. "Signora Maria hasn’t slept at all last night; she’s just now fallen into a light sleep. I don’t need to remind you not to wake her with any noise, and when she does wake up, she mustn’t be allowed to talk. She needs to stay calm and not get worked up; mental stress won’t be good for her. Tell her all sorts of strange stories, so she'll have to listen quietly."

"Be assured, doctor," replied Maximilian, with a melancholy smile. "I have educated myself for a long time in chattering, and will not let her talk. I will narrate abundance of fantastic nonsense, as much as you require. But how long can she live?"

"Don't worry, doctor," Maximilian said with a sad smile. "I've trained myself for a long time in rambling on, and I won't let her get a word in. I'll share plenty of crazy stories, as much as you need. But how long can she survive?"

"I am greatly pressed for time," answered the doctor, and slipped away.

"I’m really short on time," the doctor replied before slipping away.

Black Deborah, quick of hearing as she was, had already recognised the stranger's footstep, and softly opened the door. At a sign from him she left as softly, and Maximilian found himself alone with his friend. A single lamp dimly lighted the chamber. This cast now and then half timid, half inquisitive gleams upon the countenance of the sick lady, clothed entirely in white muslin, who lay stretched on a green sofa in calm sleep.

Black Deborah, being quick to hear, had already recognized the stranger's footsteps and quietly opened the door. At his signal, she slipped out just as quietly, leaving Maximilian alone with his friend. A single lamp dimly lit the room, casting timid, curious glimmers onto the face of the sick woman, dressed entirely in white muslin, who lay peacefully asleep on a green sofa.

Silent, and with folded arms, Maximilian stood a little while before the sleeping figure, and gazed on the beautiful limbs which the light garments revealed rather than covered; and every time that the lamp threw a ray of light over the pale countenance, his heart quivered. "For God's sake!" he said softly, "what is that? What memories are awaking in me? Yes, now I know. This white form on the green ground, yes, now...."

Silent, with his arms crossed, Maximilian stood still for a moment in front of the sleeping figure, admiring the beautiful limbs that the light clothing revealed rather than concealed; and every time the lamp cast a ray of light over the pale face, his heart fluttered. "For God’s sake!" he said quietly, "what is this? What memories are coming back to me? Yes, now I understand. This white figure on the green ground, yes, now...."

At this moment the invalid awoke, and gazing out, as it were, from the depths of a dream, the tender dark-blue eyes rested upon him, asking, entreating.... "What were you thinking of, just now, Maximilian?" she said, in that awful, gentle voice so often found in consumptives, and wherein we seem to recognise the lisping of children, the twittering of birds, and the gurgle of the dying. "What were you thinking of, just then, Maximilian?" she repeated again, and started up so hastily that the long curls, like roused snakes, fell in ringlets around her head.

At that moment, the sick woman woke up, and gazing out, as if from the depths of a dream, her tender dark-blue eyes fell on him, asking, pleading... "What were you thinking about just now, Maximilian?" she said, in that hauntingly gentle voice so often heard in those with consumption, where you can almost hear the lisp of children, the chirping of birds, and the gurgle of someone near death. "What were you thinking about just then, Maximilian?" she asked again, and she jumped up so quickly that her long curls, like startled snakes, cascaded in ringlets around her head.

"For God's sake!" exclaimed Maximilian, as he gently pressed her back on to the sofa, "lie still, do not talk; I will tell you all I think, I feel, yes, what I myself do not know!

"For God's sake!" Maximilian exclaimed, as he gently pushed her back onto the sofa, "Just lie still, don't talk; I'll share everything I've been thinking and feeling, even what I don't fully understand myself!"

"In fact," he pursued, "I scarcely know what I was thinking and feeling just now. Dim visions of childhood were passing through my mind. I was thinking of my mother's castle, of the deserted garden there, of the beautiful marble statue that lay in the grass.... I said, 'my mother's castle,' but pray do not imagine anything grand and magnificent. To this name I have indeed accustomed myself; my father always laid a special emphasis on the words, 'the castle,' and accompanied them always with a singular smile. The meaning of that smile I understood later, when, a boy of some twelve years, I travelled with my mother to the castle. It was my first journey. We spent the whole day in passing through a thick forest; I shall never forget its gloomy horror; and only towards evening did we stop before a long cross-bar which separated us from a large meadow. Here we waited nearly half-an-hour before the boy came out of the wretched hut near by, removed the barrier, and admitted us. I say 'the boy,' because old Martha always called her forty years' old nephew 'the lad.' To receive his gracious mistress worthily, he had assumed the livery of his late uncle; and it was in consequence of its requiring a little previous dusting that he had kept us waiting so long. Had he had time, he would have also put on stockings; the long red legs, however, did not form a very marked contrast with the glaring scarlet coat. Whether there were any trousers underneath I am unable to say. Our servant, John, who had likewise often heard of 'the castle,' put on a very amazed grimace as the boy led us to the little ruined building in which his master had lived. He was, however, altogether at a loss when my mother ordered him to bring in the beds. How could he guess that at the 'castle' no beds were to be found, and my mother's order that he should bring bedding for us he had either not heard or considered as superfluous trouble.

"In fact," he continued, "I hardly know what I was thinking and feeling just now. Faded memories of childhood were flickering in my mind. I was thinking of my mother's castle, the empty garden there, the beautiful marble statue lying in the grass... I called it 'my mother's castle,' but please don't picture anything grand or magnificent. I've gotten used to that name; my father always emphasized the words 'the castle,' and accompanied them with a peculiar smile. I understood the meaning of that smile later, when I was about twelve, traveling with my mother to the castle. It was my first trip. We spent the entire day making our way through a dense forest; I can never forget its gloomy eeriness, and only toward evening did we stop in front of a long barrier that separated us from a large meadow. We waited nearly half an hour before a boy came out of the shabby hut nearby, took down the barrier, and let us in. I refer to him as 'the boy,' since old Martha always called her forty-year-old nephew 'the lad.' To give a proper welcome to his esteemed mistress, he wore the uniform of his late uncle; and it was because it needed a bit of dusting that he kept us waiting so long. If he had time, he would have also put on stockings; however, his long red legs didn’t stand out too much next to the bright scarlet coat. I'm not sure if there were trousers underneath. Our servant, John, who had also heard many stories about 'the castle,' wore a very surprised expression as the boy led us to the little ruined building where his master had lived. He was completely confused when my mother asked him to bring in the beds. How could he have guessed that there were no beds at the 'castle,' and that my mother's instruction to bring bedding for us was something he either hadn’t heard or thought was unnecessary trouble?"

"The little house, only one storey high, which in its best days contained, at the most, five habitable rooms, was a lamentable picture of transitoriness. Broken furniture, torn carpets, not one window-frame left entire, the floor pulled up here and there, everywhere the hated traces of the wantonest military possession. 'The soldiers quartered with us have always amused themselves,' said the boy, with a silly smile. My mother signed that we should all leave her alone, and while the boy and John were busying themselves, I went out to see the garden. This also offered the most disconsolate picture of ruin. The great trees were partly destroyed, partly broken down, and parasites were scornfully spreading over the fallen trunks. Here and there by the grown-up box-bushes the old paths might be recognised. Here and there also stood statues, for the most part wanting heads, or at all events noses. I remember a Diana whose lower half the dark ivy grew round in a most amusing way, as I also remember a Goddess of Plenty, out of whose cornucopia mere ill-odorous weeds were blooming. Only one statue had been spared from the malice of men and of time; it had, indeed, been thrown from off its pedestal into the high grass; but there it lay, free from mutilation, the marble goddess with pure lovely features and the noble deep-cleft bosom, which seemed, as it glowed out of the grass, like a Greek revelation. I almost started when I saw it; this form inspired me with a singular feeling, and bashfulness kept me from lingering long near so sweet a sight.

The little house, just one story high, which at its best had a maximum of five livable rooms, was a sad reminder of impermanence. Broken furniture, ripped carpets, not a single window frame intact, the floor torn up in spots, and everywhere the unwanted signs of reckless military occupation. "The soldiers staying with us always had their fun," said the boy with a foolish grin. My mother gestured that we should leave her alone, and while the boy and John were busy, I stepped outside to check the garden. It too was a heartbreaking scene of destruction. The large trees were either damaged or toppled, and weeds were defiantly growing over the fallen trunks. Here and there, among the overgrown box bushes, the old paths were still somewhat visible. Scattered around were statues, most of them missing heads or at least noses. I remember a Diana whose lower half was whimsically entwined with dark ivy, and I also recall a Goddess of Plenty from whose cornucopia nothing but foul-smelling weeds were sprouting. Only one statue escaped the damage caused by both people and time; though it had been knocked from its pedestal into the tall grass, it lay there unscarred — the marble goddess with beautiful features and a noble, deep-cleft bosom, glowing from the grass like a Greek revelation. I nearly jumped when I saw it; this figure gave me a peculiar feeling, and my shyness kept me from lingering too long near such a lovely sight.

"When I returned to my mother, she was standing at the window, lost in thought, her head resting on her right arm, and the tears were flowing over her cheeks. I had never seen her weep so before. She embraced me with passionate tenderness, and asked my forgiveness, because, owing to John's negligence, I should have no regular bed. 'Old Martha,' she said, 'is very ill, dear child, and cannot give up her bed to you; but John will arrange the cushions out of the coach, so that you will be able to sleep upon them, and he can also give you his cloak for a covering. I shall sleep on the straw; this was my dear father's bed-room; it was much better here once. Leave me alone!' And the tears came still more impetuously.

"When I got back to my mom, she was standing by the window, deep in thought, with her head resting on her right arm, and tears streaming down her face. I had never seen her cry like that before. She hugged me tightly and asked for my forgiveness because, due to John's carelessness, I wouldn’t have a proper bed. 'Old Martha,' she said, 'is very sick, my dear, and can’t give up her bed for you; but John will set up the cushions from the coach so you can sleep on them, and he can also give you his cloak to cover up with. I’ll sleep on the straw; this used to be my father's bedroom; it was much nicer here once. Leave me alone!' And the tears flowed even more heavily."

"Whether it was owing to my unaccustomed place of rest or to my disturbed heart, I could not sleep. The moonlight streamed in through the broken window-panes, and seemed to allure me out into the bright summer night. I might lie on the right or the left side, close my eyes or impatiently open them again—I could still think of nothing but the lovely marble statue I had seen lying in the grass. I could not understand the shyness which had come over me at the sight of it; I was vexed at this childish feeling, and 'To-morrow,' I said softly to myself, 'to-morrow I will kiss you, you lovely marble face, kiss you just on that pretty corner of your mouth where the lips melt into such a sweet dimple!' An impatience I had never before felt was stirring through all my limbs; I could no longer rule the strange impulse, and I sprang up at last with audacious vivacity, exclaiming, 'And why should I not kiss you to-night, you dear image?' Quietly, so that mother might not hear my steps, I left the house; with the less difficulty, since the entrance was furnished with an escutcheon indeed, but no longer with a door, and hastily worked my way through the abundant growth of the neglected garden. There was no sound; everything was resting silent and solemn in the still moonlight. The shadows of the trees seemed to be nailed on the earth. In the green grass lay the beautiful goddess, likewise motionless, yet no stony death, but only a quiet sleep, seemed to hold her lovely limbs fettered; and as I came near, I almost feared lest the least noise should awake her out of her slumber. I held my breath, as I leant over to gaze on the beautiful features; a shuddering pain thrust me back, but a boyish wantonness drew me again towards her; my heart was beating wildly, and at last I kissed the lovely goddess with such passion and tenderness and despair as I have never in this life kissed with again. And I have never been able to forget the fearful and sweet sensation which flowed through my soul as the blissful cool of those marble lips touched my mouth.... And so you see, Maria, that as I was just now standing before you, and saw you lying in your white muslin garments on the green sofa, your appearance suggested to me the white marble form in the green grass. Had you slept any longer my lips would not have been able to resist——"

"Whether it was because of my unfamiliar place to sleep or my restless heart, I couldn’t fall asleep. The moonlight streamed in through the broken window panes and seemed to lure me out into the bright summer night. I could lie on my right side or my left side, close my eyes or impatiently reopen them—yet all I could think about was the beautiful marble statue I had seen lying in the grass. I didn’t understand the shyness that had overwhelmed me when I saw it; I was annoyed at this childish feeling, and I softly told myself, 'Tomorrow, I will kiss you, lovely marble face, just on that pretty corner of your mouth where your lips blend into such a sweet dimple!' An impatience I had never felt before surged through my entire body; I could no longer control this strange urge, and I finally sprang up with bold enthusiasm, exclaiming, 'And why shouldn’t I kiss you tonight, dear image?' Quietly, so my mother wouldn’t hear my steps, I left the house; it was easier since the entrance had a shield but no door, and I hurried through the unruly growth of the neglected garden. There was no sound; everything was resting, silent, and solemn in the still moonlight. The shadows of the trees seemed stuck to the ground. In the green grass lay the beautiful goddess, equally motionless, but it seemed like she was only in a peaceful sleep, not in stony death. As I got closer, I nearly feared that the smallest noise would wake her from her slumber. I held my breath as I leaned over to admire her beautiful features; a shuddering pain pushed me back, but a boyish desire drew me in again; my heart was racing, and finally, I kissed the lovely goddess with a passion and tenderness and despair that I have never experienced again in this life. I’ve never been able to forget the intense and sweet sensation that flowed through my soul as the blissful cool of those marble lips touched mine... And so you see, Maria, that as I was just standing before you and saw you lying on your green sofa in your white muslin garments, your appearance reminded me of the white marble figure in the green grass. If you had slept any longer, my lips wouldn’t have been able to resist—"

"Max! Max!" she cried from the depth of her soul. "Horrible! You know that a kiss from your mouth——"

"Max! Max!" she shouted from the core of her being. "This is terrible! You know that a kiss from your lips——"

"Oh, be silent only; I know you think that something horrible. Do not look at me so imploringly. I do not misunderstand your feelings, although their causes are hidden from me. I have never dared to press my mouth on your lips."

"Oh, just be quiet; I know you think something terrible. Don’t look at me like that, so desperately. I get your feelings, even if I don't know what's causing them. I've never had the courage to kiss you."

But Maria would not let him finish speaking; she seized his hand, covered it with passionate kisses, and then said, smiling—"Please tell me more of your love affairs. How long did you adore the marble beauty that you kissed in your mother's castle garden?"

But Maria wouldn't let him finish; she grabbed his hand, showered it with passionate kisses, and then said, smiling—"Please tell me more about your love stories. How long did you worship the beautiful statue that you kissed in your mother's castle garden?"

"We went away the next day," Maximilian answered, "and I have never seen the lovely statue again. It occupied my heart, however, for nearly three years. A wonderful passion for marble statues has since then developed in my soul, and this very day I have felt its transporting power. I was coming out of the Laurentian, the library of the Medici, and I wandered, I know not how, into the chapel where that most magnificent of Italian families built for itself a resting-place of jewels, and is quietly sleeping. For a whole hour I was absorbed in gazing on the marble figure of a woman, whose powerful body witnesses to the cunning strength of Michael Angelo, while yet the whole form is pervaded by an ethereal sweetness which we are not accustomed to seek in that master. The whole dream-world, with its silent blisses, lives in that marble; a tender repose dwells in the lovely limbs, a soothing moonlight seems to course through the veins. It is the Night of Michael Angelo Buonarotti. O, how willingly would I sleep the eternal sleep in the arms of that Night!

"We left the next day," Maximilian replied, "and I have never seen that beautiful statue again. It held a place in my heart for almost three years. A wonderful passion for marble statues has since developed in my soul, and just today I felt its captivating power. I was coming out of the Laurentian, the Medici library, and I somehow wandered into the chapel where that most magnificent Italian family built their resting place filled with jewels, and now they rest quietly. For a whole hour, I was engrossed in looking at the marble figure of a woman, whose strong body showcases the brilliant strength of Michelangelo, yet the entire form is infused with an ethereal sweetness that we rarely associate with that master. The entire dream world, with its silent joys, lives in that marble; a gentle calm rests in her lovely limbs, and a soothing moonlight seems to flow through her veins. It is the Night of Michelangelo Buonarroti. Oh, how gladly I would sleep the eternal sleep in the embrace of that Night!"

"Painted women forms," Maximilian pursued, after a pause, "have never so powerfully interested me as statues. Only once was I in love with a painting. It was a wondrously lovely Madonna that I learnt to know at a church in Cologne. I was at that time a very zealous church-goer, and my heart was absorbed in the mysticism of the Catholic religion. I would then have willingly fought like a Spanish knight, at the peril of my life, for the immaculate conception of Mary, the Queen of Angels, the fairest lady of Heaven and earth! I was interested in all the members of the holy family at that time, and I took my hat off in an especially friendly manner whenever I passed near a picture of the holy Joseph. This disposition did not last long, however, and I deserted the Mother of God almost without any explanations, having become acquainted, in a gallery of antiquities, with a Grecian nymph, who for a long time held me enchained in marble fetters."

"Painted women," Maximilian continued after a moment, "have never fascinated me as much as sculptures. I only fell in love with a painting once. It was a beautifully lovely Madonna that I encountered in a church in Cologne. At that time, I attended church regularly, and my heart was deeply engaged in the mysticism of the Catholic faith. I would have gladly fought like a Spanish knight, risking my life, for the immaculate conception of Mary, the Queen of Angels, the most beautiful lady in Heaven and earth! I was interested in all the members of the holy family then, and I would tip my hat in a particularly friendly way whenever I passed by a picture of Saint Joseph. However, this feeling didn’t last long, and I almost effortlessly abandoned the Mother of God after becoming acquainted with a Grecian nymph in an antiquities gallery, who kept me captivated in marble chains for a long time."

"And you only loved sculptured or painted women?" said Maria, smiling.

"And you only loved sculpted or painted women?" Maria asked, smiling.

"No, I have also loved dead women," answered Maximilian, over whose face an expression of seriousness had spread. He failed to perceive Maria start and shrink at these words, and quietly proceeded—

"No, I've also loved women who are gone," Maximilian replied, a serious look crossing his face. He didn't notice Maria flinch at his words and continued speaking—

"Yes, it is very strange that I once fell in love with a girl after she had been seven years dead. When I became acquainted with little Very I liked her extremely. For three days I occupied myself with this young person, and experienced the greatest pleasure in all that she said and did, and in every expression of her charming wayward being, without being betrayed withal into any over-tender emotion. And so I was not too deeply grieved when a few months later I heard that a fever that had seized her suddenly resulted in death. I forgot her entirely, and I am convinced that from one year's end to another's I had not one thought of her. Seven years passed away, and I found myself at Potsdam, to enjoy the beautiful summer in undisturbed solitude. My society was confined to the statues in the garden of Sansouci. It happened there one day that I recollected certain features, and a singular, lovely way of speaking and moving, without being able to remember to whom they belonged. Nothing is more annoying than such a drifting into old memories, and I was therefore joyfully surprised when, after some days, I recollected little Very, and discovered that it was her dear, forgotten form that had hovered before me so restlessly. Yes, I rejoiced at this discovery like one who unexpectedly meets his most intimate friend; the pale hues gradually grew bright, and at last her sweet little person seemed to stand bodily before me, smiling, pouting, witty, and prettier than ever. From that time forth the sweet vision never left me, it filled my whole soul; wherever I went or stood, that went and stood at my side, spoke with me, laughed with me, always gentle, and yet never over-tender. I was, however, more and more fascinated with this vision, which daily gained more and more reality for me. It is easy to raise ghosts, but it is difficult to send them back again to their dark night; they look at us then so imploringly, our own hearts lend them such powerful intercession. I could not tear myself free, and fell in love with little Very after she had been seven years dead. I lived thus at Potsdam for six months, quite buried in this love. I guarded myself more carefully than ever from any contact with the outer world, and if anyone in the street came at all near me, I experienced the most miserable oppression. I cherished a deep horror of every occurrence, such as, perhaps, the night-wandering spirits of the dead experience; for these, it is said, are terrified when they meet a living man, as much as a living man is terrified when he meets a spectre. By chance a traveller came at that time to Potsdam whom I could not escape—namely, my brother. His appearance and his accounts of the latest news woke me as from a deep dream, and I suddenly felt, with a shudder, in what a frightful solitude I had been so long living. In this condition I had not once noted the change of the seasons, and I now gazed with wonder on the trees, long since leafless, decked in their autumn mellowness. I immediately left Potsdam and little Very, and in another town, where important business was awaiting me, and by means of difficult circumstances and relations, I was soon again plunged into crude reality.

"Yes, it's really strange that I once fell in love with a girl who had been dead for seven years. When I first met little Very, I really liked her. For three days, I focused on this young person and found great joy in everything she said and did, and in every expression of her charmingly unpredictable nature, without getting too sentimental. So, I wasn't too heartbroken when a few months later I heard that a fever she caught suddenly led to her death. I completely forgot about her, and I'm convinced that throughout the year, I didn't think about her at all. Seven years went by, and I found myself in Potsdam, enjoying the beautiful summer in peaceful solitude. My only company was the statues in the garden of Sanssouci. One day, I suddenly remembered certain features, along with a unique, lovely way of speaking and moving, but I couldn’t recall to whom they belonged. There’s nothing more annoying than drifting into old memories, so I was pleasantly surprised when, after a few days, I remembered little Very and realized it was her dear, forgotten form that had been appearing before me so restlessly. Yes, I felt joy at this discovery, like someone unexpectedly meeting their closest friend; the pale memories gradually brightened, and soon her sweet little figure seemed to stand right in front of me, smiling, pouting, witty, and more beautiful than ever. From then on, that sweet vision never left me, it filled my entire soul; wherever I went or stood, she accompanied me, talking and laughing with me, always gentle, yet never overly sentimental. I became more and more captivated by this vision, which grew increasingly real to me every day. It's easy to conjure up ghosts, but hard to send them back to their dark night; they look at us so pleadingly, and our own hearts provide them with powerful support. I could not break free, and I fell in love with little Very after she had been dead for seven years. I lived in Potsdam like this for six months, completely absorbed in this love. I was more careful than ever to avoid any contact with the outside world, and whenever anyone came near me on the street, I would feel an overwhelming sense of dread. I had a deep horror of anything that happened, like perhaps the wandering spirits of the dead feel; they are said to be just as terrified when they encounter a living person as a living person is when faced with a ghost. By chance, a traveler came to Potsdam during that time whom I couldn't avoid—my brother. His presence and stories about the latest news abruptly pulled me from my deep dream, and I suddenly realized with a shudder how terrifyingly isolated I had been for so long. In that time, I hadn’t noticed the change of seasons, and now I looked in amazement at the trees, long since bare, adorned with the beauty of autumn. I immediately left Potsdam and little Very, and in another city where important work awaited me, I soon found myself plunged back into harsh reality through difficult circumstances and relationships."

"The living women," Maximilian pursued, while a sorrowful smile played on his upper lip, "the living women with whom I then came into unavoidable contact, how they tormented me, tenderly tormented me with their pouting, jealousy, and constant sighs. At how many balls must I trot round with them, in how much gossip must I mix myself! What restless vanity, what delight in lying, what kissing treachery, what envenomed flowers! These women spoilt all pleasure and love for me, and I was for some time a misogynist, who damned the whole sex. It went with me almost as with the French officer, who, in the Prussian campaign, only saved himself with the greatest difficulty from the ice-pits at Beresina, and since that retains such an antipathy to everything frozen, that now he thrusts away with disgust the sweetest and most delicious of Tortoni's ices. Yes, the remembrance of the Beresina of love that I passed through then spoilt for me, for a time, even the most charming ladies, women like angels, girls like Vanilla sherbert."

"The living women," Maximilian continued, a sad smile tugging at his lips, "the living women I inevitably interacted with back then, how they tormented me—gently tormented me with their pouts, jealousy, and constant sighs. How many balls did I have to attend with them, how much gossip did I have to get involved in! Such restless vanity, such a pleasure in deceit, such sneaky kisses, such poisoned flowers! These women ruined all joy and love for me, and for a while, I became a misogynist who cursed the entire gender. It felt like that French officer who barely escaped the ice pits at Beresina during the Prussian campaign and now has such a distaste for anything frozen that he refuses even the sweetest and most delicious ice creams from Tortoni. Yes, the memory of that Beresina of love I went through back then spoiled, for a time, even the loveliest women, those angelic ladies, girls as delightful as vanilla sherbet."

"Pray, do not abuse women," exclaimed Maria. "That is a worn-out commonplace among men. In the end, to be happy, you need women after all."

"Please, don’t mistreat women," Maria exclaimed. "That’s an old stereotype among men. Ultimately, to be happy, you really need women in your life."

"Oh," sighed Maximilian, "that is true, certainly. But women, unfortunately, have only one way of making us happy, while they have thirty thousand ways of making us unhappy."

"Oh," sighed Maximilian, "that's definitely true. But women, unfortunately, have only one way to make us happy, while they have thirty thousand ways to make us unhappy."

"Dear friend," replied Maria, suppressing a little smile, "I am speaking of the concord of two souls in unison. Have you never experienced this joy? But I see an unaccustomed blush spreading over your cheeks. Tell me, Max."

"Dear friend," Maria replied, holding back a smile, "I'm talking about the harmony of two souls in sync. Have you never felt this joy? But I notice an unfamiliar blush creeping onto your cheeks. Tell me, Max."

"It is true, Maria, I feel as confused almost as a boy at confessing to you the happy love with which I was once infinitely blessed. That memory is not yet lost to me, and to its cool shades my soul often flies, when the burning dust and day's heat of life grow almost unbearable. Yet I am not able to give you a just idea of her. She was such an ethereal creature that she only seemed revealed to me in dreams. I think that you, Maria, have no vulgar prejudice against dreams; those nightly visions have, in truth, as much reality as the coarser shapes of day, which we can touch with our hands, and by which we are not seldom besmutched. Yes, it was in a dream that I knew that sweet being who has made me most happy on earth. I can say little of her outward appearance. I am not able to describe the form of her features with precision. It was a face that I had never seen before, and that I have never in my life seen since. So much I remember; it was not white and rosy, but all of one colour—a soft, reddened, pale-yellow, transparent as crystal. The charm of this face was not in firm regularity of beauty, nor in interesting vivacity; its characteristic was, rather, a charming, enrapturing, almost terrible veracity. It was a face full of conscious fire and gracious goodness; it was more a soul than a face, and on that account I have never been able to make her outward form quite present to myself. The eyes were soft as flowers, the lips rather pale, but charmingly arched. She wore a silk dressing-gown of a corn-flour blue colour, and in that consisted her entire clothing; neck and feet were naked, and through the thin delicate garment now and then peeped stealthily the slender tenderness of the limbs. Nor can I make plain the words we said to one another; I only know that we betrothed each other, and that we chatted with one another, gay and familiar and open-hearted, like bridegroom and bride, almost like brother and sister. Often we left off talking, and gazed into each other's eyes; we spent whole eternities so. What waked me I cannot say, but I revelled for a long time in the after-feeling of these love-blisses. I was long, as it were, intoxicated with ineffable delight, the pining depth of my heart was filled with bliss, a hitherto unknown joy seemed poured over all my emotions, and I remained glad and joyful, though I never saw the beloved form in my dreams again. But had I not enjoyed whole eternities in her gaze? and she knew me too well not to be aware that I do not like repetitions."

"It’s true, Maria, I feel as confused as a boy when I confess to you the joyful love that once blessed me infinitely. That memory isn't lost on me, and my soul often returns to its cool shade when the scorching dust and heat of life become nearly unbearable. Yet, I can’t give you a fair idea of her. She was such an ethereal creature that she seemed present to me only in dreams. I believe you, Maria, have no silly prejudice against dreams; those nightly visions have, in fact, just as much reality as the rough shapes of the day, which we can touch and by which we are often sullied. Yes, it was in a dream that I met that sweet being who brought me the most happiness on earth. I can say little about her appearance. I can't precisely describe her features. It was a face I had never seen before and haven’t seen since. What I remember is that it wasn’t white and rosy, but all one color—a soft, pale yellow with a hint of red, as clear as crystal. The charm of this face wasn’t in perfect beauty or lively interest; its signature was rather a delightful, captivating, almost haunting sincerity. It was a face filled with conscious fire and kind goodness; it was more a soul than a face, and because of that, I’ve never been able to visualize her outward form clearly. Her eyes were as soft as flowers, her lips a bit pale but charmingly arched. She wore a silk dressing gown of a cornflower blue color, and that was her entire outfit; her neck and feet were bare, and through the thin delicate fabric, the gentle grace of her limbs occasionally peeked through. I can’t clearly express the words we exchanged; I only know that we became engaged, and we spoke to each other joyfully and openly, like a groom and bride, almost like siblings. We often paused our conversation and gazed into each other's eyes; we spent what felt like eternities doing so. I can't say what woke me, but I lingered for a long time in the afterglow of those love-filled moments. I was intoxicated with indescribable joy, the aching depth of my heart was fulfilled with happiness, a previously unknown joy seemed to wash over all my feelings, and I remained glad and cheerful, even though I never saw that beloved form in my dreams again. But hadn't I spent eternal moments in her gaze? And she knew me well enough not to be unaware that I don’t enjoy repetitions."

"Truly," exclaimed Maria, "you are an homme à bonne fortune. But, tell me, was Mademoiselle Laurence a marble statue or a painting—was she dead or a dream?"

"Honestly," exclaimed Maria, "you are a homme à bonne fortune. But, tell me, was Mademoiselle Laurence a marble statue or a painting—was she dead or just a dream?"

"Perhaps she was all these together," answered Maximilian, very earnestly.

"Maybe she was all of these at once," replied Maximilian, very earnestly.

"I can imagine, dear friend, that this sweetheart was of very doubtful character. And when will you tell me the history?"

"I can imagine, dear friend, that this sweetheart had a pretty questionable character. So when will you share the story with me?"

"To-morrow. It is too long, and I am tired to-night. I have just come from the opera, and have too much music in my ears."

"Tomorrow. It's too far away, and I'm tired tonight. I just got back from the opera, and I have too much music in my ears."

"You often go to the opera now, and I think, Max, you go there more to see than to hear."

"You often go to the opera now, and I think, Max, you go there more to watch than to listen."

"You are not mistaken, Maria; I go to the opera, indeed, to look at the faces of the beautiful Italian women. In truth, they are beautiful enough outside the theatre, and a connoisseur in faces could easily trace in the ideality of their features the influence which the arts have had on the physique of the Italian people. Nature has taken back from the artists the capital she once lent, and see how delightfully the interest has increased! Nature, who once furnished the artists with their model, now on her side copies the masterpieces which have thus arisen. The sense of the beautiful has permeated the whole people, and as once the flesh on the spirit, so now the spirit works on the flesh. The devotion paid before those fair Madonnas and lovely altar-pieces, which impress themselves on the mind of the bridegroom, while the bride bears a handsome saint in her ardent heart, is not fruitless. From this affinity a race has arisen still fairer than the gracious earth on which it flourishes, and the sunny sky that is as bright around it as a golden frame. The men do not interest me much when they are not painted or sculptured, and I resign to you, Maria, all possible enthusiasm in regard to those handsome, supple Italians, who have such wild-black beards, such bold noble noses, and such soft subtle eyes. They say the Lombards are the most handsome men. I have never made any investigations on the subject, but I have earnestly considered the Lombardy women, and they, I have noted well, are indeed as beautiful as report announces. Even in the middle ages they must have been tolerably beautiful. It is said of Francis I. that the fame of the beauty of the Milanese women was a secret motive which impelled him to the Italian campaign; the chivalrous king was certainly curious whether the kinsfolk of his spiritual muses were really as beautiful as fame reported. Poor rogue! he had to atone dearly for this curiosity at Pavia!

"You’re not wrong, Maria; I do go to the opera to admire the faces of beautiful Italian women. Honestly, they look stunning even outside the theater, and anyone with a good eye for faces could easily see how the arts have shaped the features of the Italian people. Nature has reclaimed what she once shared with the artists, and look how wonderfully the results have blossomed! Nature, who used to provide the artists with their models, now mirrors the masterpieces that have emerged. The appreciation for beauty has seeped into the entire population, and just as the flesh once followed the spirit, now the spirit influences the flesh. The devotion people show to those lovely Madonnas and beautiful altar pieces leaves a mark on the mind of the groom, while the bride holds a handsome saint close in her heart, and this connection is not in vain. From this bond has come a race more beautiful than the enchanting land it inhabits, beneath a radiant sky that shines like a golden frame. I’m not particularly interested in men unless they’re portrayed in art, so I’ll leave all admiration for those handsome, graceful Italians to you, Maria, with their wild black beards, bold noble noses, and soft, deep-set eyes. They say the Lombards are the most attractive men. I’ve never looked into it myself, but I have carefully observed the women of Lombardy, and I can confirm they are as beautiful as everyone claims. Even back in the Middle Ages, they must have been quite lovely. It’s said that Francis I’s interest in the beauty of Milanese women was a hidden reason for his Italian campaign; the chivalrous king was certainly curious to see if the relatives of his artistic inspirations were truly as beautiful as the stories suggested. Poor guy! He had to pay dearly for that curiosity at Pavia!"

"But how beautiful they are, these Italian women, when music illuminates their countenances! I say 'illuminates,' because the effect of the music, which I marked in the opera, on the faces of the beautiful women altogether resembled those light-and-shade effects which surprise us so when we look at statues by torch-light at night-time. These marble forms reveal to us then, with terrifying truth, their indwelling spirit and their horrible dumb secrets. In the same way the whole life of the fair Italian women becomes known to us when we see them in the opera; the changing melodies wake in their souls a succession of emotions, memories, wishes, scandals, which visibly speak in the movements of their features, in their blushes, in their pallors, and even in their eyes. He who knows how to read them may then see in their faces many very sweet and interesting things—histories as remarkable as Boccaccio's tales, emotions as tender as Petrarch's sonnets, caprices as full of adventure as Ariosto's ottaverime, sometimes, too, fearful treachery and sublime wickedness as poetic as Dante's Inferno. It is worth while to gaze at the boxes. If the men would only express their enthusiasm meanwhile with less frightful sounds! This mad noise in an Italian theatre often annoys me. But music is the soul of these men, their life, their national business. In other countries, certainly, there are musicians who equal the greatest Italian masters, but there is no other musical nation. Here, in Italy, music is not represented by individuals; it manifests itself in the whole population; music has become a nation. With us in the north it is quite different; there music only becomes a man, and is called Mozart or Meyerbeer; and when, moreover, they would accurately investigate what is the best that this northern music offers us, they find it in Italian sunshine and orange-perfume; and much rather than to our Germany those belong to fair Italy, the home of music. Yes, Italy will always be the home of music, even though her great maestri descend early into the grave or become dumb—even though Bellini dies and Rossini keeps silence."

"But how beautiful these Italian women are when music lights up their faces! I say 'lights up' because the effect of the music I observed in the opera on these lovely women’s faces resembled those striking light-and-shadow effects we see when looking at statues by torchlight at night. These marble figures reveal to us, with chilling clarity, their inner spirit and their dark, silent secrets. Similarly, the entire lives of the beautiful Italian women become clear to us when we see them in the opera; the shifting melodies awaken a torrent of emotions, memories, desires, and tales of scandal in their souls, which are visibly expressed through their facial movements, blushes, paleness, and even in their eyes. Those who know how to read them can see many delightful and fascinating things in their faces—stories as extraordinary as Boccaccio's tales, feelings as tender as Petrarch's sonnets, whims as adventurous as Ariosto's ottaverime, and sometimes, too, frightening betrayal and sublime wickedness as poetic as Dante's Inferno. It’s worth it just to gaze at the boxes. If only the men would express their excitement with less dreadful sounds! This wild noise in an Italian theater often irritates me. But music is the soul of these men, their life, their national passion. In other countries, there are certainly musicians who rival the greatest Italian masters, but there is no other musical nation. Here, in Italy, music isn’t represented by individuals; it shows itself through the entire population; music has become a nation. In the north, it's quite different; there, music often personifies as one man, like Mozart or Meyerbeer; and when they meticulously explore what the best of our northern music offers, they discover it in Italian sunshine and the scent of oranges; and much more than to our Germany, it is fair Italy, the home of music, that deserves it. Yes, Italy will always be the home of music, even if her great maestri die young or fall silent—even if Bellini passes away and Rossini remains quiet."

"Indeed," remarked Maria, "Rossini has preserved a very long silence. If I do not mistake, he has been silent for ten years."

"Definitely," Maria said, "Rossini has been quiet for a really long time. If I'm not mistaken, he's been silent for ten years."

"Perhaps that is a joke on his part," answered Maximilian. "He wishes to show that the title, "Swan of Pesaro," which has been conferred upon him, is quite unsuitable. Swans sing at the end of their lives, but Rossini has left off singing in the middle of his life. And I believe that he has done well in that, and shown, even by that, that he is a genius. The artist who has only talent retains to the end of his life the impulse to exercise that talent; ambition stimulates him; he feels that he is constantly perfecting himself, and he is compelled to strive after the highest. But genius has already accomplished the highest; it is content; it contemns the world and small ambition, and goes home to Stratford-on-Avon, like William Shakespeare, or walks about the Boulevard des Italiens at Paris, and laughs and jokes, like Giacomo Rossini. If genius has a not altogether badly constituted body, it lives on in this way for a good while after it has given forth its masterpieces, or, as people express it, after it has fulfilled its mission. It is owing to a prepossession that people say that genius must die early; I think that from the thirtieth to the thirty-fourth year has been indicated as the most dangerous period for genius. How often have I bantered poor Bellini on this subject, and playfully prophesied that, being a genius, and having reached that dangerous age, he must soon die. Singular! in spite of the playful tone, he tormented himself about this prophecy; he called me his jettatore, his evil eye, and always made the jettatore sign. He so wished to live, he had an almost passionate hatred of death: he would hear nothing of dying; he was frightened of it as a child who is afraid to sleep in the dark.... He was a good, dear child, often rather naughty, but then one only needed to threaten him with an early death, and he would immediately draw in, and entreat, and make with his two raised fingers the jettatore sign. Poor Bellini!"

"Maybe that's a joke on his part," Maximilian replied. "He wants to show that the title 'Swan of Pesaro,' that's been given to him, is totally inappropriate. Swans sing at the end of their lives, but Rossini stopped singing in the middle of his life. I think he did the right thing by that, and even by doing so, he's shown that he’s a genius. An artist who only has talent keeps the drive to use that talent for their entire life; ambition fuels them; they feel like they’re always improving and are forced to reach for the highest. But genius has already achieved the highest; it feels satisfied; it scorns the world and petty ambition, and returns home to Stratford-upon-Avon, like William Shakespeare, or strolls along the Boulevard des Italiens in Paris, laughing and joking, like Giacomo Rossini. If genius has a somewhat healthy body, it tends to stick around for quite a while after it has produced its masterpieces, or, as people say, after it has fulfilled its purpose. It’s a bit of a misconception that people say genius must die young; I think it’s often believed that the ages of thirty to thirty-four are the most dangerous for genius. How often have I teased poor Bellini about this and jokingly predicted that, being a genius and reaching that risky age, he wouldn’t last much longer? It's strange! Despite my playful tone, he worried about that prediction; he called me his jettatore, his evil eye, and always made the jettatore sign. He wanted to live so much; he had an almost passionate fear of death: he wouldn’t hear of dying; it scared him like a child afraid to sleep in the dark.... He was a good, dear child, often a bit naughty, but all it took was a threat of early death, and he would immediately pull back, plead, and make the jettatore sign with his two raised fingers. Poor Bellini!"

"So you knew him personally? Was he handsome?"

"So you knew him personally? Was he good-looking?"

"He was not ugly. You see, we cannot answer affirmatively when anyone asks us such a question about our own sex. He had a tall, slender figure, which moved in an elegant, I might say a coquettish, manner; always a quatre épingles; a long, regular face, with a pale rosiness; very fair, almost golden, hair, put into small curls; very high noble brows, a straight nose, pale blue eyes, a beautifully-chiselled mouth, a round chin. His features had something vague and characterless; something like milk, and in this milk-face often mingled, half sweet, half bitter, an expression of sorrow. This expression of sorrow compensated for the want of soul in Bellini's face, but it was a sorrow without depth; it glistened in the eyes without poetry, it played passionless about his lips. The young Maestro seemed anxious to make this flat, languid sorrow conspicuous in his whole person. His hair was curled in such a fanciful, melancholy way, his clothes sat so languidly about his frail body, he carried his little Spanish cane in so idyllic a way, that he always reminded me of the affected young shepherds with their be-ribboned sticks, and bright-coloured jackets, and pantaloons that we see in our pastorals. And his gait was so young-lady-like, so elegiac, so ethereal. The whole man looked like a sigh en escarpins. He had received much applause among women, but I doubt if he anywhere awakened a strong passion. In himself his appearance had something comically unenjoyable, the reason of which lay in his way of speaking French. Although Bellini had lived many years in France, he spoke the language so badly, that even in England it could scarcely be spoken worse. I ought not to call it 'bad;' bad is here much too good. One must call it awful, a violation, something enough to overturn the world. Yes, when one was in society with him, and he mangled the poor French words like an executioner, and displayed, unmoved, his colossal coq-à-l'âne, one thought sometimes that the world must fall in with a crash of thunder. The stillness of the grave reigned on the whole room; a death agony was painted on all faces in chalk or in vermilion; the ladies were uncertain whether to faint or to escape; the gentlemen gazed in alarm at their trousers, to convince themselves that they actually had them on; and what was most horrible, this fright raised at the same time a convulsive desire to laugh, which could hardly be suppressed. So that when one was in Bellini's society, his presence inspired a certain anxiety, which by a horrible charm was at once repellant and attractive. Often his involuntary calembours were merely amusing, and in their droll insipidity reminded one of the castle of his fellow-countryman, the Prince of Pallagonia, which Goethe in his Italian Journey has described as a museum of uncouth distortions and absurd deformities. As Bellini on such occasions always imagined he had said something quite harmless and earnest, his face and his words formed the maddest contrast. That which displeased me in his face came at such moments specially prominent. What I disliked could not be exactly described as something lacking, and may not have been displeasing to women at all. Bellini's face, like his whole appearance, had that physical freshness, that bloom of flesh, that rosiness which makes a disagreeable impression on me—on me, because I like much more what is death-like and marble. Later on, when I had known him a long time, I felt some liking for Bellini. This arose after I had observed that his character was thoroughly noble and good. His soul was certainly pure and unspotted by any hateful contagion. And he was not wanting in that good-natured, childlike quality which we never miss in men of genius, even if they do not wear it as an outward show.

He wasn't unattractive. You see, we can't answer people honestly when they ask us about our own gender's looks. He had a tall, slender frame that moved in an elegant, almost flirtatious way; always a quatre épingles; a long, symmetrical face with a pale blush; very light, nearly golden hair styled in small curls; high noble brows, a straight nose, pale blue eyes, a beautifully defined mouth, and a round chin. His features had something vague and indistinct; something like milk, and in this milk-like face often mixed, half sweet, half bitter, an expression of sadness. This sadness made up for the lack of soul in Bellini's face, but it was a shallow sorrow; it shone in his eyes without any poetry, it played emotionlessly on his lips. The young Maestro seemed intent on making this flat, languid sorrow the center of his entire being. His hair was styled in a fanciful, melancholic way, his clothes hung loosely on his frail body, and he carried his small Spanish cane in such an idyllic manner that he constantly reminded me of the affected young shepherds we see in our pastoral scenes with their ribboned sticks, bright jackets, and breeches. His walk was so feminine, so elegiac, so ethereal. The whole man looked like a sigh en escarpins. He received plenty of applause from women, but I doubt he ever stirred any strong passion. His appearance had something comically off-putting, which stemmed from his way of speaking French. Although Bellini had lived many years in France, he spoke the language so poorly that even in England, it could hardly be spoken worse. I shouldn’t call it ‘bad’; that’s too generous. It was awful, a travesty, something that could turn the world upside down. Yes, when you were in his company and he butchered the French words like an executioner, displaying his colossal coq-à-l'âne without a care, you sometimes thought the world might just come crashing down. A grave silence filled the whole room; a deathly pallor was painted on everyone's faces; the ladies were unsure whether to faint or flee; the gentlemen anxiously eyed their trousers, checking that they were actually wearing them; and what was most dreadful, this fear also triggered a convulsive urge to laugh that was hard to contain. So when you were with Bellini, his presence created a certain unease, which, by a horrible charm, was both repulsive and captivating. Often, his unintentional puns were simply amusing and in their silly tastelessness reminded one of the castle of his fellow countryman, the Prince of Pallagonia, which Goethe described in his Italian Journey as a museum of awkward distortions and ridiculous deformities. As Bellini on such occasions always thought he had said something totally innocent and serious, his face and his words created the wildest contrast. What I found unappealing about his face became particularly noticeable at those moments. What I disliked couldn’t be strictly named as something missing and may not have even been off-putting to women at all. Bellini's face, like his entire appearance, possessed that youthful freshness, that flush of flesh, that rosy look which leaves me with an unpleasant impression—on me, because I prefer something more death-like and marble-like. Later on, after getting to know him better, I started to feel some affection for Bellini. This blossomed after I realized that his character was genuinely noble and good. His soul was certainly pure and untainted by any hateful influence. And he also had that kind-hearted, childlike quality we never miss in men of genius, even if they don’t display it outwardly.

"Yes, I remember," Maximilian pursued, sinking down on the chair, on the back of which he had been hitherto leaning—"I remember one moment when Bellini appeared in so amiable a light, that I gazed on him with pleasure, and resolved to become more intimately acquainted with him. But, unhappily, it was the last time I should see him in this life. It was one evening after we had been dining together at the house of a great lady who had the smallest foot in Paris. We were very merry, and the sweetest melodies rang out from the piano. I see him still, the good-natured Bellini, as, at last, exhausted with the mad Bellinism that he chattered, he sank into a seat.... It was a very low one, so that Bellini found himself sitting at the foot, as it were, of a beautiful lady, stretched on a sofa opposite, who gazed down on him with a sweet, malicious delight, as he worked off some French expressions to entertain her, and was compelled, as usual, to communicate what he had said in his Sicilian jargon to show that it was no sottise, but, on the contrary, the most delicate flattery. I think the fair lady paid little attention to Bellini's conversation. She had taken from his hand the little Spanish cane with which he often used to assist his weak rhetoric, and was making use of it for a calm destruction of the elegant curl-edifice on the young Maestro's brows. But this wanton occupation was well repaid by the smile which gave her face an expression which I have seen on no other living human countenance. That face will never leave my memory! It was one of those faces which belong more to the kingdom of poetry than to the crude reality of life, contours which remind one of Da Vinci—that noble oval, with the naïve cheek-dimples and the sentimental pointed chin of the Lombard school. The colouring was more soft and Roman, with the dull gleam of pearls, a distinguished pallor, morbidezza. In short, it was one of those faces which can only be found in early Italian portraits, which, perhaps, represent those great ladies with whom the Italian artists of the sixteenth century were in love when they created their masterpieces, of whom the poets of those days thought when they sang themselves immortal, and which kindled German and French heroes with desire when they girded on their swords and started across the Alps in search of great deeds. Yes, it was such a face, and on it played a smile of sweetest, malicious delight and most delicate wantonness, as she, the fair lady, with the point of the little Spanish cane destroyed the blonde curls on the good-natured Bellini's brows. At that moment Bellini seemed to me as if touched by an enchanted wand, as if transformed, and he was at once akin to my heart. His face shone with the reflection of that smile; it was, perhaps, the most joyful moment of his life. I shall never forget it. Fourteen days afterwards I read in the papers that Italy had lost one of her most famous sons!

"Yes, I remember," Maximilian said, sinking into the chair he'd been leaning against—"I remember a moment when Bellini seemed so approachable that I looked at him with pleasure and decided I wanted to get to know him better. Unfortunately, that turned out to be the last time I would see him in this life. It was one evening after we had dinner at the home of a prominent woman who had the smallest feet in Paris. We were in high spirits, and sweet melodies filled the air from the piano. I can still picture him, the kind-hearted Bellini, as he finally sank into a seat, exhausted from the wild chatter he had been sharing. It was a very low chair, so he found himself positioned at the feet of a beautiful lady lounging on a sofa across from him. She looked down at him with a sweet, teasing smile while he tried to entertain her with some French expressions. As usual, he had to clarify his words in his Sicilian dialect to show that it was no silly joke but rather delicate flattery. I don’t think the lady paid much attention to his conversation. She had taken the little Spanish cane he often used to assist his weak rhetoric and was now using it to playfully mess up the elegant curls on the young Maestro's head. But this playful act was well rewarded by the smile on her face, an expression I have never seen on anyone else. That face will stay with me forever! It was one of those faces that belong more to the realm of poetry than to the harsh reality of life, with contours reminiscent of Da Vinci— that noble oval shape, the charming cheek dimples, and the sentimental pointed chin of the Lombard school. The coloring was soft and Roman, with a dull sheen of pearls, a refined pallor, morbidezza. In short, it was one of those faces typically found in early Italian portraits, perhaps representing the great ladies who inspired the Italian artists of the sixteenth century while creating their masterpieces. Those were the women poets of that time immortalized in song, and they ignited desire in German and French heroes as they donned their swords and crossed the Alps in search of greatness. Yes, it was such a face, lit up by a smile of sweetest, teasing delight and delicate mischief, as she, the beautiful lady, playfully destroyed the blonde curls on the kind-hearted Bellini's head with the tip of the little Spanish cane. At that moment, Bellini seemed touched by an enchanted wand, transformed, and he felt like kin to my heart. His face glowed with the reflection of that smile; it might have been the happiest moment of his life. I will never forget it. Fourteen days later, I read in the papers that Italy had lost one of her most famous sons!"

"Strange! At the same time Paganini's death was announced. About his death I had no doubt, for the old, ash-coloured Paganini always looked like a dying man; but the death of the young, rosy Bellini seemed to me incredible. And yet the news of the death of the first was only a newspaper error; Paganini is safe and sound at Genoa, and Bellini lies in his grave at Paris!"

"Strange! At the same time, news of Paganini's death was announced. I had no doubt about his passing, as the old, ash-colored Paganini always looked like a man on the brink of dying; but the death of the young, rosy Bellini seemed unbelievable to me. Yet the news about the first was just a newspaper mistake; Paganini is alive and well in Genoa, and Bellini is resting in his grave in Paris!"

"Do you like Paganini?" asked Maria. "He is the ornament of his country," answered Maximilian, "and deserves the most distinguished mention in speaking of the musical notabilities of Italy."

"Do you like Paganini?" Maria asked. "He’s the pride of his country," Maximilian replied, "and deserves special mention when talking about the musical talents of Italy."

"I have never seen him," Maria remarked, "but according to report his outward appearance does not altogether satisfy the sense of beauty. I have seen portraits of him."

"I've never seen him," Maria said, "but from what I've heard, his looks don't really meet the standards of beauty. I've seen pictures of him."

"Which are all different," broke in Maximilian; "they either make him uglier or handsomer than he is; they do not give his actual appearance. I believe that only one man has succeeded in putting Paganini's true physiognomy on to paper—a deaf painter, Lyser by name, who, in a frenzy full of genius, has, with a few strokes of chalk, so well hit Paganini's head that one is at the same time amused and terrified at the truth of the drawing. 'The devil guided my hand,' the deaf painter said to me, chuckling mysteriously, and nodding his head with good-natured irony in the way he generally accompanied his genial witticisms. This painter was, however, a wonderful old fellow; in spite of his deafness he was enthusiastically fond of music, and he knew how, when near enough to the orchestra, to read the music on the musicians' faces, and to judge the more or less skilful execution by the movements of their fingers; indeed, he wrote critiques on the opera for an excellent journal at Hamburg. And is that peculiarly wonderful? In the visible symbols of the performance the deaf painter could see the sounds. There are men to whom the sounds themselves are invisible symbols in which they hear colours and forms."

"Which are all different," interrupted Maximilian; "they either make him look uglier or better-looking than he is; they do not reflect his actual appearance. I think only one person has managed to capture Paganini's true likeness on paper—a deaf painter named Lyser, who, in a moment of genius, managed with just a few strokes of chalk to accurately portray Paganini's head so that it’s both amusing and unsettling in its truth. 'The devil guided my hand,' the deaf painter told me, chuckling mysteriously and nodding in a good-natured, ironic way, which was typical of his witty comments. This painter was a truly remarkable old guy; despite his deafness, he had a great passion for music and could, when close enough to the orchestra, read the music on the musicians' faces and gauge their skill by the movement of their fingers. In fact, he wrote reviews of operas for a respected journal in Hamburg. Isn't that amazing? In the visible elements of the performance, the deaf painter could see the sounds. There are people for whom sounds themselves are invisible symbols through which they perceive colors and shapes."

"You are one of those men!" exclaimed Maria.

"You are one of those guys!" Maria exclaimed.

"I am sorry that I no longer possess Lyser's little drawing; it would perhaps have given you an idea of Paganini's outward appearance. Only with black and glaring strokes could those mysterious features be seized, features, which seemed to belong more to the sulphurous kingdom of shades than to the sunny world of life. 'Indeed, the devil guided my hand,' the deaf painter assured me, as we stood before the Alster pavilion at Hamburg on the day when Paganini gave his first concert there. 'Yes, my friend,' he pursued, 'it is true, as everyone believes, that he has sold himself to the devil, body and soul, in order to become the best violinist, to fiddle millions of money, and principally to escape the damnable galley where he had already languished many years. For, you see, my friend, when he was chapel-master at Lucca he fell in love with a princess of the theatre, was jealous of some little abbate, was perhaps deceived by the faithless Amata, stabbed her in approved Italian fashion, came in the galley to Genoa, and, as I said, sold himself to the devil to escape from it, become the best violin-player, and impose upon us this evening a contribution of two thalers each. But, you see, all good spirits praise God; there in the avenue he comes himself, with his suspicious Famulus!'

"I'm sorry that I no longer have Lyser's little drawing; it might have given you an idea of what Paganini looked like. Only with harsh, black strokes could those mysterious features be captured, features that seemed to belong more to a shadowy realm than to the bright world of the living. 'Indeed, the devil guided my hand,' the deaf painter told me as we stood in front of the Alster pavilion in Hamburg on the day Paganini had his first concert there. 'Yes, my friend,' he continued, 'it’s true, as everyone believes, that he sold his soul to the devil to become the greatest violinist, to play for masses of money, and mainly to escape the wretched galley where he had already suffered for many years. You see, my friend, when he was the chapel-master in Lucca, he fell in love with a theatrical princess, got jealous of some little abbate, might have been betrayed by the unfaithful Amata, and stabbed her in typical Italian style. He ended up in the galley in Genoa, and as I said, sold his soul to the devil to get out of it, become the best violin player, and charge us two thalers each tonight. But, you see, all good spirits praise God; he’s coming right here in the avenue, with his suspicious Famulus!'”

"It was indeed Paganini himself, whom I then saw for the first time. He wore a dark grey overcoat, which reached to his feet, and made his figure seem very tall. His long black hair fell in neglected curls on his shoulders, and formed a dark frame round the pale, cadaverous face, on which sorrow, genius, and hell had engraved their indestructible lines. Near him danced along a little pleasing figure, elegantly prosaic—with rosy, wrinkled face, bright grey little coat with steel buttons, distributing greetings on all sides in an insupportably friendly way, leering up, nevertheless, with apprehensive air at the gloomy figure who walked earnest and thoughtful at his side. It reminded one of Retzsch's representation of Faust and Wagner walking before the gates of Leipsic. The deaf painter made comments to me in his mad way, and bade me observe especially the broad, measured walk of Paganini. 'Does it not seem,' said he, 'as if he had the iron cross-pole still between his legs? He has accustomed himself to that walk for ever. See, too, in what a contemptuous, ironical way he sometimes looks at his guide when the latter wearies him with his prosaic questions. But he cannot separate himself from him; a bloody contract binds him to that companion, who is no other than Satan. The ignorant multitude, indeed, believe that this guide is the writer of comedies and anecdotes, Harris from Hanover, whom Paganini has taken with him to manage the financial business of his concerts. But they do not know that the devil has only borrowed Herr George Harris's form, and that meanwhile the poor soul of this poor man is shut up with other rubbish in a trunk at Hanover, until the devil returns its flesh-envelope, while he perhaps will guide his master through the world in a worthier form—namely, as a black poodle.'

It was truly Paganini himself that I saw for the first time. He wore a dark gray overcoat that reached his feet, making him appear very tall. His long black hair fell in unkempt curls over his shoulders and framed his pale, gaunt face, marked by lines of sorrow, genius, and despair. Next to him danced a charming little figure, elegantly simple—with a rosy, wrinkled face, a bright gray coat adorned with steel buttons, greeting everyone around him in an unbearably friendly manner, even as he nervously glanced up at the somber figure walking earnestly and thoughtfully beside him. It reminded one of Retzsch's portrayal of Faust and Wagner walking before the gates of Leipzig. The deaf painter commented to me in his eccentric way, urging me to notice Paganini's broad, deliberate stride. "Doesn't it seem," he said, "like he still has an iron crossbar between his legs? He's gotten used to that walk for life. And notice how contemptuously and ironically he sometimes glances at his guide when the latter tires him with mundane questions. But he can’t separate from him; a bloody contract ties him to that companion, who is none other than Satan. The clueless crowd thinks this guide is the comedy writer and anecdote teller, Harris from Hanover, whom Paganini brought along to handle the financial side of his concerts. But they don’t realize that the devil has merely borrowed Herr George Harris's appearance, while the poor soul of this man is locked away with other junk in a trunk in Hanover, until the devil returns his physical form, perhaps to lead his master through the world in a more fitting guise—namely, as a black poodle."

"But if Paganini seemed mysterious and strange enough when I saw him walking in bright mid-day under the green trees of the Hamburg Jungfernstieg, how his awful bizarre appearance startled me at the concert in the evening! The Hamburg Opera House was the scene of this concert, and the art-loving public had flocked thither so early, and in such numbers, that I only just succeeded in obtaining a little place in the orchestra. Although it was post-day, I saw in the first row of boxes the whole educated commercial world, a whole Olympus of bankers and other millionaires, the gods of coffee and sugar by the side of their fat goddesses, Junos of Wandrahm and Aphrodites of Dreckwall. A religious silence reigned through the assembly. Every eye was directed towards the stage. Every ear was making ready to listen. My neighbour, an old furrier, took the dirty cotton out of his ears in order to drink in better the costly sounds for which he had paid two thalers. At last a dark figure, which seemed to have arisen from the under-world, appeared upon the stage. It was Paganini in his black costume—the black dress-coat and the black waistcoat of a horrible cut, such as is perhaps prescribed by infernal etiquette at the court of Proserpina; the black trousers anxiously hanging around the thin legs. The long arms appeared to grow still longer, as, holding the violin in one hand and the bow in the other, he almost touched the ground with them while displaying to the public his unprecedented obeisances. In the angular curves of his body there was a horrible woodenness, and also something absurdly animal-like, that during these bows one could not help feeling a strange desire to laugh; but his face, that appeared still more cadaverously pale in the glare of the orchestra lights, had about it something so imploring, so simply humble, that a sorrowful compassion repressed one's desire to laugh. Had he learnt these complimentary bows from an automaton or a dog? Is that the entreating gaze of one sick unto death, or is there lurking behind it the mockery of a crafty miser? Is that a man brought into the arena at the moment of death, like a dying gladiator, to delight the public with his convulsions? Or is it one risen from the dead, a vampire with a violin, who, if not the blood out of our hearts, at any rate sucks the gold out of our pockets?

"But if Paganini seemed mysterious and strange when I saw him walking in the bright midday under the green trees of Hamburg's Jungfernstieg, his bizarre appearance completely shocked me at the concert that evening! The Hamburg Opera House was hosting this concert, and the art-loving crowd had gathered so early and in such large numbers that I barely managed to find a small spot in the orchestra. Even though it was post-day, I saw the whole educated commercial elite in the first row of boxes—a whole Olympus of bankers and millionaire tycoons, the gods of coffee and sugar alongside their plump goddesses, the Junos of Wandrahm and the Aphrodites of Dreckwall. A religious silence filled the room. Every eye was fixed on the stage. Every ear was tuned in to listen. My neighbor, an old furrier, pulled the dirty cotton from his ears to better absorb the beautiful sounds for which he had paid two thalers. Finally, a dark figure, looking like he had emerged from the underworld, appeared on stage. It was Paganini in his black outfit—the black dress coat and the black waistcoat of a truly awful cut, possibly dictated by some infernal etiquette at Proserpina's court; the black trousers hanging awkwardly around his skinny legs. His long arms seemed to stretch even longer as he held the violin in one hand and the bow in the other, nearly touching the ground as he displayed his exaggerated bows to the audience. The sharp angles of his body had a disturbing stiffness, combined with something absurdly animal-like, making it hard to suppress a strange desire to laugh; yet, his face, which appeared even more ghostly pale under the bright orchestra lights, had something so pleading and humbly sincere that a wave of sorrowful compassion stifled the urge to laugh. Had he learned those bowing gestures from a robot or a dog? Was that the desperate gaze of someone on the brink of death, or was there a cunning sarcasm lurking beneath it? Was he like a gladiator, dragged into the arena at the moment of his demise, there to entertain the crowd with his struggles? Or was he a risen soul, a vampire with a violin, who, if not draining the blood from our hearts, at least siphons the gold from our pockets?"

"Such questions crossed our minds while Paganini was performing his strange bows, but all those thoughts were at once still when the wonderful master placed his violin under his chin and began to play. As for me, you already know my musical second-sight, my gift of seeing at each tone a figure equivalent to the sound, and so Paganini with each stroke of his bow brought visible forms and situations before my eyes; he told me in melodious hieroglyphics all kinds of brilliant tales; he, as it were, made a magic-lantern play its coloured antics before me, he himself being chief actor. At the first stroke of his bow the stage scenery around him had changed; he suddenly stood with his music-desk in a cheerful room, decorated in a gay, irregular way after the Pompadour style; everywhere little mirrors, gilded Cupids, Chinese porcelain, a delightful chaos of ribbons, garlands of flowers, white gloves, torn lace, false pearls, diadems of gold leaf and spangles—such tinsel as one finds in the room of a prima-donna. Paganini's outward appearance had also changed, and certainly most advantageously; he wore short breeches of lily-coloured satin, a white waistcoat embroidered with silver, and a coat of bright blue velvet with gold buttons; the hair in little carefully curled locks bordered his face, which was young and rosy, and gleamed with sweet tenderness as he ogled the pretty little lady who stood near him at the music-desk, while he played the violin.

Such questions came to mind while Paganini was performing his unusual bows, but all those thoughts disappeared as soon as the amazing master set his violin under his chin and started to play. As for me, you already know about my musical intuition, my ability to visualize a figure corresponding to each tone, and so Paganini, with every stroke of his bow, created visible forms and situations before my eyes; he communicated all kinds of dazzling stories through melodious symbols; he, in a way, made a magic lantern display its colorful antics in front of me, with himself as the main actor. At the first stroke of his bow, the stage setting around him transformed; he suddenly found himself in a cheerful room, decorated in a playful, irregular way after the Pompadour style; everywhere there were little mirrors, gilded Cupids, Chinese porcelain, a delightful mess of ribbons, garlands of flowers, white gloves, torn lace, fake pearls, gold-leaf diadems, and sequins—such glitter as one finds in the room of a prima donna. Paganini's appearance also changed, and certainly for the better; he wore short breeches of light-colored satin, a white waistcoat embroidered with silver, and a bright blue velvet coat with gold buttons; his hair was styled in little carefully curled locks framing his youthful, rosy face, which shone with sweet tenderness as he flirted with the pretty young lady standing near him at the music desk while he played the violin.

"Yes, I saw at his side a pretty young creature, in antique costume, the white satin swelled out below the waist, making the figure still more charmingly slender; the high raised hair was powdered and curled, and the pretty round face shone out all the more openly with it glancing eyes, its little rouged cheeks, its little beauty-patches, and the sweet impertinent little nose. In her hand was a roll of white paper, and by the movements of her lips as well as by the coquettish waving to and fro of her little upper lip she seemed to be singing; but none of her trills were audible to me, and only from the violin with which the young Paganini led the lovely child could I discover what she sang, and what he himself during her song felt in his soul. O, what melodies were those! Like the nightingale's notes, when the fragrance of the rose intoxicates her yearning young heart with desire, they floated in the evening twilight. O, what melting, languid delight was that! The sounds kissed each other, then fled away pouting, and then, laughing, clasped each other and became one, and died away in intoxicated harmony. Yes, the sounds carried on their merry game like butterflies, when one, in playful provocation, will escape from another, hide behind a flower, be overtaken at last, and then, wantonly joying with the other, fly away into the golden sunlight. But a spider, a spider can prepare a sudden tragical fate for such enamoured butterflies. Did the young heart anticipate this? A melancholy sighing tone, a foreboding of some slowly approaching misfortune, glided softly through the enrapturing melodies that were streaming from Paganini's violin. His eyes became moist. Adoringly he knelt down before his Amata. But, alas! as he bowed down to kiss her feet, he saw under the bed a little abbate! I do not know what he had against the poor man, but the Genoese became pale as death, he seized the little fellow with furious hands, gave him sundry boxes on the ear, as well as a considerable number of kicks, flung him outside, drew a stiletto from its sheath, and buried it in the young beauty's breast.

"Yes, I saw at his side a pretty young girl in a vintage dress. The white satin flared out below the waist, making her figure even more charmingly slender. Her hair was styled high, powdered, and curled, and her pretty round face shone even more brightly with her sparkling eyes, rosy cheeks, beauty marks, and her sweet, cheeky little nose. In her hand was a roll of white paper, and by the way her lips moved and how her little upper lip playfully swayed back and forth, she seemed to be singing; but I couldn't hear any of her notes, and only from the violin, played by the young Paganini as he accompanied the lovely girl, could I tell what she was singing and what he felt in his soul during her song. Oh, what melodies those were! They floated through the evening twilight like the nightingale's notes, intoxicated with the fragrance of the rose that filled her yearning heart with desire. Oh, what melting, languid delight that was! The sounds kissed each other, then flew away pouting, and then, laughing, intertwined and merged into one, fading away in blissful harmony. Yes, the sounds played their merry game like butterflies, where one, in playful tease, escapes from the other, hides behind a flower, eventually gets caught, and then joyfully flits away into the golden sunlight. But a spider can bring a sudden tragic fate for such enamored butterflies. Did the young heart sense this? A melancholic sigh, a sense of impending misfortune, softly drifted through the enchanting melodies streaming from Paganini's violin. His eyes filled with tears. He knelt down adoringly before his Amata. But, alas! as he leaned down to kiss her feet, he spotted a little abbate under the bed! I don't know what he had against the poor man, but the Genoese turned pale as death, grabbed the little fellow with furious hands, slapped him several times, kicked him quite a bit, threw him outside, drew a stiletto from its sheath, and plunged it into the young beauty's breast."

"At this moment, however, a shout of 'Bravo! Bravo!' broke out from all sides. Hamburg's enthusiastic sons and daughters were paying the tribute of their uproarious applause to the great artist, who had just ended the first part of his concert, and was now bowing with even more angles and contortions than before. And on his face the abject humility seemed to me to have become more intense. From his eyes stared a sorrowful anxiety like that of a poor malefactor. 'Divine!' cried my neighbour, the furrier, as he scratched his ears; 'that piece alone was worth two thalers.'

At that moment, however, a shout of "Bravo! Bravo!" erupted from all around. Hamburg's excited sons and daughters were paying tribute to the great artist, who had just finished the first part of his concert and was now bowing with even more angles and twists than before. To me, his humility seemed to deepen. A sorrowful anxiety stared from his eyes, like that of a poor criminal. "Divine!" exclaimed my neighbor, the furrier, as he scratched his ears; "that piece alone was worth two thalers."

"When Paganini began to play again a gloom came before my eyes. The sounds were not transformed into bright forms and colours; the master's form was clothed in gloomy shades, out of the darkness of which his music moaned in the most piercing tones of lamentation. Only at times, when a little lamp that hung above cast its sorrowful light over him, could I catch a glimpse of his pale countenance, on which the youth was not yet extinguished. His costume was singular, in two colours, yellow and red. Heavy chains weighed upon his feet. Behind him moved a face whose physiognomy indicated a lusty goat-nature. And I saw at times long hairy hands seize assistingly the strings of the violin on which Paganini was playing. They often guided the hand which held the bow, and then a bleating laugh of applause accompanied the melody, which gushed from the violin ever more full of sorrow and anguish. They were melodies which were like the song of the fallen angels who had loved the daughters of earth, and, being exiled from the kingdom of the blessed, sank into the under-world with faces red with shame. They were melodies in whose bottomless shallowness glimmered neither consolation nor hope. When the saints in heaven hear such melodies, the praise of God dies upon their paled lips, and they cover their heads weeping. At times when the obligato goat's laugh bleated in among the melodious pangs, I caught a glimpse in the background of a crowd of small women-figures who nodded their odious heads with wicked wantonness. Then a rush of agonising sounds came from the violin, and a fearful groan and a sob, such as was never heard upon earth before, nor will be perhaps heard upon earth again; unless in the valley of Jehoshaphat, when the colossal trumpets of doom shall ring out, and the naked corpses shall crawl forth from the grave to abide their fate. But the agonised violinist suddenly made one stroke of the bow, such a mad despairing stroke, that his chains fell rattling from him, and his mysterious assistant and the other foul mocking forms vanished.

When Paganini started to play again, a darkness fell before my eyes. The sounds didn’t transform into bright shapes and colors; instead, the master appeared shrouded in gloomy shadows, from which his music moaned in the most piercing tones of sorrow. Only occasionally, when a small lamp hanging above him cast its sorrowful light, could I catch a glimpse of his pale face, where the spark of youth hadn’t yet faded. His outfit was unusual, in yellow and red. Heavy chains weighed down his feet. Behind him was a figure with a face that suggested a lively goat-nature. I would sometimes see long, hairy hands reach out to assist with the strings of the violin that Paganini was playing. They often guided the hand that held the bow, resulting in a bleating laugh of applause that accompanied the melody, which flowed from the violin full of sorrow and anguish. The melodies resembled the song of fallen angels who had loved the daughters of earth and, exiled from the kingdom of the blessed, sank into the underworld with faces flushed with shame. They were melodies devoid of consolation or hope. When the saints in heaven hear such tunes, their praise of God fades from their pale lips, and they cover their heads in tears. Occasionally, when the goat’s laugh interjected among the melodious pangs, I noticed in the background a crowd of small female figures nodding their wicked heads with lewdness. Then a wave of agonizing sounds erupted from the violin, accompanied by a terrifying groan and a sob never heard on earth before, nor likely to be heard again; unless in the valley of Jehoshaphat, when colossal trumpets of doom will sound, and the naked corpses rise from the grave to face their fate. But suddenly, the tormented violinist made a single stroke of the bow, a frantic, desperate stroke that caused his chains to fall away with a clatter, and his mysterious assistant along with the other grotesque, mocking figures vanished.

"At this moment my neighbour, the furrier, said, 'A pity, a pity; a string has snapped—that comes from the constant pizzicato.'

"Right then, my neighbor, the furrier, said, 'What a shame, what a shame; a string has broken—that's from the constant pizzicato.'"

"Had a string of the violin really snapped? I do not know. I only observed the alteration in the sounds, and Paganini and his surroundings seemed to me again suddenly changed. I could scarcely recognise him in the monk's brown dress, which concealed rather than clothed him. With savage countenance half hid by the cowl, waist girt with a cord, and bare feet, Paganini stood, a solitary defiant figure, on a rocky prominence by the sea, and played his violin. But the sea became red and redder, and the sky grew paler, till at last the surging water looked like bright scarlet blood, and the sky above became of a ghastly, corpse-like pallor, and the stars came out large and threatening; and those stars were black, black as glooming coal. But the tones of the violin grew ever more stormy and defiant, and the eyes of the terrible player sparkled with such a scornful lust of destruction, and his thin lips moved with such a horrible haste, that it seemed as if he murmured some old accursed charms to conjure the storm and loose the evil spirits that lie imprisoned in the abysses of the sea. Often, when he stretched his long thin arm from the broad monk's sleeve, and swept the air with his bow, he seemed like some sorcerer who commands the elements with his magic wand; and then there was a wild wailing from the depth of the sea, and the horrible waves of blood sprang up so fiercely that they almost besprinkled the pale sky and the black stars with their red foam. There was a wailing and a shrieking and a crashing, as if the world was falling into fragments, and ever more stubbornly the monk played his violin. He seemed as if by the power of violent will he wished to break the seven seals wherewith Solomon sealed the iron vessels in which he had shut up the vanquished demons. The wise king sank those vessels in the sea, and I seemed to hear the voices of the imprisoned spirits while Paganini's violin growled its most wrathful bass. But at last I thought I heard the jubilee of deliverance, and out of the red billows of blood emerged the heads of the fettered demons: monsters of legendary horror, crocodiles with bats' wings, snakes with stags' horns, monkeys with shells on their heads, seals with long patriarchal beards, women's faces with breasts in place of cheeks, green camels' heads, hermaphrodites of incomprehensible combination—all staring with cold, crafty eyes, and with long fin-like claws grasping at the fiddling monk. From the latter, however, in the furious zeal of his conjuration, the cowl fell back, and the curly hair, fluttering in the wind, fell round his head in ringlets, like black snakes.

"Did a violin string actually snap? I don't know. I just noticed the change in the sounds, and Paganini and his surroundings felt suddenly different again. I could hardly recognize him in the monk's brown robe, which hid him more than it dressed him. With a fierce expression partly covered by the hood, a cord around his waist, and bare feet, Paganini stood alone on a rocky ledge by the sea, playing his violin. But the sea turned redder and redder, and the sky grew lighter until the churning water looked like bright scarlet blood, and the sky above turned a ghastly, corpse-like white, with large, ominous stars appearing; those stars were as black as coal. Yet the notes from the violin became increasingly stormy and defiant, and the eyes of the terrifying performer shone with a scornful hunger for destruction, his thin lips moving with such urgency that it seemed he was whispering some ancient cursed spells to summon the storm and release the evil spirits trapped in the ocean's depths. Often, when he extended his long, thin arm from the wide monk's sleeve and swept the air with his bow, he resembled a sorcerer commanding the elements with his magic wand; then a wild wailing erupted from the depths of the sea, and the horrific blood waves surged up so violently that they nearly splashed the pale sky and the black stars with their red foam. There was wailing, shrieking, and crashing, as if the world were collapsing into pieces, and still the monk played his violin more stubbornly. It seemed as if, with sheer force of will, he wanted to break the seven seals that Solomon had sealed the iron vessels with, in which he had imprisoned the conquered demons. The wise king had sunk those vessels in the sea, and I felt as if I could hear the voices of the captured spirits while Paganini's violin growled with its most furious bass. But eventually, I thought I heard the joyous sounds of liberation, and from the red waves of blood emerged the heads of the bound demons: creatures of legendary horror, crocodiles with bat wings, snakes with stag horns, monkeys with shells on their heads, seals with long patriarchal beards, women's faces with breasts for cheeks, green camel heads, hermaphrodites of incomprehensible shapes—all staring with cold, cunning eyes and long, fin-like claws reaching out for the fiddling monk. However, in the intense excitement of his summoning, the cowl slipped off, and his curly hair, blowing in the wind, fell around his head in ringlets, like black snakes."

"So maddening was this vision that, to keep my senses, I closed my ears and shut my eyes. When I again looked up the spectre had vanished, and I saw the poor Genoese in his ordinary form, making his ordinary bows, while the public applauded in the most rapturous manner.

"So maddening was this vision that, to keep my mind straight, I covered my ears and shut my eyes. When I opened them again, the ghost had disappeared, and I saw the poor Genoese in his usual form, making his usual bows as the audience applauded enthusiastically."

"'That is the famous performance upon G,' remarked my neighbour; 'I myself play the violin, and I know what it is to master that instrument.' Fortunately, the pause was not considerable, or else the musical furrier would certainly have engaged me in a long conversation upon art. Paganini again quietly set his violin to his chin, and with the first stroke of his bow the wonderful transformation of melodies again also began. They no longer fashioned themselves so brightly and corporeally. The melody gently developed itself, majestically billowing and swelling like an organ chorale in a cathedral, and everything around, stretching larger and higher, had extended into a colossal space which, not the bodily eye, but only the eye of the spirit could seize. In the midst of this space hovered a shining sphere, upon which, gigantic and sublimely haughty, stood a man who played the violin. Was that sphere the sun? I do not know. But in the man's features I recognised Paganini, only ideally lovely, divinely glorious, with a reconciling smile. His body was in the bloom of powerful manhood, a bright blue garment enclosed his noble limbs, his shoulders were covered by gleaming locks of black hair; and as he stood there, sure and secure, a sublime divinity, and played the violin, it seemed as if the whole creation obeyed his melodies. He was the man-planet about which the universe moved with measured solemnity and ringing out beatific rhythms. Those great lights, which so quietly gleaming swept around, were they the stars of heaven, and that melodious harmony which arose from their movements, was it the song of the spheres, of which poets and seers have reported so many ravishing things? At times, when I endeavoured to gaze out into the misty distance, I thought I saw pure white garments floating around, in which colossal pilgrims passed muffled along with white staves in their hands, and, singular to relate, the golden knob of each staff was even one of those great lights which I had taken for stars. These pilgrims moved in large orbit around the great performer, the golden knobs of their staves shone even brighter at the tones of the violin, and the chorale which resounded from their lips, and which I had taken for the song of the spheres, was only the dying echo of those violin tones. A holy, ineffable ardour dwelt in those sounds, which often trembled, scarce audibly, in mysterious whisper on the water, then swelled out again with a shuddering sweetness, like a bugle's notes heard by moonlight, and then finally poured forth in unrestrained jubilee, as if a thousand bards had struck their harps and raised their voices in a song of victory. These were sounds which the ear never hears, which only the heart can dream when it rests at night on a beloved breast. Perhaps also the heart can grasp them in the bright light of day, when it loses itself with joy in the curves of beauty in a Grecian work of art...."

"'That’s the famous performance in G,' my neighbor said. 'I play the violin myself, so I know what it takes to master that instrument.' Luckily, the pause wasn’t too long, or the musical furrier would have definitely dragged me into a lengthy discussion about art. Paganini calmly put his violin back under his chin, and with the first stroke of his bow, the incredible transformation of melodies began again. The melodies no longer appeared so vividly and tangibly. Instead, they gently unfolded, grandly swelling and soaring like an organ piece in a cathedral, and everything around us expanded into a massive space that could only be grasped by the eye of the spirit, not the physical eye. In the midst of this space hovered a radiant sphere, upon which stood a man playing the violin, grand and incredibly proud. Was that sphere the sun? I can’t say for sure. But in the man’s features, I recognized Paganini, only idealized, beautifully divine, and wearing a reconciliatory smile. His body radiated with powerful manhood, a bright blue garment enveloped his noble limbs, and his shoulders were adorned with shining black hair. As he stood there, confident and secure, a sublime figure, playing the violin, it felt as if all of creation was responding to his melodies. He was the man-planet around which the universe moved with measured solemnity and pulsating rhythms. Those great lights quietly circling around—were they the stars of heaven? And was the melodious harmony emanating from their movements the song of the spheres that poets and visionaries have spoken of so beautifully? Occasionally, when I tried to look out into the misty distance, I thought I saw pure white garments drifting by, where colossal pilgrims passed quietly with white staffs in their hands, and strangely, the golden knobs on each staff were those great lights I had mistaken for stars. These pilgrims moved in a large orbit around the great performer, their staffs’ golden knobs shining even brighter in response to the violin’s notes, and the chorale that echoed from their lips, which I’d taken for the song of the spheres, was merely the fading echo of those violin tones. A sacred, indescribable passion lived in those sounds, which often trembled almost inaudibly in mysterious whispers on the water, then swelled again with a shivering sweetness, like trumpet notes heard by moonlight, finally bursting forth in unrestrained jubilation, as if a thousand bards had struck their harps and lifted their voices in a song of victory. These were sounds that the ear can never truly hear, only the heart can dream of them when it rests at night on a beloved breast. Perhaps the heart can also grasp them in the bright light of day, losing itself joyfully in the curves of beauty found in a Grecian work of art...."

"Or when one has drunk one too many bottles of champagne!" broke in suddenly a laughing voice, which woke our story-teller as from a dream. Turning round, he saw the doctor, who, under the guidance of black Deborah, had gently entered the room to inform himself of the effect of his medicine on the patient.

"Or when someone has had one too many bottles of champagne!" interrupted a laughing voice, jolting our storyteller from his reverie. Turning around, he saw the doctor, who, guided by black Deborah, had quietly entered the room to check on the effect of his medicine on the patient.

"That sleep does not please me," he said, pointing to the sofa.

"That sleep doesn't work for me," he said, pointing to the sofa.

Maximilian, who, absorbed in the fancies of his own discourse, had not observed that Maria had long since fallen asleep, bit his lip with vexation.

Maximilian, lost in his own thoughts, didn't notice that Maria had fallen asleep a long time ago, and he bit his lip in frustration.

"That sleep," the doctor pursued, "gives to her countenance already the appearance of death. Does it not look like those white masks, those plaster casts, in which we seek to preserve the features of the dead?"

"That sleep," the doctor continued, "gives her face the look of death. Doesn’t it resemble those white masks, those plaster casts, that we use to keep the features of the deceased?"

"I should like," Maximilian whispered in his ear, "to have such a cast of our friend's face. Even as a corpse she would be very lovely."

"I’d like," Maximilian whispered in his ear, "to have a mold of our friend's face. Even as a corpse, she would be really beautiful."

"I do not advise you to do so," answered the doctor. "Such masks spoil the recollection of those we love. We think that in the plaster we have procured something of their life, but it is only death that we have caught. Beautiful regular features get something horribly rigid, mocking, fatal, with which they terrify rather than delight us; but the casts of those faces whose charm was of a more spiritual kind, whose features were less regular than interesting, are absolute caricature; for as soon as the graces of life are extinguished, the real declinations from the line of ideal beauty are no longer compensated by the spiritual charm. A certain enigmatic expression is common to all these casts, which, after long contemplation, send an intolerable chill through our souls; they look as if on the point of going a long journey."

"I don't recommend you do that," replied the doctor. "Such masks ruin the memory of the people we love. We think that in the plaster we've captured a piece of their life, but what we've really captured is death. Beautiful, symmetrical features become unnervingly stiff, mocking, and fatal, which terrifies us instead of bringing us joy; but the casts of those faces that had a more spiritual beauty, whose features were less about perfection and more about interest, aretotal caricatures; as soon as the life’s charm is gone, the real deviations from the ideal concept of beauty are no longer balanced by that spiritual appeal. There's a certain enigmatic look common to all these casts, which, after staring at them for a while, sends an unbearable chill through our souls; they seem like they are about to embark on a long journey."

"Whither?" asked Maximilian, as the doctor took his arm and led him from the room.

"Where to?" asked Maximilian, as the doctor took his arm and led him out of the room.

Second Night.

Second Night.

"And why will you torment me with this horrible medicine, since I must die so soon?"

"And why will you torture me with this terrible medicine, when I have to die so soon?"

It was Maria who, as Maximilian entered, spoke these words. The doctor was standing before her with a medicine bottle in one hand and in the other a little glass in which a brownish liquor frothed nauseously. "My dear fellow," he exclaimed, turning to the new-comer, "you have just come at the right time; try and persuade Signora to swallow these few drops; I am in a hurry."

It was Maria who, as Maximilian walked in, said these words. The doctor was standing in front of her, holding a medicine bottle in one hand and a little glass filled with a brownish liquid that was bubbling unpleasantly in the other. "My dear friend," he exclaimed, turning to the newcomer, "you arrived just in time; please try to convince Signora to take these few drops; I'm in a rush."

"I entreat you, Maria!" whispered Maximilian, in that tender voice which one did not often observe in him, and which seemed to come from so wounded a heart that the patient, singularly touched, took the glass in her hand. Before she put it to her mouth, she said, smiling, "Will you reward me with the story of Laurence?"

"I beg you, Maria!" whispered Maximilian, in that gentle voice that was rare for him, and which seemed to come from such a hurt heart that the patient, unusually moved, took the glass in her hand. Before she drank, she said with a smile, "Will you reward me with the story of Laurence?"

"All that you wish shall be done," nodded Maximilian.

"Everything you want will be done," nodded Maximilian.

The pale lady then drank the contents of the glass, half smiling, half shuddering.

The pale lady then drank what was in the glass, half smiling and half shuddering.

"I am in a hurry," said the doctor, drawing on his black gloves. "Lie down quietly, Signora, and move as little as possible."

"I’m in a hurry," said the doctor, pulling on his black gloves. "Lie down quietly, ma'am, and try to move as little as you can."

Led by black Deborah, who lighted him, he left the room. When the two friends were left alone, they looked at each other for a long time in silence. In the souls of both thoughts were clamorous which each strove to hide from the other. The woman, however, suddenly seized the man's hand and covered it with glowing kisses.

Led by Black Deborah, who guided him out, he left the room. When the two friends were alone, they stared at each other in silence for a long time. Both had tumultuous thoughts swirling inside, which they each tried to conceal from one another. However, the woman suddenly took the man's hand and showered it with passionate kisses.

"For God's sake," said Maximilian, "do not agitate yourself so, and lie back quietly on the sofa."

"For heaven's sake," said Maximilian, "don't get so worked up and just relax on the couch."

As Maria fulfilled this wish, he covered her feet carefully with a shawl, which he previously touched with his lips. She probably noticed him, for her eyes winked with contentment, like a happy child's.

As Maria made this wish come true, he gently covered her feet with a shawl that he had kissed earlier. She likely noticed him, as her eyes sparkled with happiness, like a joyful child's.

"Was Mademoiselle Laurence very beautiful?"

"Was Mademoiselle Laurence gorgeous?"

"If you will not interrupt me, dear friend, and promise to listen quite silently, I will tell you circumstantially all that you wish to know." Smiling in response to Maria's affirmative glance, Maximilian seated himself on the chair which was beside the sofa, and began his story:—

"If you won’t interrupt me, my dear friend, and promise to listen quietly, I will tell you everything you want to know in detail." Smiling at Maria's encouraging look, Maximilian sat down on the chair next to the sofa and started his story:—

It is now eight years since I travelled to London to become acquainted with the language and the people. Confound the people and their language too! There they take a dozen monosyllables in their mouths, chew them, gnash them, spit them out again, and they call that speaking! Fortunately, they are by nature tolerably taciturn, and though they always gape at us with open mouths, they spare us long conversations. But woe unto us if we fall into the hands of a son of Albion who has made the great tour and learnt French on the Continent. He will use the opportunity to exercise the achieved language, and overwhelm us with questions on all possible subjects. And scarcely is one question answered before he comes out with another about one's age or home or length of one's stay, and with these incessant inquiries he thinks he is entertaining us in the most delightful manner. One of my friends at Paris was perhaps right when he maintained that the English learn their French conversation at the Bureaux des Passeports. Their talk is most useful at table, when they carve their colossal roast beef and inquire which cut you like, overdone or underdone, the inside or the brown outside, fat or lean. This roast beef and this roast mutton are the only good things they have. Heaven preserve every Christian man from their sauces, which consist of one part of flour and two of butter, or when the composition aims at a change, of one part of butter and two of flour. Heaven preserve anyone also from their vegetables, which they bring on the table cooked in water, just as God created them. Still more horrible than the cookery of the English are their toasts and obligato speeches, when the table-cloth is taken away and the ladies retire, and instead of them just so many bottles of port wine are brought up; for they think that that is the best way to replace the absence of the fair sex. I say the 'fair' sex, for the English women deserve that name. They are fair, slender creatures. Only the excessive space between the nose and the mouth, which is found in them as frequently as in the men, has often spoiled for me in England the most beautiful faces. This declination from the type of beauty acts upon me still more fatally when I see the English here in Italy, where their sparingly chiselled noses, and the broad space of flesh that stretches from there to the mouth, forms so much the more uncouth contrast with the faces of the Italians, whose features have a more antique regularity, and whose noses, either curved in the Roman way or inclined in the Grecian, degenerate into too great a length. Very correct is the observation of a German traveller that the English, when among the Italians, all look like statues with the points of their noses broken off.

It's been eight years since I went to London to get to know the language and the people. What a mess the people and their language are! They take a bunch of one-syllable words, chew on them, gnash them, spit them out, and call that speaking! Luckily, they’re pretty quiet by nature, and even though they always stare at us with their mouths open, they don’t keep us in long conversations. But woe to us if we get stuck with an Englishman who has traveled and learned French on the Continent. He’ll take the chance to practice his French and bombard us with questions on every possible topic. Barely is one question answered before he fires another one about our age, home, or how long we’ll be staying, and with these constant questions, he thinks he’s being charming. One of my friends in Paris might have been right when he claimed that the English learn their French at the Bureaux des Passeports. Their chatter becomes really handy at the table when they carve their massive roast beef and ask which cut you prefer, well-done or rare, the inside or the crispy outside, fatty or lean. This roast beef and their roast mutton are the only decent things they have. God save every Christian man from their sauces, which are made up of one part flour and two parts butter, or when they try to mix it up, of one part butter and two parts flour. And heaven help anyone who has to eat their vegetables, which they serve up boiled in water, just as God made them. Even worse than English cooking are their toasts and obligatory speeches after the tablecloth is removed and the ladies leave, and in their place come just a bunch of bottles of port wine; they think that’s the best way to fill the gap left by the fair sex. I say 'fair' because the English ladies deserve that title. They are lovely, slender creatures. Only the wide gap between the nose and mouth, which is often seen in both men and women, can ruin the most beautiful faces for me in England. This deviation from the ideal of beauty affects me even more when I see the English here in Italy, where their rarely sculpted noses and the broad flesh that stretches from there to the mouth create an awkward contrast with the faces of Italians, whose features are more classically regular, and whose noses, whether Roman or Grecian in shape, risk being too long. A German traveler accurately noted that when among Italians, the English all look like statues with the tips of their noses chipped off.

Yes, when one meets the English in a foreign land, the contrast brings out their deficiencies distinctly. They are the gods of ennui, who travel through all lands at post haste in shining, lacquered coaches, and leave everywhere a grey, dark cloud of mournfulness behind them. Their curiosity without interest, their dressed-up awkwardness, their insolent timidity, their angular egotism, and their empty joy at all melancholy objects, aid in this impression. In the last three weeks an Englishman has been visible every day on the Piazza del Gran Duca, gazing for an hour at a time at a quack sitting on a horse who draws people's teeth. Perhaps this performance compensates the noble son of Albion for the loss of the executions of his own dear native land. For after boxing and cock-fights, there is no more delightful sight for a Briton than the agony of some poor devil who has stolen a sheep, or imitated somebody's handwriting, and is exhibited for an hour in front of the Old Bailey before he is thrown into eternity. It is no exaggeration to say that forgery and the theft of a sheep in that detestable and barbarous land are punished in the same way as the most awful crimes, as parricide and incest.[12] I, myself, led by a sad chance, saw a man hanged for stealing a sheep, and after that I lost all pleasure in roast mutton; the fat reminded me of the poor culprit's white cap. Near him an Irishman was hanged for forging the signature of a rich banker; I still see poor Paddy's death agony; he could not understand at the assizes why he should be so hardly punished for imitating a signature when he would allow any human being to imitate his own! And these people talk constantly of Christianity, and never miss church on Sunday, and flood the whole world with Bibles.

Yes, when you encounter the English in a foreign country, the contrast highlights their shortcomings clearly. They are the masters of boredom, rushing through all lands in shiny, polished coaches, leaving behind a gloomy, dark cloud of sadness wherever they go. Their uninterested curiosity, their awkwardly dressed demeanor, their cocky shyness, their rigid self-importance, and their hollow enjoyment of all things melancholy contribute to this perception. In the past three weeks, an Englishman has been seen every day at the Piazza del Gran Duca, staring for an hour at a quack on a horse pulling people's teeth. Perhaps this spectacle makes up for the absence of executions in his homeland. Because after boxing and cockfights, there’s nothing a Brit enjoys more than watching a poor soul, who has stolen a sheep or forged someone’s signature, put on public display for an hour in front of the Old Bailey before being sent to his fate. It's not an exaggeration to say that forgery and sheep theft in that cruel and barbaric land are punished just as harshly as the most terrible crimes, like murder or incest. I, myself, unfortunately, witnessed a man hanged for stealing a sheep, and after that, I lost all desire for roast mutton; the fat reminded me of the condemned man's white cap. Nearby, an Irishman was hanged for forging a wealthy banker’s signature; I can still picture poor Paddy's death struggle; he couldn't comprehend why he was being punished so severely for mimicking a signature when he would let anyone imitate his own! And these people constantly talk about Christianity, never skip church on Sundays, and flood the world with Bibles.

"I confess to you, Maria, that if I relished nothing in England, men or cookery, the reason lay partly in myself. I brought over a good store of ill-humour with me, and I was seeking amusement among a people who can only kill their ennui in the whirlpool of political and mercantile activity. The perfection of machinery, which is applied to everything here, and has superseded so many human functions, has for me something dismal; this artificial life of wheels, bars, cylinders, and a thousand little hooks, pins, and teeth which move almost passionately, fills me with horror. I am annoyed no less by the definiteness, the precision, the strictness, in the life of the English; for just as the machines in England seem to have the perfection of men, so the men seem like machines. Yes, wood, iron, and brass seem to have usurped the human mind there, and to have gone almost mad from fulness of mind, while the mindless man, like a hollow ghost, exercises his ordinary duties in a machine-like fashion; at the appointed moment eats beef-steaks, makes parliamentary speeches, trims his nails, mounts the stage-coach, or hangs himself.

"I have to admit, Maria, that the reason I didn't enjoy anything in England—neither the people nor the food—was partly because of me. I brought a lot of negativity with me and was trying to find fun among people whose only way to escape boredom is through the chaos of politics and business. The flawless machinery applied to everything here, which has replaced so many human roles, feels really gloomy to me; this artificial world of gears, levers, cylinders, and countless small pieces moving almost frantically fills me with dread. I'm equally bothered by the rigidity, precision, and strictness in English life; just as the machines here seem to embody human perfection, the people come off as machine-like. Yes, wood, iron, and brass seem to have taken over human thought there, almost going crazy from too much intellect, while the thoughtless man, like a soulless ghost, performs his everyday tasks in a robotic way—eating steak at the right time, delivering parliamentary speeches, trimming his nails, getting on the stagecoach, or even hanging himself."

"You can well imagine how my dissatisfaction increased in this country. Nothing, however, equalled the gloomy mood which once came over me as I stood on Waterloo Bridge towards evening and gazed on the water. It seemed to me as if my soul was mirrored there, and was gazing up out of the water at me with all its scars. The most sorrowful stories came to my recollection. I thought of the rose which was always watered with vinegar, and so lost its sweet fragrance and faded early. I thought of the strayed butterfly which a naturalist, who ascended Mount Blanc, saw fluttering amid the ice. I thought of the tame monkey who was so familiar with men, played with them, eat with them, but once at table recognised in the roast meat on the dish her own little monkey baby, quickly seized it, and hastened to the woods, never more to be seen among her human friends. Ah, I felt so sorrowful that the hot tears started from my eyes. My tears fell down into the Thames, and floated on to the great sea which has swallowed so many tears without noticing them.

You can easily imagine how my dissatisfaction grew in this country. Still, nothing compared to the heavy mood that hit me one evening as I stood on Waterloo Bridge and stared at the water. It felt like my soul was reflected there, looking up at me with all its scars. The saddest stories came to my mind. I thought of the rose that was always watered with vinegar, losing its sweet scent and wilting early. I remembered the lost butterfly that a naturalist saw fluttering in the ice while climbing Mont Blanc. I recalled the pet monkey that was so comfortable around people, playing and eating with them, but once at the table, recognized the roast meat as her own little baby, quickly grabbed it, and ran off into the woods, never to be seen by her human friends again. Oh, I felt so sad that hot tears streamed down my face. My tears fell into the Thames and flowed into the great sea that has swallowed so many tears without a care.

"At this moment it happened that a singular music awoke me from my gloomy dreams, and looking round, I saw on the bank a crowd of people, who seemed to have formed a circle round some amusing display. I drew nearer, and saw a family of performers, consisting of the following four persons:—

"At that moment, a unique melody pulled me out of my dark dreams, and as I looked around, I noticed a group of people gathered by the bank, forming a circle around something entertaining. I moved closer and saw a family of performers made up of four individuals:—

"Firstly, a short, thick-set woman, dressed entirely in black, who had a very little head and a very large, protuberant belly. Upon this belly was hung an immense drum, upon which she drummed away most unmercifully.

"First, there was a short, stocky woman, completely dressed in black, who had a really small head and a big, bulging belly. On that belly was strapped a huge drum, and she drummed on it relentlessly."

"Secondly, a dwarf, who wore an embroidered coat like an old French marquis. He had a large powdered head, but for the rest, had very thin contemptible limbs, and danced to and fro striking the triangle.

"Secondly, a dwarf wore an embroidered coat like an old French marquis. He had a large powdered head, but otherwise had very thin, unimpressive limbs and danced back and forth, striking the triangle."

"Thirdly, a young girl of about fifteen years, who wore a short close-fitting jacket of blue-striped silk, and broad pantaloons also with blue stripes. She was an ærially-made figure. The face was of Grecian loveliness. A straight nose, sweet lips turned outwards, a dreamy, tender, rounded chin, the colour a sunny yellow, the hair of a gleaming black, wound round the brows. So she stood, slender and serious; yes, ill-humoured, and gazed upon the fourth person of the company, who was just then engaged in his performance.

"Thirdly, there was a young girl about fifteen years old, wearing a snug, short blue-striped silk jacket and wide pantaloons that matched. She had a graceful figure. Her face was classically beautiful, with a straight nose, sweet lips that curved slightly outward, a dreamy, soft chin, sun-kissed skin, and shiny black hair that framed her face. She stood there, slender and serious; yes, slightly moody, watching the fourth person in the group, who was currently performing."

"This fourth person was a learned dog, a very hopeful poodle, and to the great delight of the English public, he had just put together from some wooden letters before him, the name of the Duke of Wellington, and joined to it a very flattering word—namely, "Hero." Since the dog, as one might conclude from his witty expression, was no English beast, but had, like the other three persons, come from France, the sons of Albion rejoiced that their great general had at least obtained from the French dog that recognition which the other French creatures had so disgracefully denied.

"This fourth character was a clever dog, a very optimistic poodle, and to the great joy of the English public, he had just arranged some wooden letters in front of him, to spell the name of the Duke of Wellington, and added a very flattering word—namely, "Hero." Since the dog, as you could tell from his witty expression, was not an English dog, but had, like the other three characters, come from France, the people of Britain were delighted that their great general had at least received recognition from the French dog that the other French creatures had so disgracefully denied.

"In fact, this company consisted of French people, and the dwarf, who now announced himself as Monsieur Turlutu, began to bluster in French, and with such vehement gestures, that the poor English opened their mouths and noses still wider than usual. Often, after a long phrase, he crowed like a cock, and these cock-a-doodle-doos, as also the names of many emperors, kings, and princes which he mixed up with his discourse, were probably the only sounds the poor spectators understood. Those emperors, kings, and princes he extolled as his patrons and friends. When only a boy of eight years, so he assured us, he had had an interview with his most sacred majesty Louis XVI., who also, later on, always asked his advice on weighty matters. He escaped the storms of the Revolution, like many others, by flight, and he only returned under the empire to his beloved country to take part in the glory of the great nation. Napoleon, he said, never loved him, whereas His Holiness Pope Pius VII. almost idolised him. The Emperor Alexander gave him bon-bons, and the Princess Wilhelm von Kyritz always placed him on her lap. His Highness Duke Charles of Brunswick often allowed him to ride on his dogs, and his majesty King Ludwig of Bavaria read to him his sublime poems. The Princes of Reuss-Schleiz-Kreuz and of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen loved him as a brother, and always smoked the same pipe with him. Yes, from childhood up, he said, he had lived among sovereigns; the present monarchs, had, as it were, grown up with him; he looked upon them as equals, and he felt deep sorrow every time that one of them passed from the scene of life. After these solemn words he crowed like a cock.

"In fact, this company was made up of French people, and the dwarf, who introduced himself as Monsieur Turlutu, began to boast in French, gesturing so dramatically that the poor English spectators opened their mouths and noses even wider than usual. Often, after a long statement, he would crow like a rooster, and those cock-a-doodle-doos, along with the names of several emperors, kings, and princes that he mixed into his speech, were probably the only sounds the poor audience understood. He praised those emperors, kings, and princes as his patrons and friends. He claimed that when he was just eight years old, he had met his most sacred majesty Louis XVI., who later always sought his advice on important matters. He escaped the upheaval of the Revolution, like many others, by fleeing, and only returned to his beloved country during the empire to share in the glory of the great nation. According to him, Napoleon never liked him, whereas His Holiness Pope Pius VII. almost worshipped him. Emperor Alexander gave him candy, and Princess Wilhelm von Kyritz always let him sit on her lap. His Highness Duke Charles of Brunswick often let him ride on his dogs, and His Majesty King Ludwig of Bavaria read him his grand poems. The Princes of Reuss-Schleiz-Kreuz and Schwarzburg-Sondershausen loved him like a brother and always shared the same pipe with him. Yes, from childhood, he said, he had lived among rulers; the current monarchs had, in a way, grown up with him; he regarded them as equals and felt deep sadness every time one of them passed away. After these solemn words, he crowed like a rooster."

"Monsieur Turlutu was, in fact, one of the most curious dwarfs I ever saw; his wrinkled old face formed such a droll contrast with his scanty, childish, little body, and his whole person again contrasted as comically with his performances. He threw himself into the most sprightly postures, and with thrusts of an inhumanly long rapier he transfixed the air, affirming all the while, on his honour, that no one could parry this quarte or that tierce; that, on the contrary, his own defence could be broken through by no mortal man, and he challenged anyone to engage with him in the noble art. After the dwarf had carried this performance on for some time, and found no one who would resolve on open conflict with him, he bowed with old French grace, gave thanks for the applause which was bestowed upon him, and took the liberty of announcing to the very honourable public the most extraordinary performance ever displayed upon English ground. 'You see this person,' he exclaimed, after drawing on dirty kid gloves, and leading the young girl of the company with respectful gallantry into the middle of the circle—'this is Mademoiselle Laurence, the only daughter of the honourable Christian lady whom you see there with the drum, and who still wears mourning for the loss of her dearly-beloved husband, the greatest ventriloquist in Europe! Mademoiselle Laurence will now dance! Now, admire the dancing of Mademoiselle Laurence.' After these words, he again crowed like a cock.

Monsieur Turlutu was, in fact, one of the most interesting dwarfs I ever saw; his wrinkled old face was a funny contrast to his small, childish body, and the way he carried himself made everything even more comical. He jumped into the most lively poses, and with thrusts of his ridiculously long rapier, he stabbed the air, claiming all the while, on his honor, that no one could block this quarte or that tierce; on the other hand, no mortal man could break through his defense, and he challenged anyone to engage with him in the noble art. After the dwarf had entertained the crowd for a while and found no one willing to take him on, he bowed with old French elegance, thanked the audience for their applause, and took the opportunity to announce to the distinguished public the most extraordinary act ever performed on English soil. 'You see this person,' he exclaimed, after putting on some dirty kid gloves and leading the young girl in the group with respectful charm to the center of the circle—'this is Mademoiselle Laurence, the only daughter of the esteemed lady you see there with the drum, who is still in mourning for her beloved husband, the greatest ventriloquist in Europe! Mademoiselle Laurence will now dance! Now, admire the dancing of Mademoiselle Laurence.' After saying this, he crowed like a rooster.

"The young girl appeared to care not the least either for these words or the gaze of the spectators; ill-humouredly absorbed in herself, she waited till the dwarf had spread a large carpet at her feet, and under the guidance of the great drum had again begun to play his triangle. It was strange music, a mixture of awkward humming and a delightful tinkling, and I caught a pathetic, foolish, melancholy, bold, bizarre melody of, nevertheless, the most singular simplicity. But I soon forgot the music when the young girl began to dance.

The young girl didn’t seem to care at all about what was being said or the looks from the crowd. Clearly lost in her own world, she waited until the dwarf had laid out a large carpet at her feet and had started to play his triangle again, guided by the beat of the big drum. The music was odd, a blend of clumsy humming and sweet tinkling, and I picked up on a sad, silly, melancholy, daring, strange tune that had a unique simplicity. But I quickly forgot the music once the young girl began to dance.

"Dance and dancer powerfully seized my attention. It was not the classical dance which we still see in our great ballets, where, just as in classical tragedy, only sprawling unities and artificialities reign; it was not those danced Alexandrines, those declamatory springs, those antithetic capers, that noble emotion which pirouets round on one foot, so that one sees nothing except heaven and petticoats, ideality and lies! There is, indeed, nothing so odious to me as the ballet at the Paris Grand Opera, where the traditions of that classical dance are retained in their purest forms, while in the rest of the arts, in poetry, in music, and in painting, the French have overturned the classical system. It will be, however, difficult for them to bring about a similar revolution in the art of dancing; they will need, as in their political revolution, to have recourse to terrorism, and guillotine the legs of the obdurate dancers. Mademoiselle Laurence was no great dancer; the joints of her feet were not very supple, her legs were not exercised in all possible dislocations, she understood nothing of the art of dancing as Madame Vestris teaches it, but she danced as nature commands to dance: her whole being was in harmony with her pas; not only her feet but her whole body danced; her face danced—she was often pale, almost deathly pale, her eyes opened to an almost ghostly size, desire and pain quivered on her lips, and her black hair, which enclosed her brows in smooth oval, moved like a pair of fluttering wings. It was, indeed, no classical dance, but also no romantic dance, in the sense of a young Frenchman of the Eugène Renduel school. This dance had nothing mediæval, nor Venetian, nor hump-backed, nor Macabrian about it; there was neither moonshine nor incest in it. It was a dance which did not seek to answer by outward movements, but the outward movements seemed words of a strange speech which strove to express strange things. But what did this dance express? I could not understand, however passionately this speech uttered itself. I only guessed sometimes that it spoke of something intensely sorrowful. I, who so easily seized the meaning of all appearances, was nevertheless unable to solve this danced riddle; and that I groped in vain for the sense of it was partly the fault of the music, which certainly pointed intentionally to false roads, cunningly sought to lead me astray, and always disturbed me. Monsieur Turlutu's triangle often tittered maliciously. Madame, however, beat upon her drum so wrathfully, that her face glowed forth from the black cloud of cap like a blood-red northern light.

"Dance and the dancer immediately grabbed my attention. It wasn’t the classical dance still showcased in grand ballets, where, like in classical tragedy, only sprawling unities and artificiality thrive; it wasn’t those rhythmic phrases, those exaggerated movements, that noble emotion that spins around on one foot, creating a view of only heaven and skirts, ideals and deceit! Honestly, nothing is as unbearable to me as the ballet at the Paris Grand Opera, where the traditions of classical dance remain intact, while in other arts like poetry, music, and painting, the French have totally overhauled the classical system. However, it will be tough for them to achieve a similar revolution in the dance world; they might need, like in their political revolution, to resort to terrorism and chop off the legs of stubborn dancers. Mademoiselle Laurence was not a great dancer; her feet weren't very flexible, her legs didn’t go through all possible movements, she didn’t grasp the art of dancing like Madame Vestris teaches, but she danced as nature intended: her entire being was in sync with her moves; not just her feet, but her whole body danced; her face danced—she was often pale, almost deathly pale, her eyes wide open in a ghostly manner, desire and pain flickering on her lips, and her black hair, framing her forehead in a smooth oval, moved like a pair of fluttering wings. It was indeed not classical dance, but also not romantic dance in the way a young Frenchman from the Eugène Renduel school might see it. This dance had nothing medieval, Venetian, hunchbacked, or macabre about it; there was neither moonlight nor taboo in it. It was a dance that didn’t try to respond with external movements, but those movements seemed like words from a strange language trying to express unusual ideas. But what did this dance convey? I couldn't quite grasp it, no matter how passionately it expressed itself. I sometimes suspected it spoke of something profoundly sorrowful. I, who so easily grasped the meaning behind appearances, was still unable to decipher this danced riddle; my struggle for its sense was partly due to the music, which certainly pointed me intentionally down the wrong paths, cleverly leading me astray and always unsettling me. Monsieur Turlutu's triangle often giggled mockingly. Madame, however, struck her drum so angrily that her face shone out from the dark cloud of her cap like a blood-red northern light."

"Long after the troop had passed away, I remained standing at the same spot, considering what that dance might signify. Was it a national dance of the south of France or of Spain? In such a dance might appear the impetuosity with which the dancer swung her little body to and fro, and the wildness with which she often threw her head backward in the bold way of those Bacchantes whom we gaze at with amazement on ancient vases. There was an intoxicated absence of will about her dance, something gloomy and inevitable; it was like the dance of fate. Or was it a fragment of some venerable forgotten pantomime? Or was she dancing her personal history? Often the girl bent down to the earth with a listening ear, as though she heard a voice which spoke up to her. She trembled then like an aspen leaf, bent suddenly to another side, went through her maddest, most unrestrained leaps, then again bent her ear to the earth, listened more anxiously than before, nodded her head, became red and pale by turns, shuddered, stood for a while stiffly upright as if benumbed, and made finally a movement as one who washes his hands. Was it blood that so long and with such care, such horrible care, she was washing from her hands? She threw therewith a sideward glance so imploring, so full of entreaty, so soul-dissolving—and that glance fell by chance upon me.

"Long after the group had left, I stayed in the same spot, thinking about what that dance could mean. Was it a traditional dance from the south of France or Spain? In that dance, you could see the energy with which the dancer moved her small body back and forth, and the wildness with which she often threw her head back boldly like those Bacchantes we admire on ancient vases. There was an almost drunken lack of control in her dance, something dark and unavoidable; it felt like the dance of fate. Or was it a piece of some ancient forgotten pantomime? Or was she expressing her own story through dance? Often, the girl leaned down towards the ground with a listening ear, as if she heard a voice calling to her. She trembled like a trembling leaf, suddenly swayed to one side, performed her craziest, most uninhibited leaps, then leaned down again to the ground, listening more intently than before, nodding her head, flushing red and pale alternately, shuddering, standing momentarily stiff as if frozen, and finally making a gesture like someone washing their hands. Was she washing blood from her hands with such careful, unsettling attention? With that, she cast a glance so pleading, so filled with desperation, so soul-stirring—and that glance happened to fall on me."

"All the following night I was thinking of that glance, of that dance, of that strange accompaniment; and as, on the following day, I sauntered as usual through the streets of London, I longed to meet the pretty dancer again, and I constantly pricked my ears in case I might somewhere hear the music of the drum and the triangle. I had at last found something in London which interested me, and I no longer wandered aimless through its yawning streets.

"All the next night, I kept thinking about that glance, that dance, and that odd music. The next day, as I strolled through the streets of London like usual, I really wanted to see the pretty dancer again, and I always perked up my ears hoping to hear the sound of the drum and the triangle somewhere. I had finally found something in London that captured my interest, and I wasn’t just wandering aimlessly through its endless streets anymore."

"I had just come out of the Tower, after carefully examining the axe which cut off Anne Bullen's head, as well as the English crown-diamonds and the lions, when in front of the Tower I caught a glimpse, amid a crowd, of Madame with the great drum, and heard Monsieur Turlutu crowing like a cock. The learned dog again scraped together the heroism of the Duke of Wellington, the dwarf again showed his not-to-be-parried tierces and quartes, and Mademoiselle Laurence again began her wondrous dance. There were again the same enigmatic movements, the same speech which I could not understand, the same impetuous throwing back of the beautiful head, the same leaning down to the earth, the anguish which sought to soothe itself by ever madder leaps, and again the listening ear bent to the earth, the trembling, the pallor, the benumbed stiffness; then also the fearful mysterious washing of the hands, and at last the imploring side-glance, which rested upon me this time still longer than before.

"I had just come out of the Tower, after carefully examining the axe that beheaded Anne Boleyn, as well as the English crown jewels and the lions, when I caught sight of Madame with the big drum in front of the Tower, and heard Monsieur Turlutu crowing like a rooster. The clever dog again summoned the heroism of the Duke of Wellington, the dwarf once more displayed his unbeatable tierces and quartes, and Mademoiselle Laurence began her amazing dance again. There were once again the same mysterious movements, the same speech that I couldn't understand, the same impulsive toss of her beautiful head, the same bending down to the ground, the distress that tried to soothe itself with even crazier leaps, and again the ear listening to the earth, the trembling, the pallor, the numb stiffness; then also the terrifying, mysterious washing of hands, and finally the pleading glance that lingered on me this time even longer than before."

"Yes, women, and young girls as well as women, immediately observe when they have excited the attention of a man. Although Mademoiselle Laurence, when she was not dancing, gazed immovable and ill-humouredly before her, and while she was dancing often cast only one glance on the public, it was now no mere chance that this glance fell upon me; and the oftener I saw her dance, the more significantly it gleamed, but also the more incomprehensibly. I was fascinated by this glance, and for three weeks, from morning till evening, I wandered about the streets of London, always remaining wherever Mademoiselle Laurence danced. In spite of the greatest confusion of sounds, I could catch the tones of the drum and the triangle at the farthest distance; and Monsieur Turlutu, as soon as he saw me hastening near, raised his most friendly crow. Although I never spoke a word to him or to Mademoiselle Laurence, or to madame, or to the learned dog, I seemed at last as if I belonged to the company. When Monsieur Turlutu made a collection, he always behaved with the most delicate tact as he drew near me, and looked in the opposite direction when I put a small coin in his little three-cornered hat. His demeanour was indeed most distinguished; he reminded one of the good manners of the past; one could tell that the little man had grown up with monarchs, and all the stranger was it when at times, altogether forgetting his dignity, he crowed like a cock.

"Yes, women and young girls notice right away when they've caught a man's attention. Even though Mademoiselle Laurence would stare blankly and a bit grumpily in front of her when she wasn't dancing, and would only cast a quick glance at the audience while dancing, it was no coincidence that her gaze landed on me. The more often I watched her dance, the more that look sparkled with significance, even if it was hard to understand. I was mesmerized by that glance, and for three weeks, day and night, I roamed the streets of London, always staying wherever Mademoiselle Laurence performed. Despite the overwhelming noise around me, I could pick out the sounds of the drum and triangle from far away; and as soon as Monsieur Turlutu spotted me rushing over, he would greet me with the friendliest crow. Although I never spoke to him, Mademoiselle Laurence, Madame, or the learned dog, I started to feel like part of the group. When Monsieur Turlutu collected money, he approached me with the utmost grace and would look away when I dropped a small coin into his little three-cornered hat. His manner was truly refined; he reminded me of the good manners of earlier times. You could tell this little man had been raised among monarchs, which made it all the more surprising when he sometimes forgot his dignity and crowed like a rooster."

"I cannot describe to you how vexed I became, when, after seeking for three days in vain for the little company through all the streets of London, I was forced to conclude that they had left the town. Ennui again took me in its leaden arms, and again closed my heart. At last I could endure it no longer; I said farewell to the four estates of the realm—i.e., the mob, the blackguards, the gentlemen, and the fashionables—and travelled back again to civilised terra firma, where I knelt in adoration before the white apron of the first cook I met. Here once more I could sit down to dinner like a reasonable being, and refresh my soul by gazing at good-natured, unselfish faces. But I could not forget Mademoiselle Laurence; she danced in my memory for a long time; at solitary hours I often reflected over the lovely child's enigmatic pantomime, especially over the listening ear bent to the earth. It was a long time, too, before the romantic melodies of the triangle and drum died away in my memory."

I can’t describe how frustrated I got when, after searching for three days in vain for the little group all over London, I had to accept that they must have left the city. Ennui once again wrapped me in its heavy grip and shut my heart. Eventually, I couldn’t take it anymore; I said goodbye to the four classes of society—i.e., the crowd, the riffraff, the gentlemen, and the fashionable—and traveled back to civilized terra firma, where I knelt in reverence before the first cook I encountered. Here, I could finally sit down to dinner like a sensible person and recharge my spirit by looking at kind, selfless faces. But I couldn’t forget Mademoiselle Laurence; she danced in my thoughts for a long time; during lonely moments, I often pondered the charming child’s mysterious gestures, especially the way she listened with her ear to the ground. It also took a long time for the romantic sounds of the triangle and drum to fade from my memory.

"And is that the whole story?" cried out Maria, all at once, starting up eagerly.

"And is that the whole story?" Maria exclaimed suddenly, sitting up eagerly.

Maximilian pressed her softly down, placed his finger significantly to his lips, and whispered, "Still! still! do not talk! Lie down, good and quiet, and I will tell you the rest of the story. Only on no account interrupt me."

Maximilian gently pushed her down, placed his finger meaningfully to his lips, and whispered, "Shh! Shh! Don’t say anything! Lie down, calm and quiet, and I’ll finish the story. Just don’t interrupt me, no matter what."

Leaning slowly back in his chair, Maximilian pursued the story:—

Leaning back slowly in his chair, Maximilian continued the story:—

"Five years afterwards I came for the first time to Paris, and at a very noteworthy period. The French had just performed their July revolution, and the whole world was applauding. This piece was not so horrible as the earlier tragedies of the Republic and the Empire. Only some thousand corpses remained upon the stage. The political Romanticists were not very contented, and announced a new piece in which more blood should flow, and the executioner have more to do.

"Five years later, I arrived in Paris for the first time, during a significant time. The French had just completed their July revolution, and the whole world was celebrating. This event wasn’t as terrible as the earlier tragedies of the Republic and the Empire. Only a few thousand corpses were left onstage. The political Romanticists were not too happy and announced a new piece that would have even more bloodshed and keep the executioner busier."

"Paris delighted me by the cheerfulness which prevails there, and which exercises its influence over the most sombre minds. Singular! Paris is the stage on which the greatest tragedies of the world's history are performed—tragedies at the recollection of which hearts tremble and eyes become moist in the most distant lands; but to the spectator of these tragedies it happens as it happened to me once at the Porte Saint-Martin Theatre, when I went to see the Tour de Nesle performed. I found myself sitting behind a lady who wore a hat of rose-red gauze, and this hat was so broad that it obstructed the whole of my view of the stage, and I saw all the tragedy only through the red gauze of this hat, and all the horror of the Tour de Nesle appeared in the most cheerful rose-light. Yes, there is such a rose-light in Paris, which makes all tragedies cheerful to the near spectator, so that his enjoyment of life is not spoilt there. In the same way all the terrible things that one may bring in his own heart to Paris there lose their tormenting horror. Sorrows are singularly soothed. In this air of Paris all wounds are healed quicker than anywhere else; there is in this air something as generous, as kind, as amiable as in the people themselves.

"Paris amazed me with its cheerful vibe that influences even the most serious minds. It's interesting! Paris is the stage for some of the greatest tragedies in history—tragedies that make hearts race and eyes well up even in faraway places; but for those watching these tragedies, it’s like what happened to me once at the Porte Saint-Martin Theatre when I went to see the Tour de Nesle. I ended up sitting behind a lady wearing a wide rose-red gauze hat that blocked my entire view of the stage, so I could only see the tragedy through the red gauze of her hat, making all the horror of the Tour de Nesle appear in the brightest rose-colored light. Yes, there’s this rosy glow in Paris that makes all the tragedies feel cheerful for those close by, so their enjoyment of life isn’t ruined. Likewise, all the terrible things one might carry in their heart lose their painful grip in Paris. Sorrows are surprisingly eased. In this Parisian air, all wounds heal faster than anywhere else; there’s something generous, kind, and friendly about it, just like the people themselves."

"What most pleased me in the people of Paris was their polite bearing and distinguished air. Sweet pine-apple perfume of politeness! how beneficently thou refreshedst my sick soul, which had swallowed down in Germany so much tobacco smoke, sauerkraut odour, and coarseness! The simple words of apology of a Frenchman, who, on the day of my arrival, only gently pushed against me, rang in my ears like the melodies of Rossini. I was almost terrified at such sweet politeness, I, who was accustomed to German clownish digs in the ribs without apology. During the first week of my stay in Paris I several times deliberately sought to be jostled, simply to delight myself with this music of apology. But the French people has for me a certain touch of nobility, not only on account of its politeness, but also on account of its language. For, as you know, with us in the north the French language is one of the attributes of high birth; from childhood I had associated the idea of speaking French with nobility. And a Parisian market-woman spoke better French than a German canoness with sixty-four ancestors.

"What impressed me most about the people of Paris was their polite demeanor and refined presence. The delightful scent of politeness! How wonderfully it refreshed my tired soul, which had absorbed so much tobacco smoke, sauerkraut smell, and rudeness in Germany! The simple apology from a Frenchman who lightly bumped into me on the day I arrived sounded in my ears like the melodies of Rossini. I was almost taken aback by such sweet politeness, especially since I was used to the rough nudges of Germans without any apologies. During my first week in Paris, I purposely tried to get bumped into a few times, just to indulge in this music of apology. The French people, to me, exude a certain nobility, not just because of their politeness, but also because of their language. As you know, in the north, speaking French is seen as a mark of high status; from a young age, I'd linked the idea of speaking French with nobility. And a Parisian market woman spoke better French than a German canoness with sixty-four ancestors."

"On account of this language, which lends a distinguished bearing to it, the French people has in my eyes something delightfully fabulous. This originated in another reminiscence of my childhood. The first book in which I learnt French was the Fables of La Fontaine; its naïve, sensible manner of speech impressed itself on my recollection ineffaceably, and as I now came to Paris and heard French spoken everywhere, I was constantly reminded of La Fontaine's Fables, I constantly imagined I was hearing the well-known animal voices; now the lion spoke, then the wolf, then the lamb, or the stork, or the dove, not seldom, I thought, I caught the voice of the fox, and often the words awoke in my memory—'Eh! bonjour, Monsieur du Corbeau! Que vous êtes joli! que vous me semblez beau!'

"Because of this language, which gives it a distinguished presence, the French people seem delightfully fabulous to me. This comes from another memory from my childhood. The first book I learned French from was the Fables by La Fontaine; its simple, sensible way of speaking left an unforgettable impression on me. Now that I’m in Paris and hear French spoken everywhere, I’m constantly reminded of La Fontaine's Fables. I keep imagining I'm hearing the familiar animal voices: first the lion, then the wolf, then the lamb, or the stork, or the dove. Often, I think I catch the voice of the fox, and the words often come back to me—'Eh! bonjour, Monsieur du Corbeau! Que vous êtes joli! que vous me semblez beau!'”

"Such reminiscences, however, awoke in my soul still oftener when at Paris I ascended to that higher region which is called 'the world.' This was even that world which gave up to the happy La Fontaine the types of his animal characters. The winter season began soon after my arrival at Paris, and I took part in the salon life in which that world more or less joyfully moves. What struck me as most interesting in this world was not so much the equality of good manners which reigned there as the variety of its ingredients. Often when I gazed round at the people gathered peacefully together in a large drawing-room I thought I was in one of those curiosity shops where relics of all ages lie beside each other, a Greek Apollo, a Chinese pagoda, a Mexican Vizlipuzli by a Gothic Ecce-Homo, Egyptian idols with little dogs' heads, holy caricatures made of wood, of ivory, of metal, and so on. There I saw old mousquetaires who had danced with Marie Antoinette, republicans who were deified in the National Assembly, Montagnards without spot and without mercy, former men of the Directory who were throned in the Luxembourg, great dignitaries of the Empire, before whom all Europe had trembled, ruling Jesuits of the Restoration—in short, mere faded, mutilated deities of olden times, in whom nobody believed any longer. The names seem to recoil from each other, but the men one may see standing peaceful and friendly together like the antiquities in the shops of the Quai Voltaire. In German countries, where the passions are not so easily disciplined, for such a heterogeneous mass of persons to live together in society would be quite impossible. And with us in the cold north the vivacity of speech is not so strong as in warmer France, where the greatest enemies, if they meet one another in a salon, cannot long observe a gloomy silence. In France, also, the desire to please is so great that people zealously strive to please not only their friends, but also their enemies. There is constant drapery and affectation, and the women here have the delightful trouble of excelling the men in coquetry; but they succeed, nevertheless.

"Those memories came back to me even more often when I went to Paris and entered that high society known as 'the world.' This was the same world that inspired the joyful La Fontaine with his animal characters. Winter soon arrived after I got to Paris, and I joined the salon life where that world moves about, more or less happily. What fascinated me most about this world wasn’t just the good manners that everyone shared, but the variety of people within it. Often, when I looked around at the folks gathered peacefully in a large drawing room, I felt like I was in one of those curiosity shops where relics from all eras sit side by side—like a Greek Apollo next to a Chinese pagoda, a Mexican Vizlipuzli beside a Gothic Ecce-Homo, Egyptian idols with dog heads, and quirky carvings made of wood, ivory, or metal. I saw old musketeers who had danced with Marie Antoinette, republicans revered in the National Assembly, Montagnards without a single flaw or mercy, former members of the Directory now seated in the Luxembourg, and high-ranking officials of the Empire who had once made all of Europe tremble, alongside ruling Jesuits from the Restoration—essentially, faded, broken gods of the past whom no one believed in anymore. Their names seem to clash, but the people stood together peacefully and friendly like antiques in the shops along the Quai Voltaire. In Germany, where passions aren’t as easily controlled, it would be impossible for such a diverse group to socialize like this. And in our cold northern lands, the liveliness of conversation isn’t as strong as in warmer France, where even the greatest enemies, if they meet in a salon, can’t keep up a gloomy silence for long. In France, the desire to be liked is so powerful that people go out of their way to please not just their friends, but also their foes. There’s a constant air of flair and pretense, and the women here delightfully compete to outdo the men in charm; yet they manage to do so."

"I do not mean anything wicked by this observation, certainly not as regards the French ladies, and least of all as regards the Parisian ladies. I am their greatest adorer, and I adore them on account of their failings still more than on account of their virtues. I know nothing more excellent than the legend that the Parisian women come into the world with all possible failings, but that a kind fairy has mercy upon them and lends to each fault a spell by which it works as a charm. That kind fairy is Grace! Are the Parisian women beautiful? Who can say? Who can see through all the intrigues of the toilet? Who can decipher whether what the tulle betrays is genuine, or what the swelling silk displays, false? And when the eye succeeds in piercing the shell, and we are at the point of finding the kernel, we discover that it is enclosed in a new shell, and after this again in another, and with this ceaseless change of fashions they mock masculine acuteness. Are their faces beautiful? Even this is difficult to find out. For all their features are in constant movement; every Parisian woman has a thousand faces, each more laughing, spirituel, gracious than the other, and puts to confusion those who seek to choose the loveliest face among them, or at all events, who wishes to guess which is the true face. Are their eyes large? What do I know! We cease investigating the calibre of the canon when the ball carries off our heads. And when their eyes do not hit, they at least blind us with the flash, and we are glad enough to get out of range. Is the space between nose and mouth broad or narrow? It is often broad when they wrinkle up their noses; it is often narrow when they give their upper lips an insolent little pout. Have they large or small mouths? Who can say where the mouth leaves off and where the smile begins? In order to give a just opinion, both the observer and the object of observation must be in a state of rest. But who can be quiet near a Parisian, and what Parisian woman is ever quiet? There are people who think that they can observe a butterfly quite accurately when they have stuck it on to paper with a pin. That is as foolish as it is cruel. The motionless transfixed butterfly is a butterfly no longer. One must observe the butterfly in his antics round the flowers, and one must observe the Parisian woman, not at home, when she is made fast by a pin through her breast, but in the salon, at soirées, and balls, when she flutters about with her wings of gauze and silk beneath the gleaming chandeliers. Then is revealed in her an impetuous passion for life, a longing after a sweet stupor, a thirsting for intoxication, by which means she becomes almost horribly beautiful, and wins a charm which at the same time delights and terrifies our souls.

"I don't mean anything bad by this observation, certainly not about the French ladies, and least of all about the Parisian ladies. I admire them greatly, and I admire them even more for their flaws than for their virtues. I know of nothing more wonderful than the idea that Parisian women come into the world with all sorts of imperfections, but a kind fairy has compassion on them and gives each flaw a charm that transforms it. That kind fairy is Grace! Are Parisian women beautiful? Who can say? Who can see through all the tricks of their appearance? Who can tell if what the tulle reveals is real, or if what the flowing silk shows is fake? And just when the eye manages to penetrate the outer layer, discovering the essence within, we find it's wrapped in yet another layer, then another, and with this endless cycle of fashion, they mock men's perception. Are their faces lovely? It's hard to say that too. Their features are always shifting; each Parisian woman has a thousand expressions, each more joyful, spirituel, and graceful than the last, confusing anyone trying to pick out the most beautiful face or, at least, guess which one is the real face. Are their eyes big? How would I know! We stop examining the size of the cannon when the cannonball takes our heads off. And when their eyes don’t hit the mark, they still dazzle us with their sparkle, and we’re happy just to get out of the way. Is the space between their nose and mouth wide or narrow? It's often wide when they scrunch their noses, and often narrow when they give their upper lip a cheeky pout. Do they have big or small mouths? Who can tell where the mouth ends and the smile begins? To form a fair opinion, both the observer and the object of observation need to be still. But who can stay calm around a Parisian, and which Parisian woman is ever still? Some people think they can accurately observe a butterfly by pinning it down on paper. That’s as foolish as it is cruel. The motionless pinned butterfly is no longer a butterfly. You have to watch the butterfly flit around the flowers, just as you should observe a Parisian woman, not at home, pinned down and helpless, but in the salon, at parties and dances, where she flutters about in her gauzy and silky wings under the shining chandeliers. In those moments, you see in her a fierce passion for life, a craving for sweet oblivion, a thirst for exhilaration, which makes her almost painfully beautiful, giving her a charm that captivates and unsettles our souls at the same time."

"This thirst to enjoy life, as if death was about to snatch them from the bubbling spring of enjoyment, or as if that spring was about to cease flowing, this haste, this fury, this madness of the Parisian women, especially as it shows itself at balls, reminds me always of the legend of the dead dancing-girls which we call Willis. These are young brides who died before the wedding-day, and the unsatisfied desire of dancing is preserved so powerfully in their hearts that they come every night out of their graves, assemble in bands on the high roads, and give themselves up at midnight to the wildest dances. Dressed in their wedding clothes, with garlands on their heads, and glittering rings on their pale hands, laughing horribly, irresistibly lovely, the Willis dance in the moonshine, and they dance ever more madly the more they feel that the hour of dancing, which has been granted them, is coming to an end, and that they must again descend to their cold graves.

"This desire to live life to the fullest, as if death is ready to pull them away from the joyful flow of existence, or as if that joy is about to stop, this rush, this intensity, this craziness of the Parisian women, especially when they're at balls, always reminds me of the story of the dead dancing girls known as Willis. These are young brides who died before their wedding day, and their unfulfilled longing for dance is so strong that they rise from their graves every night, gather on the roads, and engage in wild dances at midnight. Dressed in their wedding gowns, with floral crowns on their heads and shimmering rings on their pale hands, they laugh eerily, irresistibly beautiful. The Willis dance under the moonlight, and they dance more frantically as they realize that their time to dance is running out, and that soon they must return to their cold graves.

"At a soirée once in the Chaussée d'Antin this idea moved my soul profoundly. It was a brilliant soirée, and none of the customary ingredients of social pleasure were wanting: enough light to illuminate us, enough mirrors to see ourselves in, enough people to heat us with the squeeze, enough eau sucrée to cool us. They began with music. Franz Liszt allowed himself to be drawn to the piano, pushed his hair over his genial brows, and waged one of his most brilliant battles. The keys seemed to bleed. If I am not mistaken, he played a passage from the Palingenesis of Ballanche, whose ideas he was translating into music, which was very useful for those who cannot read the works of that famous writer in the original. Afterwards he played Berlioz's La Marche au Supplice, that excellent piece which the young musician, if I am not mistaken, composed on the morning of his wedding-day. Throughout the room paled faces, heaving bosoms, highly-drawn breath during the pauses, were succeeded at last by stormy applause. The women are always as it were intoxicated when Liszt plays anything for them. The Willis of the salon now gave themselves up to dancing with frantic delight, and I had difficulty in getting out of this confusion and saving myself in the adjoining room. Here card-playing was going on, and several ladies were resting in large chairs, looking on at the players, or at all events pretending to interest themselves in the play. As I passed one of these ladies, and my arm touched her dress, I felt from hand to shoulder a slight quiver as from a very weak electric shock. A similar shock, but of the greatest force, went through my whole heart when I saw the lady's countenance. Was it she, or was it not? It was the same face, with the form and sunny colour of an antique, only it was no longer so marble pure and marble smooth as formerly. The acute observer might perceive on brow and cheeks several little flaws, perhaps small-pox marks, which here exactly resembled those delicate weather-flecks which may be seen on the faces of statues that have been standing some time in the rain. It was the same black hair which covered the brows in smooth oval like a raven's wings. As, however, her eyes met mine, and with that well-known side-glance, whose swift lightning had always shot so enigmatically through my soul, I doubted no longer—it was Mademoiselle Laurence.

"At a party once in the Chaussée d'Antin, this idea deeply moved me. It was an amazing party, and all the usual elements of social enjoyment were present: enough light to see each other, enough mirrors to check ourselves out, enough people to create warmth from the crowd, and enough eau sucrée to keep us cool. They started with music. Franz Liszt moved to the piano, swept his hair back from his pleasant face, and fought one of his most brilliant musical battles. The keys seemed to bleed. If I'm not mistaken, he played a passage from the Palingenesis of Ballanche, translating those ideas into music, which was helpful for those who couldn't read that famous author in the original. Then he played Berlioz's La Marche au Supplice, that fantastic piece which the young composer, if I remember correctly, wrote on the morning of his wedding day. Throughout the room, pale faces, gasping breaths, and intense anticipation during the pauses were finally met with thunderous applause. Women always seem to be a bit intoxicated when Liszt plays for them. The 'Willis' of the salon now gave themselves to dancing with wild joy, and I struggled to escape the chaos and find safety in the next room. In there, people were playing cards, and several ladies were relaxing in large chairs, watching the players, or at least pretending to be interested in the game. As I brushed past one of these ladies, and my arm grazed her dress, I felt a slight shiver travel from my hand to my shoulder, like a faint electric shock. A similar shock, but much stronger, struck my heart when I saw the lady's face. Was it her, or not? It was the same face, with the shape and warm color of an ancient statue, only it was no longer as perfectly smooth and pure as before. A keen observer might notice on her brow and cheeks a few blemishes, possibly small-pox marks, resembling the delicate weathering seen on statues left out in the rain. It was the same black hair that framed her forehead in a smooth oval, like a raven's wings. However, when her eyes met mine, with that familiar sidelong glance that had always shot through my soul so enigmatically, I no longer doubted—it was Mademoiselle Laurence."

"Stretched in a distinguished way on her chair, with a bouquet in one hand and the other placed on the arm of the chair, Mademoiselle Laurence sat not far from one of the tables, and seemed to devote her whole attention to the cards. Her dress of white satin was elegant and distinguished, but still quite simple. Except bracelets and breast-pins of pearl, she wore no jewels. An abundance of lace covered the youthful bosom, covered it almost puritanically up to the neck, and in this simplicity and modesty of clothing she formed a lovely and touching contrast with some elderly ladies, gaily adorned and glistening with diamonds, who sat near her, and displayed to view the ruins of former magnificence, the place where once Troy stood, in a state of melancholy nakedness. She had the same wondrous loveliness, the same enrapturing look of ill-humour, and I was irresistibly drawn towards her, till at last I stood behind her chair, burning with desire to speak to her, and yet held back by a trembling delicacy.

Relaxed elegantly in her chair, with a bouquet in one hand and the other resting on the armrest, Mademoiselle Laurence sat near one of the tables, seemingly focused entirely on the cards. Her white satin dress was stylish and refined yet quite simple. Aside from pearl bracelets and a brooch, she wore no jewelry. An abundance of lace covered her youthful chest, almost modestly up to her neck, and this simplicity and modesty in her clothing created a beautiful and poignant contrast with some older ladies nearby, who were brightly adorned and sparkling with diamonds, revealing the remnants of their past grandeur, like the ruins of Troy, now sadly bare. She possessed that same incredible beauty, that same captivating expression of irritation, and I felt an irresistible urge to approach her. Ultimately, I found myself standing behind her chair, burning with the desire to speak to her but held back by a nervous sensitivity.

"I must have been standing silently behind her for some time, when she suddenly drew a flower from her bouquet and, without looking round, held it to me over her shoulder. The perfume of that flower was strong, and it exercised a peculiar enchantment over me. I felt myself freed from all social formality, and I seemed in a dream, where one does and says all kinds of things at which oneself wonders, and when one's words have an altogether childish, familiar, and simple character. Quiet, indifferent, negligent, as one does with old friends, I leant over the arm of the chair, and whispered in the youthful lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where is, then, the mother with the drum?'

"I must have been standing silently behind her for a while when she suddenly pulled a flower from her bouquet and, without looking back, held it out to me over her shoulder. The scent of that flower was strong, and it had a unique spell over me. I felt completely free from all social formalities, as if I were in a dream where you do and say all sorts of things that leave you wondering, and where your words feel innocent, familiar, and simple. Calm, indifferent, and laid-back like you are with old friends, I leaned over the arm of the chair and whispered in the young lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where is the mother with the drum?'"

'She is dead,' answered she, in just the same tone—as quiet, indifferent, negligent.

"She's dead," she replied, in the exact same tone—calm, indifferent, careless.

"After a short pause, I again leant over the arm of the chair, and whispered in the youthful lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where is the learned dog?'

"After a brief pause, I leaned over the arm of the chair again and whispered in the young lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where is the clever dog?'"

"'He has run away into the wide world,' she answered, in the same quiet, indifferent, negligent tone.

"'He has run away into the big world,' she replied, in the same calm, indifferent, careless tone."

"And again, after a short pause, I leant over the arm of the chair, and whispered in the youthful lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where, then, is Monsieur Turlutu, the dwarf?'

"And again, after a brief pause, I leaned over the arm of the chair and whispered in the young lady's ear, 'Mademoiselle Laurence, where is Monsieur Turlutu, the dwarf?'"

"'He is among the giants in the Boulevard du Temple,' she answered. She had hardly spoken these words, and in just the same quiet, indifferent, negligent tone, when a serious old man, with a tall military figure, came towards her and announced that her carriage was ready. Slowly rising from her seat, she leant upon his arm, and without casting one glance back to me, left the company.

"'He is among the giants on Boulevard du Temple,' she replied. She had barely finished speaking in that same calm, indifferent, careless tone when a serious old man with a tall, military build approached her and said that her carriage was ready. Slowly getting up from her seat, she leaned on his arm, and without looking back at me, left the group.

"When I inquired of the lady of the house, who had been standing all the evening at the entrance of the principal saloon, presenting her smiles to those who came or went, the name of the young lady who had just gone out with the old man, she laughed gaily in my face, and exclaimed—'Mon Dieu! who can know everybody! I know her as little.'—She stopped, for she was about to say as little as myself, whom she had that evening seen for the first time. 'Perhaps,' I remarked, 'your husband can give me some information; where shall I find him?'

"When I asked the lady of the house, who had been standing at the entrance of the main room all evening, greeting everyone who came or went, about the young woman who had just left with the old man, she laughed cheerfully and said, 'Goodness! who can know everybody? I don't know her any better.' She paused, as she was about to say she didn't know me at all either, since she had only seen me for the first time that evening. 'Maybe,' I suggested, 'your husband can help me out; where can I find him?'"

"'At the hunt at Saint Germain,' answered the lady, with a yet louder laugh; 'he went early yesterday morning, and will return to-morrow evening. But wait. I know somebody who has been talking a good deal with the lady you inquire after; I do not know his name, but you can easily find him out by inquiring after the young man whom M. Casimir Perrier kicked, I don't know where.'

"'At the hunt at Saint Germain,' the lady replied with an even louder laugh, 'he went early yesterday morning and will be back tomorrow evening. But hold on. I know someone who has been chatting a lot with the lady you’re asking about; I don’t know his name, but you can easily find him by asking about the young man that M. Casimir Perrier kicked, I’m not sure where.'

"Although it is rather difficult to recognise anyone by the fact of his having received a kick from a minister, I soon discovered my man, and I desired from him a more intimate knowledge of the singular creature who had so interested me, and whom I could describe to him clearly enough. 'Yes,' said the young man, 'I know her very well; I have spoken to her at several soirées'—and he repeated to me a mass of meaningless things with which he had entertained her. What especially surprised him was her earnest look whenever he said anything complimentary to her. He also wondered not a little that she always declined his invitation to a contre danse, assuring him that she was unable to dance. Of name and condition he knew nothing. And nobody, as much as I inquired, could give me any more distinct information on the subject. In vain I ran through all possible soirées; nowhere could I find Mademoiselle Laurence."

"Even though it’s pretty hard to identify someone just because they got kicked by a minister, I quickly figured out who I was looking for. I wanted to learn more about the unique person who had captured my interest, and I could describe her clearly enough to him. 'Yeah,' said the young man, 'I know her well; I've talked to her at several parties'—and he went on to tell me a bunch of meaningless stuff he had shared with her. What surprised him the most was her serious expression whenever he said anything nice to her. He also found it curious that she always turned down his invitation to a dance, insisting that she couldn't dance. He didn't know anything about her name or background. And no one, no matter how much I asked, could give me any clearer information on the matter. I searched through every possible party, but I couldn’t find Mademoiselle Laurence anywhere."

"And that is the whole story?" exclaimed Maria, as she slowly turned round and yawned sleepily—"that is the whole memorable story? And you have never again seen either Mademoiselle Laurence, or the mother with the drum, or the dwarf Turlutu, or the learned dog?"

"And that's the entire story?" Maria exclaimed, as she slowly turned around and yawned sleepily—"that's the whole memorable tale? And you've never seen Mademoiselle Laurence, the mother with the drum, the dwarf Turlutu, or the smart dog again?"

"Remain lying still," replied Maximilian. "I have seen them all again, even the learned dog. The poor rascal was certainly in a very sad state of necessity when I came across him at Paris. It was in the Quartier Latin. I had just passed the Sorbonne, when out of its gates rushed a dog, and behind him with sticks a dozen students, who were soon joined by two dozen old women, who all cried in chorus, 'The dog is mad!' The animal looked almost human in his death agony, tears flowed from his eyes, and as he ran panting by and lifted his moist glance towards me, I recognised my old friend the learned dog, the Duke of Wellington's panegyrist, who had once filled the people of England with wonderment. Was he really mad? Had he been driven mad by mere learning while pursuing his studies in the Quartier Latin? Or had he in the Sorbonne, by his growling and scratching, marked his disapprobation of the puffed-up charlatanry of some professor, who sought to free himself from his unfavourable hearer by proclaiming him to be mad? And, alas! the youths are not long investigating whether it is the wounded conceit of learning or envy that first called out, 'The dog is mad!' and they strike with their thoughtless sticks, and the old women are ready with their howling, and cry down the voice of innocence and reason. My poor friend must yield; before my eyes he was miserably struck to death, insulted, and at last thrown on a dunghill! Poor martyr of learning!

"Stay still," Maximilian replied. "I've seen them all again, even the learned dog. The poor thing was definitely in a very sad state when I found him in Paris. It was in the Latin Quarter. I had just passed the Sorbonne when a dog rushed out of its gates, followed by a dozen students with sticks, who were soon joined by two dozen old women, all shouting in unison, 'The dog is mad!' The animal looked almost human in his agony, tears streaming from his eyes, and as he ran by, panting and looking up at me, I recognized my old friend, the learned dog, the Duke of Wellington's panegyrist, who had once amazed the people of England. Was he really mad? Had he been driven mad just by learning while studying in the Latin Quarter? Or had he expressed his disapproval of some pompous professor at the Sorbonne by growling and scratching, leading the professor to label him as mad to get rid of an unwelcome listener? And sadly, the students don’t take long to consider whether it was the wounded pride of academia or jealousy that first shouted, 'The dog is mad!' They strike with their careless sticks, the old women are quick with their howling, drowning out the voice of innocence and reason. My poor friend had to give in; right before my eyes, he was brutally beaten to death, insulted, and ultimately thrown on a pile of garbage! Poor martyr of learning!

"Not much more pleasant was the condition of the dwarf, Monsieur Turlutu, when I found him on the Boulevard du Temple. Mademoiselle Laurence had certainly told me that he had gone there, but whether I had not thought of actually seeing him there, or that the crowd had hindered me, it was some time before I noted the place where the giants were to be seen. When I entered I found two tall fellows who lay idly on benches, and quickly sprang up and placed themselves in giant posture before me. They were, in truth, not as large as they boasted on the placards hanging outside. These two long fellows, who were dressed in pink tricots, had very black, perhaps false, whiskers, and brandished hollow wooden clubs over their heads. When I asked after the dwarf, whom the placards also announced, they replied that for four weeks he had not been exhibited on account of his increasing illness—that I could see him, however, on paying double the price of admission. How willingly one pays double admission-fee to see a friend again! And, alas, this was a friend who lay on his death-bed. This death-bed was properly a cradle, and the poor dwarf lay inside with his yellow shrivelled old face. A little girl of some fourteen years sat beside him, and rocked the cradle with her foot, and sang in a laughing, roguish tone—

"Not much more pleasant was the condition of the dwarf, Monsieur Turlutu, when I found him on the Boulevard du Temple. Mademoiselle Laurence had definitely told me he was there, but whether I didn’t think I'd actually see him or the crowd blocked my view, it took me a while to notice where the giants were supposed to be. When I walked in, I found two tall guys lounging on benches who quickly jumped up and posed in giant postures in front of me. They weren’t nearly as big as the signs outside claimed. These two tall guys, dressed in pink tights, had very black, possibly fake, beards, and were waving hollow wooden clubs over their heads. When I asked about the dwarf, also advertised on the placards, they told me he hadn't been on display for four weeks due to his worsening illness—but I could see him if I paid double the admission price. How gladly one pays double the ticket price to see a friend again! And, sadly, this was a friend who lay on his deathbed. This deathbed was essentially a cradle, and the poor dwarf lay inside with his yellow, shriveled old face. A little girl of about fourteen sat beside him, rocking the cradle with her foot and singing in a playful, mischievous tone—"

"'Sleep, little Turlutu, sleep!'

"‘Sleep, little Turlutu, sleep!’"

"When the little fellow saw me, he opened his glassy pale eyes as wide as possible, and a melancholy smile played on his white lips; he seemed to recognise me again, stretched his shrunken little hand towards me, and gently rattled—'Old friend!'

"When the little guy saw me, he opened his glassy pale eyes as wide as he could, and a sad smile flickered on his white lips; he looked like he recognized me again, reached out his tiny, thin hand toward me, and softly said—'Old friend!'"

"It was, in fact, a sad condition in which I found the man who, in his eighth year, had had a long conversation with Louis XVI., whom the Czar Alexander had fed with bon-bons, whom the Princess von Kyritz had taken on her lap, who had ridden on the Duke of Brunswick's dogs, whom the King of Bavaria had read his poems to, who had smoked out of the same pipe with German princes, whom the Pope had idolised, and Napoleon never loved! This last circumstance troubled him on his death-bed, or, as I said, in his death-cradle, and he wept over the tragic fate of the great Emperor, who had never loved him, but who died in such a sorrowful way at Saint Helena—'just as I am dying,' he added, 'solitary, misunderstood, forsaken by all kings and princes, a caricature of former magnificence!'

It was truly a sad state for the man who, at the age of eight, had had a long conversation with Louis XVI., been spoiled with treats by Czar Alexander, sat on the lap of Princess von Kyritz, rode the Duke of Brunswick's dogs, had his poems read by the King of Bavaria, shared a pipe with German princes, was idolized by the Pope, and was never loved by Napoleon! This last point troubled him on his deathbed, or as I said, in his death-cradle, and he wept over the tragic fate of the great Emperor, who had never cared for him but died so sorrowfully at Saint Helena—'just like I am dying,' he added, 'alone, misunderstood, abandoned by all kings and princes, a shadow of my former greatness!'

"Although I could not rightly understand how a dwarf who died among giants could compare himself with a giant who died among dwarfs, I was nevertheless moved by poor Turlutu's words and by his forsaken condition at the last moment. I could not help expressing my astonishment that Mademoiselle Laurence, who was now so grand, gave herself no trouble about him. I had scarcely uttered this name than the dwarf in the cradle was seized by the most fearful spasms, and he whispered with his white lips—'Ungrateful child! that I brought up, that I would elevate to be my wife, that I taught to move and behave among the great of this world, how to smile, how to bow at court, how to act—you have used my instructions well, and you are now a great lady, and you have a coach and footmen, and plenty of money, and plenty of pride, and no heart. You leave me here to die—to die alone and in misery, as Napoleon died at Saint Helena! O Napoleon! you never loved me.' What he added I could not catch. He raised his head, made some movements with his hand, as if fighting against somebody, perhaps against death. But that is an opponent whose scythe neither a Napoleon nor a Turlutu can withstand. No skill in fencing avails here. Faint, as if overcome, the dwarf let his head sink down again, looked at me a long time with an indescribable, ghostly stare, suddenly crowed like a cock, and expired.

"Even though I couldn't really understand how a dwarf who died among giants could compare himself to a giant who died among dwarfs, I was still touched by poor Turlutu's words and his abandoned state in his final moments. I couldn't help but express my surprise that Mademoiselle Laurence, who was now so impressive, didn’t seem to care about him. As soon as I said her name, the dwarf in the cradle was struck by the most terrifying convulsions, and he whispered with his pale lips—'Ungrateful child! The one I raised, the one I wanted to elevate to be my wife, the one I taught to move and act among the important people in this world, how to smile, how to bow at court, how to behave—you have followed my lessons well, and now you are a great lady, with a coach and footmen, and plenty of money, and lots of pride, but no heart. You leave me here to die—alone and in misery, just like Napoleon died on Saint Helena! O Napoleon! you never loved me.' I couldn’t catch what else he said. He raised his head and made some gestures with his hand, as if he were fighting against someone, perhaps against death. But that’s a foe that neither a Napoleon nor a Turlutu can withstand. No skill in combat helps in this case. Weak, as if overwhelmed, the dwarf let his head fall again, gazed at me for a long time with an indescribable, ghostly look, suddenly crowed like a rooster, and passed away."

"His death troubled me the more since he had been unable to give me any more exact information about Mademoiselle Laurence. Where should I now find her again? I was not in love with her, nor did I feel my former inclination towards her; yet a mysterious desire spurred me to seek her everywhere. When I entered a drawing-room and examined the company, and could not find the well-known face, I soon lost all repose and was driven away. Reflecting over this feeling, I stood one day at a remote entrance to the Great Opera, waiting for a carriage, and waiting with considerable annoyance, for it was raining very fast. But no carriage came, or, rather, only carriages which belonged to other people, who placed themselves comfortably inside, and the place around me became gradually solitary. "Then you must come with me," said at last a lady, who, concealed in her black mantilla, had stood for a little time near me, and was now on the point of getting into a carriage. The voice sent a quiver through my heart, the well-known side-glance again exercised its charm, and I was again as in a dream on finding myself beside Mademoiselle Laurence in a cosy warm carriage. We did not speak, indeed we could not have understood each other, as the carriage rattled noisily through the streets of Paris for a long time, till it stopped at last before a great gateway.

"His death troubled me even more because he hadn’t been able to give me any clearer information about Mademoiselle Laurence. Where would I find her now? I wasn't in love with her, nor did I feel my previous attraction towards her; yet a mysterious desire pushed me to look for her everywhere. When I walked into a drawing-room and scanned the crowd, not seeing her familiar face, I quickly lost all calm and had to leave. One day, I found myself waiting at a remote entrance to the Great Opera for a carriage, and I was quite annoyed because it was raining heavily. But no carriage came; only carriages that belonged to other people, who settled comfortably inside, leaving me alone in the gradually emptying space. "Then you must come with me," said a lady, who had been standing near me, hidden under her black mantilla, and was now about to get into a carriage. Her voice sent a shiver through my heart, the familiar glance again worked its magic, and I found myself in a daze next to Mademoiselle Laurence in a cozy, warm carriage. We didn’t speak; we couldn’t have understood each other as the carriage rattled noisily through the streets of Paris for a long time, until it finally stopped in front of a large doorway."

"Servants in gorgeous livery lighted us up the steps and through a succession of rooms. A lady's-maid met us with sleepy face, and stammering many excuses, said that there was only a fire in the red room. Motioning to the woman to go away, Laurence said, with a laugh, 'Chance is leading you a long way to-night; there is only a fire in my bed-room.'

"Servants in stunning uniforms guided us up the steps and through a series of rooms. A lady's maid approached with a sleepy expression and, stumbling over her words, apologized, saying that there was only a fire in the red room. Waving the woman off, Laurence laughed and said, 'Fate is taking you on quite a journey tonight; there’s only a fire in my bedroom.'"

"In this bed-room, in which we soon found ourselves alone, blazed a large open fire, which was the pleasanter since the room was of immense size and height. This large sleeping-room, which rather deserved the name of a sleeping-hall, had a similarly desolate appearance. Furniture and decoration, all bore the impress of a time whose brilliance seems to us now so bedimmed, its sublimity so jejune, that its remains raise a certain dislike within us, if not indeed a smile. I speak of the time of the Empire, of the time of the golden eagle, of high-flying plumes, of Greek coiffures, of glory, of great drum-majors, of military masses, of official immortality (conferred by the Moniteur), of continental coffee prepared from chickory, of bad sugar manufactured from beet root, and of princes and dukes made from nothing at all. But it had its charm, though, that time of pathetic materialism. Talma declaimed, Gros painted, Bigottini danced, Grassini sang, Maury preached, Rovigo had the police, the Emperor read Ossian, Pauline Borghese let herself be moulded as Venus, and quite naked too,[13] for the room was well warmed, like the bed-room in which I found myself with Mademoiselle Laurence.

"In this bedroom, where we soon found ourselves alone, there was a large open fire, which was quite nice since the room was huge and tall. This big sleeping area, which could more accurately be called a sleeping hall, also had a rather desolate look. The furniture and decor all showed signs of a time whose brilliance now seems so dull to us, its grandeur so lackluster, that its remnants evoke a certain distaste, if not even a smile. I refer to the era of the Empire, the time of the golden eagle, of high-flying plumes, of Greek hairstyles, of glory, of grand drum-majors, of military parades, of official immortality (bestowed by the Moniteur), of continental coffee brewed with chicory, of poor-quality sugar made from beetroot, and of princes and dukes created from scratch. Yet, that era of touching materialism had its charm. Talma performed, Gros painted, Bigottini danced, Grassini sang, Maury preached, Rovigo handled the police, the Emperor read Ossian, and Pauline Borghese posed as Venus, entirely naked too, for the room was well heated, just like the bedroom where I found myself with Mademoiselle Laurence."

"We sat by the fire chatting familiarly, and she told me with a sigh that she was married to a Buonopartist hero, who enlivened her every evening before going to bed with a description of one of his battles; a few days ago, before going away, he had fought for her the battle of Jena; he was very ill, and with difficulty survived the Prussian campaign. When I asked her how long her father had been dead, she laughed, and confessed that she had never known a father, and that her so-called mother had never been married.

"We sat by the fire chatting comfortably, and she told me with a sigh that she was married to a Buonopartist hero, who brightened up her evenings before bed with stories of his battles; a few days ago, before he left, he had fought the battle of Jena for her; he was very sick and barely survived the Prussian campaign. When I asked her how long her father had been dead, she laughed and admitted that she had never known her father, and that her so-called mother had never been married."

"'Not married!' I exclaimed; 'I saw her myself in London in the deepest mourning on account of her husband's death!'

"'Not married!' I exclaimed; 'I saw her myself in London, dressed in deep mourning for her husband's death!'"

"'Oh,' replied Laurence, 'for twelve years she had always dressed herself in black, to excite people's compassion as an unhappy widow, as well as to allure any donkey desirous of marrying, for she hoped to reach the haven of marriage quicker under black flags. But only death had pity on her, and she died of a hæmorrhage. I never loved her, for she always, gave me plenty of beating and little to eat. I should have died of starvation if Monsieur Turlutu had not often given me a little piece of bread on the sly; but the dwarf wished to marry me on that account, and when his hopes were frustrated he made common cause with my mother—I say 'mother' from custom—and both agreed to torment me. They always said that I was a superfluous creature, and that the learned dog was worth a thousand times more than I with my bad dancing. And then they praised the dog at my expense, extolled him to the skies, caressed him, fed him with cakes, and threw me the crumbs. The dog, they said, was their best support; he delighted the public, who were not in the least interested in me; the dog must support me by his work. I ate the bread of the dog. The cursed dog!'

“Oh,” Laurence replied, “for twelve years she wore black to gain people’s sympathy as a grieving widow, and to attract any fool wanting to marry her, hoping to reach the safety of marriage faster under those dark colors. But only death had any compassion for her, and she died from a hemorrhage. I never loved her because she always beat me and gave me very little to eat. I would have starved if Monsieur Turlutu hadn’t secretly given me bits of bread; but the dwarf wanted to marry me because of that, and when his hopes were dashed, he teamed up with my ‘mother’—I call her ‘mother’ out of habit—and they both chose to torment me. They constantly claimed I was unnecessary and that the learned dog was worth a thousand times more than I was, with my terrible dancing. Then they praised the dog at my expense, sang his praises, showered him with affection, fed him cakes, and tossed me the scraps. They said the dog was their best asset; he entertained the audience, who couldn’t care less about me. The dog was supposed to support me with his work. I lived off the dog’s leftovers. That cursed dog!”

"'Oh, do not curse him any more,' I broke in upon her passion; 'he is dead now; I saw him die.'

"'Oh, please stop cursing him,' I interrupted her anger; 'he's dead now; I saw him die.'"

"'Is the beast dead?' exclaimed Laurence, springing up with a red glow of joy over her face.

"Is the beast dead?" Laurence exclaimed, jumping up with a bright smile of joy on her face.

"'And the dwarf is also dead,' I added.

"'And the dwarf is also dead,' I added."

"'Monsieur Turlutu?' cried Laurence, also with joy. But this joy gradually died from her face, and in a milder, almost melancholy tone, she added, 'Poor Turlutu!'

"'Monsieur Turlutu?' Laurence exclaimed, also with joy. But this happiness slowly faded from her face, and in a softer, almost sad tone, she added, 'Poor Turlutu!'"

"When I told her, without any concealment, that the dwarf had complained of her very bitterly on his death-bed, she became passionately disturbed, and assured me, with many protestations, that she had had the foresight to care for him as well as possible, that she had offered him a pension if he would go and live quietly somewhere in the country. 'But ambitious as he was,' Laurence pursued, "he wished to stay in Paris, and even to live at my house; he could then, he thought, through my interposition, renew his connections in the Faubourg Saint-Germain, and again take his former brilliant position in society. When I flatly refused him this, he told me that I was a cursed ghost, a vampyre, a death-child."

"When I told her, without holding back, that the dwarf had complained about her very bitterly on his deathbed, she became extremely upset and insisted to me, with many promises, that she had done everything she could to take care of him, that she had even offered him a pension if he would go live quietly somewhere in the countryside. 'But as ambitious as he was,' Laurence continued, 'he wanted to stay in Paris and even live at my house; he thought that through my connections, he could revive his ties in the Faubourg Saint-Germain and reclaim his former prestigious status in society. When I flat out refused him that, he called me a cursed ghost, a vampire, a child of death.'"

"Laurence suddenly stopped, shuddered violently, and said at last, with a deep sigh, 'Ah, I wish they had left me in the grave with my mother!' As I pressed her to explain these mysterious words, a stream of tears flowed from her eyes, and, trembling and sobbing, she confessed to me that the black woman with the drum, who gave herself out as her mother, had once herself told her that the rumour which went about concerning her birth was no mere story. 'For in the town where we lived,' pursued Laurence, 'they always called me the death-child! The old woman maintained that I was the daughter of a Count who lived there, and who constantly ill-treated his wife, and when she died buried her very magnificently; she was, however, near her confinement, and only apparently dead, and when some churchyard thieves opened the grave to strip the richly-adorned corpse, they found the countess alive and in child-birth; and as she expired immediately after delivery, the thieves placed her again quietly in her grave, took away the child, and gave it to the receiver of the stolen goods, the great ventriloquist's sweetheart, to be brought up. This poor child, who had been buried before it was born, was everywhere called the death-child. Ah! you cannot understand how much sorrow I felt even as a little girl when anyone called me by that name. While the great ventriloquist was alive, whenever he was discontented with me, he always called out, 'Cursed death-child, I wish you had never been taken out of the grave!' He was a skilful ventriloquist, and could so modulate his voice that it seemed to come up out of the earth, and he told me that that was the voice of my dead mother telling me her fate. He might well know that horrible fate, for he had been a valet of the Count's. He took a cruel pleasure in the horrible fright which I, poor little girl, received from the words which seemed to ascend from the earth. These words, which seemed to ascend from the earth, mingled together fearful tales—tales which I never understood in their connection, and which later on I gradually forgot; but when I danced they would again come into my mind with living power. Yes, when I danced a singular remembrance seized me; I forgot myself, and I seemed to be quite another person, and as if all the sorrows and secrets of this person were poisoning me, and as soon as I left off dancing it was all extinguished in my memory.'

Laurence suddenly stopped, shuddered violently, and finally said with a deep sigh, "Ah, I wish they had left me in the grave with my mother!" When I urged her to explain these mysterious words, tears streamed down her face, and trembling and sobbing, she confessed to me that the black woman with the drum, who claimed to be her mother, had once told her that the rumors about her birth were no mere story. "In the town where we lived," Laurence continued, "they always called me the death-child! The old woman insisted that I was the daughter of a Count who lived there, and who constantly mistreated his wife. When she died, he gave her a grand burial; however, she was near her delivery and was only thought to be dead. When some grave robbers opened the tomb to strip the richly-dressed body, they found the countess alive and giving birth; and as she died right after delivering, the thieves quietly put her back in her grave, took the baby, and gave it to the receiver of the stolen goods, the great ventriloquist's girlfriend, to raise. This poor child, who had been buried before she was born, was known everywhere as the death-child. Ah! You can’t understand how much sorrow I felt even as a little girl when anyone called me that. While the great ventriloquist was alive, whenever he was upset with me, he would always shout, 'Cursed death-child, I wish you had never been taken out of the grave!' He was a skilled ventriloquist and could modulate his voice so it seemed to rise from the ground, claiming it was my dead mother’s voice telling me her fate. He certainly knew that terrible fate because he had been a servant of the Count. He took cruel pleasure in the horror I felt from the words that seemed to come up from the earth. Those words, which seemed to come up from the ground, mixed together terrifying stories—stories I never understood in their context, and which I gradually forgot later on; but when I danced, they would flood my mind with living power again. Yes, when I danced, a strange memory would seize me; I would lose myself, feeling like a completely different person, as if all the sorrows and secrets of this person were poisoning me, and as soon as I stopped dancing, it would vanish from my memory."

"While Laurence said this, slowly and as if questioning, she stood before me at the fireplace, where the fire was burning pleasanter than ever; and I sat in the easy-chair, which was apparently the seat of her husband, where he told her his battles before going to bed of an evening. Laurence looked at me with her large eyes as if she was asking my advice; she moved her head to and fro in such a melancholy, reflective way; she filled me with such a sweet compassion; she was so slender, so young, so lovely, this lily that had sprung out of the grave, this daughter of death, this ghost with the face of an angel and the body of a bayadere! I do not know how it came to pass; perhaps it was the influence of the easy-chair on which I was sitting, but it suddenly came into my mind that I was the old general who had described the battle of Jena yesterday from this place, and as if I must go on with my narrative, and I said, 'After the battle of Jena all the Prussian fortresses yielded themselves up within a few weeks, almost without drawing a sword. First Magdeburg yielded; it was the strongest fortress, and had three hundred cannon. Was not that disgraceful?'

"While Laurence said this slowly, as if she were questioning, she stood before me at the fireplace, where the fire was burning more warmly than ever; and I sat in the easy chair, which seemed to be where her husband would tell her about his battles before going to bed in the evening. Laurence looked at me with her large eyes as if she was seeking my advice; she moved her head back and forth in such a melancholy, reflective way that it filled me with a sweet compassion; she was so slender, so young, so beautiful, this lily that had risen from the grave, this daughter of death, this ghost with the face of an angel and the body of a dancer! I don't know how it happened; maybe it was the influence of the easy chair I was sitting in, but suddenly it struck me that I was the old general who had described the battle of Jena yesterday from this spot, and as if I needed to continue my story, I said, 'After the battle of Jena, all the Prussian fortresses surrendered within a few weeks, almost without a fight. First, Magdeburg surrendered; it was the strongest fortress and had three hundred cannons. Wasn't that disgraceful?'"

"But Mademoiselle Laurence allowed me to say no more; the troubled mood had vanished from her face; she laughed like a child, and cried, 'Yes, that was disgraceful, more than disgraceful! If I was a fortress and had three hundred guns, I would never yield myself!'

"But Mademoiselle Laurence wouldn't let me say anything else; the worried look had disappeared from her face; she laughed like a kid and exclaimed, 'Yes, that was shameful, more than shameful! If I were a fortress with three hundred cannons, I would never give in!'"

"But as Mademoiselle Laurence was not a fortress, and had not three hundred guns——"

"But since Mademoiselle Laurence wasn't a fortress and didn't have three hundred cannons——"

At these words Maximilian suddenly stopped in his story, and, after a short pause, asked gently, "Are you asleep, Maria?"

At these words, Maximilian suddenly paused in his story and, after a brief moment, gently asked, "Are you asleep, Maria?"

"I'm asleep," answered Maria.

"I'm sleeping," answered Maria.

"So much the better," said Maximilian, with a smile; "then I need not be afraid of wearying you if I describe the furniture of the room in which I found myself, as novelists are accustomed to do rather at length now-a-days."

"So much the better," said Maximilian, smiling; "then I don’t have to worry about boring you if I describe the furniture in the room where I found myself, like novelists tend to do at length these days."

"Say what you like, dear friend; I'm asleep."

"Say whatever you want, my friend; I'm asleep."

"It was," continued Maximilian, "a very magnificent bed. The feet, as in all the beds of the Empire, consisted of caryatides and sphinxes; it gleamed with richly-gilt eagles, billing like turtle doves, perhaps an emblem of love under the Empire. The curtains of the bed were of red silk, and as the flames from the fireplace shone brightly through them, I found myself with Laurence in a fiery red illumination, and I seemed to be the god Pluto with the flames of hell blazing round him as he held the sleeping Proserpine in his arms. She was asleep, and in this condition I gazed on her sweet face, and sought in her features a clue to that sympathy which my soul felt for her. What was the meaning of this woman? What sense lurked under the symbolism of that beautiful form? I held the charming enigma in my arms now as my own property, and yet I could not find the solution of it.

"It was," continued Maximilian, "a really magnificent bed. The legs, like all the beds of the Empire, were supported by caryatids and sphinxes; it sparkled with richly-gilt eagles, cooing like doves, perhaps a symbol of love in the Empire. The bed's curtains were made of red silk, and as the flames from the fireplace shone brightly through them, I found myself with Laurence in a fiery red glow, and I felt like the god Pluto with the flames of hell blazing around him as he held the sleeping Proserpine in his arms. She was asleep, and in that moment I gazed at her sweet face, trying to find in her features a clue to the connection my soul felt for her. What was the meaning of this woman? What hidden sense lay beneath the symbolism of that beautiful form? I held this charming mystery in my arms now as my own possession, yet I still couldn’t find the answer to it."

"But is it not folly to wish to sound the inner meaning of any phenomenon outside us, when we cannot even solve the enigma of our own souls? We hardly know even whether outside phenomena really exist! We are often unable to distinguish reality from mere dream-faces. Was it a shape of my fancy, or was it horrible reality that I heard and saw on that night? I know not. I only remember that as the wildest thoughts were flowing through my heart, a singular sound came to my ear. It was a crazy melody, peculiarly soft. It seemed known to me, and at last I distinguished the tones of a triangle and a drum. This music, whirring and humming, seemed to come from afar, and yet as I looked up I saw near me in the middle of the room a well-known performance. It was Monsieur Turlutu the dwarf who played the triangle, and Madame beating the great drum, while the learned dog was scratching about on the floor, as if searching for his wooden letters. The dog appeared to move with difficulty, and his skin was spotted with blood. Madame still wore her black mourning, but her belly was no longer so spaciously protuberant, but repulsively pendant. Her face, too, was no longer red, but pale. The dwarf, who still wore the embroidered coat of an old French marquis and a powdered toupet, appeared to have grown somewhat, perhaps because he was so horribly lean. He again exhibited his skill in fencing, and seemed to be again spinning off his old vaunts; but he spoke so softly that I was unable to understand a word, and only by the movements of his lips could I sometimes observe that he was again crowing like a cock.

"But isn't it foolish to try to understand the deeper meaning of anything outside us when we can't even figure out the mystery of our own souls? We hardly even know if outside phenomena truly exist! We often can't tell reality from just dreams. Was it something I imagined, or was it a terrifying reality that I heard and saw that night? I don’t know. I just remember that as the wildest thoughts flowed through my heart, a strange sound reached my ears. It was a bizarre melody, unusually soft. It felt familiar to me, and eventually, I made out the sounds of a triangle and a drum. This music, buzzing and humming, seemed to come from far away, yet when I looked up, I saw right in the middle of the room a familiar scene. It was Monsieur Turlutu the dwarf playing the triangle, and Madame hitting the large drum, while the learned dog was scratching around on the floor as if searching for his wooden letters. The dog seemed to move with difficulty, and his skin was stained with blood. Madame still wore her black mourning attire, but her figure was no longer so prominently rounded, instead it hung unattractively. Her face, too, had changed from red to pale. The dwarf, still dressed in the embroidered coat of an old French marquis and a powdered wig, looked a bit taller, perhaps because he was so painfully thin. He was once again showing off his skill in fencing and seemed to be boasting as he used to; but he spoke so softly that I couldn’t understand a word, and only by watching his lips could I sometimes see that he was again crowing like a rooster."

"While this ludicrous, horrible caricature moved like a magic lantern with confused haste before my eyes, I felt Mademoiselle Laurence breathing more and more uneasily. A cold paroxysm froze her whole body, and her sweet limbs writhed as if with unbearable agony. At last, however, supple as an eel, she glided from my arms, stood suddenly in the middle of the room, and began to dance, while the mother with the drum and the dwarf with the triangle continued their deadened soft music. She danced just as formerly on Waterloo Bridge and in the squares of London. There were the same mysterious pantomimes, the same outbreaks of passionate leaping, the same Bacchante-like throwing of the head backwards, often also the same leaning towards the earth, as if she wished to hear somebody speaking beneath, then also the trembling, the pallor, the benumbed stiffness, and again the listening with ear bent to the earth. Again also she rubbed her hands as if washing herself. At last she appeared again to cast her intense, sorrowful, imploring glance upon me, but now only in the features of her death-pale countenance could I recognise that glance—not in her eyes, for they were shut. In ever softer sounds the music died away; the mother with the drum and the dwarf, gradually growing pale and breaking like mist, vanished at last altogether; but Mademoiselle Laurence still stood and danced with closed eyes. This dance with closed eyes in the silent nocturnal chamber gave this sweet being so ghostly an appearance that a disagreeable feeling seized me; I shuddered, and was heartily glad when she finished her dance, and as easily as she had slipped away again glided into my arms.

"While this ridiculous, horrifying caricature moved like a magic lantern with frantic confusion before my eyes, I could feel Mademoiselle Laurence becoming increasingly uneasy. A wave of coldness swept through her entire body, and her delicate limbs writhed as though in unbearable pain. Finally, however, as nimble as an eel, she slipped out of my arms, suddenly stood in the middle of the room, and began to dance, while the mother with the drum and the dwarf with the triangle kept playing their muted soft music. She danced just like she used to on Waterloo Bridge and in the squares of London. There were the same mysterious gestures, the same bursts of passionate leaps, the same Bacchante-like tilting of her head back, often leaning toward the ground as if she wanted to hear someone speaking below, then the trembling, the pallor, the numbed stiffness, and again the listening with her ear pressed to the earth. Once more, she rubbed her hands as if she were washing herself. Finally, she seemed to give me her intense, sorrowful, pleading glance, but I could only recognize it in the features of her deathly pale face—not in her eyes, as they were shut. The music faded into ever softer sounds; the mother with the drum and the dwarf gradually turned pale and dissolved like mist, eventually disappearing completely; yet Mademoiselle Laurence continued to stand and dance with her eyes closed. This dance in the silent night chamber gave this sweet being such a ghostly presence that an unsettling sensation gripped me; I shuddered, and I was heartily relieved when she finished her dance and, just as effortlessly as she had slipped away, glided back into my arms."

"In truth, this scene was not pleasant to me. But we accustom ourselves to everything. And it is even possible that what was mysterious in this woman lent her a more peculiar charm, that an awful tenderness mingled with my emotions. In any case, after some weeks I ceased to wonder in the least when the low sounds of the drum and triangle were heard at night, and my dear Laurence suddenly started up and danced a solo with closed eyes. Her husband, the old Buonapartist, commanded in the neighbourhood of Paris, and his duties allowed him to pass the day only in the city. Of course he became my most intimate friend, and he wept when later on he bade me farewell. He travelled with his wife to Sicily, and I have seen neither of them again since."

"Honestly, this scene wasn’t enjoyable for me. But we get used to everything. It’s even possible that what was mysterious about this woman added an unusual charm to her, and a strange tenderness mixed with my feelings. In any case, after a few weeks, I stopped being surprised when I heard the soft sounds of the drum and triangle at night, and my dear Laurence would suddenly jump up and dance a solo with her eyes closed. Her husband, the old Buonapartist, was in command near Paris, and his job only allowed him to be in the city during the day. Naturally, he became my closest friend, and he cried when he later said goodbye. He traveled with his wife to Sicily, and I haven’t seen either of them since."

When Maximilian had finished this narrative, he hastily seized his hat and slipped out of the room.

When Maximilian finished telling this story, he quickly grabbed his hat and hurried out of the room.

DON QUIXOTE.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[The following admirable account of Don Quixote—here given chiefly in Mr. Fleishman's translation—was written in 1837, as the introduction to an edition de luxe of Cervantes's masterpiece.]

[The following impressive summary of Don Quixote—largely based on Mr. Fleishman's translation—was written in 1837 as the introduction to a special edition of Cervantes's masterpiece.]

THE first book that I read after I arrived at boyhood's years of discretion, and had tolerably mastered my letters, was The Life and Deeds of the Sagacious Knight, Don Quixote de la Mancha, written by Miguel Cervantes de Saavedra. Well do I remember the time, when, early in the morning, I stole away from home and hastened to the court-garden, that I might read Don Quixote without being disturbed. It was a beautiful day in May, the blooming Spring lay basking in the silent morning light, listening to the compliments of that sweet flatterer, the nightingale, who sang so softly and caressingly, with such a melting fervour, that even the shyest of buds burst into blossom, and the lusty grasses and the fragrant sunshine kissed more rapturously, and the trees and flowers trembled from very ecstasy. But I seated myself on an old moss-covered stone bench in the so-called Avenue of Sighs, not far from the water-fall, and feasted my little heart with the thrilling adventures of the valiant knight. In my childish simplicity I took everything in sober earnest; no matter how ridiculous the mishaps which fate visited upon the poor hero, I thought it must be just so, and imagined that to be laughed at was as much a part of heroism as to be wounded; and the former vexed me just as sorely as the latter grieved my heart. I was a child, and knew nothing of the irony God has interwoven into the world, and which the great poet has imitated in his miniature world;—and I wept most bitterly, when for all his chivalry and generosity the noble knight gained only ingratitude and cudgels. As I was unpracticed in reading, I spoke every word aloud, and so the birds and the trees, the brooks and the flowers, could hear all I read, and as these innocent beings know as little as children of the irony of the world, they too took it all for sober earnest, and wept with me over the sorrows of the unfortunate knight; an old worn-out oak sobbed even; and the water-fall shook more vehemently his white beard, and seemed to scold at the wickedness of the world. We felt that the heroism of the knight was none the less worthy of admiration because the lion turned tail without fighting, and that if his body was weak and withered, his armour rusty, his steed a miserable jade, his deeds were all the more worthy of praise. We despised the vulgar rabble who beat the poor hero so barbarously, and still more the rabble of higher rank, who were decked in silk attire, gay courtly phrases, and grand titles, and jeered at the man who was so far their superior in powers of mind and nobility of soul. Dulcinea's knight rose ever higher in my esteem, and my love for him grew stronger and stronger the longer I read in that wonderful book, which I continued to do daily in that same garden, so that when autumn came I had reached the end of the story,—and I shall never forget the day when I read the sorrowful combat, in which the knight came to so ignominious an end.

The first book I read when I was old enough to be considered a boy and had gotten a decent grip on reading was The Life and Deeds of the Sagacious Knight, Don Quixote de la Mancha by Miguel Cervantes de Saavedra. I clearly remember the time when, early in the morning, I slipped out of the house and hurried to the garden to read Don Quixote without being interrupted. It was a beautiful May day; spring was basking in the quiet morning light, listening to the sweet compliments of the nightingale, who sang softly and sweetly, with such passion that even the shyest buds bloomed, the lush grasses and warm sunshine embraced each other more passionately, and the trees and flowers trembled with joy. I sat down on an old, mossy stone bench in the so-called Avenue of Sighs, not far from the waterfall, and indulged my young heart in the thrilling adventures of the brave knight. In my innocent way, I took everything very seriously; no matter how ridiculous the things that happened to the poor hero were, I thought it must be that way and imagined that being ridiculed was just as much a part of heroism as being wounded. The former upset me just as much as the latter saddened me. I was a child, unaware of the irony woven into the world by God and echoed by the great poet in his small universe, and I cried bitterly when, for all his chivalry and generosity, the noble knight received nothing but ingratitude and beatings. Since I was inexperienced at reading, I read every word out loud, so the birds, trees, brooks, and flowers could hear everything I said. And just like children, these innocent beings were clueless about the world's irony, so they took it all seriously and cried with me over the unfortunate knight's sorrows; even an old, worn oak seemed to sob, and the waterfall shook its white beard as if scolding the wickedness of the world. We felt that the knight's heroism was still admirable, even when the lion fled without fighting, and that despite his frail body, rusty armor, and pathetic steed, his deeds deserved even more praise. We looked down on the common people who violently attacked the poor hero, and even more on the upper-class crowd, dressed in silk and using fancy phrases and grand titles, who mocked someone far superior to them in intelligence and nobility. Dulcinea's knight grew more admirable in my eyes, and my love for him deepened the more I read that amazing book, which I continued to read daily in that same garden, so by autumn, I had finished the story. I will never forget the day I read the tragic duel in which the knight met such an embarrassing end.

It was a gloomy day; dismal clouds swept over a leaden sky, the yellow leaves fell sorrowfully from the trees, heavy tear-drops hung on the last flowers that drooped down in a sad faded way their dying little heads, the nightingales had long since died away, from every side the image of transitoriness stared at me—and my heart was ready to break as I read how the noble knight lay on the ground, stunned and bruised, and through his closed visor said, in tones faint and feeble, as if he was speaking from the grave, "Dulcinea is the fairest lady in the world, and I the unhappiest knight on earth, but it is not meet that my weakness should disown this truth—strike with your lance, Sir Knight."

It was a gloomy day; dark clouds covered a heavy sky, and the yellow leaves fell sadly from the trees. Big drops of water clung to the last flowers that hung their heads in a faded, drooping way. The nightingales had long since disappeared, and all around me, the image of impermanence stared back—and my heart felt like it was going to break as I read how the noble knight lay on the ground, stunned and bruised, and through his closed visor said, in weak and faint tones, as if he were speaking from the grave, "Dulcinea is the most beautiful lady in the world, and I the unluckiest knight alive, but it’s not right for my weakness to deny this truth—strike with your lance, Sir Knight."

Ah me! that brilliant knight of the silver moon, who vanquished the bravest and noblest man in the world, was a disguised barber!

Ah me! That dazzling knight of the silver moon, who defeated the bravest and noblest man in the world, was actually a disguised barber!

That was long ago. Many new springs have bloomed forth since then, yet their mightiest charm has always been wanting, for, alas! I no longer believe the sweet deceits of the nightingale, Spring's flatterer; I know how soon his magnificence fades, and when I look at the youngest rosebuds I see them in spirit bloom to a sorrowful red, grow pale, and be scattered by the winds. Everywhere I see a disguised Winter.

That was a long time ago. Many new springs have come and gone since then, but their greatest charm has always been missing because, sadly, I no longer buy into the sweet lies of the nightingale, Spring's flatterer; I know how quickly its beauty fades. When I look at the youngest rosebuds, I can see them in my mind bloom to a sad red, grow pale, and be blown away by the wind. Everywhere I see hidden winter.

In my breast, however, still blooms that flaming love, which soared so ardently above the earth, to revel adventurously in the broad yawning spaces of heaven, and which, pushed back by the cold stars, and sinking home again to the little earth, was forced to confess, with sighing and triumph, that there is in all creation nothing fairer or better than the heart of man. This love is the inspiration that fills me, always divine, whether it does foolish or wise deeds.—And so the tears the little boy shed over the sorrows of the silly knight were in no wise spent in vain, any more than the later tears of the youth, as on many a night he wept in the study over the deaths of the holy heroes of freedom—over King Agis of Sparta, over Caius and Tiberius Gracchus of Rome, over Jesus of Jerusalem, and over Robespierre and Saint Just of Paris. Now that I have put on the toga virilis, and myself desire to be a man, the tears have come to an end, and it is necessary to act like a man, imitating my great predecessors; in the future, if God will, to be wept also by boys and youths. Yes, upon these one can still reckon in our cold age; for they can still be kindled by the breezes that blow to them from old books, and so they can comprehend the flaming hearts of the present. Youth is unselfish in its thoughts and feelings, and on that account it feels truth most deeply, and is not sparing, where a bold sympathy is wanted, with confession or deed. Older people are selfish and narrow-minded; they think more of the interest of their capital than of the interest of mankind; they let their little boat float quietly down the gutter of life, and trouble themselves little about the sailor who battles with the waves on the open sea; or they creep with clinging tenacity up to the heights of mayoralty or the presidency of their club, and shrug their shoulders over the heroic figures which the storm throws down from the columns of fame; and then they tell, perhaps, how they themselves also in their youth ran their heads against the wall, but that later on they reconciled themselves to the wall, for the wall was the absolute, existing by and for itself, which, because it was, was also reasonable, on which account he is unreasonable who will not endure a high, reasonable, inevitable, eternally-ordained absolutism. Ah, these objectionable people, who wish to philosophise us into a gentle slavery, are yet more worthy of esteem than those depraved ones who do not even admit reasonable grounds for the defence of despotism, but being learned in history fight for it as a right of custom, to which men in the course of time have gradually accustomed themselves, and which has so become incontestably valid and lawful.

In my heart, however, that intense love still thrives, which soared passionately above the earth, enjoying the vast openness of the sky, and which, pushed back by the cold stars and returning to the small earth, had to admit, with sighs and triumph, that there is nothing more beautiful or better in all creation than the heart of a person. This love is the inspiration that fills me, always divine, whether it leads to foolish or wise actions. So, the tears the little boy shed for the foolish knight were not wasted, just as the later tears of the young man, who wept many nights in the study over the deaths of the noble heroes of freedom—over King Agis of Sparta, over Caius and Tiberius Gracchus of Rome, over Jesus of Jerusalem, and over Robespierre and Saint Just of Paris. Now that I have taken on the toga virilis and wish to be a man, the tears have come to an end, and it is time to act like a man, following in the footsteps of my great predecessors; in the future, if God wills, I will also be mourned by boys and young men. Yes, one can still rely on them in our cold age; they can still be inspired by the ideas flowing from old books, allowing them to understand the passionate hearts of today. Youth is selfless in its thoughts and feelings, which is why it feels the truth most deeply and does not hold back where bold empathy is needed, whether in confession or action. Older people are selfish and narrow-minded; they care more about their own interests than those of humanity; they let their small ship drift quietly down the stream of life, paying little attention to the sailor battling the waves on the open sea; or they cling stubbornly to their aspirations for becoming mayor or club president and dismiss the heroic figures tossed down from the columns of fame. Then they might reminisce about how they also struggled in their youth, but later accepted the wall, believing that the wall was absolute, existing by itself for itself, and therefore reasonable, which is why it seems unreasonable to refuse to accept a high, rational, inevitable, eternally ordained absolutism. Ah, these objectionable people, who try to philosophize us into a gentle submission, are still more admirable than those corrupt individuals who don’t even recognize reasonable justifications for supporting despotism, but having studied history, defend it as a customary right that people have gradually become accustomed to, which has then become undeniably valid and lawful.

Ah, well! I will not, like Ham, lift up the garment of my fatherland's shame; but it is terrible how slavery has been made with us a matter for prating about, and how German philosophers and historians have tormented their brains to defend despotism, however silly or awkward, as reasonable and lawful. Silence is the honour of slaves, says Tacitus; these philosophers and historians maintain the contrary, and exhibit the badge of slavery in their button-holes.

Ah, well! I won’t, like Ham, reveal the shame of my homeland; but it’s awful how we’ve turned slavery into something to talk about, and how German philosophers and historians have struggled to justify despotism, no matter how ridiculous or clumsy, as sensible and legitimate. Silence is the honor of slaves, says Tacitus; these philosophers and historians argue the opposite and proudly display the mark of slavery in their lapels.

Perhaps, after all, you are right, and I am only a Don Quixote, and the reading of all sorts of wonderful books has turned my head, as it was with the Knight of La Mancha, and Jean Jacques Rousseau was my Amadis of Gaul, Mirabeau my Roland or Agramanto; and I have studied too much the heroic deeds of the French Paladins and the round table of the National Convention. Indeed, my madness and the fixed ideas that I created out of books are of a quite opposite kind to the madness and the fixed ideas of him of La Mancha. He wished to establish again the expiring days of chivalry; I, on the contrary, wish to annihilate all that is yet remaining from that time, and so we work with altogether different views. My colleague saw windmills as giants; I, on the contrary, can see in our present giants only vaunting windmills. He took leather wine-skins for mighty enchanters, but I can see in the enchanters of to-day only leather wine-skins. He held beggarly pot-houses for castles, donkey-drivers for cavaliers, stable wenches for court ladies; I, on the contrary, hold our castles for beggarly pot-houses, our cavaliers for mere donkey-drivers, our court ladies for ordinary stable wenches. As he took a puppet-show for a state ceremony, so I hold our state ceremonies as sorry puppet-shows, yet as bravely as the brave Knight of La Mancha I strike out at the clumsy machinery. Alas! such heroic deeds often turn out as badly for me as for him, and like him I must suffer much for the honour of my lady. If I denied her from mere fear or base love of gain, I might live comfortably in this reasonably-constructed world, and I should lead a fair Maritorna to the altar, and let myself be blessed by fat enchanters, and banquet with noble donkey-drivers, and engender harmless romances as well as other little slaves! Instead of that, wearing the three colours of my lady, I must strike through unspeakable opposition, and fight battles, everyone of which costs me my heart's blood. Day and night I am in straits, for those enemies are so artful that many I struck to death still give themselves the appearance of being alive, changing themselves into all forms, and spoiling day and night for me. How many sorrows have I suffered by such fatal spectres! Where anything lovely bloomed for me then they crept in, those cunning ghosts, and broke even the most innocent buds. Everywhere, and when I should least suspect it, I discovered on the ground the traces of their silvery slime, and if I took no care, I might have a dangerous fall even in the house of my love. You may smile and hold such anxieties for idle fancies like those of Don Quixote. But fancied pains hurt all the same; and if one fancies that he has drunk hemlock he may get into a consumption, and he certainly will not get fat. And the report that I have got fat is a calumny; at least I have not yet received any fat sinecure, even if I possess the requisite talents. I fancy that everything has been done to keep me lean; when I was hungry they fed me with snakes, when I was thirsty they gave me wormwood to drink; they poured hell into my heart, so that I wept poison and sighed fire; they crouched near me even in my dreams; and I see horrible spectres, noble lackey faces with gnashing teeth and threatening noses, and deadly eyes glaring from cowls, and white ruffled hands with gleaming knives.

Maybe you’re right after all, and I’m just a Don Quixote, with all the amazing books I've read turning my mind upside down, like the Knight of La Mancha. Jean Jacques Rousseau is my Amadis of Gaul, and Mirabeau is my Roland or Agramanto; I’ve studied the heroic deeds of the French Paladins and the National Convention too much. My madness and the fixed ideas I’ve formed from books are pretty different from his. He wanted to revive the fading days of chivalry, while I, on the other hand, want to get rid of everything left from that time, so we’re working towards completely different goals. My colleague saw windmills as giants; I, however, see today’s giants as nothing more than boastful windmills. He mistook leather wine-skins for powerful enchanters, but I only see today’s enchanters as leather wine-skins. He thought shabby inns were castles, donkey-drivers were knights, and stable girls were noblewomen; I, on the other hand, see our castles as shabby inns, our knights as donkey-drivers, and our noblewomen as just ordinary stable girls. He took a puppet show for a state ceremony, while I see our state ceremonies as pathetic puppet shows, yet just like the brave Knight of La Mancha, I bravely go after the clumsy machinery. Alas! My heroic deeds often turn out as badly for me as for him, and like him, I must suffer a lot in honor of my lady. If I denied her out of mere fear or a desire for gain, I could live easily in this well-structured world, take a nice Maritorna to the altar, let myself be blessed by fat enchanters, feast with noble donkey-drivers, and create harmless romances as well as other little slaves! Instead, wearing my lady's three colors, I have to push through unbearable opposition and fight battles, each one costing me dearly. Day and night I struggle, because my enemies are so clever that many I’ve defeated still pretend to be alive, changing into all sorts of things and ruining my days and nights. How much sorrow have I endured because of these deadly phantoms! Wherever something beautiful bloomed for me, those sly ghosts would sneak in and ruin the most innocent buds. Everywhere, when I least expect it, I found traces of their silvery slime on the ground, and if I’m not careful, I could take a dangerous fall even in the house of my love. You might laugh and think these worries are just silly fancies like Don Quixote’s. But imagined pains hurt just the same; if someone believes they’ve drunk hemlock, they might get really sick, and they definitely won’t gain any weight. The rumor that I’ve gained weight is a falsehood; at least, I haven’t received any fat paycheck, even if I have the right skills. I think everything has been done to keep me thin; when I was hungry, they fed me snakes, and when I was thirsty, they gave me wormwood to drink; they poured hell into my heart, so that I wept poison and sighed fire; they were even crouching beside me in my dreams; and I see horrible phantoms, noble faces of lackeys with gritted teeth and threatening noses, and deadly eyes glaring from under hoods, and white, ruffled hands holding shining knives.

And even the old woman who lives near me in the next room considers me to be mad, and says that I talk the maddest nonsense in my sleep; and the other night she plainly heard me calling out—"Dulcinea is the fairest woman in the world, and I the unhappiest knight on earth; but it is not meet that my weakness should disown this truth. Strike with your lance, Sir Knight!"

And even the old woman living next door thinks I'm crazy and says I talk the craziest nonsense in my sleep. The other night, she clearly heard me shouting—"Dulcinea is the most beautiful woman in the world, and I’m the most miserable knight on earth; but it's not right for my weakness to deny this truth. Charge with your lance, Sir Knight!"

——

Understood! Please provide the short piece of text you'd like me to modernize.

It is now eight years since I wrote the foregoing lines[14] for the Fourth Part of the Reisebilder, in which I described the impression which the reading of Don Quixote had made on my mind many years ago. Good Heavens! how swiftly time flies! It seems to me as if it were but yesterday that, in the Avenue of Sighs, in the court-garden at Düsseldorf, I finished reading the book, and my heart is still moved with admiration for the deeds and sufferings of the noble knight. Has my heart remained constant in this ever since, or has it, after passing through a wonderful cycle, returned to the emotions of childhood? The latter may well be the case, for I remember that during each lustrum of my life Don Quixote has made a different impression upon me. When I was blossoming into adolescence, and with inexperienced hands sought to pluck the roses of life, climbed the loftiest peaks in order to be nearer to the sun, and at night dreamed of naught else but eagles and chaste maidens, then Don Quixote was to me a very unsatisfactory book, and if it chanced to fall in my way I involuntarily shoved it aside. At a later period, when I had ripened into manhood, I became to a certain degree reconciled to Dulcinea's luckless champion, and I began to laugh at him. The fellow is a fool, said I. And yet, strange to say, the shadowy forms of the lean knight and his fat squire have ever followed me in all the journeyings of my life, particularly when I came to any critical turning-point. Thus I recollect that while making the journey to France, one morning in the post-chaise I awakened from a half-feverish slumber, and saw in the early morning mist two well-known figures riding by my side. The one on my right was Don Quixote de la Mancha, mounted on his lean, abstract Rosinante, the other on my left was Sancho Panza, on his substantial, positive grey donkey. We had just reached the French frontier. The noble Manchean bowed his head reverently before the tri-coloured flag, which fluttered towards us from the high post that marks the boundary line. Our good Sancho saluted with a somewhat less cordial nod the first French gendarmes whom we saw approaching near by. At last my two friends pushed on ahead, and I lost sight of them, only now and then I caught the sound of Rosinante's spirited neighing, and the donkey's responsive bray.

It’s been eight years since I wrote the lines above[14] for the Fourth Part of the Reisebilder, where I shared the impact that reading Don Quixote had on me many years ago. Good heavens! How fast time flies! It feels like just yesterday that I finished reading the book in the Avenue of Sighs, in the garden at Düsseldorf, and my heart still swells with admiration for the noble knight's adventures and struggles. Has my heart stayed true to this emotion since then, or has it circled back to the feelings of childhood? The latter could be true, as I recall that during each stage of my life, Don Quixote has left a different mark on me. When I was growing into my teenage years, trying clumsily to grab life's roses, reaching for the tallest peaks to be closer to the sun, and at night dreaming only of eagles and pure maidens, Don Quixote felt like a frustrating book to me, and I would push it aside if I stumbled upon it. Later, as I matured into adulthood, I started to find some acceptance for Dulcinea's unfortunate champion and began to laugh at him. "What a fool," I said. Yet, oddly enough, the shadowy figures of the skinny knight and his plump squire have always accompanied me throughout my life, especially at critical moments. I remember one morning on my journey to France, waking from a feverish sleep in the post-chaise, and seeing two familiar figures riding alongside me in the early morning mist. On my right was Don Quixote de la Mancha, on his lean and abstract Rosinante, and on my left was Sancho Panza, on his solid, dependable gray donkey. We had just reached the French border. The noble Manchean bowed respectfully to the tricolor flag waving at us from the tall post marking the boundary line. Our good Sancho offered a somewhat less enthusiastic nod to the first French gendarmes we spotted approaching nearby. Eventually, my two friends moved on ahead, and I lost sight of them, though I occasionally heard Rosinante's spirited neigh and the donkey's answering bray.

At that time I was of the opinion that the ridiculousness of Don Quixotism consisted in the fact that the noble knight endeavoured to recall a long-perished past back to life, and his poor limbs and back came into painful contact with the harsh realities of the present. Alas! I have since learned that it is an equally ungrateful folly to endeavour to bring the future prematurely into the present, and that for such an assault upon the weighty interests of the day, one possesses but a very sorry steed, a brittle armour, and an equally frail body! And the wise man dubiously shakes his sage head at the one, as well as at the other, of these Quixotisms. But Dulcinea del Toboso is still the most beautiful woman in the world; although I lie stretched upon the earth, helpless and miserable, I will never take back that assertion, I cannot do otherwise—on with your lances, ye Knights of the Silver Moon, ye disguised barbers!

At that time, I thought the absurdity of Don Quixotism was that the noble knight tried to revive a long-lost past, only for his frail body to painfully clash with the harsh realities of the present. Unfortunately, I've since realized that it's just as foolish to try to force the future into the present, and for such an attack on the serious matters of the day, all you’re left with is a sorry horse, fragile armor, and an equally weak body! And the wise person shakes their head skeptically at both of these kinds of Quixotism. But Dulcinea del Toboso is still the most beautiful woman in the world; even as I lie here on the ground, helpless and miserable, I will never take that back—it's just how I feel—charge forth, Knights of the Silver Moon, you disguised barbers!

What leading idea guided Cervantes when he wrote his great book? Was his purpose merely the destruction of the romances of knight-errantry, the reading of which at that time was so much the rage in Spain that both clerical and secular ordinances against them were powerless? Or did he seek to hold up to ridicule all manifestations of human enthusiasm in general, military heroism in particular? Ostensibly he aimed only to satirise the romances above referred to, and through the exposition of their absurdities deliver them over to universal derision, and thus put an end to them. In this he succeeded most brilliantly; for that which neither the exhortations from the pulpit, nor the threats of the authorities could effect, that a poor writer accomplished with his pen. He destroyed the romances of chivalry so effectually that soon after the appearance of Don Quixote the taste for that class of literature wholly died out in Spain, and no more of that order were printed. But the pen of a man of genius is always greater than he himself; it extends far beyond his temporary purpose, and without being himself clearly conscious of it, Cervantes wrote the greatest satire against human enthusiasm. He had not the least presentiment of this, for he himself was a hero, who had spent the greater portion of his life in chivalrous conflicts, and who in his old age was wont to rejoice that he had participated in the battle of Lepanto, although he paid for this glory with the loss of his left hand.

What main idea guided Cervantes when he wrote his famous book? Was he just aiming to take down the romances of knight-errantry, the reading of which was so popular in Spain at the time that both religious and secular authorities couldn't stop it? Or was he trying to mock all forms of human enthusiasm in general, particularly military heroism? On the surface, he seemed to be intending only to satirize the romances mentioned earlier and, by exposing their absurdities, subject them to widespread ridicule and ultimately put an end to them. In this, he succeeded brilliantly; what neither sermons from the pulpit nor the threats of the authorities could achieve, a humble author managed with his writing. He dismantled the romances of chivalry so effectively that shortly after the release of Don Quixote, the interest in that kind of literature completely disappeared in Spain, and no more were published. Yet, the pen of a genius surpasses the individual; it reaches far beyond its immediate goal, and without even being fully aware of it, Cervantes wrote the greatest satire against human enthusiasm. He had no inkling of this, as he was himself a hero who spent most of his life in noble battles, and in his old age, he used to take pride in having fought at the Battle of Lepanto, even though he paid for this glory with the loss of his left hand.

The biographers can tell us but little concerning the person or private life of the poet who wrote Don Quixote. We do not lose much by the omission of such details, which are generally picked up from the female gossips of the neighbourhood. They see only the outer shell; but we see the man, his true, sincere, unslandered self.

The biographers can tell us very little about the person or private life of the poet who wrote Don Quixote. We don’t miss much by not knowing those details, which are usually gathered from local women gossiping. They only see the surface; we see the man, his genuine, honest, untainted self.

He was a handsome, powerful man, Don Miguel Cervantes de Saavedra. He had a high forehead, and a large heart. His eyes possessed a wonderful magic; just as there are people who can look into the earth, and see the hidden treasures and the dead that lie buried there, so the eye of the great poet could penetrate the breasts of men, and see distinctly all that was concealed there. To the good his look was as a ray of sunlight gladdening and illuminating the heart; to the bad his glance was a sword, sharply piercing their souls. His searching eyes penetrated to the very soul of a person, and questioned it, and if it refused to answer, he put it to the torture, and the soul lay stretched bleeding on the rack, while perhaps the body assumed an air of condescending superiority. Is it to be wondered at that many formed a dislike for him, and gave him but scant assistance in his journey through life? He never achieved rank or position, and from all his toilsome pilgrimages he brought back no pearls, but only empty shells. It is said that he could not appreciate the value of money, but I assure you he fully appreciated its worth when he had no more. But he never prized it as highly as he did his honour. He had debts, and in one of his writings, in which Apollo is supposed to grant to the poets a charter of privileges, the first paragraph declares: When a poet says he has no money, his simple assurance shall suffice, and no oath shall be required of him. He loved music, flowers, and women, but in his love for the latter he sometimes fared very badly, particularly in his younger days. Did the consciousness of future greatness console him, when pert young roses stung him with their thorns?—Once on a bright summer afternoon, while yet a young gallant, he walked along the banks of the Tagus in company with a pretty girl of sweet sixteen, who continually mocked at his tender speeches. The sun had not yet set, it still glowed with all its golden splendour, but high up in the heavens was the moon, pale and insignificant, like a little white cloud. "See'st thou," said the young poet to his sweetheart, "see'st thou yonder small pale disk? The river by our side in which it mirrors itself seems to receive its pitiful reflex on its proud bosom merely out of compassion, and the curling billows at times cast it disdainfully aside towards the shore. But wait until day fades into twilight; as soon as darkness descends, yonder pale orb will grow brighter and brighter, and will flood the whole stream with its silvery light, and the haughty billows that before were so scornful will then tremble with ecstasy at sight of the lovely moon, and roll rapturously towards it."

He was a handsome, powerful man, Don Miguel Cervantes de Saavedra. He had a high forehead and a big heart. His eyes held a fascinating magic; just as some people can look into the ground and see hidden treasures and the dead buried there, the great poet's eyes could see right into people's hearts and reveal everything hidden within. To the good, his gaze was like a ray of sunlight, uplifting and brightening the heart; to the bad, his stare was like a sword, sharply piercing their souls. His penetrating eyes reached deep into a person’s soul, questioning it, and if it wouldn’t answer, he would push it to the limit, leaving the soul exposed and bleeding while the body maintained an air of false superiority. Is it any surprise that many disliked him and offered little help on his journey through life? He never achieved any rank or position, and from all his hard travels, he returned with no treasures, just empty shells. It’s said he didn’t understand the value of money, but I assure you he recognized its importance when he had none left. However, he never valued it as much as he did his honor. He had debts, and in one of his writings, where Apollo is supposed to grant poets special privileges, the first line states: When a poet claims he has no money, his word alone should be enough, and no oath is necessary. He loved music, flowers, and women, but his romantic pursuits sometimes went poorly, especially in his younger years. Did the thought of future greatness comfort him when youthful beauties pricked him with their thorns?—Once, on a bright summer afternoon, while still a young man, he strolled along the banks of the Tagus with a pretty girl of sweet sixteen, who constantly teased his romantic words. The sun had not yet set, still shining in all its golden glory, but high in the sky was the moon, pale and insignificant, like a little white cloud. "Do you see," said the young poet to his sweetheart, "do you see that small pale disk? The river beside us, in which it reflects, seems to show its miserable image out of pity, while the gentle waves occasionally push it disdainfully towards the shore. But wait until day turns to dusk; as soon as night falls, that pale orb will shine brighter, flooding the whole river with silver light, and the proud waves that were so dismissive before will then quiver with joy at the sight of the beautiful moon, rushing toward it with delight."

The history of poets must be sought for in their works, for there are to be found their most confidential confessions. In all his writings, in his dramas even more than in Don Quixote, we see, as I have before mentioned, that Cervantes had long been a soldier. In fact, the Roman proverb, "Living means fighting," finds a double application in his case. He took part as a common soldier in most of those fierce games of war which King Philip II. carried on in all countries for the honour of God and his own pleasure. The circumstance that Cervantes devoted his whole youth to the service of the greatest champion of Catholicism, and that he fought to advance Catholic interests, warrants the assumption that he had those interests at heart, and hence refutes the widely-spread opinion that only the fear of the Inquisition withheld him from discussing in Don Quixote the great Protestant questions of the time. No, Cervantes was a faithful son of the Roman church, and he not only bled physically in knightly combats for her blessed banner, but his whole soul suffered a most painful martyrdom during his many years of captivity among the Unbelievers.

The history of poets can be found in their works, as they contain their most private confessions. Throughout his writing, and especially in his plays more than in Don Quixote, we see, as I mentioned before, that Cervantes had spent a long time as a soldier. In fact, the Roman saying, "Living means fighting," is particularly relevant in his case. He fought as a regular soldier in many of the intense battles that King Philip II waged across various countries for the glory of God and his own pleasure. The fact that Cervantes dedicated his entire youth to serving the leading champion of Catholicism and fought to promote Catholic interests suggests that he truly cared about those beliefs. This undermines the common view that only fear of the Inquisition kept him from addressing the major Protestant issues of his time in Don Quixote. No, Cervantes was a loyal follower of the Roman Church; he not only suffered physically in knightly battles for her revered banner, but his entire being endured deep agony during his many years of captivity among the non-believers.

We are indebted to accident for most of the details of Cervantes's doings while in Algiers, and here we recognise in the great poet an equally great hero. The history of his captivity gives a most emphatic contradiction to the melodious lie of that polished man of the world, who made Augustus and the German pedants believe that he was a poet, and that poets are cowards. No, the true poet is also a true hero, and in his breast dwells that God-like patience, which, as the Spaniards say, is a second fount of courage. There is no more elevating spectacle than that of the noble Castilian who serves the Dey of Algiers as a slave, constantly meditating an escape, with unflagging energy preparing his bold plans, composedly facing all dangers, and when the enterprise miscarries, is ready to submit to torture and death rather than betray his accomplices. The blood-thirsty master of his body becomes disarmed by such grand magnanimity and virtue. The tiger spares the fettered lion, and trembles before the terrible "One-Arm," whom with but a single word he could dispatch to his death. Cervantes is known in all Algiers as "One-Arm," and the Dey confesses that only when he knows that the one-armed Spaniard is in safe-keeping can he sleep soundly at night, assured of the safety of his city, his army, and his slaves.

We owe most of the details about Cervantes's time in Algiers to chance, and here we see the great poet as an equally great hero. The story of his captivity strongly contradicts the smooth lie told by that polished man of the world, who convinced Augustus and the German intellectuals that he was a poet and that poets are cowards. No, the true poet is also a true hero, and within him resides a God-like patience, which, as the Spaniards say, is a second source of courage. There’s nothing more uplifting than witnessing the noble Castilian who serves the Dey of Algiers as a slave, constantly thinking about escape, tirelessly planning his daring moves, calmly facing all dangers, and when things go wrong, being ready to endure torture and death rather than betray his companions. The bloodthirsty master of his body is disarmed by such magnificent nobility and virtue. The tiger spares the chained lion and trembles before the fearsome “One-Arm,” whom with just a word he could send to his death. Cervantes is known throughout Algiers as "One-Arm," and the Dey admits that only when he knows the one-armed Spaniard is securely held can he sleep peacefully at night, confident in the safety of his city, his army, and his slaves.

I have referred to the fact that Cervantes was always a common soldier, but even in so subordinate a position he succeeded in distinguishing himself to such a degree as to attract the notice of the great general, Don John of Austria, and on his return from Italy to Spain he was furnished with the most complimentary letters of recommendation to the king, in which his advancement was most emphatically urged. When the Algerine corsairs, who captured him on the Mediterranean Sea, beheld these letters, they took him to be a person of the highest rank and importance, and hence demanded so large a ransom that notwithstanding all their efforts and sacrifices his family were not able to purchase his freedom, and the unfortunate poet's captivity was thereby prolonged and embittered. Thus the recognition of his merits became an additional source of misfortune, and thus to the very end of his days was he mocked by that cruel dame, the Goddess Fortuna, who never forgives genius for having achieved fame and honour without her assistance.

I have mentioned that Cervantes was always a regular soldier, but even in such a lowly position, he managed to stand out enough to catch the attention of the great general, Don John of Austria. When he returned from Italy to Spain, he was given highly flattering letters of recommendation to the king, strongly urging his advancement. When the Algerine pirates, who captured him in the Mediterranean Sea, saw these letters, they thought he was a person of the highest rank and importance. As a result, they demanded such a large ransom that, despite all their efforts and sacrifices, his family couldn't buy his freedom, leading to the unfortunate poet’s prolonged and painful captivity. Thus, the recognition of his talents became an additional source of suffering, and until the end of his days, he was taunted by that cruel mistress, the Goddess Fortuna, who never forgives genius for achieving fame and honor without her help.

But are the misfortunes of a man of genius always the work of blind chance, or do they necessarily follow from his inner nature and environment? Does his soul enter into strife with the world of reality, or do the coarse realities begin the unequal conflict with his noble soul?

But are the hardships faced by a talented person always due to random fate, or do they stem from his character and surroundings? Does his spirit clash with the real world, or do the harsh realities initiate the unfair battle against his noble spirit?

Society is a republic. When an individual strives to rise, the collective masses press him back through ridicule and abuse. No one shall be wiser or better than the rest. But against him, who by the invincible power of genius towers above the vulgar masses, society launches its ostracism, and persecutes him so mercilessly with scoffing and slander, that he is finally compelled to withdraw into the solitude of his own thoughts.

Society is a republic. When someone tries to succeed, the collective pushes them down through mockery and abuse. No one should be smarter or better than anyone else. But against those who, through their incredible genius, stand out from the ordinary masses, society reacts with ostracism, mercilessly attacking them with ridicule and gossip, forcing them to retreat into the solitude of their own thoughts.

Verily, society is republican in its very essence. Every sovereignty, intellectual as well as material, is hated by it. The latter oftener gives aid to the former than is generally imagined. We ourselves came to this conclusion soon after the revolution of July, when the spirit of republicanism manifested itself in all social relations. Our republicans hated the laurels of a great poet even as they hated the purple of a great king. They sought to level the intellectual inequalities of mankind, and in as much as they regarded all ideas that had been produced on the soil of the state as general property, nothing remained to be done but to decree an equality of style also. In sooth, a good style was decried as something aristocratic, and we heard manifold assertions: "A true democrat must write in the style of the people—sincere, natural, crude." Most of the Party of Action succeeded easily in doing this, but not every one possesses the gift of writing badly, especially if one has previously formed the habit of writing well, and then it was at once said, "That is an aristocrat, a lover of style, a friend of art, an enemy of the people." They were surely honest in their views, like Saint Hieronymus, who considered his good style a sin, and gave himself sound scourgings for it.

Truly, society is fundamentally republican. It despises every form of authority, both intellectual and material. The latter often supports the former more than people realize. We reached this conclusion soon after the July Revolution when the spirit of republicanism showed itself in all social interactions. Our republicans loathed the achievements of a great poet just as much as they hated the status of a great king. They aimed to eliminate the intellectual disparities among people, and since they viewed all ideas created within the state as common property, the only thing left to do was to establish equality in writing style as well. Indeed, a good writing style was seen as something aristocratic, and we heard many claims: "A true democrat must write in the people's language—sincere, natural, raw." Most of the Party of Action managed to do this easily, but not everyone has the knack for writing poorly, especially if they've previously developed the habit of writing well. Then it was immediately said, "That's an aristocrat, a style lover, an art enthusiast, an enemy of the people." They were certainly sincere in their beliefs, like Saint Jerome, who considered his polished style a sin and punished himself harshly for it.

Just as little as we find anti-Catholic, so also do we fail to discover anti-absolutist strains in Don Quixote. The critics who think that they scent such sentiments therein are clearly in error. Cervantes was the son of a school which went so far as to poetically idealise the idea of unquestioning obedience to the sovereign. And that sovereign was the King of Spain at a time when its majesty dazzled the whole world. The common soldier felt himself a ray in that halo of glory, and willingly sacrificed his individual freedom to gratify the national pride of the Castilian.

Just as we barely find anti-Catholic views, we also don't see anti-absolutist themes in Don Quixote. Critics who believe these sentiments are present are clearly mistaken. Cervantes was raised in a tradition that even poetically glorified the idea of absolute obedience to the ruler. And that ruler was the King of Spain at a time when his grandeur amazed the entire world. The average soldier felt like a part of that glory and willingly gave up his personal freedom to boost the national pride of the Castilians.

The political grandeur of Spain at that time contributed not a little to exalt and enlarge the hearts of her poets. In the mind of a Spanish poet, as in the realm of Charles V., the sun never set. The fierce wars against the Moors were ended, and as after a storm the flowers are most fragrant, so poesy ever blooms most grandly after a civil war. We witness the same phenomenon in England at the time of Elizabeth, and at the same time as in Spain there arose a galaxy of poets, which invites the most remarkable parallelisms. There we see Shakespeare, here Cervantes, as the flower of the school.

The political greatness of Spain during that time greatly inspired and uplifted her poets. In the mind of a Spanish poet, much like in the realm of Charles V, the sun always shone. The intense wars against the Moors had concluded, and just like flowers are most fragrant after a storm, poetry thrives most beautifully after a civil conflict. We see a similar situation in England during Elizabeth's reign, where a group of poets emerged alongside Spain, prompting fascinating comparisons. There, we see Shakespeare, and here, we have Cervantes, representing the pinnacle of their respective literary scenes.

Like the Spanish poets under the three Philips, so also the English poets under Elizabeth present a certain family likeness, and neither Shakespeare nor Cervantes have claim to originality in our sense of the word. They by no means differ from their contemporaries through peculiar modes of thought or feeling, or by an especial manner of portrayal, but only through greater depth, fervour, tenderness, and power. Their creations are more infused and penetrated with the divine spark of poetry.

Just like the Spanish poets during the reign of the three Philips, the English poets under Elizabeth show a resemblance. Both Shakespeare and Cervantes don't really have a claim to originality as we understand it today. They don't stand out from their peers because of unique thoughts or feelings, or by a distinctive style of expression, but rather due to their greater depth, passion, sensitivity, and strength. Their works are more filled with the divine spark of poetry.

But both poets were not only the flowers of their time, but they were also the germs of the future. As Shakespeare, by the influence of his works, particularly on Germany and the France of to-day, is to be regarded as the creator of the later dramatic art, so must we honour in Cervantes the author of the modern novel. I shall allow myself a few passing observations on the subject.

But both poets were not just the highlights of their time; they were also the seeds of the future. Just as Shakespeare, through the impact of his works, especially on today's Germany and France, is seen as the creator of modern drama, we must also recognize Cervantes as the author of the modern novel. I’ll share a few thoughts on the topic.

The older novels, the so-called romances of chivalry sprang from the poetry of the middle ages. They were at first prose versions of those epic poems whose heroes are derived from the mythical traditions of Charlemagne and the Holy Grail. The subject was always knightly adventures. It was the romance of the nobility, and the personages that figured therein were either fabulous, fantastic beings, or knights with golden spurs; nowhere an allusion to the people. These romances of knighthood, which degenerated into the most ridiculous absurdities, Cervantes overthrew by his Don Quixote. But while by his satire he destroyed the earlier romances, he also furnished a model for a new school of fiction, which we call the Modern Novel. Such is always the wont of great poets; while they tear down the old, they at the same time build up the new; they never destroy without replacing. Cervantes created the modern novel by introducing into his romances of knighthood a faithful description of the lower classes, by intermingling with it phases of folk-life. This partiality for describing the doings of the common rabble, of the vilest tatterdemalions, is not only found in Cervantes, but in all his literary contemporaries, and among the Spanish painters as well as among the poets of that period. A Murillo, who stole heaven's loveliest tints with which to paint his beautiful Madonnas, painted with the same love the filthiest creatures of this earth. It was perhaps the enthusiasm for art itself that made these noble Spaniards find equal pleasure in the faithful portrayal of a beggar lad scratching his head as in the representation of the Blessed Virgin. Or, perhaps, it was the charm of contrast that led noblemen of the highest rank, a dapper courtier like Quevedo, or a powerful minister like Mendoza, to fill their romances with ragged beggars and vagabonds. They perhaps sought to relieve the monotony of their lofty rank by putting themselves in imagination into a quite different sphere of life, just as we find a similar tendency among some of our German authors, whose novels contain naught else but descriptions of the nobility, and who always make their heroes counts and barons. We do not find in Cervantes this one-sided tendency to portray the vulgar only; he intermingles the ideal and the common; one serves as light or as shade to the other, and the aristocratic element is as prominent in it as the popular. But this noble, chivalrous, aristocratic element disappears entirely from the novels of the English, who were the first to imitate Cervantes, and to this day always keep him in view as a model. These English novelists since Richardson's reign are prosaic natures; to the prudish spirit of their time even pithy descriptions of the life of the common people are repugnant, and we see on yonder side of the channel those bourgeois novels arise, wherein the petty, humdrum life of the middle classes is depicted. The public were surfeited with this deplorable class of literature until recently, when appeared the great Scot, who effected a revolution, or rather a restoration, in novel-writing. As Cervantes introduced the democratic element into romance, at a time when one-sided knight-errantry ruled supreme, so Walter Scott restored the aristocratic element to romance when it had wholly disappeared, and only a prosaic bourgeoisie was to be found there. By an opposite course Walter Scott again restored to romance that beautiful symmetry which we admire in Cervantes's Don Quixote.

The older novels, known as romances of chivalry, came from the poetry of the Middle Ages. Initially, they were prose versions of epic poems featuring heroes based on the mythical traditions surrounding Charlemagne and the Holy Grail. The main topic was always knightly adventures. These stories celebrated the nobility, and the characters were either mythical beings or knights adorned with golden spurs—never a mention of the common people. Cervantes challenged these romances, which had descended into ridiculous absurdities, through his work, *Don Quixote*. While his satire dismantled the earlier romances, it also laid the foundation for a new style of storytelling that we now refer to as the Modern Novel. This is the nature of great poets; as they dismantle the old, they also create the new; they never destroy without building something in its place. Cervantes shaped the modern novel by presenting a realistic depiction of the lower classes and weaving in aspects of everyday life. This interest in capturing the lives of the common folk, even the most disheveled characters, is seen not only in Cervantes but also echoed in the works of his literary contemporaries, as well as among Spanish painters and poets of that era. A Murillo, who captured the most beautiful colors from heaven to paint his lovely Madonnas, depicted with the same passion the most destitute creatures. Perhaps it was a passion for art itself that drove these noble Spaniards to find joy in honestly portraying a beggar boy scratching his head, just as much as in depicting the Blessed Virgin. Or maybe it was the charm of contrast that led high-ranking nobles, like the dapper courtier Quevedo or the influential minister Mendoza, to fill their romances with ragged beggars and vagrants. They might have sought to break the monotony of their high status by imagining themselves in a different sphere of life, similar to some of our German authors, whose novels focus solely on the nobility and always feature counts and barons as heroes. Cervantes does not lean towards solely depicting the vulgar; he blends the ideal with the ordinary, each providing light or shadow to the other, with elements of both aristocracy and common life interwoven. However, the noble, chivalrous, aristocratic aspect completely vanishes from the novels of the English, who were the first to imitate Cervantes and still regard him as a model today. Since the time of Richardson, these English novelists have been more grounded; their prudish spirit found even vivid portrayals of common life distasteful, leading to the rise of *bourgeois* novels across the channel, which depict the mundane lives of the middle class. The public became overwhelmed with this unfortunate genre of literature until recently when the great Scot emerged, bringing about a revolution—or rather a restoration—in novel writing. Just as Cervantes infused a democratic element into romance at a time when knightly quests dominated, Walter Scott reintegrated the aristocratic element into romance when it had entirely vanished, leaving only a prosaic bourgeois narrative. Through a contrasting approach, Walter Scott revived the beautiful balance we admire in Cervantes's *Don Quixote*.

I believe that the merits of England's second great poet have never in this respect been recognised. His Tory proclivities, his partiality for the past, were wholesome for literature, and for those masterpieces of his genius that everywhere found favour and imitators, and which drove into the darkest corners of the circulating libraries those ashen-grey, ghostly remains of the bourgeoisie romances. It is an error not to recognise Walter Scott as the founder of the so-called Historical Romance, and to endeavour to trace the latter to German initiative. This error arises from the failure to perceive that the characteristic feature of the Historical Romance consists just in the harmony between the aristocratic and democratic elements, and that Walter Scott, through the re-introduction of the aristocratic element, most beautifully restored that harmony which had been overthrown during the absolutism of the democratic element, whereas our German romanticists eliminated the democratic element entirely from their novels, and returned again to the ruts of those crazy romances of knight-errantry that flourished before Cervantes. Our De la Motte-Fouqué is only a straggler from the ranks of those poets who gave to the world Amadis de Gaul, and similar extravagant absurdities. I admire not only the talent, but also the courage of the noble Baron who, two centuries after the appearance of Don Quixote, has written his romances of chivalry. It was a peculiar period in Germany when the latter appeared and found favour with the public. What was the significance in literature of that partiality for knight-errantry, and for those pictures of the old feudal times? I believe that the German people desired to bid an eternal farewell to the middle ages, but moved with emotion as we Germans are so apt to be, we took our leave with a kiss. For the last time we pressed our lips to the old tombstone. True, some of us behaved in a very silly manner on that occasion. Ludwig Tieck, the smallest boy in school, dug the dead ancestors out of their grave, rocked the coffin as if it were a cradle, and in childish, lisping accents sang, "Sleep, little grandsire, sleep."

I think that the value of England's second great poet has never really been recognized in this way. His Tory leanings and love for the past were beneficial for literature and for those masterpieces of his talent that found favor and followers everywhere, pushing those ashen-grey, ghostly remnants of the bourgeois romances into the darkest corners of circulating libraries. It’s a mistake not to see Walter Scott as the creator of the so-called Historical Romance and instead try to trace its origins back to German roots. This mistake comes from not understanding that the key feature of the Historical Romance is the balance between aristocratic and democratic elements. Scott, by reintroducing the aristocratic element, beautifully restored that balance which was disrupted during the dominance of the democratic element. Meanwhile, our German romanticists completely eliminated the democratic aspect from their novels, reverting to the outdated tales of chivalry that thrived before Cervantes. Our De la Motte-Fouqué is just a leftover from the poets who brought us Amadis de Gaul and similar extravagant nonsense. I admire not only the talent but also the bravery of the noble Baron who, two centuries after Don Quixote, wrote his tales of chivalry. It was a unique time in Germany when these works appeared and were embraced by the public. What did this nostalgia for knight-errantry and depictions of old feudal times signify in literature? I believe that the German people wanted to say a final goodbye to the Middle Ages, but being the sentimental people we are, we parted with a kiss. For one last time, we pressed our lips to the old gravestone. True, some of us acted quite foolishly during that farewell. Ludwig Tieck, the smallest boy in school, dug up the dead ancestors from their graves, rocked the coffin like a cradle, and in childish, lisping tones sang, "Sleep, little grandsire, sleep."

I have called Walter Scott England's second great poet, and his novels masterpieces; but it is to his genius only that I would give the highest praise. His novels I can by no means place on an equality with the great romance of Cervantes. The latter surpasses him in epic spirit. Cervantes was, as I have already stated, a Catholic poet, and it is perhaps to this circumstance that he is indebted for that grand epic composure of soul, which, like a crystalline firmament, overarches those picturesque and poetical creations; nowhere is there a rift of scepticism. Added to this is the calm dignity which is the national characteristic of the Spaniard. But Walter Scott belongs to a church which subjects even divine matters to a sharp examination; as an advocate and as a Scotchman he is accustomed to action and to debate, and we find the dramatic element most prominent in his novels, as well as in his life and his temperament. Hence his works can never be regarded as the pure model of that style of fiction which we denominate the Romance. To the Spaniards is due the honour of having produced the best novel, as England is entitled to the credit of having achieved the highest rank in the drama.

I’ve called Walter Scott England’s second great poet, and his novels masterpieces; but it’s his genius alone that deserves the highest praise. I can't place his novels on the same level as Cervantes’ great romance. The latter surpasses him in epic spirit. Cervantes was, as I’ve already mentioned, a Catholic poet, and it’s perhaps because of this that he possesses that grand epic composure of soul, which, like a clear sky, covers those vivid and poetic creations; there isn't a hint of skepticism anywhere. On top of that is the calm dignity that’s a national characteristic of the Spaniard. But Walter Scott comes from a tradition that subjects even divine matters to rigorous examination; as an advocate and a Scotsman, he’s used to action and debate, and we see the dramatic element prominently in his novels, as well as in his life and personality. Therefore, his works can never be seen as the pure model of the style of fiction we call Romance. The Spaniards deserve credit for producing the best novel, just as England is acknowledged for having reached the highest rank in drama.

And the Germans, what palm remains for them? Well, then, we are the best lyric poets on earth. No people possesses such beautiful songs as the Germans. At present the nations are too much occupied with political affairs, but when these are once laid aside, then let us Germans, English, Spaniards, French, Italians, all go out into the green forests and chant our lays, and the nightingale shall be umpire. I am convinced that in this tournament of minstrelsy the songs of Wolfgang Goethe will win the prize.

And what do the Germans have left? Well, we are the best lyric poets in the world. No other people has such beautiful songs as the Germans. Right now, everyone is too caught up in politics, but once that’s behind us, let’s gather—Germans, English, Spaniards, French, Italians—out in the lush forests to sing our songs, and the nightingale will judge. I’m sure that in this music competition, the songs of Wolfgang Goethe will take the prize.

Cervantes, Shakespeare, and Goethe form the triumvirate of poets, who, in the three great divisions of poetry, epic, dramatic, and lyric, have achieved the greatest success. The writer of these pages is perhaps peculiarly fitted to sound the praises of our great countryman as the most perfect of lyric poets. Goethe stands midway between the two classes of song-writers, between those two schools, of which one, alas! is known by my own name, the other as the Suabian school. Both have their merits; they have indirectly promoted the welfare of German poetry. The first effected a wholesome reaction against the one-sided idealism of German poetry, it led the intellect back to stern realities, and uprooted that sentimental Petrarchism that has always seemed to us as a Quixotism in verse. The Suabian school also contributed indirectly to the weal of German poetry. If in Northern Germany strong and healthy poetical productions came to light, thanks are perhaps due to the Suabian school, which attracted to itself all the sickly chlorotic, mawkishly-pious, clumsy votaries of the German muse. Stuttgart was the fontanel, as it were, for the German muse.

Cervantes, Shakespeare, and Goethe make up the trio of poets who, in the three main forms of poetry—epic, dramatic, and lyric—have achieved the greatest success. The author of these words is perhaps particularly suited to praise our great countryman as the most perfect of lyric poets. Goethe occupies a middle ground between the two types of songwriters, between two schools, one of which, unfortunately, bears my name, while the other is known as the Swabian school. Both have their strengths; they have indirectly advanced the quality of German poetry. The first sparked a healthy reaction against the one-sided idealism of German poetry, bringing the intellect back to harsh realities and uprooting the sentimental Petrarchism that has always seemed like a Quixotic notion in verse. The Swabian school also indirectly contributed to the betterment of German poetry. If strong and vibrant poetic works emerged in Northern Germany, credit may be due to the Swabian school, which attracted all the weak, overly-sentimental, and awkward followers of the German muse. Stuttgart was, in a sense, the source for the German muse.

While I ascribe the highest achievements in drama, in romance, and in lyric poetry to this great triumvirate, far be it from me to depreciate the poetical merits of other great poets. Nothing is more foolish than the query, "Which poet is greater than the other?" Flame is flame, and its weight cannot be determined in pounds and ounces. Only a narrow shopkeeper mind will attempt to weigh genius in its miserable cheese scales. Not only the ancients, but some of the moderns, have written works in which the fire of poetry burns with a splendour equal to that of the masterpieces of Shakespeare, Cervantes, and Goethe. Nevertheless, these names hold together as if through some secret bond. A kindred spirit shines forth from their creations, an immortal tenderness exhales from them like the breath of God, the modesty of nature blooms in them. Goethe not only constantly reminds one of Shakespeare, but also of Cervantes, and he resembles the latter even in the details of style, and in that charming prose diction which is tinged with a vein of the sweetest and most harmless irony. Cervantes and Goethe resemble each other even in their faults, in diffusiveness of style, in those long sentences that we occasionally find in their writings, and which may be compared to a procession of royal equipages. Not infrequently but a single thought sits in one of those long, wide-spreading sentences that rolls majestically along like a great, gilded court-chariot, drawn by six plumed steeds. But that single idea is always something exalted, perhaps even royal.

While I attribute the highest achievements in drama, romance, and lyric poetry to this great triumvirate, I certainly do not mean to downplay the poetic talents of other esteemed poets. It's completely pointless to ask, "Which poet is greater than the other?" Fire is fire, and you can't measure it in pounds or ounces. Only a limited perspective would try to quantify genius with pathetic scales. Not just the ancients, but some modern poets, have produced works where the flame of poetry burns as brightly as the masterpieces of Shakespeare, Cervantes, and Goethe. Yet, these names are connected by some unseen bond. A shared spirit radiates from their creations, an everlasting tenderness emanates from them like the breath of God, and the modesty of nature blossoms within them. Goethe constantly reminds us of Shakespeare, and also of Cervantes, resembling the latter even in stylistic details and in that delightful prose style marked by a hint of sweet and harmless irony. Cervantes and Goethe share similarities even in their flaws, in their wordiness, and in those long sentences we sometimes see in their works, which can be likened to a parade of royal carriages. Often, just a single thought resides within those lengthy, sprawling sentences that move grandly, like a magnificent, gilded chariot, pulled by six feathered horses. But that singular idea is always something elevated, possibly even regal.

My remarks concerning the genius of Cervantes and the influence of his book have been necessarily scant. Concerning the true value of his romance from an artistic standpoint, I must express myself still more briefly, as otherwise questions might arise which would lead to wide digressions into the sphere of æsthetics. I may only call attention in a general way to the form of the romance, and to the two figures that constitute its central point. The form is that of a description of travels which has ever been the most natural for this class of writings. I am reminded of The Golden Ass of Apuleius, the first romance of antiquity. Later poets sought to relieve the monotony of this form through what we to-day call fabliaux. But on account of poverty of invention the majority of romance writers have borrowed each other's fables; at least, part have always used the same tales, making but slight variations. Hence, through the resulting sameness of characters, situations, and complications, the public became at last somewhat wearied of romance-reading. To escape from the tediousness of hackneyed tales and fables, they sought refuge in the ancient, original form of narratives of travels. But this form will again be wholly supplanted just as soon as some creative genius shall arise with a new and original style of romance. In literature, as well as in politics, all things are subject to the law of action and reaction.

My comments about Cervantes's genius and the impact of his book have been pretty limited. When it comes to the true artistic value of his story, I have to be even more concise, as diving too deep could lead to a lot of unrelated discussions about aesthetics. I can only generally highlight the structure of the story and the two key characters at its core. The structure is that of a travel narrative, which has always been the most straightforward for this type of writing. It reminds me of Apuleius's The Golden Ass, the first romance from ancient times. Later writers tried to break the monotony of this format through what we now refer to as fabliaux. However, due to a lack of creativity, most romance authors have copied each other's stories; many have relied on the same plots with only minor tweaks. As a result, with the repetition of characters, situations, and conflicts, readers eventually became somewhat tired of romance novels. To escape the boredom of overused stories and fables, they turned back to the timeless, original style of travel narratives. But this format will once again be completely replaced as soon as a new creative talent emerges with a fresh and original way of writing romance. In literature, just like in politics, everything is influenced by the cycle of action and reaction.

As regards the two figures that are called Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, that so constantly burlesque, and yet so wonderfully complement each other, so that together they form the one true hero of the romance,—these two figures give evidence equally of the poet's artistic taste and of his intellectual profundity. If other authors, in whose romances the hero journeys solitary and alone through the world, are compelled to have recourse to monologues, letters, or diaries in order to communicate the thoughts and emotions of their heroes, Cervantes can always let a natural dialogue arise; and, inasmuch as the one figure always parodies the other, the author's purpose is the more clearly shown. Manifold have been the imitations of this double figure which lends to the romance of Cervantes such an artistic naturalness, and out of which, as from a single seed, has grown the whole novel, with all its wild foliage, its fragrant blossoms, its glowing fruits, its apes and marvellous birds that cluster amid its branches, resembling one of those giant trees of India.

Regarding the two characters known as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, who constantly mock each other yet perfectly complement one another, together they create the true hero of the story. These two characters showcase both the poet's artistic taste and intellectual depth. While other authors, whose heroes travel alone through the world, often rely on monologues, letters, or diaries to express their characters' thoughts and feelings, Cervantes can naturally develop a dialogue. Since one character always parodies the other, the author's intention becomes clearer. Many have tried to imitate this dual character dynamic, which gives Cervantes's romance its genuine artistic quality. From this single concept has blossomed a full novel, filled with wild foliage, fragrant flowers, vibrant fruits, monkeys, and fantastic birds perched among its branches, resembling one of those giant trees from India.

But it would be unjust to charge all this to a servile imitation; on the surface, as it were, lay the introduction of two such figures as Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, of which the one, the poetical nature, seeks adventures, and the other, half out of affection, half out of selfish motives, follows through sunshine and rain, as we often meet them in real life. In order to recognise this couple anywhere, under the most varied disguises, in art as well as in life, one must keep in view only the essential, the spiritual characteristics, not the incidental or external. I could offer innumerable instances of this. Do we not find Don Quixote and Sancho Panza clearly repeated in Don Juan and Leporello, and to a certain degree also in the persons of Lord Byron and his servant Fletcher? Do we not recognise these two types and their changed relations in the figures of the Knight von Waldsee and his Caspar Larifari, as also in the form of many an author and his publisher? The latter clearly discerns his author's follies, but in order to reap pecuniary profit out of them, faithfully accompanies him in all his ideal vagaries. And Master Publisher Sancho, even if at times he gains only buffets in the transaction, yet always remains fat, while the noble knight grows daily more and more emaciated. But not only among men, but also among women, have I often met the counterparts of Don Quixote and his henchman. I particularly remember a beautiful English lady, an impulsive, enthusiastic blonde, who, accompanied by her friend, had run away from a London boarding-school, to roam the wide world over in search of a noble, true-hearted lover, such as she had dreamed of on soft moonlight nights. Her friend, a short, plump brunette, also hoped through this opportunity to gain, if not so rare and high an ideal, at least a husband of good appearance. Still do I see her, with her slender figure, and blue, love-longing eyes, standing on the beach at Brighton, casting wistful glances over the billowy sea towards the French coast; meanwhile her companion cracked hazel-nuts, munched the sweet kernels with relish, and threw the shells into the water.

But it wouldn't be fair to call all this just a mere imitation; on the surface, so to speak, we see the introduction of two characters like Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, with one, the dreamer, searching for adventures, while the other, partly out of affection and partly for selfish reasons, follows through rain and shine, just as we often encounter them in real life. To spot this duo anywhere, in various disguises, in art as well as in life, one only needs to focus on the essential, the spiritual traits, not the incidental or external ones. I could give countless examples of this. Don't we see Don Quixote and Sancho Panza clearly reflected in Don Juan and Leporello, and to some extent also in the figures of Lord Byron and his servant Fletcher? Don't we recognize these two types and their shifting dynamics in the characters of Knight von Waldsee and his Caspar Larifari, as well as in many an author and his publisher? The latter clearly sees his author's follies but, in order to profit from them, faithfully follows him in all his fanciful pursuits. And Publisher Sancho, even if he sometimes gets only a beating in the deal, still remains well-fed, while the noble knight becomes more and more gaunt. But not only among men, but also among women, have I often encountered the counterparts of Don Quixote and his sidekick. I particularly remember a beautiful English lady, an impulsive, enthusiastic blonde, who, alongside her friend, ran away from a London boarding school to roam the world searching for a noble, true-hearted lover just like the one she had dreamed of on soft, moonlit nights. Her friend, a short, plump brunette, hoped through this adventure to find, if not such a rare and lofty ideal, at least a husband of good looks. I still picture her, with her slender figure and blue, longing eyes, standing on the beach at Brighton, casting wistful glances over the choppy sea toward the French coast; meanwhile, her friend cracked hazelnuts, munched on the sweet kernels with delight, and tossed the shells into the water.

And yet neither in the masterpieces of other artists, nor in nature herself, do we find these two types in their varying relations so minutely elaborated as in Cervantes. Every trait in the character and appearance of the one answers to a contrasting, and yet kindred, trait in the other. Here every detail has a burlesque signification; yes, even between Rosinante and Sancho's grey donkey there exists the same ironic parallelism as between the squire and the knight, and the two beasts are made to convey symbolically the same idea. As in their modes of thought, so also in their speech, do master and servant reveal a most marvellous contrast, and I cannot here omit to refer to the difficulties with which the translator has had to contend in order to reproduce in German the homely, gnarled dialect of our good Sancho. Through his blunt, frequently vulgar speeches, and his fondness for proverbialising, our good Sancho reminds us of King Solomon's fool, and of Marculfe, who, also, in opposition to a somewhat pathetic idealism, expresses in short and pithy sayings the practical wisdom of the common people. Don Quixote, on the contrary, speaks the language of culture, of the higher classes, and in the solemn gravity of his well-rounded periods, he fairly represents the high-born Hidalgo. At times his sentences are spun out too broadly, and the knight's language resembles a haughty court dame, attired in a much bepuffed silken robe, with a long rustling train. But the graces, disguised as pages, laughingly carry the tips of this train, and the long sentences end with the most charming turns.

And yet, neither in the masterpieces of other artists, nor in nature itself, do we find these two types in their varying relationships so intricately explored as in Cervantes. Every trait in the character and appearance of one aligns with a contrasting, yet similar, trait in the other. Here, every detail has a humorous significance; yes, even between Rosinante and Sancho's gray donkey, there is the same ironic parallel as between the squire and the knight, and the two animals symbolically convey the same idea. In their ways of thinking, as well as in their speech, master and servant reveal a remarkable contrast, and I must mention the challenges the translator faced to capture in German the earthy, rough dialect of our good Sancho. Through his blunt, often vulgar remarks, and his love for proverbs, our good Sancho reminds us of King Solomon's fool and Marculfe, who, in opposition to a somewhat sentimental idealism, expresses the practical wisdom of ordinary people in short, direct sayings. Don Quixote, on the other hand, speaks the language of culture, of the upper classes, and in the serious elegance of his well-structured sentences, he truly represents the noble Hidalgo. Sometimes his sentences are drawn out too long, and the knight's language resembles a proud court lady dressed in an overly elaborate silk gown with a long, rustling train. But the graces, disguised as pages, cheerfully carry the ends of this train, and the lengthy sentences finish with the most delightful turns.

The character of Don Quixote's language and that of Sancho Panza may be briefly summarised in the words: the former, when he speaks, seems always mounted on his high horse; the latter, as if seated on his humble donkey.

The way Don Quixote speaks is best described as always being on his high horse, while Sancho Panza seems to be sitting on his modest donkey.

It is remarkable that a book which is so rich as Don Quixote in picturesque matter has as yet found no painter who has taken from it subjects for a series of independent art works. Is the spirit of the book so volatile and fanciful that the variegated colours elude the artist's skill? I do not think so, for Don Quixote, light and fanciful as it is, is still based on rude, earthly realities, as must necessarily be the case to make it a book of the people. Is it, perhaps, because behind the figures brought before us by the poet, deeper ideas lie hidden, which the artist cannot produce again, so that he can give only the outward features, salient though they be, but fails to grasp and reproduce the deeper meaning?

It’s surprising that a book as rich in vivid detail as Don Quixote hasn't inspired any painters to create a series of independent artworks based on it. Is the book's spirit so whimsical and imaginative that its colorful essence escapes an artist's talent? I don’t think so, because while Don Quixote is lighthearted and whimsical, it still reflects gritty, earthly realities, which is essential for it to resonate with the public. Could it be that behind the characters presented by the poet, there are deeper ideas that the artist can’t quite capture? Maybe they can only portray the surface elements, which are striking, but fail to convey the richer meanings beneath?

GODS IN EXILE.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[Gods in Exile, in which Heine has gathered up some of the mediæval legends concerning the later history of the Greek and Roman gods, was written in the early spring of 1853 (a few pages, however, had been written so long before as 1836), and published in the Revue des Deux Mondes for that year. The translation, by Mr. Fleishman, here used, has been carefully revised, and in part rewritten.

[Gods in Exile, where Heine collected various medieval legends about the later history of the Greek and Roman gods, was written in early spring 1853 (though a few pages were written as far back as 1836) and published in the Revue des Deux Mondes that year. The translation by Mr. Fleishman used here has been carefully revised and partially rewritten.

It will be observed that the years between 1837 and 1853 are unrepresented in this volume. During that period—with the exception of the fragment of The Rabbi of Bacharach (which was, however, written earlier) and his book on Börne, both published in 1840—Heine produced very little prose.]

It can be noted that the years between 1837 and 1853 are not included in this volume. During that time—except for the excerpt from The Rabbi of Bacharach (which was actually written earlier) and his book on Börne, both published in 1840—Heine wrote very little prose.

...I AM speaking here of that metamorphosis into demons which the Greek and Roman gods underwent when Christianity achieved supreme control of the world. The superstition of the people ascribed to those gods a real but cursed existence, coinciding entirely in this respect with the teaching of the Church. The latter by no means declared the ancient gods to be myths, inventions of falsehood and error, as did the philosophers, but held them to be evil spirits, who, through the victory of Christ, had been hurled from the summit of their power, and now dragged along their miserable existences in the obscurity of dismantled temples or in enchanted groves, and by their diabolic arts, through lust and beauty, particularly through dancing and singing, lured to apostasy unsteadfast Christians who had lost their way in the forest.... I will remind the reader that the perplexities into which the poor old gods fell at the time of the final triumph of Christendom—that is, in the third century—offer striking analogies to former sorrowful events in their god-lives; for they found themselves plunged into the same sad predicament in which they had once before been placed in that most ancient time, in that revolutionary epoch when the Titans broke loose from their confinement in Orcus and, piling Pelion on Ossa, scaled high Olympus. At that time the poor gods were compelled to flee ignominiously and conceal themselves under various disguises on earth. Most of them repaired to Egypt, where, as is well known, for greater safety, they assumed the forms of animals. And in a like manner, when the true Lord of the universe planted the banner of the cross on the heavenly heights, and those iconoclastic zealots, the black band of monks, hunted down the gods with fire and malediction and razed their temples, then these unfortunate heathen divinities were again compelled to take to flight, seeking safety under the most varied disguises and in the most retired hiding-places. Many of these poor refugees, deprived of shelter and ambrosia, were now forced to work at some plebeian trade in order to earn a livelihood. Under these circumstances several, whose shrines had been confiscated, became wood-choppers and day-labourers in Germany, and were compelled to drink beer instead of nectar. It appears that Apollo was reduced to this dire plight, and stooped so low as to accept service with cattle-breeders, and as once before he had tended the cows of Admetus, so now he lived as a shepherd in Lower Austria. Here, however, he aroused suspicion through the marvellous sweetness of his singing and, being recognised by a learned monk as one of the ancient magic-working heathen gods, he was delivered over to the ecclesiastical courts. On the rack he confessed that he was the god Apollo. Before his execution he begged that he might be permitted for the last time to play the zither and sing to its accompaniment. But he played so touchingly and sang so enchantingly, and was so handsome in face and form, that all the women wept; and many of them indeed afterwards sickened. After some lapse of time, it was decided to remove his body from the grave under the impression that he was a vampire, and impale it upon a stake, this being an approved domestic remedy certain to effect the cure of the sick women; but the grave was found empty.

...I AM talking here about the transformation of the Greek and Roman gods into demons when Christianity took over the world. People believed these gods had a real but cursed existence, which aligned perfectly with the Church's teachings. The Church didn’t declare the ancient gods as mere myths or creations of falsehood like the philosophers did; instead, it viewed them as evil spirits who, after Christ’s victory, were cast down from their power and now lived miserable lives in abandoned temples or enchanted groves. Using their demonic powers, particularly through seduction and beauty, especially through dancing and singing, they led wandering Christians who had strayed from their faith into apostasy.… I’d like to remind the reader that the confusion the old gods experienced at the peak of Christianity’s triumph—around the third century—has striking similarities to their past sorrows; they found themselves in the same unfortunate situation they were once in long ago during that ancient time when the Titans broke free from their prison in Orcus and climbed Olympus by piling Pelion on Ossa. Back then, the poor gods had to shamefully flee and disguise themselves on earth. Most of them sought refuge in Egypt, where, for safety, they turned into animals. Similarly, when the true Lord of the universe raised the cross in the heavens, and when the iconoclastic monks hunted down the gods with fire and curses and destroyed their temples, these unfortunate pagan deities once again had to flee, searching for safety in various disguises and hidden places. Many of these refugees, stripped of their homes and divine food, were forced to take on common jobs to survive. Under these conditions, several, whose shrines had been taken away, became woodcutters and day laborers in Germany, and had to drink beer instead of nectar. It seems that Apollo fell into this desperate situation and stooped so low as to work with cattle breeders; just as he once tended Admetus’s cows, he now lived as a shepherd in Lower Austria. However, he drew suspicion due to the incredible sweetness of his singing, and a learned monk recognized him as one of the ancient enchantingly powerful pagan gods, leading to his arrest by the ecclesiastical courts. Under torture, he confessed that he was the god Apollo. Before his execution, he requested to play the zither and sing one last time. But he played so beautifully and sang so enchantingly, and was so handsome, that all the women wept; many of them even fell ill afterwards. After some time, they decided to dig up his body from the grave, believing he was a vampire, and wanted to impale it on a stake to cure the sick women; however, they found the grave empty.

I have but little to communicate concerning the fate of Mars, the ancient god of war. I am not disinclined to believe that during the feudal ages he availed himself of the then prevailing doctrine that might makes right. Lank Schimmelpennig, nephew of the executioner of Münster, once met Mars at Bologna, and conversed with him. Shortly before he had served as a peasant under Froudsberg, and was present at the storming of Rome. Bitter thoughts must have filled his breast when he saw his ancient, favourite city, and the temples wherein he and his brother gods had been so revered, now ignominiously laid waste.

I don't have much to share about the fate of Mars, the ancient god of war. I’m inclined to think that during the feudal ages, he took advantage of the belief that power justifies actions. Lank Schimmelpennig, the nephew of the executioner of Münster, once encountered Mars in Bologna and talked with him. Not long before that, he had been a peasant under Froudsberg and witnessed the storming of Rome. It must have filled him with bitterness to see his beloved ancient city and the temples where he and the other gods had been so honored, now disgracefully destroyed.

Better than either Mars or Apollo fared the god Bacchus at the great stampede, and the legends relate the following:—In Tyrol there are very large lakes, surrounded by magnificent trees that are mirrored in the blue waters. Trees and water murmur so that one experiences strange feelings of awe when one wanders there alone. On the bank of such a lake stood the hut of a young fisherman, who lived by fishing, and who also acted as ferryman to any travellers who wished to cross the lake. He had a large boat, that was fastened to the trunk of an old tree not far from his dwelling. Here he lived quite alone. Once, about the time of the autumnal equinox, towards midnight, he heard a knocking at his window, and on opening the door he saw three monks, with their heads deeply muffled in their cowls, who seemed to be in great haste. One of them hurriedly asked him for the boat, promising to return it within a few hours. The monks were three, and the fisherman could not hesitate; so he unfastened the boat, and when they had embarked and departed, he went back to his hut and lay down. He was young, and soon fell asleep; but in a few hours he was awakened by the returning monks. When he went out to them, one of them pressed a silver coin into his hand, and then all three hastened away. The fisherman went to look at his boat, which he found made fast. Then he shivered, but not from the night-air. A peculiarly chilling sensation had passed through his limbs, and his heart seemed almost frozen, when the monk who paid the fare touched his hand; the monk's fingers were cold as ice. For some days the fisherman could not forget this circumstance; but youth will soon shake off mysterious influences, and the fisherman thought no more of the occurrence until the following year, when, again just at the time of the autumnal equinoxes, towards midnight, there was a knocking at the window of the hut, and again the three cowled monks appeared, and again demanded the boat. The fisherman delivered up the boat with less anxiety this time, but when after a few hours they returned, and one of the monks again hastily pressed a coin into his hand, he again shuddered at the touch of the icy cold fingers. This happened every year at the same time and in the same manner. At last, as the seventh year drew near, an irresistible desire seized on the fisherman to learn, at all costs, the secret that was hidden under these three cowls. He piled a mass of nets into the boat, so as to form a hiding-place into which he could slip while the monks were preparing to embark. The sombre expected travellers came at the accustomed time, and the fisherman succeeded in hiding himself under the nets unobserved. To his astonishment, the voyage lasted but a short time, whereas it usually took him over an hour to reach the opposite shore; and greater yet was his surprise when here, in a locality with which he had been quite familiar, he beheld a wide forest-glade which he had never before seen, and which was covered with flowers that, to him, were of quite strange kind. Innumerable lamps hung from the trees, and vases filled with blazing rosin stood on high pedestals; the moon, too, was so bright that the fisherman could see all that took place, as distinctly as if it had been mid-day. There were many hundreds of young men and young women, most of them beautiful as pictures, although their faces were all as white as marble, and this circumstance, together with their garments, which consisted of white, very white, tunics with purple borders, girt up, gave them the appearance of moving statues. The women wore on their heads wreaths of vine leaves, either natural or wrought of gold and silver, and their hair was partly plaited over the brow into the shape of a crown, and partly fell in wild locks on their necks. The young men also wore wreaths of vine leaves. Both men and women swinging in their hands golden staffs covered with vine leaves, hastened joyously to greet the new-comers. One of the latter threw aside his cowl, revealing an impertinent fellow of middle age, with a repulsive, libidinous face, and pointed goat-ears, and scandalously extravagant sexuality. The second monk also threw aside his cowl, and there came to view a big-bellied fellow, not less naked, whose bald pate the mischievous women crowned with a wreath of roses. The faces of the two monks, like those of the rest of the assemblage, were white as snow. White as snow also was the face of the third monk, who laughingly brushed the cowl from his head. As he unbound the girdle of his robe, and with a gesture of disgust flung off from him the pious and dirty garment, together with crucifix and rosary, lo! there stood, robed in a tunic brilliant as a diamond, a marvellously beautiful youth with a form of noble symmetry, save that there was something feminine in the rounded hips and the slender waist. His delicately-curved lips, also, and soft, mobile features gave him a somewhat feminine appearance; but his face expressed also a certain daring, almost reckless heroism. The women caressed him with wild enthusiasm, placed an ivy-wreath upon his head, and threw a magnificent leopard-skin over his shoulders. At this moment came swiftly dashing along, drawn by two lions, a golden two-wheeled triumphal chariot. Majestically, yet with a merry glance, the youth leaped on the chariot, guiding the wild steeds with purple reins. At the right of the chariot strode one of his uncassocked companions, whose lewd gestures and unseemly form delighted the beholders, while his comrade, with the bald pate and fat paunch, whom the merry women had placed on an ass, rode at the left of the chariot, carrying in his hand a golden drinking-cup, which was constantly refilled with wine. On moved the chariot, and behind it whirled the romping, dancing, vine-crowned men and women. At the head of the triumphal procession marched the orchestra; the pretty, chubby-cheeked youth, playing the double flute; then the nymph with the high-girt tunic, striking the jingling tambourine with her knuckles; then the equally gracious beauty, with the triangle; then the goat-footed trumpeters, with handsome but lascivious faces, who blew their fanfares on curious sea-shells and fantastically-shaped horns; then the lute-players.

Better than Mars or Apollo, the god Bacchus did well during the great stampede, and the legends say this: In Tyrol, there are large lakes surrounded by magnificent trees that reflect in the blue waters. The trees and water create a gentle sound, making anyone who wanders there alone feel a strange sense of awe. On the shore of one of these lakes stood the hut of a young fisherman, who made his living by fishing and also served as a ferryman for any travelers who wanted to cross the lake. He had a big boat tied to the trunk of an old tree not far from his home. He lived there alone. One night, around the time of the autumn equinox, he heard a knock at his window. When he opened the door, he saw three monks, their heads deep in their cowls, looking like they were in a hurry. One of them quickly asked for the boat, promising to return it in a few hours. The fisherman couldn’t refuse, so he untied the boat, and after they boarded and left, he went back to his hut and laid down. He was young and soon fell asleep; but a few hours later, he was awakened by the returning monks. When he stepped outside, one of them pressed a silver coin into his hand, and then all three hurried away. The fisherman went to check on his boat, which he found secure. Then he shivered, but not from the night air. A strange chill had passed through him, and his heart felt almost frozen when the monk who paid him touched his hand; the monk's fingers were icy. For several days, he couldn’t shake off that feeling, but youth soon forgets mysterious events, and the fisherman didn’t think about it again until the next year when, right around the autumn equinox, there was a knock at his window again, and the three cowled monks showed up, asking for the boat once more. This time, the fisherman gave up the boat with less worry, but when they returned after a few hours and one of the monks pressed a coin into his hand again, he felt that chilling touch once more. This happened every year at the same time. Finally, as the seventh year approached, the fisherman felt an irresistible urge to discover what was hidden beneath those three cowls. He piled nets into the boat to create a hiding place for himself while the monks prepared to board. The expected travelers arrived at their usual time, and the fisherman successfully concealed himself under the nets without being noticed. To his surprise, the trip was much shorter than usual; it only took a brief time to reach the other shore, where he encountered a large forest clearing he had never seen before, filled with flowers unlike any he knew. Countless lamps hung from the trees, and vases filled with blazing resin stood on high pedestals; the moon was so bright that the fisherman could see everything as clearly as if it were midday. Hundreds of young men and women, most of them stunningly beautiful, gathered there, but their faces were all as white as marble, and their white tunics with purple borders made them look like statues come to life. The women wore wreaths of vine leaves, either real or made of gold and silver, and their hair was styled, some braided into crowns and others flowing freely. The young men also wore vine wreaths. Both men and women carried golden staffs covered with vine leaves and joyfully rushed to greet the newcomers. One of the newcomers threw off his cowl, revealing an impudent middle-aged man with a grotesque, lustful face and pointed goat ears. The second monk also unveiled himself, showing a big-bellied man, similarly unclothed, who was crowned with a wreath of roses by the playful women. The faces of these two monks, much like those of the others in the crowd, were as white as snow. The third monk laughed as he took off his cowl. When he loosened his robe and tossed aside the tattered clothes, crucifix, and rosary, there stood a young man wearing a tunic shimmering like a diamond, incredibly handsome with a noble build, though there was something feminine about his curvy hips and slim waist. His delicate lips and soft, expressive features gave him a slightly feminine look, but there was also a daring, almost reckless heroism in his expression. The women embraced him with wild excitement, placed an ivy wreath on his head, and draped a magnificent leopard skin over his shoulders. At that moment, a golden chariot, drawn by two lions, raced in. Boldly, the youth hopped onto the chariot, guiding the wild steeds with purple reins. To the right of the chariot walked one of his companions, whose lewd gestures and unusual form amused the onlookers, while the bald man with the round belly, whom the merry women had placed on a donkey, rode at the left of the chariot, holding a golden drinking cup, which was constantly refilled with wine. The chariot moved on, followed by frolicking, dancing vine-crowned men and women. Leading the festive procession was the orchestra: a charming, chubby-cheeked youth playing the double flute; then a nymph in a high-girt tunic, striking the tambourine with her knuckles; then another lovely musician with the triangle; then the goat-footed trumpeters, with handsome but lascivious faces, blowing their fanfares on quirky sea shells and uniquely shaped horns; followed by the lute players.

But, dear reader, I forgot that you are a most cultured and well-informed reader, and have long since observed that I have been describing a Bacchanalia and a feast of Dionysius. You have often seen on ancient bas-reliefs, or in the engravings of archæological works, pictures of the triumphal processions held in honour of the god Bacchus; and surely, with your cultivated and classic tastes, you would not be frightened even if at dead of night, in the depths of a lonely forest, the lonely spectres of such a Bacchanalian procession, together with the customary tipsy personnel, should appear bodily before your eyes. At the most you would only give way to a slight voluptuous shudder, an æsthetic awe, at sight of this pale assemblage of graceful phantoms, who have risen from their monumental sarcophagi, or from their hiding-places amid the ruins of ancient temples, to perform once more their ancient, joyous, divine service; once more, with sport and merry-making, to celebrate the triumphal march of the divine liberator, the Saviour of the senses; to dance once more the merry dance of paganism, the can-can of the antique world—to dance it without any hypocritical disguise, without fear of the interference of the police of a spiritualistic morality, with the wild abandonment of the old days, shouting, exulting, rapturous. Evoe Bacche!

But, dear reader, I forgot that you are very cultured and well-informed, and have long noticed that I’ve been describing a Bacchanalia and a feast for Dionysius. You’ve often seen, in ancient bas-reliefs or in archaeological books, images of the triumphal processions held in honor of the god Bacchus; and surely, with your refined and classic tastes, you wouldn’t be scared even if, in the dead of night, deep in a lonely forest, the ghostly figures of such a Bacchanalian procession, along with the usual tipsy crowd, appeared before your eyes. At most, you might only feel a slight thrill of pleasure, an aesthetic awe, at the sight of this pale gathering of graceful phantoms, who have risen from their monumental sarcophagi or from their hiding spots among the ruins of ancient temples, to once again perform their joyous, divine service; to celebrate once more, with fun and laughter, the triumphant march of the divine liberator, the Saviour of the senses; to dance again the lively dance of paganism, the can-can of the ancient world—to dance it without any hypocritical disguise, without fear of being interrupted by the enforcers of a spiritual morality, with the wild abandon of old times, shouting, rejoicing, ecstatic. Evoe Bacche!

But alas, dear reader, the poor fisherman was not, like yourself, versed in mythology; he had never made archæological studies; and terror and fear seized upon him when he beheld the Triumphator and his two wonderful acolytes emerge from their monks' garb. He shuddered at the immodest gestures and leaps of the Bacchantes, Fauns, and Satyrs, who, with their goats' feet and horns, seemed to him peculiarly diabolical, and he regarded the whole assemblage as a congress of spectres and demons, who were seeking by their mysterious rites to bring ruin on all Christians. His hair stood on end at sight of the reckless impossible posture of a Mænad, who, with flowing hair and head thrown back, only balanced herself by the weight of her thyrsus. His own brain seemed to reel as he saw the Corybantes in mad frenzy wounding their own bodies with short swords, seeking voluptuousness in pain itself. The soft and tender, yet so terrible, tones of the music seemed to penetrate to his very soul, like a burning, consuming, excruciating flame. But when he saw that defamed Egyptian symbol, of exaggerated size and crowned with flowers, borne upon a tall pole by an unashamed woman, then sight and hearing forsook the poor fisherman—and he darted back to the boat, and crept under the nets, with chattering teeth and trembling limbs, as though Satan already held him fast by the foot. Soon after, the three monks also returned to the boat and shoved off. When they had disembarked at the original starting-place, the fisherman managed to escape unobserved from his hiding-place, so that they supposed he had merely been behind the willows awaiting their return. One of the monks, as usual, with icy-cold fingers pressed the fare into the fisherman's hand, then all three hurried away.

But sadly, dear reader, the poor fisherman was not, like you, knowledgeable about mythology; he had never studied archaeology; and terror overwhelmed him when he saw the Triumphator and his two amazing acolytes emerge from their monk robes. He shuddered at the inappropriate gestures and jumps of the Bacchantes, Fauns, and Satyrs, who, with their goat feet and horns, appeared particularly demonic to him, and he viewed the whole group as a gathering of ghosts and demons, who were trying through their mysterious rituals to bring destruction upon all Christians. His hair stood on end at the sight of the reckless, impossible pose of a Mænad, who, with flowing hair and her head thrown back, balanced herself only by the weight of her thyrsus. His mind seemed to spin as he watched the Corybantes in a mad frenzy, injuring their own bodies with short swords, seeking pleasure in pain itself. The soft and tender yet so terrifying notes of the music seemed to penetrate his very soul, like a burning, consuming, excruciating flame. But when he saw that notorious Egyptian symbol, oversized and crowned with flowers, carried on a tall pole by an unashamed woman, he lost his sight and hearing—and he dashed back to the boat, creeping under the nets, his teeth chattering and his limbs trembling, as if Satan already had a grip on his foot. Soon after, the three monks returned to the boat and pushed off. When they landed back at their original spot, the fisherman managed to escape unnoticed from his hiding place, so they assumed he had simply been behind the willows waiting for their return. One of the monks, as usual, pressed the fare into the fisherman's hand with icy fingers, then all three hurried away.

For the salvation of his own soul, which he believed to be endangered, and also to guard other good Christians from ruin, the fisherman held it his duty to communicate a full account of the mysterious occurrence to the Church authorities; and as the superior of a neighbouring Franciscan monastery was in great repute as a learned exorcist, the fisherman determined to go to him without delay. The rising sun found him on his way to the monastery, where, with modest demeanour, he soon stood before his excellency the superior, who received him seated in an easy-chair in the library, and with hood drawn closely over his face, listened meditatively while the fisherman told his tale of horror. When the recital was finished, the superior raised his head, and as the hood fell back, the fisherman saw, to his dismay, that his excellency was one of the three monks who annually sailed over the lake—the very one, indeed, whom he had the previous night seen as a heathen demon riding in the golden chariot drawn by lions. It was the same marble-white face, the same regular, beautiful features, the same mouth with its delicately-curved lips. And these lips now wore a kindly smile, and from that mouth now issued the gracious and melodious words, "Beloved son in Christ, we willingly believe that you have spent the night in company of the god Bacchus. Your fantastic ghost-story gives ample proof of that. Not that we would say aught unpleasant of this god: at times he is undoubtedly a care-dispeller, and gladdens the heart of man. But he is very dangerous for those who cannot bear much; and to this class you seem to belong. We advise you to partake in future very sparingly of the golden juice of the grape, and not again to trouble the spiritual authorities with the fantasies of a drunken brain. Concerning this last vision of yours, you had better keep a very quiet tongue in your head; otherwise the secular arm of our beadle shall measure out to you twenty-five lashes. And now, beloved son in Christ, go to the monastery kitchen, where brother butler and brother cook will set before you a slight repast."

For the sake of his own soul, which he thought was in danger, and to protect other good Christians from harm, the fisherman felt it was his duty to share a full account of the mysterious event with the Church authorities. Since the head of a nearby Franciscan monastery was well-known as a skilled exorcist, the fisherman decided to visit him right away. By dawn, he was on his way to the monastery, where, with a humble demeanor, he soon found himself before the superior, who was seated comfortably in an easy chair in the library. With his hood pulled tightly over his face, the superior listened thoughtfully as the fisherman recounted his terrifying experience. When the story ended, the superior lifted his head, and as the hood fell back, the fisherman, to his horror, recognized him as one of the three monks who sailed across the lake each year—the very one he had seen the previous night as a heathen demon riding in a golden chariot pulled by lions. It was the same marble-white face, the same striking, handsome features, the same mouth with its delicately curved lips. And those lips now wore a warm smile, and from that mouth came the kind and melodic words, "Beloved son in Christ, we are pleased to believe that you spent the night in the company of the god Bacchus. Your wild ghost story serves as ample evidence of that. Not that we mean to speak ill of this god: at times he certainly brings relief from worries and cheers the heart. But he can be very dangerous for those who can’t handle much, and you seem to belong to that group. We recommend that you partake in moderation of the golden juice of the grape in the future and refrain from bothering the spiritual authorities with the fantasies of a drunken mind. Regarding that last vision you had, it's better to keep quiet about it; otherwise, our beadle will give you twenty-five lashes. And now, beloved son in Christ, head to the monastery kitchen, where brother butler and brother cook will prepare a light meal for you."

With this, the reverend father bestowed the customary benediction on the fisherman, and when the latter, bewildered, took himself off to the kitchen and suddenly came face to face with brother cook and brother butler, he almost fell to the earth in affright, for they were the same monks who had accompanied the superior on his midnight excursions across the lake. He recognised one by his fat paunch and bald head, and the other by his lascivious grin and goat-ears. But he held his tongue, and only in later years did he relate his strange story.

With that, the reverend father gave the usual blessing to the fisherman, and when the fisherman, confused, went to the kitchen and unexpectedly ran into the cook and the butler, he nearly fell to the ground in fear, because they were the same monks who had gone with the superior on his late-night trips across the lake. He recognized one by his round belly and bald head, and the other by his lecherous grin and pointy ears. But he stayed quiet, only sharing his strange story many years later.

Several old chronicles which contain similar legends locate the scene near the city of Speyer, on the Rhine.

Several old chronicles that contain similar legends place the scene near the city of Speyer, along the Rhine.

Along the coast of East Friesland an analogous tradition is found, in which the ancient conception of the transportation of the dead to the realm of Hades, which underlies all those legends, is most distinctly seen. It is true that none of them contain any mention of Charon, the steersman of the boat: this old fellow seems to have entirely disappeared from folk-lore, and is to be met with only in puppet-shows. But a far more notable mythological personage is to be recognised in the so-called forwarding agent, or dispatcher, who makes arrangements for the transportation of the dead, and pays the customary passage-money into the hands of the boatman; the latter is generally a common fisherman, who officiates as Charon. Notwithstanding his quaint disguise, the true name of this dispatcher may readily be guessed, and I shall therefore relate the legend as faithfully as possible.

Along the coast of East Friesland, there's a similar tradition where the ancient idea of transporting the dead to the realm of Hades is clearly visible in all those legends. It’s true that none of them mention Charon, the ferryman: this old figure seems to have completely vanished from folklore and appears only in puppet shows. However, a much more significant mythological character is recognized in the so-called forwarding agent, or dispatcher, who makes arrangements for transporting the dead and pays the usual fare to the boatman; this boatman is typically an ordinary fisherman who acts as Charon. Despite his quirky disguise, the true name of this dispatcher is easy to figure out, so I will tell the legend as accurately as I can.

The shores of East Friesland that border on the North Sea abound with bays, which are used as harbours, and are called fiords. On the farthest projecting promontory of land generally stands the solitary hut of some fisherman, who here lives, peaceful and contented, with his family. Here nature wears a sad and melancholy aspect. Not even the chirping of a bird is to be heard, only now and then the shrill screech of a sea-gull flying up from its nest among the sand-hills, that announces the coming storm. The monotonous plashings of the restless sea harmonise with the sombre, shifting shadows of the passing clouds. Even the human inhabitants do not sing here, and on these melancholy coasts the strain of a volkslied is never heard. The people who live here are an earnest, honest, matter-of-fact race, proud of their bold spirit and of the liberties which they have inherited from their ancestors. Such a people are not imaginative, and are little given to metaphysical speculations. Fishing is their principal support, added to which is an occasional pittance of passage-money for transporting some traveller to one of the adjacent islands.

The shores of East Friesland that touch the North Sea are filled with bays used as harbors, known as fjords. On the farthest point of land usually stands the lone hut of a fisherman, who lives here peacefully and contentedly with his family. Here, nature has a sad and melancholic vibe. Not even the chirping of a bird can be heard; only occasionally does the sharp screech of a seagull rise from its nest among the sand dunes, signaling an approaching storm. The constant sound of the restless sea blends with the dark, shifting shadows of the passing clouds. Even the locals don’t sing here, and on these gloomy coasts, the tune of a folk song is never heard. The people living here are serious, honest, and practical, proud of their bold spirit and the freedoms they’ve inherited from their ancestors. Such a people aren’t imaginative and don’t tend to engage in deep philosophical thinking. Fishing is their main source of income, along with the occasional fare for transporting travelers to nearby islands.

It is said that at a certain period of the year, just at mid-day, when the fisherman and his family are seated at table eating their noonday meal, a traveller enters and asks the master of the house to vouchsafe him an audience for a few minutes to speak with him on a matter of business. The fisherman, after vainly inviting the stranger to partake of the meal, grants his request, and they both step aside to a little table. I shall not describe the personal appearance of the stranger in detail, after the tedious manner of novel-writers: a brief enumeration of the salient points will suffice. He is a little man, advanced in years, but well preserved. He is, so to say, a youthful greybeard: plump, but not corpulent; cheeks ruddy as an apple; small eyes, which blink merrily and continually, and on his powdered little head is set a three-cornered little hat. Under his flaming yellow cloak, with its many collars, he wears the old-fashioned dress of a well-to-do Dutch merchant, such as we see depicted in old portraits—namely, a short silk coat of a parrot-green colour, a vest embroidered with flowers, short black trousers, striped stockings, and shoes ornamented with buckles. The latter are so brightly polished that it is hard to understand how the wearer could trudge a-foot through the slimy mud of the coast and yet keep them so clean. His voice is a thin, asthmatic treble, sometimes inclining to be rather lachrymose; but the address and bearing of the little man are as grave and measured as beseem a Dutch merchant. This gravity, however, appears to be more assumed than natural, and is in marked contrast with the searching, roving, swift-darting glances of the eye, and with the ill-repressed fidgettiness of the legs and arms. That the stranger is a Dutch merchant is evidenced not only by his apparel, but also by the mercantile exactitude and caution with which he endeavours to effect as favourable a bargain as possible for his employers. He is, as he says, a forwarding agent, and has received from some of his mercantile friends a commission to transport a certain number of souls, as many as can find room in an ordinary boat, from the coast of East Friesland to the White Island. In fulfilment of this commission, he adds, he wishes to know if the fisherman will this night convey in his boat the aforesaid cargo to the aforesaid island; in which case he is authorised to pay the passage-money in advance, confidently hoping that, in Christian fairness, the fisherman will make his price very moderate. The Dutch merchant (which term is, in fact, a pleonasm, since every Dutchman is a merchant) makes this proposition with the utmost nonchalance, as if it referred to a cargo of cheeses, and not to the souls of the dead. The fisherman is startled at the word "souls," and a cold chill creeps down his back, for he immediately comprehends that the souls of the dead are here meant, and that the stranger is none other than the phantom Dutchman, who has already intrusted several of his fellow-fishermen with the transportation of the souls of the dead, and paid them well for it, too.

It’s said that at a certain time of year, right around noon, when the fisherman and his family are sitting down to their midday meal, a traveler arrives and asks the head of the household for a few minutes of his time to discuss a business matter. The fisherman, after unsuccessfully inviting the stranger to share the meal, agrees to his request, and they both move to a small table. I won’t go into detail about the stranger’s appearance like a tedious novelist might; a brief description will do. He’s a short, older man, but well-preserved. He’s like a youthful old man: chubby but not overweight; his cheeks are as red as an apple; he has small, twinkling eyes that blink continuously, and on his powdered little head is a little three-cornered hat. Under his bright yellow cloak with many collars, he wears the old-fashioned attire of a prosperous Dutch merchant, like those in old portraits—specifically, a short silk coat of a parrot-green color, a flower-embroidered vest, short black trousers, striped stockings, and shoes with buckles. The shoes are so polished that it’s hard to believe he could walk through the muddy coast while keeping them so clean. His voice is a thin, asthmatic squeak, sometimes sounding a bit teary; but the way he carries himself is as serious and measured as you'd expect from a Dutch merchant. However, this seriousness seems more affected than genuine, and it sharply contrasts with his probing, darting eyes and the barely concealed restlessness of his legs and arms. That he’s a Dutch merchant is evident not just from his clothing but also from the meticulous and cautious way he tries to get the best deal possible for his employers. He claims to be a forwarding agent and has received instructions from some of his business associates to transport a certain number of souls—any that can fit in a regular boat—from the coast of East Friesland to the White Island. In fulfillment of this job, he adds, he wants to know if the fisherman will, that night, take this cargo to the island; if so, he’s authorized to pay the fare upfront, trusting that the fisherman will be fair with his price. The Dutch merchant—which is a bit redundant since all Dutchmen are merchants—makes this offer with complete nonchalance, as if discussing a shipment of cheeses rather than the souls of the dead. The fisherman is taken aback by the word "souls," and a chill runs down his back, as he quickly realizes that he’s talking about the souls of the deceased and that the stranger is none other than the phantom Dutchman, who has already tasked several of his fellow fishermen with transporting the souls of the dead, and paid them well for it, too.

These East Frieslanders are, as I have already remarked, a brave, healthy, practical people; in them is lacking that morbid imagination which makes us so impressible to the ghostly and supernatural. Our fisherman's weird dismay lasts but a moment; suppressing the uncanny sensation that is stealing over him, he soon regains his composure, and, intent on securing as high a sum as possible, he assumes an air of supreme indifference. But after a little chaffering the two come to an understanding, and shake hands to seal the bargain. The Dutchman draws forth a dirty leather pouch, filled entirely with little silver pennies of the smallest denomination ever coined in Holland, and in these tiny coins counts out the whole amount of the fare. With instructions to the fisherman to be ready with his boat at the appointed place about the midnight hour when the moon becomes visible, the Dutchman takes leave of the whole family, and, declining their repeated invitations to dine, the grave little figure, dignified as ever, trips lightly away.

These East Frieslanders are, as I mentioned before, a brave, healthy, practical people; they don’t have that morbid imagination that makes us so susceptible to ghosts and the supernatural. Our fisherman’s strange fear only lasts a moment; pushing aside the eerie feeling creeping over him, he quickly regains his composure and, focused on getting the highest amount possible, acts completely indifferent. But after a bit of bargaining, the two reach an agreement and shake hands to finalize the deal. The Dutchman pulls out a dirty leather pouch filled entirely with tiny silver pennies, the smallest denomination ever minted in Holland, and counts out the exact fare with these coins. After instructing the fisherman to have his boat ready at the agreed spot around midnight when the moon is visible, the Dutchman says goodbye to the whole family and, turning down their repeated dinner invitations, walks away gracefully, as dignified as ever.

At the time agreed upon the fisherman appears at the appointed place. At first the boat is rocked lightly to and fro by the waves; but by the time the full moon has risen above the horizon the fisherman notices that his bark is less easily swayed, and so it gradually sinks deeper and deeper in the stream, until finally the water comes within a hand's-breadth of the boat's bow. This circumstance apprises him that his passengers, the souls, are now aboard, and he pushes off from shore with his cargo. Although he strains his eyes to the utmost, he can distinguish nothing but a few vapoury streaks that seem to be swayed hither and thither, and to intermingle with one another, but assume no definite forms. Listen intently as he may, he hears nothing but an indescribably-faint chirping and rustling. Only now and then a sea-gull with a shrill scream flies swiftly over his head; or near him a fish leaps up from out the stream, and for a moment stares at him with a vacuous look. The night-winds sigh, and the sea-breezes grow more chilly. Everywhere only water, moonlight, and silence! and silent as all around him is the fisherman, who finally reaches the White Island and moors his boat. He sees no one on the strand, but he hears a shrill, asthmatic, wheezy, lachrymose voice, which he recognises as that of the Dutchman. The latter seems to be reading off a list of proper names, with a peculiar, monotonous intonation, as if rehearsing a roll-call. Among the names are some which are known to the fisherman as belonging to persons who have died that year. During the reading of the list, the boat is evidently being gradually lightened of its load, and as soon as the last name is called it rises suddenly and floats free, although but a moment before it was deeply imbedded in the sand of the sea-shore. To the fisherman this is a token that his cargo has been properly delivered, and he calmly rows back to his wife and child, to his beloved home on the fiord.

At the agreed time, the fisherman shows up at the designated spot. At first, the boat gently rocks back and forth with the waves; but by the time the full moon rises above the horizon, the fisherman notices that his boat isn't swaying as much, and it gradually sinks deeper into the water until the water is barely an arm's length from the front of the boat. This tells him that his passengers, the souls, are now on board, and he pushes off from shore with his cargo. Even though he strains his eyes, he can only make out a few misty streaks that appear to shift back and forth and blend together without taking on any definite shapes. No matter how attentively he listens, he hears nothing but a faint chirping and rustling. Occasionally, a seagull screams and quickly flies over his head, or a fish jumps out of the water nearby, momentarily staring at him with a vacant expression. The night winds sigh, and the sea breezes become colder. All around him, there’s just water, moonlight, and silence! And just as silent is the fisherman himself as he finally reaches the White Island and ties up his boat. He doesn’t see anyone on the shore, but he hears a sharp, wheezy, melancholic voice that he recognizes as the Dutchman's. The Dutchman seems to be reading off a list of names with a peculiar, monotonous tone, like he’s going through a roll call. Among the names are some that the fisherman knows belong to people who have died that year. As the list is read, the boat gradually becomes lighter, and as soon as the last name is called, it suddenly rises and floats free, even though just moments before it was stuck deep in the sand at the shore. To the fisherman, this is a sign that his cargo has been successfully delivered, and he calmly rows back to his wife and child, to his beloved home by the fjord.

...Notwithstanding this clever disguise, I have ventured to guess who the important mythological personage is that figures in this tradition. It is none other than the god Mercury, Hermes Psychopompos, the whilom conductor of the dead to Hades. Verily, under that shabby yellow cloak and prosaic tradesman's figure is concealed the youthful and most accomplished god of heathendom, the cunning son of Maia. On his little three-cornered hat not the slightest tuft of a feather is to be seen which might remind the beholder of the winged cap, and the clumsy shoes with steel buckles fail to give the least hint of the winged sandals. This grave and heavy Dutch lead is quite different from the mobile quicksilver, from which the god derived his very name. But the contrast is so exceedingly striking as to betray the god's design, which is the more effectually to disguise himself. Perhaps this mask was not chosen out of mere caprice. Mercury was, as you know, the patron god of thieves and merchants, and, in all probability, in choosing a disguise that should conceal him, and a trade by which to earn his livelihood, he took into consideration his talents and his antecedents.

...Despite this clever disguise, I've taken a guess at who the significant mythological figure is that appears in this tradition. It's none other than the god Mercury, Hermes Psychopompos, the former guide of the dead to Hades. Truly, beneath that shabby yellow cloak and ordinary tradesman's appearance lies the youthful and highly skilled god of paganism, the cunning son of Maia. On his little three-cornered hat, there’s not the slightest hint of a feather that might remind anyone of the winged cap, and the clumsy shoes with steel buckles give no indication of the winged sandals. This serious and heavy Dutch lead is entirely different from the quick-moving mercury, from which the god gets his name. But the contrast is so striking that it reveals the god's intention, which is to disguise himself more effectively. Perhaps this mask wasn't chosen just on a whim. Mercury was, as you know, the patron god of thieves and merchants, and by selecting a disguise to hide himself and a trade to earn a living, he likely considered his skills and background.

...And thus it came to pass that the shrewdest and most cunning of the gods became a merchant, and, to adapt himself most thoroughly to his rôle, became the ne plus ultra of merchants—a Dutch merchant. His long practice in the olden time as Psychopompos, as conveyor of the dead to Hades, marks him out as particularly fitted to conduct the transportation of the souls of the dead to the White Island, in the manner just described.

...And so it happened that the cleverest and most cunning of the gods became a merchant, and, to fully embrace his role, became the ne plus ultra of merchants—a Dutch merchant. His long experience in the past as Psychopompos, the guide of the dead to Hades, makes him especially suited to lead the journey of the souls of the dead to the White Island, in the way just described.

The White Island is occasionally also called Brea, or Britannia. Does this perhaps refer to White Albion, to the chalky cliffs of the English coast? It would be a very humorous idea if England was designated as the land of the dead, as the Plutonian realm, as hell. In such a form, in truth, England has appeared to many a stranger.

The White Island is sometimes referred to as Brea or Britannia. Could this possibly be a reference to White Albion, the chalky cliffs of the English coast? It would be quite a funny notion if England were labeled as the land of the dead, the Plutonian realm, or hell. In reality, England has seemed that way to many a stranger.

In my essay on the Faust legend I discussed at full length the popular superstition concerning Pluto and his dominion. I showed how the old realm of shadows became hell, and how its old gloomy ruler became more and more diabolical. Neither Pluto, god of the nether regions, nor his brother, Neptune, god of the sea, emigrated like the other gods. Even after the final triumph of Christendom they remained in their domains, their respective elements. No matter what silly fables concerning him were invented here above on earth, old Pluto sat by his Proserpine, warm and cosey down below.

In my essay on the Faust legend, I explored in detail the common superstition about Pluto and his domain. I explained how the ancient realm of shadows turned into hell, and how its former gloomy ruler became increasingly evil. Unlike the other gods, neither Pluto, the god of the underworld, nor his brother, Neptune, the god of the sea, left their places. Even after the ultimate victory of Christianity they remained in their respective realms. No matter what absurd tales were made up about him up here on earth, old Pluto sat comfortably with his Proserpine, warm and cozy down below.

Neptune suffered less from calumny than his brother Pluto, and neither church-bell chimes nor organ-strains could offend his ears in the depths of old ocean, where he sat peacefully by the side of his white-bosomed wife, Dame Amphitrite, surrounded by his court of dripping nereids and tritons. Only now and then, when a young sailor crossed the equator, he would dart up from the briny deep, in his hand brandishing the trident, his head crowned with sea-weed, and his flowing, silvery beard reaching down to the navel. Then he would confer on the neophyte the terrible sea-water baptism, accompanying it with a long unctuous harangue, interspersed with coarse sailor jests, to the great delight of the jolly tars. The harangue was frequently interrupted by the spitting of amber quids of chewed tobacco, which Neptune so freely scattered around him. A friend, who gave me a detailed description of the manner in which such a sea-miracle is performed, assured me that the very sailors that laughed most heartily at the droll antics of Neptune never for a moment doubted the existence of such a god, and sometimes when in great danger they even prayed to him.

Neptune faced less criticism than his brother Pluto, and neither church bells nor organ music could disturb him in the depths of the ocean, where he relaxed with his lovely wife, Dame Amphitrite, surrounded by his court of dripping sea nymphs and tritons. Occasionally, when a young sailor crossed the equator, he would spring up from the salty depths, holding his trident, his head adorned with seaweed, and his long, silver beard flowing down to his waist. He would then give the newcomer the infamous sea-water baptism, delivering a lengthy, humorous speech filled with crude sailor jokes that delighted the sailors. His speech was often interrupted by the sounds of tobacco being spat out, which Neptune scattered all around him. A friend who described this sea miracle in detail assured me that even the sailors who laughed the loudest at Neptune's antics never doubted his existence, and sometimes, in moments of great danger, they prayed to him.

Neptune, as we have seen, remained monarch of the watery realm; and Pluto, notwithstanding his metamorphosis into Satan, still continued to be prince of the lower regions. They fared better than did their brother Jupiter, who, after the overthrow of their father, Saturn, became ruler of heaven, and as sovereign of the universe resided at Olympus, where, surrounded by his merry troop of gods, goddesses, and nymphs-of-honour, he carried on his ambrosial rule of joy. But when the great catastrophe occurred,—when the rule of the cross, that symbol of suffering, was proclaimed,—then the great Kronides fled, and disappeared amid the tumults and confusion of the transmigration of races. All traces of him were lost, and I have in vain consulted old chronicles and old women: none could give me the least information concerning his fate. With the same purpose in view, I have ransacked many libraries, where I was shown the magnificent codices ornamented with gold and precious stones, true odalisques in the harem of science. To the learned eunuchs who, with such affability, unlocked for me those brilliant treasures, I here return the customary thanks. It appears as if no popular tradition of a medieval Jupiter exists; and all that I could gather concerning him consists of a story told me by my friend, Niels Andersen.

Neptune, as we’ve seen, remained the king of the ocean; and Pluto, despite his transformation into a devil figure, still continued to be the ruler of the underworld. They had it better than their brother Jupiter, who, after their father Saturn was overthrown, became the ruler of the heavens. As the sovereign of the universe, he lived on Olympus, surrounded by his cheerful group of gods, goddesses, and honorific nymphs, where he ruled over a joyful existence. But when the great catastrophe hit—when the rule of the cross, a symbol of suffering, was declared—then the mighty Kronides escaped and vanished amid the chaos and upheaval of the shifting races. All traces of him were lost, and despite my efforts to consult ancient records and wise women, none could offer any clues about his fate. In pursuit of the same goal, I scoured many libraries, where I was shown magnificent manuscripts adorned with gold and precious stones, true treasures in the realm of knowledge. To the learned guardians who graciously opened those brilliant collections for me, I give my sincere thanks. It seems there is no common folklore about a medieval Jupiter; all I could find about him was a story shared by my friend, Niels Andersen.

...The events that I am about to relate, said Niels Andersen, occurred on an island, the exact situation of which I cannot tell. Since its discovery no one has been able again to reach it, being prevented by the immense icebergs that tower like a high wall around the island, and seldom, probably, permit a near approach. Only the crew of a Russian whaling-vessel, which a storm had driven so far to the north, ever trod its soil; and since then over a hundred years have elapsed. When the sailors had, by means of a small boat, effected a landing, they found the island to be wild and desolate. Sadly waved the blades of tall sedgy grass over the quicksands; here and there grew a few stunted fir-trees, or barren shrubs. They saw a multitude of rabbits springing around, on which account they named it the Island of Rabbits. Only one miserable hut gave evidence that a human being dwelt there. As the sailors entered the hut they saw an old, very old man, wretchedly clad in a garment of rabbit skins rudely stitched together. He was seated in a stone chair in front of the hearth, trying to warm his emaciated hands and trembling knees by the flaring brushwood fire. At his right side stood an immense bird, evidently an eagle, but which had been roughly treated by time, and shorn of all its plumage save the long bristly quills of its wings, that gave it a highly grotesque, and, at the same time, hideous appearance. At the old man's left, squatted on the earth, was an extraordinarily large hairless goat, which seemed to be very old; although full milky udders, with fresh, rosy nipples, hung at its belly.

...The events I'm about to share, said Niels Andersen, took place on an island whose exact location I can't reveal. Since its discovery, no one has managed to reach it again, blocked by the massive icebergs that rise like a tall wall around the island, making close approaches very rare. Only the crew of a Russian whaling ship, blown far north by a storm, ever stepped on its land; and over a hundred years have passed since then. When the sailors landed using a small boat, they found the island wild and desolate. Tall, sedgy grass swayed sadly over the quicksand, and a few stunted fir trees and barren shrubs grew here and there. They saw a bunch of rabbits hopping around, which is why they named it the Island of Rabbits. Only one miserable hut showed that anyone lived there. As the sailors entered the hut, they saw an old, very old man, poorly dressed in a garment made of rabbit skins roughly stitched together. He was seated in a stone chair in front of the hearth, trying to warm his frail hands and trembling knees by the blazing brushwood fire. To his right stood a huge bird, clearly an eagle, but it looked battered by time, having lost all its feathers except for the long bristly quills on its wings, giving it both a grotesque and terrifying look. To the old man's left, squatting on the ground, was an extraordinarily large hairless goat that seemed very old, yet its full milky udders with fresh, rosy nipples hung from its belly.

Among the sailors were several Greeks, one of whom, not thinking that his words would be understood by the aged inhabitant of the hut, remarked in the Greek language to a comrade, "This old fellow is either a spectre or an evil demon." But at these words the old man suddenly arose from his seat, and to their great surprise the sailors beheld a stately figure, which, in spite of its advanced age, raised itself erect with commanding, yes, with king-like dignity, his head almost touching the rafters. The features, too, although rugged and weather-beaten, showed traces of original beauty, they were so noble and well-proportioned. A few silvery locks fell over his brow, which was furrowed by pride and age. His eyes had a dim and fixed look, but occasionally they would still gleam piercingly; and from his mouth were heard in the melodious and sonorous words of the ancient Greek language, "You are mistaken, young man; I am neither a spectre nor an evil demon; I am an unhappy old man, who once knew better days. But who are ye?"

Among the sailors were several Greeks, one of whom, not believing that the old inhabitant of the hut would understand him, commented to a friend in Greek, "This old guy is either a ghost or a malevolent spirit." But at these words, the old man suddenly stood up, and to their surprise, the sailors saw a majestic figure who, despite his age, stood tall with a commanding, almost royal dignity, his head nearly brushing the rafters. His features, though rough and weathered, showed signs of their former beauty; they were noble and well-proportioned. A few silver strands fell over his brow, which was lined with pride and age. His eyes had a distant, fixed gaze, but occasionally sparkled piercingly; and from his mouth came the melodious and resonant words of ancient Greek, "You are mistaken, young man; I am neither a ghost nor a malevolent spirit; I am an unhappy old man who once knew better days. But who are you?"

The sailors explained the accident which had befallen them, and then inquired concerning the island. The information, however, was very meagre. The old man told them that since time immemorial he had inhabited this island, whose bulwark of ice served him as a secure asylum against his inexorable foes. He subsisted principally by catching rabbits, and every year, when the floating icebergs had settled, a few bands of savages crossed over on sleds, and to them he sold rabbit-skins, receiving in exchange various articles of indispensable necessity. The whales, which sometimes came swimming close to the island, were his favourite company. But it gave him pleasure to hear again his native tongue, for he too was a Greek. He entreated his countrymen to give him an account of the present condition of Greece. That the cross had been torn down from the battlements of Grecian cities apparently caused the old man a malicious satisfaction; but it did not altogether please him when he heard that the crescent had been planted there instead. It was strange that none of the sailors knew the names of the cities concerning which the old man inquired, and which, as he assured them, had flourished in his time. In like manner the names of the present cities and villages in Greece, which were mentioned by the sailors, were unknown to him; at this the old man would shake his head sadly, and the sailors looked at one another perplexed. They noticed that he knew exactly all the localities and geographical peculiarities of Greece; and he described so accurately and vividly the bays, the peninsulas, the mountain-ridges, even the knolls and most trifling rocky elevations, that his ignorance of these localities was all the more surprising. With especial interest, with a certain anxiety even, he questioned them concerning an ancient temple, which in his time, he assured them, had been the most beautiful in all Greece; but none of his hearers knew the name, which he pronounced with a loving tenderness. But finally, when the old man had again described the site of the temple, with the utmost particularity, a young sailor recognised the place by the description.

The sailors explained the accident that had happened to them and then asked about the island. The information, however, was very limited. The old man told them that he had lived on this island for ages, whose ice borders served as a safe refuge against his relentless enemies. He primarily survived by catching rabbits, and every year, when the floating icebergs settled, a few groups of savages would come over on sleds, to whom he sold rabbit skins in exchange for various essential items. The whales, which sometimes swam close to the island, were his favorite company. He took pleasure in hearing his native language again, as he too was Greek. He asked his fellow countrymen to tell him about the current state of Greece. The fact that the cross had been removed from the battlements of Greek cities seemed to give the old man a cruel satisfaction; however, he was not entirely pleased to hear that the crescent had taken its place. It was strange that none of the sailors knew the names of the cities that the old man asked about, which, as he assured them, had thrived in his time. Similarly, the names of the present cities and villages in Greece mentioned by the sailors were unknown to him; this made the old man shake his head sadly, while the sailors looked at each other in confusion. They noticed that he knew all the localities and geographical features of Greece; he described the bays, peninsulas, mountain ridges, and even the hills and the smallest rocky elevations with such precision and vividness that his ignorance of these places was even more surprising. With special interest and a bit of anxiety, he questioned them about an ancient temple that he claimed had been the most beautiful in all of Greece; but none of the sailors knew the name, which he pronounced with affection. Finally, after the old man had described the temple's location in great detail again, a young sailor recognized the place from the description.

The village wherein he was born, said the young man, was situated hard by, and when a boy he had often tended his father's swine at the very place where there had been found ruins of an ancient structure, indicating a magnificent grandeur in the past. Now, only a few large marble pillars remained standing; some were plain, unadorned columns, others were surmounted by the square stones of a gable. From the cracks of the masonry the blooming honeysuckle-vines and red bell-flowers trailed downwards. Other pillars—among the number some of rose-coloured marble—lay shattered on the ground, and the costly marble head-pieces, ornamented with beautiful sculpture, representing foliage and flowers, were overgrown by rank creepers and grasses. Half buried in the earth lay huge marble blocks, some of which were squares, such as were used for the walls; others were three-cornered slabs for roof-pieces. Over them waved a large, wild fig-tree, which had grown up out of the ruins. Under the shadow of that tree, continued the young man, he had passed whole hours in examining the strange figures carved on the large marble blocks; they seemed to be pictorial representations of all sorts of sports and combats, and were very pleasing to look at, but, alas! much injured by exposure, and overgrown with moss and ivy. His father, whom he had questioned in regard to the mysterious signification of these pillars and sculptures, told him that these were the ruins of an ancient pagan temple, and had once been the abode of a wicked heathen god, who had here wantoned in lewd debauchery, incest, and unnatural vices. Notwithstanding this, the unenlightened heathen were accustomed to slaughter in his honour a hundred oxen at a time, and the hollowed marble block into which was gathered the blood of the sacrifices was yet in existence. It was, in fact, the very trough which they were in the habit of using as a receptacle for refuse wherewith to feed the swine.

The village where he was born, the young man said, was nearby, and as a boy, he often took care of his father's pigs right at the spot where ruins of an ancient structure were found, hinting at a magnificent past. Now, only a few large marble pillars were still standing; some were simple, plain columns, while others had square stones on top forming a gable. From the cracks in the masonry, blooming honeysuckle vines and red bell flowers cascaded down. Other pillars—some made of rose-colored marble—lay broken on the ground, and the costly marble headpieces, adorned with beautiful carvings of leaves and flowers, were overtaken by thick vines and grass. Half-buried in the earth were huge marble blocks; some were square, used for walls, while others were triangular slabs intended for roof pieces. A large, wild fig tree grew out of the ruins, waving over them. Under the shade of that tree, the young man continued, he spent hours examining the strange figures carved into the large marble blocks; they appeared to depict all kinds of sports and battles, and were very pleasing to look at, but, sadly, much damaged by the weather and overrun with moss and ivy. His father, when he asked about the mysterious meanings behind these pillars and sculptures, told him that these were the remains of an ancient pagan temple, once home to a wicked heathen god who had indulged in lewd debauchery, incest, and unnatural vices. Despite this, the misguided heathens used to sacrifice a hundred oxen at a time in his honor, and the hollow marble block that collected the blood of the sacrifices was still there. It was, in fact, the very trough they used as a receptacle for scraps to feed the pigs.

So spoke the young sailor. But the old man heaved a sigh that betrayed the most terrible anguish. Tottering, he sank into his stone chair, covered his face with his hands, and wept like a child. The great, gaunt bird, with a shrill screech, flapped its immense wings, and menaced the strangers with claws and beak. The old goat licked its master's hands, and bleated mournfully as in consolation.

So said the young sailor. But the old man let out a sigh that showed his deep sorrow. Unsteady, he sat down in his stone chair, covered his face with his hands, and cried like a child. The huge, thin bird, with a loud screech, flapped its giant wings, threatening the strangers with its claws and beak. The old goat licked its owner's hands and bleated sadly as if to offer comfort.

At this strange sight, an uncanny terror seized upon the sailors: they hurriedly left the hut, and were glad when they could no longer hear the sobbing of the old man, the screaming of the bird, and the bleating of the goat. When they were safely on board the boat, they narrated their adventure. Among the crew was a learned Russian, professor of philosophy at the university of Kazan; and he declared the matter to be highly important. With his forefinger held knowingly to the side of his nose, he assured the sailors that the old man of the island was undoubtedly the ancient god Jupiter, son of Saturn and Rhea. The bird at his side was clearly the eagle that once carried in its claws the terrible thunderbolts. And the old goat was, in all probability, none other than Althea, Jupiter's old nurse, who had suckled him in Crete, and now in exile again nourished him with her milk.

At this strange sight, a chilling fear gripped the sailors: they quickly left the hut and were relieved when they could no longer hear the old man's sobbing, the bird's screaming, and the goat's bleating. Once they were safely on the boat, they shared their experience. Among the crew was a knowledgeable Russian, a philosophy professor from the University of Kazan, who declared the situation to be very significant. With his forefinger placed conspiratorially against the side of his nose, he assured the sailors that the old man on the island was undoubtedly the ancient god Jupiter, son of Saturn and Rhea. The bird next to him was clearly the eagle that once carried the terrifying thunderbolts. And the old goat was probably none other than Althea, Jupiter's former nurse, who had fed him in Crete and was now nourishing him with her milk in exile again.

This is the story as told to me by Niels Andersen; and I must confess that it filled my soul with a profound melancholy. Decay is secretly undermining all that is great in the universe, and the gods themselves must finally succumb to the same miserable destiny. The iron law of fate so wills it, and even the greatest of the immortals must submissively bow his head. He of whom Homer sang, and whom Phidias sculptured in gold and ivory, he at whose glance earth trembled, he, the lover of Leda, Alcmena, Semele, Danaë, Callisto, Io, Leto, Europa, etc.—even he is compelled to hide himself behind the icebergs of the North Pole, and in order to prolong his wretched existence must deal in rabbit-skins, like a shabby Savoyard!

This is the story as told to me by Niels Andersen, and I have to admit that it filled me with deep sadness. Decay is quietly undermining everything great in the universe, and even the gods must eventually face the same grim fate. The harsh law of destiny demands it, and even the mightiest of immortals must humbly bow their heads. He of whom Homer sang, and whom Phidias sculpted in gold and ivory, he at whose gaze the earth trembled, he, the lover of Leda, Alcmena, Semele, Danaë, Callisto, Io, Leto, Europa, etc.—even he is forced to hide behind the icebergs of the North Pole, and to prolong his miserable existence, he must trade in rabbit fur, like a worn-out peddler!

I do not doubt that there are people who will derive a malicious pleasure from such a spectacle. They are, perhaps, the descendants of those unfortunate oxen who, in hecatombs, were slaughtered on the altars of Jupiter. Rejoice! avenged is the blood of your ancestors, those poor martyrs of superstition. But we, who have no hereditary grudge rankling in us, we are touched at the sight of fallen greatness, and withhold not our holiest compassion.

I have no doubt that some people will take a twisted joy in watching this. They might be the descendants of those poor oxen who were sacrificed in great numbers on the altars of Jupiter. Celebrate! The blood of your ancestors, those unfortunate victims of superstition, has been avenged. But we, who don't carry any old grudges, feel a sense of sorrow when we see greatness diminished, and we cannot help but offer our deepest compassion.

CONFESSIONS.

decorative bar

decorative bar

[Heine wrote these Confessions, which form one of his most characteristic works, in the winter of 1853-4. They were originally intended to form part of the book on Germany. The translation here given is Mr. Fleishman's, revised by collation with the original.]

[Heine wrote these Confessions, which are one of his most distinctive works, in the winter of 1853-4. They were originally meant to be part of the book on Germany. The translation provided here is by Mr. Fleishman, revised by comparing it with the original.]

A WITTY Frenchman—a few years ago these words would have been a pleonasm—once dubbed me an unfrocked Romanticist. I have a weakness for all that is witty; and spiteful as was this appelation, it nevertheless delighted me highly. Notwithstanding the war of extermination that I had waged against Romanticism, I always remained a Romanticist at heart, and that in a higher degree than I myself realised. After I had delivered the most deadly blows against the taste for Romantic poetry in Germany, there stole over me an inexpressible yearning for the blue flower in the fairy-land of Romanticism, and I grasped the magic lyre and sang a song wherein I gave full sway to all the sweet extravagances, to all the intoxication of moonlight, to all the blooming, nightingale-like fancies once so fondly loved. I know it was "the last free-forest song of Romanticism,"[15] and I am its last poet. With me the old German lyric school ends; while with me, at the same time, the modern lyric school of Germany begins. Writers on German literature will assign to me this double rôle. It would be unseemly for me to speak at length on this subject, but I may with justice claim a liberal space in the history of German Romanticism. For this reason I ought to have included in my account of the Romantic school a review of my own writings. By my omission to do this, a gap has been left which I cannot easily fill. To write a criticism of one's self is an embarrassing, even an impossible task. I should be a conceited coxcomb to obtrude the good I might be able to say of myself, and I should be a great fool to proclaim to the whole world the defects of which I might also be conscious. And even with the most honest desire to be sincere, one cannot tell the truth about oneself. No one has as yet succeeded in doing it, neither Saint Augustine, the pious bishop of Hippo, nor the Genevese Jean Jacques Rousseau—least of all the latter, who proclaimed himself the man of truth and nature, but was really much more untruthful and unnatural than his contemporaries.

A WITTY Frenchman—a few years ago, these words would have been redundant—once called me an unfrocked Romanticist. I have a soft spot for everything witty, and even though this label was spiteful, it still made me quite happy. Despite the war I waged against Romanticism, I always remained a Romanticist at heart, even more so than I realized. After I dealt the final blows to the taste for Romantic poetry in Germany, I felt an overwhelming longing for the blue flower in the fairyland of Romanticism. I picked up the magic lyre and sang a song where I fully embraced all the sweet excesses, all the intoxication of moonlight, and all the blooming, nightingale-like fantasies I once cherished. I know it was "the last free-forest song of Romanticism,"[15] and I am its last poet. With me, the old German lyric school ends, while at the same time, the modern lyric school of Germany begins. Writers on German literature will assign me this dual role. It wouldn’t be right for me to elaborate much on this topic, but I can justifiably claim a significant place in the history of German Romanticism. For this reason, I should have included a review of my own writings in my account of the Romantic school. By not doing so, I've left a gap that's hard to fill. Writing a critique of oneself is an awkward, even impossible task. I'd be a conceited fool to highlight the good I could say about myself, and it would be foolish to announce to the world the flaws I'm aware of. Even with the best intentions of being truthful, you can't really tell the truth about yourself. No one has managed to do it yet, not even Saint Augustine, the devout bishop of Hippo, nor Jean Jacques Rousseau from Geneva—especially not Rousseau, who claimed to be a man of truth and nature but was actually much more dishonest and unnatural than his peers.

...Rousseau, who in his own person also slandered human nature, was yet true to it in respect to our primitive weakness, which consists in always wishing to appear in the eyes of the world as something different from what we really are. His self-portraiture is a lie, admirably executed, but still only a brilliant lie.

...Rousseau, who also criticized human nature, was nevertheless accurate about our basic flaw, which is our constant desire to seem different from who we actually are. His self-portrait is a deception, skillfully done, but still just a dazzling falsehood.

I recently read an anecdote concerning the King of Ashantee, which illustrates in a very amusing manner this weakness of human nature. When Major Bowditch was despatched by the English Governor of the Cape of Good Hope as resident ambassador to the court of that powerful African monarch, he sought to ingratiate himself with the courtiers, especially with the court-ladies, by taking their portraits. The king, who was astonished at the accuracy of the likenesses, requested that he also might be painted, and had already had several sittings, when the artist noticed in the features of the king, who had often sprung up to observe the progress of the picture, the peculiar restlessness and embarrassment of one who has a request on the tip of his tongue and yet hesitates to express it. The painter pressed his majesty to tell his wish, until at last the poor African king inquired, in a low voice, if he could not be painted white.

I recently read a story about the King of Ashantee that amusingly highlights a weakness in human nature. When Major Bowditch was sent by the English Governor of the Cape of Good Hope as the resident ambassador to the court of that powerful African king, he tried to win over the courtiers, especially the court ladies, by taking their portraits. The king, amazed by how accurate the likenesses were, asked to be painted too and had already sat for several sessions. The artist noticed that the king, who would often get up to check on the progress of the painting, showed signs of peculiar restlessness and embarrassment, like someone who wants to ask for something but is hesitant to say it. The painter urged his majesty to share his wish, and finally, the poor African king quietly asked if he could be painted white.

And so it is. The swarthy negro king wishes to be painted white. But do not laugh at the poor African: every human being is such another negro king, and all of us would like to appear before the public in a different colour from that which fate has given us. Fully realising this, I took heed not to draw my own portrait in my review of the Romantic school. But in the following pages I shall have ample occasion to speak of myself, and this will to a certain extent fill up the gap caused by the lacking portrait; for I have here undertaken to describe, for the reader's benefit and enlightenment, the philosophical and religious changes which have taken place in the author's mind since my book on Germany was written.

And that’s how it is. The dark-skinned king wants to be painted white. But don’t laugh at the poor African: every person is basically that same king, and all of us wish we could present ourselves to the world in a different way than the fate we’ve been dealt. Fully aware of this, I made sure not to draw my own portrait in my review of the Romantic school. However, in the following pages, I will have plenty of opportunities to talk about myself, which will somewhat fill the gap left by the missing portrait; because here, I’ve set out to describe, for the reader’s understanding and insight, the philosophical and religious changes that have occurred in my thinking since I wrote my book on Germany.

Fear not that I shall paint myself too white and my fellow-beings too black. I shall always give my own colours with exact fidelity, so that it may be known how far my judgment is to be trusted when I draw the portraits of others.

Fear not that I will make myself look too perfect and others look too bad. I will always show my own colors honestly, so people can see how much trust to put in my judgment when I portray others.

...Madame de Staël's hate of the Emperor is the soul of her book, De l'Allemagne, and, although his name is nowhere mentioned, one can see at every line how the writer squints at the Tuilleries. I doubt not that the book annoyed the Emperor more than the most direct attack; for nothing so much irritates a man as a woman's petty needle-pricks. We are prepared for great sabre-strokes, and instead we are tickled at the most sensitive spots.

...Madame de Staël's hatred of the Emperor is the essence of her book, De l'Allemagne, and even though his name is never mentioned, you can tell in every line how the writer glances at the Tuileries. I’m sure the book bothered the Emperor more than a direct attack would have; nothing irritates a man more than a woman’s small, annoying jabs. We expect big, aggressive strikes, but instead, we’re tickled in the most sensitive areas.

Oh, the women! we must forgive them much, for they love much—and many. Their hate is, in fact, only love turned the wrong way. At times they try to injure us, but only because they hope thereby to please some other man. When they write, they have one eye on the paper and the other on a man. This rule applies to all authoresses, with the exception of Countess Hahn-Hahn, who only has one eye. We male authors have also our prejudices. We write for or against something, for or against an idea, for or against a party; but women always write for or against one particular man, or, to express it more correctly, on account of one particular man. We men will sometimes lie outright; women, like all passive creatures, seldom invent, but can so distort a fact that they can thereby injure us more surely than by a downright lie. I verily believe my friend Balzac was right when he once said to me, in a sorrowful tone, "La femme est un être dangereux."

Oh, the women! We have to forgive them a lot because they love deeply—and with many. Their hate is actually just love turned the other way. Sometimes they try to hurt us, but only because they hope it will please another man. When they write, they have one eye on the paper and the other on a man. This is true for all women writers, except for Countess Hahn-Hahn, who only has one eye. We male writers have our own biases. We write for or against something, for or against an idea, for or against a party; but women always write for or against one specific man, or, to put it more precisely, because of one specific man. We men might sometimes lie outright; women, like all passive beings, rarely make things up, but they can twist a fact so much that they can hurt us even more effectively than with a flat-out lie. I really believe my friend Balzac was right when he once told me, sadly, "La femme est un être dangereux."

Yes, women are dangerous; but I must admit that beautiful women are not so dangerous as those whose attractions are intellectual rather than physical; for the former are accustomed to have men pay court to them, while the latter meet the vanity of men half-way, and through the bait of flattery acquire a more powerful influence than the beautiful women. I by no means intend to insinuate that Madame de Staël was ugly; but beauty is something quite different. She had single points which were pleasing; but the effect as a whole was anything but pleasing. To nervous persons, like the sainted Schiller, her custom of continually twirling between her fingers some fragment of paper or similar small article was particularly annoying. This habit made poor Schiller dizzy, and in desperation he grasped her pretty hand to hold it quiet. This innocent action led Madame de Staël to believe that the tender-hearted poet was overpowered by the magic of her personal charms. I am told that she really had very pretty hands and beautiful arms, which she always displayed. Surely the Venus of Milo could not show such beautiful arms! Her teeth surpassed in whiteness those of the finest steed of Araby. She had very large, beautiful eyes, a dozen amorets would have found room on her lips, and her smile is said to have been very sweet: therefore she could not have been ugly,—no woman is ugly. But I venture to say that had fair Helen of Sparta looked so, the Trojan War would not have occurred, and the strongholds of Priam would not have been burned, and Homer would never have sung the wrath of Pelidean Achilles.

Yes, women can be dangerous; but I have to say that beautiful women aren't as dangerous as those whose appeal is intellectual rather than physical. Beautiful women are used to having men woo them, while the latter kind engage men's vanity more directly and, through the lure of flattery, gain a stronger influence than beautiful women. I don’t mean to suggest that Madame de Staël was ugly; beauty is something quite different. She had certain features that were attractive, but overall, the effect was anything but charming. For sensitive individuals like the revered Schiller, her habit of constantly twirling a piece of paper or some small object between her fingers was especially irritating. This habit made poor Schiller feel dizzy, and in his frustration, he took hold of her delicate hand to still it. This innocent gesture led Madame de Staël to think that the tender-hearted poet was captivated by her personal charms. I've heard that she actually had very lovely hands and beautiful arms, which she always showcased. Surely, the Venus of Milo couldn't display such lovely arms! Her teeth were whiter than those of the finest Arabian horse. She had large, beautiful eyes, and a dozen cupids could have found space on her lips, and her smile was said to be very sweet; therefore, she couldn't have been ugly—no woman is ugly. But I would argue that if fair Helen of Sparta had looked like her, the Trojan War would never have happened, Priam’s strongholds would never have burned, and Homer would never have sung about the wrath of Achilles.

...In my Memoirs I relate with more detail than is admissible here how, after the French Revolution of July 1830, I emigrated to Paris, where I have ever since lived quiet and contented. What I did and suffered during the Restoration will be told when the disinterestedness of such a publication is no longer liable to doubt or suspicion. I worked much and suffered much; and about the time that the sun of the July revolution arose in France, I had gradually become very weary, and needed recreation. Moreover, the air of my native land was daily becoming more unwholesome for me, and I was compelled to contemplate seriously a change of climate. I had visions: in the clouds I saw all sorts of horrible, grotesque faces, that annoyed me with their grimaces. It sometimes seemed to me as if the sun were a Prussian cockade. At night I dreamed of a hideous black vulture that preyed on my liver; and became very melancholy. In addition to all this, I had become acquainted with an old magistrate from Berlin who had spent many years in the fortress of Spandau, and who described to me how unpleasant it was in winter to wear iron manacles. I thought it very un-Christian not to warm the irons a little, for if our chains were only warmed somewhat, they would not seem so very unpleasant, and cold natures could even endure them very well. The chains ought also to be perfumed with the essence of roses and laurels, as is the custom in France. I asked my magistrate if oysters were often served at Spandau. He answered, no; Spandau was too far distant from the sea. Meat, also, he said, was seldom to be had, and the only fowls were the flies which fell into one's soup. About the same time I became acquainted with a commercial traveller of a French wine establishment, who was never tired of praising the merry life of Paris,—how the air was full of music, how from morning until night one heard the singing of the "Marseillaise" and "En avant, marchons!" and "Lafayette aux cheveux blancs." He told me that at every street-corner was the inscription, "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." He likewise recommended the champagne of his firm, and gave me a large number of business cards. He also promised to furnish me with letters of introduction to the best Parisian restaurants, in case I should visit Paris. As I really did need recreation, and as Spandau was at too great a distance from the sea to procure oysters, and as the fowl-soup of Spandau was not to my taste, and as, moreover, the Prussian chains were very cold in winter and could not be conducive to my health, I determined to go to Paris, the fatherland of champagne and the "Marseillaise," there to drink the former, and to hear the latter sung, together with "En avant, marchons!" and "Lafayette aux cheveux blancs."

...In my Memoirs, I go into more detail than is appropriate here about how, after the July Revolution in France in 1830, I moved to Paris, where I have since lived peacefully and happily. What I did and endured during the Restoration will be shared when the impartiality of such a publication can no longer be doubted or questioned. I worked hard and suffered greatly; by the time the July Revolution broke out in France, I had become quite exhausted and needed a break. Also, the atmosphere in my homeland was becoming increasingly unhealthy for me, and I had to seriously consider a change of climate. I was having nightmares: I saw all kinds of horrible, grotesque faces in the clouds that disturbed me with their grimaces. Sometimes I felt like the sun was a Prussian cockade. At night, I dreamed of a terrifying black vulture that was feasting on my liver, which made me

I crossed the Rhine on May 1st, 1831. I did not see the old river-god, father Rhine, so I contented myself with dropping my visiting card into the water. I am told that he was sitting down below, conning his French grammar; for during the Prussian rule his French had grown rusty from long disuse, and now he wished to practice it anew, in order to be prepared for contingencies. I thought I could hear him, conjugating, "J'aime, tu aimes, il aime; nous aimons"—but what does he love? Surely not the Prussians!

I crossed the Rhine on May 1st, 1831. I didn’t see the old river-god, father Rhine, so I settled for dropping my visiting card into the water. I’ve been told he was down below, brushing up on his French grammar; during the Prussian rule, his French had gotten rusty from lack of use, and now he wanted to practice it again to be ready for anything. I thought I could hear him conjugating, "J'aime, tu aimes, il aime; nous aimons"—but what does he love? Surely not the Prussians!

I awoke at St. Denis from a sweet morning sleep, and heard for the first time the shout of the driver, "Paris! Paris!" Here we already inhaled the atmosphere of the capital, now visible on the horizon. A rascally lackey tried to persuade me to visit the royal sepulchre at St. Denis; but I had not come to France to see dead kings.... In twenty minutes I was in Paris, entering through the triumphal arch of the Boulevard St. Denis, which was originally erected in honour of Louis XIV., but now served to grace my entry into Paris. I was surprised at meeting such multitudes of well-dressed people, tastefully arrayed like the pictures of a fashion-journal. I was also impressed by the fact that they all spoke French, which, in Germany, is the distinguishing mark of the higher classes; the whole nation are as noble as the nobility with us. The men were all so polite, and the pretty women all smiled so graciously. If some one accidentally jostled me without immediately asking pardon, I could safely wager that it was a fellow-countryman. And if a pretty woman looked a little sour, she had either eaten sauerkraut or could read Klopstock in the original. I found everything quite charming. The skies were so blue, the air so balmy, and here and there the rays of the sun of July were still glimmering. The cheeks of the beauteous Lutetea were still flushed from the burning kisses of that sun, and the bridal flowers on her bosom were not yet wilted. But at the street-corners the words, "Liberté, égalité, fraternité," had already been erased. Honeymoons fly so quickly!

I woke up in St. Denis from a lovely morning sleep and heard for the first time the shout of the driver, "Paris! Paris!" Here we could already sense the atmosphere of the capital, now visible on the horizon. A cheeky servant tried to convince me to visit the royal tomb at St. Denis, but I hadn't come to France to see dead kings.... In twenty minutes, I was in Paris, entering through the triumphal arch of Boulevard St. Denis, which was originally built in honor of Louis XIV., but now welcomed me into Paris. I was amazed to see so many well-dressed people, tastefully arranged like the images in a fashion magazine. I was also struck by the fact that they all spoke French, which in Germany is a sign of the upper class; the whole nation seemed as noble as the nobility back home. The men were all very polite, and the beautiful women smiled so gracefully. If someone accidentally bumped into me without immediately apologizing, I could bet it was a fellow countryman. And if a pretty woman had a slightly sour expression, she had either eaten sauerkraut or could read Klopstock in the original. I found everything utterly charming. The skies were so blue, the air so pleasant, and here and there the July sun's rays still sparkled. The cheeks of the lovely Lutetia were still flushed from the sun's warm kisses, and the bridal flowers on her chest were not yet wilted. But at the street corners, the words "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" had already been erased. Honeymoons pass by

I immediately visited the restaurants to which I had been recommended. The landlords assured me that they would have made me welcome even without letters of introduction, for I had an honest and distinguished appearance, which in itself was a sufficient recommendation. Never did a German landlord so address me, even if he thought it. Such a churlish fellow feels himself in duty bound to suppress all pleasant speeches, and his German bluntness demands that he shall tell only the most disagreeable things to our faces. In the manner, and even in the language, of the French, there is so much delicious flattery, which costs so little, and is yet so gratifying. My poor sensitive soul, which had shrunk with shyness from the rudeness of the fatherland, again expanded under the genial influence of French urbanity. God has given us tongues that we may say something pleasant to our fellow-men.

I quickly went to the restaurants people had recommended to me. The owners assured me they would have welcomed me even without letters of introduction, since I had an honest and distinguished appearance, which was recommendation enough. A German landlord never spoke to me like that, even if he might have thought it. Such a rude person feels obligated to hold back any pleasant words, and his German bluntness means he can only say the most unpleasant things to our faces. In the way and even in the language of the French, there's so much delightful flattery that costs so little and is so satisfying. My poor sensitive soul, which had shrunk from the rudeness of my homeland, blossomed again under the warm influence of French politeness. God has given us the gift of speech so we can say something nice to one another.

My French had grown rusty since the battle of Waterloo, but after half-an-hour's conversation with a pretty flower-girl in the Passage de l'Opéra it soon flowed fluently again. I managed to stammer forth gallant phrases in broken French, and explained to the little charmer the Linnæan system, in which flowers are classified according to their stamens. The little one practised a different system, and divided flowers into those which smelled pleasantly and those which smelled unpleasantly. I believe that she applied a similar classification to men. She was surprised that, notwithstanding my youth, I was so learned, and spread the fame of my erudition through the whole Passage de l'Opéra. I inhaled with rapturous delight the delicious aroma of flattery, and amused myself charmingly. I walked on flowers, and many a roasted pigeon came flying into my gaping mouth.

My French had become a bit rusty since the battle of Waterloo, but after chatting for half an hour with a pretty flower girl in the Passage de l'Opéra, it started to flow smoothly again. I managed to stutter some brave phrases in broken French and explained to the little charmer the Linnaean system, which classifies flowers based on their stamens. She practiced a different system, sorting flowers into those that smelled nice and those that smelled bad. I think she applied a similar approach to men. She was surprised that, despite my youth, I was so knowledgeable, and she spread the word about my scholarly talents throughout the Passage de l'Opéra. I breathed in with sheer delight the sweet scent of flattery and entertained myself wonderfully. I walked on flowers, and many a roasted pigeon came flying into my open mouth.

...Among the notabilities whom I met soon after my arrival in Paris was Victor Bohain; and I love to recall to memory the jovial, intellectual form of him who did so much to dispel the clouds from the brow of the German dreamer, and to initiate his sorrow-laden heart into the gaieties of French life. He had at that time already founded the Europe Littéraire, and, as editor, solicited me to write for his journal several articles on Germany, after the genre of Madame de Staël. I promised to furnish the articles, particularly mentioning, however, that I should write them in a style quite different from that of Madame de Staël. "That is a matter of indifference to me," was the laughing answer; "like Voltaire, I tolerate every genre, excepting only the genre ennuyeux." And in order that I, poor German, should not fall into the genre ennuyeux, friend Bohain often invited me to dine with him, and stimulated my brain with champagne. No one knew better than he how to arrange a dinner at which one should not only enjoy the best cuisine, but be most pleasantly entertained. No one could do the honours of host as well as he; and he was certainly justified in charging the stockholders of the Europe Littéraire with one hundred thousand francs as the expense of these banquets. Even his wooden leg contributed to the humour of the man, and when he hobbled around the table, serving out champagne to his guests, he resembled Vulcan performing the duties of Hebe's office amidst the uproarious mirth of the assembled gods. Where is Victor Bohain now? I have heard nothing of him for a long period. The last I saw of him was about ten years ago, at an inn at Granville. He had just come over from England, where he had been studying the colossal English national debt, in this occupation smothering the recollection of his own little personal debts, to this little town on the coast of Normandy, and here I found him seated at a table with a bottle of champagne and an open-mouthed, stupid-looking citizen, to whom he was earnestly explaining a business project by which, as Bohain eloquently demonstrated, a million could be realised. Bohain always had a great fondness for speculation, and in all his projects there was always a million in progress—never less than a million. His friends nicknamed him, on this account, Messer Millione.

...Among the notable people I met shortly after arriving in Paris was Victor Bohain. I enjoy remembering his cheerful, intellectual presence, which did so much to lighten the mood of the German dreamer and to introduce his heavy heart to the joys of French life. At that time, he had already established the Europe Littéraire and, as its editor, asked me to write several articles about Germany for his journal, inspired by the style of Madame de Staël. I agreed to write the articles but noted that I would do so in a style quite different from hers. "That’s fine by me," he laughed, "like Voltaire, I can appreciate every style except the boring one." To ensure I, poor German, wouldn’t fall into the boring style, my friend Bohain often invited me to dinner, stimulating my mind with champagne. No one was better than him at arranging a dinner where you could enjoy not only the finest food but also delightful entertainment. He truly excelled at being a host, and he had every right to charge the shareholders of the Europe Littéraire a hundred thousand francs for the cost of those banquets. Even his wooden leg added to his humor, and as he hobbled around the table pouring champagne for his guests, he looked like Vulcan playing the role of Hebe amid the lively laughter of the assembled gods. Where is Victor Bohain now? I haven't heard from him in a long time. The last time I saw him was about ten years ago at an inn in Granville. He had just come over from England, where he had been studying the massive British national debt, using this task to overshadow his own small personal debts. In this little Normandy town, I found him sitting at a table with a bottle of champagne and a slack-jawed, dull-looking local citizen, to whom he was earnestly pitching a business idea through which, as Bohain passionately argued, a million could be made. Bohain always loved speculation, and in all his plans, there was always a million involved—never less than a million. His friends even nicknamed him Messer Millione for this reason.

...The founding of the Europe Littéraire was an excellent idea. Its success seemed assured, and I have never been able to understand why it failed. Only one evening before the day on which the suspension occurred, Victor Bohain gave a brilliant ball in the editorial salons of the journal, at which he danced with his three hundred stockholders, just like Leonidas with his three hundred Spartans the day before the battle of Thermopylæ. Every time that I behold in the gallery of the Louvre the painting by David which portrays that scene of antique heroism, I am reminded of the last ball of Victor Bohain. Just like the death-defying king in David's picture, so stood Victor Bohain on his solitary leg; it was the same classic pose. Stranger, when thou strollest in Paris through the Chaussée d'Antin towards the Boulevards, and findest thyself in the low-lying, filthy street that was once called the Rue Basse du Rempart, know that thou standest at the Thermopylæ of the Europe Littéraire, where Victor Bohain with his three hundred stockholders so heroically fell.

...The founding of the Europe Littéraire was a great idea. Its success seemed guaranteed, and I’ve never understood why it failed. Just one evening before the suspension happened, Victor Bohain threw an amazing ball in the editorial salons of the journal, where he danced with his three hundred shareholders, just like Leonidas with his three hundred Spartans the day before the battle of Thermopylæ. Every time I see the painting by David in the Louvre that depicts that moment of ancient heroism, I think of Victor Bohain’s last ball. Just like the fearless king in David's painting, Victor Bohain stood on one leg; it was the same classic pose. Stranger, when you walk through Paris along the Chaussée d'Antin towards the Boulevards, and find yourself in the low, dirty street that was once called the Rue Basse du Rempart, know that you are standing at the Thermopylæ of the Europe Littéraire, where Victor Bohain with his three hundred shareholders so heroically fell.

...In my articles on German philosophy I blabbed without reserve the secrets of the schools, which, draped in scholastic formulas, were previously known only to the initiated. My revelations excited the greatest surprise in France, and I remember that leading French thinkers naively confessed to me that they had always believed German philosophy to be a peculiar mystic fog, behind which divinity lay hidden as in a cloud, and that German philosophers were ecstatic seers, filled with piety and the fear of God. It is not my fault that German philosophy is just the reverse of that which until now we have called piety and fear of God, and that our latest philosophers have proclaimed absolute atheism to be the last word of German philosophy. Relentlessly and with bacchantic recklessness they tore aside the blue curtain from the German heavens, and cried, "Behold! all the gods have flown, and there above sits only an old spinster with leaden hands and sorrowful heart—Necessity."

...In my articles on German philosophy, I shared without holding back the secrets of the schools, which were previously known only to a select few, wrapped in complex jargon. My revelations surprised many in France, and I remember that prominent French thinkers openly admitted to me that they had always thought of German philosophy as a strange mystical fog, hiding divinity like a cloud, and that German philosophers were visionary mystics, filled with devotion and reverence for God. It's not my fault that German philosophy is actually the opposite of what we’ve traditionally called devotion and fear of God, and that our most recent philosophers have declared absolute atheism to be the final word of German philosophy. Fearlessly and with wild abandon, they pulled back the blue curtain from the German skies and proclaimed, "Look! all the gods have disappeared, and up there sits only an old maid with heavy hands and a sorrowful heart—Necessity."

Alas! what then sounded so strange is now being preached from all the house-tops in Germany, and the fanatic zeal of many of these propagandists is terrible! We have now bigoted monks of atheism, grand-inquisitors of infidelity, who would have bound Voltaire to the stake because he was at heart an obstinate deist. So long as such doctrines remained the secret possession of an intellectual aristocracy, and were discussed in a select coterie-dialect which was incomprehensible to the lackeys in attendance, while we at our philosophical petit-soupers were blaspheming, so long did I continue to be one of the thoughtless free-thinkers, of whom the majority resembled those grand-seigneurs who, shortly before the Revolution, sought by means of the new revolutionary ideas to dispel the tedium of their indolent court-life. But as soon as I saw that the rabble began to discuss the same themes at their unclean symposiums, where instead of wax-candles and chandeliers gleamed tallow-dips and oil-lamps; when I perceived that greasy cobblers and tailors presumed in their blunt mechanics' speech to deny the existence of God; when atheism began to stink of cheese, brandy, and tobacco—then my eyes were suddenly opened, and that which I had not comprehended through reason, I now learned through my olfactory organs and through my loathing and disgust. Heaven be praised! my atheism was at an end.

Unfortunately, what once sounded so strange is now being preached from every rooftop in Germany, and the intense zeal of many of these advocates is alarming! We now have narrow-minded monks of atheism and leading inquisitors of disbelief, who would have burned Voltaire at the stake because, deep down, he was an unyielding deist. As long as such ideas remained the secret knowledge of an intellectual elite, discussed in a private jargon that was incomprehensible to the lackeys around, while we in our philosophical gatherings were speaking irreverently, I continued to be one of those thoughtless free-thinkers, much like the noblemen who, just before the Revolution, sought to ease their bored court lives with new revolutionary ideas. But once I saw that the common folk started discussing the same topics at their messy gatherings, where instead of wax candles and chandeliers, there were cheap tallow candles and oil lamps; when I noticed that greasy cobblers and tailors dared to deny the existence of God in their crude mechanical talk; when atheism began to smell of cheese, brandy, and tobacco—my eyes were suddenly opened, and what I had not understood through reason, I now learned through my sense of smell and my disgust. Thank goodness! my atheism was over.

To be candid, it was perhaps not alone disgust that made the principles of the godless obnoxious to me, and induced me to abandon their ranks. I was oppressed by a certain worldly apprehension which I could not overcome, for I saw that atheism had entered into a more or less secret compact with the most terribly naked, quite fig-leafless, communistic communism. My dread of the latter has nothing in common with that of the parvenu, who trembles for his wealth, or with that of well-to-do tradesmen, who fear an interruption of their profitable business. No; that which disquiets me is the secret dread of the artist and scholar, who sees our whole modern civilisation, the laboriously-achieved product of so many centuries of effort, and the fruit of the noblest works of our ancestors, jeopardised by the triumph of communism. Swept along by the resistless current of generous emotions, we may perhaps sacrifice the cause of art and science, even all our own individual interests, for the general welfare of the suffering and oppressed people. But we can no longer disguise from ourselves what we have to expect when the great, rude masses, which by some are called the people, by others the rabble, and whose legitimate sovereignty was proclaimed long ago, shall obtain actual dominion. The poet, in particular, experiences a mysterious dread in contemplating the advent to power of this uncouth sovereign. We will gladly sacrifice ourselves for the people, for self-sacrifice constitutes one of our most exquisite enjoyments—the emancipation of the people has been the great task of our lives; we have toiled for it, and in its cause endured indescribable misery, at home as in exile—but the poet's refined and sensitive nature revolts at every near personal contact with the people, and still more repugnant is the mere thought of its caresses, from which may Heaven preserve us! A great democrat once remarked that if a king had taken him by the hand, he would immediately have thrust it into the fire to purify it. In the same manner I would say, if the sovereign people vouchsafed to press my hand, I would hasten to wash it. The poor people is not beautiful, but very ugly; only that ugliness simply comes from dirt, and will disappear as soon as we open public baths, in which His Majesty may gratuitously bathe himself.

Honestly, it wasn't just disgust that made me find the principles of the godless unbearable and led me to leave their ranks. I was weighed down by a certain worldly fear that I couldn't shake off because I noticed that atheism had formed a somewhat secret alliance with a brutally straightforward and completely unadorned form of communism. My fear of communism isn’t like that of the nouveau riche who worry about losing their wealth or that of comfortable business owners who fear the disruption of their lucrative enterprises. No; what troubles me is the deep concern of the artist and scholar, who sees our entire modern civilization—an accomplishment painstakingly developed over centuries and the result of our ancestors’ finest works—threatened by the rise of communism. Caught up in a wave of noble emotions, we might sacrifice the causes of art and science, even our own individual interests, for the greater good of the suffering and oppressed. But we can no longer fool ourselves about what to expect when the vast, rough masses—referred to by some as the people and by others as the rabble, whose rightful rule was declared long ago—gain real power. The poet, in particular, feels a strange fear when thinking about the rise of this crude ruler. We would gladly give ourselves for the people, as self-sacrifice is one of our greatest joys—the liberation of the people has been our life's mission; we have worked hard for it and have endured unimaginable suffering, both at home and in exile—but the poet’s delicate and sensitive nature recoils at any close personal interaction with the people, and the mere thought of their affection is even more repugnant—may heaven protect us from it! A prominent democrat once remarked that if a king took his hand, he would immediately plunge it into the fire to cleanse it. Similarly, I would say that if the sovereign people were to shake my hand, I would hurry to wash it. The poor people are not beautiful, but rather very ugly; yet that ugliness comes from filth and would disappear as soon as we establish public baths where His Majesty can bathe for free.

...It required no great foresight to foretell these terrible events so long before their occurrence. I could easily prophesy what songs would one day be whistled and chirped in Germany, for I saw the birds hatching that in after-days gave tone to the new school of song. I saw Hegel, with his almost comically serious face, like a setting hen, brooding over the fatal eggs; and I heard his cackling; to tell the truth, I seldom understood him, and only through later reflection did I arrive at an understanding of his works. I believe he did not wish to be understood.

...It didn't take much insight to predict these terrible events long before they happened. I could easily guess what songs would eventually be whistled and sung in Germany because I saw the beginnings that would later define the new style of music. I saw Hegel, with his almost comically serious expression, like a hen sitting on her eggs, pondering over the crucial ideas; and I could hear his clucking. To be honest, I rarely understood him, and only through later contemplation did I come to grasp his works. I believe he didn't want to be understood.

...One beautiful starlight night, Hegel stood with me at an open window. I, being a young man of twenty-two, and having just eaten well and drunk coffee, naturally spoke with enthusiasm of the stars, and called them abodes of the blest. But the master muttered to himself, "The stars! Hm! hm! the stars are only a brilliant eruption on the firmament." "What!" cried I; "then there is no blissful spot above, where virtue is rewarded after death?" But he, glaring at me with his dim eyes, remarked, sneering, "So you want a pourboire because you have supported your sick mother and not poisoned your brother?" At these words he looked anxiously around, but was reassured when he saw that it was only Henry Beer.

...One beautiful night filled with starlight, Hegel stood with me at an open window. I, a young man of twenty-two, having just enjoyed a nice meal and some coffee, naturally spoke with enthusiasm about the stars, calling them homes of the blessed. But the master muttered to himself, "The stars! Hm! hm! The stars are just a brilliant eruption in the sky." "What!" I exclaimed; "so there’s no happy place above where virtue is rewarded after death?" But he glared at me with his dim eyes and sneered, "So you want a tip because you’ve cared for your sick mother and not poisoned your brother?" After saying this, he looked around nervously but was relieved to see it was only Henry Beer.

...I was never an abstract thinker, and I accepted the synthesis of the Hegelian philosophy without examination, because its deductions flattered my vanity. I was young and arrogant, and it gratified my self-conceit when I was informed by Hegel that not, as my grandmother had supposed, He who dwelt in the heavens, but I myself, here on earth, was God. This silly pride had, however, by no means an evil influence on me. On the contrary, it awoke in me the heroic spirit, and at that period I practiced a generosity and self-sacrifice which completely cast into the shade the most virtuous and distinguished deeds of the good bourgeoisie of virtue, who did good merely from a sense of duty and in obedience to the laws of morality. I was myself the living moral law, and the fountain-head of all right and all authority. I myself was morality personified; I was incapable of sin, I was incarnated purity.... I was all love, and incapable of hate. I no longer revenged myself on my enemies; for, rightly considered, I had no enemies; at least, I recognised none as such. For me there now existed only unbelievers who questioned my divinity. Every indignity that they offered me was a sacrilege, and their contumely was blasphemy. Such godlessness, of course, I could not always let pass unpunished; but in those cases it was not human revenge, but divine judgment upon sinners. Absorbed in this exalted practice of justice, I would repress with more or less difficulty all ordinary pity. As I had no enemies, so also there existed for me no friends, but only worshippers, who believed in my greatness, and adored me, and praised my works, those written in verse as well as those in prose. Towards this congregation of truly devout and pious ones I was particularly gracious, especially towards the young-lady devotees.

...I was never someone who thought abstractly, and I accepted Hegel’s philosophy without question because it stroked my ego. I was young and cocky, and it felt great when Hegel told me that, contrary to what my grandmother believed, it wasn’t some heavenly being but I, right here on earth, who was God. This misguided pride didn’t harm me, though. On the contrary, it sparked a heroic spirit within me, and during that time, I embodied a level of generosity and self-sacrifice that completely overshadowed the most virtuous acts of the good bourgeoisie, who did good out of duty and to follow moral laws. I viewed myself as the living moral law, the source of all rights and authority. I was morality personified; I was incapable of sin, I was pure incarnate.... I was all love, incapable of hate. I no longer sought revenge on my enemies; after all, I had no enemies; at least, I didn’t recognize anyone as such. For me, there were only non-believers who doubted my divinity. Every insult they hurled my way felt like a sacrilege, and their contempt was blasphemy. Such godlessness, of course, couldn’t always go unpunished; but in those moments, it wasn’t about human revenge, but divine judgment on sinners. Immersed in this high-minded notion of justice, I would suppress, with varying degrees of difficulty, all ordinary compassion. Just as I had no enemies, I had no friends either, only worshippers who believed in my greatness, adored me, and praised my works, both in verse and prose. I was especially gracious towards this group of truly devout followers, particularly the young-lady admirers.

But the expense of playing the rôle of a God, for whom it were unseemly to go in tatters, and who is sparing neither of body nor of purse, is immense. To play such a rôle respectably, two things are above all requisite—much money and robust health. Alas! it happened that one day [in February 1848] both these essentials failed me, and my divinity was at an end. Luckily, the highly-respected public was at that time occupied with events so dramatic, so grand, so fabulous and unprecedented, that the change in the affairs of so unimportant a personage as myself attracted but little attention. Unprecedented and fabulous were indeed the events of those crazy February days, when the wisdom of the wisest was brought to naught, and the chosen ones of imbecility were raised aloft in triumph. The last became the first, and the lowliest became the highest. Matter, like thought, was turned upside down, and the world was topsy-turvy. If in those mad days I had been sane, those events would surely have cost me my wits; but, lunatic as I then was, the contrary necessarily came to pass, and, strange to say, just in the days of universal madness I regained my reason! Like many other divinities of that revolutionary period, I was compelled to abdicate ignominiously, and to return to the lowly life of humanity. I came back into the humble fold of God's creatures. I again bowed in homage to the almighty power of a Supreme Being, who directs the destinies of this world, and who for the future shall also regulate my earthly affairs. The latter, during the time I had been my own Providence, had drifted into sad confusion, and I was glad to turn them over to a celestial superintendent, who with his omniscience really manages them much better. The belief in God has since then been to me not only a source of happiness, but it has also relieved me from all those annoying business cares which are so distasteful to me. This belief has also enabled me to practice great economies; for I need no longer provide either for myself or for others, and since I have joined the ranks of the pious I contribute almost nothing to the support of the poor. I am too modest to meddle, as formerly, with the business of Divine Providence. I am no longer careful for the general good; I no longer ape the Deity; and with pious humility I have notified my former dependants that I am only a miserable human being, a wretched creature that has naught more to do with governing the universe, and that in future, when in need and affliction, they must apply to the Supreme Ruler, who dwells in heaven, and whose budget is as inexhaustible as His goodness—whereas I, a poor ex-god, was often compelled, even in the days of my godhead, to seek the assistance of the devil. It was certainly very humiliating for a god to have to apply to the devil for aid, and I am heartily thankful to be relieved from my usurped glory. No philosopher shall ever again persuade me that I am a god. I am only a poor human creature, that is not over well; that is, indeed, very ill. In this pitiable condition it is a true comfort to me that there is some one in the heavens above to whom I can incessantly wail out the litany of my sufferings, especially after midnight, when Mathilde has sought the repose that she oft sadly needs. Thank God! in such hours I am not alone, and I can pray and weep without restraint; I can pour out my whole heart before the Almighty, and confide to Him some things which one is wont to conceal even from one's own wife.

But the cost of pretending to be a God, who can’t be seen in rags and isn’t sparing either with their body or money, is huge. To play this part properly, you need two main things—plenty of money and good health. Unfortunately, one day [in February 1848], both of these essentials let me down, and my divinity came to an end. Luckily, the well-respected public was then preoccupied with events that were so dramatic, grand, bizarre, and unprecedented that the change in the life of someone as insignificant as me didn’t attract much attention. Those crazy days in February were truly unprecedented and unbelievable, when the wisdom of the wisest was rendered useless, and the foolish were celebrated in triumph. The last became the first, and the lowest became the highest. Matter, like thoughts, was turned upside down, and the world was chaotic. If I had been sane during those insane days, the events would surely have driven me crazy; but, as mad as I was, the opposite happened, and strangely enough, just during the height of this universal madness, I regained my sanity! Like many other gods during that revolutionary time, I had to humbly step down and return to a humble human life. I returned to the simple existence of God’s creations. I once again bowed in reverence to the almighty power of a Supreme Being, who oversees the fates of this world and who will now also manage my earthly concerns. Those concerns, while I was acting as my own Providence, had slipped into a sad mess, and I was relieved to hand them over to a heavenly overseer, who, with His omniscience, really handles them much better. My belief in God since then has not only been a source of joy for me but has also freed me from all those annoying business worries that I dislike. This belief has also allowed me to economize significantly; for I no longer have to provide for myself or others, and since I joined the faithful, I contribute almost nothing to support the poor. I am too modest to meddle, as I once did, in the business of Divine Providence. I no longer worry about the common good; I no longer imitate the Deity; and with humble piety, I have informed my former dependents that I am just a miserable human being, a wretched soul with nothing more to do with governing the universe, and that in the future, when they need help and are in distress, they must turn to the Supreme Ruler in heaven, whose resources are as limitless as His goodness—while I, a poor ex-god, often had to seek help from the devil. It was certainly humiliating for a god to have to ask the devil for assistance, and I am genuinely grateful to be released from my usurped glory. No philosopher will ever convince me again that I am a god. I am just a poor human being, not doing well; in fact, I am very sick. In this pitiful state, it is a true comfort to me that there is someone in the heavens above to whom I can endlessly cry out my sorrows, especially after midnight when Mathilde has sought the rest she often desperately needs. Thank God! In those hours, I am not alone, and I can pray and weep freely; I can pour out my entire heart before the Almighty and share things that one usually keeps hidden even from one’s own wife.

After the above confession, the kindly-disposed reader will easily understand why I no longer found pleasure in my work on the Hegelian philosophy. I saw clearly that its publication would benefit neither the public nor the author. I comprehended that there is more nourishment for famishing humanity in the most watery and insipid broth of Christian charity than in the dry and musty spider-web of the Hegelian philosophy. I will confess all. Of a sudden I was seized with a mortal terror of the eternal flames. I know it is a mere superstition; but I was frightened. And so, on a quiet winter's night, when a glowing fire was burning on my hearth, I availed myself of the good opportunity, and cast the manuscript of my work on the Hegelian philosophy into the flames. The burning leaves flew up the chimney with a strange and hissing sound.

After that confession, any kind reader will easily understand why I no longer enjoyed my work on Hegelian philosophy. I realized that publishing it would help neither the public nor the author. I understood that there's more nourishment for hungry humanity in the most bland and tasteless broth of Christian charity than in the dry and outdated web of Hegelian philosophy. I will admit everything. Suddenly, I was hit with a deep fear of eternal damnation. I know it's just a superstition, but I was scared. So, on a quiet winter night, with a warm fire crackling in my fireplace, I took the opportunity and threw the manuscript of my work on Hegelian philosophy into the flames. The burning pages shot up the chimney with a strange hissing sound.

Thank God! I was rid of it! Alas! would that I could destroy in the same manner all that I have ever published concerning German philosophy! But that is impossible, and since I cannot prevent their republication, as I lately learned to my great regret, no other course remains but to confess publicly that my exposition of German philosophy contains the most erroneous and pernicious doctrines.

Thank God! I was finally free of it! If only I could erase everything I’ve ever published about German philosophy in the same way! But that’s not possible, and since I can’t stop them from being republished, as I recently found out to my great regret, the only thing left to do is to admit publicly that my explanation of German philosophy contains some of the most mistaken and harmful ideas.

...It is strange! during my whole life I have been strolling through the various festive halls of philosophy, I have participated in all the orgies of the intellect, I have coquetted with every possible system, without being satisfied, like Messalina after a riotous night; and now, after all this, I suddenly find myself on the same platform whereon stands Uncle Tom. That platform is the Bible, and I kneel by the side of my dusky brother in faith with the same devotion.

...It's strange! Throughout my life, I’ve wandered through the different grand halls of philosophy, taken part in every intellectual celebration, flirted with every conceivable system, yet I've never been satisfied, like Messalina after a wild night; and now, after all this, I suddenly find myself on the same platform as Uncle Tom. That platform is the Bible, and I kneel beside my dark-skinned brother in faith with the same devotion.

What humiliation! With all my learning, I have got no farther than the poor ignorant negro who can hardly spell! It is even true that poor Uncle Tom appears to see in the holy book more profound things than I, who am not yet quite clear, especially in regard to the second part.

What a humiliation! With all my knowledge, I haven't gotten any further than the poor ignorant black man who can barely spell! It's even true that poor Uncle Tom seems to see deeper meanings in the holy book than I do, especially regarding the second part, where I'm still not entirely clear.

...But, on the other hand, I think I may flatter myself that I can better comprehend, in the first part of the holy book, the character of Moses. His grand figure has impressed me not a little. What a colossal form! I cannot imagine that Og, King of Bashan, could have looked more giant-like. How insignificant does Sinai appear when Moses stands thereon! That mountain is merely a pedestal for the feet of the man whose head towers in the heavens and there holds converse with God. May God forgive the sacrilegious thought! but sometimes it appears to me as if this Mosaic God were only the reflected radiance of Moses himself, whom he so strongly represents in wrath and in love. It were a sin, it were anthropomorphism, to assume such an identity of God and his prophet; but the resemblance is most striking.

...But, on the other hand, I think I might flatter myself that I can better grasp, in the first part of the holy book, the character of Moses. His grand figure has really impressed me. What a colossal presence! I can’t imagine that Og, King of Bashan, looked more giant-like. How small Sinai seems when Moses stands on it! That mountain is just a pedestal for the feet of the man whose head towers in the heavens and who speaks with God there. May God forgive the irreverent thought! But sometimes it seems to me as if this Mosaic God were simply the reflected light of Moses himself, whom he so strongly embodies in both anger and love. It would be a sin, it would be anthropomorphism, to assume such an identity of God and his prophet; but the similarity is quite striking.

I had not previously much admired the character of Moses, probably because the Hellenic spirit was predominant in me, and I could not pardon the lawgiver of the Jews for his hate of the plastic arts. I failed to perceive that Moses, notwithstanding his enmity to art, was nevertheless himself a great artist, and possessed the true artistic spirit. Only, this artistic spirit with him, as with his Egyptian countrymen, was applied to the colossal and the imperishable. But not, like the Egyptians, did he construct his works of art from bricks and granite, but he built human pyramids and carved human obelisks. He took a poor shepherd tribe and from it created a nation which should defy centuries; a great, an immortal, a consecrated race, a God-serving people, who to all other nations should be as a model and prototype: he created Israel.

I hadn't really admired Moses' character before, probably because I was more influenced by Greek culture and couldn't forgive the Jewish lawgiver for his dislike of the arts. I failed to see that despite his aversion to art, Moses was actually a great artist and had the true artistic spirit. However, like his Egyptian counterparts, his artistic spirit was focused on the monumental and the everlasting. But instead of using bricks and granite like the Egyptians, he built human pyramids and carved human obelisks. He took a poor shepherd tribe and turned it into a nation that would stand the test of time; a great, immortal, and sacred race, a people devoted to God, who would serve as a model and example for all other nations: he created Israel.

I have never spoken with proper reverence either of the artist or of his work, the Jews; and for the same reason—namely, my Hellenic temperament, which was opposed to Jewish asceticism. My prejudice in favour of Hellas has declined since then. I see now that the Greeks were only beautiful youths, but that the Jews were always men, strong, unyielding men, not only in the past, but to this very day, in spite of eighteen centuries of persecution and suffering. Since that time I have learned to appreciate them better, and, were not all pride of ancestry a silly inconsistency in a champion of the revolution and its democratic principles, the writer of these pages would be proud that his ancestors belonged to the noble house of Israel, that he is a descendant of those martyrs who gave the world a God and a morality, and who have fought and suffered on all the battle-fields of thought.

I have never spoken with the proper respect about the artist or his work, the Jews; and for the same reason—my Greek temperament, which clashed with Jewish asceticism. My bias in favor of Greece has faded since then. I now see that the Greeks were just beautiful youths, while the Jews have always been strong, resilient men, not only in the past but even today, despite eighteen centuries of persecution and suffering. Since that time, I've come to appreciate them more, and if pride in ancestry weren’t a silly contradiction for someone who supports the revolution and its democratic principles, I would take pride in the fact that my ancestors came from the noble house of Israel, that I am a descendant of those martyrs who gave the world a God and a moral framework, and who have fought and suffered on all fronts of thought.

The histories of the middle ages, and even those of modern times, have seldom enrolled on their records the names of such knights of the Holy Spirit, for they generally fought with closed visors. The deeds of the Jews are just as little known to the world as is their real character. Some think they know the Jews because they can recognise their beards, which is all they have ever revealed of themselves. Now, as during the middle ages, they remain a wandering mystery, a mystery that may perhaps be solved on the day which the prophet foretells, when there shall be but one shepherd and one flock, and the righteous who have suffered for the good of humanity shall then receive a glorious reward.

The histories of the Middle Ages, and even those of modern times, rarely include the names of knights of the Holy Spirit, as they typically fought with their visors down. The actions of the Jews are just as unknown to the world as their true character. Some think they understand the Jews because they can recognize their beards, which is all they have ever shown of themselves. Just like in the Middle Ages, they continue to be a wandering mystery, one that may perhaps be unraveled on the day the prophet foretells, when there will be one shepherd and one flock, and the righteous who have suffered for the good of humanity will finally receive a glorious reward.

You see that I, who in the past was wont to quote Homer, now quote the Bible, like Uncle Tom. In truth, I owe it much. It again awoke in me the religious feeling; and this new birth of religious emotion suffices for the poet, for he can dispense far more easily than other mortals with positive religious dogmas.

You see, I used to quote Homer, but now I quote the Bible, like Uncle Tom. Honestly, I owe a lot to it. It has reignited my religious feelings, and this renewed sense of faith is enough for a poet, since they can more easily live without strict religious beliefs than most people.

...The silliest and most contradictory reports are in circulation concerning me. Very pious but not very wise men of Protestant Germany have urgently inquired if, now that I am ill and in a religious frame of mind, I cling with more devotion than heretofore to the Lutheran evangelic faith, which, until now, I have only professed after a luke-warm, official fashion. No, dear friends, in that respect no change has taken place in me, and if I continue to adhere to the evangelic faith at all, it is because now, as in the past, that faith does not at all inconvenience me. I will frankly avow that when I resided in Berlin, like several of my friends, I would have preferred to separate myself from the bonds of all denominations, had not the rulers there refused a residence in Prussia, and especially in Berlin, to any who did not profess one of the positive religions recognised by the State. As Henry IV. once laughingly said, "Paris vaut bien une messe," so could I say, with equal justice, "Berlin is well worth a sermon." Both before and after, I could easily tolerate the very enlightened Christianity which at that time was preached in some of the churches of Berlin. It was a Christianity filtered from all superstition, even from the doctrine of the divinity of Christ, like mock-turtle soup without turtle. At that time I myself was still a god, and no one of the positive religions had more value for me than another. I could wear any of their uniforms out of courtesy, after the manner of the Russian Emperor, who, when he vouchsafes the King of Prussia the honour to attend a review at Potsdam, appears uniformed as a Prussian officer of the guard.

...The most ridiculous and contradictory rumors are being spread about me. Very devout but not very wise men from Protestant Germany have been asking if, now that I'm ill and in a spiritual mindset, I'm more dedicated than before to the Lutheran faith, which I've only practiced in a half-hearted, official way until now. No, dear friends, nothing has changed in that regard, and if I still believe in the faith, it's because, just like before, it doesn’t cause me any trouble. I’ll be honest and say that when I lived in Berlin, like several of my friends, I would have preferred to break free from all religious affiliations, if only the authorities hadn’t denied residency in Prussia, especially in Berlin, to anyone who didn’t follow one of the officially recognized religions. As Henry IV once jokingly said, “Paris is well worth a mass,” I could justly say, “Berlin is well worth a sermon.” Both before and after, I could easily tolerate the very liberal Christianity that was preached in some churches in Berlin at that time. It was a form of Christianity stripped of all superstition, even the belief in Christ’s divinity, like mock-turtle soup without the turtle. Back then, I considered myself a god, and none of the established religions held more value for me than another. I could put on any of their religious uniforms out of courtesy, much like the Russian Emperor, who, when he graciously allows the King of Prussia to attend a review in Potsdam, dresses as a Prussian officer of the guard.

Now that my physical sufferings, and the reawakening of my religious nature, have effected in me many changes, does the uniform of Lutheranism in some measure express my true sentiments? How far has the formal profession become a reality? I do not propose to give direct answers to these questions, but I shall avail myself of the opportunity to explain the services which, according to my present views, Protestantism has rendered to civilisation. From this may be inferred how much more I am now in sympathy with this creed.

Now that my physical suffering and renewed sense of spirituality have brought about many changes in me, does the uniform of Lutheranism somewhat reflect my true beliefs? To what extent has my formal profession become genuine? I don’t intend to provide direct answers to these questions, but I will take this opportunity to explain the contributions that, in my current perspective, Protestantism has made to civilization. From this, it can be understood how much more aligned I feel with this faith.

At an earlier period, when philosophy possessed for me a paramount interest, I prized Protestantism only for its services in winning freedom of thought, which, after all, is the foundation on which in later times Leibnitz, Kant, and Hegel could build. Luther, the strong man with the axe, must, in the very nature of things, have preceded these warriors, to open a path for them. For this service I have honoured the Reformation as being the beginning of German philosophy, which justified my polemical defence of Protestantism. Now, in my later and more mature days, when the religious feeling again surges up in me, and the shipwrecked metaphysician clings fast to the Bible,—now I chiefly honour Protestantism for its services in the discovery and propagation of the Bible. I say "discovery," for the Jews, who had preserved the Bible from the great conflagration of the sacred temple, and all through the middle ages carried it about with them like a portable fatherland, kept their treasure carefully concealed in their ghettos. Here came by stealth German scholars, the predecessors and originators of the Reformation, to study the Hebrew language and thus acquire the key to the casket wherein the precious treasure was enclosed. Such a scholar was the worthy Reuchlinus; and his enemies, the Hochstraaten, in Cologne, who are represented as the party of darkness and ignorance, were by no means such simpletons. On the contrary, they were far-sighted Inquisitors, who foresaw clearly the disasters which a familiar acquaintance with the Holy Scriptures would bring on the Church. Hence the persecuting zeal with which they sought to destroy the Hebrew writings, at the same time inciting the rabble to exterminate the Jews, the interpreters of these writings. Now that the motives of their actions are known, we see that, properly considered, each was in the right. This reactionary party believed that the spiritual salvation of the world was endangered, and that all means, falsehood as well as murder, were justifiable, especially against the Jews. The lower classes, pinched by poverty, and heirs of the primeval curse, were embittered against the Jews because of the wealth they had amassed; and what to-day is called the hate of the proletariate against the rich, was then called hate against the Jews. In fact, as the latter were excluded from all ownership of land and from every trade, and relegated to dealing in money and merchandise, they were condemned by law to be rich, hated, and murdered. Such murders, it is true, were in these days committed under the mantle of religion, and the cry was, "We must kill those who once killed our God." How strange! The very people who had given the world a God, and whose whole life was inspired by the worship of God, were stigmatised as deicides! The bloody parody of such madness was witnessed at the outbreak of the revolution in San Domingo, where a negro mob devastated the plantations with murder and fire, led by a negro fanatic who carried an immense crucifix, amid bloodthirsty cries of "The whites killed Christ; let us slay all whites!"

At an earlier time, when philosophy was my main interest, I valued Protestantism mainly for its role in promoting freedom of thought, which is the foundation on which Leibnitz, Kant, and Hegel later built. Luther, the strong man with the axe, had to come first to pave the way for them. For this reason, I have respected the Reformation as the start of German philosophy, which justified my defense of Protestantism. Now, in my later and more mature years, when my religious feelings have resurfaced, and the shipwrecked thinker clings to the Bible, I primarily honor Protestantism for its role in discovering and spreading the Bible. I say "discovery," because the Jews, who kept the Bible safe from the catastrophic destruction of the sacred temple and carried it with them through the Middle Ages like a portable homeland, carefully concealed their treasure in their ghettos. German scholars, who were the forerunners of the Reformation, stealthily came to study the Hebrew language to unlock the treasure hidden within its casket. One such scholar was the esteemed Reuchlin, and his adversaries, the Hochstraaten in Cologne, who are portrayed as the forces of darkness and ignorance, were not foolish. Instead, they were astute Inquisitors who clearly predicted the havoc that a close familiarity with the Holy Scriptures would wreak on the Church. Hence, their fervent efforts to destroy Hebrew writings while inciting the crowd to exterminate the Jews, the interpreters of these texts. Now that we understand their motives, we can see that, in a way, each side believed they were right. This reactionary group thought that the spiritual salvation of the world was at stake, and that any means, including lies and murder, were justified, especially against the Jews. The lower classes, suffering from poverty and burdened by ancient curses, felt resentment towards the Jews because of the wealth they had accumulated; what we now call the proletariat's hatred of the rich was then directed as hatred towards the Jews. In fact, since the latter were excluded from owning land or engaging in various trades, relegated only to money lending and trade, they were legally condemned to be wealthy, hated, and murdered. Such murders, it is true, were committed under the guise of religion, with the rallying cry, "We must kill those who once killed our God." How strange! The very people who had given the world a God, and whose entire lives were centered around worshiping Him, were branded as deicides! The bloody absurdity of such madness was evident during the outbreak of the revolution in San Domingo, where a group of black individuals laid waste to the plantations with violence and fire, led by a black fanatic who carried a large crucifix, shouting bloodthirsty calls of "The whites killed Christ; let us kill all whites!"

Yes, to the Jews the world is indebted for its God and His word. They rescued the Bible from the bankruptcy of the Roman empire, and preserved the precious volume intact during all the wild tumults of the migration of races, until Protestantism came to seek it and translated it into the language of the land and spread it broadcast over the whole world. This extensive circulation of the Bible has produced the most beneficent fruits, and continues to do so to this very day. The propaganda of the Bible Society have fulfilled a providential mission, which will bring forth quite different results from those anticipated by the pious gentlemen of the British Christian Missionary Society. They expect to elevate a petty, narrow dogma to supremacy, and to monopolise heaven as they do the sea, making it a British Church domain—and see, without knowing it, they are demanding the overthrow of all Protestant sects; for, as they all draw their life from the Bible, when the knowledge of the Bible becomes universal, all sectarian distinctions will be obliterated.

Yes, the world owes a debt to the Jews for their God and His word. They saved the Bible from the decline of the Roman Empire and maintained the integrity of this valuable book throughout the chaotic migrations of various races, until Protestantism sought it out, translated it into the local language, and spread it widely across the globe. This widespread distribution of the Bible has generated incredibly positive outcomes and continues to do so today. The efforts of the Bible Society have fulfilled a divinely intended mission, which will yield results quite different from what the well-meaning members of the British Christian Missionary Society expect. They aim to elevate a narrow dogma to dominance and monopolize heaven as they do the seas, turning it into a British Church domain—and, ironically, they are unknowingly calling for the collapse of all Protestant sects; because they all draw their essence from the Bible, once the knowledge of the Bible becomes universal, all sectarian differences will fade away.

While by tricks of trade, smuggling, and commerce the British gain footholds in many lands, with them they bring the Bible, that grand democracy wherein each man shall not only be king in his own house, but also bishop. They are demanding, they are founding, the great kingdom of the spirit, the kingdom of the religious emotions, and the love of humanity, of purity, of true morality, which cannot be taught by dogmatic formulas, but by parable and example, such as are contained in that beautiful, sacred, educational book for young and old—the Bible.

While through trade tricks, smuggling, and commerce the British establish themselves in many lands, they bring along the Bible, that great symbol of democracy where each person is not only the ruler in their own home but also a spiritual leader. They are demanding and creating the great kingdom of the spirit, a realm of religious feelings, love for humanity, purity, and true morality, which cannot be taught through rigid doctrines, but through stories and examples, like those found in that beautiful, sacred, educational book for people of all ages—the Bible.

To the observant thinker it is a wonderful spectacle to view the countries where the Bible, since the Reformation, has been exerting its elevating influence on the inhabitants, and has impressed on them the customs, modes of thought, and temperaments which formerly prevailed in Palestine, as portrayed both in the Old and in the New Testament. In the Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon sections of Europe and America, especially among the Germanic races, and also to a certain extent in Celtic countries, the customs of Palestine have been reproduced in so marked a degree that we seem to be in the midst of the ancient Judean life. Take, for example, the Scotch Protestants: are not they Hebrews, whose names even are biblical, whose very cant smacks of the Phariseeism of ancient Jerusalem, and whose religion is naught else than a pork-eating Judaism? It is the same in Denmark and in certain provinces of North Germany, not to mention the majority of the new sects of the United States, among whom the life depicted in the Old Testament is pedantically aped. In the latter, that life appears as if daguerreotyped: the outlines are studiously correct, but all is depicted in sad, sombre colours; the golden tints and harmonising colours of the promised land are lacking. But the caricature will disappear sooner or later. The zeal, the imperishable and the true—that is to say, the morality—of ancient Judaism will in those countries bloom forth just as acceptably to God as in the old time it blossomed on the banks of Jordan and on the heights of Lebanon. One needs neither palm-trees nor camels to be good; and goodness is better than beauty.

To the keen observer, it’s a fascinating sight to see the countries where the Bible, since the Reformation, has been positively impacting its people and shaping their customs, ways of thinking, and temperaments that once existed in Palestine, as depicted in both the Old and New Testaments. In the Scandinavian and Anglo-Saxon parts of Europe and America, especially among the Germanic races, and to some extent in Celtic regions, the customs of Palestine have been recreated to such a significant degree that we feel like we are experiencing ancient Judean life. Take, for instance, the Scottish Protestants: aren’t they like Hebrews, with names that are even biblical, whose style of speaking echoes the Phariseeism of ancient Jerusalem, and whose religion resembles a version of Judaism that includes pork? The same can be seen in Denmark and certain areas of northern Germany, not to mention many of the new sects in the United States, where the life shown in the Old Testament is followed in a very strict manner. In these cases, that life seems almost like a photograph: the details are carefully accurate, but everything is portrayed in dull, dark colors; the bright and vibrant colors of the promised land are missing. However, this distortion will fade eventually. The passion, the everlasting truth—that is, the morality—of ancient Judaism will flourish in those countries just as pleasingly to God as it did in ancient times along the banks of the Jordan and the heights of Lebanon. One doesn’t need palm trees or camels to be good; goodness is more valuable than beauty.

The readiness with which these races have adopted the Judaic life, customs, and modes of thought is, perhaps, not entirely attributable to their susceptibility of culture. The cause of this phenomenon is, perhaps, to be sought in the character of the Jewish people, which always had a marked elective affinity with the character of the Germanic, and also to a certain extent with that of the Celtic races. Judea has always seemed to me like a fragment of the Occident misplaced in the Orient. In fact, with its spiritual faith, its severe, chaste, even ascetic customs,—in short, with its abstract inner life,—this land and its people always offered the most marked contrasts to the population of neighbouring countries, who, with their luxuriantly varied and fervent nature of worship, passed their existence in a Bacchantic dance of the senses.

The willingness of these cultures to embrace Jewish life, customs, and ways of thinking can’t just be attributed to their openness to new ideas. The reason for this might lie in the unique character of the Jewish people, which has always had a strong connection to the character of the Germanic tribes, and to some extent, with the Celtic races as well. Judea has always felt to me like a piece of the West misplaced in the East. In fact, with its spiritual beliefs, strict, simple, even ascetic practices—in short, with its deep inner life—this region and its people have always stood in stark contrast to the surrounding nations, who lived lives full of vibrant and passionate worship, immersed in a hedonistic celebration of the senses.

At a time when, in the temples of Babylon, Nineveh, Sidon, and Tyre, bloody and unchaste rites were celebrated, the description of which, even now, makes our hair stand on end, Israel sat under its fig-trees, piously chanting the praises of the invisible God, and exercised virtue and righteousness. When we think of these surroundings we cannot sufficiently admire the early greatness of Israel. Of Israel's love of liberty, at a time when not only in its immediate vicinity, but also among all the nations of antiquity, even among the philosophical Greeks, the practice of slavery was justified and in full sway,—of this I will not speak, for fear of compromising the Bible in the eyes of the powers that be. No Socialist was more of a terrorist than our Lord and Saviour. Even Moses was such a Socialist; although, like a practical man, he attempted only to reform existing usages concerning property. Instead of striving to effect the impossible, and rashly decreeing the abolition of private property, he only sought for its moralisation by bringing the rights of property into harmony with the laws of morality and reason. This he accomplished by instituting the jubilee, at which period every alienated heritage, which among an agricultural people always consisted of land, would revert to the original owner, no matter in what manner it had been alienated. This institution offers the most marked contrast to the Roman statute of limitations, by which, after the expiration of a certain period, the actual holder of an estate could no longer be compelled to restore the estate to the true owner, unless the latter should be able to show that within the prescribed time he had, with all the prescribed formalities, demanded restitution. This last condition opened wide the door for chicanery, particularly in a state where despotism and jurisprudence were at their zenith, and where the unjust possessor had at command all means of intimidation, especially against the poor who might be unable to defray the expense of litigation. The Roman was both soldier and lawyer, and that which he conquered with the strong arm he knew how to defend by the tricks of law. Only a nation of robbers and casuists could have invented the law of prescription, the statute of limitations, and consecrated it in that detestable book which may be called the bible of the Devil—I mean the codex of Roman civil law, which, unfortunately, still holds sway.

At a time when, in the temples of Babylon, Nineveh, Sidon, and Tyre, gruesome and immoral rituals were performed—descriptions of which still make our hair stand on end—Israel sat under its fig trees, devoutly praising the unseen God, practicing virtue and righteousness. When we consider this context, we can't help but admire the early greatness of Israel. Regarding Israel's love for freedom, at a time when not just nearby, but throughout all of ancient nations, including the philosophical Greeks, slavery was accepted and thriving—I'll refrain from commenting on this, to avoid compromising the Bible in the eyes of those in power. No Socialist was more of a radical than our Lord and Savior. Even Moses was a kind of Socialist; however, being pragmatic, he only tried to reform existing practices about property. Instead of trying to achieve the impossible by recklessly abolishing private property, he aimed to moralize it, ensuring that property rights aligned with morality and reason. He did this by establishing the jubilee, during which every piece of land, often the source of wealth in an agricultural society, would return to its original owner, regardless of how it had been taken. This practice starkly contrasts with the Roman statute of limitations, which stated that after a certain period, a current holder of property could no longer be forced to return it to its rightful owner, unless that owner could prove that they had formally demanded its return within the time allowed. This last requirement opened the door wide to manipulation, especially in a state where tyranny and legalism were at their peak, and where the unjust possessor had all means of intimidation at their disposal, particularly against the poor who couldn't afford legal battles. The Roman was both a soldier and a lawyer, and what he conquered by force, he adeptly defended through legal maneuvers. Only a nation of thieves and sophists could have created the law of prescription, the statute of limitations, and sanctioned it in that contemptible book that might be called the bible of the Devil—I mean the codex of Roman civil law, which, unfortunately, still prevails.

I have spoken of the affinity which exists between the Jews and the Germans, whom I once designated as the two pre-eminently moral nations. While on this subject, I desire to direct attention to the ethical disapprobation with which the ancient German law stigmatises the statute of limitations: this I consider a noteworthy fact. To this very day the Saxon peasant uses the beautiful and touching aphorism, "A hundred years of wrong do not make a single year of right."

I have talked about the connection between Jews and Germans, whom I once called the two most moral nations. While discussing this, I want to highlight the ethical disapproval that ancient German law has towards the statute of limitations: I see this as an important point. Even today, a Saxon peasant uses the beautiful and poignant saying, "A hundred years of wrong do not make a single year of right."

The Mosaic law, through the institution of the jubilee year, protests still more decidedly. Moses did not seek to abolish the right of property; on the contrary, it was his wish that everyone should possess property, so that no one might be tempted by poverty to become a bondsman and thus acquire slavish propensities. Liberty was always the great emancipator's leading thought, and it breathes and glows in all his statutes concerning pauperism. Slavery itself he bitterly, almost fiercely, hated; but even this barbarous institution he could not entirely destroy. It was rooted so deeply in the customs of that ancient time that he was compelled to confine his efforts to ameliorating by law the condition of the slaves, rendering self-purchase by the bondsman less difficult, and shortening the period of bondage.

The Mosaic law, through the creation of the jubilee year, makes its stance even clearer. Moses didn’t aim to eliminate property rights; on the contrary, he wanted everyone to have property so that no one would be tempted by poverty to become enslaved and develop a mindset of servitude. Freedom was always the great liberator's main focus, and it resonates throughout all his laws regarding poverty. He strongly despised slavery, almost with a fierce passion; however, he couldn't completely abolish this cruel system. It was so deeply entrenched in the customs of that ancient time that he had to focus on improving the slaves' conditions by law, making it easier for them to buy their freedom and reducing the length of their servitude.

But if a slave thus eventually freed by process of law declined to depart from the house of bondage, then, according to the command of Moses, the incorrigibly servile, worthless scamp was to be nailed by the ear to the gate of his master's house, and after being thus publicly exposed in this disgraceful manner, he was condemned to life-long slavery. Oh, Moses! our teacher, Rabbi Moses! exalted foe of all slavishness! give me hammer and nails that I may nail to the gate of Brandenburg our complacent, long-eared slaves in liveries of black-red-and-gold.

But if a slave who had been freed through legal means chose not to leave the place of bondage, then, according to Moses' command, that stubborn, worthless person was to have their ear nailed to the gate of their master's house. After being publicly shamed in such a disgraceful way, they were condemned to a life of slavery. Oh, Moses! our teacher, Rabbi Moses! great enemy of all servitude! give me a hammer and nails so I can nail to the gate of Brandenburg our complacent, long-eared slaves dressed in black, red, and gold.

I leave the ocean of universal religious, moral, and historical reflections, and modestly guide my bark of thought back again into the quiet inland waters of autobiography, in which the author's features are so faithfully reflected.

I step away from the vast sea of universal religious, moral, and historical reflections and gently steer my thoughts back into the calm waters of autobiography, where the author's traits are so accurately mirrored.

In the preceding pages I have mentioned how Protestant voices from home, in very indiscreet questions, have taken for granted that with the reawakening in me of the religious feeling my sympathy for the Church had also grown stronger. I know not how clearly I have shown that I am not particularly enthusiastic for any dogma or for any creed; and in this respect I have remained the same that I always was. I repeat this statement in order to remove an error in regard to my present views, into which several of my friends who are zealous Catholics have fallen. How strange! at the same time that in Germany Protestantism bestowed on me the undeserved honour of crediting me with a conversion to the evangelic faith, another report was circulating that I had gone over to Catholicism. Some good souls went so far as to assert that this latter conversion had occurred many years ago, and they supported this statement by definitely naming time and place. They even mentioned the exact date; they designated by name the church in which I had abjured the heresy of Protestantism, and adopted the only true and saving faith, that of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church. The only detail that was lacking was how many peals of the bell had been sounded at this ceremony.

In the previous pages, I've mentioned how Protestant voices back home, in their rather indiscreet inquiries, assumed that with the revival of my religious feelings, my sympathy for the Church had also increased. I'm not sure how clearly I've expressed that I'm not particularly enthusiastic about any dogma or creed; and in this regard, I've remained the same as I always was. I repeat this statement to correct a misunderstanding about my current views, which several of my Catholic friends have fallen into. It's strange! At the same time that Protestantism in Germany has given me the undeserved honor of suggesting that I converted to the evangelical faith, another rumor was spreading that I had converted to Catholicism. Some well-meaning individuals even claimed that this latter conversion happened many years ago and backed it up by naming the time and place. They even mentioned the exact date and identified the church where I supposedly renounced the heresy of Protestantism and accepted the only true and saving faith, that of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church. The only detail missing was how many church bells rang during this ceremony.

From the newspapers and letters that reach me I learn how widely this report has won credence; and I fall into a painful embarrassment when I think of the sincere, loving joy which is so touchingly expressed in some of these epistles. Travellers tell me that the salvation of my soul has even furnished a theme for pulpit eloquence. Young Catholic priests seek permission to dedicate to me the first fruits of their pen. I am regarded as a shining light—that is to be—of the Church. This pious folly is so well meant and sincere that I cannot laugh at it. Whatever may be said of the zealots of Catholicism, one thing is certain: they are no egotists; they take a warm interest in their fellow-men—alas! often a little too warm an interest. I cannot ascribe that false report to malice, but only to mistake. The innocent facts were in this case surely distorted by accident only. The statement of time and place is quite correct. I was really in the designated church on the designated day, and I did there undergo a religious ceremony; but this ceremony was no hateful abjuration, but a very innocent conjugation. In short, after being married according to the civil law, I also invoked the sanction of the Church, because my wife, who is a strict Catholic, would not have considered herself properly married in the eyes of God without such a ceremony; and for no consideration would I shake this dear being's belief in the religion which she has inherited.

From the letters and newspapers I receive, I can see how widely this report has been accepted, and it makes me uncomfortable to think about the sincere and loving joy expressed in some of these messages. Travelers tell me that the salvation of my soul has even become a topic of sermons. Young Catholic priests want to dedicate their first writings to me. I'm viewed as a future shining light of the Church. This well-intentioned devotion is so genuine that I can’t simply laugh it off. Whatever can be said about the enthusiasts of Catholicism, one thing is clear: they are not selfish; they care deeply about their fellow people—sometimes a bit too intensely. I can't attribute that false report to ill will, only to misunderstanding. The actual facts were likely just misinterpreted by chance. The time and place mentioned are definitely correct. I was indeed in the specified church on the appointed day, and I did participate in a religious ceremony; however, this ceremony was not a distasteful renunciation but rather a very innocent union. In short, after getting married under civil law, I sought the blessing of the Church because my wife, who is devoutly Catholic, wouldn’t consider herself truly married in God’s eyes without that ceremony; and there’s no way I would undermine her faith in the religion she has grown up with.

It is well, moreover, that women should have a positive religion. Whether there is more fidelity among wives of the evangelic faith, I shall not attempt to discuss. But the Catholicism of the wife certainly saves the husband from many annoyances. When Catholic women have committed a fault, they do not secretly brood over it, but confess to the priest, and as soon as they have received absolution they are again as merry and light-hearted as before. This is much pleasanter than spoiling the husband's good spirits or his soup by downcast looks or grieving over a sin for which they hold themselves in duty bound to atone during their whole lives by shrewish prudery and quarrelsome excess of virtue. The confessional is likewise useful in another respect. The sinner does not keep her terrible secret preying on her mind; and since women are sure, sooner or later, to babble all they know, it is better that they should confide certain matters to their confessor than that they should, in some moment of overpowering tenderness, talkativeness, or remorse, blurt out to the poor husband the fatal confession.

It's definitely good for women to have a positive belief system. I won’t get into whether wives of the evangelical faith are more faithful, but I can say that a Catholic wife's faith can save her husband from a lot of annoyance. When Catholic women mess up, they don’t dwell on it in silence; they confess to the priest, and once they receive absolution, they’re back to being cheerful and light-hearted. That’s much better than ruining their husband's mood or meal with gloomy expressions or sulking over a sin they think they need to make amends for their whole lives through nagging and excessive virtue. The confessional serves another purpose, too. It prevents the sinner from keeping a heavy secret that eats away at her. Since women tend to share everything eventually, it’s smarter for them to share certain things with their confessor rather than risk spilling the beans to their poor husband during an emotional moment of tenderness, chatter, or regret.

Scepticism is certainly dangerous in the married state, and, although I myself was a free-thinker, I permitted no word derogatory to religion to be spoken in my house. In the midst of Paris I lived like a steady, commonplace townsman; and therefore when I married I desired to be wedded under the sanction of the Church, although in this country the civil marriage is fully recognised by society. My free-thinking friends were vexed at me for this, and overwhelmed me with reproaches, claiming that I had made too great concessions to the clergy. Their chagrin at my weakness would have been still greater had they known the other concessions that I had made to the hated priesthood. As I was a Protestant wedding a Catholic, in order to have the ceremony performed by a Catholic priest it was necessary to obtain a special dispensation from the archbishop, who in these cases exacts from the husband a written pledge that the offspring of the marriage shall be educated in the religion of the mother. But, between ourselves, I could sign this pledge with the lighter conscience since I knew the rearing of children is not my specialty, and as I laid down my pen the words of the beautiful Ninon de L'Enclos came into my mind—"O, le beau billet qu' a Lechastre!"

Skepticism is definitely risky in marriage, and even though I was a free thinker, I didn’t allow any disrespectful comments about religion in my home. In the middle of Paris, I lived like an ordinary, everyday townsman; so when I got married, I wanted to do it in a church even though civil marriages are fully accepted in this country. My free-thinking friends were upset with me for this and showered me with complaints, saying that I had compromised too much with the clergy. Their disappointment in my weakness would have been even greater if they had known about the other compromises I had made with the loathed priesthood. Since I was a Protestant marrying a Catholic, I had to get a special dispensation from the archbishop to have the ceremony officiated by a Catholic priest. He requires the husband to provide a written promise that the children from the marriage will be raised in the mother’s religion. But, to be honest, I felt okay signing this promise since I knew that raising children wasn’t my thing, and as I put down my pen, the words of the lovely Ninon de L'Enclos came to mind—"Oh, the beautiful note that Lechastre has!"

...I will crown my confessions by admitting that, if at that time it had been necessary in order to obtain the dispensation of the archbishop, I would have bound over not only the children but myself. But the ogre of Rome, who, like the monster in the fairy tales, stipulates that he shall have for his services the future births, was content with the poor children who were never born. And so I remained a Protestant, as before—a protesting Protestant; and I protest against reports which, without being intended to be defamatory, may yet be magnified so as to injure my good name.

...I’ll wrap up my confessions by admitting that, if it had been necessary at that time to get the archbishop’s approval, I would have sacrificed not just the children but myself as well. But the giant from Rome, who, like a monster in fairy tales, demands future blessings in return for his services, was satisfied with the poor children who were never born. So I stayed a Protestant, just like before—a protesting Protestant; and I object to any claims that, even if not meant to be harmful, could be blown out of proportion and damage my reputation.

...There is not a particle of unkindly feeling in my breast against the poor ogre of Rome. I have long since abandoned all feuds with Catholicism, and the sword which I once drew in the service of an idea, and not from private grudge, has long rested in its scabbard. In that contest I resembled a soldier of fortune, who fights bravely, but after the battle bears no malice either against the defeated cause or against its champions.

...I don't have any unkind feelings towards the poor ogre of Rome. I've completely let go of any disputes with Catholicism, and the sword I once wielded for an idea, not out of personal grudge, has long been sheathed. In that conflict, I was like a mercenary soldier, who fights fiercely, but after the battle, holds no hatred for the losing side or its supporters.

Fanatical enmity towards the Catholic Church cannot be charged against me, for there was always lacking in me the self-conceit which is necessary to sustain such an animosity. I know too well my own intellectual calibre not to be aware that with my most furious onslaughts I could inflict but little injury on a colossus such as the Church of St. Peter. I could only be a humble worker at the slow removal of its foundation stones, a task which may yet require centuries. I was too familiar with history not to recognise the gigantic nature of that granite structure. Call it, if you will, the bastile of intellect; assert, if you choose, that it is now defended only by invalids; but it is therefore not the less true that the bastile is not to be easily captured, and many a young recruit will break his head against its walls.

I can’t be accused of being fanatically hostile towards the Catholic Church because I’ve never had the arrogance needed to maintain such hatred. I know my own intellectual capacity well enough to understand that even my most intense attacks would barely scratch the surface of a giant like the Church of St. Peter. I could only contribute as a small part of its slow dismantling, a job that might take centuries. I’m too familiar with history not to see the massive scale of that solid structure. Call it, if you want, the fortress of intellect; claim, if you prefer, that it’s now only defended by the weak; but it’s still true that this fortress won’t be easily taken, and many a young newcomer will hurt himself trying to breach its walls.

As a thinker and as a metaphysician, I was always forced to pay the homage of my admiration to the logical consistency of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, and I may also take credit to myself that I have never by witticism or ridicule attacked its dogmas or its public worship. Too much and too little honour has been vouchsafed me in calling me an intellectual kinsman of Voltaire. I was always a poet; and hence the poesy which blossoms and glows in the symbolism of Catholic dogma and culture must have revealed itself more profoundly to me than to ordinary observers, and in my youthful days I was often touched by the infinite sweetness, the mysterious, blissful ecstasy and awe-inspiring grandeur of that poetry. There was a time when I went into raptures over the blessed Queen of Heaven, and in dainty verse told the story of her grace and goodness. My first collection of poems shows traces of this beautiful Madonna period, which in later editions I weeded out with laughable anxiety.

As a thinker and a metaphysician, I’ve always admired the logical consistency of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, and I can also take pride in the fact that I have never mocked or ridiculed its beliefs or its public worship. I've received both too much and too little credit for being considered an intellectual relative of Voltaire. I have always been a poet; therefore, the beauty that shines in the symbolism of Catholic dogma and culture must have revealed itself to me on a deeper level than it does to most people, and in my younger days, I was often moved by the endless sweetness, the mysterious and blissful ecstasy, and the awe-inspiring grandeur of that poetry. There was a time when I was captivated by the blessed Queen of Heaven and wrote delicate verses telling the story of her grace and goodness. My first collection of poems reflects this lovely Madonna phase, which I later removed from subsequent editions with a somewhat comical sense of urgency.

The time for vanity has passed, and everyone is at liberty to smile at this confession.

The time for being vain is over, and everyone is free to smile at this admission.

It will be unnecessary for me to say that, as no blind hate against the Catholic Church exists in me, so also no petty spite against its priests rankles in my heart. Whoever knows my satirical vein will surely bear witness that I was always lenient and forbearing in speaking of the human weaknesses of the clergy, although by their attacks they often provoked in me a spirit of retaliation. But even at the height of my wrath I was always respectful to the true priesthood; for, looking back into the past, I remembered benefits which they had once rendered me; for it is Catholic priests whom I must thank for my first instruction; it was they who guided the first steps of my intellect.

I don't need to say that I have no blind hatred for the Catholic Church, nor do I hold any petty grudges against its priests. Anyone familiar with my satirical style can attest that I’ve always been understanding and tolerant when discussing the human flaws of the clergy, even though they often provoked my desire for revenge with their attacks. But even at my angriest, I always maintained respect for true priests; reflecting on the past, I remember the support they once offered me. It’s Catholic priests who I owe my first education to; they helped shape the early development of my understanding.

Pedagogy was the specialty of the Jesuits, and although they sought to pursue it in the interest of their order, yet sometimes the passion for pedagogy itself, the only human passion that was left in them, gained the mastery; they forgot their aim, the repression of reason and the exaltation of faith, and, instead of reducing men to a state of childhood, as was their purpose, out of the children they involuntarily made men by their instruction. The greatest men of the Revolution were educated in Jesuit schools. Without the training there acquired, that great intellectual agitation would perhaps not have broken out till a century later.

Teaching was the specialty of the Jesuits, and while they aimed to pursue it for the sake of their order, sometimes their passion for teaching itself— the only real human passion they had left— took over. They lost sight of their goal, which was to suppress reason and elevate faith. Instead of reducing people to a state of childhood, as they intended, they accidentally turned children into men through their education. The greatest figures of the Revolution were educated in Jesuit schools. Without the training they received there, that significant intellectual upheaval might not have emerged until a hundred years later.

Poor Jesuit fathers! You have been the bugbear and the scapegoat of the liberals. The danger that was in you was understood, but not your merits. I could never join in the denunciations of my comrades, who at the mere mention of Loyola's name would always become furious, like bulls when a red cloth is held before them. It is certainly noteworthy, and may perhaps at the assizes in the valley of Jehoshaphat be set down as an extenuating circumstance, that even as a lad I was permitted to attend lectures on philosophy. This unusual favour was exceptional in my case, because the rector Schallmeyer was a particular friend of our family. This venerable man often consulted with my mother in regard to my education and future career, and once advised her, as she afterwards related to me, to devote me to the service of the Catholic Church, and send me to Rome to study theology. He assured her that through his influential friends in Rome he could advance me to an important position in the Church. But at that time my mother dreamed of the highest worldly honours for me. Moreover, she was a disciple of Rousseau, and a strict deist. Besides, she did not like the thought of her son being robed in one of those long black cassocks, such as are worn by Catholic priests, and in which they look so plump and awkward. She knew not how differently, how gracefully, a Roman abbate wears such a cassock, and how jauntily he flings over his shoulders the black silk mantle, which in Rome, the ever-beautiful, is the uniform of gallantry and wit.

Poor Jesuit fathers! You have been the bogeyman and the scapegoat of the liberals. The danger you posed was recognized, but not your virtues. I could never join in the criticisms of my peers, who would get furious at the mere mention of Loyola's name, like bulls enraged by a red flag. It’s definitely worth noting, and maybe one day at the judgment in the valley of Jehoshaphat it will be seen as a mitigating factor, that even as a kid I was allowed to attend philosophy lectures. This unusual opportunity was exceptional in my case because Rector Schallmeyer was a close family friend. This respected man often consulted my mother about my education and future, and once suggested to her, as she later told me, to dedicate me to the service of the Catholic Church and send me to Rome to study theology. He assured her that through his influential contacts in Rome, he could help me secure an important position in the Church. But at that time, my mother envisioned the highest worldly honors for me. Moreover, she was a follower of Rousseau and a strict deist. Besides, she disliked the idea of her son being dressed in one of those long black robes worn by Catholic priests, which make them look so plump and awkward. She didn’t realize how differently, how gracefully, a Roman abate wears such a robe, and how stylishly he drapes the black silk mantle over his shoulders, which in Rome, the always beautiful, is the uniform of charm and wit.

Oh, what a happy mortal is such a Roman abbate! He serves not only the Church of Christ, but also Apollo and the Muses, whose favourite he is. The Graces hold his inkstand for him when he indites the sonnets which, with such delicate cadences, he reads in the Accademia degli Arcadi. He is a connoisseur of art, and needs only to taste the lips of a young songstress in order to be able to foretell whether she will some day be a celeberrima cantatrice, a diva, a world-renowned prima-donna. He understands antiquities, and will write a treatise in the choicest Ciceronian Latin concerning some newly-unearthed torso of a Grecian Bacchante, reverentially dedicating it to the supreme head of Christendom, to the Pontifex Maximus, for so he addresses him. And what a judge of painting is the Signor Abbate, who visits the painters in their ateliers and directs their attention to the fine points of their female models! The writer of these pages had in him just the material for such an abbate, and was just suited for strolling in delightful dolce far niente through the libraries, art galleries, churches, and ruins of the Eternal City, studying among pleasures, and seeking pleasure while studying. I would have read mass before the most select audiences, and during Holy Week I would have mounted the pulpit as a preacher of strict morality,—of course even then never degenerating into ascetic rudeness. The Roman ladies, in particular, would have been greatly edified, and through their favour and my own merit I would, perhaps, have risen eventually to high rank in the hierarchy of the Church. I would, perhaps, have become a monsignore, a violet-stocking; perhaps even a cardinal's red hat might have fallen on my head. The proverb says—

Oh, what a happy person is such a Roman priest! He serves not only the Church of Christ, but also Apollo and the Muses, of whom he is a favorite. The Graces hold his inkstand for him while he writes the sonnets that he reads with such delicate rhythm at the Accademia degli Arcadi. He knows art well and just needs to kiss the lips of a young singer to predict whether she will someday become a famous diva, a world-renowned prima donna. He understands antiques and will write a treatise in the finest Ciceronian Latin about some newly discovered torso of a Greek Bacchante, reverentially dedicating it to the supreme leader of Christendom, the Pontifex Maximus, as he calls him. And what a critic of painting is the Signor priest, who visits painters in their studios and points out the finer details of their female models! The writer of these pages had just the right qualities to be such a priest, perfectly suited for leisurely strolls through the libraries, art galleries, churches, and ruins of the Eternal City, studying among pleasures and seeking pleasure while studying. I would have read mass before the most distinguished audiences, and during Holy Week, I would have taken the pulpit as a preacher of strict morality—of course, never stooping to ascetic harshness. The Roman ladies, in particular, would have been deeply impressed, and through their favor and my own merit, I might have eventually risen to a high position in the Church hierarchy. I might have become a monsignor, a violet-stocking; perhaps even a cardinal's red hat could have been bestowed upon me. The proverb says—

"There is no priestling, how small soe'er he be,
That does not wish himself a Pope to be."

"There is no insignificant priest, no matter how small he is,
"That doesn't secretly wish he could be a Pope."

And so it might have come to pass that I should attain the most exalted position of all, for, although I am not naturally ambitious, I would yet not have refused the nomination for Pope, had the choice of the conclave fallen on me. It is, at all events, a very respectable office, and has a good income attached to it; and I do not doubt that I could have discharged the duties of my position with the requisite address. I would have seated myself composedly on the throne of St. Peter, presenting my toe for the kisses of all good Christians, the priests as well as the laity. With a becoming dignity I would have let myself be carried in triumph through the pillared halls of the great basilica, and only when it tottered very threateningly would I have clung to the arms of the golden throne, which is borne on the shoulders of six stalwart camerieri in crimson uniform. By their side walk bald-headed monks of the Capuchin order, carrying burning torches. Then follow lackeys in gala dress, bearing aloft immense fans of peacocks' feathers, with which they gently fan the Prince of the Church. It is all just like Horace Vernet's beautiful painting of such a procession. With a like imperturbable sacerdotal gravity—for I can be very serious if it be absolutely necessary—from the lofty Lateran I would have pronounced the annual benediction over all Christendom. Here, standing on the balcony, in pontificalibus and with the triple crown upon my head, surrounded by my scarlet-hatted cardinals and mitred bishops, priests in suits of gold brocade and monks of every hue, I would have presented my holiness to the view of the swarming multitudes below, who, kneeling and with bowed heads, extended farther than the eye could reach; and I could composedly have stretched out my hands and blessed the city and the world.

And so it might have happened that I could have achieved the most prestigious position of all, because even though I’m not particularly ambitious, I wouldn’t have turned down the nomination for Pope if the conclave had chosen me. It's, in any case, a very respectable role, with a nice income attached; and I have no doubt I could have handled the responsibilities with the necessary skill. I would have sat comfortably on the throne of St. Peter, presenting my toe for the kisses of all good Christians, both priests and laypeople. With appropriate dignity, I would have been carried in triumph through the grand halls of the great basilica, and only when it wobbled dangerously would I have clung to the arms of the golden throne, which is carried on the shoulders of six sturdy attendants in crimson uniforms. Beside them would walk bald-headed Capuchin monks, carrying lit torches. Following them would be footmen in formal attire, holding up large fans made of peacock feathers, gently fanning the Prince of the Church. It's all just like Horace Vernet's beautiful painting of such a procession. With a similar unshakeable sacerdotal seriousness—because I can be quite serious when absolutely necessary—from the high Lateran, I would have delivered the annual blessing over all Christendom. Here, standing on the balcony, dressed in my pontifical robes and wearing the triple crown, surrounded by my scarlet-hatted cardinals and mitred bishops, priests in gold brocade, and monks of every color, I would have presented my holiness to the view of the throngs below, who, kneeling with bowed heads, extended farther than the eye could see; and I could calmly have stretched out my hands and blessed the city and the world.

But, as thou well knowest, gentle reader, I have not become a Pope, nor a cardinal, nor even a papal nuncio. In the spiritual as well as in the worldly hierarchy I have attained neither office nor rank; I have accomplished nothing in this beautiful world; nothing has become of me—nothing but a poet.

But, as you well know, dear reader, I have not become a Pope, nor a cardinal, nor even a papal envoy. In both the spiritual and worldly hierarchy, I have achieved neither office nor rank; I have accomplished nothing in this beautiful world; nothing has come of me—nothing but a poet.

But no, I will not feign a hypocritical humility, I will not depreciate that name. It is much to be a poet, especially to be a great lyric poet, in Germany, among a people who in two things—in philosophy and in poetry—have surpassed all other nations. I will not with a sham modesty—the invention of worthless vagabonds—depreciate my fame as a poet. None of my countrymen have won the laurel at so early an age; and if my colleague, Wolfgang Goethe, complacently writes that "the Chinese with trembling hand paints Werther and Lotte on porcelain," I can, if boasting is to be in order, match his Chinese fame with one still more legendary, for I have recently learned that my poems have been translated into the Japanese language.

But no, I won’t pretend to be falsely humble; I won’t downplay that title. It’s a big deal to be a poet, especially a great lyric poet, in Germany, where the people have excelled in two things—philosophy and poetry—more than any other nation. I won’t diminish my reputation as a poet with false modesty, which is just a tactic of worthless drifters. None of my fellow countrymen have achieved such honors at such a young age; and if my colleague, Wolfgang Goethe, smugly claims that "the Chinese with trembling hand paints Werther and Lotte on porcelain," I can, if boasting is acceptable, counter his Chinese fame with something even more legendary, as I’ve recently found out that my poems have been translated into Japanese.

...But at this moment I am as indifferent to my Japanese fame as to my renown in Finland. Alas! fame, once sweet as sugared pine-apple and flattery, has for a long time been nauseous to me; it tastes as bitter to me now as wormwood. With Romeo, I can say, "I am the fool of fortune." The bowl stands filled before me, but I lack a spoon. What does it avail me that at banquets my health is pledged in the choicest wines, and drunk from golden goblets, when I, myself, severed from all that makes life pleasant, may only wet my lips with an insipid potion? What does it avail me that enthusiastic youths and maidens crown my marble bust with laurel-wreaths, if meanwhile the shrivelled fingers of an aged nurse press a blister of Spanish flies behind the ears of my actual body. What does it avail me that all the roses of Shiraz so tenderly glow and bloom for me? Alas! Shiraz is two thousand miles away from the Rue d'Amsterdam, where, in the dreary solitude of my sick-room, I have nothing to smell, unless it be the perfume of warmed napkins. Alas! the irony of God weighs heavily upon me! the great Author of the universe, the Aristophanes of Heaven, wished to show the petty, earthly, so-called German Aristophanes that his mightiest sarcasms are but feeble banter compared with His, and how immeasurably he excels me in humour and in colossal wit.

...But right now, I’m just as indifferent to my fame in Japan as I am to my reputation in Finland. Unfortunately! Fame, which was once as delightful as sweet pineapple and flattery, has long since become sickening to me; it now tastes as bitter as wormwood. Like Romeo, I could say, “I’m a fool of fortune.” The bowl is full in front of me, but I don't have a spoon. What good does it do me that at banquets my health is toasted in the finest wines, drunk from golden goblets, when I, cut off from everything that makes life enjoyable, can only moisten my lips with a tasteless drink? What good does it do me that enthusiastic youths and maidens crown my marble bust with laurel-wreaths, while the gnarled fingers of an old nurse apply a blister of Spanish flies behind my ears? What good does it do me that all the roses of Shiraz bloom so lovingly for me? Alas! Shiraz is two thousand miles away from Rue d'Amsterdam, where, in the dreary solitude of my sickroom, I have nothing to smell except the scent of warmed napkins. Alas! The irony of God weighs heavily on me! The great Author of the universe, the Aristophanes of Heaven, wanted to show the petty, earthly, so-called German Aristophanes that his most powerful sarcasms are just weak jokes compared to His, and how incomparably He surpasses me in humor and colossal wit.

Yes, the mockery which the Master has poured out over me is terrible, and horribly cruel is His sport. Humbly do I acknowledge His superiority, and I prostrate myself in the dust before Him. But, although I lack such supreme creative powers, yet in my spirit also the eternal reason flames brightly, and I may summon even the wit of God before its forum, and subject it to a respectful criticism. And here I venture to offer most submissively the suggestion that the sport which the Master has inflicted on the poor pupil is rather too long drawn out: it has already lasted over six years, and after a time becomes monotonous. Moreover, if I may take the liberty to say it, in my humble opinion the jest is not new, and the great Aristophanes of Heaven has already used it on a former occasion, and has, therefore, been guilty of plagiarism on His own exalted self. In order to prove this assertion, I will quote a passage from the Chronicle of Lüneberg. This chronicle is very interesting for those who seek information concerning the manners and customs of Germany during the middle ages. As in a fashion-journal, it describes the wearing-apparel of both sexes which was in vogue at each particular period. It also imparts information concerning the popular ballads of the day, and quotes the opening lines of several of them. Among others, it records that during the year 1480 there were whistled and sung throughout all Germany certain songs, which for sweetness and tenderness surpassed any previously known in German lands. Young and old, and the women in particular, were quite bewitched by these ballads, which might be heard the livelong day. But these songs, so the chronicle goes on to say, were composed by a young priest who was afflicted with leprosy, and lived a forlorn, solitary life, secluded from all the world. You are surely aware, dear reader, what a horrible disease leprosy was during the middle ages, and how the wretched beings afflicted with this incurable malady were driven out from all society and from the abodes of men, and were forbidden to approach any human being. Living corpses, they wandered to and fro, muffled from head to foot, a hood drawn over the face, and carrying in the hand a bell, the Lazarus-bell, as it was called, through which they were to give timely warning of their approach, so that every one could get out of the way in time. The poor priest whose fame as a lyric poet the chronicle praised so highly was such a leper; and while all Germany, shouting and jubilant, sang and whistled his songs, he, a wretched outcast, in the desolation of his misery sat sorrowful and alone.

Yes, the ridicule the Master has thrown at me is awful, and His mockery is incredibly cruel. I humbly recognize His superiority and bow down before Him in submission. But, even though I don’t have such supreme creative powers, the eternal truth shines brightly within my spirit, and I can even bring the wit of God before its court and offer it respectful criticism. Here, I timidly propose that the amusement the Master has inflicted on this poor pupil has dragged on for a bit too long: it has already lasted over six years and has become monotonous. Moreover, if I may say so, in my humble opinion, the joke isn’t original, and the great Aristophanes of Heaven has used it before, thus committing self-plagiarism. To support this claim, I will quote a passage from the Chronicle of Lüneberg. This chronicle is quite interesting for those looking for insights about the customs and traditions of Germany in the Middle Ages. Much like a fashion magazine, it describes the clothing styles for both genders popular at each specific time. It also shares information about the popular songs of the day and includes the opening lines of several of them. Among other things, it notes that in 1480, certain songs were whistled and sung all across Germany, which for their sweetness and tenderness surpassed any previously known in German lands. Young and old, especially women, were completely enchanted by these ballads, which could be heard throughout the day. However, these songs, as the chronicle continues, were composed by a young priest suffering from leprosy, who lived a lonely, isolated life, cut off from the world. You surely know, dear reader, what a dreadful disease leprosy was during the Middle Ages and how those afflicted with this incurable illness were shunned by society and cast out from human dwellings, unable to approach anyone. These living corpses wandered about, covered from head to toe, with a hood over their faces and carrying a bell—the Lazarus bell—so they could warn others of their approach, allowing everyone to get out of the way in time. The poor priest, whose talent as a lyric poet the chronicle praised so highly, was such a leper; while all of Germany sang and celebrated his songs with joy, he sat in the desolation of his misery, sorrowful and alone.

Oh, that fame was the old, familiar scorn, the cruel jest of God, the same as in my case, although there it appears in the romantic garb of the middle ages. The blasé king of Judea said rightly, There is no new thing under the sun. Perhaps that sun itself, which now beams so imposingly, is only an old warmed-up jest.

Oh, that fame was the old, familiar disdain, the cruel joke of God, just like in my situation, although it shows up in the romantic style of the Middle Ages. The blasé king of Judea was correct; there’s nothing new under the sun. Maybe that sun itself, which shines so impressively now, is just an old, reheated joke.

Sometimes among the gloomy phantasms that visit me at night I seem to see before me the poor priest of the Lüneberg Chronicle, my brother in Apollo, and his sorrowful eyes stare strangely out of his hood; but almost at the same moment it vanishes, and, faintly dying away, like the echo of a dream, I hear the jarring tones of the Lazarus-bell.

Sometimes among the dark visions that come to me at night, I think I see the poor priest from the Lüneberg Chronicle, my fellow in creativity, and his sorrowful eyes look strangely out from his hood; but almost immediately, it disappears, and, fading away like the echo of a dream, I hear the dissonant sounds of the Lazarus bell.









Printed by WALTER SCOTT, Felling, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

Printed by WALTER SCOTT, Felling, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.


The Canterbury Poets.

The Canterbury Poets.

In SHILLING Monthly Volumes, Square 8vo. Well printed on fine toned paper, with Red-line Border, and strongly bound in Cloth. Each Volume contains from 300 to 350 pages. With Introductory Notices by WILLIAM SHARP, MATHILDE BLIND, WALTER LEWIN, JOHN HOGBEN, A. J. SYMINGTON, JOSEPH SKIPSEY, EVA HOPE, JOHN RICHMOND, ERNEST RHYS, PERCY E. PINKERTON, MRS. GARDEN, DEAN CARRINGTON, DR. J. BRADSHAW, FREDERICK COOPER, HON. RODEN NOEL, J. ADDINGTON SYMONDS, G. WILLIS COOKE, ERIC MACKAY, ERIC S. ROBERTSON, WILLIAM TIREBUCK, STUART J. REID, MRS. FREILIGRATH KROEKER, J. LOGIE ROBERTSON, M.A. SAMUEL WADDINGTON, etc., etc.

In SHILLING Monthly Volumes, Square 8vo. Printed on high-quality paper with a red-line border and sturdily bound in cloth. Each volume has between 300 and 350 pages. Includes introductory notes by WILLIAM SHARP, MATHILDE BLIND, WALTER LEWIN, JOHN HOGBEN, A.J. Symington, JOSEPH SKIPSEY, EVA HOPE, JOHN RICHMOND, ERNEST RHYS, PERCY E. PINKERTON, MRS. GARDEN, DEAN CARRINGTON, Dr. J. Bradshaw, FREDERICK COOPER, Hon. Roden Noel, J. Addington Symonds, G. Willis Cooke, ERIC MACKAY, ERIC S. ROBERTSON, WILLIAM TIREBUCK, STUART J. REID, Mrs. Freiligrath Kroeker, J. Logie Robertson, M.A. SAMUEL WADDINGTON, etc., etc.

Cloth, Red Edges-1s.Red Roan, Gilt Edges2s. 6d.
Cloth, Uncut Edges-1s.Silk Plush, Gilt Edges4s. 6d.





THE FOLLOWING VOLUMES ARE NOW READY.

THE FOLLOWING VOLUMES ARE NOW READY.

CHRISTIAN YEAR.
By Rev. John Keble.

COLERIDGE.
Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

LONGFELLOW.
Edited by Eva Hope.

CAMPBELL. Edited by J. Hogben.

SHELLEY. Edited by J. Skipsey.

WORDSWORTH.
Edited by A. J. Symington.

BLAKE. Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

WHITTIER. Edited by Eva Hope.

POE. Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

CHATTERTON.
Edited by John Richmond.

BURNS. Poems.

BURNS. Songs.
Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

MARLOWE.
Edited by P. E. Pinkerton.

KEATS. Edited by John Hogben.

HERBERT.
Edited by Ernest Rhys.

VICTOR HUGO.
Translated by Dean Carrington.

COWPER. Edited by Eva Hope.

SHAKESPEARE:
Songs, Poems, and Sonnets.
Edited by William Sharp.

EMERSON. Edited by W. Lewin.

SONNETS of this CENTURY.
Edited by William Sharp.

WHITMAN. Edited by E. Rhys.

SCOTT. Marmion, etc.

SCOTT. Lady of the Lake, etc.
Edited by William Sharp.

PRAED. Edited by Fred. Cooper.

HOGG.
By his Daughter, Mrs. Garden.

GOLDSMITH.
Edited by William Tirebuck.

LOVE LETTERS OF A
VIOLINIST
. By Erin Mackay.

SPENSER.
Edited by Hon. Roden Noel.

CHILDREN OF THE POETS.
Edited by Eric S. Robertson.

BEN JONSON.
Edited by J. A. Symonds.

BYRON (2 Vols.)
Edited by Mathilde Blind.

THE SONNETS OF EUROPE.
Edited by S. Waddington.

ALLAN RAMSAY.
Edited by J. Logie Robertson.

SYDNEY DOBELL.
Edited by Mrs. Dobell.

POPE. Edited by John Hogben.

HEINE. Edited by Mrs. Kroeker.

BEAUMONT & FLETCHER.
Edited by J. S. Fletcher.

BOWLES, LAMB, AND
HARTLEY COLERIDGE
.
Edited by William Tirebuck.

EARLY ENGLISH POETRY.
Edited by H. Macaulay Fitzgibbon.

SEA MUSIC.
Edited by Mrs. Sharp.

HERRICK. Edited by Ernest Rhys.

BALLADES AND RONDEAUS.
Edited by J. Gleeson White.

CHRISTIAN YEAR.
By Rev. John Keble.

COLERIDGE.
Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

LONGFELLOW.
Edited by Eva Hope.

CAMPBELL. Edited by J. Hogben.

SHELLEY. Edited by J. Skipsey.

WORDSWORTH.
Edited by A. J. Symington.

BLAKE. Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

WHITTIER. Edited by Eva Hope.

POE. Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

CHATTERTON.
Edited by John Richmond.

BURNS. Poems.

BURNS. Songs.
Edited by Joseph Skipsey.

MARLOWE.
Edited by P. E. Pinkerton.

KEATS. Edited by John Hogben.

HERBERT.
Edited by Ernest Rhys.

VICTOR HUGO.
Translated by Dean Carrington.

COWPER. Edited by Eva Hope.

SHAKESPEARE:
Songs, Poems, and Sonnets.
Edited by William Sharp.

EMERSON. Edited by W. Lewin.

SONNETS of this CENTURY.
Edited by William Sharp.

WHITMAN. Edited by E. Rhys.

SCOTT. Marmion, etc.

SCOTT. Lady of the Lake, etc.
Edited by William Sharp.

PRAED. Edited by Fred. Cooper.

HOGG.
By his Daughter, Mrs. Garden.

GOLDSMITH.
Edited by William Tirebuck.

LOVE LETTERS OF A
VIOLINIST
. By Erin Mackay.

SPENSER.
Edited by Hon. Roden Noel.

CHILDREN OF THE POETS.
Edited by Eric S. Robertson.

BEN JONSON.
Edited by J. A. Symonds.

BYRON (2 Vols.)
Edited by Mathilde Blind.

THE SONNETS OF EUROPE.
Edited by S. Waddington.

ALLAN RAMSAY.
Edited by J. Logie Robertson.

SYDNEY DOBELL.
Edited by Mrs. Dobell.

POPE. Edited by John Hogben.

HEINE. Edited by Mrs. Kroeker.

BEAUMONT & FLETCHER.
Edited by J. S. Fletcher.

BOWLES, LAMB, AND
HARTLEY COLERIDGE
.
Edited by William Tirebuck.

EARLY ENGLISH POETRY.
Edited by H. Macaulay Fitzgibbon.

SEA MUSIC.
Edited by Mrs. Sharp.

HERRICK. Edited by Ernest Rhys.

BALLADES AND RONDEAUS.
Edited by J. Gleeson White.


MONTHLY SHILLING VOLUMES.

Monthly Shilling Amounts.

THE CAMELOT SERIES.

THE CAMELOT SERIES.

ALREADY ISSUED

Issued Already

ROMANCE OF KING ARTHUR. Edited by E. Rhys.

ROMANCE OF KING ARTHUR. Edited by E. Rhys.

THOREAU'S WALDEN. Edited by W. H. Dircks.

THOREAU'S WALDEN. Edited by W. H. Dircks.

CONFESSIONS OF AN ENGLISH OPIUM-EATER. Edited by William Sharp.

CONFESSIONS OF AN ENGLISH OPIUM-EATER. Edited by William Sharp.

LANDOR'S CONVERSATIONS. Edited by H. Ellis.

LANDOR'S CONVERSATIONS. Edited by H. Ellis.

PLUTARCH'S LIVES. Edited by B. J. Snell, M.A.

PLUTARCH'S LIVES. Edited by B. J. Snell, M.A.

SIR THOMAS BROWNE'S RELIGIO MEDICI, etc. Edited by J. Addington Symonds.

SIR THOMAS BROWN'S RELIGIO MEDICI, etc. Edited by J. Addington Symonds.

SHELLEY'S ESSAYS AND LETTERS. Edited by Ernest Rhys.

SHELLEY'S ESSAYS AND LETTERS. Edited by Ernest Rhys.

PROSE WRITINGS OF SWIFT. Edited by W. Lewin.

PROSE WRITINGS OF SWIFT. Edited by W. Lewin.

MY STUDY WINDOWS. Edited by R. Garnett, LL.D.

MY STUDY WINDOWS. Edited by R. Garnett, LL.D.

GREAT ENGLISH PAINTERS. Edited by W. Sharp.

GREAT ENGLISH PAINTERS. Edited by W. Sharp.

LORD BYRON'S LETTERS. Edited by M. Blind.

LORD BYRON'S LETTERS. Edited by M. Blind.

ESSAYS BY LEIGH HUNT. Edited by A. Symons.

ESSAYS BY LEIGH HUNT. Edited by A. Symons.

LONGFELLOW'S PROSE. Edited by W. Tirebuck.

LONGFELLOW'S PROSE. Edited by W. Tirebuck.

GREAT MUSICAL COMPOSERS. Edited, with Introduction, by Mrs. Sharp.

GREAT MUSICAL COMPOSERS. Edited, with Introduction, by Mrs. Sharp.

MARCUS AURELIUS. Edited by Alice Zimmern.

MARCUS AURELIUS. Edited by Alice Zimmern.

SPECIMEN DAYS IN AMERICA. By Walt Whitman.

SPECIMEN DAYS IN AMERICA. By Walt Whitman.

WHITE'S NATURAL HISTORY of SELBORNE. Edited, with Introduction, by Richard Jefferies.

WHITE'S NATURAL HISTORY of SELBORNE. Edited, with Introduction, by Richard Jefferies.

DEFOE'S CAPTAIN SINGLETON. Edited, with Introduction, by H. Halliday Sparling.

DEFOE'S CAPTAIN SINGLETON. Edited, with Introduction, by H. Halliday Sparling.

ESSAYS: Literary and Political. By Joseph Mazzini. With Introduction by William Clarke.

ESSAYS: Literary and Political. By Joseph Mazzini. With Introduction by William Clarke.

THE PROSE WRITINGS OF HEINRICH HEINE. With Introduction by Havelock Ellis.

THE PROSE WRITINGS OF HEINRICH HEINE. With Introduction by Havelock Ellis.


MONTHLY SHILLING VOLUMES.

Monthly Shilling Volumes

GREAT WRITERS.

GREAT WRITERS.

A NEW SERIES OF CRITICAL BIOGRAPHIES.

A NEW SERIES OF CRITICAL BIOGRAPHIES.

Edited by Professor E. S. ROBERTSON.

Edited by Professor E. S. ROBERTSON.

ALREADY ISSUED

Already issued

LIFE OF LONGFELLOW. BY PROFESSOR ERIC S. ROBERTSON.

LIFE OF LONGFELLOW. BY PROFESSOR ERIC S. ROBERTSON.

"The story of the poet's life is well told.... The remarks on Longfellow as a translator are excellent."—Saturday Review.

"The story of the poet's life is well told.... The comments on Longfellow as a translator are excellent."—Saturday Review.

"No better life of Longfellow has been published."—Glasgow Herald.

"No better biography of Longfellow has been published."—Glasgow Herald.

LIFE OF COLERIDGE. By HALL CAINE.

LIFE OF COLERIDGE. By HALL CAINE.

The Scotsman says—"It is a capital book.... Written throughout with spirit and great literary skill. The bibliography is unusually full, and adds to the value of the work."

The Scotsman says—"It's an excellent book.... Written with energy and impressive literary talent. The bibliography is notably comprehensive, adding to the work's value."

LIFE OF DICKENS. BY FRANK T. MARZIALS.

Life of Dickens. By Frank T. Marzials.

"An interesting and well-written biography."—Scotsman.

"A captivating and well-written biography."—Scotsman.

LIFE OF DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI. BY JOSEPH KNIGHT.

LIFE OF DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI. BY JOSEPH KNIGHT.

LIFE OF SAMUEL JOHNSON. BY COL. F. GRANT.

LIFE OF SAMUEL JOHNSON. BY COL. F. GRANT.

LIFE OF DARWIN. BY G. T. BETTANY.

DARWIN'S LIFE. BY G. T. BETTANY.

CHARLOTTE BRONTË. By AUGUSTINE BIRRELL.

CHARLOTTE BRONTË. By AUGUSTINE BIRRELL.

LIFE OF THOMAS CARLYLE. BY RICHARD GARNETT, LL.D.

LIFE OF THOMAS CARLYLE. BY RICHARD GARNETT, LL.D.

LIFE OF ADAM SMITH. BY R. B. HALDANE, M.P.

LIFE OF ADAM SMITH. BY R. B. HALDANE, M.P.

Ready September 26th.

Available September 26th.

LIFE OF KEATS. BY W. M. ROSSETTI.

LIFE OF KEATS. BY W. M. ROSSETTI.

To be followed on October 25th by

To be followed on October 25th by

LIFE OF SHELLEY. BY WILLIAM SHARP.

LIFE OF SHELLEY. BY WILLIAM SHARP.

Volumes in preparation by AUSTIN DOBSON, CANON VENABLES, JAMES SIME, EDMUND GOSSE, PROFESSOR KNIGHT, etc.

Volumes in preparation by AUSTIN DOBSON, CANON VENABLES, JAMES SIME, EDMUND GOSSE, PROF. KNIGHT, etc.

LIBRARY EDITION OF "GREAT WRITERS."

Library edition of "Great Writers."

An Issue of all the Volumes in this Series will be published, printed on large paper of extra quality, in handsome binding, Demy 8vo, price 2s. 6d. per volume.

An issue of all the volumes in this series will be published, printed on high-quality large paper, in attractive binding, Demy 8vo, priced at 2s. 6d. per volume.


Now Ready, Part I., Price 6d.; by Post, 7d.

Now Available, Part I., Price 6p.; by Mail, 7p.

THE NATURALISTS' MONTHLY:

THE NATURALISTS' MONTHLY:

A Journal for Nature-Lovers and Nature-Thinkers.

A Journal for Nature Lovers and Nature Thinkers.

EDITED BY DR. J. W. WILLIAMS, M.A.

Edited by Dr. J. W. Williams, M.A.

CONTENTS.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Pathology of the Celandine.—Rev. Hilderic Friend, M.A., F.L.S.

The Evolution of the Fishing-Hook from the Flint-Hook of
Prehistoric Man to the Salmon-Hook of the Present Day.—Edward
Lovett.

A Study in My Garden (Rose-Aphis).—H. W. S. Worsley-Benison,
F.L.S.

Binary Suns.—Herbert Sadler, F.R.A.S.

Charles Robert Darwin (with a photograph).—B. Middleton
Batchelor.

Shell Collecting in Guernsey and Hern.—J. R. Brockton
Tomlin, B.A.

A Chapter on the Centipedes and Millipedes.—T. D. Gibson-Carmichael,
M.A., F.L.S.

The Snails and Slugs of My Garden.—George Roberts.

The Origin of our Fresh-water Faunas.—H. E. Quilter.

Reviews. General Notes and Gleanings. Reports of the
Learned Societies.

Pathology of the Celandine.—Rev. Hilderic Friend, M.A., F.L.S.

The Evolution of the Fishing Hook from the Flint Hook of
Prehistoric Humans to Today's Salmon Hook.—Edward
Lovett.

A Study in My Garden (Rose-Aphis).—H. W. S. Worsley-Benison,
F.L.S.

Binary Suns.—Herbert Sadler, F.R.A.S.

Charles Robert Darwin (with a photograph).—B. Middleton
Bachelor.

Shell Collecting in Guernsey and Hern.—J. R. Brockton
Tomlin, B.A.

A Chapter on Centipedes and Millipedes.—T. D. Gibson-Carmichael,
M.A., F.L.S.

The Snails and Slugs in My Garden.—George Roberts.

The Origin of Our Freshwater Faunas.—H. E. Quilter.

Reviews. General Notes and Gleanings. Reports of the
Academic Societies.

"A sound journal, the monthly advent of which will be awaited with feelings of satisfaction and pleasure."—Bath Chronicle.

"A reliable journal that everyone looks forward to each month with satisfaction and enjoyment."—Bath Chronicle.

"To the student of nature who has had few opportunities of study, just such a magazine as this supplies a felt want. We trust that an appreciative public will ensure the success of this new magazine."—Midlothian Journal.

"To the student of nature who has had limited opportunities for study, a magazine like this provides a necessary resource. We hope that an appreciative audience will support the success of this new magazine."—Midlothian Journal.

"This neatly got-up magazine seems to supply a vacant place in the ranks of serial literature, and to supply it well."—Nottingham Guardian.

"This well-designed magazine appears to fill a gap in serial literature, and it does so effectively."—Nottingham Guardian.

Part II. Ready September 26th. Annual Subscription—Seven Shillings. Post free.

Part II. Ready September 26th. Annual Subscription—Seven Shillings. Free shipping.


London: WALTER SCOTT, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.

London: Walt Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] There are three German biographies of Heine, those of Strodtmann, Karpeles, and Proelss; a new edition of his works in six volumes, with a biography and notes by Dr. Elster, has lately been announced. Mr. Matthew Arnold, by his well-known essay and poem, has done much to stimulate English interest in Heine. A careful critical estimate by Mr. Charles Grant (Contemporary, Sept. 1880) may be mentioned with praise.

Please provide the text you would like me to modernize. There are three German biographies of Heine: those by Strodtmann, Karpeles, and Proelss. A new six-volume edition of his works, featuring a biography and notes by Dr. Elster, has recently been announced. Mr. Matthew Arnold has played a significant role in boosting English interest in Heine through his well-known essay and poem. A thoughtful critical review by Mr. Charles Grant (Contemporary, Sept. 1880) deserves recognition.

[2] He lodged at 32, Craven Street, Strand.

[2] He stayed at 32 Craven Street, Strand.

[3] "C'est le Bible, plus que tout autre livre," a distinguished French critic wrote lately, "qui a façonné le génie poétique de Heine, en lui donnant sa forme et sa couleur. Ses véritables maîtres, ses vrais inspirateurs sont les glorieux inconnus qui ont écrit l'Ecclesiaste et les Proverbes, le Cantique des cantiques, le livre de Job et ce chez d'œuvre d'ironie discrète intitulé: le livre du prophète Jonas. Celui qui s'appelait un rossignol Allemand niché dans la perruque de Voltaire fut à la fois le moins évangélique des hommes et le plus vraiment biblique des poètes modernes."

[3] "It's the Bible, more than any other book," a distinguished French critic wrote recently, "that shaped Heine's poetic genius, giving it its form and color. His true masters, his real inspirations are the glorious unknowns who wrote Ecclesiastes and Proverbs, the Song of Songs, the Book of Job, and that masterpiece of discreet irony called the Book of the Prophet Jonah. The one who called himself a German nightingale nestled in Voltaire's wig was at once the least evangelical of men and the most truly biblical of modern poets."

[4] He committed suicide.—Ed.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ He took his own life.—Ed.

[5] Or in English.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Or in English.

[6] Heine at this period was never tired of laughing at Göttingen, and here couples it with six particularly insignificant towns.—Ed.

[6] Heine during this time never got tired of making jokes about Göttingen, and he links it with six especially unremarkable towns.—Ed.

[7] Dumm in German means stupid.

Dumm in German means stupid.

[8] In the French edition Heine rightly substituted "The Emperor Maximilian."

[8] In the French edition, Heine correctly replaced "The Emperor Maximilian."

[9] i.e. Ariosto.—Ed.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ i.e. Ariosto.—Ed.

[10] Michel corresponds to John Bull.—Ed.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Michel matches John Bull.—Ed.

[11] This is a common error. Faust the printer is quite a distinct person.—Ed.

[11] This is a typical mistake. Faust the printer is a completely different person.—Ed.

[12] It must be remembered that Heine visited England in 1827.

[12] It's important to remember that Heine visited England in 1827.

[13] This is said to have been the response of Princess Borghese to a friend who asked her how she had felt when sitting as a model to Canova.—Ed.

[13] This is said to have been the reply of Princess Borghese to a friend who asked her how it felt to pose as a model for Canova.—Edited.

[14] Heine only quotes the first part of the passage from the Reisebilder, which has here been given in full.—Ed.

[14] Heine only cites the first part of the excerpt from the Reisebilder, which is provided here in its entirety.—Editor.

[15] Heine here alludes to Atta Troll.—Ed.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Heine is referencing Atta Troll.—Ed.





        
        
    
Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!