Chapter IV: Preface (3)

On the 2d of December, the day before the above letter, Varnhagen wrote in his diary: “Humboldt called yesterday. Talked about Paris. How he finds things here. He thinks seriously of retiring. He knows that his name alone is of any value to the King, and that his active usefulness has long been superseded by that of others. Thiers told him, in Paris, that France is much talked about as being revolutionary; but he thought Prussia was pretty well agitated, too. A letter from Guizot to Humboldt spoke much in praise of the King; and when Humboldt read it to him, and came to the word ‘_success_,’ the King interrupted him with the words, ‘Ah me! there is not much of that; on that point we had best be silent.’ And really Humboldt thinks the public feeling here dreadfully changed for the worse. The King has enemies, and in the highest circles! Minister Eichhorn is generally hated, and makes but a poor figure at court. There seems scarcely a doubt that Bunsen will be Ambassador to England. Count Stolberg is almost the only one who speaks openly against Bunsen. Humboldt sneers at Bunsen’s little tract, ‘The Week of Meditation.’”

The 3d of December, 1841, Varnhagen observes: “I just received a note from Humboldt, inclosing a pamphlet of President Seckendorf’s, which also calls for a ‘representation’—the ‘re puro,’ an incarnation of the people. Humboldt observes: ‘Must be acceptable, for without such an assurance he would not have dared to publish it.’ He concludes with significant melancholy: ‘The atmosphere to me is gloomy and foreboding. It is hard to be Humboldt, and to be obliged to confess this, at the summit of honor, and in the fulness of glory.’ Indeed, he has but little pleasure, and his satirical humor alone can make life here at all supportable to him!”

61.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, MONDAY NIGHT, _Dec. 7th, 1841_.

I have not the leisure, dear friend, to thank you as I ought to do for your spirited and historically thorough biography of Schwerin.[28] A deep penetration into the individuality of this great man pervades the whole. Simplicity is the essential, vital element of description. A hasty word of advice to ride off, and the winning of the battle by himself alone,[29] were constant stumbling-blocks in the path of this hero during his life. His end, the standard in his hand, amid the bloody massacre of thirteen thousand unsympathizing men, is a striking conclusion to the life of the old soldier, who, like Columbus, was at the same time great and unromantically avaricious. What does much honor to your talent as historian, and what is probably overlooked by many is, that you do not allow Schwerin’s death to interrupt the narrative of the strife of battle. I will bring you the “Collected Works” myself, and beg the second volume of Hormayr’s exquisitely spicy production. Your last favor, doing me so much honor, contains words about which I wish to prevent every mistake. “You are afraid to enjoy the exclusive possession of my impieties.” You may freely dispose of this sort of property after my not far distant departure from life. Truth is due to those only whom we deeply esteem—to you, therefore.

A. HT.

On the 18th December, 1841, Varnhagen writes in his diary: “I heard to-day the quite incredulous, mysteriously-whispered story, that the King would go to England for the baptism of the Prince of Wales; that it had been agreed upon quite secretly, and that this flattering communication had contributed a great deal to make Bunsen’s appointment as Ambassador agreeable to the Court of St. James. The latter part of the story makes me suspect the truth of the whole. This is by no means the real diplomatic state of things. Should, however, the journey have been decided upon, or even only be under discussion, there can be no doubt that Bunsen had a hand in it; and then important events would result therefrom, and very dangerous events, too, in my opinion. A near alliance with England would in itself be hazardous; but to enter into close connexion with the Anglican Church and the Tories, sure ruin! And all Prussia, all Germany, all Europe would take it for granted that such a connexion was really established, even if it were not; and the supposition alone would damage us in a thousand ways; the king would lose more in the loyal attachment of his subjects than he can now afford. I hope the whole story will turn out a fable. Humboldt says the spirit of discontent, which he calls the howling mania, has largely increased here. When he left, a few were howling; but now they all howl. His sharp and witty remarks are really refreshing in our spiritless society.”

Before his departure for England Humboldt called on Varnhagen to take leave. On this occasion the following entry was made in the diary, on the 14th of January, 1842: “Humboldt called to take leave,—he starts to-morrow night. He came from Count Maltzan’s of whose life but little hope is left to-day. ‘His death will bring Canitz here—not Buelow’, said Humboldt dolefully. I comforted him with the suggestion, that Canitz too might be dropped, ‘And whose turn would it then be?’ ‘Bunsen’s.’ ‘That would be too frightful! But as it is, he accompanies the King on his return. That is already decided upon.’ Humboldt dislikes Canitz and cannot understand how I am not more afraid of him—of this arch-aristocratic, utterly bigoted—(and consequently preposterous, nay, stupid)—fanatically anti-French Canitz, with his malicious and vulgar sneers. ‘But then you are a Tory yourself!’ he added. ‘As to that,’ I replied, ‘that is still somewhat doubtful—but as for Canitz, he is honest, strict, and straightforward; he will do much, and as for the rest, business and circumstances will control him.’”

After Humboldt’s return, Varnhagen writes on the 24th of February, in his diary: “Humboldt gave me some very interesting descriptions of England. At court the greatest magnificence; the mode of living, however, plain and easy; conversation unrestrained; the tone very pleasant and cheerful, even between gentlemen and ladies of adverse parties. Peel pleases him as little as ever; looks like a Dutchman; is more vain than ambitious, and narrow in his views. Lord Aberdeen is invincibly taciturn, without being able to convince people that his taciturnity covers anything worth saying. Bunsen has shown the greatest want of tact; every one is against him, except the King, who likes him better than ever.” The whole visit of the King was an intrigue of Bunsen, and was so understood even by Englishmen.

“Our affairs here are the subject of much conjecture. As minister of foreign affairs the pious Arnim will, for the present, be recalled from Brussels; at some later day Canitz will be appointed,—or Bunsen, say I. Count Alvensleben is to go to Vienna; Radowitz first to Carlsruhe, until the embassy to the German Diet become vacant. Perhaps there is hardly courage enough as yet to take Bunsen and remove Buelow. Every month, however, every week must improve the courage, and then both these appointments will be done. There is no hope that Maltzan can recover; the better days have again been followed by the worse, and light gives way to renewed darkness. Sad state of things.”

62.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, MONDAY, _28th February, 1842_.

I am anxious to hear a few words about your health, dear friend.

I have succeeded in procuring a pension of three hundred thalers, a miserable sum, but it is only a beginning, for the impoverished but talented poet Freiligrath at Darmstadt, involving no obligation on his part, and allowing him to live out of the country. Can you lend me his poems?

A. HT.

NOTE BY VARNHAGEN.—On Tuesday Humboldt wrote me with the feuilleton of
the _Journal des Debats_, in which Philarète Chasles, in the most
vulgar manner, abuses the literature of Germany, and sneers at the
most distinguished German authors.

And this miserable fellow has been appointed under Guizot’s ministry Professeur des Langues du Nord (litt. anglaise, allemande) au College de France.

You need not return the silly, spiteful trash.

A. HT.

63.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _16th March, 1842_.

Be comforted about the mishap. The King purchases Italian, but, under no circumstances whatever, French pictures. The portrait of Cherubini is, indeed, very fine, and if I remember aright, I saw it in Cherubini’s own house. As the author is not dead, and Ingres very rich, I cannot conceive how the portrait can be for sale? You can tell the sprightly “Child”[30] that you sent me the feuilleton.

In the last number of the _Journal des Débats_ there is a strong and very fine article against the abominable Jew Bill, with which we are threatened, and against which I have already protested in very impressive words.

Ever grateful, yours,
A. HT.

WEDNESDAY.

It was intended in the preamble of the law to speak of “the miracle which God performed in preserving the Jewish race amid other nations;” “of the will of God to keep the Jewish race separated.” I have replied thereto, that the bill is a violation of all the principles of a wise policy of unity; that it is a dangerous arrogance in short-sighted man to dare interpret the primeval decrees of God. The history of the dark ages ought to teach us what abnormities such doctrines lead to.

I live in apparent outward luxury, and in the enjoyment of the fanciful predilection of a generous Monarch, yet in a moral and mental seclusion, such as can only arise from the monotonous dulness of a country (a real steppe) which, though it is not wanting in erudition, is torn asunder by the opposing influences of similar “poles,” and becomes more and more contracted in its Eastern proclivities. May you be content with him, who, though standing alone, has the courage to avow his own opinions.

64.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _March 21st, 1842_.

My dear friend, so happily restored to me! It is a source of infinite joy to me to learn, from your exquisite letter, that the really very delightful society at the Princess’s has benefited you physically, and, therefore, as I should say in my criminal materialism, mentally also. Such a society, blown together chiefly from the same fashionable world of Berlin (somewhat flat and stale), immediately takes a new shape in the house of Princess Pueckler. It is like the spirit which should breathe life into the state; the material seems ennobled.

I still retain your “Christliche Glaubenslehre,”[31] I who long ago, in Potsdam, was so delighted with Strauss’s Life of the Saviour. One learns from it, not only what he does not believe, which is less new to me, but rather what kind of things have been believed and taught by those black coats (parsons) who know how to enslave mankind anew, yea, who are putting on the armor of their former adversaries. I shall gladly copy the passage concerning Spinoza. Will not the late date of the second volume of the “Glaubenslehre” (1841) he urged against it by these men who pretend to teach from ancient manuscript? It would seem to me a better plan to have published the wonderfully conflicting chronology with some remarks on the new faith in the whole “_roman historique_” of the apostolic collectors of myths. He who teaches so publicly has to subject himself to the publicity arising from the defence of those who differ from him in creed. A private statement, clothed in the mild language of complaint, makes the subsequent public one very difficult, and elicits only patronizing smiles and a denial. It is not the mishap of Spinoza, but this degradation of the noblest intellectual faculties in the service of the narrow doctrines of dark ages, that is really painful to me. The man[32] himself had certainly nothing attractive for me, but I had a kind of predilection for him, because everything enthrals and enraptures me, in which, as in his lecture on Art, the gentle breath of imagination warms and enlivens the harmony of language. Now we are separated. In his last speech, not the one on art, amid the glare of torchlight, he spoke of his departure like a well-paid artist who had just accomplished a musical tour—probably only a sentimental figure of speech to frighten his listeners.

Now for an answer to enquiries for the biography, of which, after all, I think with some fear, not on account of its political contents, but on account of family considerations. I rely on your promise. The man certainly cannot want to afflict so many!

Wilhelm was born in Potsdam, because his father was Royal Chamberlain, and at the same time acting Chamberlain to the Princess Elizabeth of Prussia. He left Potsdam when the Princess was sent to Stettin. My father remained in high favor with the Prince of Prussia, who visited him frequently at Tegel. This explains to you the passage in the English despatch, running thus (I believe very early in 1775? Raumer’s Beitraege zur neuern Geschichte, vol. v., p. 297):—“Hertzberg, Schulenburg could form a ministry, but those have the greatest chance of success, who, although not of the same kind, are considered favorites of the Prince. Among the first of these stands Herr von Humboldt, formerly an official in the allied army, a man of sense and fine character; Herr von Hordt, an enterprising genius....” The expression “official” is a strange mistake. My father was major and aide-de-camp to Duke Ferdinand, of Brunswick: after long service in the Finkenstein dragoons, he was frequently sent to Frederick II., during the gloomiest period of the Seven Years’ War; thus Frederick II. writes in his letters on the Wedel disaster:—“I told Humboldt everything that can be told at such a distance.”—(Manuscript letters quite recently bought by the King in Eastern Prussia.)

My family comes from Northern Pomerania. My brother and I were for a long time the last of our name. My mother’s maiden name was Colomb, cousin of the Princess Bluecher, and therefore niece of the old President in Aurich (Ostfriesland). She was first married to a Baron von Holwede. From this marriage sprung my step-brother Holwede, formerly in the regiment of gensdarmes. To my mother belongs the merit of having procured for us, at the instigation of old privy-councillor Kunth, a thorough education. Wilhelm, for the first years, was educated by our tutor Campe. The foundation of his profound attainments in Grecian lore was laid by Loeffler, the author of a liberal book on the New Platonism of the Fathers of the Church; he then was a chaplain in the army, and afterwards chief ecclesiastical counsellor at Gotha. Fischer, of the Graue Kloster, instructed Wilhelm in Greek for many years; he had, what is little known, a profound knowledge of Greek, besides that of mathematics. That Engel, Reitemeier, Dohm, and Klein lectured to us for a long time on philosophy, jurisprudence, and political science, is known to you. When at the University of Frankfurt (for six months) we lived with Loeffler, who was Professor there. In Goettingen, both of us were members (for one year) of the Philological Seminary of Heyne.

To my father belonged Tegel (formerly a hunting chateau of the great Elector, and it was consequently only a leasehold property. Wilhelm first possessed the place in fee-simple, as a manor; therefore Schinkel added to it four towers, in order to preserve the old tower erected under the great Elector). Besides this, he owned Ringenwalde, near Soldin, in the Neumark. Ringenwalde afterwards belonged to me, then to the Counts Reeden and Achim Arnim. Wilhelm, at the time of his death, possessed Tegel, Burgoerner, and Auleben (acquired by his wife, as the fiefdom of the Dacheroeden family had been abolished), Hadersleben, in the Magdeburg country, and Castle Ottmachau, in Silesia, the dotation given to him after the Paris peace.

The Sonnet I., 394, refers to a second child, I believe, which Frau von Humboldt lost when at Rome. One was buried in Paris.

I conjure you do not mention to the author anything as coming from me. He would inevitably state it in the preface, and then I should become responsible for a great many things which I dread.

Pardon the stercoran-like[33] loquacity.

A. HT.

NOTE BY VARNHAGEN.—He probably had just read of the Stercoranists in
Strauss’s “Glaubenslehre.” Hence this allusion.

65.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

THURSDAY, _31st March, 1842_.

On my return from Potsdam with the King I received the “Loa-Tseu,” a work with a peculiar flavor of ante-Herodotian antiquity. Your note accompanying the Chinese philosopher impresses me painfully. I find that you have not yet received the courage arising from a consciousness of restored physical strength. That the vigor of your intellect never suffered is shown in each of your letters. I think I have not lost any of them. About a week ago I wrote you a long one of four pages about that “Christianly-dogmatising philosopher,” and my reply to the inquiries of the “Biographer,” who pestered me with his pietistic curiosity. Did that letter come to hand safely? It contained also much chit-chat on my brother’s first erudition. You don’t make any mention of my talkativeness. I trust it will not be a source of trouble to me. We have succeeded with Buelow. He may be here next Saturday. It may be the beginning of something good; or the end of it—_le bouquet_—the stage effect of foot-lights. I met with Tholuk and Bekedorff yesterday at Potsdam at dinner. No other occasion would have favored me with their _apparition_. With constant devotion yours,

A. HT.

66.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _April 6th, 1842_.

Since the inquisitorial sentence against Bruno (Bauer) has been so presumptuously published, I deem it my duty to retain your Strauss no longer. I return you that remarkable book, which caused me to indulge in much meditation. Accept my best thanks. The method of the author is excellent; it makes us acquainted with the whole history of the faith of our time, particularly so with the jesuitical trick of so many people who declare publicly their belief in and their adherence to all the dogmas of the Christian mythology, after the fashion of Schleiermacher, and after having “drained the chalice,” are followed to the grave by a solemn cortege of court equipages, although in fact they had always discarded the orthodox belief and substituted for it pseudo-philosophical interpretations.

What displeases me very much in Strauss is his frivolous manner of speaking of natural sciences, which makes him accept without hesitation the formation of organism from inorganisms, and which enables him to easily believe in the origin of man as springing from the primitive sod of Chaldea. That he seems to think very little of the blue regions on the other side of the grave I might cheerfully forgive him; the more so, as we are the more agreeably and willingly surprised when we expect little. As for you, you fortunate man, it could have caused no surprise. How purely Spanish and revolting in the present inquisitorial formula was the sentence that “The culprit would _admit_ himself.” Neque aliud aut qui eadem saevitia usi sunt, nisi dedecus sibi atque reges illis gloriam peperere.

I send you a copy of “Don Juan.” It shows beauty of language, also a rich imagination. I am anxious to hear how you are pleased with it.

The constitutional Roi des Landes[34] _repeatedly_ said yesterday at dinner in the presence of forty people: The professors of Goettingen had talked of their patriotism in an address to him. Professors, he said, have no country at all. Professors, prostitutes, and dancers may be had every where for money; they go to the highest bidder. What a shame to call such a fellow a German Prince!

With faithful attachment, yours,

A. HT.

WEDNESDAY NIGHT.

67.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _April 7th, 1842_.

Our unknown friend is very amiable. I have lost all apprehension. _You_ have a balm for every wound. I will show you, with pleasure, the few lines, which fell, as it was intended they should, into the King’s hands on the following morning. I chose that circuitous way, because it enabled me to write more freely, and to openly show my dissatisfaction. The thing is now in a better way, but it is not yet irrevocably dismissed. I must entreat you, therefore, most fervently, not to give the lines in question out of your hand. They would irrevocably be inserted in the papers, and that would seriously injure my efforts in a good and important cause.

The King sent for me at a very early hour; and his thanking me very cordially for my frank exposition does him much honor.

I did not go to Potsdam to-day, because I wished to advocate in the full board of the Academy the election of Mr. Riess, the Jewish philosopher, as a member. His election is very honorable to the Academy. There were only three black balls.

To-morrow I shall be with the King till Sunday. I will try to hunt up some interesting autograph—something poetical (by Wilhelm von Humboldt)—for Stuttgart. All that I possess are unfortunately but _copies_.

Take care of your health, dear friend, it is not firmly restored.

Yours,
A. V. HUMBOLDT.

THURSDAY NIGHT.

68.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _June 24th, 1842_.

Your kind remembrance, honored and gifted friend, was very beneficial to me—the more so, as I have returned from Sans Souci rather unwell, affected by a cold; and as I am involved in all the miseries of moving into a detestable house in the Siberian ward of the city, the Oranienburger Strasse, I have not even an inkstand on my table.

At present, nothing more than my best thanks. I have told Marheineke myself how dear he is to me. A thunderstorm, in the form of a cabinet order, suddenly growling through the papers, and exhibiting a few flashes of censorial absurdities, would be preferable to that impracticable law, the assigning of a Grand Inquisitor to the liberty of the press. We have so much to say to each other, I hope to see you yet before your departure. Think only of the enlivening presence of four Crown-Princes and throne-successors—one lame in the knees, and pale; the other a drunken Icelander; the third blind, and politically raving; and the last capricious and infirm in intellect. And this is the approaching generation of the monarchical world.

Yours,
A. HT.

I accompany the King to the Rhine. That I had no mind to become a mere color-stand at Petersburg will be understood by you. The Chancellor has always the pleasure of being the subject of vulgar recrimination on the part of those who are either not invited or refused admittance to the banquet. What an excitement glass beads, peacock plumes, and ribbons can stir up among men![35]....

NOTE BY VARNHAGEN.—Marheineke’s article on the Anglican church in the
“Jahrbuecher fuer wissenschaftliche Kritik,” with a couple of
censorial blunders.

On the 26th June, 1842, Varnhagen writes in his diary about the new order:—“Humboldt tells me much about the foundation of the new order. The King had at first composed a list, in which he had written the names with Sanscrit letters. This list was referred for advice to Humboldt, Eichhorn, Savigny, Thiele; then it was altered many times; new names were added and others stricken out—the indecision lasted six weeks. Originally the King had decided for forty-six members, to correspond with the number of years embraced by the reign of Frederick the Great. Afterwards he thought of adopting forty, but was afraid of doing so, on account of the ‘plaisanteries’ about the number ‘quarante’ in the French Academy; at last he limited the number to thirty. All was managed by the King in his own way. Arago was originally placed on the list by the King. He insisted upon Metternich as his particular choice. Rumohr was abandoned. Steffens was, in the opinion of the King, not deserving ‘enough—neither as philosopher nor as a naturalist.’ Liszt was decidedly favored by the King, and no objections could prevail. Spontini was thought of, but Savigny and the cabinet counsellor, Mueller, succeeded in displacing him. Moore was objected to as having written satirical verses on Prussia. ‘That is not at all my business,’ said the King. Melloni was opposed as being a Carbonaro, and having been at the head of a revolutionary Junta. ‘I do not care the least about that,’ said the King. ‘I would confer the order on O’Connell, if he possessed such scientific merits.’ The King proposed Raumer and Ranke. Eichhorn and Savigny assented only to Ranke, and thereupon both were dropped. Notwithstanding the view taken in Melloni’s, Moore’s, and Arago’s cases, Schlosser the historian was rejected on account of his political views(?). Metternich had railed at the ‘bishopric of Jerusalem.’ Now to insure the new order against the same fate, he was to be nominated a member of it—this is deemed the ‘secret motive,’ in Humboldt’s opinion. And for Metternich’s sake Uwaroff was left out, for with him the other would not have been the sole representative of his species. Link was weighed, but found wanting.”

On the 27th June, 1842, Varnhagen makes the following addition to his notes of yesterday: “Humboldt told me he had informed the King in advance of the intention of the Academy of Sciences to elect Mr. Riess, a Jew, one of their members, and that the King had replied he would confirm the election unhesitatingly. ‘I will hope,’ he added, ‘your brother has not committed the folly of writing in the by-laws a clause against Jews becoming members of the Academy?’ Minister Eichhorn knew that the King would not create any difficulty in the matter, but he himself disliked it, and he thought it likely that Thiele, Rochow, Stollberg, and others, would also be displeased at it; therefore he left the application of the Academy, to have their election confirmed by the King, unattended to for six weeks, and then wrote a letter, by which he inquired of the Academy, whether they were aware that Riess was a Jew? The Academy, indignant at this inquiry, replied unanimously, that they were only ruled by the by-laws, in concurrence with which the election had taken place, and they therefore repudiated the minister’s inquiry as inappropriate and impertinent. Eichhorn pocketed the insult, and reported the application to the King, who at once confirmed the election; feeling, however, a little disinclined to approve, at the present day, what Frederick the Great had refused. Frederick the Great had declined to confirm the election of Moses Mendelssohn, out of regard, as it is believed, for the Empress Catherine of Russia, who was a member of the Academy, and who was presumed to be averse to such a colleague.”

On the 30th of August, 1842, Varnhagen remarks in his diary: “Humboldt tells me miserable things of Eichhorn. Talks also much of the King, his amiability, good humor, jocoseness. He thinks, however, he will not relinquish his favorite views, even when he seems to abandon them. The King was more satisfied with Count Maltzan than with any one else of his ministers; he placed full confidence in him—believed him capable of anything. We had a dispute about the signification of the word ‘ingenious,’ and how far it could be applied to the King. Humboldt thinks the King intends going to Greece, and to extend his journey to Jerusalem. It was to be feared, however, that the parsons would at last get control of him, and destroy his cheerfulness. Humboldt goes to Eu on business, with the King of France; then to Paris. Will be back at Berlin in December.”

Varnhagen speaks of a call made by Humboldt after his return from Paris, in his diary of the 18th March, 1843, as follows: “Humboldt came to see me; he looks much older since I last saw him, but his spirit and courage are fresh. In Paris he was happy and gay; here his spirits sank at once. Things here were going on miserably, he says; the old beaten track—treating matters of dangerous character in a spirit of childish frivolity. And besides that, he is overrun with applications and requests; every one wishes to secure his influence! ‘Influence!’ said he; ’nobody has any! Even Bunsen and Radowitz, the King’s favorites, have none. All that they are capable of is to anticipate the weak fancies of the King, and obey them. Should they attempt anything beyond this, their overthrow is certain. The _King_ acts just as he pleases. He follows the impulses of his early received and firmly rooted impressions, and the advice which he may now and then think worthy of hearing, is nothing at all to him. He speaks contemptuously of Eichhorn and Savigny, as hypocritical menials, who receive the word of command from Thiele, from Gerlach, and from Hengstenberg. The King has relinquished nothing whatever of his cherished designs, and may, at any time, come out again with them, as with his designs regarding the Jews’ observance of the Sabbath, the Anglican ordination of the bishops, and the new institutions of nobility, etc. He has projects which it would take a hundred years to accomplish. He contemplates immense constructions, outlaying of parks, enterprises in matters of art. There is already the question of going to Athens; in the background a pilgrimage to Jerusalem may be looming; triumphant promenades _à la_ Napoleon; peaceable ones to London, to St. Petersburg, to the Orient; conquered scholars and artists, instead of countries. Love of art and imagination upon the throne, fanaticism and deceit all round, and hypocritical exaggeration in matters unworthy of attention. And with all this, the man is really ingenious, is really amiable, and inspired by the best intentions. What will come out of all this at last?”

69.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _April 3d, 1842_.

If I have appeared slow in thanking you, my dear friend, for your delightful present, it is because all my leisure time at Potsdam was absorbed by the perusal of your biography, beginning with your early youth and terminating with your description of the Congress of Vienna. To have had such a development as yours is a gratifying advantage. It is instructive to follow the career of men like you and to behold them acting before our eyes.

How unjust we once were in our opinions of the men who undertook to rearrange Europe at that great Congress—I mean to say how much more did we then exact in our unjust views, while at present, on comparing the members of that Congress with the mediocre creatures of to-day, they appear great in our recollection. In their place we have now court-philosophers, missionary-devoted ladies of state ministers, court theologians, and sensation preachers......

Minister Buelow complains that you never came to see him _en famille_ between the hours of 8 and 9. He will hold his public reception to-morrow, Tuesday evening, and you would be an ornament to his circle. He never sends letters of invitation to those who know how welcome they are to him.

A. V. HUMBOLDT.

MONDAY.

70.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

TUESDAY, _June 13th, 1843_.

Excuse me, dear friend, for being prevented by the absence of Reimer, by my own eternal distractions and pendulum-like movements, as well as by some little preparations for an excursion to Pomerania, from sending you the two new volumes of Wilhelm’s works. I know that you are little pleased with the commentary on Hermann and Dorothea. It would have been preferable, to be sure, had he extended it into a pamphlet on epics; but you perceive even in the Kawi book how that great genius always deduced general law from special instances. The sonnets are full of grave pathos and depth of sentiment. I shall call to embrace you, and to ask you the surest way of sending a copy to Mr. Thomas Carlyle? A. seems unreliable, and Buelow’s despatches cannot be overloaded. I shall thank Mr. Carriere personally. The “fossil” minister, I am told, has given evidence of his vitality by an amiable letter to you! My life is also described “dans les biographies redigées par un homme de rien,” in which I am pictured as a socially-malicious beast. Such things will not kill, nor will they improve a man either.

Always faithfully yours,
A. V. HT.

71.

BERLIN, _June 26th, 1843_.

I am sure, dear friend, to afford you some enjoyment by communicating to you (to you _alone_) a fragment of a new volume by Eckermann. Remarkable adoration of youthful vigor as the divine source of productiveness. This is simply the adoration of an old man. Napoleonic worship unrestrained by moral considerations. I most fervently entreat you, not to show the sheet to our _child_, also not to talk with Brockhaus about what Eckermann has confided to me. It might possibly damage him, and he is already unfortunate. I am confident the two last volumes will have come to your hands through Buschmann. The weather was very favorable for our journey north. Such journeys are the best means to deceive princes regarding public opinion. I have made a little speech, out of a window, to the young men upon “The intellectual ties”—which independent of “space” beget a just interpretation of liberal ideas, and an unfading confidence in the advancement of humanity. You may read the speech in the Staats Zeitung, as I wrote it down after delivery, a necessary precaution, as my daily increasing friends would have perverted it. I read a part of “Custine” to the King. He is infinitely ingenious and magnificent in style. I have read but two volumes, and of these I prefer the first, which portrays a modern greatness of tragical events in a masterly manner.

With devotion, yours,
A. V. HUMBOLDT.

Please send me back Eckermann.

72.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

TUESDAY, _June 27th, 1843_.

I am afraid, my dear friend, that you might come to Tegel next Thursday and find nobody at home. Buelow will take leave of the King to-night and expects to start to-morrow—Wednesday—for Schlangenbad. His wife and two oldest daughters are going with him. I write this in view of the impossibility of my embracing you before your departure. The torchlight procession at Düsseldorf could shed light on many a thing. I enclose the little speech for you, as you like to preserve everything concerning your friends.

Yours,
A. HT.

73.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

SANS SOUCI, _August 27th, 1843_.

How could I be, my dear friend, otherwise than alive to the duty of thanking you at once for your precious gift, and for the affectionate souvenir of one whose life is gradually vanishing? I know nothing more graceful in composition, in sympathy of conception, in elegance of language, and in appropriate scenic surroundings, than your “_Lebensbilder_,” which serve at the same time as correct commentaries upon all the valuable literature of our time. How generous you are when you mention me, and even my most insignificant words! I have often followed you through the three volumes, over those beaten, but still delightful paths; but nothing pleases me more in this “sylva sylvarum” than your dignified and just remarks on the historical blunder as to the “truly Germanic” distinction of political classes, ii., p. 256–272.

You will observe that my political “ire” is still the same; that I am always very much attached to this life, having learned from you that, according to Kant’s doctrine, there is not much to boast of after our dissolution. “The budding twig starting up in the regions of northern empires” (I am satirical now) has been but poorly acclimated; and I have little time to spare, having already waited fifty-three years.... The Germans will yet have to _write_ many more books on liberty.

The card-playing man—ii., p. 157—will again cause some excitement in the environs of my “hill.” I believe I have discovered some “moderation,” which, however, one does not like to mention. The words, “that miserable fellow,” are no longer heard. You see how much I love to read your writings—and not through fear.

A. V. H.

We have not yet talked of Custine’s book. The first volume is an eloquent and sprightly description (of dramatic scenes), and is the best done. What a startling effect such a book must have, even on those who detest justifying themselves. “Il y a des longueurs de déclamations,”—something of rhetorical blackening, which is tiresome. I find the publication of the hypertragical letter (of Princess Trubetzkoi) very wrong. Were it not for the irritation necessarily caused by the publication of this letter, we might have looked for some salvation from a new petition. What justification is there for risking so much, even for murder? I am also disgusted by the worship of those literary trifles by Mad. de Girardin and Mad. Gay. Such worship could, perhaps, be allowed in a beautiful Grand-Duchess.

That the “Saint-Simonism” was invented by a Prussian business-man, amuses me very much. As it concerns Königsberg, I will keep it secret.

74.
HUMBOLDT TO THE PRINCE OF PRUSSIA.

BERLIN, _Dec. 29, 1843_.

YOUR ROYAL HIGHNESS:

I have the honor, most humbly, to inform you that the box containing the universal siderial clock of the inventors, D. and H. V. A——, together with your gracious orders, has duly been delivered to me. I shall do in the matter what will be agreeable to you. The two officers, in a letter dated Temesvar, 13th of December, gave me notice of the arrival of the instruments, naively adding “That I should try to procure for the inventors some military decoration from His Majesty the King ‘the _universal physician_,’ of all arts and sciences.”

To obtain, however, such a “universal panacea,” from the “universal physician,” the gentlemen must address his majesty a few words themselves. The so-called universal siderial clocks had much reputation in the middle ages; in the present state of astronomy, however, they are never used in observatories, where the astronomer makes the calculations himself. Such graphic inventions in that line cannot therefore be recommended as deserving reward unless the inventors address themselves in person to the monarch. These rules are observed even when books are presented, which meet with no acknowledgment unless accompanied by a letter.

Under these circumstances I hope that your Royal Highness will approve of my writing to Lieutenant H. v. A., thanking him for his confidence, and requesting him, for his own sake and that of his friend, to write some letters to his majesty the King, in which he may refer to me. To secure the delivery of the letter at Temesvar your Royal Highness will gracefully be pleased to direct it under your seal to the ambassador, General von Canitz. I shall have the box opened at the observatory in the presence of Professor Encke, and charge him, as is usual in such cases, to make a report for the private cabinet. Although the word “_ingenious_” cannot be applied to instruments the construction of which is not strictly original, I will nevertheless try to obtain, through my representations, a small dose of “the universal panacea.”

In deepest devotion, I remain
Your Royal Highness’s
most humble servant,
A. V. HUMBOLDT.

75.

MONDAY, _Jan. 1st, 1844_.

I am in haste to tell you, as the Potsdam train is about starting, dear friend, in spite of your incognito, that the King, previous to the soap bubbling, lead melting, and to the angelic chorus in the cathedral, and the entrance of the watchman,[36] received and enjoyed very much the charming gift. It is a group full of grace and sweetness of composition; it is heaven reflected in earthly love. The King instantly guessed it to be the work of those young fairies, Bettina’s cygnets, and would like to offer his thanks.

A. V. HT.

Privatissime.—I expressed some doubts about that hieroglyph distinguishing the male swan from the female. The King thinks me, however, quite “arrière” as to the changes which art-life has made in modern education.

NOTE BY VARNHAGEN.—Bettina von Arnim had given me a delicate and
beautifully executed drawing, representing a naked girl and a naked
lad standing under a tree, in the foliage of which a nightingale is
singing, which she requested me to send anonymously to Mr. v.
Humboldt, asking him to present it also anonymously to the King as a
New Year’s present. The nakedness of the male figure might indeed
appear rather shocking, although it would have been pardonable in
one _like Bettina_, but that the King could suppose it the work of
her daughters is rather too strong, unless by this pretence he meant
to convey a rallying correction to Bettina.

On the 1st of April, 1844, Varnhagen wrote in his diary: “After a long interruption, a visit from Humboldt at last. He told me all that occupies his mind. He is striving to do what he can, but this is not much, and after all, the man of seventy-four years is but a man of seventy-four. He himself refers significantly to his advanced age. His manifold duties are a heavy charge upon him, although he is reluctant to abandon them. The Court and its society are to him like a tavern of habitual resort, where one is wont to pass one’s evening, and to drink one’s glass. The King, says he, busies himself with nothing but his whims, and these have, for the most part, a spiritual, nay, an ecclesiastical, tendency—worshipping, building churches, concocting missions. He cares very little about earthly affairs. It seems immaterial to him whether Louis Philippe’s death causes a crisis; what may happen after Metternich’s death, or how Russia behaves with us. To all this he is indifferent; he scarcely thinks of it. Whoever has secured his favor and nourishes his fancies plays a sure game. Bunsen, Radowitz, and Canitz stand highest in his favor. Stollberg comes only in the second rank. Besides, there exists the greatest carelessness and distraction. Rueckert had congratulated the Queen upon her recovery, in some very beautiful stanzas. They were found delightful; but the propriety of acknowledging such an offering by a word of thanks was overlooked, until at last it occurred to the Queen. Rueckert was then sent for, but had been gone some three weeks. Schelling is received scarcely once a year by the King. Having secured him, he cares but little for him. Steffens, too, whom he likes, is seldom invited. Reumont belongs to the exceptions; he secures a small share of the favoritism of Bunsen and Count Bruehl. There is much sneering at ... about his dancing, &c. Humboldt said once, he was green, if not quite yellow, whereupon the King answered: ‘At ... every one had that complexion.’ Bunsen has not grown much wiser: he proposed to the King to purchase California, to send missionaries there, &c. He strongly supports the schemes of Madame von Helfert; he had a mind to send his own son with her, and to contribute £12,000 of his own means for the establishment of settlements in the East Indies (!), with the view, of course, to open a field for missionaries; he withdrew, however, his offers when he saw that the King’s co-operation was doubtful. In the meantime Mrs. Helfert could not obtain more than ten thousand thalers from the King. Minister Rother succeeded in frustrating her plot; he could not help, however, sending two agents to examine and to report on the state of the possessions of Mrs. Helfert in the East Indies. It was also attempted to induce the King to take part in the colonization of Texas—always in connexion, of course, with religious interests. Humboldt had written previously to Bunsen, in strong terms, advising him to warn Eichhorn, and to point out to him the hatred which his actions awakened, and which also reflected upon the King. When he met Bunsen here he expressed himself in the same way, arguing in forcible but fruitless language. Bunsen, who talked with him with great interest on Egypt for two hours, did not answer a word, but rose and went away. Humboldt believes him vain enough to accept a ministry. It seems to me that Humboldt is much too familiar with Bunsen, and shows him too much friendship. The Queen, says Humboldt, has no Catholic tendencies; on the contrary, she is an arch-Protestant, and even more of a fanatic than the King himself, whom she is constantly urging in this direction. She would have more influence if she better understood the management of matters.

“In the evening Humboldt sent me the work: ‘Russie, Allemagne et France,’ par M. Fournier, Paris, 1844, with a very amiable letter, inclosing eighteen precious autographs by Arago, Metternich, Peel, Stanley, Récamier, Balzac, Prescott, Brunel, Herschel, Bresson, Helene d’Orleans, Duchesse de Dino, and four confidential good-humored notes of the King. A brilliant present!”

76.
HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.

BERLIN, _April 1st, 1844_.

I have a mind, my noble friend, to impart some enjoyment to you to-night by a few insignificant gifts, accompanying the horrible Ruthenic venom beneath enclosed.[37] I know that I am personally flattered in all the inclosed letters with the exception of that from Solingen; but this cannot prevent my offering what may be interesting to you. You will find the following letter from

1. Lord Stanley, the present minister, to whom I had recommended the cousin of our Dieffenbach, the author of a highly commendable journey to New Zealand. This traveller was implicated in the rebellion at Frankfort, wherefore it was difficult to get him an engagement in Germany. If travelling were still a business of mine I could not desire a better companion.

2. The “Presumption” from Solingen.

3. A very interesting letter of Count Bresson, the ambassador of France, dated Feb. 6, 1839.

4. A very amiable letter from Arago, when I had dedicated him the “Examen de l’histoire de la géographie du 15 Siècle.” I don’t recollect having given you anything else of Arago.

5. A note written by the King, at a time when he assisted me in obtaining the pardon of young “demagogues.” The note refers to the prosecution of young Hoeninghaus, for whom my efforts were successful. The letter of the Crown-Prince shows a noble indignation against Kamptz and his accomplices.

6. A letter of the Duchess of Orleans.

7. A letter of the King of Denmark. Simultaneously with Arago I had recommended Hansen, the great lunar calculator at Gotha, to the King. Our petition was granted. Arago received also a very amiable autograph from “Christianus Rex,” once constitutional King in Norway.

8. Another note of the Crown-Prince, good-humored and witty. He wished very much to have Metternich accept the Presidency, _pour mettre la société en bonne odeur à Rome ou elle passe pour Bunsohérétique_.

9. A letter of the Duchess de Dino, now Duchesse de Talleyrand. She has been created Duchess of Sagan lately.

10, 11. Two good-humored letters more of the King. Le _Seehund_, the recommendation of a rather rough Danish sea captain, who declared his willingness to take two naturalists around the globe at the rate of 2500 rixthalers a head (a little high). The plan was a failure. _Le Seigneur Cados, ministre Sécretaire d’Etat_ of the watchmaking _Duc de Normandie_, who addressed to the Crown-Prince a complaint about the indecent manner in which he was treated by the Staats Zeitung.

12. From Brunel, the hero of the tunnel.

13. A letter of Sir John Herschel, full of flattering expressions.

14. Mr. de Balzac.

15. Sir Robert Peel. Somebody had written me, from Oxford, that Robert Brown, the first botanist of Europe, had got suddenly into money difficulties, and that Peel, on my intercession, would grant him one of the four only pensions accorded to savans by Parliament. I recommended him and was successful.

16. Mad. Récamier. I am sure you have already several letters from her.

17. A letter from Prince Metternich, to be added to the number of those which you have already from him.

18. The illustrious American historian, Prescott. In your hands all will be safe, even what I myself would destroy from wantonness. I entreat you, dear friend, not to tell anybody that I gave you the King’s notes, however insignificant they are. It would injure me.

With old veneration, yours,
A. VON HUMBOLDT.

MONDAY EVENING.

77.
J. W. T. TO HUMBOLDT.

HÖFGEN, NEAR SOLINGEN, _March 12th, 1844_.

Your Excellency will not be offended at the liberty I take of writing you. Some time ago I read in the newspapers that somebody of Koenigsberg is said to have written you about secrets of nature, referring to photographs taken in the dark. I presume, therefore, that your Excellency is a naturalist and has friends who are likewise so. As I also have made important discoveries in secrets of nature, which my present business will not allow me to pursue, I wish to have an opportunity of speaking with you about them. Perhaps we can be useful to each other. I am perfectly willing to make the journey to Berlin, in order to see you. May it please your Excellency to write me as soon as possible at what time I can call on you at Berlin, if you have no objection to my visit.

In hope that you will favor me with an answer, I am, with due respect,

Your Excellency’s most obedient,
J. W. T.

Mr. Gottfried H., merchant at Berlin, can give you information, if required, as to my standing and character.

NOTE OF HUMBOLDT.—The presumption of the writer, arising from the
perusal of a newspaper, that I might be a naturalist, is a fact. I
am guilty of having published some books on Natural History as early
as 1789.

78.
COUNT BRESSON, FRENCH AMBASSADOR, TO HUMBOLDT.

BERLIN, _February 6th, 1839_.

DEAR EXCELLENCY,—I am happy to be able to send you to-day an article worthier of you than that of yesterday. Keep this number “_Des Débats._” I do not file them.

The remark of Mr. M. V. L—— on the “Nescio quis _Plutarchus_” is puerile. Besides, excepting this, his article is inspired by a just appreciation of your glory, which is ours as well, and which we claim as such.

Pray, dear Excellency, receive my affectionate and respectful homage.

BRESSON.

P. S.—I had just finished this note when yours of this morning reached me. I shall keep it all my life, as well for its being a true historical monument, as for the precious title of friend which you deign to give me. It is true, alas! we shall see, if God grants us life, a great many things; but may it be His will that we shall never see again events like those which have already swept over our country, by sapping the power of the King. Yet the Coalition works in this direction with all its might. It is a fit of madness which reminds me of 1791. These plotters are Girondists in embryo, whom we would have loved; and they will be the first to be buried under the ruins of the edifice which they are undermining.

Does it, then, require a great effort of reasoning to perceive that the King is the cementer of all things, that he keeps us out of chaos, and that upon his living or dying the state of affairs wholly depends? Let us ask conscientiously, does our danger to-day come from him? Shall an order of things, acquired with so much trouble, established with so much labor—shall it be sacrificed to the renown of a few men, or to the vain theories inapplicable to France, serviceable at the best only in England, where they are consecrated by age, and, what is still better, administered by the enlightened upper classes. D., who is a man of sound intellect, writes me that he believes in the happy issue of the ministerial crisis. Mr. Molé has changed his determination not to resume office; he will do so if there is a majority of thirty-six or forty votes secured to him. The Jacqueminot party, which is rendering great service, is working for this.

Here are the adieux, the last ones of Mr. de Talleyrand at Fontainebleau, on the 2d of June, 1838: “Adieu, my dear Bresson, stay at Berlin as long as you can; you are well off there; do not try to be better off. There will be much commotion in the world; you are young; you will see it.” I quote these words for you, because they agree with the spirit of your note, for which I thank you once more, and which will become a family title to me.

NOTE BY HUMBOLDT.—_Letter of Count Bresson, French Ambassador at
Berlin._—I kept it on account of the few words of Talleyrand. I had
written to Mr. Bresson that the situation of France was very
serious, that I still believed in peace, because, besides the wisdom
of the rulers, there was an expectant treatment of want of energy
and timid prudence. That these things, however, could act only for a
limited time, and that those who were young, like him, would see in
action what was now spreading its deep roots, as the unconscious and
inarticulate desires of the nations.

79.
ARAGO TO HUMBOLDT.

PARIS, _August 19th, 1834_.