Chapter II: Descent of the Saxon Emperors (7)

Amongst the leading cities of the Confederation, Zurich was conspicuous as the centre of Liberal tendencies and intellectual progress, whilst Bern was the political centre, and the leading financial focus.[76] Like a modern Rothschild, Bern then lent to various European states. Part of her treasure went towards paying the cost of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. Among her sister cities, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Lucerne, Bern presented the most perfect example of an oligarchy, admired by Montesquieu, Napoleon, and even Rousseau. Her decided bent was for diplomacy, and she was completely absorbed in rule and administration, and she had few other tastes. Trade and industry she considered beneath her dignity; even literary pursuits to a great extent. The Bernese aristocrats were politicians from birth, so to speak, and the young men had a curious society amongst themselves, "Aeusserer Stand," a society formed for the purpose of cultivating the diplomatic art and practising parliamentary oratory and tactics, especially their more formal outward side. Thus trained in bearing and ceremonial they acquired their much-admired political _aplomb_. Bern was French in fashion, in manners, and in language, and the German tongue was as little appreciated amongst the Bernese patricians as at the Court of Frederick the Great. The constitution presents some features quite unique in their way. There was an exclusiveness which has lasted in all its force even down to our own days; and three classes of society sprang up, as widely separated from each other as the different castes in India. All power was vested in the 360 "reigning families"; the number of these was at length, by death and clever manipulating, reduced to eighty, and even fewer. From these families alone were the councils selected, and to the members of these only were governorships assigned. If male heirs were wanting, then the seats on the council were given to the daughters as dowries. So exclusive was this governing body, that even Haller, the great poet, was not allowed to enter it. The class next lower in rank was that of the burghers, _ewige habitanten_, with no political rights, and with not a vestige of power in the commonwealth. They were not allowed to hold officerships abroad, but trade, industry, and the schools and churches were theirs. Lastly came the Ansaessige (settlers), the proletariat, including the country labourers, foreigners, refugees, and commoner folk generally. Many were their disabilities; they were not permitted to buy houses, to have their children baptised in the city, to have tombstones set up over the graves of members of their family.[77] They might not even appear in the market till their betters had done their business, viz., 11 a.m., and they were strictly forbidden to carry baskets in the archways (_les arcades de la ville_), in order that these should not damage the hooped petticoats of the patrician ladies.[78] Bern has often been compared with ancient Rome, and certainly its stern council somewhat resembles in its austerity, solemnity, and pomp the august Roman Senate. It is not surprising that many attempts should have been made to induce the Government to relax its severity. In 1744 certain citizens petitioned the council to that effect, but were banished for their pains. Five years later a famous man named Henzi, with several associates, formed a plot against the council, but they were detected and executed.

But in truth there were risings in almost every one of the cantons. Of these only the most remarkable can be touched on here, those of Geneva. These are real constitutional struggles, and, indeed, form the preliminaries in their way to the French Revolution, on which indeed their history sheds no little light. These troubles in Geneva are not unlike those of the Gracchi period in Roman history. By the Constitution of 1536 Geneva had been granted the right of a "Conseil General," but this council had never been allowed to act or meet. The patricians who occupied the _haut de la cite_ had arrogated to themselves well-nigh all power. But as early as 1707, the burghers, ever on the alert to regain their liberties, rose with the view of re-establishing the General Council of 1536. The movement was headed by the generous and noble-minded Pierre Fatio, himself a patrician. In fiery speeches, made in the open places of the town, he championed the popular rights, asserting with vehemence that the rulers were not the masters and tutors of the people, but the executors of its sovereign will. The attempt to gain popular liberty miscarried, Fatio was shot in prison, and his followers were exiled. Yet Fatio's idea lived on amongst the working classes, and later were again advocated in the pamphlets of Micheli du Crest. In the years 1734 and 1737 the insurrections burst out afresh, and resulted in the establishment of the Constitution of 1738, which secured for a quarter of a century a happiness it had never before known.

However, the second half of the century witnessed new troubles between the burghers and the patricians. These latter were called, by way of nickname, "Negatifs," because they denied the people reform, whilst the burghers were styled "Representants," because they presented petitions for political liberty. The artizan class were nicknamed "Natifs." It is impossible here to follow closely these "tea-cup squabbles," as Voltaire called them, but the philosopher's sympathies were with the _haut de la ville_, while Rousseau, on the contrary, sided with the _bas de la ville_.

Of all the Swiss lands the most equitable and righteous government was that enjoyed by Neuchatel, under Frederick the Great (1740-1786). This state had of its own free will in 1707 accepted the ducal sway of the kings of Prussia, in order to escape the grasp of Louis XIV. At one time, however, Frederick II. so far forgot himself as to infringe the "states'" right of taxation, and the semi-republican duchy at once rose in rebellion. Gaudot, the vice-governor, Frederick's devoted minister, was shot in the fray (1768). Yet, thanks to the monarch's wise moderation, and the intervention of the Swiss Confederation, the storm was calmed, and Neuchatel continued in her peaceful and happy condition. It is clear that there was in Switzerland plenty of combustible matter, needing only the French Revolution to raise a conflagration.

FOOTNOTES:

[73] The unrighteous and cruel Landvogt Tscharner was punished with death by the Bernese Government in 1612.

[74] For further particulars about this original man the reader is referred to the charming novel bearing his name, by Keller (Keller's "Zurcher Novellen").

[75] Madame de la Charriere, the novelist, writes: "Nous vivons avec eux, nous leur plaisons, quelquefois nous les formons, et ils nous gatent."

[76] The Bernese peasantry had attained unusual wealth by its excellent management and the strict administration of its government.

[77] Prof. Voegelin, "Schweizergeschichte," p. 344.

[78] See "Die Patrizierin," a recent fascinating novel by Widmann, a Bernese writer.

XXVIII.

SWITZERLAND AND THE RENAISSANCE. INFLUENCE OF VOLTAIRE AND ROUSSEAU.

Barren and uninviting is the waste of politics in Switzerland at this period of our story, and it seemed as if the republic was quietly crumbling out of active existence. But the literary and scientific renaissance runs through it all like a fertilizing stream, and saves it from utter sterility. Feeble though it was politically, Switzerland yet produced on all sides men of mark in science, in literature, in philosophy. Time would fail to tell of them all, and we must be content to follow briefly the three great currents of the movement, which centred respectively around Geneva, Zurich, and the Helvetic Society. The two former of these may indeed be said to form a part (and an important part) of the great general awakening of the eighteenth century, an awakening beginning with the French "period of enlightenment," and crowned by the era of German classicism. Yet the French movement itself was based on English influence. Just as, at the Restoration, England had copied the France of Louis Quatorze, so France in return drew intellectual strength from the England of the second half of the eighteenth century--England was then vastly ahead of the Continent--and brought forth the "_siecle de la philosophie_." Of the great Frenchmen who learned in the school of English thought, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Voltaire stand foremost, and of these again Voltaire occupies indisputably the highest place. Voltaire was not only the founder, but the very heart of the philosophic school which reared its front against the statutes and traditions and pretensions of the Church. He had drunk deeply of the spirit of Newton and of Locke during his exile in England, and spread abroad their views and discoveries, assisted by his genius, his sparkling wit, his lashing satire, and his graceful style. None equally with him naturalized on the Continent English free thought and English rationalism. Voltaire and Rousseau were as two great beacons planted in the century guiding as they would the course of philosophy. Both were champions of personal freedom and religious tolerance in a benighted and down-trodden age. But the influence of the two men worked in very different ways, for in the one it was based on the head, in the other on the heart. Voltaire, the realist, by his venomous and even reckless satires on the Church and on Christianity, dealt a severe blow to religion at large. Rousseau, the idealist, plunged into the mystery of good and evil, and was wrecked by the very impracticability of his system.

Voltaire, as is well known, spent the last twenty years of his life--his "_verte vieillesse_"--almost at the gates of Geneva, and Rousseau, actually one of its citizens, passed the greater part of his life wandering abroad, though he loved Geneva so dearly that he once fainted with emotion on leaving it. Yet while both did battle so to speak from Geneva, neither of them was reckoned as a prophet in that city. After Voltaire had spent a couple of years at "Les Delices"--this was subsequent to his break with the great Frederick--he bought Tournay and Ferney, close to Geneva, to "keep aloof from monarchs and bishops, of whom he was afraid." Ferney, with its _parc a la Versailles_, and its fine castle, he made his residence; and there his niece did the honours of the house to the countless visitors who came from all parts to do homage to the illustrious "Aubergiste del' Europe," as he pleasantly styled himself. It was not the salons of Ferney that induced him to reside there, but care for his health and a wish to be free from all fear of bastilles.

Geneva was not inclined to bow in admiration before her famous neighbour, as has been already stated. She had by this time become a great intellectual centre. Men of science, naturalists, and philosophers there congregated, and a reaction against the everlasting study of theology, of which the fashion had been introduced by the Huguenot refugees, having come about, the study of nature had taken its place. Whilst France was being governed by the Pompadours, Geneva was ruled by a society of savants, inclined, it is true, to absolutism and narrow Calvinism, but still savants. It is a common error to suppose that Voltaire's influence took deep root in Geneva. Voltaire set the current running for the world at large indeed, but Geneva was not specially affected. In truth, most of her learned men were disinclined to do more than follow Voltaire half way, as it were, into his philosophy, whilst some of them, as, for instance, Charles Bonnet, were particularly narrow in their views, and were even heretic hunters.[79] Voltaire's contest with the city authorities respecting the establishing of a theatre is a good illustration of his want of real authority and influence there. It greatly tickled his fancy to seduce the "pedantic city still holding to her old reformers, and submitting to the tyrannical laws of Calvin" from the ancient path, and to make war on her orthodoxy. And as part of his plan he determined to introduce theatrical performances into the city. The ball was set rolling by an article in the "Encyclopedie" by D'Alembert, but the arguments there adduced in favour of the theatre proved of no avail. Rousseau made a furious reply, and averred that a theatre was injurious to the morals of a small town. In a large city, where the morals were already corrupt, it did not signify. The Consistoire was in a flutter, for it had pretended that the Genevans had a prodigious love for light amusements. However, one day Voltaire invited the city authorities to "Les Delices," and there treated them to a representation of his "Zaire," and it was no little triumph to the wily old schemer that his audience were overcome with emotion. "We have moved to tears almost the whole council--Consistory and magistrates; I have never seen more tears," he delightedly reports; "never have the Calvinists been more tender! God be blessed! I have corrupted Geneva and the Republic." Nevertheless he was not to triumph. The theatre at "Les Delices" had to be closed. He opened his theatre several times elsewhere in Genevan territory, and began to draw crowds, but in every instance was compelled to close again. In truth, it was not till 1766 that Geneva had a theatre of its own, and even then it lasted but two years. The building was set on fire by some Puritans, and, being only of wood, was rapidly consumed. Crowds ran to the conflagration, but finding that it was only the theatre that was on fire, they emptied their buckets, shouting, "Let those who wanted a theatre put out the fire!" "_Perruques_ or _tignasses_," exclaimed Voltaire, with irritation, "it is all the same with Geneva. If you think you have caught her, she escapes."

Rousseau (1712-1778) was the son of a Genevan watchmaker, and received but a very desultory education in his early days. Whilst yet but a boy he had drunk in the republican and Calvinistic spirit of his native town, hence his democratic leanings. He was a lover of nature, and fond of solitude, and was possessed of a deep religious feeling, even though his religion was based on sentiment. He witnessed the revolt of 1735-37, and, _enfant du peuple_ as he was, rebelled against the tyranny of the patricians, and gave vent to his indignation in his writings. He thus became the mouthpiece of a down-trodden people craving for liberty, of a society satiated with culture. His prize essay on "Arts and Sciences" is an answer in the negative to the question propounded by the Dijon Academy, Whether the New Learning had resulted in an improvement to morals. His next essay on "L'origine et les fondements de l'inegalite" is a sally against the state of society. In it he advocates a return to the condition of nature, on which Voltaire sarcastically retorted, "I felt a great desire to go on all fours." "Emile" (1762), which Goethe calls the "gospel of education," declares against the hollowness of our distorted and over-refined civilization, and advocates a more rational training based on nature. And Pestalozzi, pedagogue and philanthropist, though he styled "Emile" a "book of dreams," was yet nourished on Rousseau's ideas. "Emile" is opposed to deism and materialism on the one hand, whilst on the other it objects to revelation and miracles, and declares that existing religion is one-sided and unable to save mankind from intellectual slavery. The excitement the book created was immense on both sides, and it was publicly burnt both at Paris and Geneva. Its author was compelled to flee.

(_From a photograph of the statue, at Yverdon, by Lanz._)]

A similar untoward fate befel the same author's famous "Contrat Social," perhaps the most important political work of the eighteenth century. In this Rousseau advances much further than Montesquieu. Indeed the former was a strong Radical, whilst the latter might be more fittingly described as a Whig. Rousseau advocates republicanism, or rather a democracy, as the best form of government; whilst Montesquieu points to the constitutional government of England as his model, insisting on the right to equality of all before the law. The "Contrat Social," as is well known, did much to advance the revolutionary cause, and became indeed the textbook of the democracy, and formed the principal basis of the Constitution of 1793. But Rousseau himself was no agitator. On the contrary, when the burghers of Geneva rose on his behalf, to save "Emile" and the "Contrat" from the flames, he hesitated hardly a moment, but begged them to submit to order, as he disliked disorder and bloodshed.

His novel, "La Nouvelle Heloise" (1761), introduced the romantic element, and opened a new era in literature. It was, in fact, a manifesto against a bewigged and bepowdered civilization. Poetry was invited to withdraw from the salons and come once more to live with nature. But this sudden onslaught on the stiff conventionalism and narrowness of the time was too much, and there ensued an outburst of excitement and feeling such as we in our day can scarcely realize. A great stream of sentiment poured into literature, and gave rise to that tumultuous "storm and stress" (_Sturm und Drang_) period in Germany, out of which sprang Schiller's "Raeuber" (Robbers). Goethe caught up the prevailing tone of sentimentality and supersensitiveness in his "Werther" (1774). This tearful, boisterous period is but the outrush of a nation's pent-up feelings on its sudden emancipation from the thraldom of conventionalism. And it led the way to the golden era in German literature, the era of Schiller and Goethe.

The brilliant literary court of Madame de Stael at Coppet succeeded that of Voltaire at Ferney. Though born in Geneva she was in heart a Frenchwoman, and her native country but little affected her character. "I would rather go miles to hear a clever man talk than open the windows of my rooms at Naples to see the beauties of the Gulf," is a characteristic speech of hers. Yet amongst women-writers Madame de Stael is perhaps the most generous, the most lofty, and the grandest figure. Her spirited opposition to Napoleon, her exile, her brilliant _coterie_ at Coppet, and her famous literary productions, are topics of the greatest interest, but as they do not specially concern Switzerland, they cannot be more than hinted at here.

From the very depression, political and social, prevailing in Swiss lands arose the yearning for and proficiency in letters and scientific culture which in the period now before us produced so prolific a literature in the country. And it was not in West Switzerland alone that this revival of letters showed itself. Basel prided herself on her naturalists and mathematicians, Merian, Bernoulli, and Euler; while Zurich could boast of her botanists, Scheuchzer and John Gessner. Bern produced that most distinguished naturalist, Haller, who was also a poet; Schaffhausen claims Johannes von Mueller, the brilliant historian; and Brugg (Aargau) Zimmermann, philosopher and royal physician at Hanover. Bodmer and Breitinger formed an aesthetic critical forum at Zurich. And no country of similar area had so many of its sons occupying positions of honour in foreign universities. A whole colony of Swiss savants had settled at Berlin, drawn thither by the great Frederick; others were to be found at Halle. Haller, who had lived at Goettingen ever since 1736, likewise received an invitation from Frederick, but found himself unable to accept it, being greatly averse to Voltaire and his influence. A perfect stream of Swiss intellect poured into Germany, and by its southern originality, greater power of expression, and its true German instinct, quickened German nationality, and witnesses to the fact that there is ever passing between the two countries an intellectual current.[80] It is impossible within the limits of the present volume to do more than touch upon the most characteristic literary movements of the period.

Amongst the upper classes in Switzerland, French culture reigned supreme, just as did French fashions, French manners, and it may almost be said, the French language. Nevertheless, the Swiss were the first to throw off the French supremacy in literature, turning rather to England as a more congenial guide and pattern. Bodmer speaks of Shakespeare and Milton "as the highest manifestations of Germanic genius." As for German literature itself, it was still in a state of helplessness--what with the Thirty Years' War, and the German nobility given over to French tastes and French influence--and fashioned itself in foreign modes till the close of the Seven Years' War, in 1763, when it took the leading position it has ever since maintained.

Bern and Zurich, which had both risen to wealth and independence, were stout opponents of the French policy. Both cities were homes of the _belles lettres_, and Zurich was a veritable "poets' corner." The chief figure there was Bodmer, who wielded the literary sceptre in Switzerland and Germany for well-nigh half a century. A fellow-worker with him, and his well-nigh inseparable companion, was Breitinger, and these two more than any others helped to break the French spell. Bodmer (1698-1783), was the son of a pastor of Greifensee, and had himself been at first destined for the church, though he was at length put to the silk trade. But neither calling could keep him from his beloved letters, and in 1725 he became professor of history and political science at the Zurich Carolinum. His aim was to raise literature from its lifeless condition. As far back as 1721, he had joined with Breitinger and others, in establishing a weekly journal on the model of Addison's _Spectator_--"Discurse der Maler." Breitinger was professor of Hebrew, and later on, canon of the minster of Zurich, and was a man of profound learning and refined taste. The new paper treated not only of social matters, but discussed poetry and _belles lettres_ generally. Gottsched (1700-1766), who occupied the chair of rhetoric at Leipzig, was supreme as a literary critic. His tastes were French, and he held up the French classics as models. In his "Critical Art of Poetry" (1730), he tries to teach what may be called the _mechanics_ of poetry based on reason, and pretends that it is in the power of any really clever man to produce masterpieces in poetry. In 1732, appeared Bodmer's translation of "Paradise Lost," to the chagrin of Gottsched, who, feeling that he was losing ground, furiously attacked the Miltonian following. His mockery of the blind poet roused Bodmer's anger, and he replied with his work the "Wonderful in Poetry." A fierce controversy raged for ten years. In the name of Milton the young men of talent took the side of Zurich, that is, of the German, as opposed to the French influence in literature. The result was that by the efforts of such men as Haller, Klopstock, Wieland, and Kleist, the French influence was ousted and the national German influence came to the front.

Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777), whom Goethe calls "the father of national poetry," was the first representative of the new school of poets which began to turn to nature for inspiration and illustration rather than to mere dead forms. His poems on the Alps (1732) paint the majestic beauty of the Bernese highlands, and contrast the humble and peaceful but natural life of the shepherd with the luxurious and artificial life of the patrician, and the dweller in cities. Haller's writings made a great impression on the polite world.[81] Klopstock it was, however, whom Bodmer welcomed as the harbinger of a new era, as the German Milton. Klopstock had been trained in the Swiss school of thought, and regarded Breitinger's "Critical Art" as his aesthetic bible, whilst Bodmer's translation of "Paradise Lost" inspired his epic, "Messiah." The first three cantos appeared in the "Bremer Beitraege" in 1748, and created such a _furore_ that he was declared to be an immortal poet. Wieland's first poems were, in 1751, published in the "Swiss Critic," and met with a reception hardly less favourable if somewhat less enthusiastic. A strong friendship springing up between Bodmer and the young Klopstock, the former offered the poet a temporary home at his Tusculum (still standing) on the slopes of Zurichberg, that he might go on with his great epic. The fine view of the lake and mountains, the "highly cultivated city beneath," was greatly prized by Goethe who sounds its praises in "Wahrheit und Dichtung." However, Bodmer was disappointed with his young guest, for Klopstock loved the society of the young men and young women of his own age, and the progress made with the "Messiah" was well-nigh _nil_. However, it is to Klopstock's sojourn there, that we owe some of his fine odes, especially that on Zurich lake. But meanwhile Bodmer's friendship had cooled, and Klopstock went to the house (in Zurich itself) of Hartmann Rahn, who later on married the poet's sister. With this same Rahn was some years afterwards associated the philosopher Fichte, when he lived at Zurich (1788). Fichte in fact married Rahn's daughter, Johanna. In 1752, Wieland[82] repaid Bodmer for his previous disappointments, by staying with him for some two years.

Bodmer's zeal for the advance of literature was unremitting. Though he could not himself boast of much poetic genius, he was a prolific writer in both prose and verse. His great merit is his bringing to light again the fine old mediaeval poetry long since forgotten. The manuscript of the "Minnesaenger" and the famous "Nibelungen" he had dug up from the lumber-room of Hohenems Castle. He moved heaven and earth to obtain royal protection and patronage for German literature. But little did he gain at the court of the great Frederick. To Mueller, who presented the "Nibelungen," his majesty replied in characteristic fashion that the piece was not worth a single "charge of powder." Not less characteristic was Voltaire's reply when a request was made for the royal favour to Klopstock. "A new 'Messiah' is too much of a good thing, the old one has not been read yet."

Bodmer's influence on the young man of parts is noticeable. He gathered round him a large following of young Zuercher who had a taste for letters. Crowds of them would accompany him in his evening walks in the avenue Platzspitz, drinking in his words of wit and wisdom. Of the disciples thus gathered round "Father" Bodmer--for so he was affectionately styled--some attained no little eminence in later life. Amongst them we may mention Sulzer, who became art professor at Berlin, and stood in high favour with the king; and Solomon Gessner, the painter poet, whose word pictures are hardly less beautiful than the productions of his brush. His "Idylls," published in 1756, gave him a European reputation. The work was translated into all the literary languages, and in France and Italy was read with great eagerness, a first edition in French being sold out within a fortnight. Another important work is Hirzel's "Kleinjogg," or the "Socrates of the Fields." In this Hirzel, who was a physician and a philanthropist, brings to the fore the despised peasantry. "Kleinjogg" is not a work of fiction solely, but an account of Jakob Gujer who lived in a small Zurich village. Jakob was a man of great intelligence, indomitable resolution, and practical wisdom, who by his admirable management raised a wretched country home into a model farm. Goethe, who on a visit ate at his table, was delighted with the philosophic peasant, and called him "one of the most delicious creatures earth ever produced."

Heinrich Pestalozzi, the philanthropist, but better known for his efforts in the cause of education, was also a Zurich man. His principles of education are embodied in his novel of rural life, "Lienhard and Gertrude" (1781). His ideas are partly borrowed from Rousseau, but he failed to realize them in practice. The work at once won for Pestalozzi European fame. Ludwig Meyer von Knonau, a country magnate, was a poet and a painter, and wrote "Fables." Johannes Casper Lavater, Bodmer's favourite pupil, stirred to their depth the patriotic feelings of his countrymen by his famous "Schweizerlieder," which he composed for the Helvetic Society, in 1767. Indeed literary tastes seem to have been very prevalent amongst the Swiss at that time. More of Winkelmann's great work on AEsthetics were sold in Zurich and Basel then would in our own day probably be sold in such cities as Berlin and Vienna. And Solothurn, we find, produced thrice as many subscribers to Goethe's works as the great cities just mentioned.

After Bodmer Lavater became the chief attraction at Zurich, and strangers flocked thither in great numbers to see him. He was the founder of the study of physiognomy, and his works on it were very largely read at the time. Goethe himself joined with Lavater in his "Essays on Physiognomy." The philosopher's personality being singularly charming and fascinating, he was one of the most influential men of his time. He was the pastor of St. Peter's church, and was full of high religious enthusiasm. He desired to take Christianity from its lifeless condition and make it a living thing, and was strongly opposed to rationalism--Anglo-French deism--then slowly creeping in, notwithstanding severe repressive measures against it. Goethe was for many years the close friend of Lavater, and carried on with him a brilliant correspondence. The great poet, it may be stated, paid no fewer than three visits to Zurich, viz., in 1775, 1779, and 1797. He considered his intercourse with Lavater the "seal and crown" of the whole trip to Switzerland in 1779, and calls the divine the "crown of mankind," "the best among the best," and compares his friendship with "pastureland on heaven's border." Lavater's later years were marked by many eccentricities, and he fell into religious mysticism. But his sterling merits will not readily be forgotten by the Swiss.

A word respecting the Helvetic Society must close the present chapter. This society was founded in 1762, with the view of gathering together those who were stirred by political aspiration. It gradually united all those who desired the political regeneration of their fatherland, and the most prominent men of both East and West Switzerland, and of both confessions, joined the new society. The young patriots regularly met to discuss methods of improving the country and its institutions, and this in spite of the prohibitions of a narrow-minded executive, and the close control of the press. Stockar's scheme for amalgamating the free states into one republic mightily swelled the hearts of both Catholic and Protestant, and their efforts gave rise to many practical reforms. The most prominent result of these efforts was the rise of national education. Zurich with its higher schools occupied a leading position in the work of reform, and Pestalozzi established on his own estate a school for the poor. Unfortunately this admirable institution failed for want of a proper manager. Later on, after the Revolution, when the soil was better prepared for it, Pestalozzi's system took vigorous root.

FOOTNOTES:

[79] Hettner's "French Literature in the Eighteenth Century."

[80] Switzerland was the cradle of the German drama in the sixteenth century; even the Oberammergau Passion play can be traced to a Swiss origin (Baechtold).

[81] Haller, anxious to return to his native land, accepted an inferior post as director of salt-mines at Bex (Vaud), Bern, his native town, disregarding his great merits, declining to offer him either a professorship or a seat on the governing board.

[82] A daughter of Wieland was also married to the son of his great friend Gessner, the poet.

XXXI.

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION AND SWITZERLAND.

(1790-1798.)

None of our readers will need to be told the story of the French Revolution, nor shown that it was the natural outcome of previous misgovernment and oppression. Every one has read of the miseries of the lower classes--intolerable beyond description; of the marvellous inability of the nobles and clergy to see that amidst all their selfishness and pleasures they were living on the very edge of a frightful volcano; of the _tiers-etat_ and its emancipatory movement, which, outgrowing its primary intention, brought about a series of stupendous changes; of Napoleon, how he stopped this disorder and how he made all Europe into one vast theatre of war. All this, in so far as it is the history of France, can only be alluded to here, but, inasmuch as Switzerland was dragged into the whirlpool of changes, we must dwell upon some of the effects of the great Revolution. Not less clearly than in France itself did the cry of "_Liberte, and egalite!_" resound through the Swiss lands, filling the hearts of the unfree and the oppressed with high hopes. Yet it was only after terrible sufferings and endless vicissitudes that the liberal principles of the Revolution came to the front, and admitted of that practical realization which was to lead up to a nobler and happier life for men.

(_From a photograph of the original._)]

Of the many popular risings in Switzerland due to the influence of France, we may briefly touch on those which precede the Bern catastrophe in 1798. In September, 1791, Lower Valais rose against the _landvoegte_ of Upper Valais, but the intervention of Bern checked the revolt. In the April of the following year, Pruntrut (in the Bernese Jura) renounced its allegiance to the prince-bishops of Basel, and set up as an independent territory, under the style of the "Rauracian Republic," and three months later the widely-extended bishopric itself was amalgamated with France as the "Department Mont Terrible." It was on August 10th of this same year (1792) that the Swiss Guards defending the Tuileries against the Paris mob were massacred. Every one knows the story. "We are Swiss, and the Swiss never surrender their arms but with their lives," were the proud words of Sergeant Blaser to the crowds furious against the protectors of royalty, and claiming that their arms should be put down. When Louis was in safety, the Swiss Guards were withdrawn. But on leaving the palace they were suddenly attacked by thousands of the mob. Resistance was plainly useless, yet the Swiss would not fly, and were ruthlessly slaughtered. Of the 760 men and twenty-two officers, but few escaped that terrible onslaught. The beautiful and far-famed Thorwaldsen monument--the "Lion of Lucerne"--with its inscription, "Helvetiorum fidei ac virtuti," still keeps up the memory of the heroic courage of the Swiss Guards.[83] The outrage aroused intense indignation at home, but could not be avenged. The subjects of the prince-abbot Beda, of St. Gall, secured under his mild rule the abolition of serfdom. His successor, Forster, however, refusing the measure his sanction, was driven from his see--till he returned under Austrian auspices--and a large rural district of St. Gall gained autonomy and freedom from the rule of the abbey in 1797. Geneva saw almost every possible change. At one time she was rescued by Bern at Zurich, but was, in 1798, absorbed by France. The singularly harsh bearing of Zurich towards the country districts brought about the widespread insurrection of Staefa, in 1795; an insurrection vigorously suppressed however. The Italian lordships, severely treated by Graubuenden, desired to be included in the Cis-alpine republic Bonaparte was forming, and the general advised that free state that it should be admitted into their pale as a fourth member of equal rank. Finding that his advice was not taken, he suddenly proclaimed the memorable maxim, "that no people can be subject to another people without a violation of the laws of nature," and joined Valtellina, Bormio, and Chiavenna to Lombardy. This arrangement he had ratified by the treaty of Campo Formio, in 1797, which destroyed the Venetian republic, handing it over, indeed, to Austria, France taking the Netherlands and Milan as her share of the plunder.

Few things served to draw the attention of France to Swiss lands more than the Helvetic Club at Paris. This famous club was founded in 1790, by malcontents, chiefly from Vaud, Geneva, and Freiburg. They were bent on the liberation of Switzerland from aristocratic domination, and desirous of assimilating the form of government with that of France. This suited the French Directory exactly, their aim being to girdle France with a strong belt of vassal states. Among these Switzerland was to serve as a bulwark, or at any rate as a battle-ground, against Austria; and France was not without hope of filling her _coffres-forts_ with Swiss treasure, now grown, after long years of peace, to great dimensions. Amongst the band of patriots two men stand out as leaders. One was Cesar de La Harpe, a noble-minded and enthusiastic Vaudois, who, however, was more concerned for his own canton than for Switzerland at large. The other was Peter Ochs, of Basel, a shrewd and able man, but ambitious, and a creature of France. La Harpe had once been taunted by a Bernese noble, who reminded him that Vaud was subject to Bern, and this he never forgot. Even at the Court of Catherine II. of Russia, to which he had been called as tutor to the imperial grandchildren, he never forgot his republican principles. In 1797, returning from Russia, and being forbidden to enter Vaud, he joined the Helvetic Club at Paris, and thence launched forth his pamphlets against Bern. And in the Directory things were making against that hapless canton, Reubel, a declared enemy, gaining a seat. Napoleon too was no lover of Bern. On his way to the Congress of Rastatt, in 1797, he passed through Switzerland, and, while accepting the enthusiastic welcome offered by Basel and Vaud, he declined altogether to respond to that of Bern and Solothurn. Peter Ochs enjoyed Napoleon's full confidence, and was by him summoned to Paris, and charged with the drafting of a new constitution for Switzerland, on the lines of the Directory. La Harpe and Ochs thus worked towards the same end, though the motives of the two men differed greatly.

Vaud hailed with delight the French Revolution, and celebrated the fall of Bastille in the most ostentatious manner; Bern, on the other hand, looked with dismay on the march of events, and, in Jan. 1798, sent Colonel Weiss with troops into the province. France replied by immediately sending men to occupy the southern shore of Lake Geneva. This was done at the request of the Helvetic Club, which gave as a pretext an old treaty of 1564, by which France guaranteed her support to Vaud. In vain did Weiss issue manifestoes; Bern was irresolute, and Vaud, feeling herself safe under the aegis of France, proclaimed the establishment of the "Lemanic Republic," with the seat of government at Lausanne (Jan. 24, 1798). A simple accident which resulted in the death of a couple of French soldiers was by their general magnified into an _attentat_ of the "Bernese tyrants" against a "great nation." The French troops marched on Weiss, ousted him without the necessity of striking a blow, and then charged Vaud with a sum of L28,000 for services rendered. Such proceedings struck terror into the hearts of the Swiss, and many of the cantons--Basel, Schaffhausen, Lucerne, &c.--set about reforming their governments. With matters at this pass the Diet ordered that the national federal oath should be sworn to, a proceeding which had been neglected for three hundred years. But this pretence of unity was a mere sham, as indeed were all these hasty attempts at reform. They failed to avert the coming storm, as the rulers failed to read aright the signs of the times. The Tagsatzung distracted and helpless dissolved on Feb. 1st.

In the operations which followed, the chief command of the French forces in Switzerland was transferred from Mengaud to Brune, a Jacobite of the school of Danton. Brune directed his main attack on Bern, which, torn by dissensions, was wavering between peace and war. With Machiavellian astuteness Brune enticed the city into a truce. This truce, which was to last till the 1st of March, was most injurious to the interests of Bern, as it allowed time both for Brune to increase his own forces, and for Schauenburg to join him with a body of troops from Alsace. The Bernese were well-nigh paralyzed, and not unnaturally suspected treason amongst their own adherents. Unluckily, too, for her, Bern was far from popular amongst her sister cantons, and was well-nigh left to her own resources. Her chief allies were Solothurn and Freiburg, but these surrendered to Schauenburg and Brune at the first shock, on March 2nd. The French troops next marched to Bern, destroying on the way the national monument at Morat. But Von Grafenried secured a decided victory against Brune at Neueneck. On the other hand, Ludwig von Erlach, who attempted a stand against Schauenburg at Fraubrunnen, quite failed to hold his own, and was driven back on Grauholz, a few miles from Bern. A life-and-death struggle followed, even women and children seizing whatever weapons they could and fighting desperately, many of them even unto death. For three hours the combat lasted, and the Bernese fighting with their old bravery, maintained their honour as soldiers. Old Schultheiss von Steiger, "trembling in body, but stout in heart," cheered on his men regardless of the hail of bullets falling, but harmlessly, around him. Four times did the Swiss stand against the terrible onslaught of the French, but were at length compelled to yield to a force so superior in numbers and tactics to their own. And even whilst the clash of arms was still sounding the news came that Bern had surrendered. Erlach and Steiger fled to the Oberland, intending there to resume the combat; but the troops, mad with suspicion that the capitulation was the result of treason, murdered the former, Steiger narrowly escaping a similar fate. On the 5th of March, 1798, the French entered Bern in triumph, Brune, however, cautiously keeping up strict discipline. On the 22nd of the previous month at Lausaune, Brune had caused it to be proclaimed that the French came as friends and bearers of freedom, and would respect the property of the Swiss citizens. Notwithstanding this he emptied the treasuries and magazines of Bern, and on the 10th and 11th of March, sent off eleven four-horse waggons full of booty, nineteen banners, and the three bears--which they nicknamed respectively Erlach, Steiger, and Weiss--the French carried off in triumph.

Thus fell Bern, the stronghold of the aristocracy, and with its fall the doom of Switzerland was sealed, though more work remained to be done before it would be complete. The Directory now abolished the old Confederation, and proclaimed in its stead the "one and undivided Helvetic Republic," forcing on it a new constitution elaborated from the draft by Peter Ochs. Brune himself had had a scheme for a triple division of the territory, but a preference was given to a united republic, as more easily manageable from Paris. The thirteen old cantons, together with the various subject lands and connections were formed into twenty-two divisions. After the failure of the _laender_ the number was reduced to nineteen, the three Forest Cantons with Zug being thrown into one, as a punishment. Some of the rearrangements and partitions were very curious. A few may be cited. Oberland Canton was lopped off from Bern, and Baden from Aargau proper. Saentis included Appenzell and the northern portion of St. Gall, and Linth comprised the rest of St. Gall and Glarus; Tessin was split into Bellinzona and Lugano; Vaud, Valais, and Buenden were added intact. Geneva and Neuchatel were left outside. In this manner the united Helvetic commonwealth was formed, the central government being fixed at Aarau, Lucerne, and Bern in succession. The passing of laws was vested in a senate and great council. There was a Directory of five members to whom were added four ministers of state--for war, justice, finance, and art and science. A supreme court of justice was made up of nineteen representatives, one from each canton. These were sweeping changes, and the unadvised manner in which they were forced on the people prevented their meeting with general approval. And then France gained the hearty dislike of the Swiss generally by her treatment of the country. Switzerland was regarded as a conquered and subject land, and was ruthlessly despoiled by the French. A contribution of sixteen million francs was imposed on the Swiss aristocracy--besides the eight million francs carried off from Bern at her fall.[84]

Ten cantons, notably Bern, Zurich, Lucerne, and Vaud, _i.e._, the city cantons, feeling that resistance was impossible, and reform was necessary, acquiesced in the new arrangement; but the _laender_, except Obwalden, stirred up by the priests and local patriots, and fearing that religion and liberty would die together, offered a most uncompromising resistance. They preferred, they said, "to be burnt beneath their blazing roofs, rather than submit to the dictates of the foreigner." Very noble was the defence made by the Forest folk, but we can only touch briefly upon it. After a brave resistance Glarus was defeated at Rapperswyl, on the 30th of April, 1798, and then Schauenburg proceeded with his whole strength against Schwyz. In its defence a band of some four thousand stout-hearted men was collected under the command of Reding, a young and handsome officer, who had just returned from Spanish service. Reding was an enthusiastic patriot of the old stamp, deeply imbued with conservative principles. Men rallied to his standard eagerly, and swore a solemn oath, "not to flee, but conquer." Reding and his little army gained three brilliant victories, at Schindellegi, Arth, and Morgarten, respectively, showing themselves worthy descendants of the old heroes of 1315. However, the French effected an entrance by way of Mount Etzel, through the failure of the priest Herzog to hold his own against them, and poured through the gap in overwhelming numbers. For the moment they were thrust back at Rothenthurm, but Schwyz was too exhausted to continue the unequal struggle, and Reding was forced to enter into negotiations, though negotiations of an honourable character, with Schauenburg.

Then followed the gloomy 9th of September, written down as "doomsday" in the annals of Midwalden,[85] a day that well-nigh blotted that semi-canton out of existence. Having set up a wild opposition to the "Helvetic," this district drew down upon itself the wrath of France. Animated by the spirit of Winkelried, one and all--its worthy sons, its women and children even--the little band--they were but two thousand as against sixteen thousand--for some days kept up the unequal struggle. The little bay of Alpnach (Alpnacher See) and the Wood of Kerns (Kernserwald) were red with the blood of the enemy. But this state of things could not last long. Suddenly the French broke through, and poured in from all sides. Terrible conflicts took place at Rotzloch and Drachenried, and a rush was made on Stanz, the chief place of the district. By noon this town was really taken, but notwithstanding this the combat continued in furious fashion till evening. This was the 9th of September, 1798, a day which Schauenburg called the hottest of his life. "Like furies," the report says, "the black legion of the French galley-slaves slew and raged the district through." When night set in Stanz looked a devastated, smoking city of blood and death. Europe looked with amazement, yet with admiration and sympathy, on this heroic spot of earth. Both England and Germany sent provisions and money, and even Schauenburg was moved with compassion towards the poor Midwaldeners, and had food distributed to them. It may perhaps here be noted that Stanz shortly figures again in Swiss history, but this time in a far more peaceful and humane manner. It was here that Pestalozzi resumed his noble work of education. To heal the wounds of his noble country as far as was in his power the minister Stapfer founded an educational establishment for the orphan children of the district. And here it was that Pestalozzi ruled, not so much as a mere pedagogue, but as a veritable father, the little unfortunates committed to his care.

FOOTNOTES:

[83] This grand work of art is carved out of and on the face of an immense rock, after a model by Thorwaldsen--a wounded lion with a broken spear, representing hapless but noble courage. The work was executed in 1821.

[84] The exact sum paid by Bern is not known, but probably it reached seven or eight million francs. The Bernese losses, up to 1813, were estimated at seventeen million francs. One hundred and sixty cannon, and sixty thousand muskets were also captured. Bern had kept three bears (in the Baerangraben of the town) ever since the battle of Novara, in 1513. Strangely enough the bears carried off in that battle were French trophies.

[85] The mountain range, running from Titlis north-west and then north-east to Stanzer Horn, with the Kernwald at its centre, separates Unterwalden into Obwalden (above the wood) and Midwalden (below the wood).

XXX.

THE "ONE AND UNDIVIDED HELVETIC REPUBLIC."

(1798-1803.)

The day of the "one and undivided Helvetic Republic" was a period of "storm and stress," short-lived, full of creative ideas and vast schemes, with much struggling for what was most noble in the principles of the Revolution. Yet Helvetia was torn by inner dissensions, and its energies paralysed by civil and foreign war, by its position of dependence, and by financial difficulties. The Helvetic scheme of pounding the various members of the Confederation into one state wiping out the cantons--a scheme often planned since then, but to this day unrealized, and as yet unrealizable--by its inevitable levelling tendencies, roused intense disgust and hatred amongst the more conservative of the Swiss. In truth, it went too fast, and too far in the direction of centralization. The _laender_ were robbed of their _landsgemeinde_, the city cantons of their councils, and the independent states of their sovereignty. Everything seemed to be turned topsy-turvy. Cantons became mere administrative districts.[86] The barriers between them, and likewise between the various classes of society, were broken down. Subject lands were recognized as equal in status to the rest, and the inhabitants given full rights of citizenship. Amongst the many beneficent measures brought forward the principal may be mentioned. All restrictions on trade and industry were removed, tithes, bondservice, and land taxes could be redeemed at a small cost; freedom in religious matters, freedom of the press, and the right to petition were guaranteed, and torture was suppressed. That child of the Revolution, "the Helvetic," indeed, advocated many reforms and gave birth to many new ideas which required time and thought and peace to bring to maturity and usefulness. But the time was not yet ripe, and peace was lacking, and many things were suggested rather than put into practice. Yet we look back with interest on many of the ideas of the time, for they paved the way for and led up to much of our modern progress.

Excellent men, men of parts, wise and moderate, watched over the early days of the young republic; amongst them Usteri, Escher (of Zurich), Secretan and Carrard (Vaud), and Mayer (Bern). But gradually French partisans, nominated from Paris, were returned to the Swiss Directory, and Ochs and La Harpe were promoted to the leadership of Helvetic affairs. Soon a "reign of terror"--of a milder form, perhaps, but none the less a rule of terrorism--was set up, with the view of dragooning the country into submission to the "_grande nation_." A levy was enforced in order to make up a total of eighteen thousand men, a number the Swiss were loth to produce for the foreigner. They objected to this forced service, and took up arms abroad, whilst men like Lavater and Reding, who defied both French tyranny and "Helvetic" despotism, were transported, or thrust into the filthy dungeons of the fortress of Aarburg. On the 19th of August, 1798, was concluded the fatal Franco-Helvetic Alliance--offensive and defensive--despite the supplications and warnings of the more far-seeing patriots, such as Escher (von der Linth) for instance. Swiss neutrality being thus abandoned, the door was opened to the Austro-Russian invasion, planned by the second European coalition with the view of ousting France from Swiss territory. Hating the new _regime_ exasperated at French supremacy and French extortion, and desirous that the _status quo ante_ of 1798 should be re-established, the reactionists hailed with delight the coming of the Austrians, quite as much as the "Patriots" had before welcomed the interference of France. A legion of Swiss _emigres_ abroad collected by Roverea, at Vaudois, who had sided with Bern in the previous struggle, joined the Austrian army. The foreign occupation which took place and turned Switzerland into one military camp cannot be followed in all its details here. Yet one or two points must be noted, above all, those remarkable Alpine marches carried out, though against his own will, by Suwarow. These marches are quite unique in military history.