Theater von Schiller Erster Theil 1810 Original-Scan (German Edition)
It is noteworthy that this is another moment where Heron makes a copying mistake and begins to copy Schiller but must cross out the word "Nature" to write his translation as "Mankind. Schiller's "forsaken by Nature" places the forsaken one in the position of the woman representing friendship, as the leafless tree would symbolize Nature and the leaflessness would symbolize the forsaking despite the embrace of friendship. Schiller's translation, therefore, acknowledges a broken relationship that occurs despite close physical proximity and despite the embrace of friendship.
As "Nature" can refer equally to the natural world as to the "nature" of human nature, including the realm of gender, Schiller's translation goes further. Being "forsaken by nature" indicates that nature is doing the forsaking and thus the relationship between nature of any kind and the individual is an active one.
UBC Theses and Dissertations
This imagery extends the concept Heron. Schiller's imagery, therefore, emphasizes the lack of Stimmung between the woman Friendship and Nature despite a genuine embrace. This could signify humankind's proclivity to act against friendship rather than accepting it. It could also signify a woman's nature persisting in a lack of Stimmung despite her active efforts to accept and embrace it.
Or, it could signify that the Weiblichkeit inherently part of all successful friendship persists despite man's refusal to accept his effeminacy and thus the leafless tree is the "sensation of Man" Schiller references later. In comparison, Heron's translation ignores the complexity of genderedness. Heron's "forsaken by Mankind" puts the forsaken one in the position of the leafless tree and the woman representing friendship is in the act of consoling the tree by embracing it.
The line "forsaken by Mankind, this renders Friendship of all human feelings the most amiable and delightfull" places Friendship, which is represented by a woman, in opposition to Mankind. While "mankind" can refer to both genders, this does not appear to be thoroughly implied in Heron's translation. Because friendship is limited by the clause "of all human feelings" and ascribed traditionally feminine qualities of being "amiable and delightfull," the femininity of Friendship as represented by a woman is all encompassing.
Also, that this womanly feeling is "rendered" from the act of "being forsaken by Mankind," there is an allusion to the Biblical creation of Eve from Adam's rib This allusion, however, places womanly feelings as subordinate to man as well as inferring that friendship is created only from the process of others first forsaking an Heron. This is problematic from both the gender and relational perspectives. It is an issue from a gender perspective because it places the genders in opposition to each other rather than harmonizing with each other.
Also, the subordination of feelings as womanly and inferior relates to the concept of gender as Bestimmung. As Richter describes, "Bestimmung leaves subjects powerless in the face of the fate or law that has destined them one way or another" The state of Bestimmung in Heron's translation is connected to the problematic relational perspective. If one is powerless to destiny then there is no motivation for self-improvement or even self-awareness.
The steadfastness of friendship has no place in a world-view shaped by unchangeable destiny. Rather, it would remain a transitory "amiable and delightful" feeling as described. In contrast, Schiller emphasizes friendship as being "rendered" or created by "sensation of Man" indicating that the "sensation" is in opposition to steadfast friendship rather than woman versus man.
Thus whereas Heron translates the section as an oppositional dyad of woman versus man, Schiller translates the section as an oppositional dyad of sensationalism versus steadfastness. As can be seen by this example, therefore, Schiller's Weiblichkeit is the stronger and more universal concept. Heron's difficulty with Weiblichkeit changed from their interaction. This change is made apparent in his fifth letter u. Clearly, the act of writing in German affects his phrasing.
Schiller's steadfast Weiblichkeit has won over his previous prejudices. The Weiblichkeit expressed in Schiller's translation regarding the representative of friendship is compared to a guardian angel. Heron expresses this thought much more clearly at the end of the letter when he lapses into English: Both of these sections clearly express Heron's distress at separating from Schiller.
The difference in style and in succinctness is clearly connected to language familiarity. And yet, as a reader, it is difficult to discern which of these passages is the more powerful for Schiller's reception. Both sections express Heron's continued reliance on Schiller's goodness to accompany his thoughts. The thought of other women encountered in his life is also present in both passages. The expression of thier relationship, however, is quite differently expressed in the different languages.
In the English, Schiller is "such an acquaintance" and an "ameable" "friend. On the other hand, it is equally plausible that social conventions and self-regulatory practice are more in effect when using his native language and that the German language section referring to Schiller as his "Angel Protector" and his travelling companion or leader. The differences due to language proficiency affect the letters but do not detract from the aestheticness of the correspondence.
This indicates that not all literary texts are literary works of art. As the textual features of the correspondence have been demonstrated sufficient to classify them as a literary work, the next question is if there are sufficient aesthetic features to classify the collection as art. The sense of aestheticism generally attributed to Weimar Classicism is found within the collection of letters in its sensibility and in the artistic expression within the parts and the collection as a whole.
Humor As in any well-written narrative, the collection of correspondence contains recurring themes. One of these is the humor of humility when expressing oneself in a second language. In his second letter, dated March 16, , Heron ends with a short section in English in which he apologizes, "I must really beg your pardon that I plague you to read my limping german.
The concept or draft letter we have of Charlotte Schiller to Henry Heron responds directly to this comment, stating, "truly you are very good to encourage me to writ yet one letter in your language that I write so bad but if you have not told me the truth, I hope you will be punished enough to be obliged to read in second time my limping english. You have served you not justly of this expression then you write the german very well," The repeated drafts of this single sentence reveal much about Schiller's personality and the meaning the relationship had for her.
First, the repeated practice to get Stein Haugom Olsen. That she is building upon a comment written to her by Heron demonstrates attention to his words as well as an established pattern of repartee between them. Her ability to achieve this by adding to rather than losing the humor established in the previous letter is the mark of an incredible and talented mind and indicates she knew her efforts would not only be noted, but that the wit and kind regard would be duly appreciated.
We know that Heron received the content of this reply, as this inside joke continues in in his next letter to Schiller, in which he pauses briefly in his German to write it in English: He implies either that her English is far from proper English as he is from Hercules, or he is praising her English as very good and boasting that he is equally as close to Hercules. It is possible, considering Heron's military experience, that this may be an extension of a joke shared during a previous conversation. The growing exchange of and increase in humor demonstrate an increasing depth of familiarity and trust.
Moreover, this type of humor seems to indicate a sense of equality of minds.
His acknowledgment of her joke with the phrase "there's a thumper for you" conveys and evokes a sense of knee-slapping laughter and congenial sense of humor. The use of humor demonstrates the Stimmung between Schiller and Heron to the reader of the collection; it communicates the depth of the shared worldview, personality, interest and wit between them that is revelatory in a male-female correspondence from the time.
It is this Stimmung that Richter argues was at the true center of Weimar Classicism. The difference between Bestimmung and Stimmung, as explained by Humboldt, "liegt allein in der Art, wie beide gegenseitig gestimmt sind" However, whereas Richter claims "We should think of Weimar Classicism Social Construction Initially formulaic but friendly, the tone and style or arrangement of details throughout the letters change and build upon previous correspondence and events to express nuanced changes in their relationship with one another.
Even with the missing Richter, "Heteroclassicism", The continuation of the humor conveyed through the use of "limping" demonstrates the purpose of the letter in communicating camaraderie and the relationship between sender and receiver, as well as the circumstances of trans-lingual communication in which the letter was written, all of which signify the "mediated form of expression" as defined by Grasso The purpose of the letters is the literal building of an initiated relationship - literal in the sense that the relationship is built upon the mediated exchanges expressed in the letters, and literal in the sense of the relationship being built largely on their sharing of literary works such as discussing Alexander Pope's Essay on Man and Scottish author James Thomson's Seasons Grasso's assertion that the letter writers make choices of language usage, detail arrangement, and the subjects about which they write in ways similar to these choices in the production of other types of literary works is seen as these choices shift with the changing relationship between the letter writers.
An example of this shift in socially constructed arrangement is identifiable through a comparison of the openings of Heron's first and fifth letters to Schiller. In his first letter, Heron writes to Schiller March 2, Whereas the first letter maintains social formalities of greetings and inquiring of the recipient's health or safe return, the latter chooses to jump immediately to the conveying of personal emotions to the recipient.
The language in the first letter is more mundane and predictable; the language of the latter letter demonstrates a higher level of imagination and creativity in the writing that correlates with the increased intimacy between sender and receiver. As this comparison demonstrates, the stylistic and content differences in letters communicate to the reader a great deal about the relationship between the sender and receiver even when only one side of the correspondence is present. The gaps are filled by the reader's imagination and background knowledge of the persons, time, and place s involved.
Even uninformed readers, however, can note the difference. The social constructions of formal greetings are recognizable, as is the connection between a lack of such formality as corresponding to an increase in relationship between sender and receiver. It seems almost instinct to ascribe a higher aesthetic value to the introduction of the later letter over that of the first, so it seems prudent to examine the causation of this ideation and determine if it is an objective or an emotive response. This indicates that while there is an inclination to ascribe higher aesthetic value to the less formulaic letter, the social formula expressed in the first letter does not necessarily render it as less aesthetic.
Rather, the expression of this social practice can be done across a scale of aestheticism and does not, in and of itself, necessarily indicate a loss of aestheticism. By this definition, many letters more accurately fit the definition of literature than other literary forms. Aesthetic Letters are literary texts in the sense of story as well as from the perspective of literary anthropology.
The elements of prose literature that Parker designates as aesthetic are also found in letters: Parker writes that prose literature "tends to be transparent, sacrificing itself in order that nothing may stand between what it reveals to thought and the imagination" and is therefore "incompletely beautiful. The full meaning and value of the aesthetic are not to Olsen, The Principles of Aesthetics. Silver, Burdett and Co. Yet prose literature remains art, if incomplete art-a free, personal expression of life, for the sake of contemplation" Through their correspondence, Schiller and Heron convey enough characteristics to gain a sense of them to fulfill the qualifications of this element.
Their individual voice and handwriting, their connection to various other persons in and around Rudolstadt, their sense of humor and literary interests - these comprise two clearly developed and distinct characters within the collection. Incident, states Parker, means action or event that express character or that express their fate, future, or foreshadowing of a life event This element of "fate" corresponds to the idea of a text's conclusion. The correspondence contains both. The action of their collaboration on translating "The Rose" and the recorded action of Schiller drafting a clever addition to the "limping" joke are two examples of action that expresses character.
In addition, expressions of fate are seen in both the letter from Heron giving Schiller his forwarding address and his letter to Knebel, as well as the fact that the letter to Knebel is a copy and the correspondence collection therefore includes Charlotte Schiller's later request from Knebel to lend her the original and her action of having copied and returned it to Knebel. These actions relate to the fate of their relationship and, as Parker insists necessary, it is a fate "independent of any special philosophical view of the world" In addition, the collection has a clear beginning, middle, and end of the story and a unity of story, indicating that the construction of events formed by the letters as written create a story.
Suspense and Ibid, The milieu "is not anything that can be seen or heard or touched; it does not manifest itself to perception, but has to be constructed by a process of inference and synthesis In this collection of correspondence, the reader finds the constructed synthesis of the Weimar milieu and the philosophy of Weiblichkeit according to Humboldt. Typical social boundaries are more fluid through the medium of Weimar society. That there even is this correspondence evidences the Weiblichkeit and egaltarianism of Weimar.
The elements of aesthetic prose are all present in a manner that engages the unintended reader, making the collection an aesthetic literary text in its own right. Letters as aesthetic literary texts challenge theoretical concepts of authorship. The authorship of this newly defined aesthetic literary text is complex. Because Schiller and Heron are the writers of the letters, they are the collaborative authors. However, authorial credit for the collection is shared with others as well.
Schiller initiated the collection and was the first to edit what fragments of her own correspondence remained and expresses authorship through her curation. The second editor, or curatorial author, is her daughter, Emilie.
As will be demonstrated in the discussion of Wallberg below, curation of letters in epistolary novels also add this second layer of authorship framework. Schiller's editorial and authorial curation of her correspondence, and especially holding on to the scrap paper with her notes for response, indicate that this correspondence, and the relationship it was part of, were meaningful to her. Meaningful Relationship Perhaps above all else, the collection of correspondence is the testament to a deep and meaningful relationship.
Asking how many stockings she is daily knitting in the same sentence as asking about her health and how many pages of Marcus Aurelius she has read seems a bit unusual; however, this string of thoughts also demonstrates a certain awkwardness along with familiarity. Heron knows these three activities have meaning to Schiller and that they are acceptable questions within the 'safe' and expected norms for a friendly letter and social conventions. The letters express the relationship as it blossoms.
In addition to the declaration "o meine beste Freundin," Heron demonstrates that their relationship is an intimate friendship through his other words as well by pitying the others outside their shared correspondence and his radiating joy and gratitude to be "ein Daseyn [sic]" in her thoughts. In Heron's second letter, dated March 16, from Jena, he writes: Sehen Sie dies wie wie keinen Compliment an, denn es ist wirklich was ich glaube - " This praise of Schiller's English became part of the inside joke between them.
It also reveals Heron's previously mentioned prejudice against women as intellectual beings. His statement that he "cannot forgive" Schiller for writing to him in English is an expression of wounded pride only partially covered in jest. However, Heron's appraisal of her English abilities was not a superficial compliment; as discussed above, their correspondence included a collaborative translation project of "The Rose" and "Of Friendship" into English: The amount and type of literature discussed and copied out between the two is indicative of Schiller's extensive reading.
Moreover, the lectures mentioned demonstrate that Schiller dedicated significant time to enjoying studious productivity. Heron's later comment, then, that Schiller should "not see this as a compliment, because it is really what I think" is a more straightforward comment. Heron's statement regarding Schiller's gender and his conviction that women can be equal to men "if they only make the effort" indicates that he is negotiating the concept of Weiblichkeit encountered in Weimar society and through his interactions with Schiller. Heron and Schiller felt more than respect for each other's intellectual abilities, however.
That the relationship between them was meaningful was no secret to their friends and acquaintances. Perhaps the best example of this is an anecdote of an event that happened about a year after Heron's departure: Heron's reference to Schiller as his Schutzengel can be compared to this reference of Schiller calling Heron her Herzensvogel. These endearments signify deep friendship and an intimate understanding of each other's inner self. That, later in life, the widowed Charlotte Schiller requests the loan of Heron's last letter from Knebel is further testament to the connection she shared and lost.
The manuscript is undated; however, Gaby Pailer places the manuscript as likely from Charlotte Schiller's Weimar years Wallberg demonstrates multiple uses of the information about the Americas, England and Scotland Schiller learned from Heron. The setting is interesting given the likely overlap in time with Friedrich Schiller writing his play Wilhelm Tell and the beginning of the reign of Napoleon. Additionally, there are two women in the novel whose names begin with the letter "C," as does the novel's author.
Frau Wallberg, whose name is Elise, and the later villain's accomplice Isabella do not have "C" names, but their names are both diminuatives of the name Elizabeth. Clara and her small children have left the American Colonies due to the ongoing War of Independence. The context of the war is significant given the intertextual timeline of production with Friedrich Schiller's Wilhelm Tell. The novel opens with Clara and her children arriving in Plymouth, England to stay with her German in-laws for safety during the war. Clara's husband, Alexander Wallberg, is fighting in the war, but the novel does not specify on what side he is fighting until the end when Alexander returns with the fanfare of his regiment.
His homecoming is identified before he is visible Schiller, Literarische Schriften. Dieser March war der lezte [sic] den ich in Amerika vernahm! Wilhelm Tell emphasizes the notion of nation, or Vaterland, as a common orientation that bridges the class divide. Charlotte Schiller's Wallberg, however, emphasizes the notion of family as a common orientation that bridges the differences of national origin. The strongest example of national origin overcome by family bond is the character of the Scottish highlander "Bergschotte" Macdonald. Upon Clara's repeated remarking on a portrait she believes to be Frau Wallbert, Frau Wallberg reveals to Clara the back-story of Alexander's sister, Cecilia, who ran off to the Americas with the leader of a religious sect.
One evening, the Wallberg's friend Macdonald, tells the family about the woman named Therese, with whom he fell in love during his time in America He shows the Wallbergs a letter and Frau Wallberg instantly recognizes Cecilia's handwriting During Frau Wallberg's emotional reaction, Macdonald identifies the small portrait of Cecilia as his Therese Macdonald is accepted as family and participates in efforts to reunite the Wallbergs. He frequently retells his story to Clara and compares his loss to her life, despite the fact that they believe Alexander to be living amongst them at the time.
National origin is lost in shared emotions and shared familial care. The choice of pseudonym in regards to Cecilia is interesting because a concept draft of this story centers on a Therese as the main character with Latin America and Catholicism as the main context and focus. Schiller's choice to abandon this more accessible source of knowledge and focus instead on a connection to her past relationship with Heron may be connected to the Schiller family's copperplate of The Death of General Warren at the Battle of Bunker's Hill, 17 June, , that Friedrich Schiller received as a present in The actions of Robert in Der Verbrecher lead to Christian Wolf's illegal actions, dishonor and social exclusion.
Simiarly, Wallberg's Robert is the antagonist who destroys the family bond between Clara and everyone else. In Wallberg, Alexander returns to his family in England changed by the war and Clara takes on the role of the dutiful wife within her in-laws' household. After time passes, the real Alexander comes home. During the chaos of his arrival, the false Alexander, whose real name is Robert, goes inside and commits suicide, leaving out a pile of documents as explanation.
These documents comprise the second part of the novel. Thus, in a manner parallel to Der Verbrecher, the reader is Schiller. Museum of Fine Arts Boston. It is through her husband's silence, however, that cause the ultimate demise of Clara. In reaction to the homecoming of her true husband, Clara faints and is quite ill. Alexander explains that he had been wounded and presumed dead, but was rescued by his sister Cecilia.
Cecilia nursed her brother back to health and returned with him to England in hopes of reconciling with her parents and a future with Macdonald. The family is reunited and complete as both Alexander and Cecilia are home. The family leaves Clara to rest and focus on their joy of being together again. Alexander does not speak directly with his wife about her experience or her feelings. The second part of the novel is the voice of Robert through the reproduction of Robert's curated documents.
Thus the concepts of text as containing and conveying individual voice as well as curation and the editing of the order of information as an element of voice are both expressed in the novel. These reveal his story as half-orphaned bastard of a Scottish nobleman and a former comrade of Alexander. A letter to Clara professing his love for her, his self-judgment and decision to perform a self-execution by suicide is also included. Clara's inner emotional state and self-judgment is thus connected to Robert's not only in sentiment, in Stimmung, but in the actual text.
The physical connection between the characters' shared self-judgment expressed through the placement of Clara's fate as an addendum to this last line of Robert's letter strengthens the expression of their feelings for one another and of belonging but not belonging; in other words, the mannerisms of Briefkultur are used in the text to represent the relationship between Clara and Robert in the physical experience of the reader by means of the position of these statements.
Cecilia initially left her family out of similar motives but through her Bildung of experiential self-discovery and personal growth sharing Ossian with Macdonald, Cecilia is able to return to the family having embraced the full sense of her Weiblichkeit. Clara, on the other hand, embodies weiblich expectations of society without the strength or self-awareness of true Weiblichkeit. Therefore, Clara's voice is left in the weiblich nature of speech; she remains a receiver of letters and of relatinal identities placed upon her by others. Without true Weiblichkeit, Clara is analogous to the leafless tree "forsaken by Nature" as she cannot be saved from dishonour or social exclusion, from being forsaken by mankind, unless she can be a friend to herself.
Clara's inability to form an identity as an independent intellectual being originates in her lack of understanding Weiblichkeit. Clara withers and dies from the shame and dishonor of her Stimmung with Ibid, The use of epistolary devices serves the novel Wallberg well and Charlotte Schiller skillfully includes multiple styles of letters throughout the text, which increases the sense of authenticity and realism.
It is precisely the skill with which Charlotte Schiller executes these letters that clarifies the intentional lack of any writing by Clara, even though the protagonists of most epistolary novels are the primary letter writer. Clara does not write a letter; rather, Clara is the primary receiver of letters in this novel. By inverting the relationship between protagonist and letters, Schiller makes a bold statement about their importance. This conscious choice by the author leaves the reader with no intimate internal stream of self-consciousness that is typical of a letter in an epistolary novel.
Clara's authorship of her story is oral rather than as a writer, curator, or editor. It occurs as a response to a request and she must produce her story in an immediate moment as compared to a thoughtful process of writing and editing or curation.
Full text of "German Classics Lessing,Goethe,Schiller"
She shapes her story in social response to her inlaws. Given Clara's education, this seems signfificant. She shapes her identity solely through speech and through action in relation to others. Clara's definition of character is her social identity as defined by her relationship with others. Clara's identity opposes and compliments the self-constructed identity of Robert, whose identity is authored through the curation and editing of the letters and documents that make up the second half of the novel.
The first letter is to her parents, held closely by her mother, and presented to the reader to be experienced simultaneously by the reader and Clara. Cecilia continues, saying she knows her mother would never give permission, so she felt the need to go away to follow this religious life to atone for her previous vanity. However, Cecilia's immaturity is revealed later in the letter when Watson's instigation of these thoughts shows in her narrative: Her weakness in relation to Watson is what made her feel ashamed. In fact, Cecilia more directly identifies this source of shame than she does in any of her discussion of sins for which she is atoning.
Also, Cecilia's genuine love for her parents and family is repeated along with her personal desire to atone for her sins. These indicate that Cecilia's identity at the time of her departure was no longer based on frivolity, but was still based on the opinion of others - in this case, on the opinion of Watson. The letter Macdonald shares with the Wallbergs depicts Cecilia's personal growth. Cecilia now acknowledges that "the holiest ties of Nature, of Love" are the ties of family. She has moved beyond her frivolous flatterers and beyond her focus of self.
Her understanding of a balance relationship as "contributing to the happiness" of another rather than depending on the opinion of another demonstrates significant personal growth. Cecilia now understands the significant importance of family relationships for individual and social identity. The significance of the written word is visible in the differences between Cecilia and Robert as opposed to Clara.
Cecilia and Robert are rebellious and disobedient to social norms and expectations in their efforts to shape their own destiny and write their own story. Clara, on the other hand, is obedient and is pushed into telling her story by others. Alexander's story is told in segments by his mother, his sister, and Clara; his story appears, much like his character, as a function of his absence.
The voices that come through most clearly are those of Cecilia and Robert. Cecilia's return squeezes Clara out of her newfound position as daughter in the Wallberg family, and Robert's trickery results in Clara's expulsion from the defining role of dutiful wife. Thus, the permanency and power of written story over oral story is made manifest in the novel. Weiblichkeit in Wallberg The female characters Clara and Cecilia create a statement of intelligence and Weiblichkeit that depicts Schiller's personal expression of these key concepts in her life.
Clara does not hold "superiority of birth or station," but is described as embodying "acquired accomplishments. Here it is clear that weiblich is part of, but not synonymous to, Weiblichkeit. Clara seems to embody the ideal intelligent and engaging role of Weiblichkeit, yet it is Clara who does not write letters. Clara is the obedient daughter and wife, yet it is Clara who breaks the bonds of marriage albeit under questionable circumstances and potential innocence.
In a sense, Clara represents the mechanical or programmed education without the self-discovery inherent in Bildung; Clara's Weiblichkeit is, in fact, simply being weiblich, as she has no strength of self-identity. Clara gives herself up to Frau Wallberg's hopes and gives herself to obedience as wife to the "returned Alexander" despite her inner tingling sense of doubt.
Stammbuch entry, Weimar, July 20, This is in contrast to Cecilia, who represents "superiority of Birth or Station" and "personal pride. In an odd way, Clara more closely resembles Frau Wallberg than it first appears, as both women received the education that was socially approved at the time of their coming of age. Cecilia, on the other hand, takes chances and makes mistakes; rather than simply following the prescribed path expected of her by society, Cecilia embarks on a true Bildung. Clara and Frau Wallberg both view being weiblich as being obedient and responsive to society's ideals. They have an incomplete concept of Weiblichkeit as they do not include strength of individual character among their qualifying traits.
Schiller's particular description of the ideal balance between intelligent Bildung and Weiblichkeit is further explained through the character Cecilia. I argue that Charlotte Schiller is contrasting these characters to depict the nuances of how intelligent Weiblichkeit is balanced and bounded by the persons and abilities of the present company, and including an inner humility that neither belittles nor calls attention to one's own abilities. As discussed, the ideal human beauty inherent to Humboldtian Weiblichkeit was described using gendered beauty but was not limited to gendered physical beauty.
An exploration of beauty as it relates to gender and Weiblichkeit similar to the translation project with Heron is found in Schiller's novel. Whereas Clara was considered by others to be beautiful only after observing the beauty 61 and liveliness of her intellect, Cecilia was considered by others to be physically beautiful, but upon observation to lack depth of mind. As Frau Wallberg relates to Clara: Although Cecilia's vanity turns to penitence, it is only later, when she meets Macdonald, that her Weiblichkeit grows into including intelligence over a shared enjoyment of Ossian.
Ossian in particular held an important role for Schiller. Cecilia's intelligence is different than Clara's. Clara's Bildung was a limited self-discovery of the intellect that arose largely from efforts to connect her with the standards of European society despite her American origin; Cecilia's Bildung was a self-discovery that grew from her personal search for something beyond her previous pettiness and vanity. Clara's beauty of intellect is still limited by her dependence on the approval of others.
Therefore, Alexander's silence regarding her time with Robert leaves her in an ambiguous state. Clara cannot reconcile this independently; she dies because she is Ibid, Cecilia expresses her intelligent Weiblichkeit as a quiet quality in comparison to Clara's being center stage during the family gathering.
Weiblichkeit is also connected to dutiful service. At the time of their correspondence, both Heron and Schiller's futures were overshadowed by civic duty: Charlotte Schiller was, out of filial duty, preparing to enter into court service and Heron was under obligation to compulsory military service. Clara and Cecilia are bound by social and familial duty. Cecilia was tricked and temporarily abandoned her weiblich duties as daughter and as the betrothed of F.
However, Cecilia takes ownership of her decision and is able to forgive herself. Her return to the family restores her position as filial daughter and opens up the possibility of a future with Macdonald. It also expresses her having matured into a more comprehensive sense of Weiblichkeit as she has the strength of character to pursue "a conscious rectitude of Conduct.
Because Clara's break from duty was out of dutifulness, Clara is disoriented and her identity is broken. Being "so treu, und doch treulos" shattered her ability to define herself as the faithful wife. Therefore, when one of her identifiers is altered she is unable to reconcile her identity because she lacks the inner strength necessary to possess true Weiblichkeit. Interestingly, the novel leaves it entirely unclear as to which side of the conflict Alexander and Robert fought on - leaving the reader to question the political statement being made in regards to revolutionary war and was another reason why the exact nature of Heron's service was of such intrigue.
Alexander Wallberg and Clara's relationship bears similarities to that of the young Charlotte Schiller and Henry Heron - the male love interest meets the female away from his homeland and while holding military rank. In both cases their separation causes a total breach of communication and, although it is not acknowledged until much later, marks the end of their relationship with one another.
Clara thinks Robert is her life-long love but he turns out not to be such, just as Charlotte Schiller can recognize that Heron was not her life-partner and work-mate. Yet Clara finds it painful to acknowledge her 64 love for this non-spouse as her current self-awareness, or developed Weiblichkeit, is dependent upon this non-spousal relationship and personal connection. Heron's influence is seen within the novel Wallberg. His communicated knowledge of the American War of Independence as received by Charlotte Schiller shapes the story itself. Her broader knowledge of the world abroad, which began with her Switzerland trip and grew exponentially from her relationship with Heron is depicted in the yearnings both for home and far away in the novel.
After her friendship with Heron and receiving letters from far away, Schiller was fascinated by reports of distant sails and sailor heroes Heron's sailor's heart infected her as well as the distance between them. In April Schiller told her lifelong friend Fritz: Despite her Sehnsucht, Schiller had to satisfy herself with travel journals and stories; among these she read the story of Christopher Columbus as well as translating from the Scottish historian William Robertson's The History of America From onwards, Charlotte Schiller read, translated, and was inspired by Henke and Ludwig, Conclusion The correspondence of Charlotte Schiller and Henry Heron is a rich resource that has previously been under-researched.
Analysis of this correspondence demonstrates the increasing Stimmung, growing fondness and building of a literary relationship between these individuals. Application of Wilhelm von Humboldt and Caroline von Wolzogen's concept of Weiblichkeit as investigated by Simon Richter to the analysis of the Schiller-Heron correspondence reveals how choices of language in translation correlate with the individuals' negotiated and growingly shared concept of gender. More precisely it seems that Schiller successfully influenced Heron's understanding of Weiblichkeit and the intellectual abilities of women.
My analysis of the correspondence closely followed Linda Grasso's approach to recogize letter collections and editions as literary texts with narrative and plot elements. One important section of the correspondence concerns a poetry translation project between Heron and Schiller, which most significantly indicates that in a way these two people were not only experiencing, but also writing, their growing personal and literary relationship.
In my final part, the previously unpublished novel Wallberg was examined focusing on discussions and implied concepts of Weiblichkeit relating some of the novel's structural features such as embedded documentary and epistolary parts , main characters and motifs. These elements were intertextually analyzed with reference to the Schiller-Heron correspondence. Wallberg further illustrates within the text that letters can be read as literary text and that literary text can include fictional documentation through letters.
The relationship between letters and literature is therefore extended more completely into 67 a Stimmung between them that indicates potential for the field of literary studies. The Schiller-Heron correspondence and Schiller's later novel Wallberg reveal an intellectual friendship crossing gender, social, and national boundaries. As the Schiller-Heron correspondence demonstrates, intelligent Weiblichkeit enables unity within diversity by recognizing the complexity of individuals and the concept of a non-gendered ideal human beauty of the mind and "rectitude of conduct" The London Gazette, Numb.
Accessed June 28, The London Gazette Numb. Accessed on June 28, Henry Heron to Charlotte Schiller. Charlotte Schiller to Henry Heron. Portrait of Henry Heron. The National Archives, Kew. Accessed June 24, Briefe von Schiller's Gattin an einen vertrauten Freund. Charlotte von Schiller und ihre Freunde. Secondary Resources Argyll Estates. Personal correspondence with author. Der Dichter und seine Familie: Germany and the American Revolution The University of North Carolina Press, Henke, Silke and Ludwig, Ariane.
Scholarly Editing and German Literature: A Social History of the Navy - George Allen and Unwin Ltd, The University of Chicago Press, National Park Service, U. Department of the Interior. Accessed March 5, Publications of the English Goethe Society, A History of German Literature. Some Remarks on Terminology. Accessed 4 June Accessed 8 July Accessed 22 June With Zeal and with Bayonets Only: Volume 19, Campaigns and Commanders Series. University of Oklahoma Press, Directed by Dominik Graf.
Group Discussion with Author. Probleme der Brief edtion. Internationaler Workshop, Masterstudengang Editionswissenschaft. Representing the Royal Navy: British Sea Power, Ashgate Publishing Company, Der Verbrecher aus verlorener Ehre. The Royal Navy in American Waters The British Navy and the American Revolution. University of South Carolina, On Editorial Studies, or "Editionswissenschaft" For over two centuries, Charlotte Schiller was not taken seriously as a thinker and author. Establishing Schiller as such is relatively new, which increases the importance for any project to take the time to employ thoughtful consideration of the editorial choices made and how these may affect the reception of the project's content.
For example, choosing to refer to Charlotte Schiller as Schiller rather than Charlotte acknowledges her in the same manner as is traditional for male authors or modern authors; this choice communicates respect for her works. While this may seem to be an "obvious" decision, it is actually a quite recent practice in academic publishing. Editorial principles have changed from the nineteenth century, necessitating review of editions of transcribed materials and, in many cases, the need to create transcriptions that uphold the scientific method and level of accuracy required by modern historical-critical editions.
Nineteenth century principles focused on the reader's understanding. The goal of published editions of correspondence was to convey a sense of the correspondents and their relationship. Even in more scientific texts, citation and source identification were inconsistent at this time. The establishment of a scientific approach to categorization and presentation of archival materials in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries led to an emphasis on historical-critical editions published for academic researchers, an audience for which the editions include explanations of decisions used in the edition, such as rendering spelling errors, capitalization, crossed out words, and so on.
Bodo Plachta describes the specific importance of working with the original: The importance of working with the originals is something that is aesthetically experienced; however, the necessity to return to the original is an essential element of the "wissenschaft" in the field; the original requires methodological approach and scientific reasoning to a degree unparalleled even by fascimiles. In addition, it is important to note that to maintain accuracy to the originals, every effort was made to directly transcribe all quotes from the letters in this work as they were in the original including misspellings and grammatical errors.
Editionswissenschaft is an essential goal for first editions from handwriting that seek to be acknowledged as part of canon and is an area of study that can reveal how editorial choices of the past influenced canon formation. This may have been controversial in ; however, current research increasingly accepts this. Rockenberger, for example, identifies that "the relevance of editions for the canon" depends on the editing itself; namely, a scholarly edition is the required entry fee into the ranks of canonization.
This entry fee does not grant a direct entry, but rather, Rockenberger details, published scholarly editions open up the door as "the published results of this cooperative practice [distribution, processing, and production including fragmentary transmission] delineate the basis of different follow-up communications that Plachta, Editionswissenschaft, Canonization cannot be identified until it has revealed its completion. While this viewpoint supports past consensus that women writers were not excluded from the canon, but rather were just simply not part of it, Rockenberger's argument validates canonization as an identifiable series of actions that can be individually influenced to redirect the process towards desired results.
Rockenberger's perspective is essential for the scholar working with un-transcribed or poorly transcribed manuscripts and for those studying the writing of women previously overlooked by canon formation. Transcription of handwritten documents entails numerous challenges. Typed text cannot convey the depth of information that handwriting communicates to the receiver.
Editorial challenges must be identified and the approach to handling these challenges needs to be consistent throughout the process in order to have a meaningful transcription. Regarding this issue, Bodo Plachta acknowledges that scholarly editing of works entails variations dependent "on the editor's objectives" that "rely on standards which are Ibid, Therefore, it is important to identify one's own editorial objectives as soon as possible in order to ensure that the choices of theory and method as well as other seemingly small practical decisions are made as cohesively as possible.
While an edition can, as Plachta writes, seek to reconstruct texts, I know from my experience with scans, facsimiles and original manuscripts also that these themselves require editorial choices - does the editor choose settings which make the text the most legible, show the colour and texture of the page and ink to greatest effect, or minimize the inevitable markings from scanning that emphasize what is ignorable on the original? Each of these options indicates the editor's focus on the scan itself - is it a text, an aesthetic object, or a historical recreation?
For the purposes of this thesis, for example, the aestheticism of the letters was not the focus and decisions were made as much as possible to treat the correspondence as historical and literary primary documents in as like manner as possible as has been done with canonized authors of the time. Unfortunately, these categorizations of text, object, and historical recreation are in themselves are an over simplification. As Nutt-Kofoth explains, the space and spatial positioning of words on the page were themselves a layer of text and social signification in the medium of epistolary communication in this era This view is shared by Grasso, who argues that letters are "mediated forms of expression; they are a Bodo Plachta.
How International is Scholarly Editing? A Look at Its History. How the letter writer enacts that translation is shaped by the purpose of the letter, the relationship of the letter writer to the correspondent, and the circumstances in which the letter is written" Transcribing the content is easier than to translate the cultural markers of the Briefkultur from the letter to the reader's understanding. However, transcribing the handwritten words onto the typed page is an essential first step that makes the correspondence accessible to other scholars.
Space and handwriting convey more than social rank and deference, however. The importance of space in the handwritten letter is particularly apparent in the larger undated letter of Heron's that stands out due to its size and carefully constructed columns "Remarks," "Mine" and "Yours" In this letter, Henry Heron has created a record of their collaborative effort to translate "The Rose" from German into English. These numbered points are numbered and underlined respectively in the other two columns. Heron squeezes and alters the size and shape of his handwriting so that these columns match up Linda M.
I was able to verify this by identifying it in both languages. For the German, see Johann Gottfried von Herder. For the purposes of identification within the appendix of this thesis, I have entitled this document "The Translation Project Document" in the appendix.
Not only does this make transcription of these difficult to produce in a typed digital form, it also makes it incredibly difficult for the reader to have a sense of the effort and time spent on the letter, as well as the aesthetic and usefulness of the document for their partnered project. Rudolstadt the 7th Mart. I am well, and enjoy the pleasure of the Solidute, I have heard the Storms bowl, the leafless trees have shud their heads in the wind. I have seen all that from the window of my little pea- ceable room, with Calm. Ossian has given me an agreeable Idea of the wind, and since I pursue thos thoughts with joy.
But for the Souls of our departed friend it would not be so joyfull as for us. You have made me much pleasure in Sending me those books, I will render it to you with thousand thanks So soon as I have finished it. You are very good to deprive you of any weeks from so an a agreeable Lecture, then I believe that ones could read dayly in the book, and would find always new beauties.
I have found any Poems, which I send you here, I believe they will please you. I love much the Spring, Spring, the wintler mades a sad impression of heart and body. But all is changed when the Spring and hope for better times p approached. I I believe, while he gives us much remarkeds to make, of our self, self declining nature. I read it often, and hope to read I arrive So..
I would be glad if it would be so isyours. I have had any news from there, and I expect with great impatiente a Letters from 2r-0 my friends de Imhof, and Schardt. The rest of the time was more disciplined, with museums, libraries, theatre. She in her turn was taking Schlegel more and more into her confidence, using him as a signatory on documents for loans with an eye to purchasing property in France Acosta was one possibility.
She signed a contract with the publisher Nicolle, and arranged with Cotta for the German translation to be done by Friedrich Schlegel in fact, by Dorothea. She was sending Auguste back to Geneva to prepare him for his confirmation, the religious education of her children being something that she took very seriously. His mother meanwhile was not making it easy for those around her. She was putting out feelers to Metternich if only by sending him a copy of Corinne and other Austrian grandees. It was a novel about Italy, and essentially about two English characters in Italy, not French, and the main French character was largely unflattering.
Its Anglophile sentiments, which admittedly did not extend to all the characters or all the moral situations, were another source of irritation. She would not back down, and the price was further exile. The extended family made its way back to Coppet in May-June, He would follow it up with the longer and more sustained review of the novel which appeared later in the year in the Jena Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung.
The first point could be dealt with in a few masterful and disdainful sentences; the second would require more circumspection. While not being exactly the Oswald to her Corinne—far from it—he had been her companion through much that was here translated into fiction, and he had helped to ease the pangs of its creation. The Germans, who like no other literary nation had placed artists in the centre of their drama and fiction, might be expected to be sympathetic to a novel about an artist, Corinne the chosen vessel of providence.
They could take in their stride a many-stranded text that took a love story, a travelogue, and long passages of art criticism, and interlaced them into a successful whole, a balanced ensemble aspects that even well-intentioned readers today do not find easy to reconcile. He was perhaps on less secure ground with the emotional content of the novel, but he made his position on Oswald clear immature and unsteady , and hoped that his female readers would agree.
The envoi of the review was puzzling. Was he piqued that, say, Monti was directly quoted in the text, while he and his brother Friedrich, whose Romantic art appreciation from Europa certainly informed passage after passage of the novel, were sidelined in a note each?
It seemed that he was. The real Corinne would have forgiven him this little touch of personal vanity. Others would soon approach the novel with a definite parti pris. They paused here long enough for Schlegel to meet the librarian and to be shown two Roman mosaics in the city. It gave him the opportunity for his first piece of sustained archaeological description: Schlegel shows here that he can be technical and learned, while also giving a spirited portrayal of the scenes depicted. The two ladies made an excursion to the glaciers at Chamonix: The savant-traveller was also—how could it be otherwise?
He kept his ears open for gradations in dialect: The journey on foot was also a progression through pristine nature and uncorrupted morals. True, there were three set-piece descriptions that showed an eye for both nature and human customs; and there was disapproval of the tourism that had already sprung up. The dates of publication, , brought with them reminders that this was the land of ancient freedom: Prince August of Prussia, who was forced to spend six weeks in Coppet while waiting for passports for himself and Clausewitz, fell passionately in love with her during the time he spent at Coppet they later vowed eternal love, without marriage.
Closer in time, he would state to his sister-in-law Dorothea Schlegel that he merely wanted to stir things up, get people annoyed, and to Goethe he used a similar tone. That in its turn was somewhat disingenuous: When these lectures were available, first in German, then in French, the full extent of his thinking on the notion of the classic, on classicism, on neo-classicism, would be shown in its widest context. It was a question of how one approached revival or recrudescence, not the principle itself.
By placing this passage in the centre of his treatise, Schlegel was aligning himself with someone who had entered the Greek world with heart and mind and soul and spirit. Schlegel, like Lessing, cut corners in argument, overlooked inconsistencies that did not suit him, and was often plainly unfair once he had his teeth in an opponent.
Schlegel, as was his policy, never mentioned Schiller in this connection, but readers of Europa , that recent work from the Schlegel circle, would be left in no doubt as to its position: She did not place Racine on a pinnacle for all time, as Voltaire had done. All the same, when directing the same notion of progress towards Greek drama, she placed the trio Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides in descending order of merit. There were further contradictions. While correctly seeing that Euripides and Racine are basically different, she was unable to suppress the insight that only a Frenchman, not a Greek, could have written.
He could be more outspoken before the audience of his Vienna Lectures a year later. As said, it stands essentially between the Berlin Lectures and those in Vienna, rehearsing some insights of the one and anticipating views expressed later. In the Comparaison we have the same gradation of esteem but also for the sake of his argument an implicit equality. He does not bring out essential but equally valid differences, as Herder had done forty years earlier when comparing Sophocles with Shakespeare.
He notes rather how much Racine has borrowed from his Greek source and how much he has changed, not why a seventeenth-century dramatist would find many motifs from Greek tragedy unsuitable or why he would read them differently from antiquity or from the early nineteenth century , bound as he was by the conventions of his own theatre that called for a love intrigue quite impossible in Athens but permissible in Paris. Schlegel cannot deny that the play has great beauty of verse and diction, but that is about all he is prepared to concede. Why this is so, he never discusses; there is no mention of the Jansenist doctrines of Port-Royal or of exemplary states of grace.
There is another factor as well: It is not Christian: Here Schlegel is rehearsing arguments that inform the second cycle of his Vienna Lectures. Constant noted nothing in his journal. Performances of French tragedies, such as Lessing had objected to in Hamburg forty years earlier, were still by no means uncommon in Once Schlegel found himself in the imperial capital, these two enterprises became joined in one effort.
She continues, knowing his response in advance: This he already knew, and in a sense the rumour—for it was no more than that—of his sailing to America provided the answer. Switzerland, occasionally France, Austria and Germany, before the great flight to Russia and Sweden in Sophie of course wanted money: August Wilhelm had to hear promptings from his brother about his talent as a dramatist, about careers in new universities like Berlin, just being founded. Dorothea, extending her rapt admiration for Friedrich to her brother-in-law, averred that the two would be the pyramids that would outlast everything of their age.
We cannot of course overlook the litany of querulous and self-pitying communications from Friedrich, but two symbolic confraternal gestures do stand out: August Wilhelm was to give his poem a prominent position in the reissue of his poetic works that he oversaw in Was August Wilhelm the author? This is only one side. For this periodical Schlegel produced a corpus of learned reviews that must rank as a scholarly achievement almost commensurate with the more accessible Vienna Lectures.
The list does not necessarily end there. By the same token, it is also without doubt that Schlegel certainly gave advice on German literature and thought to his benefactress which she in fact acknowledged. The plan of a comprehensive work on Germany—its people, culture, letters, moeurs , in brief whatever the French needed to learn about this fascinating nation in the north that was paradoxically not yet a nation—had never left her.
Now, there was the south, and there was Austria. They had met in Venice in , and she had not forgotten him. The disparity in their ages was no hindrance, as other admirers and lovers knew or were to know. Her plans for Vienna now had a treble thrust: Schelling and Schlegel were on their best behaviour and discoursed amicably, while agreeing to differ in private. It was also to be the last time that he saw her. But Munich also had its drawbacks: This was granted, and the seventeen-year-old boy made his request: The Emperor, as so often, was forthright, blunt and rude; he then relented and adopted a more kindly tone.
Might not a little credit accrue to his tutor Schlegel? Within a week, she had been received by the Emperor Francis and two royal archdukes. Her letters are studded with other grand names—Lobkowitz, Lichtenstein, Lubomirski, Potocki. He, at her prompting, had joined them in March: The serious business in Vienna was threefold: It needs to be said that her every step was followed by the assiduous Austrian police, they having taken over from the equally zealous but more efficient Napoleonic surveillance system.
This was partly his own doing, and partly because, as so often, he was ahead of his times. There were however problems: Ever since their removal to Paris and then Cologne, Friedrich had been doing just that. Of his Germanic and patriotic sentiments there could be no doubt; his letters, such as the one that he wrote to his brother in , were beginning to express notions of spiritual authority and order—one church, one constitution, one faith—that suggested the hierarchy of Rome.
Rediscovering his exiguous dramatic talents, he was drafting a historical play on Charles V. Could he consult the imperial archives in Vienna? She temporarily lost custody of her talented son Philipp Veit, the later Nazarene painter. By the time of his arrival in Vienna Friedrich had seen the publication of a work that towered in significance over almost anything that he had produced that decade: Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier.
While it did not involve the very first publication in German of a Sanskrit text, it was the first comprehensive survey of comparative mythology, migration theory, and the principles and origins of language, that was also a chrestomathy, a selection of Sanskrit religious and poetic texts in a German translation. This Friedrich had, during the extraordinary six-month burst of creative energy—and sheer concentration—after their arrival in Paris.
After approaches to Reimer and eventual successful negotiations with Zimmer, it was not to come out until Yet in many ways Friedrich had succeeded in bringing together in one volume aspects of India that would occupy August Wilhelm in what was ultimately a never-ending quest. The work had two major thrusts. It was a study in comparative grammar, which enabled two language groups or families to emerge, equally venerable as organs of sacred truths Hebrew and Sanskrit but divergent in terms of structure.
Human history could be traced to movements and removals, of place, language, belief and culture, away from the Centre, the simple and undivided Whole of primeval origins, as disorders and disruptions forced mankind in all directions. The work shows the comparative religionist, that Friedrich once was, in conflict with the believer on one faith and order.
There is no hint of any preparatory work, but coincidences and overlaps between Berlin and Vienna suggest that he had to hand notes from the earlier series and that he used these, suitably adapted, for his new audience. There is evidence that he wanted his lectures to reach a wider public: There is also no doubt that the quickly-forged links with the literary world of Vienna gave some immediacy to his lecturing plans. There was no attempt to present him as the voice of a faction, a school, as he had been in Berlin.
But there was no overlooking the Schlegel presence in Prometheus , either: His own contribution to Prometheus was in itself not inconsiderable: It was in a sense the Vienna that August Wilhelm was poised to conquer. Otherwise, it seemed like a triumph of Kotzebue and Iffland and their dubious sentimentality; or a riot of frivolous comedy after the French, and, this being Vienna, lots of opera. Her divorce from Bernhardi had been finally decreed, and the courts had awarded custody of her two sons to him.
There Ludwig succumbed again to the rheumatic complaint that regularly laid him low in moments of stress; while Friedrich Tieck, his artistic career compromised and his finances exhausted, sent more and more desperate letters to the all-provident Schlegel. At the end of , Bernhardi appeared in person and took his elder son Wilhelm back with him to Berlin, leaving Felix Theodor, who Schlegel had once believed was his, with his mother.
Sophie and Knorring finally married in , but it was not until that she and Felix made the long journey to the Knorring estates in farthest Estonia. It brought odium to the name of Tieck, singly and collectively. Friendships and collaborations stood or fell according to their stance towards the affair: The medium to be adopted was another matter. Schlegel was there at the outset of an era that saw, Europe-wide, the great wave of public lectures associated with Cuvier, Humboldt, Davy or Coleridge, and his must take their place in that lineage.
But even as he was delivering his lectures in Vienna, others closer to hand were also using the public rostrum: Fichte, in Berlin, had been delivering his Reden an die deutsche Nation [ Speeches to the German Nation ] since the winter, and they represented in many ways the antithesis of what Schlegel stood for. Even more was happening in Dresden. Title page of vol. Image in the public domain. If Schlegel in his peroration commended the Romantic historical drama to the German nation—in its widest sense—it was in the awareness that this form of dramatic art had evolved in the crucible of other national cultures, the English and Spanish, and hence drew on both North and South for its inspiration, while appealing to the Germanic facility for assimilation and creative adaptation.
There, one nation would be seen through the eyes of another; but here was a German claiming insights into the drama and theatre of the whole of Europe. Words in season eventually secured Schlegel permission to lecture in the capital city, and the university was the first chosen venue. A princely twenty-five florins was charged for fifteen lectures, three per week.
One notices also the state censor, perhaps making notes in the back row. Nobles jostled to secure tickets, including Count Wrbna-Freudenthal who later signed the letter granting Schlegel his imperial audience in April. These were the people with the time and the leisure, who would not miss 25 florins. What he has to say, however, is very much to my liking, e.
I can say that I attended the lectures with great pleasure. It suited his hearers better and was more appropriate to his subject-matter. He had now found the right medium, not academic discourse as in Jena, or that demanding section in Prometheus taken from his Berlin cycle. He would have to make concessions and keep technicalities to a minimum: Romantic doctrine would have to be made accessible to princes and counts of the Empire, a balancing-act that required considerable skill and tact. In a sense, of course, he was not proclaiming Romanticism as something radically new or—the ultimate horror in Vienna—revolutionary.
Much of his material was recycled from his own earlier lectures and publications. Very few, possibly none, of his audience would have been present in all three places, Jena, Berlin and now Vienna, and not many would have noticed how much had already been enunciated in those earlier venues, for instance most of the long sections on the Greeks. Much drew on existing published material, the Parny review in the Athenaeum on Aristophanes , the article on the Spanish theatre in Europa , or the recent Comparaison of that Heinrich von Collin also present was in the process of translating.
Schlegel had passed on but few of their insights in isolated publications, and Schelling, without acknowledgment, had done the same. In Vienna, Schlegel had to take a lot for granted, and he was sparing in his citation of sources. It was not the real point. While philology could never be an irrelevance for Schlegel, the circumstances of the Lectures required large generalisations, relativisms, eye-catching juxtapositions and sweeping conclusions, the most famous of which is this section from the Twelfth Lecture: Ancient art and poetry strives for the strict severance of the disparate, the Romantic delights in indissoluble mixtures: As the oldest law-givers proclaimed and set out their teachings and precepts in modulated harmonies, as Orpheus, the first tamer of the still wild human race, is praised in fable; in the same way the whole of ancient poetry and art is like a cadenced set of prescriptions, the harmonious proclamation of the eternal precepts of a world, finely ordered, that reflects the eternal archetypes of things.
The Romantic, by contrast, is the expression of the mysteries of a chaos that is struggling to bring forth ever new and wondrous births, that is hidden under the order of nature, in its very womb: The one is simpler, clearer and more akin to nature in the self-sufficient perfection of its single works; the other, despite its fragmentary appearance, is closer to the secret of the universe. For instance, the images of biological organic growth as opposed to the mechanical and ordered, are common currency in the language of German idealism: Schlegel applies them to whole periods and styles.
In matters of presentation and disposition, he had learned some lessons from Berlin; while in terms of his general attitudes, he had not greatly changed. Old enmities ran deep. Thus to introduce the essential Shakespeare, Schlegel reformulated the insight, not new or original, which the Germans Herder, Goethe, Eschenburg, Tieck, Schlegel himself had made their own: Read my Shakespeare, is the unspoken message of his Shakespeare lecture to his German audience, an instruction of less relevance for later French, English or other readers.
Certain Schlegelian preferences or prejudices nevertheless emerge: Shakespeare had links with both the intellectual Bacon and the political strivings of his age, but there was in his account of the English nation still some of that spirit of chivalry and feudalism, independence of mind and action, that had animated the Middle Ages.
Not for the first time German ideas were being assimilated to the processes of foreign literature: Schlegel was clearly finding analogies with the Nibelungenlied , one of his current preoccupations.
Roman theatre was not like this: Aeschylus and Sophocles had been Athenian citizens, Seneca the court philosopher of Nero. Hence the amount of space, seemingly beyond all proportion three lectures out of fifteen , that Schlegel devotes to the disqualification of the neo-classical, the need to deny it houseroom in the wide scheme of European drama that he unfolds, one that also obliquely takes in the Indians, who with the Greeks were the only ancient people with a native dramatic tradition.
It reflected national characteristics and virtues love, honour. Much of this would take on a peculiar relevance as the Lectures appeared in print, the sections up to and including European neo-classicism in , followed in by the sections on Romantic drama. National drama would also be nation-building: These political aspirations as opposed to legal, military and educational reforms were of course not to be fulfilled in the German lands, and Prince Metternich, no doubt sitting in the front row of the lecture hall, would be the author of the later reaction that saw their frustration.
Their journey took them into the Bohemian lands: Goethe was rumoured to be in Carlsbad. This meeting never eventuated, but in Prague, where they arrived on 26 May, they hoped to meet Friedrich Gentz. He chose therefore to lie low in Prague. At their meeting, they got on famously: He had to borrow money from his brother to get this far, and more would be needed to see him to his ultimate destination. His first communication from Vienna, in July , would inaugurate a litany recounting his tribulations, his waiting in the antechambers of the influential, his harassments, real and imagined, by the secret police.
His first quarters were with Karl Gregor von Knorring: Wieland was gracious, even to Schlegel. Schlegel left the party at Weimar and made a quick dash across to Hanover. It was part of her discovery that the Germans were a profoundly religious people Protestant Germans, that is, for Catholics formed a disproportionately shorter part of the narrative. She may not even have appreciated the differences inside German Protestantism. But the visit to the Moravian Brethren in Neudietendorf near Erfurt struck a different note.
She described the communal life and worship of the Brethren, their regularity and tranquility, the harmony of their inner feelings and their outward conduct. In comparing them with Quakers, whom she knew from England or from Voltaire , she was showing her indifference in matters both of doctrine and observance: Hanover had in experienced occupations and troop billetings not least under Marshal Bernadotte: It was to be the last time that he saw his cherished and devoted mother.
Hanover had been swallowed up by this Napoleonic creation. Outside, Spain rose in revolt; later, Austria prepared for war. But one act of fealty towards Coppet stands out: He is more conciliatory in the matter of national dramatic styles, provided that none claims a monopoly of taste or excellence the second part of his Vienna Lectures, published later in the same year, would adopt a different tone.
Instead, he uses Constant to diminish Schiller. Schiller had not succeeded in containing his material in five acts; his trilogy was not, like those of the Greeks, the product of inner necessity, but of despair. Had Schiller been a more experienced dramatist, had he spent less time on philosophical or historical studies, he might have achieved the same five- act solution as Constant. This was the delayed critical voice of Jena. Reimer in his turn handed Schlegel over to Julius Hitzig in Berlin, a new publisher looking for copy and very glad to add the famous translator to his list.
Sophie Bernhardi had not forgotten her poetic ambitions amid her family affairs. Could Schlegel find a publisher for her verse epic Flore und Blanscheflur? He remembered Zimmer in Heidelberg. Zimmer was not interested, but he sensed a real prize when Schlegel offered him his Vienna Lectures. Schlegel had wanted them to appear in Vienna itself, but publishers there would only pay in paper money. Zimmer could offer proper currency, two and a half Carolins per sheet for a print-run of 1, Doubtless Schelling had a hand in this.
There was an academy project on standard German grammatical usage. Could he be persuaded? In fact Schlegel was far more interested in borrowing the Munich manuscript of the Nibelungenlied. Schlegel had remained behind while she, Sabran and Montmorency set out for the event, which took place on 17 August.
It was the only folk event that she in fact seems to have seen and it suited her purposes admirably. There were other spectators of note at Interlaken. That great royal traveller Crown Prince Ludwig was there. It was the moment to intercede for Friedrich Tieck, still in Rome. Having done the busts of the Weimar notabilities and some in Munich, would Tieck not be the ideal sculptor for the Walhalla, the monument to German greatness that was to arise on the banks of the Danube near Regensburg?
Friedrich Ludwig Zacharias Werner. Thus ensued one of the more bizarre episodes in the history of Coppet. He did not practise ethereality: Goethe had been equally fascinated and repelled by him, but the periodical Prometheus expressed itself more drastically: Werner also spent hours in conversation with Schlegel.
Maybe she needed a catalyst such as Werner or Schlegel. Tieck, Novalis and Friedrich Schlegel had been attracted to the Silesian theosophist, whereas August Wilhelm had been less drawn. That was only to cease with his conversion to Catholicism in Schlegel was not to take such a step. For there is enough evidence from his correspondence up to the Russian journey of a searching for spiritual satisfaction, for an easing of soul, but not necessarily inside an ecclesiastical or hierarchical framework. At this stage he was willing to defend the speculations of his brother Friedrich in Ueber die Sprache und Weisheit against the likes of Schelling; indeed in an important letter to the latter of 19 August he saw philosophy as but one way towards truth, not an end in itself; it alone—not even Kant—could not open up the ultimate secrets.
Whereas later it would be history, historical record, the examination of sources on the broadest of bases that would inform his method of study, he was now prepared to entertain hidden links between the spiritual and material world that would not sustain historical or philological analysis. But where personal involvement or friendship entered into it he could be relied upon to produce a striking image that comes over to us as authentic. He filled niches in the Weimar palace, not only with Goethe and Schiller, but with Klopstock and Voss.
His Schelling breathes energy and intelligence; his Alexander von Humboldt has something of the freshness and determination of the young voyager. That was certainly the way that Werner, the later convert to Catholicism and ordained priest, wished to see it. This would not be the hardship it might seem to be, for her father had presciently purchased property there.
The fates of these two enterprises were soon to be intertwined. Was he the property of the Franco-American owner of Chaumont and a reminder that slavery was still being practised in both countries? The poem states that the slave was set free, and it affirms his belief still in the efficacy of the sacraments. For a publisher the author went to Gabriel-Henri Nicolle, who had also brought out Corinne. They knew of her unrepentant interest in politics, for instance her concern as the widow of a Swedish diplomat at the outcome of the succession to the Swedish throne.
The proofs then went to the highest authority himself: His main instruction was the removal of the section favourable to England. It is clear from that context that Auguste, not subject to the same ban as his mother, had taken the letter in person; Schlegel had sought to intervene with Corbigny.
The proofs were then pulped. Pleas for an audience fell on deaf ears. In fact she received a visa for Coppet and decided to return there instead. And was it not clear that Schlegel, the author of the Comparaison , was regarded as her accomplice? Fortunately the French translation had not reached the production stage, and Chamisso was able to retain his manuscript for future use.
The French police bulletins of October and November were notable in drawing attention to the ideological dangers filtering in from Germany: Werner, with his offensive Attila ; Fichte of the Reden an die deutsche Nation , Gentz in the pay of the English , and the Schlegel brothers. Nor with a print run of 5, and several sets of proofs in existence was this humanly possible. Some say, in Lausanne, Humboldt is supposed to have said it. Do you not have any bright new plans for next spring? She had meanwhile decided that it would be prudent for him to absent himself from Coppet or Geneva for a couple of months.
It all added to the precariousness of their situation. In the summer of and lasting into , there was even an infatuation: Schlegel could only enjoy her charms, her intelligence and her talk at a distance. It is certainly no coincidence that the two poems that he addressed to her adopt the conventions of Minnesang, one of them even in an approximation to Middle High German stanzaic form, for this was the lady untouchable and inviolate whom one could approach only in verse.
It was to the robuster Nibelungenlied that Schlegel now devoted time and leisure, to collate the various manuscripts. It was, however, to Mohr and Zimmer that Schlegel turned for the works that for him mattered in these last Swiss years: These were not good times for publishers or for authors.
North Germany, a market that a bookseller overlooked at his peril, was subject to the decree of 5 February that extended across the French imperial territories to all those under its jurisdiction; Zimmer, in neutral Baden, went ahead with the Poetische Werke nevertheless. Those who remembered the Gedichte , the first collection of his poetry, would note a few additions: Die Kunst der Griechen , that elegy that had once adulated Goethe, was still there, more on account of its correct versification than its genuine sentiments.
He would have even more pleasure when in the same year Ludwig Tieck, a notoriously bad correspondent, surprised him by dedicating to him his collection Phantasus and reawakening the memory of Jena. Here were some political tactics, some acts of deference, but also an acknowledgement of who belonged together, who had stood up for the other over the years—and there were not many of them left. The volumes sold well: Frontispiece and title page. It was a reminder of how medieval chivalry and fable still informed the Renaissance Ariosto, Tasso, Shakespeare, Cervantes , how the canonical poets all proceeded from the same sources and substance.
It also brings out the Romantic dichotomy: In June, , while he was briefly back in Coppet, she decided on an altogether more adventuresome and risky operation: The route to be taken was at this stage not clear, but Vienna would in all likelihood be the point of departure. In Vienna, he found his brother, doubtless told in advance of this imminent incursion, and not a little surprised.
It bound him to a political ideology—that of the Habsburg state, its aspirations and its myths—yet who in these years could live free of such allegiances? Ludwig Tieck, living in his bolt hole in remotest Brandenburg, perhaps, or those two footloose if very different figures, Clemens Brentano and Zacharias Werner, until Rome claimed them, but most others could not afford that luxury.
One must picture—if one can—a corpulent Friedrich festooned in this finery, on horseback, in the rain, mud, heat and dust of armies on the march. It was his task to produce an army newspaper. The Austrian army had meanwhile withdrawn to Hungary. He was not back in Vienna until the end of More significant for him were the lectures on history which he gave in Vienna from 19 February to 9 May, And these lectures, delivered in the fine historiographical prose of which Friedrich was capable, had a distinctly Austrian accent.
Out of the decline and fall of the old order would emerge figures who symbolized the movements of the times: And the fine rhetoric of delivery did not conceal a historical teleology and a message for the times, something that a political journalist and intellectual was expected to supply. It is for us brothers of course a great privation to be separated from each other without any prospect of meeting again; he was quite hypochondriac and in lowest spirits before I arrived, but our conversations picked him up again.
When I left, he went with me and then he turned back, alone, on foot across a bare and treeless plain, a truly sad image of our separation. Unlike Friedrich, who was to deliver three more big lecture cycles in Vienna and Dresden, August Wilhelm was only once again to lecture to a general public, much later in Berlin. His lectures on history embraced the ancient world, not the modern, and they were for a university audience. It was a reflection of her own experience, sometimes even shared with him, yet it was so much limited to what she had actually seen and taken in, was so ideologically slanted to her needs, that questions of mere attributions or informants— who helped her with this part or that—became largely irrelevant.
There was little point in asking, as some contemporaries were to do, whether Schlegel had checked it through. Nations should serve as guides one to one another, and they would all be wrong were they to deprive each other of the enlightenment that they can afford one another mutually.
There is something very strange about the difference between one people and another: He had, however, not been at her side when she encountered the persons and places that provide some of the great set-pieces: He knew also which places and which persons she chose to omit no Munich, no Berlin salons, no Gentz, for instance and which individuals she chose to elevate to a status largely ordained by her and her own personal acquaintance.
He might also have reflected that his material, his insights, his plot-summaries could be implicitly relied upon for their accuracy, while hers could not, being often second-hand, tailored to her needs, and sometimes wilfully wrong as in her account of the plot of Faust. He may have despaired at her account of Kant, until he recognized, as one must, that she was using him, as so many other figures and ideas, to further her own cultural and political aims, or that she was calling for the study of serious philosophy as opposed to frivolous scepticism or materialism.
There were allusions enough to the times in which they were delivered, arguments for the audience to understand why Germany in its present state could not emulate Athens or Golden Age Spain or Elizabethan England. In that sense his Lectures were a continuation of debates and agonizings since over what had gone wrong, why the old order had collapsed, why the German lands had fallen to Napoleon one after the other and had been divided and ruled as he saw fit.
In postulating how the theatre might contribute to the building of the nation, Schlegel was doing his patriotic duty, less outspokenly of course than political voices like, say, Arndt, Gentz, or Stein, while performing it nevertheless. True, with its territorial divisions, it had then as now lacked a capital city, something that the Germans themselves had been deploring for several generations and that Friedrich Schlegel had noted with regret in Europa.
For her part, she was not interested in institutions or society other than its highest echelons, or indeed too many tiresome factual details. The important thing was to point to what France did not have, but might have, if it let another nation be its guide and inspiration. It might see alternatives to centralism, control, despotism and acts of arbitrary tyranny. Readers in France might have cause to ponder issues that were not specific to Germany, but which might acquire a new urgency through an openness to another culture: It had been a way of transcending the provincial narrowness of Jena and it would also overcome the restrictions of Bonn, for his later scholarly career was oriented as much to Paris and London as to the Prussian university where he was to live and work.
In fact he was only there from October to November, , and from March to May in America was now ruled out, although as late as November she was contemplating it. They became more and more dependent on snippets of news regarding the political situation in Europe. Could Turkey be a route, once the Russo-Turkish border was secure? When Capelle used chicanery to challenge the validity of the original purchase of Coppet by the Neckers, it was Schlegel who was able to use the good offices of his Heidelberg publisher to secure the deeds.
On his side, he could not aspire to claiming her affection, let alone her love; he was merely indispensable and fraternally so; on her side she permitted no rivals, but at the same time she was free to indulge her passions as she chose. Small wonder that he in a letter of April or May, reproached her with folly and heartlessness towards him. Already in May, Germaine and Rocca entered into a solemn engagement to marry, and in the late summer she found herself pregnant—in her forty-sixth year.
Of the official Coppet circle only Fanny Randall was party to the secret; Schlegel never found out while there. Germaine was to the outside world suffering from dropsy: It was in Berne, too, that he received through his sister-in-law Julie Schlegel in Hanover the news of the death of his mother, on 21 January, A letter from Mathieu de Montmorency of 3 March tried to offer him consolation for his loss: Protestant worship no longer met the needs of his heart: Nowhere is there a word about confession or doctrine: He must have assumed that he would never return, for this cache was to remain undiscovered for over years.
He left behind too his 1,volume library, carefully ordered according to incunables, quartos, and octavos. One could see here the books that had occupied him during this part of his career—the material on Dante, Shakespeare, Homer, Roman antiquities, the Nibelungenlied , the fine arts—and some, like the volumes of the Asiatick Researches , that pointed to future preoccupations. Rocca and Albert would join them later. No-one must suspect anything: It was to end in St Petersburg. In a sense she had been traversing Europe since late Schlegel was in her company for a large part of that time.
Why not an even grander tour? Yet this journey was in every other respect different. Stockholm lent itself, because she was the widow of a Swedish envoy and baron. Her children were technically Swedish citizens, and she wished to see her sons employed in the service of their adopted country. Her ultimate goal was however England, the land that in her eyes could do no wrong or very little. He was already the much-celebrated author of the Vienna Lectures, which had been published in full in , and were to appear in French in and in English in It would be issued in London by John Murray.
For these were years that saw him producing not poetry but a great deal of prose, political rhetoric in fact. After this interlude of roughly two years, Schlegel was to turn again to pure scholarly activity, involving learning the basics of Sanskrit. Like her he was a fugitive from Napoleon. His association with her had seen him banned from Geneva.
Now he was fleeing in her company, finding refuge in Russia, a country at war with Napoleon, and then in Sweden, where the Prince Royal and the Tsar had just concluded a treaty. Once Sweden and France were formally at war, Schlegel had no option but to stay close to Bernadotte. For Napoleon and his agents they were seditious, insurrectionary even. Savary intercepted their—often indiscreet—letters and passed on all the essential information to his master: When later comparing his own career in these years with the academic idyll in Heidelberg enjoyed by his old adversary Johann Heinrich Voss, Schlegel was not exaggerating in saying that he could have been arrested for treason in French territory.
It was also tempered with a sobering knowledge: In , Albertine, now sixteen and a young beauty, was married to Victor, duke of Broglie. There were other reminders. All this may help in part to explain the tone in his letters, not without some self-pity, of stoical acceptance of an unfulfilled lot, the sense that one had to accommodate to what life had in store and not expect happiness.
A secret political agent, following armies on horseback; wearing a splendid uniform, in court dress; rubbing shoulders with the high and mighty, corresponding with the Tsar, Metternich Bernadotte as a matter of course ; formulating state policy, like Stein or Gentz? There was nothing new in these associations: In a way the rest simply followed.
In these years people changed in station and allegiance as chance and circumstances demanded. Why could not Schlegel the Hanoverian write pamphlets in Swedish service? The middle-aged Fichte ruined his health as an academic firebrand in Berlin. Younger men, some of whom had heard Schlegel in Jena or Berlin, rallied to the colours. Only the unmartial Ludwig Tieck, dedicating his collection Phantasu s to Schlegel in and evoking the great days of Jena, kept well out of the fray in his bolt hole in the Mark of Brandenburg.
Unlike some of these, Schlegel did not see action and generally kept back with the headquarters staff. Not for him the mud, the dust, the fleas, the corpses, the dead horses, the Cossacks, the detritus of the battlefield, the first-hand narratives of great encounters. In the rearguard, he would exchange the sword for the pen, as a forceful writer in both German and French. Here, they were joined by Rocca, Albert, and Schlegel, who had been entrusted with securing passports for the next leg of the journey.
He would rejoin them in Stockholm. He had no option but to swallow his chagrin and concentrate on the main task of their all somehow reaching Sweden. It would be different from their previous journeyings, for she was now in poor health and less able to withstand discomforts. Schlegel was in effect a proscribed person, Rocca was a French citizen. From Berne they went via Zurich and Winterthur and then briefly through the Bavarian controlled Tyrol.
Rather than reflect on the recent fate of Andreas Hofer and his Tyrolean uprising, it was expedient to pass quickly through to Salzburg and Munich and gain Austrian soil. The parties met up at Linz and proceeded to Vienna. She would soon realize that Austria had changed since The Schlegel brothers saw each other for the last time until There was however the need to obtain passports for their forward journey: They were soon to learn the unpalatable fact that Austria could present a different aspect if one came as a fugitive, even one of fame and high rank.
They were subjected to constant surveillance, and it was even to emerge that one of their servants was in police pay. His master Metternich, less enamoured than he, was absent and did nothing. Peace had been concluded between Russia and Turkey. It was one reason why she had preferred exile in Coppet to banishment in America. Napoleon however put paid to that particular scheme by declaring war on Russia. There were harassments and petty inconveniences along the way, with uncertainties about passports Schlegel had been left in Vienna to sort these out as they passed through Moravia Brno, Olomouc and Galicia.
The monotony of the landscape depressed her. There were however compensations. With great relief they arrived at Brody, the Austrian-Russian border station, on 13 July. The governors of Kiev, Orel and Tula received them. Then, on 2 August, the golden cupolas of Moscow came into sight. Except in a political context, he rarely wrote anything complimentary about the Slavs. Whether the journey through the Slavonic lands was the cause, must remain a conjecture. They had time to take in the ancient city, to meet its most famous literary personage, Nikolai Karamzin, and its governor, Count Rostopchin, who was soon to give the order for its destruction.
They then travelled across the endless plain, through Novgorod and thus to St Petersburg, where they arrived on 11 August. The month in the Russian capital was to be the first of her late triumphs, with Stockholm, London and Paris to follow. This meant that Schlegel inevitably receded into the background, while she shone all the more refulgently. Arndt mentions him only by name, Stein similarly, John Quincy Adams, who had two animated conversations with her, not at all.
Kutuzov had just been appointed commander-in- chief of the Russian armies; the French were in retreat. St Petersburg was offering asylum to notable ruling spirits in the opposition against Napoleon. Arndt had made his journey to Moscow and to St Petersburg to join Stein and become his private secretary. A treaty had been signed there on 30 August, leaving Sweden free to pursue its policies against Denmark, suitably assisted by a Russian loan.
The Tsar had charmed his Swedish partner, but had not committed himself to concrete undertakings. Savary certainly thought so. More probably she put in a good word for Bernadotte during her audience with Alexander. To her distress it was booed. Anti- French feelings might run high, but surely French culture was excepted. It clearly was not. In that assumption he was correct.
This meant leaving the splendours of St Petersburg for the more sober grandeur of Stockholm. Above all, it meant meeting Bernadotte, the Prince Royal of Sweden: If one wanted an illustration of how the French Revolution had shaken up the old political and social order of Europe, he would provide it. Bernadotte was above all the army commander at Austerlitz, at Jena, at Eylau, at Wagram, yet Napoleon was never satisfied with his performance at these battles, and what is more he did not trust him. Nor did the thought of a parvenu on the Swedish throne worry him.
Or indeed of older Swedish history: He would have learned that Sweden was still smarting under the loss of its large eastern buffer province of Finland, which had been wrested from it by Russia in after a brief campaign. It was all the more necessary to ensure good relations with Russia in the east and to secure territorial guarantees in the west. He had forced Sweden to declare war on Britain no shots were actually ever fired , then he had invaded Swedish Pomerania preparatory to his Russian campaign in the summer of For the first time since Vienna, Schlegel emerged from the shadows.
Her customary intrepidity deserted her when she left dry land, and her fears were compounded on seeing the frail vessel that was to transport them. It was, as it were, Lady Hamilton translated to the Baltic. A storm rose, the ship was forced to take shelter near a rocky island. Under such bizarre and slightly hilarious circumstances were Niobe or Iphigenia seen in the Gulf of Bothnia.
Schlegel produced a poem for the occasion—it could not be otherwise—adding it to his earlier homage to the young dancer Friederike Brun. The Prussian envoy claimed that her house was the centre of anti-Napoleonic intrigue in the city. It was a post calling for some delicacy and tact: Nor did he support the Danish initiatives to secure concessions from the British, which later elicited sarcastic comments from Schlegel. Of course he had in various contexts expressed quite pronounced views on the development of the modern state, its tendency to centralism, bureaucracy, standing armies.
For him the Reformation was the source of many of these evils, which as he saw it had brought the Middle Ages proper to a symbolic end. Rather—in the year —they were a call for reflection on the past as a guide to present uncertainties. Real politics were, as ever, best left to those who knew its practical limits and who did not go into reveries about what once was. His brother Friedrich meanwhile had been called upon to formulate general policies of state according to Austrian doctrine and had assumed the role of a political propagandist for the Habsburg cause.
They were very largely in German, a language that Bernadotte did not read. The Vienna Lectures, the best proof of the man and his style, were not to appear in French until later in Thus General Suchtelen was more or less right when he saw in Schlegel a man whose talents and whose knowledge of Germany made him ideally suitable. Thus it lacked official status and remained a draft. The reasons for this are not difficult to see.
It begged questions and made sweeping assumptions. No-one doubted that a campaign against Napoleon would have to be initiated in the German lands: Bernadotte himself was really only marginally interested in Germany. When he did go there, he used Swedish territory in Pomerania as his base. Baron Stein, and later Prince Metternich, also had very different notions of how Germany would look during and after a campaign against Napoleon, and they were not especially interested in a Swedish role in these processes except in a minor capacity.
He knew that, rhetorically, the case had to be prepared with care. The mention of Walcheren, the British fiasco of , suggested that small and badly organised expeditions were unlikely to succeed. It would by the same token remind the Prince Royal that he, as Marshal Bernadotte, had once been largely instrumental in that particular British defeat. What was needed was the revival of the German empire itself.
- The Life of August Wilhelm Schlegel.
- Personengesellschaften im Abkommensrecht - Pobleme und Lösungsvorschläge de lege ferenda (German Edition)!
- Charlie Rabbit - Train to Funtown Park (Charlie Rabbits Adventures Book 7).
- am verlobungstage 08 original scan von german edition Manual.
- Literature & Fiction 1800-1849 Antiquarian & Collectible Books in German.
Of course it would be an empire that reflected the present state of Germany, its sophistication in political and philosophical thought, not some entity in the past. At most one might wish an existing royal house to assume leadership, such as Habsburg. Only here did the memorandum pick up some of the medievalisings of the Deutsches Museum. This latter would be no other than Baron Stein with whom, Schlegel reminded the Prince, he had had conversations in St Petersburg. Switzerland would form part of it, the Hanseatic towns as well they would make it a sea power.
Without realizing it, Schlegel was coming close to the pan-German visions to be formulated in mid-century and beyond. The envoi of the memorandum was addressed to Sweden and to the Prince Royal himself. It invoked the ultimate example of Gustavus Adolphus, whose worthy successor it suggested Bernadotte was. A good command of selected facts, a well- presented argument however shaky in parts , and some gross flattery: It was, as said, a draft, destined for the eyes of the Prince Royal only, but Schlegel clearly had the authority to make some of its general thrust known in other quarters.
It was now opportune to make use of these contacts. Should Napoleon not be vanquished, it would be hemmed in by the constraints of a French alliance. How much more attractive an association with Russia, Britain and Sweden that would guarantee the balance of power but also enable a German league against Napoleon to be constituted. There follow the usual flatteries about the Emperor Francis, Sickingen himself, and the Prince Royal. There was still opposition in. She would be free to move as ever, to England, while he, now the committed amanuensis and propagandist of Bernadotte, must remain behind.
It was to this pamphlet that Schlegel was later referring when he claimed that he could have been arrested in the Kingdom of Westphalia into which his native Hanover had been incorporated. Indeed it was assumed by many that she was the author the English translation actually said so. There was even a public retraction.
His aim was to show that neutrality was ineffectual in the face of the dangers of Napoleonic domination. There was the need for an alliance that would strengthen the three main powers as yet unaffected by French occupation: Russia, Britain, and Sweden itself. To that effect, Sweden must extend its border to the west: