[67] Cf. Elster edition, IV, 406-9. The circumstantial way in whichHeine retells this story is almost sufficient to lead one tobelieve that he had Schreiber at hand when he wrote this part ofElementargeister; but he says that he did not.
[68] Discussion as to the first conception of Heine'sRabbiarefound in:Heinrich Heines Fragment;Der Rabbi von Bacharach,by Lion Feuchtwanger, München, 1907;Heinrich Heine und Der Rabbivon Bacharach, by Gustav Karpeles, Wien, 1895.
[69] The poem is one of theJunge Leiden, published in 1821, Elster (I, 490) says: "Eine bekannte Sage, mit einzelnen vielfach wiederkehrenden uralten Zügen, dargestellt In SimrocksRheinsagen." Simrock had, of course, done nothing on theRheinsagenin 1821, being then only nineteen years old and an inconspicuous student at Bonn. Walzel says (I. 449.): "Mit einem andern Ausgang ist die Sage in dem von Heine vielbenutztenHandbuch für Reisende am Rheinvon Aloys Schreiber (Heidelberg, 1816) überliefert." The edition of this work in the New York Public Library has no printed date, but 1818 is written in. Walzel may be correct. The outcome of Heine's poem is, after all, not so different: In Schreiber, both brothers relinquish their clalms to the girl and remain unmarried; in Heine the one kills the other and in this way neither wins the girl.
[70] It is the same story as the one told by Bulwer-Lytton in hisPilgrims of the Rhine. chap. xxiv.
[71] All through the body of Schreiber'sHandbuch, there are references to the places and legends mentioned in Heine'sRabbi. On Bacharach there is the following: "Der Reisende, wenn er auch nur eine Stunde in Bacharach verweilt, unterlasse nicht, die Ruinen von Staleck zu besteigen, wo eine der schönsten Rheinlandschaften sich von seinen Blicken aufrollt. Die Burg von sehr beträchtlichem Umfang scheint, auf den Trümmern eines Römerkastells erbaut. Die, welche die Entstehung derselben den Hunnen zuschreiben, well sie in Urkunden den Namen Stalekum hat, sind in einem Irrtum befangen, denn Stalekum oder Stalek heisst eben so viel als Stalbühl, oder ein Ort, wo ein Gericht gehegt wurde. Pfalzgraf Hermann von Staleck, starb im 12ten Jahrhundert; er war der letzte seines Stammes, und von ihm kam die Burg, als Kölnisches Lehen, an Konrad Von Staufen."
[72] To come back to Heine and Loeben, Herm. Anders Krüger says (p., 147) in hisPseudoromantik:"Heinrich Heine, der überhaupt Loeben studiert zu haben scheint," etc. He offers no proof. If one wished to make out a case for Loeben, it could bo done with his narrative poem "Ferdusi" (1817) and Heine's "Der Dichter Ferdusi." Both tell about the same story; but each tells a story that was familiar in romantic circles.
[73] In reply to a letter addressed to Professor Elster on October 4, 1914, the writer received the following most kind reply on November 23: "Die Frage, die Sie an mich richten ist leicht beantwortet: Heine hat Loeben in seinen Schriften nicht erwähnt, aber das besagt nicht viel; er hat manchen benutzt, den er nicht nennt. Und es kanngar keinem Zweifel unterliegen, dass Loeben für die Lorelei HeinesunmittelbaresVorbild ist; darauf habe ich öfter hingewiesen, aber wohl auch andere. Das TaschenbuchUraniafür das Jahr 1821, wo Loebens Gedicht u. Novelle zuerst erschienen, ist unserem Dichter zweifellos zu Gesicht gekommen." No one can view Professor Elster in any other light than as an eminent authority on Heine, but his certainty here must be accepted with reserve, and his "wohl auch andere" is, in view of the fact that, he was by no means the first, and certainly not the last, to make this assertion, a trifle disconcerting.
[74] The ultimate determining of sources is an ungrateful theme. Some excellent suggestions on this subject are offered by Hans Rohl in hisDie ältere Romantik und die Kunst des jungen Goethe, Berlin, 1909, pp. 70-72. This work was written under the general leadership of Professor Elster. The disciple would, in this case, hardly agree with the master. Pissin likewise speaks wisely in discussing the influence of Novalis on Loeben in his monograph on the latter, pp. 97-98. and 129-30. And Heine himself (Elster edition, V. 294) says in regard to the question whether Hegel did borrow so much from Schelling: "Nichts ist lächerlicher als das reklamierte Eigentumsrecht an Ideen." He then shows how the ideas were not original with Schelling either; he had them from Spinoza. And it is just so here. Brentano started the legend; Heine goes back to him indirectly. Eichenidorff and Vogt directly; Schreiber borrowed from Vogt, Loeben from Schreiber, and Heine from Schreiber—and thereafter it would be impossible to say who borrowed from whom.
[75] The majority of theLoreleidichtungencan be found in:Opern-Handbuch, by Hugo Riemann, Leipzig, 1886:Zur Geschichte der Märchenoper, by Leopold Schmidt, Halle, 1895;Die Loreleysage in Dichtung und Musik, by Hermann Seeliger, Leipzig, 1898. Seeliger took the majority of his titles fromNassau in seinen Sagen, Geschichten und Liedern, by Henniger, Wiesbaden, 1845. At least he says so, but one is inclined to doubt the statement, for "die meisten Balladen" have been written since 1845. Seeliger's book is on the whole unsatisfactory. He has, for example, Schreiber improving on, and remodeling Loeben's saga; but Schreiber was twenty-three years older than Loeben, and wrote his saga at least three years before Loeben wrote his.
[76] In F. Gräter'sIdunna und Hermode, eine Alterthumszeitung, Breslau, 1812, pp. 191-92, Gräter gives under the heading, "Die Bildergallerie des Rheins." thirty well-known German sagas. The twenty-seventh is "Der Lureley: Ein Gegenstück zu der Fabel von der Echo." It is the version of Vogt.
[77] Aside from the above, some of the less important authors of lyrics, ballads, dramas, novels, etc., on the Lorelei-theme are: J. Bartholdi, H. Bender, H. Berg, J. P. Berger, A. H. Bernard, G. Conrad, C. Doll, L. Elchrodt, O. Fiebach, Fr. Förster, W. Fournier, G. Freudenberg, W. Freudenberg, W. Genth, K. Geib, H. Grieben, H. Grüneberg, G. Gurski, Henriette Heinze-Berg, A. Henniger, H. Hersch, Mary Koch, Wilhelmine Lorenz, I. Mappes, W. Molitor, Fr. Mücke, O. W. Notzsch, Luise Otto, E. Rüffer, Max Schaffroth, Luise Frelin von Sell, E. A. W. Siboni, H. Steinheuer, Adelheid von Stolterfoth, A. Storm, W. von Waldbrühl, L. Werft, and others even more obscure than these.
[78] In Menco Stern'sGeschichten vom Rhein, the story is told so as to connect the legend of the Lorelei with the treasures of theNibelungenlied. In this way we have gold in the mountain, wine around it, a beautiful woman on it—what more could mortal wish? Sympathy! And this the Lorelei gives him in the echo. In reply to an inquiry, Mr. Stern very kindly wrote as follows: "The facts given in myGeschichten vom Rheinare all well known to German students; and especially those mentioned in my chapter 'Lorelay' can bo verified in the book:Der Rheinvon Philipp F. W. Oertel (W. O. v. Horn) who was, I think, the greatest authority on the subject of the Rhine." Oertel is not an authority. In Eduard-Prokosch'sGerman for Beginners, the version of Schreiber was used, as is evident from the lines spoken by the Lorelei to her Father:
Vater, Vater, geschwind, geschwind.Die weissen Rosse schick' deinem Kind,Es will reiten auf Wogen und Wind.
These verses are worked into a large number of the ballads, andsince they are Schreiber's own material, his saga must have hadgreat general influence.
[79] There would be no point in listing all of the books on the legends of the Rhine that treat the story of the Lorelei. Three, however, are important, since it is interesting to see how their compilers were not satisfied with one version of the story, but included, as becomes evident on reading them, the versions of Brentano, Schreiber, Loeben, and Heine:Der Rhein: Geschichten und Sagen, by W. O. von Horn, Stuttgart, 1866, pp. 207-11;Legends of the Rhine, by H. A. Guerber, New York, 1907, pp: 199-206;Eine Sammlung von Rhein-Sagen, by A. Hermann Bernard, Wiesbaden, no year, pp. 225-37.
[80] Mrs. Caroline M. Sawyer wrote a poem entitled "The Lady of Lorlei. A Legend of the Rhine." It is published inThe female Poets of America, by Rufus Wilmot Griswold, New York, 1873, p. 221. This is not the first edition of this work, nor is it the original edition of Mrs. Sawyer's ballad. It is an excellent poem. Fr. Hoebel set it to music, and Adolf Strodtmann translated it into German, because of its excellence, and included it in hisAmerikanische Anthologie. It was impossible to determine just when Mrs. Sawyer wrote her poem. The writer is deeply indebted to Professor W. B. Cairns, of the department of English in the University of Wisconsin, who located the poem for him.
[81] Cf.Otto Ludwigs gesammelte Schriften, edited by Adolf Stern, Leipzig, 1801, I. 69, 107, 114.
[82] It has been impossible to determine just when Sucher (1789-1860) set Heine's ballad to music, but since he was professor of music at the University of Tübingen from 1817 on, and since he became interested in music while quite young, it is safe to assume that he wrote his music for "Die Lorelei" soon after its publication. The question is of some importance by way of finding out just when the ballad began to be popular. Strangely enough, there is nothing on Silcher in Hobert Eitner's compendiousQuellen-Lexicon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten der christlichen Zeitrechnung, Leipzig, 1900-1904. Heine's ballad is included in theAllgemeines deutsches Commersbuch unter musikalischer Redaktion von Fr. Silcher und Fr. Erck, Strassburg, 1858 (17th ed.), but the date of composition is not given.
[83] InPauls Grundriss der germanischen Philologie, I, 1039, Mogk says: "Die Weiblichen Nixen bezaubern durch ihren Gesang, die Loreley und ähnliche Sagen mögen hierin ihre Wurzel haben." The only trouble is, no one has thus far unearthed this saga.
[84] Wilhelm Hertz gives (pp.229-30) instances of this so that uncertainty as to its accuracy is removed. The passages are striking in that they concern the "Lorberg" and the "Lorleberg."
[85] In chap, XV Eichendorff introduces the ballad as follows: "Leontin, der wenig darauf achtgab, begann folgendes Lied über ein am Rheine bekanntes Märchen." The reference can be only to Brentano, despite the fact that the first two lines are so strongly reminiscent of Goethe's "Erlkonig." Eichendorff and Brentano became acquainted in Heidelberg and then in Berlin they were intimate. There is every reason to believe that Eichendorff knew Bretano's "Rheinmärchen" in manuscript form. For the relation of the two, see the Kosch edition of Eichendorff's works.BriefeandTagebücher,Vols. XI-XIII.
[86] Niklas Vogt included, to be sure, in hisJugendphantasien üher die Sagen des Rheins(ca.1811) an amplified recapitulation in prose of Brentano's ballad. Schreiber knew this work, for in hisHandbuchthere is a bibliography of no fewer than ten pages of "Schriften, welche auf die Rheingegend Bezug haben." So far as one can determine such a matter from mere titles, the only one of these that could have helped him in the composition of his Lorelei-saga is:Rheinische Geschichten und Sagen, von Niklas Vogt. Frankfurt am Main, 1817, 6 Bände.
[87] Eduard Thorn says (p. 89): "Man darf annehmen, dass Heine die Ballade Brentano's kennen gelernt hat, dass er aus ihr den Namen entlehnte, wobei ihm Eichendorff die Fassung 'Lorelei' lieferte, und das ihm erst Loebens Auffassung der Sage zur Gestaltung verhelfen hat." It sounds like a case ofceterum censeo, but Thorn's argument as to Brentano and Heine is so thin that this statement too can be looked upon only as a weakly supported hypothesis.
[88] Cf. Raimund Pissin's monograph, pp. 73-74.
[89] There are about two thousand words in Schreiber's saga, and about five thousand in Loeben's.
[90] It must be remembered that Schreiber's manuals are written in an attractive style: his purpose was not simply to instruct, but to entertain. And it was not simply the legends of the Rhine and its tributaries, but those of the whole of Western Germany that he wrote up with this end in view.
[91] Some minor details that Loeben, or Heine, had he known theMärchenin 1823, could have used are pointed out in Wilhelm Hertz's article, pp. 220-21.
[92] Cf. Görres' edition, pp. 94-108.
[93] Cf.ibid., pp. 128-40, and 228-44. It is in thisMärchen(p. 231) that Herzeleid sings Goethe's "Wer niesein Brod in Thränon asz."
[94] Cf. Görres' edition, pp. 247-57. There are a number of details inthisMärchenthat remind strongly of Fouqué'sUndine,which Brentano knew.
[95] In hisDie Märchen Clemens Brentanos, Köln, 1895, H. Cardauns gives an admirable study of Brentano'sMärchen, covering the entire ground concerning the question whether Brentano's ballad was original and pointing out the sources and the value of his,Rheinmärchen. Cardauns comes to the only conclusion that can be reached: Brentano located his ballad in a region replete with legends, but there is no positive evidence that he did not wholly invent his own ballad. The story that Hermann Bender tells about having found an old MS dating back to the year 1650 and containing the essentials of Brentano's ballad collapses, for this MS cannot be produced, not even by Bender who claims to have found it. See Cardauns, pp. 60-67. Reinhold Steig reviewed Cardauns' book inEuphorion(1896, pp. 791-99) without taking in the question as to the originality of Brentano's ballad.
[97] In Geibel'sGesammelte Werke, VI. 106-74, Geibel wrote the libretto for Felix Mendelssohn in 1846. Mendelssohn died before finishing it; Max Bruch completed the opera independently in 1863. It has also been set to music by two obscure composers. Karl Goedeke gives a very unsatisfactory discussion of the matter inEmanuel Geibel, Stuttgart, 1860. pp. 307 ff.
[98] Hermann Seeliger says (p. 73): "Zu den Bearbeitungen, die sich an die Ballade von Brentano anlehnen, gehören die Dichtungen von Geibel, Mohr, Roquette, Hillemacher, Fiebach und Sommer." Seeliger wrote his study for musicians, and his statement may be correct.
[99] Aside from the treatises on the Lorelei already mentioned, there are the following:Zu Heines Balladen und Romanzen, by Oskar Netoliczka, Kronstadt, 1891; this study does not treat the Lorelei;Die Lurleisage, by F. Rehorn, Frankfurt am Main, 1891;Sagen und Geschichten des Rheinlandes, by Karl Geib, Mannheim, 1836; the work is naturally long since superseded;Kölnische Zeitungof July 12, 1867, by H. Grieben;Kölnische Zeitungof 1855, by H. Düntzer;H. Heine, ein Vortrag, by H. Sintenis, pp. 21-26;Die Lorelei: Die Loreleidichtungen mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die Ballade von Heinr. Heine, by C. L. Leimbach, Wolfenbüttel, 1879. The last six of these works were not accessible, but, since they are quoted by the accessible studies, it seems that they offer nothing new. (The writer has since secured Leimbach's treatise of 50 small pages. It offers nothing new.)
[100] Adolf Seybert in hisDie Loreleisage, Wiesbaden, 1863 and 1872 (Programm), contends that Frau Holla and the Lorelei are related. Fritz Strich in hisDie Mythologie in der deutschen Literatur von Klopstock bis Wagner, Halle, 1910, says (pp. 307-9) that Brentano's ballad is "eine mythologische Erfindung Brentanos, zu der ihn der echoreiche Felsen dieses Namens bei Bacharach anregte." He also says: "Ob nicht Heines Lied auf Brentanos Phantasie zurückgewirkt haben mag?" The reference is to Brentano'sMärchen. Strich's book contains a detailed account of the use of mythology in Heine, Loeben, and Brentano.
[101] Hermann Seeliger says (p. 8): "Ich meine, die ganze romantische Schule hätte ohne den Stoff vom Volke zu bekommen, ein Gedicht von solcher Schönheit wie das von Brentano weder gemacht noch machen können." Vis-à-vis such a statement, sociability ceases.