52.HUMBOLDT TO VARNHAGEN.
Berlin,August 22d, 1841.
Berlin,August 22d, 1841.
Berlin,August 22d, 1841.
Berlin,August 22d, 1841.
Your letter has done me an immense deal of good. I see that we feel ourselves both equally attracted to each other, and that you attributed my long, and to me very gloomy, seclusion, only to the distracted state of my life, and to the application of my faculties, to an aim which they never can reach. Towards the close of a much troubled life which has but imperfectly realized its aspirations, it is a happiness to remain secure in, and to possess the esteem of those to whose mind andintellect and wishes we are irresistibly drawn. I shall personally thank you, and this very afternoon apply for Mr. L. to the Princess of Prussia, and beg her Imperial Highness to assist me with all earnestness. With old veneration and love, yours,
A. v. Humboldt.
A. v. Humboldt.
A. v. Humboldt.
A. v. Humboldt.
At the request of the King I took the opportunity of reading to him Schelling’s discourse on nature and art. (Philosoph. Werke, tome 1st, 1809.) The passages concerning Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci, and about the possibility of a resuscitation of the arts, are the most pleasing in our language. This lecture produced on the King the effect of a beautiful song. But the bird is now sixty-seven years old, and goes from one golden cage to another.
Varnhagen says in his diary, under date of April 28, 1841: “Humboldt came and remained more than an hour and a half; I found him looking ill, but lively, cheerful, and more communicative than ever. He praises the King for his disposition and his intentions, but thinks that he is no man of action, and that whenever he acts, he does it by starts, without system or method. Whether it be from kindness or timidity, at all events, he often does not dare to do what he most wishes and could do quite easily; thus he expects impatiently that the minister Von Werther will resign, and asks of Humboldt,whether the minister has given no intimation of it.”
On the 30th April, 1841, Varnhagen says: “Humboldt has a great many enemies, as well amongst the savans as at court, who are constantly seeking an opportunity to malign him, but the moment he is praised all vituperation ceases—for it is all vituperation. It is seldom that anybody is able to maintain it. Some time ago a gentleman said to me, that he did not know what to think of Humboldt, and that he could not come to a conclusion concerning him. I answered: ‘Think always the best of him, believe him always capable of the best action, and you always will be nearest the truth.’ Another said, same day, sneeringly: ‘Humboldt was a great man before he came to Berlin, where he became an ordinary one.’ Moritz Robert remarked that Rahel had already said several times: ‘Nothing holds its ground in Berlin, everything has a downward tendency; indeed, if the Pope himself came to Berlin, he would not continue long to be Pope, he would sink into the ‘commonplace,’ down perhaps to the standard of a groom.’ What Rahel said is true, and I remember that she said so, but had made no note of it. This peculiarity of Berlin ought to be examined closer; it indicates a strong stratum of undeveloped greatness, and may, when positively brought forth to a point, bring the highest honor on Berlin; but if allowed to act negatively, itwill, of course, become a shame to this city. ‘The Berliners are such a daring race of men,’ said Goethe, once. That is much the same definition.”