Letters of Alexander von Humboldt to Varnhagen von Ense.: From 1827 to 1858. With extracts from Varnhagen's diaries, and letters of Varnhagen and others to HumboldtHumboldt, Alexander von
History
Letters of Alexander von Humboldt to Varnhagen von Ense.: From 1827 to 1858. With extracts from Varnhagen's diaries, and letters of Varnhagen and others to Humboldt
Humboldt, Alexander von
Humboldt, Alexander von, 1769-1859 -- Correspondence
I accompany the King to the Rhine. That I had no mind to become a mere
color-stand at Petersburg will be understood by you. The Chancellor has
always the pleasure of being the subject of vulgar recrimination on the
part of those who are either not invited or refused admittance to the
banquet. What an excitement glass beads, peacock plumes, and ribbons can
stir up among men![35]....
NOTE BY VARNHAGEN.—Marheineke’s article on the Anglican church in the
“Jahrbuecher fuer wissenschaftliche Kritik,” with a couple of
censorial blunders.
On the 26th June, 1842, Varnhagen writes in his diary about the new
order:—“Humboldt tells me much about the foundation of the new order.
The King had at first composed a list, in which he had written the names
with Sanscrit letters. This list was referred for advice to Humboldt,
Eichhorn, Savigny, Thiele; then it was altered many times; new names
were added and others stricken out—the indecision lasted six weeks.
Originally the King had decided for forty-six members, to correspond
with the number of years embraced by the reign of Frederick the Great.
Afterwards he thought of adopting forty, but was afraid of doing so, on
account of the ‘plaisanteries’ about the number ‘quarante’ in the French
Academy; at last he limited the number to thirty. All was managed by the
King in his own way. Arago was originally placed on the list by the
King. He insisted upon Metternich as his particular choice. Rumohr was
abandoned. Steffens was, in the opinion of the King, not deserving
‘enough—neither as philosopher nor as a naturalist.’ Liszt was decidedly
favored by the King, and no objections could prevail. Spontini was
thought of, but Savigny and the cabinet counsellor, Mueller, succeeded
in displacing him. Moore was objected to as having written satirical
verses on Prussia. ‘That is not at all my business,’ said the King.
Melloni was opposed as being a Carbonaro, and having been at the head of
a revolutionary Junta. ‘I do not care the least about that,’ said the
King. ‘I would confer the order on O’Connell, if he possessed such
scientific merits.’ The King proposed Raumer and Ranke. Eichhorn and
Savigny assented only to Ranke, and thereupon both were dropped.
Notwithstanding the view taken in Melloni’s, Moore’s, and Arago’s cases,
Schlosser the historian was rejected on account of his political
views(?). Metternich had railed at the ‘bishopric of Jerusalem.’ Now to
insure the new order against the same fate, he was to be nominated a
member of it—this is deemed the ‘secret motive,’ in Humboldt’s opinion.
And for Metternich’s sake Uwaroff was left out, for with him the other
would not have been the sole representative of his species. Link was
weighed, but found wanting.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account