Among the constant guests who frequented Henrietta Herz’s house were Ramler, Engel, Moritz, the elder and the younger Spalding, Nicolai and Dohm, men who, however much they may have been thrown into the shade by younger names, then held a high position in the literary world. The brothers Alexander and Wilhelm Von Humboldt also, at a very early age, already belonged to the intimate circle of Henrietta Herz; and so likewise the composer Reichardt; Schadow, the celebrated sculptor; Count Christian Bernstorff, the Danish-Prussian statesman; the notorious Genz; and Count Alexander Von Schlobitten, the eldest son of the family in which Schleiermacher had been tutor, and ultimately Minister of State in Prussia. To these were added subsequently other remarkable men, such as Gustav Von Brinkmann, Fessler, Frederick Schlegel, and Schleiermacher, who, introduced by Alexander Von Dohna, became eventually not only one of the most brilliant stars of this brilliant social constellation, but also one of the most highly valued friends of the house. We will borrow from Mrs. Herz’s Erinnerungen a few characteristics of him at this period. The acquaintance, commenced in 1794, did not assume a more intimate character until two years later, after Schleiermacher’s return from Landsberg.

“Schleiermacher was then,” says Mrs. Herz, “preacher to the Charité, and resided in the establishment, the environs of which were at the time uninhabited, desolate, and slushy. Nevertheless, he visited us every evening in the Neuen Friedrichstrasse, near the Königstrasse, where we then resided. On winter evenings the way to our house, and more especially the way home again, was beset with many difficulties; but still greater difficulties, and in winter, indeed, even dangers, Schleiermacher had to encounter, when, during some repairs at the Charité, he removed to a house on the Oranienburg Chaussée, which was then a common high-road, without lights at night, and with only a stray house here and there at considerable intervals. By this time, however, he had already attached himself so warmly to my husband and myself, and was so convinced of the sincere regard which we entertained for him in return, that these difficulties rarely prevented him from paying us his regular evening visit. In our anxiety for his safety, we presented him, therefore, with a small lantern, constructed so as to admit of its being fastened in the button-hole of his coat, and thus accoutred, the little man left our house every winter evening.

“At that time Schleiermacher had not as yet attained celebrity, or even a more than ordinary reputation. His literary activity was indeed only then begun with the translation of some English sermons, a work which was by no means calculated to win a name for him. Yet I may say that my husband and myself very soon discovered his high intellectual significance. When Friedrich Schlegel came to Berlin, I hastened to make him acquainted with Schleiermacher, as I felt convinced that intimate intercourse would be advantageous to both parties. Schlegel also soon discerned what a great treasure of intellect was concealed within the little body of his new friend … and Schlegel and I thenceforward always called him our bijou. We were also the first who encouraged him to undertake some independent literary work, by proposing to him to write an article for the Athenæum—a periodical edited by the brothers Schlegel. This was the first original work of his that was published… . . The first more extensive literary production of Schleiermacher’s that appeared was the Discourses on Religion, which were begun at Potsdam in the middle of February, 1799, and concluded about the middle of April. During his stay there, which was prolonged until May, we corresponded almost daily, and while the Discourses were in course of production, he reported in each letter the progress of the work, and as soon as a discourse was completed sent it off to me, and I then generally communicated it to Friedrich Schlegel, and our common friend Dorothea Veit, before despatching it to the censor and to the printers. In accordance with his expressed desire, we openly communicated to him our opinions of the parts of the work completed, but without ever succeeding in inducing him to make any alterations in conformity with such of our views as did not coincide with his own… . . Upon the whole, his correspondence with me from the years 1798 to 1804—a period of great inward and outward activity in Schleiermacher’s life, perhaps, indeed, the most important period in the history of his development—bears abundant testimony in favour of the intellect and heart of this excellent man. We were accustomed to see each other daily when in Berlin, and when we were separated, letters were made a substitute for this daily intercourse; and it so happened that he was frequently absent from Berlin during that period, at one time even as long as two years, when he was court-preacher at Stolpe, while my stay in the country every summer, also gave occasion for correspondence; for he had an irresistible inward craving to commune with friends, to open before them every fold and crevice in his heart and mind, and an equal craving for signs of life and love from his friends, whose merits he greatly exaggerated, when he was once assured of their friendship. Such was the case as regards myself.

“It will easily be understood that people who were so much together as Schleiermacher and myself were also frequently seen together abroad; and probably the contrast between my very tall and full figure, and Schleiermacher’s small, spare, and not very well-built person, may have been somewhat comical. At all events it called forth from a Berlin wit a caricature of us, though at that time satire was rarely expressed in this form. I was represented as walking with Schleiermacher, whom, however, I held in my hand in the form of one of the very small parasols which were then in fashion, while out of his pocket stuck another such parasol of the smallest possible dimensions. This caricature did not remain unknown to us, and I believe no one in Berlin laughed more heartily at it than we did, though it must be confessed that the wit was of the weakest kind.

“There were not, either, wanting people, who, knowing the intimacy that existed between us, suspected that it was based upon a warmer sentiment than friendship. They were mistaken. With Schleiermacher it was an easy matter to speak in the most undisguised manner of one’s relation to him, and it was indeed one of his great endeavours to come to a clear understanding with himself and his friends in regard to their mutual relations, in order that no self-deception might disturb the happiness which the connections, such as they were in reality, and such as they ought to be, were calculated to afford. Thus we often gave utterance to the conviction that we never could have felt anything but friendship for each other, but friendship of the most intimate and tender nature; and strange as it may seem, we even explained to each other in writing the reason why no other connection could ever have existed between us.”²]

During this period also occurred Schleiermacher’s relations with Eleanore G———,³ which were definitively broken off a year later. Eleanore G——— was married but childless; and the mutual relations between her husband and herself were such that, according to Schleiermacher, their connection could not be deemed a true marriage, all the essential inward conditions of this being wanting. He believed that were the connection to be continued, her inner life could not fail to be entirely destroyed, and his opinions at that time (as he repeatedly expressed them without reference to this particular case) were in favour of the dissolution of such inwardly false unions. He even regarded such dissolution as a moral duty, in as far as it could take place without infringement of the social laws, which he demanded should be held in proper respect, while he considered the outward union as decidedly immoral, and as one which ought never to have been formed. These views were undoubtedly quite in accordance with the whole turn of his mind at that period, and indeed with those tendencies of the times in which he most participated, and there is, therefore, the less reason to suppose that they arose out of his personal relations to Eleanore G———. However, they favoured his hopes of happiness in connection with his earnest attachment to this lady; and although he considered the dissolution of her marriage as a thing morally called for, independently of any further eventuality, it was, nevertheless, understood, that when she should be free, he would marry her. Eleanore G———, however, could never with full conviction assent to these views; and after a long struggle and many hesitations, which Schleiermacher regarded as proofs of weakness, she at length determined to renounce him (in the autumn of 1805); and from that moment all communication between them ceased entirely.

The voluntary exile at Stolpe, into which Schleiermacher went, was occasioned by these circumstances. Fourteen years subsequently (1819)—so relates a living eye-witness—when Schleiermacher accidentally met Eleanore G——— at a large party, he went up to her, and holding out his hand to her, said, “Dear Eleanore, God has dealt kindly with us both.”

Of Schleiermacher’s letters to Eleanore G———, a great number are still extant; but although some extracts from these, bearing witness to the great regard and sincere love he entertained for her, are given in the present collection, the editors have not felt themselves authorized to give these letters in full (more especially the later ones, written during the period of struggle, and which principally refer to personal matters), with all the details of the circumstances; because the feelings of his relatives recoiled from an unnecessary revelation of a struggle so painful to Schleiermacher, and in relation to a connection which, as far as he was concerned, was undeniably founded upon a great error. These details are not, either, essentially necessary for understanding the state of Schleiermacher’s mind at that period or the connection of events, as the latter are alluded to, and the deep mental suffering to which they gave rise is sufficiently evident in his other letters. In addition to this, these letters could not have been given in a less fragmentary form without laying bare the concerns of a family in no way connected with Schleiermacher, a proceeding which the editors shrink from, although the events in question belong to so far distant a date; and they feel that in so doing they are not guilty of weakness, but are acting in accordance with justice and propriety.

More decisive for Schleiermacher’s whole future life than the evanescent connection with Eleanore G———, was his acquaintance with a young theologian, Ehrenfried von Willich by name, which was formed during an accidental meeting in Prenzlow on the island of Rügen, in 1801, and which soon warmed into sincere friendship. Willich subsequently became preacher in Stralsund, and married, in 1804, Henrietta von Mühlenfels, a daughter of Lieutenant-Colonel von Mühlenfels, of Sisson, in Rügen, and who was then sixteen years old. The parents of this young lady (the mother, whose maiden name was Campagne, was of French extraction, her family having left their country on account of their evangelical religion,) were both dead; and Willich had learnt to know his bride in the house of her elder sister, his friend Charlotte von Kathen, who was living on her estate, Götemitz, in Rügen. Schleiermacher soon became an intimate friend of both the sisters.

After Willich’s death Henrietta von Mühlenfels became Schleiermacher’s wife (1809), and up to the close of his life Charlotte von Kathen ever remained very dear to his heart. Charlotte was exceedingly beautiful; and E. M. Arndt, who was also a friend of hers, says, in a poem dedicated to her, in the edition of his published poems, that “her life was ever tending towards the stars.”

As a knowledge of Schleiermacher’s married and domestic life, and of the spirit that reigned in his family, cannot be attained without a distinct conception of the peculiarities of his wife, more especially as, though united by the fondest love and sympathizing on all matters of the deepest import, there were essential differences in their natures and characters. Many extracts are given from her letters, also,⁴ beginning from the very commencement of their acquaintance. A few of these, of very youthful character, belong to the period comprised in this section.

---

← As Curate at Landsberg · Contents · Daily Life in Berlin →

Footnotes

1. Fürst: Henriette Herz, ihr Leben und Erinnerungen. ↩

2. The passages between brackets are additions by the Translator. ↩

3. The name of this lady was Grunow, and her husband was a clergyman in Berlin.—TRANS. ↩

4. Some of these extracts the translator has omitted, as, being all written under the influence of one strong feeling, they are somewhat monotonous in character; and however interesting they may be to those who have lived in intimate intercourse with the writer, as the spontaneous outpourings of a pure and loving heart, they would be less so to the English reader. ↩