Leopold Von Ranke: A Biography [1 ed.] 1138487570, 9781138487574

Citation preview

Leopold von Ranke

Leopold von Ranke endeavoured to understand political order within its own historical context. To understand the nature of historical phenomena, such as an institution or an idea, one had to consider its historical development and the changes it underwent over a period of time. Historical epochs, Ranke argued, should not be judged according to predetermined contemporary values or ideas. Rather, they had to be understood on their own terms by empirically establishing history ‘as things really were.’ Ranke’s influence on History as a modern discipline is thus evident, and this is the first volume in English to chart his life and works for a hundred years. Andreas D. Boldt is at Maynooth University, Ireland.

Routledge Approaches to History

Values, Objectivity, and Explanation in Historiography Tor Egil Førland The Work of History Constructivism and a Politics of the Past Kalle Pihlainen History and Sociology in France From Scientific History to the Durkheimian School Robert Leroux Universal History and the Making of the Global Edited by Hall Bjørnstad, Helge Jordheim and Anne Régent-Susini Cowrie Shells and Cowrie Money A Global History Bin Yang A Personalist Philosophy of History Bennett Gilbert Historical Parallels, Commemoration and Icons Edited by Andreas Leutzsch Historians Without Borders New Studies in Multidisciplinary History Edited by Lawrence Abrams and Kaleb Knoblauch Leopold von Ranke A Biography Andreas D. Boldt For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/RoutledgeApproaches-to-History/book-series/RSHISTHRY

Leopold von Ranke A Biography

Andreas D. Boldt

First published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2019 Andreas D. Boldt The right of Andreas D. Boldt to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Boldt, Andreas Dieter, author. Title: Leopold von Ranke / Andreas D. Boldt. Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2019. | Series: Routledge approaches to history ; 28 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018056631 (print) | LCCN 2018059725 (ebook) | ISBN 9781351042734 (adobe) | ISBN 9781351042710 (mobi) | ISBN 9781351042727 (epub) | ISBN 9781138487574 (hardback) | ISBN 9781351042741 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Ranke, Leopold von, 1795–1886. | Ranke, Leopold von, 1795–1886—Influence. | Historians—Germany—Biography. | Historiography—Germany—History—19th century. | History— Philosophy—History—19th century. Classification: LCC D15.R3 (ebook) | LCC D15.R3 B655 2019 (print) | DDC 907.2/02—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018056631 ISBN: 978-1-138-48757-4 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-351-04274-1 (ebk) Typeset in Times New Roman by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Contents

Acknowledgementsvii Introduction

1

  1 Ranke’s childhood and educational years (1795–1818)

13

  2 First employment in Frankfurt/Oder and his early years in Berlin (1818–27)

29

  3 Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)

54

  4 Academic establishment and fame during the Vormärz (1831–43)

75

  5 Ranke’s wedding and the first years of his marriage (1843–48)

108

  6 European revolutions and Ranke’s role as political advisor (1848–52)

141

  7 Ranke’s daily life, Clarissa’s illness and her ‘Salon Ranke’ (1852–59)

161

  8 Ranke and his largest work on a nation: English History (1859–65)

191

  9 Ennoblement, rise of titles, but waning of fame and the death of Clarissa (1865–71)

214

vi  Contents

10 Retirement, old age and the last masterpiece (1871–86)

251



271

Epilogue: the perception of Ranke since 1886

Appendix: chronology298 Appendix: list of archives and main contents 302 Bibliography 311 Index of themes 359 366 Index of persons Index of places 374

Acknowledgements

This book is the result of several published books and articles over the last twenty years. My research has shown that a biography on Ranke was needed – not only to understand and follow Ranke’s own thoughts but also to provide a firm foundation for interested scholars and students alike who wish to study Ranke. I would like to thank Dr Ingrid Hecht (Germany) for her help, advice and corrections, Dr Stefan Jordan (Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences, Germany) for his detailed comments, support and corrections and Frank Bigeschke (Germany) for his support and detailed knowledge of Ranke and his home town, Wiehe. Sadly, while writing this book, a number of great people in my life have passed away, including two great Ranke scholars: Prof. Georg G. Iggers (1926–2017) and Prof. Hayden White (1928–2018); both will be sadly missed as historians and friends. However, 2018 also marked the loss of both my parents, Liesbeth (1949–2018) and Dieter Boldt (1948–2018), and a very close friend, Beate Bigeschke (1943–2018). My parents have always supported my academic career, and it was they who encouraged my interest in history. Mrs Bigeschke accommodated me when I researched the Ranke collections in Wiehe and, together with her son Frank, they became a foster family of sorts, for which I am hugely grateful. For these reasons, I dedicate this publication to the mentioned Ranke scholars, friends and family. I would also like to extend my thanks to Mr Brian O’Neill, who undertook the task of proofreading this manuscript. Andreas D. Boldt Independent Historian, Maynooth University, Ireland November 2018

Introduction

According to John Warren, Leopold von Ranke is a favourite with students answering examination questions on the methodology and nature of history. As Ranke had a near-revolutionary impact on historiography, it is easy to understand why.1 The standard answer to a question on Ranke’s contribution to historiography would run something like this: Reacting against the system building and generalizations of the Enlightenment, Ranke claimed that one should study the past for its own sake and respect the uniqueness of each age. In the search for history ‘as it actually happened,’ he not only came up with a new historical technique based on rigid objectivity but also single-handedly created the history profession – complete with professors of repute, seminars and a stress on original documentary research as the mark of the real historian.2 The student who remembers to evaluate as well as describe often points out that Ranke has been criticized for overstating the possibility of objectivity and that his own objectivity can be called into question, since he wrote from a conservative, pro-Prussian viewpoint. Warren added that some students may add that Ranke focused purely on the history of the elites and on diplomatic and political history, and so, although his emphasis on rigorous scholarship remains to this day, history has expanded into a much fuller and broader concern with the totality of human experience.3 These introductory sentences – although they are how students would describe him – also reflect the common opinion of scholars worldwide. This brings us to the question of who Ranke was and what his actual contribution to historiography has been. The German historian Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886) was one of the most influential historians of the nineteenth century, and probably no other historian has had an influence on the development of historical scholarship equal to his. He made important contributions to the emergence of modern history as a discipline, and he has been called the father of ‘scientific’ history. Due to Ranke, methodical principles of archival research and source criticism became commonplace in academic institutions, and he is generally credited with the professionalization of

2  Introduction the historian’s craft. Stefan Jordan pointed out that his name is a prominent one in all historiographical books and classes. Even if modern historians smile at Ranke in regard to his demands for objectivity, Jordan believed that in principle this approach is generally accepted.4 Nevertheless, with fame comes criticism, and Ranke is not only a much-praised historian but also one of the most criticized. Much has been written about him over the last 140 years, but there is no full modern assessment of Ranke. In previous studies scholars have examined Ranke’s works, his use of language and how he dealt with specific areas of history, for instance monarchies or social classes. Sometimes historians blamed Ranke and his notion of the balance of power for Germany’s aspiration to become a world empire5 or even tried to construct a direct line from Prussian ambitions for superiority, leading eventually to Germany’s disaster of the Third Reich and the Holocaust.6 Some aspects of Ranke have received great scholarly attention, such as his early life (Laue, 1950), his methodology (Krieger, 1967) and his shaping of the discipline of history (Iggers and Powell, 1990), while a collection of essays looking at particular topics has also been published (Elvert and Salewski, 2002); however, there is no single work that critically assessed Ranke fully. Over the years several myths have evolved, such as Ranke the scientific historian, Ranke the Protestant apologist or Ranke the nationalistic Prussian who wrote monarchist history. These are only a few examples demonstrating that it is difficult to investigate Ranke’s concept of objectivity and historical writing. In order to determine whether Ranke was ‘objective,’ one would have to read all the books in Ranke’s private library, as well as the sources he used. This would be a lifelong task, and the result would not necessarily be in any way objective in itself. Even today, however, Ranke is usually mentioned with a negative tone, and Michael Pammer believed this may have something to do with the absence of a clearly outlined theory and a methodology of the subject neatly written down. Pammer mentioned a number of notes and comments in Ranke’s books, forewords and letters, but Ranke seemed never to have approached this systematically. As another reason, Pammer listed the fact that barely anybody reads Ranke anymore, which is in his opinion not the easiest literature.7 On the other hand, Ranke was apparently widely read in the nineteenth century – otherwise, why would some works be reprinted with several volumes several times? Although Günter Johannes Henz tried to give a different impression, that he was not necessarily read, or at least not read with greatest delight – ‘she [Emilie Fontane] reads her grandfather dutifully, the extremely boring Ranke’8 – he was still read!9 Another approach is to examine Ranke as a private man. E.H. Carr stated, ‘Before you study the historian, study his historical and social environment. The historian, being an individual, is also a product of history and of society.’10 One may ask to what degree Ranke’s personal and family life influenced his historical writing or to what extent his thoughts and ideas were mentioned in letters. Ranke’s scholarly career has been reviewed several times, but rarely his private life. Thus, a major facet of the man has been left entirely unexplored. This is most striking when it comes to Ranke’s marriage. Several authors never even mentioned his

Introduction  3 marriage; others were vague and unsure on the details, and his wife’s origins were described variously as Irish, English, Anglo-Irish or British. For a man who was, as the sources clearly demonstrate, extremely close to and much influenced by his spouse, this neglect of the role and impact of Clarissa von Ranke in the formation of her husband’s scholarly reputation is an oversight. Although in the past ten years a number of books and articles on her have been published,11 several recent academic publications continue to ignore her role or don’t even mention her.12 However, this and other oversights are not surprising if we look at some specific research results and their interpretations. Thomas Brady remarked that recent scholars concentrated their research aims on Ranke’s self-presentation and therefore overall results were not objective.13 Pammer quoted Henz, who believed that Ranke’s tremendous productivity in book writing stood in stark contrast to his small bodily proportions, which made him apparently curious and funny. Pammer mentioned that Ranke was recorded to have been a man of small stature (152 cm), but he was cynical in regard to the assumption of Henz that great and productive historians must be rather tall – apparently, small statures do not allow this.14 It probably also does not help that Ranke’s own handwriting was atrocious – Siegfried Baur once compared his handwriting to an ant running with ink-soaked feet across the paper.15 It is also irritating when historians start the biographical description of Ranke with a romantic description of him as a hero born to a lovely rural village surrounded by the most magical landscape, inspiring his fantasies for his future life,16 yet others note that Ranke led essentially ‘a pretty unspectacular life.’17 Jordan, who acknowledged the problem that a person’s personality and perceptions tend to change over a lifetime, undertook a more realistic approach. As he pointed out, throughout his life, Ranke not only experienced an exceptional rise in social status (from a vicar’s son to a highly acknowledged and ennobled historian) but also lived through major social and political changes, such as the after-effects of the French Revolution, the Liberation Wars, the European Revolutions in 1848, the German Unification Wars of 1864, 1866 and 1870–71 and the unification of Germany in 1871. Jordan concluded that Ranke’s national understanding should have changed – as happened to many of his contemporaries – but he showed a surprisingly strong continuity of political ideals.18 We can count on one hand all of the biographies of Ranke written so far. The oldest biography was written by Hans F. Helmolt, Leopold Rankes Leben und Wirken (Leipzig, 1921), followed by a biography in English: Theodore H. von Laue, Leopold Ranke, the formative years (Princeton, 1950). I specifically list Laue’s book here; although it is not a biography of Ranke’s full life, in the English language it is the closest we have. Recently two more biographies were published: Ingrid Hecht, Leopold von Ranke: Und ich darf es nicht verschweigen (Berlin, 2003), and Dominik Juhnke, Leopold Ranke. Biographie eines Geschichtsbessessenen (Berlin, 2015). It is interesting to note that all of these books concentrated on the early Ranke – once they moved past the 1840s, the narrative ended very quickly: Helmolt dedicated around 65 pages (29%) to the last 35 years of Ranke’s life, and Hecht allocated even less (14%). Juhnke may have allocated still an impressive 120 pages (41%); however, more than two-thirds of those pages did not deal with

4  Introduction Ranke himself but were historiographical discussions including other historians. The Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences has edited very helpful volumes in the past, such as Leopold von Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlass, 4 vols. (Munich, 1964–1975). They have started a new letter edition entitled Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke, Band 1: 1810–1825 (Berlin, 2016), and I hope that this new project can be finished (another five volumes are planned) as it would represent a most valuable tool for future Ranke research. The purpose of my work is to provide a reassessment of Ranke. To this end I have read all of his published works (66 volumes of his first editions, 54 volumes of his Sämmtliche Werke and nine articles), as well as all known correspondences both published and unpublished. From this, it is clear that Ranke’s methodology and interpretation of history evolved over the years. Usually historians would only refer to a few of his well-known works, such as the narrative works of the History of the Popes, the History of the Reformation in Germany, or English History; followed by his famous four-page preface to the Histories of the Latin and Germanic nations and his essay on the ‘Great Powers.’ In regards to Ranke’s publications, we find several different ones ranging from oral history to historicist narrative, journalism for the public as well as texts for encyclopaedias, from student essay publications to letter editions, from lecture notes to political pamphlets and royal private lessons. Each one of these had a different approach according to its aim and addressee. And even the historicist narrative was different: ranging from just quoting letters from Frederick the Great in his History of Prussia to very descriptive narrative, in some cases even philosophical, texts of History of England and Universal History. Like today, one can find different presentations of historying, and one could consider Ranke a ‘creative writer’ – even though he himself was fully aware of his own limitations in the presentation of history. The investigation of Ranke’s private life and his understanding of history will reveal a very complex personality. Growing up with traditions of the old order, he was as much a conservative as an academic ‘revolutionary.’ He would not support violent revolution because he believed in the ordained nature of ‘God-given’ structures. This had little to do with religion, but it also shows that Ranke preferred, due to his childhood education, states and orders which evolved ‘naturally’ over time and found their organic situation within the society of a state. That was one of the reasons why Ranke had what appeared to be contradictory views with conservative inclinations on some issues, for instance his opposition to revolutionaries, while on others he held more revolutionary ones, such as the creation of nations like Ireland or a favourable approach to female emancipation. It also explains why Ranke stood in such good stead with the Hohenzollern dynasty, although this must also be viewed from the perspective that the Prussian monarchs invited Ranke to the University of Berlin and made many archives available to him. A large amount of Ranke’s success was due to the help of the Prussian kings, and if they had not requested him on several occasions to write on German and Prussian history, Ranke might have spent more time working on other national histories, for instance Russia, which he is known to have been interested in. He was also a far more open-minded person than usually thought, even though

Introduction 5 he might not always have been easy to live with in his private life, because his work as a historian was always uppermost in his mind. The aspect of travels can underline this: his research and position as a Prussian historiographer and Bavarian and Prussian royal advisor made travels necessary, which meant that in some years he was for several weeks and even months away from Berlin. Ranke creates a substantial problem for the modern historian: how do you assess a historian who grew very old and produced over 60 volumes of books? How can we grasp his approach to history? Did his approach change over the decades of his academic career? But more important is the question of what made him, in his day, the leading historian of the world. Was it primarily because of the method he taught, or was it because of the vast program he carried out? Despite all criticisms, we have to acknowledge that obviously Ranke must have done something right, and in the following we can summarize in just ten points his major achievements affecting our study and understanding of history up to today:  1 History as a discipline: Ranke’s contribution to historical scholarship was immense: he helped establish history as a separate discipline, independent from philosophy or literature.19 He was also determined to strip away the veneer of posthumous condescension applied to the past by philosophizing historians such as Voltaire and to reveal it in its original colours; to try to understand the past as the people who lived in it understood it, even while deciphering hieroglyphs of interconnectedness of which they had been largely unaware.20 Ranke introduced into the study of modern history the methods that had been developed by philologists in the study of ancient and medieval literature to determine whether a text, say of a Shakespeare play or of a medieval legend like the Nibelungenlied, was true or corrupted by later interpolations, whether it was written by the author it was supposed to be written by, and which of the available versions was the most reliable. Historians, argued Ranke, had to root out forgeries and falsifications from the record. They had to test documents based on their internal consistency and their consistency with other documents originating at the same period.21 According to Richard Evans, the application of philological techniques to historical sources was a major breakthrough.22  2 Objectivity: Ranke did not always approach history in the same way, nor did he treat it ‘objectively,’ to use the word that his disciples applied to him. Ranke endeavoured, however, to write with detachment. This led him to try to explain why it was that nineteenth-century Europe was characterized by contemporary problems. Unlike many European nationalist historians, Ranke did not use the past in order to justify the particular situation of a country. Instead, he used the past to understand it. In fact, Ranke is one of the first historians who tried to explain a number of European events that were dealt with in a polemical or nationalist way in many countries, until the end of the nineteenth century. This reflects another key idea developed by Ranke and other nineteenth-century German scholars: that the past had its own nature, which was distinct from the present. Although there were

6  Introduction some generalizations that could be made about all human beings in all times and places, these were commonplaces which, while true, were essentially trivial. Each historical time and place had its own nature, which it was the task of the historian to uncover and understand.23 The key to understanding a historical period or place was the Zeitgeist or ‘spirit of the age,’ meaning the assumption and basic, unquestioned beliefs of the time. The implication is that each age has unique qualities and values of its own. This means that in some senses, separate historical epochs are incommensurable because they have different essences or identities.24   3 Aesthetics or history as ‘art’ and ‘science’: Unlike many other historians, Ranke managed to combine understandings of history as a science and as an art at the same time. He described research and approach to history as ‘scientific’ – certainly, it was at his time, in comparison to the Enlightenment – and in a way which can be described today as ‘academic.’ Most historians would not reject the essence of Ranke’s dictum of source criticism; otherwise, one could use and write anything, which then becomes fictional and ‘art’ again. Reading Ranke in German from the language perspective is actually a joy, the same as reading Edward Gibbon or Macaulay for the English language. Of course, today, not one historian would write and compose their history like them, but their use of language can create more than only ‘academic’ appreciation: it makes it enjoyable and more accessible to the general public. I may only refer to Theodor Mommsen and Winston Churchill, who did not only write influential accounts of history but were – due to their use of language – the only two historians who received a Nobel Prize in Literature, in 1902 and 1953, respectively. They were able to approach academic history, but their works were intended not only for academics but also for the public. Their books formed the historical and national identification of people. It is possible to see from this argument that history is never objective and is always written with a particular aim. One should aim for being as ‘academic’ as possible, but one should be aware of the nature of representation that we use to represent our ‘version’ of history.  4 Establishment of a hierarchy of sources: Ranke established a hierarchy of sources. Simply, not all were of equal value. The first rule for sorting sources into more and less valuable was that those closer to the event should be valued more highly and given greater credence. This meant, first, that sources which were contemporaneous with the events they described (primary sources) had a greater value than later writings (secondary sources). It also meant that sources produced by the actual actors or direct observers of events were to be preferred to ones produced by commentators or indirect observers, even if they were produced at the same time. This made the precise dating of sources a matter of vital importance.25 Ranke also argued for a particular way of reading and analyzing sources. This drew on the work of the erudites, going back to authors like Bodin, but was more systematic. As well as using the techniques of philology to analyse the internal meaning of texts and to date them, the historian had to put a series of tests or questions to the evidence of

Introduction 7 the text. These included the aim or purpose for which it was produced, its intended audience, the context in which it was produced and, above all, the nature, aims, interests and inclinations of the author.26  5 Citation of evidence: This leads to another principle which Ranke emphasized, that of citation of evidence. All of the assertions he made were supported by a full citation of the source on which it was based, with the citation on the same page as the assertion. Here he was following the practice already established by Gibbon and others of footnoting authorities for one’s account or description, but he also took it further. The new element was the citation in detail of the primary sources as well as the printed authorities. This was (and is) enormously important. The point of the citation was that any reader could follow the ‘directions’ given in the footnote to the precise source for the statement being made. They could then judge for themselves whether the statement was justified. This was one of the things that made it possible for scholars to check each other and to correct their mistakes or misinterpretations, an essential element of the cumulative growth of knowledge. It also had the effect of preventing fraud or incompetence. The practice of supporting assertions with citations of the evidence for them also revealed to the reader which assertions could be supported in this way and which could not. This laid bare to the reader those parts of a work which were based on assumption or theory rather than empirical investigation.27   6 Primacy of facts: Another central notion that Ranke formulated was the primacy of facts, meaning truth statements founded on evidence that was relatively certain. Hypotheses had to give way when confronted by facts that contradicted their premises.28 Moreover, the establishing of facts had to come first, before the formulation of explanatory hypotheses. These could then lead to further investigation which would uncover more facts, but the facts had to be the starting point. As Evans pointed out, this had important implications for the way research is done. Historians must not trawl through sources looking for facts that support or confirm a hypothesis. Instead, they should seek to test the hypothesis by looking for evidence that would disprove it.29 Of course, there has been a lot of abuse of history and historical writing for contemporary aims. Some historians may remember the different court cases over the past 40 years involving David Irving and his Holocaust denial. Questions of authenticity and attribution continue to be vitally important in historical research. Evans wrote that forgeries, as the lamentable case of the ‘Hitler Diaries’ in the 1980s, are still regrettably common. He emphasized that technological innovation has added substantially to the Rankean armoury; the ‘Hitler Diaries’ were easily exposed as forgeries by simple testing of the age of the paper on which they were written, which dated from the 1950s. Hugh Trevor-Roper (Lord Dacre), who originally ‘authenticated’ them for the London Times newspaper, should not have remained content with the fact that the name ‘Adolf Hitler’ was signed at the bottom of every page. Whatever the means they use, historians still have to engage in the basic Rankean spadework of investigating the provenance of documents, of enquiring about

8  Introduction the motives of those who wrote them, the circumstances in which they were written, and the ways in which they relate to other documents on the same subject.30 Another example is Peter Hart (Canada) and his writing of the early stages of the Irish Republican Army in Ireland, in which he claimed to have interviewed activists who were involved in ambushes (with the question of whether they were murderers or freedom fighters), but Irish scholars were able to prove that at the time of his acclaimed interviews, both witnesses were already dead. To the end of his life Hart did not reveal his sources.31  7 The historical seminar: Howard O. Brogan noted that the success of Ranke’s seminar was such that in the end he came to dominate historical method far more completely by his teaching than he could ever have done by his actual historical production, vast as that was. Three generations of German scholars were trained directly by Ranke, and with such success that by the time of his death, it could be said that every single professor of history in the German universities was a product of the Ranke school. The better historians of France, England and the United States were also deeply under his influence, and his method had been carried by his students’ students into every area of modern scholarship which was at all connected with history.32 Besides this, Ranke played an influential role in the organization and publication of history as a discipline by establishing a national and international network based on history societies (for Germany in particular; he was the founder and first president of the Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences) and numerous historical journals.  8 Europe and transnational history: When writing history, Ranke wrote not only the history of a country itself, but also its history within the European context. He was criticized by many German historians, who preferred national historiography rather than his approach of writing transnational history. Despite the criticism of writing ‘dry as dust’ history, Ranke expounded the vision of Europe as a unity, following the example of the Holy Roman Empire. This vision was not only represented in his books, but was also practised in his home, in the form of his marriage to an Anglo-Irish woman, a European-oriented salon and his connections with scholars all over the continent. The ‘European academic’ had his roots in the ‘private European.’ Antoine Guilland noticed the European character of Ranke’s work: ‘If one glances down the list of his books one finds that Italians, Spanish, Turks, Serbians, Greeks of Peloponnesus, Venetians, Roman Popes of the great period, French and English are dealt with, but in the midst of all this, German and Prussian affairs seem to be lost.’33  9 Primacy of foreign affairs: Ranke had been criticized by many scholars as having been only interested in diplomatic relations and governments as representatives of nations. This may have something to do with his narrative on the development of the state structure of a nation. Ranke believed that the idea of the state arose from the thought of an independence, which cannot sustain itself without corresponding power. Although he never used the expression himself, he developed the idea of the ‘Primacy of the Foreign Policy.’ Was

Introduction 9 Ranke perhaps right in the sense that the foreign policy is the most important one within the complete policy of a state, but its negligence could be more catastrophic than some other one? This shows that it is difficult to reject Ranke’s idea completely, and the idea kept generations of historians busy and even uneasy – up to today.34 10 History’s influence on politics: There is another reason why one should study Ranke. History does influence political movements of states and the identification of a state’s people as a nation. Several examples over the past 30 years underline this; the former Yugoslavia and its civil war is just one example of many more around the world. In Germany, historians, politicians and the people alike have problems in how to deal with their recent history: the Third Reich and former Socialist Germany. In 2009, the government in Russia announced a law that decreed that the Soviet Army won the Second World War – and with it, destroyed the Nazis – and it should be viewed as an act of freedom, not occupation. In accordance with the law, everybody not following this (state) line of history could be imprisoned. The events concerning the background of the Second Gulf War with the invasion by the United States and Britain has left a chaotic state up to today, and it is still not fully known what exactly happened. Nevertheless, several ‘historical’ interpretations have been published to justify the actions. Scholars of European or global history today are faced with barriers which were not really an issue for Ranke: the knowledge of languages and the level of expectations. Ranke had no problems reading any sources in any European language, which is not really the case today, where the knowledge of languages may reach two or three (but very rarely more than three) languages. Moreover, today one has the expectation of reading a book that would fall in line with one’s ideas, a method Ranke did not follow. He rejected books for different reasons, but not because of this expectation. In order to study history, today one needs to have three goals to achieve. First, what are the contacts and interactions between people and nations during a certain time? The second achievement is to find parallels to other people or countries, and the last one is to place the history within a transnational context. The rise of nationalism needs to be explained, not taken for granted as is usually done, and this can only be done with the knowledge of wider European and global history. The historian has to unblock his ‘blocked mobility,’ the limited openness of mind. This approach is exactly what Ranke did, and this approach needs to be reintroduced in order to understand historical epochs, events and motives within European and world history. Therefore, I will present the reader in ten chapters the life and work of Ranke, chronologically described and embedded in contemporary events of Germany and Europe. By using his correspondence and secondary sources, I will outline Ranke’s process of thought during the different changing times and how these events have influenced and shaped Ranke’s historical understanding and writing. The work English History receives the most attention, primarily because it was his largest work on one single country. I use it as an example to show not only how

10  Introduction he researched and composed this work but also accompanying correspondence nationally and internationally, his research trips and how he approached archives, how much his wife, Clarissa, was involved in creating connections and providing information for her husband as well as reviews nationally and internationally and efforts to translate the work. I believe that this is also a great example of one of Ranke’s later works, and I therefore do not follow most scholars who primarily analyzed Ranke’s early works to explain him. The reader will also find that some chapters do not follow the traditional chapter structures of previous biographies. The first chapter assesses Ranke’s childhood and educational years (1795– 1818), also including the origins of his family, the cultural and political systems in general and how they influenced the Ranke family. I then outline Ranke’s early years, the influence of the geographical environment around his birthplace and the impact of European events on his worldviews. This is followed by the second chapter, dealing with his first employment in Frankfurt/Oder and his early years in Berlin (1818–27), which includes his first approaches to writing history, resulting in his publication of History of the Latin and Teutonic nations. The work will be analyzed in this time-set, as will how it influenced Ranke’s further career. Scholars usually create a break of a chapter for 1825, when he was – due to his book’s success – appointed to a lecturing position in Berlin. However, in my opinion, the new position had not drastically changed Ranke’s approach to history; I believe that he was still in a stage of a learning process in becoming a professional historian. The next chapter follows Ranke on his first research trip (1827–31). This research trip is the most famous one; however, it should be noted that he continued to travel and research for most of his later years. He visited Austria, Switzerland and Italy and gained access to several closed archives. The research resulted in a number of publications. The next chapter analyzes his academic establishment and fame during the Vormärz (1831–43) and deals with a crucial period in Ranke’s life. In his early years Ranke learned within the Berlin salon culture the art of writing; it was especially Bettina von Arnim who would influence his historical writing style. The fruits of these teachings, including the knowledge gained from his research trip, resulted in one of the most famous of Ranke’s works: History of the Popes. At the same time, Ranke was affected by the change of politics in Germany and Prussia: the debates influenced him and his historical position. One example of this historical-political ‘marriage’ resulted in a big publishing disaster: the Historical-Political Journal during the mid-1830s. Chapter 5 concentrates on the private Ranke, his wedding to Clarissa, an Irish woman, and their children (1843–48). I will also include how the couple operated together in gathering materials for Ranke or Clarissa’s influence on the selection of translators for his work, for example Sarah Austin. Ranke finished his work on the Reformation in Germany and concluded the History of the Prussian Monarchy. The good life did not last forever, and the next chapter approaches the European Revolutions and Ranke’s role as a political advisor (1848–52). The revolutionaries regarded Ranke as a representative and supporter of the royal regime. During this time, Ranke became a political advisor to the Prussian king and wrote a couple of

Introduction 11 political pamphlets. This is followed by another chapter including many personal aspects: Ranke’s daily life, Clarissa’s illness and her ‘Salon Ranke’ (1852–59). This chapter will continue with Ranke’s academic work and publications (mainly the History of France), but I will look more closely at the family situation, the illness of Clarissa and the running of her own salon. Chapter 8 concentrates on Ranke’s largest work on a nation: English History (1859–65). While continuing with the political development in Germany and Europe, I will assess the writing of English History, which will include Ranke’s understanding of European history and in his mind the conclusion of his grand circle of European power-nations. Chapter 9 deals with Ranke’s ennoblement, the rise of titles but waning of fame, the Franco-Prussian War and the death of Clarissa (1865–71). In 1865, Ranke was ennobled for his academic work, which was followed soon after with a research trip to France, England and Ireland. Whereas his fame continued to rise internationally, he lost nearly all his influence in Germany itself as he disagreed with the direction of Bismarck’s policies, which was reflected in his work. We hear how the Rankes were involved during the Franco-Prussian War: one son marched to Paris fighting, and Clarissa supported soldiers’ relief work, as did Leopold and her two other children (collection of money, materials for hospitals, writing of letters and pastoral care). The last chapter deals with Ranke’s retirement, his old age and his last masterpiece (1871–1886). Ranke at first had problems adjusting to a single life again, but he started to write several books during the 1870s before he began his last masterpiece (Universal History). The reader will find after this detailed biography an epilogue in which I present several reviews on Ranke from different perspectives and how Ranke’s method has influenced and shaped historiography. This is followed by appendixes  – a chronology and a list of major archives – and a very detailed bibliography containing more than 1,000 books and articles written on Ranke. This can be of use for future researches on Ranke and his historical method.

Notes

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

John Warren, History and the historians (London, 2000), p. 57. Ibid, p. 57. Ibid. Stefan Jordan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), p. 42. As pointed out by Ludwig Dehio, ‘Ranke und der deutsche Imperialismus’, in: Die Historische Zeitschrift 170 (1950). Mentioned in John L. Herkless, ‘Seeley and Ranke’, in: Historian, 43, 1 (1980), pp. 1–2. See J.E. Toews, Becoming historical: Cultural reformation and public memory in early nineteenth-century Berlin (New York, 2004). Michael Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), p. 10. Emilie Fontane to Theodor Jr, 1 November 1887, in: Regina Dieterle (ed.), Theodor Fontane und Martha Fontane: Ein Familienbriefnetz (Berlin, 2002), pp. 301–302. Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, p. 10. E.H. Carr, What is history? (London, 1990), p. 44. Just to mention a few: Gisbert Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau Clarissa, geb. Graves Perceval (Göttingen, 1967); Andreas Boldt, The role of Ireland in the life of

12  Introduction Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886): The historian and historical truth (Lampter, 2007); Ingrid Hecht, Clarissa von Ranke. Im eigenen Körper gefangen mit blühenden Geist (Berlin, 2013); Joe Tollebeek, ‘Writing history in the salon vert’, in: Storia della Storiografia, History Women, 46 (2004). 12 For example G.J. Henz, Leopold von Ranke in Geschichtsdenken und Forschung (Berlin, 2014) or Dominik Juhnke, Leopold Ranke. Biografie eines Geschichtsbesessenen (Berlin, 2015). 13 Thomas A. Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation. Leopold von Rankes Entdeckung des Katholizismus’, in: Lothar Gall (ed.), Jahrbuch des Historischen Kollegs (Munich, 1999), p. 56. 14 Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, pp. 10–11. 15 Siegfried Baur, ‘Nachlass lass nach. Bemerkungen über den Ranke-Nachlass’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), p. 66. 16 Summarized after Karl Heinz Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens. Wissen­ schaftsgeschichte als Methodologie. Dargestellt an Ranke, Treitschke und Lamprecht. Mit einem Anhang über zeitgenössische Geschichtystheorie (Munich, 1979), p. 33. 17 Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, p. 10. 18 Jordan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, pp. 34–35. 19 Richard J. Evans, In defence of history (London, 2000), pp. 16–17. 20 Ibid, p. 17. 21 Ibid, p. 18. 22 Ibid, p. 19. 23 Ibid, p. 29. 24 Ibid, p. 30. 25 Ibid, p. 28. 26 Ibid. 27 Ibid, p. 29. 28 Ibid, p. 30. 29 Ibid, p. 31. 30 Ibid, p. 19. 31 See also Andreas Boldt, ‘Peter Hart and his enemies’, letter to the editor on the Peter Hart debate, in: History Ireland (Sept/Oct 2005), pp. 12–14. For the whole debate in 2005 on the topic of Tom Barry, the Kilmichael Ambush and the April 1922 killings near Dummanway, see also the following link: www.indymedia.ie/article/80362. 32 Howard O. Brogan, Antonio Pace and Adolph Weinberger, The Leopold von Ranke Manuscripts of Syracuse University (Syracuse, 1951), p. 28. 33 Antoine Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians (New York, 1915), pp. 68–69. 34 A new and modern approach based on the Rankean idea of the ‘Primate of the Foreign Policy’ is my book on Historical mechanisms: An experimental approach to applying scientific theories to the study of history (Abington, 2017). Here I discuss the possibility of utilizing natural scientific theories in order to explain historical processes, focusing on the question of how nations and empires rise, succeed, fail and then assume another form in which they begin the cycle again. Scientific methods are utilized metaphorically as a means of establishing connections between events and trends throughout history, and I argue that these methods can explain historical patterns such as chaos and stability, the relationship between power centres and power vacuums, the necessary conditions for the expansion of empires and the influence of natural and human-made borders.

1 Ranke’s childhood and educational years (1795–1818)

The roots of the Ranke family can be traced back to the ancient town of Wettin, in which Andreas Ranke (†1659) was a Stadtkämmerer or town mayor. Wettin was the centre of one of the most influential principalities of Central Europe, and the castle and town both date back to the tenth century. Conrad the Great (1098– 1157) secured the primary position of the House of Wettin, and the principality ruled this region for nearly 800  years. Due to marriages with other European emperors and kings, the influence of the house kept rising, with the effect that today’s royal houses from Saxony, England, Belgium and Greece are immediate descendants of the Wettin dynasty. Details of Andreas Ranke beyond his position are not known, but it has been suggested that he studied law. Both of his two known children, Andreas (†1717) and Israel, were educated, and Israel Ranke (1659–94) became a clergyman in the village of Bornstedt, near Eisleben. For another two generations the sons studied theology and became clergymen in the same region, and only with Gottlob Israel Ranke (1762–1836) was there a break in the clerical tradition. Gottlob Israel Ranke first studied theology in Leipzig but later turned to law.1 Although the Ranke family was an academic one, they never left the area of the so-called ‘Golden Valley,’ which belonged at that time to the principality of Saxony. The family married only within their own class. This way of life corresponds with the contemporary social system of Saxony and most of Europe, where the medieval feudal system lasted to the end of the eighteenth century. The sharp division between the classes of nobility, townspeople and farmers reinforced the rigid positioning within the social hierarchy and also within the geographic region, which was regarded as God-given. The position of the princes was based on this tradition, and they in turn were the guardians of the old, traditional ways. Only in the last quarter of the eighteenth century did this system start to break down. The development of a broad class of academics and artists marked this breakdown as much as events like the French Revolution, the Napoleonic Wars and the end of the Holy Roman Empire. The internal reforms of Prussia by Reichsfreiherr vom und zum Stein2 and Graf von Hardenberg3 shaped a society where personal efficiency, diligence and education became more important than the old class system. Royal courts opened themselves towards the new academic aristocracy. The

14  Ranke’s childhood and educational years foundation of several new grammar schools and the University of Berlin in 1810 marked this development.4 The great Renaissance of German scholarship began with the founding of the University of Berlin. Stephen Davis remarked that the German university became in matters of curriculum, organization and structure the model for similar institutions all over the world. By the eighteenth century European universities had fallen a long way from their medieval origins and had become almost the last place where one would look for scholarship or original thought.5 In 1806 Napoleon destroyed the power of Prussia at Jena and Auerstedt; the royal family fled to Memel, in East Prussia. Two professors from the closed University of Halle begged King Frederick William III to transfer that institution to Berlin. The exiled monarch, feeling the loss of Halle most bitterly, was favourably inclined. William von Humboldt,6 who was the Prussian minister of education, said to King Frederick William, ‘the State must replace by intellectual force what it has lost in physical force.’7 The ‘new model’ university created by Humboldt combined research with teaching and organized the university by the newly emerging academic disciplines as well as introducing new subjects to the curriculum.8 While Gottlob Ranke still lived in the old system, Leopold and his brothers left this narrow circle. All of them were educated in the traditional way, yet all left their home region, thereby marking the end of the old feudal system that had kept such families together. Gottlob Ranke worked in different locations in the Harz Mountains, but after his marriage with Friedericke Lehmicke in Querfurt on 17 February 1795, he moved to the house on the main street of Wiehe. In the same year Gottlob’s father, Heinrich Israel Ranke (1719–99), moved into the same house after his retirement as a clergyman on 1 December 1795. He brought several books with him, many of them in classical languages. One of his books would be owned and highly valued by his grandson Leopold: the Septuaginta – a bible in seven languages, which according to Ingrid Hecht is depicted on the famous photograph of the old bearded scholar in his house coat; the Septuaginta is sitting on the couch.9 Franz Leopold was born on 21 December  1795, as the first child of Gottlob and Friedericke Ranke. Leopold’s birth date has caused confusion because the church registry book recorded his birthday as 20 December, and several historians have wondered why Ranke claimed his birthday was 21 December. A note of Ernst Ranke, a younger brother of Leopold, sheds some light on the matter: ‘Leopold has told me that according to his mother he was born not before, but after midnight, which means not in the last hours of the 20th but in the first of the 21st December 1795.’10 After Saxony lost the crown of the Polish kingdom in 1763, it also lost its leading role in European politics and was left with minor influence in the Holy Roman Empire. With the partition of Poland starting a few years later, the traditional allegiance with the Austrian emperor loosened.11 Nevertheless, the old-fashioned loyalty to the emperor continued, and it is mirrored in the name given to Gottlob Ranke’s first son: the names of the last two crowned emperors. Rudolf Vierhaus also emphasized the continuous recognition of the Saxon dynasty – although, being Catholic, its authority received a specific

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 15 Lutheran acknowledgement as God-given for the use and protection of all subjects and institutions.12 This approach of loyalty to the authorities I believe influenced Ranke’s later recognition and justification of monarchs in the German lands and Europe. Theodore von Laue noted that the year of Ranke’s birth was also the year of the Treaty of Basel, by which Northern Germany, including Ranke’s fatherland, the Grand Electorate of Saxony, was declared neutral in the wars between revolutionary France and her enemies.13 Ranke referred to this fact in the first sentence of his last dictate of memories in November 1885,14 of which he must have been quite proud. The Ranke family was self-sufficient, as were similar families of solicitors, physicians and teachers. When Leopold’s father was not on business trips or in his office, he checked the progress of work on his fields and the stable situated on his lands, which were brought into the marriage by his father’s mother, Magdalene Eberhardt, from Voigtstedt. His speciality was horticulture and fruit-growing. His cherries, especially, were renowned. Gottlob Ranke lived economically, a characteristic which Leopold probably learned at an early age. But it was the only strategy that allowed Gottlob to provide all of his sons with a full education, at first in the famous school of Schulpforta and later in different universities.15 When Wiehe became part of Prussia in 1815 the administrative regulations had to be transferred into Prussian law and order. This meant a lot of work for Gottlob Ranke, but also additional income, which he welcomed.16 Guilland noted that for a long time, the father praised ‘the superiority of the Prussian administration and the usefulness of Frederick the Great’s institutions.’17 According to Guilland, he also predicted that ‘the future of Germany was reserved for Prussia.’18 In later years, Leopold would reflect back to this time: ‘He wished me to follow up my career in Prussia, and at length I fell in with his point of view.’19 It is questionable that the family was as enthusiastic, as pointed out. As ‘good’ Saxon subjects it is difficult to follow the glowing support for Prussia; however, for Gottlob it meant a bigger income, and for Leopold, full support for the Prussian state would only follow after his appointment as professor. In his early years, Leopold Ranke was often sick.20 Karl Heinz Metz described quite romantically that ‘little Leopold was seen as a dreamy, delicate and valetudinarian child, only of small stature on which was a seemingly too large head located.’21 Bernhard Hoeft reported that Leopold therefore developed at an early stage his particular affection towards books. He believed that this was a natural development, even if it was in the beginning mainly a childish game.22 Hoeft referred to childhood memories of Leopold’s brother Heinrich: We were in particular attracted to a historical journal, which was decorated with pictures and placed orderly with other volumes in front of us. But we did not pay much attention to look at the pictures from revolutionary times, executions with the guillotine etc.; we just wanted to play with it. We called our self-created game ‘Bowling’, which practiced us in opening the book in quick successions.23

16  Ranke’s childhood and educational years It was during those years that Ranke developed a special relationship with nature and his rural home region, and it is suggested that his love of this area marked Ranke’s later historical development and understanding of European history. In addition to Wettin, the home of the oldest known Ranke, several other historically important sites are within a distance of 40 kilometres from Wiehe. Ranke visited many of these places during his childhood and returned to them during his later career. The imperial palace of Memleben, part of which dates back to the tenth century and is the place where the Emperor Otto I (912–73) died, was the nearest. Not far away is Wendelstein, a ruined sixteenth-century castle. Religious importance was attached to Heldrungen and Allstedt, locations of a memorial and the house of Thomas Müntzer.24 Querfurt impressed Ranke because it is regarded as the largest and oldest stone castle in Central Europe, dating to the ninth century. The imperial castle of Kyffhausen, dating to the eleventh century, at Frankenhausen was as equally important as the old, famous monastery school of Schulpforta, in which all the Ranke brothers received their education. Another very important location is Eisleben, where Martin Luther25 was born and died. The Napoleonic Wars had a significant impact on Leopold Ranke. He heard the distant cannon of the French at the battles of Jena and Auerstedt in 1806 and saw French soldiers marching past the door of his school. He had to learn French during the following years of occupation. Before Leopold entered the monastery school of Donndorf in 1807, it is recorded that Wiehe had 252 houses with around 1,100 inhabitants.26 Several authors, such as Dominik Juhnke, claimed that Ranke had not heard any of the battles27 and assumed that Ranke remained untouched by worldly events during his childhood. However, they are mistaken. At different times French soldiers had to be housed and fed, affecting the whole town, including the household of the Rankes. Two letters from Ferdinand Ranke to Leopold from 1813 and 1814 describe the impact of military actions at home in Wiehe; they had to feed and accommodate soldiers from the coalition forces (Prussia, Russia and Sweden). It was also commented that the family’s own horses were taken, which were a great loss for the father.28 During these years the parents had major financial difficulties as no food was left and savings were taken. The siblings even sent Leopold their savings for him to continue studying.29 Many years later, Ranke reflected on these years: I still remember Napoleon at the height of his power. I  read as a 13-yearold his bulletins from his campaign in Spain, which gave me the biggest impression due to its form and content. Everything that we saw, including in our region, was done through his hands. . . . Saxony, to which we belonged, enjoyed its specific status of protection. We read now all his bulletins in French with slight problems. . . . The capitulation news of Yorck shattered us in our school desks like thunder. We whispered from ear to ear that everything would change from now on.30 In 1809 Leopold entered the school of Schulpforta (the old name was Landes­ schule Pforta).31 Karl Büchsenschütz mentioned that Ranke was registered with

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 17 the school on 9 May 1809 with the registration number 8504, together with three further pupils. He was just 13 and a half years old.32 A great deal of Ranke’s inspiration came from his reading of the German Idealist philosophers, foremost among them Johann Gottlieb Fichte.33 At Schulpforta, which had been attended by many of the great minds of the time, he obtained a firm grounding in Protestant religion and in the Greek and Roman classics. According to Laue, ‘the most illustrious school’ of Schulpforta was sponsored by the grand electors of Saxony and offered the type of humanistic classical education which the Renaissance had popularized and which the Reformation had assimilated into its orthodoxy.34 While the retreat of the Grand Army from Moscow encouraged the spread of nationalistic ideals that led to the liberation of the German states, Ranke studied Tacitus’s Agricola. He reflected in 1879: We followed his Russian campaign. . . . The Liberation Wars that followed were more or less directly experienced by us. Napoleon marched past the school while he collected his soldiers for the battle near Luetzen. We believed to have seen Napoleon himself in the midst of his troops; but we did not share his side. . . . Finally, nearly too late in our expectations, took place the Battle of Leipzig. . . . Shortly afterwards we saw the remainders of the defeated French army on their retreat on the other side of the river Saale along the mountains.35 He later commented that ‘there, within cloister walls and in the midst of classical studies, the modern world first came into my head.’36 Alfred Dünisch commented that the fate of Napoleon must have seemed like God’s condemnation according to the principle that conquerors come and go, but real kings will remain.37 Nevertheless, Ranke was relatively little affected by the enthusiasm of the Prussian Wars of Liberation. The decisive political experience for him was not the French Revolution or the Napoleonic Wars but the post-1815 Restoration. His childhood undoubtedly contributed to his conception of a federal Germany within a European framework of powers. Ranke’s birthplace had been part of the independent kingdom of Saxony, but the area was annexed by Prussia in 1815. Iggers and Moltke38 rightly pointed out that Ranke was therefore by no means emotionally committed to Prussia itself and that the image of a more federal Germany (i.e. states which retained some independence) was an appealing one for him.39 After visiting Schulpforta for five years, Leopold Ranke left on 2 April 1814, presenting on the same day his minor thesis, or valedictorian paper, with the title ‘De tragoediae indole et natura.’40 Fuchs noted that this paper followed the tradition at Schulpforta as no final exams existed at that time. The valedictorian paper was the proof that the leaving pupil had the ability to present an academic topic of their own choice and the fluent knowledge of Latin.41 After graduating Ranke enrolled at the University of Leipzig for theology and classics, but he studied mainly classics, concentrating particularly on philology and the translation of texts.42 The aftermath of the Liberation Wars still left traces from the battle near Leipzig, which was still occupied by the Russians. Juhnke described quite

18  Ranke’s childhood and educational years dramatically how Leopold was for the first time away from home, living in his own room. Ranke remained a solemn student instead of experiencing his new freedoms and having many friends and girlfriends.43 Fuchs also mentioned that Leopold’s loneliness is the most obvious at this time. The student life was not really of interest to him, and when he tried it, he stopped soon thereafter. Fuchs mentioned his fondness for two young girls in the house of a relative in Querfurt, where he stayed when travelling between home and Leipzig, but Fuchs believed that his poems were just romantics and the search for love was just an aesthetic practice as the girls’ personalities disappear in fog.44 Metz saw this through a different lens and believed that the years in Leipzig had most likely been Ranke’s worst time.45 Yearning for friendships on one side and cringing from them on the other, with the known political and social system in tatters and without a real aim for studying, Ranke’s longing for freedom turned into a bitter present, as Metz sees it. His own individuality turned into a ‘closed cage’ from which he was unable to escape. His eagerness to study appeared to turn into desperation.46 In the opinion of Guilland, Leopold was not a genius: he was lacking in originality, but he was very intelligent. On the benches of the University, at a time when that enormous work of specialization beyond measure began, he devoted himself to the most varied studies – history, philosophy, law, literature and theology. He showed, indeed, a kind of horror for that kind of scholar, so frequent in Germany, who was nothing more than a learned man.47 While studying in Leipzig he had some classes with the most famous philologist of his time, Gott­ fried Hermann, who was probably the only lecturer from Leipzig who had a lasting impact on Ranke. During his years at Leipzig, Ranke also showed an interest in the ideas of Friedrich von Schlegel,48 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe,49 Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling,50 Immanuel Kant,51 Thucydides,52 Livy,53 Dionysius,54 Gottfried Hermann55 and Barthold Georg Niebuhr.56 Guilland suggested that Ranke had something of Goethe’s spirit in his conception of history.57 He has expressed this admirably in the following lines: ‘The real interest we take in the world consists in our trying to make something within us of what is without us.’58 As he later recalled, he did not read many books on modern history because he saw in them only an immense number of facts, whose arid incomprehensibility scared him.59 Although Ranke continued his classical studies with great zest, he remained essentially a modern spirit. He was a great admirer of Goethe, who was at that time introducing ‘a modern classicism’ into German life and studies.60 During these years and his early time in Frankfurt an der Oder, Ranke was a follower of ‘Turnvater’ Jahn,61 whose desk Ranke bought in the 1820s and used it for writing all of his books until the end of his life.62 John Warren pointed out that Ranke entered the University of Leipzig in 1814 to study theology and philology (the science of language), but he never completed his theological studies because he objected to the university faculty’s cool, rationalistic approach to faith.63 Ranke’s God was not to be pigeon-holed or labelled in any such atmosphere of calm deduction; His presence was reflected in past and present events, but, because of the distance between God and humanity, one should not presume to reveal or uncover Him fully or simplistically. But God was

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 19 not separate from history. This religious belief linked with strands in German Idealist philosophy – particularly the work of Fichte – which Ranke found appealing (or so his early notes and correspondence suggest). He sympathized with Fichte’s concept of the role of the true scholar in uncovering something of the ‘divine idea’ from the world as we perceive it.64 This connection between religion and history has caused much criticism on Ranke’s historical perspective. Philipp Rosemann65 may be able to explain this seeming conflict, as he noted that philosophy ‘cannot shake off its religious roots’ if it wants to remain meaningful.66 He wrote that this did ‘not mean that every philosopher is condemned to be a theist. It may be impossible, however, at least at this point in the development of the western philosophic tradition, to philosophize outside an ultimately religious horizon.’67 For example Marx was longing for a healing of the world’s wounds in an eschatological future, and also Heidegger can be based on the philosophical adaption of a key concept in Lutheran theology.68 Rosemann also noted that ‘poetry is close to prophecy’69 (therefore the poetic writing attempts of the young Ranke). According to him, ‘in some cases, they even coincide, as we can see in some books of the Old Testament, like the Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. One of the differences between poetry and prophecy no doubt concerns the explicit divine authority that the prophet claims, as well as the specifically religious message he or she conveys.’70 Furthermore Rosemann wrote on truth and history, that truth, rather than standing above time, realizes itself historically since being itself does:71 Rather than constituting a modern innovation that must ultimately undermine transcendent truth, Hegel’s ‘historicism’ has deep roots in Christian revelation. For Christianity is not – or rather, it is not only – the belief of the utterly other and transcendent God, but it also affirms that this ineffable God has become man; that is to say, that this God has become immanent, assuming the human condition in all its particularity and brokenness. The Father in heaven has granted salvation through the Cross of his Son on earth, through whom he has spoken to his people: ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me’ (John 14:6). Since Jesus was a particular individual born into the particular conditions of a male body, a Jewish religious tradition, an Aramaic language, a Roman regime, and so on and so forth, the path to understanding his message – God’s message – is a path that leads through historical particularity. Put differently, the Truth is accessible only in Time.72 John Warren mentioned that Ranke was attracted to the thought of the philosopher Herder.73 Herder argued that there was not some sort of Enlightenment-style widespread progress in rationality throughout history, but a God-given flowering of separate national cultures. His contention was that one must seek to understand a period on its own terms and by studying its own unique set of values.74 Ranke was also inclined to blame the philosophes for providing the intellectual fuel for what he saw as the mindless, irreligious and destructive machine that was the French

20  Ranke’s childhood and educational years Revolution. Warren explained that some Aufklärer of Germany were at odds with French philosophes in retaining a strong religious conviction. This in turn led the Aufklärer to deny that natural laws could ‘explain’ the insights of spirituality. And so, it would be safer to argue that Ranke rejected the arguments of the Enlightenment as propounded by the French philosophes.75 According to John Edward Toews, Ranke became emotionally involved in the nationalist student movement and was intellectually absorbed by the tasks of appropriating the language and viewpoint of his neo-humanist, Romantic and Idealist inheritance. Although Ranke had, from childhood on, been set on an educational path that, in keeping with family tradition, would have led to a career in the Lutheran ministry, he was not raised in a particularly pious or orthodox environment. In fact, it seems for Toews that it was only after Ranke abandoned both his theological career and most of whatever elements of orthodox piety he may have absorbed during his childhood that religious convictions and questions became a focal point of his personal reflections and public perspectives.76 To prove his opinion Toews included a diary entry dated 20 December 1816, in which Ranke described an intense visionary experience, which has often been interpreted as a religious conversion: The spirits stir within me. This is life, and vital life. Let them stir. Thus forms are in a constant process of external transformation. Is not the form simply an expression of inner life? How could the former remain stable while the latter changes? Everything good must have space. I hear you speak within me, marvellous, with many voices. You seek the light of day. How joyously you respond as you are touched by a related voice. . . . The seed has fallen; you are like roots pushing out from it. And if the soil is good, then the green twig will not be long in coming, and only a warm sun will nourish it. But this sun already shines: I call you my sun; you united spirits of past and present ages. You stood far off, scattered and isolated, but now you are a single choir . . . witness of the gods among men. Now your rays, those bright, shining rays, are gathered into a single burning point. . . . Oh you one unified sun, shine down on this little green twig. Will you wait for it, maternal mother?77 Continuing with his arboreal metaphor, Ranke went on to describe how his sprouting twig-like existence attached itself to the trunk of the great tree of life and expressed its freedom and unique potentialities through ‘confidential dialogue’ with the other branches.78 In a short fragment composed at the same time, Ranke gave succinct expression to the vision achieved in his experience of identity with the great tree of life, nourished by the ‘maternal mother’ of the collective human spirit: ‘This infinite power which flows through everything outside us and within us, this inexhaustible, indestructible, self-sustaining spring which creates and maintains all things  – what a superior and magnificent concept it provides for that which we name God and of that which we and all things are. All in one and one is all.’79 Both the life forces circulating through his veins and the voices in the texts he was reading seemed to draw Ranke to this pantheistic conception of

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 21 the relationship between the divine and the human, the spiritual and the natural. It provided the primary paradigm for his reflections on religion until the 1830s.80 This was how Toews interpreted the religious comments of Ranke during his early years; however, if I refer to the explanation given by Rosemann, his would make more sense in understanding Ranke’s train of thought than that provided by Toews. Now, it cannot be denied that in the time period from around 1812–14 to 1818 Ranke had written many poems and epigrams, writing down notes and comments on the antiques, theology and philosophy.81 We have a few comments on aesthetics and literature, history and contemporary events, but these notes will increase in his later life, whereas the other ones will decrease.82 Fuchs noted as well that Ranke must have soon recognized his poetic limitations. Therefore many of these poems, novellas and aphorisms remain fragmented, helpless, with no significance in their concept and no depth, and were more showing a characteristic biographic part than of general meaning for history. Even in Frankfurt these notes remained like self-conversations.83 While doing his studies in Leipzig, Gustav Stenzel84 finished his PhD in 1815 and taught history a year later. Wimmer reconstructed from the correspondence between him and Leopold that they had met several times, probably regularly. They knew each other well and had Heinrich Ritter85 as a common friend.86 Although Ritter wrote Stenzel that Ranke ‘acknowledged him always with all respect,’ it cannot conceal the conflicts they sometimes had amongst friends. When Stenzel dedicated his Geschichte Deutschlands unter den Fränkischen Kaisern to his ‘friend Heinrich Ritter,’ Ranke commented sloppily and condescendingly: ‘I have read the dedication of Stenzel with a little surprise. How does it hang together so exactly, to be so full of mouth without having inwardly the source of the spirit?’87 Ranke tried to distance himself, so he would not be associated with him as a ‘common’ historian. Ranke formulated a letter to Ritter very sharply: ‘These historians are an enormous gender! However, I hope that you do not see me as one of them. I do not do it in their way.’88 Wimmer continued that Ranke tried to create history in his own way. Nevertheless, his method of source criticism is just a collection of anonymous practices which had been used for a while by historians and which were brought to him by his teacher Niebuhr and his friend Stenzel.89 Ranke was a couple of years younger than Stenzel, who introduced him in his study into the secrets of the interpretation of historical sources, ‘but as the younger one just only listened admirably, Stenzel had no idea that he also had dedicated himself to writing history.’90 Wimmer noted that in reality Ranke had started quietly during his Frankfurt years to begin his historical studies, which finalized in the publication of the Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker. The knowledge of his reading of the sources which he acquired he actually did not get from his teachers Hermann or Niebuhr, but from Stenzel.91 In his dictate from 1884, Ranke remembered that his friend showed him in his own workplace a collection of scriptures. He showed Leopold how he compared the sources for his work and interpreted them afterwards. Stenzel explained to Ranke how he added at the margin of each source a comment ‘from where and how far it was taken

22  Ranke’s childhood and educational years from or out of other writers.’92 It was exactly this method of comparing source criticism which Ranke – just before Stenzel – presented in his second volume of his Geschichten der germanischen und romanischen Völker, which was the Kritik neuerer Geschichtsschreiber, to present the public as his own.93 From all the critics we know on Ranke, this fact is actually one we can criticize Leopold on: ‘borrowing’ a method from another scholar and friend, but in this case not acknowledging him as a source. In 1817 Ranke took his doctoral degree on Thucydides. Until recently many scholars searched for a dissertation. Daniel Fulda noted that ‘apparently he wrote a PhD on Thucydides, but it is lost and we don’t even know the title.’94 He suggested that Ranke got his PhD antiquo ritu which did not require a written thesis.95 H.F. Helmolt suggested in 1921 that his dissertation may have been lost: ‘His script was not kept as one would consider in the University of Leipzig archive, but kept for decades by Ranke.’96 This opinion remained common even 90 years later, and most historians settled for this solution. However, doubts remained, and Ingrid Hecht followed up this issue after a publication from 1986 following a Ranke-symposium in Eastern Germany.97 Further research led Hecht to question whether the thesis on Thucydides ever existed.98 Shortly after the publication of her first book in 2003, she was able to find proof that Ranke received his PhD according to the old rituals – antiquo ritu creati sunt – which meant that he actually never wrote a dissertation.99 The book De Mythologia Graecorum Antiquissima, mainly written by Gottfried Hermann, became available for acquisition and on her request a copy was bought through Siegfried Baur and Gottfried Braasch for the Ranke-Verein in Wiehe, Germany.100 A number of literary fragments around the time from 1815 to 1817 represent a mixture of theology, philology, philosophy and the start of a historical interest. For example, in August 1815 Ranke wrote a script entitled ‘The psalms according to the original translated into German’ (‘Die Psalmen nach Art der Urgestalt verdeutscht’), which was probably his only attempt to translate parts of the Bible into German.101 Influenced by Goethe, he wrote in 1815 a short script entitled ‘Division of the arts: History of the metrics’ (‘Einteilung der Künste. Geschichte der Metrik’).102 It was one of the first indications for understanding his approach to aesthetics and his understanding of history in later years, that history was both arts and science. Friedrich Schiller103 also had an impact on him. In the same year he wrote ‘Political views: After a performance of Wilhelm Tell’ (‘Politische Betrachtungen. Nach einer Aufführung des Wilhelm Tell’).104 The script shows that Ranke was, in his early years, unsure how to analyse political events at this time. The religious content remained the main topic of his scripts in 1816. One is entitled ‘On the letters of Paul to the Thessalonians and Ephesians’ (‘Zu den Briefen des Paulus an die Thessalonicher und Epheser’)105 and was possibly a result of a lecture on ecclesiastical history given by Heinrich Gottlob Tzschirner106 in the same year. This was followed by a novel on Luther (‘Luther – Novelle’). The actual main character was not Luther but the poet and vicar Franz Meyer. This was not only a poetic and literary attempt but also had a stronger concept and

Ranke’s childhood and educational years  23 idea. Although it cannot be seen as a pre-script to the Luther Fragment, it showed Ranke’s philosophical attempts.107 Ranke attempted his first major scholarly work on Luther, which remained uncompleted and is known as the ‘Luther Fragment.’ According to Hecht, Helmolt believed that Ranke got inspired by the 300-year celebration of the Reformation. In his mind, the popular pamphlets were weak in content and just simply not good enough. He thought that they would not give justice to Luther’s honourable personality and should therefore be better researched and described.108 Ranke gave his historical work the provisional title ‘Luther, the Fifth Evangelist,’ but he never concluded it. Paul Joachimsen commented: ‘It is certainly not a biography. They are diary notes from late autumn 1816 to November 1817 and appear to be a wild chaos of self-confessions, thoughts, excerpts of read materials, historical comments – but in the end everything was dealing with the personality of Luther.’109 Metz commented that Ranke searched in the works of Luther for that religious knowledge which the theology lectures could not offer him, and apparently they suggested to him to try himself as a writer and to present Luther’s life ‘in his own language.’ The dream of being a poet appeared, poems were written, short literary attempts followed.110 Hans Liebeschütz interpreted Ranke’s approach to Luther’s work in the light of the idealism of Goethe’s age, the conception of history as a concrete manifestation of theology and which was not the only anticipation of Ranke’s future work, which we can trace in the diaries of his youth. The enthusiastic follower of Luther showed an intense interest in the person of Emperor Charles V. He described convincingly the conflict in the ruler’s soul between his religious allegiance to the Papal See and the necessities of the Empire. Liebeschütz commented that already the diarist of 1817 had seen what the mature historian was to prove fully 20 years later – that the course of the Reformation was shaped by the interplay of religious experience and political constellations.111 Of course the year 1817 had an importance for Ranke’s later career, but most historians interpreted the Luther Fragment to prove his religiosity and Protestant views. As we have seen from Rosemann, the theological part of the discussion was not based on Ranke as a pietistic person (which he never was), but on the philosophical-theological belief and understanding of that time. The composition of the fragment also needs to be viewed from another perspective: Ranke graduated in 1817, and for a graduate who just finished, he was hungry to start his new career, a new path, a new future, and to follow his own dream – which is not much different to students today or of any other day! And he knew very well that in order to achieve his goals – maybe also working later in academia – he had to publish. The same principle applies to students today! The choice of topic on Luther did not only suit his own interests; it also happened to be the 300th anniversary of the Reformation. Leopold did the most obvious thing: pick Luther because everybody discussed and celebrated him. Soon he realized that his ability as a professional academic scholar was not fully developed yet, and the project was abandoned. Based on financial pressure he had to pick the first choice offered: teaching classics in a school.

24  Ranke’s childhood and educational years Fuelled with Goethe’s Sturm und Drang and the energy of a young person, Ranke made, together with another student, Richter,112 his walking trip along the Rhine, passing Cologne, Heidelberg and Göttingen, and also visiting the Boisseree collection of old German paintings in September and October 1817. From that date his interests began to widen. From the idea of a new biography of Luther sprang the larger thought of the reconstruction of modern European history, from the time of the German Reformation. But Ranke was more influenced by Thucydides and Niebuhr. From the former, Ranke took his artistic style; from the latter, his critical method. The lessons derived from a careful study of the practise of ancient history were applied to modern history. Ranke himself said that Niebuhr’s History of Rome exercised the greatest influence upon his own historical studies: ‘It was the first German historical book which made an impression on me.’113 Niebuhr’s aim was to dispense with the fictional in the history narrative by the critical evaluation of the sources (through their authentication and comparison). Niebuhr assumed that by discovering the truth, one must exist in the documents, uncoverable through his method of forensic philological and textual analysis. Niebuhr also insisted, and Ranke quickly agreed, that to avoid a bad case of anachronism the past must be understood in its own terms. But this was possible only through the closest investigation of its documentary traces in the archive. Only by this means could the pattern that was assumed to exist in the past be discovered.114 Ranke, however, developed Niebuhr’s critical method and eliminated certain weaknesses. Although an admirable critic of sources, Niebuhr read into his version of Roman history a variety of moral and philosophical views unwarranted by the existing evidence, something which actually characterized German historians during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries who utilized the Roman Empire to explore and find answers to the German question of this time. By undermining ancient traditions, Niebuhr built new structures upon unsafe foundations. From fragments of truth he undertook to construct the whole truth by a somewhat fanciful and imaginative process; on the other hand he determined to hold strictly to the facts of history, to preach no sermon, to point no moral, to adorn no tale, but to tell the simple historical truth. Truth and objectivity were Ranke’s highest aims. In his view, history was not for entertainment or edification, but for instruction. Without presuming to be a moral censor, Ranke attempted to present historic truth in its purity before the world. He cultivated an artistic style, always choosing a form of expression which rose above the trivial and the commonplace. In this respect he was influenced not merely by classical models but by the style of Johannes von Müller115 and to avoid such false colouring as had been given to history by Sir Walter Scott116 and writers of the Romantic School. Thus the weaknesses as well as the strengths of other men were educating influences in the development of young Leopold Ranke.117

Notes 1 For further details see also H.B. Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Papers of the American historical association, vol. iii (New York, 1888), pp. 101–102; Gottfried Braasch, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Familie in Wiehe’, in: Ranke-Verein (ed.), Leopold

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 25 von Ranke (Wiehe, 1995), pp. 13–14; Gisbert Bäcker-von-Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Familie: Kulturgeschichtliches Bild einer deutschen Gelehrtenfamilie im neunzehnten Jahrhundert’, Diss. (Bonn, 1955); Hermann Ranke, Zur Geschichte der Familie Ranke (1901). 2 Stein, Heinrich Friedrich Karl Reichsfreiherr vom und zum (1757–1831), Prussian statesman. 3 Hardenberg, Karl August Graf von (1750–1822), Prussian minister and reformer. 4 Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Ranke und seine Familie’, pp. 1–3. 5 Stephen Davis, Empiricism and history (Hampshire, 2003), p. 32. 6 Humboldt, Wilhelm von (1767–1835), Prussian philosopher, linguist, government functionary and diplomat. 7 James Westfall Thompson, A history of historical writing, vol. ii (New York, 1962), pp. 150–151. 8 Davies, Empiricism, p. 32. 9 See Ingrid Hecht, New discoveries in the private library of Leopold von Ranke: Is medicine a part of historical knowledge? (Lewistown, 2013). 10 Note of Ernst Ranke, Geheime Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin, Familienarchiv Geschwister Ranke, No. 1. From here on I will use a short form: GStA PK, FA Geschwister Ranke, No. 1. 11 Rudolf Vierhaus, Ranke und die soziale Welt (Münster, 1957), pp. 6–7. 12 Ibid, p. 7. 13 Theodore H. von Laue, Leopold von Ranke, the formative years (Princeton, 1950), p. 10. 14 Leopold von Ranke, Leopold von Ranke; Aufsätze zur eigenen Lebensbeschreibung (Wiehe, 1993), p. 46. 15 Leopold had further siblings: Johanna was born in 1797, Heinrich Friedrich in 1798, Emilie Charlotte in 1799 (who died six months later), Karl Ferdinand in 1802, Friedrich Wilhelm in 1804, Rudolf Theodor in 1806 (who died two years later), Rosalie in 1808 and Ernst Konstantin in 1814. For details on Ranke’s siblings see Braasch, ‘Ranke und seine Familie in Wiehe’, pp. 14–15. 16 A detailed research and description of Ranke’s parents and birthplace was given by Ermentrude von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Rankes Elternhaus’, in: Herbert Grundmann (ed.), Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. xlviii (Cologne, 1966), pp. 114–132. 17 Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians, p. 73. 18 Ibid. 19 Ibid. See also Ranke, Leopold von Ranke; Aufsätze zur eigenen Lebensbeschreibung, p. 47. 20 After 1863 Ranke dictated several accounts of his childhood and early academic life until the 1830s. As the four accounts differ in detail and content I have chosen not to use his own to describe his background and early life before 1843, as they were coloured by his memory when written down 50 to 80 years after his childhood. For his account see Ranke, Leopold von Ranke; Aufsätze zur eigenen Lebensbeschreibung, pp. 1–66. 21 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 34. 22 Bernhard Hoeft, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, in: Historische Studien, 307 (1937), p. 6. 23 Ibid. See also Friedrich Heinrich Ranke, Jugenderinnerungen mit Blicken auf das spätere Leben (Stuttgart, 1877), p. 13. 24 Müntzer, Thomas (1489–1525), Anabaptist preacher. In 1525 he was elected pastor of the Anabaptists of Mühlhausen, where he was executed as a leader of the Peasant’s Revolt (1524–25). 25 Luther, Martin (1483–1546), religious reformer. In 1517 he drew up 95 theses on indulgences. The drawing up of the Augsburg Confession marks the culmination of the German Reformation (1530).

26  Ranke’s childhood and educational years 26 Vierhaus, Ranke und die soziale Welt, p. 7. 27 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, pp. 13–14. 28 Dietmar Grypa (ed.), Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke, Band 1: 1810–1825 (Berlin, 2016), pp. 4–6, 9. 29 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 16. 30 Alfred Dünisch, ‘Ranke als “Berater der Könige” ’, in: ‘Ich habe immer gedacht, dass der Historiker alt werden muss.’ Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, vol. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), p. 48. According to a dictate of Ranke in 1879. 31 For further details see Braasch, ‘Ranke und seine Familie in Wiehe’, pp.  15–16; Ingrid Hecht, Leopold von Ranke: Und ich darf es nicht verschweigen (Berlin, 2003), pp. 21–65. 32 Karl Büchsenschütz, ‘Schulpforta, eine sächsisch-thüringische Bildungseinrichtung damals und heute’, in: ‘Ich habe immer gedacht, dass der Historiker alt werden muss’. Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, vol. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), p. 41. 33 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb (1762–1814), German philosopher and founder of the philosophical movement known as German idealism. 34 T.H. von Laue, Leopold von Ranke, the formative years (Princeton, 1950), p. 10. 35 Dünisch, ‘Ranke als “Berater der Könige” ’, p. 48. 36 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 103–104. 37 Dünisch, ‘Ranke als “Berater der Könige” ’, p. 48. 38 G.G. Iggers and Konrad von Moltke (eds.), The theory and practice of history (New York, 1973). A useful collection of short extracts from Ranke on the study and writing of history. 39 See also Warren, History and the historians, p. 58. 40 Büchsenschütz, ‘Schulpforta’, p. 41. 41 Leopold von Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlass, Band 3: Frühe Schriften, ed. by W.P. Fuchs (Munich, 1973), p. 66. 42 Details in Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, pp. 65–78. 43 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 15. 44 Ranke, Frühe Schriften, p. 19. 45 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 34. 46 Ibid. 47 Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians, p. 86. 48 Schlegel, Karl Wilhelm Friedrich (1772–1829), German critic. He became the greatest critic produced by the German Romantics, writing widely on comparative literature and philology. 49 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von (1749–1832), German poet, dramatist and scientist. His literary masterpiece is Faust. 50 Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von (1775–1854), German philosopher. His early work culminated in his System of transcendental idealism (1800). 51 Kant, Immanuel (1724–1804), German philosopher. His main work, Critique of pure reason (1781), provided a response to the empiricism of Hume and exerted great influence on subsequent philosophy. 52 Thucydides (c. 460–c. 400 BC), Athenian aristocratic historian of the Peloponnesian War. 53 Titus Livius (c. 59 BC–AD 17), Roman historian. His history of Rome, from its foundation to the death of Drusus (9 BC), comprised 142 books, of which 35 have survived. 54 Dionysius of Halicarnassus (first century BC), influential Greek critic, historian and rhetorician. 55 Hermann, Johann Gottfried Jakob (1772–1849), one of the most famous philologists of Germany, lecturer in Leipzig and Berlin, who also taught Ranke. 56 Niebuhr, Barthold Georg (1776–1831), historian. His main work, the History of Rome (1811–32), marked him out as a founder of the nineteenth-century school of German historical scholarship.

Ranke’s childhood and educational years 27 57 Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians, p. 87. 58 Ranke, Aufsätze zur eigenen Lebensbeschreibung, p. 219. 59 Marnie Hughes-Warrington, Fifty key thinkers on history (New York, 2001), pp. 258–259. 60 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 104. 61 Jahn, Friedrich Ludwig (1778–1852), founder of the gymnastic and nationalist movement in Germany. He was imprisoned 1819–25 in Prussia as he opposed the system of the Restoration period. 62 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 102. 63 Warren, History and the historians, p. 58. 64 Ibid. 65 Philipp W. Rosemann, ‘What is philosophy?’, in: Philotheos. International Journal for Philosophy and Theology, 17 (2017), pp. 5–17. 66 Ibid, p. 11. 67 Ibid, pp. 11–12. 68 Ibid, p. 12. 69 Ibid, p. 10. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid, pp. 13–14. 72 Ibid, p. 14. 73 Herder, Johann Gottfried (1744–1803), German philosopher, theologian, poet and literary critic. He is associated with the periods of Enlightenment, Sturm und Drang and the Weimar Classicism. 74 Warren, History and the historians, p. 59. 75 Ibid. 76 Toews, Becoming historical, pp. 393–394. 77 Ibid, p. 394. 78 Ibid. See also Leopold von Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlass, Band 1: Tagebücher, ed. by W.P. Fuchs (Munich, 1964), p. 141. 79 Ibid. See also Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 142. 80 Ibid, pp. 394–395. 81 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 41–61, 85–117, 137–157. 82 Ibid, pp. 168–175, 232–237, 257–263. 83 Ranke, Frühe Schriften, p. 21. 84 Stenzel, Gustav Adolf Harald (1792–1854), German historian and politician. 85 Ritter, August Heinrich (1791–1869), German philosopher and historian of philosophy. 86 Mario Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, in: Historicum N.F. I–II (2015), p. 53. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid. See also Leopold von Ranke, Sämmtliche Werke, vols. 53/4, pp. 193, 201, 207. For further details see also the biography, K.G.W. Stenzel, Gustav Adolf Harald Stenzels Leben (Gotha, 1897). 89 Ibid, p. 53. 90 Ibid. See also Ernst Schulin, ‘Rankes erstes Buch’, in: Historische Zeitschrift 203 (1966), pp. 581–609. 91 Ibid. 92 Ibid, p. 54. 93 Ibid. 94 Daniel Fulda, Wissenschaft aus Kunst. Die Entstehung der modernen deutschen Geschichtsschreibung 1760–1860 (Berlin, 1996), p. 340. 95 Ibid. 96 Ingrid Hecht, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Dissertation’ (2017), paper, p. 1. 97 See also Günter Katsch and Gerhild Schwendler, ‘Probleme der Wissenschaftsentwicklung in der philosophischen Diskussion’, in: Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, Gesellschaftswissenschaftliche Reihe, 35, 3 (1986). They referred to the circumstances under which Ranke may have received his PhD.

28  Ranke’s childhood and educational years 98 See in particular her discussion in Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, pp. 72–73. 99 The following short biography of Leopold Ranke, written in Latin, supports the thesis that Ranke received his PhD without a written dissertation: ‘FRANCISCUS LEOPOLDUS RANCKE – REGII SEMIN. PHILOL. SODALIS. Ex private institutione patris mei, Gottlobi Israëlis Ranckii, iustitiarii, cui ex Friderica Wilhelmina Lehmigke natus sum Wiehae in Thuringis d. XXI. Debr. cIɔIɔCCLXXXXV, Dondorpii me liberalia exceperunt Kraftii in me studia. Deinde Portae traditus sum. Ubi ut omnes magistri optime de me meruerunt, ita grata patris auctoritate Iohnius, perfecti praeceptoris dignitate Langius, miti amici consuetudine Wickius me ad severiora antiquitatis studia formaverunt. Atque haec quidem studia Lipsia, quam ao. h. f. XIV. vidi, auxit et nutrivit. Utiles mihi fuerunt philosophorum, Platneri, Wendtii, Krugii, utiles etiam scholae theologorum: maxima debeo tum Hermanno, sum Schneideri, nunc apud Uratislaviensis Professoris, amicitae. Accesserunt vero summa Beckii beneficia: qui me at convictorio ultro admisit, et in Regium seminarium philolog. receptum eruditionis lumine et prudentia iudicii magnopere adiuvit. Restat, ut publice gratias agam L. B. a Werthern, Cancellario Regio, qui me et olim Dondorpium admisit, et stipendio avorum suorum etiamnum adiuvat, alteri Illustri Liebeskindio, Schönewerdensium in Thuringia domino, patris mei patrono, qui mihi quoque gratuita munificentia large patrocinari voluit. Stipendio Henriciano Ordo Philosophorum me ornavit.’ In: E.K. Wieland and C.D. Beck, De Mythologia Graecorum Antiquissima Dissertatio (Leipzig, 1817), p. xxxiii. 100 The copy of the book has been in the possession of the Ranke-Verein since 2003; however, this new valuable find remains unpublished. Hecht had prepared a detailed paper on her findings which should be available soon. The author would like to thank Ingrid Hecht for sharing the information. 101 Ranke, Frühe Schriften, p. 120. 102 Ibid, p. 214. 103 Schiller, Johann Christoph Friedrich von (1759–1805), German poet, philosopher, physician, historian and playwright. 104 Ibid, p. 217. 105 Ibid, p. 233. 106 Tzschirner, Heinrich Gottlieb (1778–1828), German Protestant theologian and lecturer. 107 Ibid, p. 251. 108 Hecht, ‘Ranke und seine Dissertation’, p. 2. See also H.F. Helmolt, Leopold Rankes Leben und Wirken (Leipzig, 1921), p. 17. 109 Taken from Hecht, ‘Ranke und seine Dissertation’, p. 2. Original in: Paul Joachimsen, ‘Das Lutherbild Leopold von Rankes’, in: Th. Knolle (ed.), Luther, Vierteljahresschrift der Luthergesellschaft (Munich, 1926), p. 6. 110 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 35. 111 Hans Liebeschütz, Ranke (London, 1954), p. 5. 112 See Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 18. 113 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 104. 114 For more details on Niebuhr and his influence on Ranke see also Alun Munslow, The new history (Harlow, 2003), and Davis, Empiricism and history. 115 Müller, Johannes von (1752–1809), Swiss historian. He moved several times between German states and Switzerland and rose as a private scholar to great popularity. 116 Scott, Sir Walter (1771–1832), Scottish novelist and poet. His historical works fall into three groups by their setting: the background of Scottish history, the Middle Ages and the Reformation period. 117 For more details see Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 104–105.

2 First employment in Frankfurt/Oder and his early years in Berlin (1818–27)

Early in 1818, Ranke applied for two teaching positions closer to his home, in Merseburg1 and Pforta; however, both applications were unsuccessful. Disappointed to have failed in obtaining a teaching position of his wishes, with the desired capital of Berlin out of reach and having failed in his attempt at a book on Martin Luther, he applied for a teaching position at the FriedrichsGymnasium in the Prussian town of Frankfurt/Oder.2 Here, Leopold had greater chances, especially as a former student of Gottfried Hermann, Ernst Poppo, had been the director of the grammar school since 1817.3 In April 1818, Ranke was appointed teacher of classics. In the late summer of 1818 Leopold passed the exams with the higher education authority, enabling him to teach in grammar schools.4 With his move to Frankfurt in the summer, a new chapter in Ranke’s life started after his ambitions for literary works were crushed. Metz emphasized that Ranke found new friends here quickly, and he enjoyed horse riding in the surrounding environment – even politics seemed to interest him.5 Laue added that he enjoyed the ‘limited’ sociability of the small town, meeting his colleagues and the younger local intelligentsia, and even making the acquaintance of some young female members of the provincial society, to whom he gave private lessons.6 As regards the company of young women, noteworthy were his first landlady, Mrs Ahlemann,7 her household help, Ms Caroline Beer,8 and a young widower, Mrs Antoinette von Zielinski, nicknamed Minna.9 Leopold got on so well with Caroline and Minna that Juhnke wondered if they were just good friends or if there was more behind the flirting,10 and Laue suggested among the latter that a young widowed countess brought a trace of romance into Ranke’s scholarly life. Hecht noted that although he was away from home and led a simple life, he was happy to live now for the first time independently.11 But on the whole, he led a very sober existence, in which the best hours and the best energies were devoted to work. Even in leisure hours Ranke continued his studies. The young teacher’s life in Frankfurt did not greatly differ from others at that time. His schedule was rigorous, although his duties may have been more limited. He taught classical languages to upper-class students and gave an advanced course in ancient literature to the seniors. Furthermore he taught ‘History of the oriental peoples and the Greek,’ about the ‘Universal history from the old world to the decline of the occidental empires’ and ‘German history.’ From autumn 1819,

30  First employment and early years he also taught on ‘Roman literature.’ In 1820–21 Ranke was forced by a new curriculum to teach on historiography. The materials for his classes were unsystematically created notes and source excerpts. They represent a chaotic remainder of Ranke’s class preparations. In his mind, handbooks were inadequate as they contained nothing else than ‘a lot of unprocessed notes,’ so he needed to write down excerpts from sources by himself.12 Due to the classes he had to teach, Ranke devoted himself first to ancient and medieval history, reading the ancient historians extensively in preparation for his teaching. During the critical study of sources in the grammar school library, he was struck by the contradictions and inconsistencies in the works of Francesco Guicciardini13 and Paolo Giovio.14 Dissatisfaction with historians’ existing methods and their manner of writing drove Ranke to his first work and not, as previously assumed, his general interest in modern history. And when he was done at school he turned to his private studies, to Commines,15 Guicciardini, Sleidanus16 and Machiavelli.17 Librarians in Berlin and other cities grew quite impatient at the unknown scholar from the province who pestered them with incessant requests for more books.18 Family bonds were important to Ranke: writing letters was an important feature in his life. He may well have written the letters with a publication at a later stage in mind. The fact was that Ranke rarely ever wrote spontaneously; he wrote correspondence like his books: new corrections made constantly and rewritten several times. It seems that this was Ranke’s method of writing. He wanted to make sure that no misunderstanding could be created. Obviously, with increasing fame, Ranke may have had in his mind that his letters would be published at some stage, following a typical pattern of many well-known persons and statesmen at that time. And Ranke wrote his letters according to the addressee: to his brother Heinrich he wrote with a pastoral vibe, according to his brother’s Lutheran vocation; joking with Bettina von Arnim;19 presenting statesmanship when writing to officials. Generally Ranke kept writing letters; it was only in years of major German events, such as 1848–49, 1866 and 1870–71, that the amount of letters was reduced. This could have something to do with both Ranke’s position in German society and his conflicting opinions towards these events. There is a possibility that he may not have written many letters or that these were destroyed in the following months in order to keep his reputation clean. Leopold was closest to his brother Heinrich, who chose a theological calling and had to leave Prussia due his involvement in prohibited student associations. Their letters had a strong theological colouring, mainly due to the pietistic position of Heinrich; Ranke had to write in theological terms in order to be understood by him. The apparent outward order of his life, however, did not correspond to an inner stability. As Laue analyzed, his letters show a heightened impressionability and sensitivity and occasional mental agitation, which proved that the fermentation period of his youth had not yet ended. Religious problems still strongly obsessed him. He read Thomas à Kempis,20 and mystical, pantheistic moods varied with moments of religious doubt.21 From his letters to his brother Heinrich, written during those seven years he spent at Frankfurt, one can gather that, apart from his intensive studies, Ranke’s

First employment and early years  31 chief recreation was walking in the evening and musing. On his walks he sought the ‘nightingales and singing trees and those spirits which hover above the evening fragrance of the valley, ripple in the water, bloom in the flower, walk on the bare slopes of the hills.’ He thought of the world-historic process with religious awe: ‘Those who conceive of antiquity superficially, flatly, sinfully, do so to their condemnation.’ He saw divine punishment in a shallow treatment of history; the historic spirit revenged itself. ‘Misery grows ever deeper, life more flat, thinking more numb. . . . The inner-living spirit revenges itself because it was despised.’ For, he mused as he walked under the moonlight, history was the proof of the divine being.22 His ‘diary’ with biographical comments23 and notes on the antiques24 continued, but the poetic nature of the comments and the way they were written indicate that Ranke wrote them most likely in 1818–19. After this period his biographical notes ceased for a couple of years. Leopold was not only an ambitious young man, but from an early stage – as the oldest sibling – he had to take the role of a ‘big’ brother quite seriously and help out his siblings if they were in trouble. Heinrich especially seemed to have a tendency to get into trouble and, helping his brother find employment, Heinrich stayed in Frankfurt in 1819. In the same year both brothers met Jahn in Frankfurt. Whereas Leopold kept the contact only through a long conversation, Heinrich followed Jahn on his further trips, and when Jahn got arrested based on the so-called demagogue-persecution in July  1919, Heinrich also became a victim.25 Again Leopold tried to help his brother, at first for him not to get persecuted26 and then for possible employment anywhere in Germany except Prussia.27 Heinrich had to stay for a short while in Altenkirchen, where he met Hermann Christoph Baier,28 who influenced Heinrich so much that he decided to take up a religious career.29 This role is misunderstood to this day by many scholars who claim that he was selfish and had a strong patriarchal role in later life. During his years in Frankfurt/Oder the Metternich30 reaction was in full swing. Leopold took this to heart and even considered moving to Bavaria. According to Metz even his strong religious beliefs were questioned; he had doubts, and working as a teacher became increasingly difficult for him. The duty to teach history would finally lead him to historiography.31 Nevertheless, Ranke displayed an amazing detachment. His personal reactions against the times were rare. Having a conservative but moderate nature, Ranke disliked the violent measures taken by the contemporary governments against liberal movements and men; he once criticized the reactionary statesmen ‘who know no constitution but the will of the police, no fatherland but their sofa, no gains but cash money.’ And he continued: ‘Historical studies really developed as a reaction against the autocracy of the Napoleonic ideas.’ On another occasion he said, somewhat mystically, that ‘everybody lives under the influence of the stars which rule the world.’ Thompson concluded from these comments that on the whole, however, Ranke was not politically sensitive.32 His experience was indicated by his early script ‘From the papers of a rural vicar’ (‘Aus den Papieren eines Landpfarrers’) from 1818.33 Baur emphasized that Leopold hoped for a final freedom of the ‘unholy smallness of civic life.’

32  First employment and early years He planned in the end to flee the ‘slavery’ of mind and to leave Prussia due to its demagogue-repressions.34 Shortly after this followed a script of a speech he gave, entitled ‘The idea of the Greeks, Romans and Germans about the ideal of education’ (‘Die Vorstellung der Griechen, Römer und Deutschen von dem Ideal der Erziehung’) on 12 October 1818. On the foundation day of the school three speeches were given, and the last one was given by Ranke; it was his first presentation in front of a bigger crowd.35 The next scripts all come from late 1818 to 1819 and are preparation notes for classes: ‘From the class notes on Greek history’ (‘Aus den Unterrichtsnotizen zur griechischen Geschichte’),36 ‘From studies on Greek and Roman literature history’ (‘Aus den Studien zur griechischen und römischen Literaturgeschichte’)37 and, in June  1819, ‘From class preparations on medieval history’ (‘Aus den Unterrichtsvorbreitungen zur mittelalterlichen Geschichte’), in which we find the first indication of his famously phrased ‘the finger of God’ initially mentioned in his first book: ‘He hoped to destroy the pillar. But it seems as if God wanted to prevent it.’38 This shows that several of his ideas evolved over time and had to be worked over before we find the phrases everybody quotes to this day. The next script was most likely also from 1819, a ‘drama project’ (‘Dramenentwurf ’)39 which seemed to refer to Herodotus. In October 1821 he gave another speech on the foundation day of the school, and it was simply entitled ‘School speech 1821’ (‘Schulrede 1821’).40 The next scripts were more written around 1823–24: ‘Europe and Asia’ (‘Europa und Asien’),41 ‘Balders and Hother’s fight: According to Saxo Grammaticus’ (‘Balders und Hothers Kampf. Nach Saxo Grammaticus’)42 and ‘On the interplay between state, public, teachers and pupils in relation to a grammar school. On 7 October 1824’ (‘Über die Wechselwirkung zwischen Staat, Publikum, Lehrern und Schülern in Beziehung auf ein Gymnasium. Am 7. Oktober 1824’), which was another festive speech but became in the end the final one for Ranke in Frankfurt/Oder.43 Ranke made a couple of trips during the years he lived in Frankfurt/Oder. From September to October 1819 he went for a trip starting in Berlin and going to Rostock, Stettin, Doberan, Altenkirchen and Kap Arkora (Island Rügen). Parts of this trip were in relation to the possible persecution of his brother Heinrich. The following year he travelled in October to Wiehe and Roßleben. The next trip was in March and April 1822 to Naumburg, Leipzig and Wittenberg, followed by a short trip in October 1822 to Berlin. Again, on the move in May 1823 he visited Müll­ rose, Spring and Lindow, whereas in December 1823 he visited Leipzig, Merseburg, Carsdorf and Wiehe. During the summer of 1824, from July to September, he travelled to Berlin, Halle and Wiehe. Soon after his arrival at Frankfurt/Oder the young scholar found a very good collection of historical works in the derelict building of the former University, also known as the Westermann Library, and he was attracted by the volumes containing the history of the Renaissance written by authors of that period. The reconstruction of European political history in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century became his first task.44 Besides, Ranke had started to build up his own private library. Bernhard Hoeft mentioned that his sense for acquiring books started

First employment and early years  33 during his educational years in Donndorf, Schulpforta and Leipzig. As his yearly income was limited and Leopold therefore could not buy all the books needed for his studies by himself, he had to borrow from the Royal Library in Berlin.45 Hoeft mentioned the anecdote that at some stage, he asked for so many books to be brought to Frankfurt that the Royal Library had the choice to move either the large library from Berlin to Frankfurt or the small figure of Ranke to Berlin. And so Ranke came to Berlin. By the time he left Frankfurt/Oder, he already owned around a thousand books.46 Mario Wimmer researched Ranke’s use of primary sources. Amongst them he was able to find one of the first copies of primary sources in Ranke’s own hand, dated June 1819. This little notebook is 27 pages long, bound by Ranke himself, and the pages contain different watermarks. Leopold’s handwriting was small and very fine – a sign of the young Ranke, who was still very careful with his excerpts, which were readable and well structured. Ranke had a wide range of reading materials: antique authors, contemporary philosophy and literature, and later also works of historical colleagues. However, most importantly Ranke loved to read primary sources.47 Reading became an essential part of his daily life, and at the same time reading was just a transition to writing. What he liked of the reading were the voices from the sources beginning to overlay with his own voice, which was described as ‘the Thuringian dialect with a high voice and gullying sounds.’48 According to Wimmer, this was Ranke’s way of finding his own voice and the intonation of his historical writing.49 James Westfall Thompson mentioned that gradually the fascination of original historical researches led Ranke further afield. Ancient Rome gave way to medieval Germany. When he came to the later Middle Ages, he began to amuse himself by reading the romances of Sir Walter Scott50 ‘with vivid interest.’51 But Ranke resented factual inaccuracy even in novels. Scott entertained him with his glowing portraiture, but annoyed him with his historical errors: Among other things [Ranke relates] I  was offended by his [Scott’s] treatment of Charles the Bold and Louis XI in his Quentin Durward, which was in complete contradiction to the historical sources, even in details. I studied Commines and the contemporary reports which are attached to the recent editions of this author, and convinced myself that a Charles the Bold and a Louis XI, as portrayed by Scott, never existed. This stumbled and learned author knew himself; but I could not forgive him that in his story he presented outlines which were thoroughly unhistorical and which he gave in such a way as if he believed them. In making the comparison I convinced myself that the historical sources are more attractive and in any case more interesting than romantic fiction. I turned away from it [fiction] altogether and conceived the idea that in my works I  would avoid all fabrication and fiction, and stick severely to facts.52 This was a remarkable passage, a penetrating revelation of Ranke’s mind and method showing his enormous respect for facts and wish for accuracy. Finally,

34  First employment and early years we have a psychologically revealing last sentence: that genuine history was more attractive and more interesting to him than fiction. The latter explains why Ranke took such keen joy in the study and writing of history and how he could continue his vast output until the age of 91.53 Although Ranke rejected the historical novel as he saw it exemplified in Walter Scott, he was very much aware that history was also an art, and I believe that he wrote in the manner of the historical novelists. A careful examination of his language use and construction of chapters with speeches and partial reconstructions of conversations underline this argument. And then there was, of course, the scholarly side, the central role of critical archival research, which Ranke took very seriously.54 His emphasis on research into the sources did not stop him recognizing that research must result in an ‘acceptable story.’ As Ranke said: History is distinguished from all other sciences in that it is also an art. History is a science in collecting, finding, penetrating; it is an art because it recreates and portrays that which it has found and recognized. Other sciences are satisfied simply with recording what has been found; history requires the ability to recreate.55 Munslow, of course, believed that mainstream historians do not follow up on this argument that history may be conceived of as both art and science only by not being alert to the power of language to shape and create understanding. We may therefore describe Ranke’s approach to history as ‘academic’ or ‘scholarly’ to ensure the ‘scientific’ and ‘art’ aspect of history: he followed the rules of research, i.e. that he can evidence the materials on which he wrote, but also be ‘academic’ in the way he wrote and processed this information. Ranke realized that writing history is fictive in nature. As a philologist, he was aware of the power of language and had a good understanding of the meaning of ‘fictive’ and ‘fiction.’56 Amongst the few diary notes from the Frankfurt period, the following note clearly indicated his philological knowledge as well as the awareness of aesthetics in history: The old language uses more simple roots and less outer determination words; their effect, no matter of their multi-syllable, a greater tightness and alone their syntactical transition is not so filled out. It presents its words naturally and complete; the flexions are nearly as important as the roots. In the newer language however, the idea, following the root, gets a greater overweight and of the flexion remains only the essential. We summarize: the language loses euphony, but gains abstraction. Jacob Grimm, Deutsche Grammatik, vol. 1, 1819, p. xxx.57 According to Iggers and Wang, Ranke was still convinced that the element of artistic imagination which enters into serious historical study did not prevent careful source criticism from yielding the data with which narratives that correspond to reality could be recreated.58 He solved this problem by having recourse to an

First employment and early years  35 idealistic philosophical, we might even say religious, assumption which he did not acknowledge as contrary to his scientific outlook. Yet there was a problem in the transition from the facts established through the criticism of sources to the historical narrative which involved artistic creativity. Ranke sought to solve this problem in a way similar to that which had already been well formulated by Wilhelm von Humboldt in his famous essay ‘On the Historian’s Task’ (1821).59 ‘The historian’s task,’ Humboldt wrote, ‘is to present what actually happened.’ He continued: ‘An event, however, is only partially visible in the world of the senses; the rest has to be added by intuition, inference, and guesswork.’60 For Humboldt the human world consisted of individualities, and these included individual persons as well the great social institutions. Each individuality manifested a unique idea, rooted in the actual world, but yet eternal. The ideas were thus highly individual and could not be reduced to sheer abstractions. Ranke was convinced that ‘world history does not present a chaotic tumult,’ but that ‘there are forces, and indeed life-giving, creative forces, moral engines’ which reveal themselves to us once we immerse ourselves in the sources. ‘They cannot be defined or put in abstract terms, but one can behold them and observe them.’61 The state for Ranke was a prime moral force, in his words a ‘thought of God,’ which held society together. There were no states in the abstract. ‘There is an element which makes a state not a subdivision of general categories, but a living thing, an individual, a unique self.’ It had a need to expand, to maintain itself in the struggle for power. Yet in that struggle and in war, mere force does not triumph, but rather ‘genuine moral energy.’ From this followed the conclusion that the liberal conception of civil society that recognized the needs and pursuits of individuals had its place, but it must be subordinated to the authority of the state. Iggers and Wang added that welfare was not the primary aim of the state.62 This makes sense if one researches the historical development of states, which are usually based on economic and power struggles. Ranke was wrongfully accused of neglecting the working classes; welfare was simply not his research subject, plus the first public archives would not have had social and welfare documentation ready yet. In this period of transition towards history, Ranke had to find his position first, find the meaning of history. I quote the following letter nearly in full length; in it, a still romantically infused young man describes his early vision of history and God. Especially the end of the letter has been often quoted as evidence of a religious Ranke; however, he wrote to a pious brother in his own religious language in order to be understood: Now the vacation is coming, I am looking forward to important work. I would like to learn something of the life of the nations in the fifteenth century, of the repeated opening up of all the sprouts which antiquity planted – as if now the old blossoms were gone, blown away, and the germ, long tended, was sprouting again. I know nothing about it yet. But I already know that this striving, forming, wanting did not remain with the literary nobility, but in a way there with the common people. I know. I know it from the Reformation. For although the Gospel was revealed originally to Luther by the grace of

36  First employment and early years God, there are other reasons for the success of this message. Only dry wood goes up in flames immediately. So I shall learn, I hope, or at least have an idea how the Empire and the Papacy died, and new life comes with a new breath and makes everything alive, just as certainly and generally as infected air poisons. I think that Fichte already said that this love for a past life, namely its idea, this inner drive to learn about antiquity in its depth, leads to God. I have always had difficulty accepting what is said: ‘For he that takes communion and does not believe, eats and drinks to his damnation’ (compare I Corinthians, 11, 29). But is this not how it is? Those who take antiquity shallowly, superficially, indeed sinfully, contribute to their damnation: misery becomes even deeper, life becomes shallower, and thinking becomes ever more rigid. As it happened back then in Italy, it now happens to so many. As if the immanent spirit were taking revenge because it is mocked. In all of history God dwells, lives, can be recognized. Every deed gives testimony of Him, every moment preaches His name, but most of all, it seems to me, does so the connectedness of History. He stands there like a holy hieroglyph, understood and preserved in His most extreme manifestation, perhaps in order that He is not lost to more perceptive future centuries. Let us go on, let us go forward. No matter how it goes and succeeds, let us do our part to unveil this holy hieroglyph! In this way too we serve God, in this way we are also priests and teachers. God be with you my brother.63 Through this early process of how to understand and write history, Ranke fully understood that every one of us has a past, one made of our own recollections, which we remember and forget consciously and unconsciously. History is there to help us remember parts of our past and help us locate ourselves securely into existing and important networks. We need history, a narrative written about the past, to place ourselves, but also to form a common shared inheritance within a country: history provides identity. This kind of identity usually covers national, regional and ethnic identity, but in the end history is a narrative that can be created for any purpose one wants. Ranke would have described this in different words, but essentially the same. For 1824 we have barely any of Ranke’s diary notes, but one is outstanding. The document referred to contemporary history, and it was a longer passage on German unity and Europe.64 He indirectly criticized German unity and noted that nobody would be concerned too much of the worries of the Thuringians (his own background). The passage at the end was interesting: That is Europe. If it does not fit together, it falls apart. But if it wasn’t a dream, what Charlemagne had thought of a European Republic, so it is possible, that also you, becoming one, all your peoples, with yourselves, and your habits, to recognize your own inner nature and value it. As everybody can live, so it can live: all life will have something of common use. That is Europe.65

First employment and early years  37 However, all these years and his increased interest in history did not change the fact that, according to Wimmer, Ranke did not want to become a historian in the first place.66 To write books himself he saw as a questionable business. Even a year before the publication of his first book, he wrote to a school friend: I had planned, spoiling time in writing books, but to follow those insights which make the person good and enlightened at the same time. As everything derives from God, it does not depend on the material, but upon the eye of the same; the way we take the things in the bowl, their shell and bringing forth the essential, it happens that in ourselves we collect knowledge, get inner life and the soul and sign of God get wings, or at least a presence.67 Just before he published his first book, he hoped to get away from the stagnating atmosphere of Frankfurt and wrote the book to appeal to scholars, hoping, he wrote modestly in the preface, that no one would ‘expect a Tacitus and Herodotus in this first attempt.’68 In the opinion of J.D. Braw, Ranke was a self-conscious, radical and far-reaching revisionist: ‘The entire history of the 16th century needs a thorough critical revision,’ he wrote in an 1824 letter to Niebuhr.69 Nevertheless, Juhnke noted that the publisher sent the manuscript very quickly through censorship and print. Although he thought well, Ranke was not happy and complained as it was too fast for him.70 Helmolt noted that amongst the many little things Ranke wanted to change was the title of the second volume: he preferred Beyträge instead of Beylage.71 In a letter to Georg Reimer72 in November 1824, Ranke mentioned these issues and that he was not too happy with the early publication.73 In the first half of November 1824 the print of both volumes was finished. In Ranke’s estate one can find a notebook from this time which contained new critical extracts and source notes. On the front page was noted: ‘Literature. Especially historical writers, started on 13 November  1824.’ One can find in the first few pages literature from the sixteenth century with many free spaces for additions, especially sorted for Germany, France and England; the main section contained notes on historians of the same period, and one gets the impression that Ranke may have considered a second volume to the critique, but it was never concluded.74 On the last page of this book (p. 132) one finds also some notes on manuscripts: Very important should be the 46 volumes of informazioni politiche in Berlin, which were collected by a Venetian ambassador, written in Latin, Spanish and Italian. They start from the times of Charles V. It was once not important. And they cover mainly the South. Including Turkey, so important, and in all relations, they must have been well informed. What Mueller has mentioned from a script of Tiepolo, but as it seems has checked only the first volume. For me it would be important to cover all from beginning to end.75 Late in 1824 his first work, Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker, was published. In his introduction,76 Ranke tried to demonstrate the unity of the six nations formed in the Carolingian Empire (the Latin nations of France,

38  First employment and early years Italy and Spain and the Germanic nations of Germany, England and Scandinavia) through the three medieval ‘respirations’; the great migrations, the Crusades and colonization. In these developments, he claimed, ‘one can almost perceive the unity of a single, closed event’ which produced a shared history that ‘binds nations in a closer unity.’77 In the main text, however, Ranke explored developments in Italy and viewed further countries, which were involved in Italian affairs: Spain, France, Germany and Switzerland. While examining these states, with a short synopsis of previous history and their development during the wars in Italy from 1494 until 1514, he researched with emphasis on the manifestation of a national state in France and Spain. This development was not possible in Germany due to its federative empirical structure, and Italy never had a chance due to foreign involvement in its internal affairs. Furthermore, Ranke examined the independence of Switzerland from the Holy Roman Empire. Even though most of the text certainly concentrated on the development of states and wars, politics and marriage diplomacy, he was able to provide a good association of European history as uniquely connected. Nevertheless, he also occasionally mentioned cultural aspects, such as the detailed description of Reichstag assemblies and how the different classes are represented. Already in his first book we can find the importance of aesthetics and a pretty modern perspective of history which comes close to some postmodernists’ views, as Ranke commented in the preface: ‘The other aspect is directly expressed by the content of the book, which embraces only a small part of the history of these nations, what might well be called the beginning of the modern history – only histories, not history.’78 Keith Jenkins noted that we have one past, but many histories.79 Therefore, Ranke was fully aware of this, and his first book touched on this aspect: the title, translated properly, is not History of the Latin and Teutonic nations but Histories (Geschichten). The book itself was a collection of different histories. This little difference of translation also gives the book a different interpretation. The Histories of the Latin and Germanic nations is known chiefly for the statement that ‘to history has been assigned the office of judging the past, of instructing the present for the benefit of future ages. To such high offices this work does not aspire: It wants only to show what actually happened.’80 The meaning of Ranke’s aim to study the past ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen’ has been the subject of much debate among historians.81 A number of writers have translated the phrase as ‘what actually happened,’ ‘as it really was’ or ‘simply tell how it was’ and have understood it as an endorsement of ‘colourless’ history. Historians, Ranke claimed, should stick to the facts. There should be no evidence of their views and commitments in their writing. It is only when they remove all trace of themselves that they can revive the past. Historians, Ranke claimed, try to unveil the ‘holy hieroglyph’ that is God’s presence in the world. So, history is more than just facts; the historian has a ‘joy in the particular’ but also an ‘eye for the universal.’82 More recent commentators such as Iggers have argued that such a translation is not accurate because it does not reveal Ranke’s ‘idealistic’ conception of history. He pointed out that the term ‘eigentlich’ does not only mean ‘actually,’ but also

First employment and early years  39 ‘essentially’ or ‘characteristically.’83 Therefore, Iggers preferred to translate the phrase as ‘[History] merely wants to show how, essentially, things happened.’84 Nevertheless, the translation of Ranke’s quotation into English has its problems. One thing is certain, however: the famous quote by Ranke is a conscious formula that contains a very complex meaning. The word ‘bloß’ shows Ranke’s modesty, while the word ‘eigentlich’ touches on issues like ‘truth’ and ‘the greatest good.’ The translation ‘happened’ describes an event or condition; it does not describe a development. The usual translation ‘how it really was’ is too short and does not describe what Ranke intended to say. As a more correct translation I would suggest ‘how things really were.’85 Ranke was not writing a chronology of events but the story of a specific historical unit, namely that which he identified as the Latin and Germanic peoples. This unit, which had grown organically since Roman times, was not identical with Europe, which would include the Slavic countries, i.e. Greek Orthodox Russia and Muslim Turkey. He faced the question of identifying what was Europe. Was it universal Christendom? No, said Ranke, because this would include Armenians, who were not Europeans. Maybe a European unity? No, since this would also mean taking in Turks and Russians. How about Latin Christendom? Here the difficulty was that it would exclude Slavs, Letts and Magyars. Ranke excluded Poland and Hungary from the community of European nations; their constitutions and institutions, he felt, had made no contribution to the general development, and they had not been shaped by that development’s repercussions. We see that Ranke’s Europe was circumscribed not by geography but by a common spiritual experience which might be difficult for us to follow today.86 What, then, was there left? Ranke’s answer was that European civilization was a fusion of Roman with Germanic elements, that the ‘barbarians’ had taken over many cultural elements of the declining empire and combined them with their own; in this way there developed on European soil the characteristic institutions known as State and Church, Empire and Papacy, the rise of which Ranke traced in bold strokes.87 Ranke preferred the Holy Roman Empire as the ideal of the unity of Europe. For example, in his later years he rejected the idea of a German central state. He always maintained a great interest in European history, and this was reflected in his ‘European’ connections with scholars and kings, and his open, ‘European’ friendly house, better known as the ‘Salon Ranke,’ led by his wife, Clarissa, in Berlin between the 1840s and 1860s. In his appendix, Ranke examined the literary foundations and historical writing of early modern history and concentrated on Italy. He considered the works of Machiavelli (20 pages) and Guicciardini (49 pages) as the most important ones and described briefly several European historians from Italy, Germany, Spain and France. His analysis was well structured: at first he introduced the historian and then discussed their work, leading to a conclusion. Within his discussion he compared the contents with other works and originals. Ranke’s objective was to discover how far the writer’s statements were original and trustworthy. Sometimes he wrote with a harsh judgement; sometimes excusing the writer but, when appropriate, with praise. Ranke was one of the first scholars to vindicate the character

40  First employment and early years of Machiavelli. On the other hand, he was the first to expose Guicciardini, whose history was shown to have no solid foundations and to be written purely for romantic effect. He was as interested in personality as were the contemporary portrait painters. In his narrative one met a totality of impressions which combined the perception of nature and landscape with a feeling for human and social realities.88 Ranke aimed at setting human events in an appropriate physical background: fact followed upon fact, event upon personality, colour upon anecdote, flags and tapestry upon the clanking of swords, the clatter of hoofs and the banging of pots and pans. Rarely had the texture of a historical narrative been more densely woven than in his work. For this reason the modern reader finds it slow reading. But there were touches of epigram and wit that reward the reader for his effort, as for instance the observation that the Swiss mercenaries were brave against iron but cowards against gold.89 Ranke was more motivated in his first work by his disenchantment and disagreement with how history had been written in the past. As Ranke came from a philological background, his work dealt more with the way history should be written, rather than being a work of history itself. The philological aspect, namely how to criticize and how to write history, is well structured  – the influence of Niebuhr and his teacher Hermann became evident. The book itself was at times confusing and disorganized, and the lack of a deep historical background was evident. For example, of Ranke’s aim to present the history of six European nations, he ‘forgot’ two Germanic powers (England and Scandinavia) and only mentioned them briefly. Ranke’s discussion was always straightforward, sometimes funny and sarcastic, and led along with questions. His appendix came close to a modern review. When comparing original books and passages of text, he always used the original language (Latin, German, Spanish, French, Italian and Greek), which indicates the philological background: only the original text can give the correct context, and a translation can destroy this and falsify history. The resulting work was, by the standards of his later output, not especially impressive, and upon close consideration one finds that an inconclusiveness shrouds the whole book. While Ranke’s ‘soul was full of motion, joy of things, and of plans,’ he did not succeed in reaching the clarity, balance and perfection of a masterpiece.90 Ranke did not develop a coherent philosophy of history. No doubt Ranke had ‘ideas’ on history scattered among his letters, lectures, diaries and published works; but he was not prepared, nor was he able, to assimilate them into one integral system.91 Despite criticizing historical writing practices, there were other reasons for the choice of this topic. Since 1815 Europe had undergone many changes: several revolts, uprisings and wars of independence took place in southern European countries (Spain, Italy, Greece and Serbia), while at later times liberal constitutions and parliaments were introduced to German states. At the end of his work, Ranke analyzed why Italy could not form a Unitarian state and referred this question indirectly towards the German Question, which had existed since 1806. The German states did not form a unity in any way but represented a federative idea of a state structure, which could not work with the idea of forming one national state

First employment and early years 41 following the example of France. Copying movements from other states would not mean bringing them their own national unity, but would rather cause problems that had been experienced in Germany at that time (censorship and restrictions of other freedoms, to mention two). One should work within one’s own given historical structures. The historical example of Italy indicated why the formation of a national state did not work in Italy. Due to its success, Ranke planned to write a second volume leading up to 1535, which would have included the Reformation. There were two closely interwoven institutions – the state and the church – which determine the character of the world with which Ranke was dealing. Politically, the transition to the modern world was marked in the Italian wars by the replacement of the Italian city states by two great powers, Habsburg Spain and France, in conflict for the control of Italy. The monarchy emerged as the key political institution of the modern world, and while religion and religiosity by no means declined, they assumed a different, more purified form with the Reformation, by which the power of the Papacy over the central states was curbed. The second volume of the Histories of the Latin and Germanic nations never appeared. Instead, Ranke published four volumes dealing with the Spanish monarchy, the Papacy and the Ottoman Empire, which basically strayed away from his commitment to write a history of the Western, i.e. the Latin-Germanic, world. As an ambitious young man just learning how to play the system in order to hopefully secure a new position as a lecturer, he knew that he had to send copies to the right people.92 From his correspondence we know that he sent letters with copies of his book to Karl Freiherr vom Stein zum Altenstein93 and Antoinette von Zielinski, to the ministry and to Christian Günther Graf von Bernstorff.94 Furthermore, Ranke cleverly took care to send his book to Johannes Schulze,95 expressing the hope of getting a better teaching position where he could have access to a good library. Schulze replied that he found such a wish ‘both just and natural.’ He would help, he said, to the best of his ability. ‘Perhaps there will soon be a favorable opportunity either here [Berlin] or in Halle or in Bonn; at least it does not seem improbable.’ Meanwhile Raumer96 approached Kamptz,97 the director of education in the ministry, and urged him to do something for Ranke. He added a highly significant postscript to this appreciative letter: ‘Another thing: I have no doubt that after such an achievement the career of a university teacher will be open to you everywhere, and I gladly stand ready to help you with all my powers.’98 Kamptz was impressed by Ranke’s work and offered to borrow books from Vienna for the young scholar ‘at ministerial cost’; he also promised him the use of the Berlin archives.99 He was soon rewarded; his book won him recognition at once100 and was an immediate success. Through the influence of Altenstein, the Prussian minister of education, Ranke was called by chief counsel Johannes Schulze to the University in Berlin on 31 March 1825 as Außerordentlicher professor, a professor extraordinarius, although he was not made full professor until 1836. Baur believed that Ranke hit the nerve of the time, even if the universities did not acknowledge the critical spirit of the book and it was not academics who praised the work in the

42  First employment and early years reviews but the liberal Varnhagen.101 It was not the scholarly Berlin but the educated, liberal and progressive Berlin which opened the doors for Ranke.102 It is worth noting that upon his entry into Berlin’s academic society, Ranke was welcomed by both liberal and conservative circles. His sponsor in the ministry of education was Heinrich von Kamptz, known for his arch-reactionary views. But on the other hand, the liberal Varnhagen von Ense, diplomat, author, editor and man-about-town, likewise sponsored the young professor. His wife, Rahel, who kept a famous salon, groomed him for polite society, both as a man and as a writer. The Humboldt brothers, who also belonged to the liberal faction, likewise took an interest in the promising young man. Ranke himself took no sides at first; he was not committed to any political doctrine. Laue believed that gradually, however, being a man with a weakness for the company of the powerful, Ranke grew more loyal to the authorities in the government who cultivated his talent: he fell under the spell of the Prussian state.103 Bernhard Hoeft researched that Ranke lived in Berlin at first in the street Hinter der Katholischen Kirche Nr. 2, in which he moved back again after his return from the Italian trip. As he brought back many manuscripts from Italy, he soon had to move again: at first to Jägerstrasse Nr. 10 and then Luisenstrasse 16a, from where he moved after his marriage in 1843 to the second level of number 24a, where he would live for another 40 years and which housed his ever-growing library as well.104 Not only was the royal library interesting for Ranke when he arrived in Berlin in 1825, but he also found stimulating society and influential people who could assist him.105 Through Varnhagen von Ense, a diplomat sacked from the Prussian services due to his liberal views, he was able to get access to Berlin’s famous salons and also the one from Rahel. There he met Bettina von Arnim, also called ‘Goethe’s child,’ with whom Ranke may have had an affair. The ‘small Ranke’ was described as a ‘goblin’ and appeared everywhere in order to disappear immediately again, he was apparently the rooster in the basket for the ladies, but a serious conversation was apparently impossible with him, an academic visitor of Rahel’s literary circle noted negatively from those days.106 Something similar is recorded by Rahel Varnhagen107 to her husband Karl August after talking to Ranke: ‘History. What it is: why he writes it. All full of thoughts. But he only loves it as a single case, the thoughts.’108 In particular, the salon of Rahel Varnhagen attracted him. The salon was at this time the centre of cultural and political life, and people like Goethe and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel,109 the brothers Humboldt110 and Heinrich Heine111 had strong contacts with Varnhagen. And it was here also that Ranke learned to appreciate a literary style of writing that marked his works in subsequent years. Wimmer quoted Ranke, who described his style of writing as ‘ambitious and merciless, because his soul throws itself into the studies and averts itself from other people of his surroundings.’112 Ranke also met Arnim,113 with whom he was in contact for a long time, although they fell out in later years. Other people whom Ranke met in the salon include Clemens von Brentano,114 Adelbert von Chamisso,115 Ludwig Devrient,116 Hermann Fürst von Pückler,117 Schelling and Friedrich Schleiermacher.118

First employment and early years  43 In Berlin University Hegel held the chair of philosophy, Schleiermacher taught theology and Friedrich Karl von Savigny119 law. In the humanities, opinion was sharply divided between those who agreed with Hegel that history was the story of universal freedom and those who endorsed Savigny’s view of the individuality and variety of experience in history. Ranke had his own view of history and agreed with Savigny, against Hegel’s position of an interpretation of history above, and independent of, concrete historical facts and events. He believed that universal and divine ideas were dependent upon people’s concrete experiences for their realization, yet the nature and function of the universal in Ranke’s work remained unmistakably Hegelian. Above all, the historian should be concerned with describing the past as ‘how things really were,’ implicitly ruling out any serious reflection on the ‘what ifs’ of history. Like Hegel, Ranke also held the view that history was the working out of some kind of spiritual plan. According to Muhlack, it was not the source criticism which made several scholars angry but that Ranke would not agree with their own historical basic ideas, as he was neither a follower of Hegel nor the Heidelberg school, neither a Catholic nor a nationalist. Ranke as a critical source researcher was for them undisputed and a role model.120 The Hallischen Jahrbücher did not acknowledge any historic honour, yet approved his research based on sources and spoke of his great scholarship and sharpness with the creation of the historical seminar as a special merit. Georg Gottfried Gervinus criticized that the historic studies did not refer to the present, but did not dispute his achievement for ‘opening up new sources’ and the foundation of a ‘pure and strict science.’121 Ranke’s refusal to accept the supremacy of philosophy over history earned him a disparaging remark by Hegel, that he was nothing but ‘a common historian.’122 On the other hand, this comment made Ranke welcome in the circle of anti-Hegelians – of Schleiermacher, Savigny, and Varnhagen.123 For some of the classes Ranke taught, we have transcripts from the introductions taken down by his students. For example, for ‘The newest history from 1789 to 1815,’ given in the summer semester 1826, he described the problems for the study and the presentation of history. The first problem lay in the acknowledgement of facts, which was based on sources and memoirs. The second problem was impartiality – which was important – and the third problem was the summary of the large amount of small notes to create a whole narrative.124 For his class on the ‘Development of literature since the beginnings of the eighteenth century,’ given in the summer semester 1827, he started the introduction with ‘one knows that literature has a great influence on life; and as often life is the subject of the presentation, life has on literature.’125 This comment shows again Ranke’s awareness of aesthetics. Jürgen Elvert noted that Droysen126 joined this class in 1827 and therefore counted as one of the first Ranke students.127 Shortly after his arrival in Berlin, in the spring of 1825, Ranke discovered a collection of 48 manuscript volumes in the Royal Library. The volumes contained relazioni – reports written by early modern Venetian diplomats about the politics and lives of other European countries.128 Reading through these volumes, Ranke became increasingly intrigued. Already by the summer of 1825 he was

44  First employment and early years planning an ambitious book, based upon these diplomatic reports, which would redefine European history from the Reformation to the French Revolution.129 This book never materialized, but, in 1827, his work with the Venetian sources in the Royal Library resulted in Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa, which carried the programmatic subtitle ‘Primarily from unpublished diplomatic reports.’130 The result, his second book, on the Ottomans and the Spanish monarchy, induced the Prussian government to give Ranke extended leave to study the relazioni of the Venetian ambassadors. These secret reports, submitted to their government over three centuries by those brilliant accredited spies, politically called ‘ambassadors,’ were copious, candid, highly personal yet beautifully informed. Though the historian Müller used them earlier, it was Ranke who made them famous. The use he made of these documents constituted more than the exploitation of unfamiliar historical material and method; it also brought new light into the explanation of events in Europe.131 Ranke got so fascinated by these manuscripts that he acquired his own first volume of relazioni in an antiquarian shop in Leipzig, and he wrote on it with pride: ‘Bought from the library Foschiana. FLR February 1826’ (‘Aus der bibliotheca Foschiana erkauft. FLR Februar 1826’).132 On his research trip to Italy Ranke bought another 400 relazioni, and his collection continued to grow as ‘his personal guarantee’ of his historiography. The collection would reach up to 2,350 samples of manuscripts and pamphlets by the end of his life.133 The move to Berlin also allowed Ranke to travel more for his studies: in 1825 he travelled for a couple of months; in May he went to Frankfurt/Oder, in September on a quick trip around Quedlinburg, Alexisbad, Gotha, Brocken (Harz), Ilsenburg, Harzburg, Goslar, Clausthal, Andreasberg, Wieda, Nordhausen, Kyffhäuser and Langensalza, followed in October to Halle. In November he had been in Bärenwalde, and in December in Frankfurt/Oder again. In 1826 he travelled only in September to Wiehe and Quedlinburg. Excited by the success of his first book, the lectureship in Berlin – in the first years, financed by the ministry – and the finds of new undiscovered sources had him chasing one source after another. The promising young scholar made an impression on Friedrich Perthes,134 who tried to win him over to contribute to a series of national state histories. In 1825 Ranke discovered an interest in English history, but then he found French history more interesting and dropped English history for the more promising ‘French Plan.’135 Ranke was still unsettled, still finding himself, and he thought he had to make a name first before going any further. So, he rejected the suggestion to contribute to the Staatengeschichte first. He was again asked for a contribution on English history in autumn 1825, but he did not want to reject the offer yet, so he kept it open.136 In 1826 Ranke mentioned in his letter to Perthes that, while he was interested in English history, he would not mind if someone else wrote such a history.137 According to Gunter Berg it was questionable if Ranke wanted to write about English history at this time.138 He had just published his first work, Histories of the Romanic and Germanic nations, and he had other interests apart from England. Two years later he commenced his travels across Europe, searching in archives. He wrote to Perthes from Vienna in

First employment and early years 45 January 1828 that ‘at this moment I am more capable of writing about Venice than about England.’139 Only a few weeks later, however, Ranke reaffirmed his aspiration to write a history of England, but he did not know when because he needed more background material and therefore was not in a position to write about it.140 At this time Ranke was more interested in writing about southern Europe. He published Princes and nations in Southern Europe in 1827 and History of Servia in 1829. It was in the same year of the publication of History of Servia that Ranke wrote to Perthes from Rome on 14 December 1829, ‘I wish to thank you for releasing me from the obligation of writing the history of Great Britain and for your friendly consideration of my feelings [in this matter].’141 Ranke’s reluctant refusal to write a major history of England led to Perthes selecting a less well-known author to write a history of England for German readers – Johann Martin von Lappenberg.142 In 1827 Ranke published his second work, Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert, which was influenced, he admitted 50 years later, by the revolt of the Greeks against the Turks. This work was superior to the first, mainly because here for the first time Ranke devoted much space to non-political matters such as finances and economics. The young professor meanwhile had the benefit of social contact with many sophisticated men and women of Berlin society, especially women (Rahel Varnhagen and Bettina von Arnim), and they smoothed away some of his provincial stiffness. His style acquired a greater fluidity – this was also due, as Ranke himself said, to the influence of the lucidity of the Venetian relations which he used – and his language acquired greater clarity. ‘Contact,’ Ranke related, ‘with men and – I should not keep it silent – with women of worldly education, exercised a great influence on me.’ After he completed the work, the Prussian government sent him on a research trip abroad.143 In his book he thought to include the full Mediterranean, such as Crete and Cyprus. Under the title ‘Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa’ he hoped to publish a first volume including Turkey and Spain; the second volume was supposed to be about Tuscany, the Vatican and Venice with a critical report on the source materials. But soon Ranke realized that for Venice, the Papacy, Florence and smaller states, he needed more space. As Perthes did not like the approach, he suggested that they should publish one volume first. Therefore, The Ottoman and Spanish monarchy was published first, with Italy and the critical review to follow – but that did not happen.144 Juhnke noted that this work was not published by Reimer but by Perthes. The change of publisher is to be interpreted as an important career push as Ranke now belonged to a circle of privileged authors.145 This work of four volumes was divided into two parts.146 The first volume concentrated on the history of Spain and the Ottoman Empire. While the history of the Ottoman Empire covered the areas of Greece, Persia and Egypt, Spanish history concentrated on Spain with their main European connections to Italy, Holland, France and Germany. When discussing trade Ranke also included the colonies in America, Africa and India. The second part, consisting of three volumes, is better known as the History of the Popes but would be published in the mid-1830s.

46  First employment and early years The history of the Ottoman Empire was nearly a complete discussion of cultural and social history – very rarely facts or wars were mentioned. In particular Ranke described the three pillars upon which the Ottoman Empire was built: the feudal system, the institution of slaves and the position of the sultan. The discussion of Spanish history, however, was more complex. The development of the central state structure and the relation of social classes towards the central power formed the main topic of the book. Ranke concentrated on the period from 1540 to 1620. This is also reflected in the detailed presentation of the kings Charles II, Philip II and Philip III. Ranke criticized the Inquisition of Spain harshly and he had, overall, not a high opinion of the position of the church. It seems that Ranke favoured a strict division between church and state and thought the church should not have intervened with state affairs. Nevertheless, Ranke was able to show that the influence of the church was much weaker than usually believed. Details of social structures (such as elections, democracy and merchants) were given for the state and city of Milan (Italy), and economic history played a central role for the development of Holland. The Spanish part of Holland gained, after many years of destruction and war, independence from Spain and was able to recover soon due to economic success. Although trade connections for Spain failed, this meant an economic, political and cultural rise for Holland. Although the book had improved in writing style since the first book, Ranke still did not write history, but added randomly over 60 independent small stories together, each one rarely more than ten pages in length.147 As the book was not of great success, even Ranke’s old friend Stenzel walked away from his plan to dedicate his second volume of his Fränkische Kaiser (1827) to Ranke. It is also around the same time that the friendship between Stenzel and Ranke started to crumble, although Ranke had learned a lot from him. Baur noted that not only was Stenzel’s book much better than the warren stories of Ranke, it did not help that Stenzel suggested Ranke’s method of source criticism as a master template: as Stenzel did not dedicate the volume to him, Ranke was not happy and acted accordingly.148 The only major critical review of Ranke’s first book was published by Heinrich Leo149 in 1828 in the Jenaischen Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung and was six pages long.150 Juhnke noted that Leo was also a historian with a similar career as Ranke, but in contrast, he had to work hard in libraries to earn his money. Juhnke therefore believed that he was jealous, resentful and competitive!151 It was not Ranke’s insistence upon methodological accuracy which Leo challenged, however, but his view of history. Indeed, Leo based his criticism on grounds that Ranke would have accepted. He merely rejected the justice of these criticisms. Ranke’s style was poor, Leo complained; he had introduced sentimentality into the narration and lacked critical judgement in the use of his sources. The real controversy in the critical exchanges between the two men centred on their treatment of Machiavelli, and this involved two fundamental problems of a philosophic nature: (1) was it legitimate to apply ethical standards to the assessment of historical characters, and (2) should historical personalities be studied

First employment and early years 47 for their own sake or in terms of their role in world history? Ranke, attempting to refrain from passing moral judgement upon Machiavelli, viewed the Florentine in terms of his time. He did recognize that there was something ‘shocking’ in Machiavelli’s teachings. However, Ranke held that The Prince had not been intended as a ‘general textbook’ for practical politics; rather, Machiavelli’s teachings were directed at a specific historic situation. Ranke shuddered at the idea of using them as general precepts of political action, as readers had done for centuries. But he urged that they should as the means used for a specific situation. As pointed out in Ranke’s preface to the Histories of the Romanic and Germanic nations, the task of history is not ‘to judge the past’ but the more humble one: ‘merely to show what really happened (wie es eigentlich gewesen).’ We must ‘be just,’ Ranke argued. ‘He (Machiavelli) sought Italy’s salvation. But conditions seemed so desperate to him that he was bold enough to prescribe poison [. . .] Cruel means alone could save an Italy corrupted to the core.’152 For Heinrich Leo, on the other hand, the Florentine historian must be judged both by moral standards and as a world-historical person. In the introduction to his translation of Machiavelli’s letters, Leo described him as an amoral person who looked at good and evil as an outside observer and pursued the most perverted sensual pleasures without real personal engagement, ‘a mind torn loose from all that is eternal.’ Machiavelli, Leo continued, knew that as one flatters French, Burgundian or German princes with the hope of expelling the Turks from Europe, so Italian princes were flattered with the vision of cleansing the fatherland. Machiavelli’s patriotism was a mere device to obtain personal ends. But all of this is unimportant, Leo concluded, compared to the man’s ‘world historical significance’ as the midwife of the new age of the modern state to whose basic principle he gave expression, without himself being conscious of his great task.153 Hence, Ranke’s supposed criteria for judging the value of historical works solely in terms of the degree to which they represented ‘naked truth’ appeared faulty to Leo. For truth, he held, was found not in the representation of every detail but in a context that takes growth into account. The true landscape painting was not one in which the painter had counted every blade of grass which changed before he had time to finish the painting, but one that placed the living scene in front of the observer ‘without in the least sticking pedantically to details.’ And history was like that. ‘Truth in history is the process of life and of the spirit. Historiographical truth consists exclusively in describing this process which is manifested in the events. This description need not betray the index finger of the philosopher although the true historian and the philosopher meet at every step.’154 However, to identify his concept of naked truth with ‘the silly notion of copying and making anatomical slides’ seemed to Ranke a caricature of his procedure. Ranke believed that he, no less than Leo, sought general truth, but he argued that it can be apprehended only through the particular. By absorbing himself in the particular, he attempted to represent ‘the general straight away and without much circumlocution.’ Only in its outward appearance was the individual phenomenon particular; within it, as Leibniz155 had already recognized, the individual event

48  First employment and early years contains something deeper, ‘a general truth, significance, spirit.’ This general truth cannot be grasped through extensive reasoning, but only in a more direct way, in a manner closer to that of the poet or the artist. ‘In and by means of the event, I have tried to portray the event’s course and spirit and to define its characteristic traits [. . .] I know how little I have succeeded. But he should not scold me,’ Ranke continued in reply to Leo, ‘whose thinking is restricted to perpetuating the generalizing formulas of the (Hegelian) school. I shall not scold him either. We are travelling on entirely different roads.’156 But if reality consisted of a multiplicity of individual natures which cannot be reduced to a common denominator, history seemed to lose its meaning. While Ranke found a common denominator in God, he rejected Hegel’s pantheism which identified God with the total process of history. His was a Christian pantheism which saw God distinct from the world, but omnipotent in it. Hence Ranke defended his observation that ‘each time at the decisive moment something enters which we call chance or fate, but which is God’s finger’ from Leo’s charge of sentimentality and superstition. The presence of God alone prevented the alternative between the total determination of fate and the ‘materialist notion that all is contingent.’ God alone offered the bond of unity for Ranke – and for that matter for the Historical School in general – in a world where values and truths were related to historic individualities, rather than to universal human norms. Inherent in this type of historicism which Ranke espoused was always the threat that, if Christian faith was shaken, history would lose its meaning and present man with the anarchy of values.157 From the modern perspective Oliver J. Daddow criticized Ranke’s abuse of the principle of source criticism. He referred to Grafton, who observed that one of the earliest criticisms of Ranke’s methods was that he had unjustifiably accepted certain types of documents, for example the official reports of Venetian ambassadors to their Senate, as ‘transparent windows on past states and events rather than colourful reconstructions of them, whose authors wrote within rigid conventions, had not heard or seen everything they reported, and often wished to convince their own audience of a personal theory rather than simply tell what happened.’158 In addition to ignoring or overlooking the fictive element of the primary source material Ranke scrutinized, Grafton continued by dissecting the way Ranke compiled his narratives, observing that ‘he composed his text as a whole. Only then did he search his books and notes, extracts and summaries for the evidence to support it: he used a salt-shaker to add references to an already completed stew.’159 Rather than being told what to say by the sources, Ranke was manipulating evidence from them into a story he had in his mind already, and he took what he wanted from those sources to support his opinion of what had happened.160 On the other hand Shih-Chieh Su believed that Ranke’s approach demonstrated the duties of professional historians being similar to those of the mnemons in ancient Greece: to maintain ‘the memory of the past for the purpose of making juridical decisions,’ to provide the ‘memory of the society’ and to serve as the conservator of ‘objective’ and/or ‘ideological’ history.161

First employment and early years 49

Notes 1 See his application letters in Leopold von Ranke, Das Briefwerk, ed. by W.P. Fuchs (Hamburg, 1949), pp. 3–5. 2 On both applications see Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 25. 3 See also Siegfried Baur, Versuch über die Historik des jungen Ranke (Berlin, 1998), p. 67. 4 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 17. 5 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 35. 6 Laue, Leopold Ranke, pp. 21–22. 7 Mrs Ahlemann (1772–1843). 8 Caroline Beer (1791–1851). 9 Luise Wilhelime Antoinette von Zielinski (1799–1875). 10 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, pp. 27–28. 11 Ingrid Hecht, Leopold von Ranke: Und ich darf es nicht verschweigen. Lebensbeschreibung (Berlin, 2003), p. 84. 12 Mario Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), p. 55. 13 Guicciardini, Francesco (1483–1540), Italian historian and statesman. 14 Giovio, Paolo (1483–1552), Italian physician, historian, biographer and prelate. 15 Commines, Phillippe de (1447–1511), French writer and diplomat. 16 Sleidanus, Johannes (1506–56), Luxembourgeois historian and annalist of the Reformation. 17 Machiavelli, Niccolo (1469–1527), Italian diplomat, politician, historian, philosopher, humanist and writer of the Renaissance period. His most famous book was The Prince (1513). 18 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 22. 19 Arnim, Bettina von (1785–1859), German writer and novelist, publisher, composer, singer, visual artist, illustrator, patron of young talent and social activist. 20 Kempis, Thomas à (1380–1471), German-Dutch canon regular of the late medieval period and author of The imitation of Christ, one of the most popular and best-known Christian books on devotion. 21 Ibid, p. 22. 22 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 171. 23 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 62–67. The editor dated the entries to be written 1818–24. 24 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 106–108. Texts and comments on the history of the Greeks and the Gods. 25 For details of how they met see Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, pp. 29–31. 26 See the letter of Ranke to ‘a president’, 4 August 1819, in which he explained himself and the meeting with Jahn. In: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 5–9. 27 See also letters of Leopold to Heinrich Ranke, December  1820, Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 25–26, and asking philologist Friedrich Thiersch in Munich on 28 April 1822 for possible employment for Heinrich (Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 28–29). Ranke was with his brother in Pforta he indicated that he was not happy with Prussia, yet he ‘had to be Prussian’ as his home was Saxony. Ranke never left Prussia, but he kept a close relationship to Munich. 28 Baier, Hermann Christoph (1775–1822), German vicar. 29 See Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 11–12. 30 Metternich, Klemens von (1773–1859), Austrian diplomat and statesman who was one of the most important of his era, serving as the Austrian Empire’s Foreign Minister from 1809 and Chancellor from 1821 until the liberal revolutions of 1848 forced his resignation. 31 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 35. 32 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 170.

50  First employment and early years Ranke, Frühe Schriften, p. 467. Baur, Versuch über die Historik, p. 71. Ranke, Frühe Schriften, pp. 484–487. Ibid, p. 498. Ibid, p. 543. Ibid, p. 576. Ibid, p. 579. Ibid, pp. 582–585. Ibid, pp. 596–597. Ibid, pp. 603–604. Ibid, pp. 609–611. Liebeschütz, Ranke, p. 6. Bernhard Hoeft, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, in: Historische Studien, 307 (1937), p. 6. 46 Ibid, p. 7. 47 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 49. 48 Ibid. According to Paul Bailleu, Leopold von Ranke (1895), in: Alfred Dove, Ausgewählte Schriftchen vornehmlich historischen Inhalts (Leipzig, 1898), p. 172. 49 Ibid, p. 49. 50 Scott, Sir Walter (1771–1832), Scottish historical novelist, playwright, poet and historian. 51 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 170. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid. 54 G.G. Iggers, ‘Historiography between scholarship and poetry; reflections on Hayden White’s approach to historiography’, in: Rethinking History, 4, 3 (2000), p. 379. 55 Text from Alun Munslow, Deconstructing history (London, 1997), p. 101. 56 For more on this see A. Boldt, ‘Ranke: Objectivity and history’, in: Rethinking History, 18, 4 (2014), pp. 457–474. 57 Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 504. The quote was written down after 1819. 58 Georg G. Iggers and Q. Edward Wang, A global history of modern historiography (Harlow, 2008), p. 122. 59 Ibid. 60 Ibid, p. 123. 61 Ibid. 62 Ibid. 63 G.G. Iggers, The theory and practice of history (New York, 2011), p. 4. Translated by Wilma A. Iggers. Original letter Leopold to Heinrich Ranke, end of March 1820, see Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 16–18. 64 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 263–264. 65 Ibid, p. 264. 66 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 49. 67 Ibid. Letter of Leopold Ranke to Anton Richter, 13 April  1823, original in: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 37–38. 68 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 171. 69 J.D. Braw, ‘Vision as revision: Ranke and the beginning of modern history’, in: History and Theory, 46 (2007), p.  45. Original in: Dietrich Gerhard, ‘Zur Geschichte der Historischen Schule: Drei Briefe von Ranke und Heinrich Leo’, in: Historische Zeitschrift 132 (1925), p. 102. 70 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 38. 71 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 22. 72 Reimer, Georg Andreas (1776–1842), German publisher. 73 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Georg Reimer, 13 November 1824, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 66–67.

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45

First employment and early years 51 74 Hermann Oncken, Aus Rankes Frühzeit (Gotha, 1922), p. 20. 75 Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 21. This can also be found in Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 237. 76 Leopold Ranke, Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494 bis 1535 (1824) (Histories of the Latin and Teutonic Nations, 1494 to 1514, 1887) [included the appendix Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtsschreiber [‘Of criticism to modern historians’]] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 33–34]. 77 Ranke, Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker, pp. xviii. 78 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 85. 79 Keith Jenkins, At the limits of history (London, 2009), p. 169. 80 ‘Man hat der Historie das Amt, die Vergangenheit zu richten, die Mitwelt zum Nutzen zukünftiger Jahre zu belehren beygemessen: so hoher Aemter unterwindet sich gegenwärtiger Versuch nicht: er will bloß sagen, wie es eigentlich gewesen.’ In Ranke, Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker, pp. v–vi. The given translation was taken from Fritz Stern, The varieties of history from Voltaire to the present (New York, 1973), p. 57. It is strange that at the end of ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen’ the auxiliary verb ‘ist’ or maybe ‘war’ is missing. This is following Florian Krobb, German Department, Maynooth University: nothing unusual for that time because it was fashionable to leave the auxiliary verbs out for perfect constructions. 81 So, for example Felix Escher, ‘Leopold Ranke’, in: Michael Erbe (ed.), Berlinische Lebensbilder, Geisteswissenschaftler (Berlin, 1989), pp. 113–115; Felix Gilbert, History: Politics or culture? Reflections on Ranke and Burckhardt (New York, 1990), pp. 33–38. 82 Hughes-Warrington, Fifty key thinkers, p. 258. 83 G.G. Iggers, The German conception of history (Hannover, 1988), pp. 63–89. 84 Ibid, p. 67. 85 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p.  49. In Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 171, we find the only source where the author – for whatever reason – added the ‘ist’ into the quote: ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen ist’. 86 Gilbert, History: Politics or culture?, p. 24. 87 Ibid, p. 172. 88 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 28. 89 Ibid, p. 29. For the reference to Swiss mercenaries see also Ranke, Sämmtliche Werke, vols. 33/34, p. 127. 90 Ibid, p. 30. 91 Lothar Kettenacker, ‘Ranke: The meaning of history by Leonard Krieger’, Review in: History and Theory, 17, 3 (1978), p. 391. 92 See also Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, pp. 39–40. 93 Altenstein, Karl vom Stein zum (1770–1840), Prussian politician and the first Prussian education minister. His most lasting impact was the reform of the Prussian educational system. 94 Leopold von Ranke, Neue Briefe, ed. by Bernhard Hoeft and Hans Herzfeld (Hamburg, 1949), pp. 54–60. Bernstorff, Christian Günther Graf von (1769–1835), Danish and Prussian statesman and diplomat. 95 Schulze, Johannes (1786–1869), German educator and administrator. 96 Raumer, Friedrich Ludwig Georg von (1781–1873), German historian. 97 Kamptz, Freiherr Karl Albert Christoph Heinrich von (1769–1849), director for teaching in the Prussian ministry of education since 1822, and since 1824 at the same time director for the ministry of justice and persecutor of the so-called ‘demagogues’. 98 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 175. 99 Ibid. 100 Laue, Leopold Ranke, pp. 30–31. 101 Siegfried Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie. Anmerkungen zu Aufstieg und Fall der Historisch-politischen Zeitschrift Rankes’, in: Ulrich Muhlack (ed.), Historisierung und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 2003),

52  First employment and early years p. 68. Varnhagen von Ense, Karl August (1785–1858), German biographer, diplomat and soldier. 102 Ibid. 103 Laue, Leopold Ranke, pp. 31–32. 104 Hoeft, ‘Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, p. 7. 105 For further details see Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, pp. 103–132. 106 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 36. 107 Varnhagen von Ense, Rahel (1771–1833), head of a famous salon in Berlin. 108 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 49. 109 Hegel, George Wilhelm Friedrich (1770–1831), German philosopher who set out his tripartite system of logic, philosophy of nature and mind. His approach rejects the reality of finite and separate objects and minds in space and time and establishes an underlying, all-embracing unity, the absolute. 110 Humboldt, Wilhelm von (1767–1835), and Humboldt, Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander Freiherr von (1769–1859), German naturalist and geographer. His work, Cosmos (1845–62), endeavours to provide a comprehensive physical picture of the universe. 111 Heine, Christian Johann Heinrich (1797–1856), German poet and essayist. He became leader of the cosmopolitan democratic movement, writing widely on French and German culture. 112 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 49. 113 Arnim, Bettina von (1785–1859), German Romatic writer. 114 Brentano, Clemens von (1778–1842), German writer, founder of the Heidelberg Romantic school. 115 Chamisso, Adelbert von (1781–1838), German poet and biologist. He wrote several works on natural history, but his fame rests on his poems and novels. 116 Devrient, Ludwig (1784–1852), German actor at the Berlin Theatre. 117 Pückler, Hermann Fürst von (1785–1871), German writer. 118 See also Escher, ‘Leopold Ranke’, p.  118; Carola Stern, Der Text meines Lebens: Das Leben der Rahel Varnhagen (Hamburg, 2001), p. 243. Schleiermacher, Friedrich Daniel Ernst (1768–1834), German theologian and philosopher. He was a leader of the movement which led to the union in 1817 of the Lutheran and Reformed Churches in Prussia and is widely held to be the founder of modern Protestant theology. 119 Savigny, Friedrich Karl von (1774–1861), German jurist. In 1803 he became professor of law at Marburg and published a treatise on the Roman law of possession. In 1810 he was called to Berlin, where he was appointed a member of the commission for revising the code of Prussia (1810–1842). 120 Ulrich Muhlack, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Begründung der quellenkritischen Geschichtsforschung’, in: Jürgen Elvert (ed.), Historische Debatten und Kontroversen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 2002), p. 25. 121 Georg Gottfried Gervinus, Geschichte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts seit den Wiener Verträgen, vol. 8 (Leipzig 1866), pp. 71–73. 122 Gilbert, History: Politics or culture?, p. 24. 123 Ibid. 124 Leopold von Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlass, Band 4: Vorlesungseinleitungem, ed. by Volker Dotterweich and W.P. Fuchs (Munich, 1975), p. 35. 125 Ranke, Vorlesungseinleitung, p. 62. 126 Droysen, Johann Gustav (1808–1884), German historian and politician. Due to his historical work, he is one of the chief architects of the Prussian political mystique. 127 Jürgen Elvert, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Der Historiograph des preußischen Staates als Geschichtsschreiber Europes?’, in: Jürgen Elvert (ed.), Historische Mitteilunjgen, vol. 27 (Stuttgart, 2015), p. 139. 128 Kasper Risbjerg Eskilden, ‘Leopold Ranke’s archival turn: Location and evidence in modern historiography’, in: Modern Intellectual History, 5, 3 (2008), p. 434.

First employment and early years  53 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 84–85. Ibid. See also Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 107–108. Siegfried Baur, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. Eine Freundschaft von 1820 bis Kalliope’, in: Bibliotheksmagazin. Mitteilungen aus den Staatsbibliotheken in Berlin und München, 1 (2007), p. 17. 133 Ibid. 134 Perthes, Friedrich Christoph (1772–1843), German publisher. 135 Baur, Versuch über die Historik, p. 109. 136 Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 27. 137 See also Leonard Krieger, Ranke, the meaning of history (Chicago, 1977), pp. 216–217. 138 Gunter Berg, Leopold von Ranke als akademischer Lehrer (Göttingen, 1968), p. 149. 139 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Friedrich Perthes, 28 January 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 137. 140 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Friedrich Perthes, 25 February 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 143–145. 141 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Friedrich Perthes, 14 December 1829, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 131. 142 C.E. McClelland, German historians and England (Cambridge, 1971), p. 92. Johann Martin von Lappenberg (1794–1865) was to write the histories of Northern Germany and Europe, of England and of the Hanseatic League. 143 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 178. 144 Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 27. 145 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, pp. 49–50. 146 Leopold Ranke, Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Vornehmlich aus ungedruckten Gesandschaftsberichten (vols. i–iv; vol i from 1827, vols ii–iv between 1834–1836). [Princes and peoples of Southern Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Mainly taken from unpublished diplomats reports]. Vols. ii–iv are also known as Die römischen Päpste [History of the Popes (1840) and History of the Ottoman and Spanish Empires (1843)] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 35–39]. 147 Baur, Versuch über die Historik, p. 110. 148 Ibid, pp. 112–113. 149 Leo, Heinrich (1799–1878), Prussian historian. 150 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 57. 151 Ibid, pp. 52–53. 152 Iggers, German Conception of history, pp. 66–67. 153 Ibid, pp. 67–68. 154 Ibid, p. 68. 155 Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm (1646–1716), German polymath, philosopher in the history of mathematics and the history of philosophy. 156 Ibid. 157 Ibid, p. 69. 158 Anthony Grafton, The footnote: A curious history (London, 2003), p. 60. 159 Ibid, p. 65. 160 Oliver J. Daddow, ‘The ideology of apathy: Historians and postmodernism’, in: Rethinking History, 8, 3 (2004), p. 426. 161 Shih-Chieh Su, Modern nationalism and the making of a professional historian: The life and work of Leopold von Ranke (Providence, 2012), p. 38.

129 130 131 132

3 R  anke’s first research trip (1827–31)

Ranke went on leave on 1 September 1827. He travelled from Berlin at first to Dresden and then Wiehe, probably visiting his parents, before he continued his trip to Vienna, passing through Prague, Dornbach, Brühl and Schönbrunn. On 24 September 1827 he arrived in Vienna.1 When assessing Ranke’s travels – as far it is possible to compose based on letters and notes – the extent of his travels becomes clear. Despite the large number of towns and cities he visited,2 the first most noticeable aspect is the number of years Ranke travelled. If we exclude his travels before 1817 and the last years of his life, it becomes clear that he travelled nearly every single year. By looking at his travels during his academic career, which lasted for 46 years, we find that in only 6 years he did not travel at all. This means that during his academic career Ranke travelled for 40 years or 87% of the time. If we include his years as a teacher in Frankfurt/Oder, which would mean 53 years working for the Prussian state as a teacher and lecturer, he missed in total only 7 years. The majority of those years fall in the 1840s, and his lack of travel is most likely related to the birth of several children. The fact that Ranke more or less travelled every year not only shows his dictum of critical archival research put into practice but also poses the question of how he managed to write his books and give his classes at the same time as he stayed, in a number of cases for several weeks, in cities such as London or Paris. This aspect places Ranke as a person, family man and academic into a new perspective. From all the different locations Ranke visited for either research, work-related visits or social reasons, he visited some places more often than others. We also need to acknowledge that he visited some locations several times over his life, but Ranke may not necessarily have left letters for us to follow his movements; I refer in particular to his home town, Wiehe, and the surrounding area. The towns of Wiehe, Bornstedt, Halle and Erfurt were the most-visited locations for most of his life, and the majority of these visits were personal and family-related. Throughout his life, he visited other towns and cities several times: London, Paris, Brussels, Munich, Weimar, Vienna and Venice. Munich stands out from these cities, as he had to visit it for many years not only as the royal advisor for King Maximilian II but also as the president of the Historical Commission that he presided over for almost twenty years. The town of Frankfurt/Oder was visited regularly in his early years in Berlin, but these visits were most likely personally related as he visited

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 55 friends, and over the years he started to lose contact with them. In Ranke’s later years, starting in 1864, several times he visited Lodersleben, which is close to Wiehe, where his daughter Maximiliane every year stayed for months after her marriage to Wilhelm von Kotze in 1866. Due to his previous enthusiasm about Austria, Ranke expected to find in Vienna a similar culture to Prussia. But the city appeared strange to him, and he even felt alienated from it.3 What Ranke found in the churches of Vienna, still representing the spirit of Clemens Maria Hofbauer,4 was strange to him – but not alienating. It was here that Ranke experienced Catholic popular culture. He wrote to his brother Heinrich about his first visit to the Stefansdom: I did not stay outside, but walked inside: there it was sure as beautiful as outside! Inside I became immediately pious. In combination with the darkness, the lights, the praying and the coming and going one finds here a peculiar magic. The wicked thing is: the piety only continues as you stay inside. Once outside or shortly thereafter it is gone.5 But he returned, because during Catholic mass I notice something, what I like very much . . . I go at times after working and when I am tired; maybe in the evening around 6 p.m. The church is full of people and only sparingly lit; many sit, but equally the same amount of people stand opposite of the high altar. . . . I lean against a pillar in the corner and listen: where would be another place better suited to think about everything: for one who doesn’t know what happens with him in the world, who searches God and cannot find, who wishes for a science which he would never attain – in order to cry for himself?6 Soon after these lines were written, Ranke was brought back into the real existing world of confessions. When he heard that gossip in Berlin said that he apparently had become Catholic, he was shocked.7 He wrote to Rahel Varnhagen, ‘I see that I must have enemies. You know that if you would have a person who would be so far off as being a Catholic, so it would be me.’8 Pammer noted that generally it can be said that Ranke was open towards other religions and confessions and therefore was free of prejudices.9 Due to this issue, Ranke had to assure the ministry in Berlin that ‘he would live and die as an evangelist Christian.’10 At the same time he also met state councillor Ewers,11 director of the university in Dorpat (East Prussia), who immediately recognized the scholar. He offered him a professorship in Dorpat in February 1828.12 As a public servant working for the intolerant Prussian King Frederick William III and trying to negotiate a renewal of his contract with Berlin University and the offer of lectureship at the University of Dorpat,13 the Catholic gossip in Berlin came for Ranke at a very inconvenient time.14 In August 1828 he was able to report the successful negotiation results accepted by the king: ‘Now I still can go soon to Italy.’15 We can see that although he was working at the university in Berlin, his position was by no means secure, especially since his salary and research trip grant was still paid through the ministry

56  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) of education. It seems that Ranke liked the offer of full professorship in Dorpat; however, they gave him less freedom for research than Prussia did. So, as even scholars today sometimes do, he played with the offer in order to achieve better contract conditions in Berlin. If the archives allowed Ranke to forget the outside world, however, getting into the archives demanded connections in this world, as Eskildsen phrased it. When Ranke reached his first destination, Vienna, in late September  1827, he wrote to Bettina von Arnim: ‘You know what I have to search for next: libraries and archives, and the persons who can pave my way to these.’16 During the rest of his journey he carefully cultivated contacts with civil servants, noble families and other dignitaries who possessed the influence to open archival doors. He was patient and diplomatic. Even before leaving Berlin, Ranke had obtained letters of recommendation from Prussian officials.17 Later, Prussian diplomats in Vienna and Florence interceded on his behalf.18 When he discovered Alexander von Humboldt’s popularity in Italy, he wrote to friends in Germany to secure himself a letter from the scientist.19 Ranke’s most vital contacts were at the Viennese court. Friedrich von Gentz20 especially proved an invaluable ally. Gentz was one of the foremost intellectual figures of the European reaction.21 He had been secretary to the Congress of Vienna and was one of the chief architects of the Carlsbad Decrees of 1819, which limited the freedom of the press and of universities. More importantly, Gentz was a close associate of Prince Metternich. In Vienna, on 28 September 1827, a Prussian diplomat applied on behalf of Ranke for archival access, but the director of the archive, Josef Knechtl,22 initially recommended that the administration should deny him access, since he was a foreigner and it would be impossible to censor properly the large Italian collections. Only after Gentz’s personal intervention, and a meeting with Metternich, could Ranke enter the archive, on 13 October, despite the director’s complaints.23 A few months later, Ranke explained to Varnhagen how this was negotiated: Concerning the archive, everything appeared to fail. Baron von Maltzahn, who occupies himself with this matter, after some time called me to him and read me a letter, as utterly negative as ever possible, from the State Chancellery: ‘Too recent history. Rules. A stranger to the archive’. . . . Fortunately, however, a man was interested in the matter who had the inclination and capability: Mr von Gentz. He also called me to him, and indeed to the Prince . . . that [Metternich] knew my situation and appeared to think much good of me, impressed me considerably. The matter was immediately decided. . . . The next day, I gave Gentz a slip of paper, without heading or signature, only with a more detailed description of what I was searching for. This [slip] was delivered to the archive.24 Parts of the Italian collections in the Viennese archive remained inaccessible and demanded new authorizations. This shows that, against common belief that Ranke was able to access everything, he needed to continue to ask and beg the right

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 57 people in order to get access in the first place. According to Knechtl, Ranke’s archival privileges were unprecedented, even among Austrian historians.25 In Vienna he would conclude his last archival studies of his long career at the end of October 1873.26 Also in Italy, Ranke encountered problems with archival access. The Frari proved especially troublesome. When Ranke first arrived in Venice in October 1828, he was allowed to peep into the archive, but not to read his treasured diplomatic reports. ‘With agony,’ Ranke wrote to his publisher on 12 October, ‘I have spotted my treasure, the final reports, from a distance; little protected, without bindings or order, held together with strings, and nonetheless not to be reached immediately.’27 Since Venice was at that time still under Austrian control, Ranke wrote to Gentz on 17 October. The distance from Vienna, however, made it impossible for Gentz personally to oversee Ranke’s work at informal meetings. On 9 January 1829 Ranke complained that, despite Metternich’s support, ‘even now no definite decision has followed as these matters not only pass through different ministries, but also are sent here for assessment and must be returned to Vienna.’28 The same year, however, the Austrian government bypassed the local archivists and granted Ranke an unusually generous authorization to see all documents dating from before the French Revolution.29 Howard Brogan noticed that Ranke was always getting privileges that nobody else could get: being permitted to carry off priceless materials for use in his apartment, or gaining admittance to archives closed to others with official connections as good as he had. The answer to this mystery is surely the confidence that people had that he would not distort the material so entrusted to him into propaganda and the liking that people had for him as a human being.30 This view makes sense and explains the success of Ranke in later years as well. However, Brogan’s view stands in sharp contrast to other descriptions of Ranke as a person and scholar, such as from Henz. His depiction of Ranke raises one’s eyebrows, questioning how Ranke could ever had the chance to be as successful as he had been. The explanation presented by Brogan explains this aspect. Of course, Ranke met several other scholars and dignitaries during his research trip, such as the Slavic scholar Prof. Dombrowski, philosopher Friedrich von Schlegel and poet Freiherr von Zedlitz.31 Furthermore Ranke met the Prussian crown prince in Venice, which would start a close relationship to Prussia. In winter 1829–30 he also met the poet Count August von Platen,32 who shared Ranke’s dislike of Hegel. A friend of Platen, Count Friedrich Fugger,33 accompanied the Bavarian crown prince in 1831 to Berlin and, on Platen’s suggestion, introduced Ranke to Maximilian II – which also became the foundation of a lifelong friendship with another regent.34 Laue commented that Ranke was not a mere traveller, but a scholar with a mission. The joy he experienced was characteristically ploughed back, as it were, into his researches in the archives. He spent his best time and the best hours of the day among ‘books, or rather among often somewhat rotting papers,’ in the company, if any, of a few archivists and copyists.35 Only a scholar can appreciate Ranke’s quick grasp in the selection, evaluation and interpretation of the overwhelming

58  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) mass of documents that passed through his hands in his Italian researches. His ability to sift the relevant from the irrelevant, and thus to work his way smoothly and apparently effortlessly through the mountains of documentary material, aroused the envy of his pupils and sometimes provoked the charge of superficiality from his rivals. Indeed, as an explorer of new treasures Ranke had no time for the painstaking investigation of details. Much of a historian’s handiwork is of a dull, mechanical nature. It was particularly so during an age when historical material was not yet edited and printed in easily accessible volumes. And even if we take for granted the patience of sifting, selecting and copying, it required unusual determination to keep a straight and independent course of interest in this sea of myriad papers. In all the letters we have of Ranke’s Italian travels, there was never a word of boredom or fatigue. Ranke infused his letters with pleasure and pride at being the first to see what had so long been concealed or neglected.36 He never became oversaturated with his material. On the contrary – the bigger the shelves, the bigger his appetite for their contents.37 Ranke increasingly viewed his life from the perspective of the archive. After a year abroad, he confessed to his brother, ‘I have now become a gatherer. . . . Sometimes I feel the need to gather myself.’38 When he was not busy in the archives he would occasionally meet socially; he would read the ancient classics, write new manuscripts and send many letters, which report on his discoveries but also his daily activities.39 In the summer of 1829 he started to doubt if anywhere in this world could be considered his ‘home.’40 By the summer of 1830 he had learned to overcome this feeling of homesickness through more archival research.41 After more than two years abroad, archival research had become his entire existence. Regarding historical research, Ranke wrote to his brother, ‘In the end I have to say, this is what I have been assigned, for this I am here and was born; herein lies my suffering and joy, my life and my purpose!’42 Ranke’s romantic relationship with his sources and his new self-identification as an archival researcher made him feel increasingly passionate about his patrons at the Viennese court. After their first meeting in the fall of 1827, Ranke praised Metternich’s ‘fresh, spirited, stately personality’ and confessed to Varnhagen, ‘Do you know what I thought when I left? That, in the end, the effort to acquaint oneself with those people who are in the highest places and estates normally pays off. Honestly, I am for now somewhat bought.’43 A year later, in January 1829, while his case was pending between Venice and Vienna, he had forgotten his reservations and critical distance, and he declared to an Austrian friend, ‘I truly venerate your Prince Metternich. It is surely most noble that he offhandedly has permitted my access to the final reports of this archive.’44 After finally entering the Venetian archive, in August 1830, he considered his ‘obligations to the Austrian government as extraordinary.’45 Immersed in his work with the Venetian final reports, and probably writing on his book about the Venetian conspiracy, he thankfully wrote to Gentz on 26 September 1830: When a human being, whoever he is, achieves what he honestly and eagerly wishes for, and what is necessary for the realisation of the purpose of his

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 59 life, then he feels very obliged to those whom he can thank for this. I simply consider it the result of your recommendation to His Highness Prince Metternich that everything goes well, and without significant difficulties, with my current endeavours in Venice, as before in Vienna. . . . In the archive, I have consequently been received as a good friend.46 In his 1831 book, Ranke also expressed his gratitude for ‘the extraordinary favour with which both of the two great German governments [the Prussian and the Austrian] have honoured me undeservingly.’47 However, Metternich’s and Gentz’s favours were not given without reason and certainly were not the result of unconditional love for academic freedom. Even if Ranke preferred to see his writings as independent from politics, he also knew that Vienna expected some guarantees, especially considering the recent eruption of revolutionary passions across Europe. On 26 September 1830, in his thankful letter to Gentz, Ranke assured him that even ‘if I had had the hatred against Austria of a Frenchman from the extreme left, it would be hard for me to bring forth anything from this material which could harm your cause in public opinion.’48 He even considered publishing some of the documents he had uncovered, since ‘the nature of these sources corresponds with my own loyalty towards a country which has treated me with such extraordinary liberality.’49 In his correspondence with his brother Heinrich, who studied theology and became a vicar, Ranke had to discuss the matter of history in religious terms so that Heinrich would understand him. Ranke described to Heinrich that ‘in all of history lives, creates and is God visible.’50 Every event has the signature of God and has to be understood as a holy hieroglyph, and it is the task of the historian to unveil it. ‘And by this way we also serve God; by this way we are also priests and teachers.’51 The same mind can be found in his Conspiracy against Venice, where he described his position as a historian: God did not want that I ever should hide or cover up a violent event – may it be carried out by the ones in power or their opponents; alone for the defence of those who cannot defend themselves anymore, to bring the truth to light, I believe will always be one of the most important duties of history.52 The quote did not refer directly to the letter written eleven years before, and why Ranke did not want to become a vicar, but he could serve God in a different way: in the occupation as a historian. However, these quotes do not indicate how religious Ranke was; he merely wanted to compare his duty as a historian to one of the highest ideals of his time. If he ever could reach this level of ideals was a different question, but it was worth a try. Many recent scholars misinterpreted passages such as these and believed that Ranke was a very religious Protestant who wrote history from that perspective, which is not quite correct. Iggers suggested that behind ‘Ranke’s avowed Lutheran religiosity was an outlook basically incompatible with orthodox Protestant belief. Because every individuality is the manifestation of an idea that has its origin in God, there is

60  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) no room for evil.’53 In Ranke’s opinion, the ethical task of every historical individual, every nation and every state is the full development of itself. Therefore all values assume a concrete historical form representing specific values of historical individuals. Not philosophy or religion, but history was the true guide to value. The values embodied in historical societies were not temporal; they were timeless ideas, but they had no universal general validity.54 Such a conception, which stressed the ethical autonomy of every individual and every culture, should logically exclude the idea that there was progress in history; every stage of history must be judged as an end in itself, not as a step in a progression to a higher state. Ranke wrote that ‘every epoch is immediate to God and its worth is not at all based on what derives from it but rests in its own existence, in its own self.’55 Several times Ranke actually used God as a literary key and to keep his narrative flowing. Many passages were misinterpreted by historians who believed that Ranke placed his religious beliefs into the narrative, for example ‘Is this the final judgment of God over the king?’ or ‘The final judgment of God came over Italy.’56 Of course such phrases were used not as a historical fact, but as a key of narration. In other cases, when sudden events took place or unexplainable events happened, such as the storm during the sea battle of the English navy against the Spanish Armada in 1588, Ranke referred to God as well. In these cases it was not a religious belief, but it had to be understood from the perspective that a certain parameter within a series of events changed the outcome of a possible development which may have seemed unavoidable. In these cases it was something unexplainable, not logical, and no written sources were available – and Ranke could not explain it. So he referred to God, because only God would know the final truth of such unforeseen outcomes. Mario Wimmer noted that Ranke used a sexual language in relation to his archival sources: he phantasied of untouched archives and documents as princesses and saw himself as a Captain Cook57 of historiography.58 To his brother Heinrich, Ranke described how his studies catapulted him between desperation and joy; how, at times, he felt the presence of God among the fragments he studied and, at other times, he sensed nothing but hopelessness and confusion.59 With his friend Heinrich Ritter, Ranke discussed his erotic experiences inside as well as outside the archives. While detailing an encounter with a scantily clad young Czech woman, with whom he shared his overcoat during a walk outside Prague, he suddenly interrupted himself: ‘I am terrified that I am more long-winded about this than about all the manuscripts.’60 Later, rhapsodizing about the Italian collections in Vienna, he declared: ‘Here I have splendid and sweet lovers’ trysts with the object of my desire, which is a beautiful Italian woman. And I hope we bring forth a Romano-Germanic wonder-child.’61 Ranke saw his future as ‘a Columbus62 of Venetian history.’63 Later, he lowered his ambitions to ‘becoming if not a Columbus then a kind of Cook for the many beautiful, unknown islands of world history.’64 According to Falko Schnicke, Ranke gendered his sources, but he described his research activities as a specific, academic and hardworking bodily and manly work using metaphors from the mining industry.65 For example he compared the

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  61 library in Vienna with a metal mine,66 from where he ‘made great prey,’67 or that he saw an archive as a ‘treasure chamber.’68 The finding of sources he described in the old-fashioned way as ‘raising the treasure,’ in order to ‘exploit it properly.’69 In the 1830s he had noted on a sheet his view of the Vienna library archives: ‘I compare the library with a mine; what one exploits, one can keep, and in the end it is the purest gold.’70 From the 1850s we have a similar description from one of the Belgian archives, ‘where he found a mine with unsorted masses of papers’ into which he ‘has to drive a tunnel by himself.’ He found what he needed and also ‘many unused raw materials.’71 According to Schnicke, Ranke connected his metaphors to a motive of the romantic era when myths, drama, lyrics and opera referred to mines, miners and geologists, and he listed romantics such as Novalis in his Heinrich von Ofterdingen (1802) or Goethe’s Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre (1795–96). Schnicke emphasized that visits to mines were part of students’ trips around 1800. There is a possibility that Ranke had seen a tunnel by himself; otherwise he heard it from friends, such as Savigny, who was in 1799 in a Freiburg tunnel.72 Frank Bigeschke noted that there was a copper mine in Bottendorf, located just seven kilometres from Wiehe, which was in operation from 1473–1783. Although it was closed by the time of Ranke’s childhood, he still may have seen and explored it.73 Maybe he also read literary works dealing with the topic, such as Achim von Arnim’s74 novel Die Kronenwächter, published in 1817, which described the moral testing of a miner.75 Schnicke connected the mining work with erotic encounters and adventures in dark, moist caves. Going down the mine was often compared to as an act of ‘descent into sexuality.’76 Schnicke concluded therefore that Ranke’s picturesque depictions of archives were the erotic source of the passive-female desired objects, and therefore the sexualized formed archival research. He added that historiography also borrowed phrases from archaeology such as the ideas of ‘uncovering,’ ‘dismantling’ and ‘promoting’ of knowledge.77 Ranke liked to compare his activities to the heavy work of miners, including modern scientific technology and hazardous conditions such as noise, thick air and dust.78 Several times he described his archival work as a descent to the cellars of archives and how it would improve his social prestige.79 In some letters the analysis of manuscripts is described as an ‘object of my love,’ with whom he dreams ‘great and beautiful hours.’80 He also described the archive as a virgin to which he wished his ‘access.’81 Another time he reported to Ritter a direct connection between female acquaintances and his manuscripts: ‘On a trip I have brought a lightly dressed beautiful’ home under his coat, an event ‘which let my blood boil’ and he had to call himself to order: ‘I got a shock that I was too rambling about that than all other manuscripts.’82 Around this time of 1829–30 we have also a romantic poem about an Italian woman, written in Italian.83 Erotic-sexual attraction to women and the materials from the archive seemed to have been for Ranke equally important, but they also seemed to be in connection with each other.84 At this point I think I should note that the German language may have contributed to this gendering. In German the word ‘history’ is feminine, and I know from my own childhood that other people would quickly tease with history as being ‘a

62  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) girl-friend’; if one is very much interested in history, one is also ‘married’ to it. So, from my own personal experience of others gendering my interest, I am not surprised that Ranke used the terminology for himself, more likely to impress others than actually meaning literally what he wrote. Schnicke also mentioned that Bettina von Arnim was not only a pen pal, but a girlfriend to whom Ranke had a special social and intellectual connection before his departure.85 In the salon of Rahel Varnhagen, he met Arnim in the Jägerstrasse in Berlin and was invited by her to her own salon. Soon, such a strong friendship developed between the two that Rahel became jealous of Ranke’s affection towards Arnim.86 How much this affection was based on reciprocity is shown in Ranke’s letters in which he worshipped the evenings he spent with her and without her husband.87 For Ranke the connection to Arnim was not just affection; he appreciated her intellect and was influenced through her salon in his writing style, which allowed him to express his lyrical side.88 While waiting for permission to use the relazioni of the Venetian ambassadors in the Hofbibliothek of Vienna, Ranke met the director of that collection, Jernej Kopitar,89 who was a cultured Slovene and also served as ‘Imperial Censor for Illyrian [which is to say, Slavonic] Correspondence.’ According to Franklin Ford it was Kopitar, discerning reader of other people’s mail, who had discovered and in due course become the sponsor of a Serbian exile, Vuk Stefanovich Karadzhich,90 the great pioneer in the study of Serbo-Croatian ballads and folktales. Karadzhich was an educated man who had already been enthusiastically received during a trip to Germany, by Jacob Grimm in Kassel and by Goethe in Weimar, and who was capable in 1830 of presiding over Serbia’s constitutional commission. He was, in short, a major figure in both the cultural and the political history of his people.91 Karadzhich was a language scholar and the father of Serbian folk-literature scholarship, who, in reforming the Cyrillic alphabet for Serbian usage, created one of the simplest and most logical spelling systems. Mostly in the position of a scribe to different military leaders, sometimes as schoolteacher, he served his country during the first Serbian uprising against the Turks (1804–13). At the collapse of the uprising he left Serbia, but, instead of following Karadjordje92 and other leaders to Russia, he went to Vienna. There he was introduced to Slavic scholarship by Kopitar, a government official and scholar from Slovenia, and was encouraged to collect poems and folk songs and to write a grammar of the popular Serbian language and a dictionary. It was Kopitar who introduced Karadzhich to Ranke,93 and by the summer of 1828, the South Slav had convinced the German that they should collaborate on a book detailing the events of 1804 to 1817 in Serbia, including the Turkish repression of the first Serbian revolution, that of Karadjordje, and the success of the second under Milosh Obrenovich.94 Usually Ranke would never trust oral sources; however, Karadzhich provided him with much detailed information on recent events in Serbia – not only with facts, but also poetry and songs representing cultural ideologies.95 Ranke regarded him as a reliable source and as accurate as written ones. Ford noted that political considerations made it unwise to identify the co-author of The Serbian Revolution, either in its first edition, when the book’s objectivity

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  63 might have offended Milosh, Prince of Serbia, or in its second, that of 1844, by which time the new ruler, Alexander Karageorgevich,96 might have been equally displeased and for the same reason. Because of these circumstances, a number of Ranke’s biographers have portrayed him as the sole author, using the material supplied by a mere Balkan folk singer.97 What needs to be said with equal emphasis is that Ranke never attempted to show his collaborator in any other way. Fifty years later, in a dictated memoir, he spoke warmly of those daily sessions in Vienna, when he would hear Karadzhich’s wooden leg stumping up the stairs before the two men settled down at a table covered with the visitor’s notes and documents. Over the intervening period, he had inquired of various correspondents about the well-being of ‘our Vuk’ and had seen to it that he received his half of all royalties from the book.98 It is worth remarking that the Serbian study, undertaken for lack of anything better to do, represented the only exception to Ranke’s general rule of staying clear of Slavic history. It was also the only instance of him working with other scholars on terms of equality.99 In his book History of Servia (the original translation in 1847, later changed to Serbia; it was Servia due to the description of people: Serves). Ranke concentrated on the history of the Serbian revolution in detail (1804–15).100 In the introduction Ranke described the history of Serbia from the Roman Empire to circa 1800. Through the narrative he described the cultural and social structure of the Serbian nation during and after the revolution. He also explained the revolutionary activities of different classes in the society and the involvement of the people during the restructuring of the state. The problem concerning the freedom of Serbia from the Turks was highlighted, as well as the difficulty in governing themselves as a free country. Generally Ranke did not concentrate on specific persons but described more the people as a whole, although some names were mentioned more often, for example Karađorđe Petrović, also known as Karadjordje. Ranke used many oral sources and less written ones. His book History of Servia represented a perfect example of oral history, in which the Serbian historian Karadzhich was the source. Ranke received further help from the Slavic scholars Kopitar and Dombrowski, who were able to collect a number of written sources for his book. In his introduction Ranke acknowledged that some historical information can be retrieved from documents, but there were also events which only survive in the memory of the people who were directly involved or affected by them. This fact can also be seen in the limited use of footnotes throughout the text. The writing style also indicated that another person was being reported. In the appendix, the usual ‘Rankean’ style can be seen once again as we see the introduction of more footnotes, critical aspects and a map. In later editions, Ranke also used poetry and songs as sources for the history of the Serbian Revolution as well as included more footnotes into the narrative. The English translation of this book remained the only work on the history of Serbia in the English-speaking world until the 1990s. Because the History of Servia represented oral history in the modern sense, Ranke discussed this issue in his introduction and marked out the difficulty of the most recent history: How far can you only use printed sources? Did one also

64  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) need to include oral sources, as regards how people experienced the events from their own viewpoint? How far can this be objective? Even though the issue was discussed critically, Ranke remarked that a number of sources such as songs represented more human character than history, but they can explain several events where mankind was involved. He mentioned that if these sources were not also recorded this knowledge would be lost, and ‘possibly every attempt is worth it, to preserve such loss.’ However, just a few pages later Ranke acknowledged that oral history can be misleading as well, because some experiences may differ from the historical reality. It is then the task of the historian to find the truth and connections between experienced history and historical facts. Ranke’s work was the first stepping stone for contemporary history, as the book mainly dealt with affairs which happened just twenty years before. This book needed to be seen in the context of the independent wars in Eastern Europe, particularly Greece and Serbia. As a result, it highlighted increasing problems of revolutionary tendencies in Western Europe. However, Ranke acknowledged the right of smaller and suppressed populations to obtain their own independence: ‘Even suppressed people have their own history.’101 It can also be argued that Ranke wanted to depict a counter-situation opposed to the Restoration system created by Metternich, in which Ranke described the possibilities of what could happen if this new system failed due to revolutions. The work was written in such a way that it was acceptable in Austria.102 For the second edition Ranke thought it necessary in 1847 to change it substantially, in order to follow the events to the present. This was the only case where Ranke made substantial and quick changes. Also for the third edition in the Sämmtliche Werke of 1874, now placed in the wider context of his works, he made further changes. It looks like Ranke did not feel happy about the topical script. A letter in 1829 and a Romanian-GreekOrthodox celebration mass in London in 1862, where he had an honour seat, seem to indicate this as well.103 The case study of Serbia was, in Western Europe, nearly completely unknown. Therefore it was also barely discussed, and in Berlin it was the least interesting chapter of history.104 For Ranke Serbia was a great example to show how shortsighted politics of ruling powers could lead to worse social consequences. This little book gave Ranke the title of a ‘Tacitus of the Serbs,’ changed the early sympathy for the liberation movements of Christian peoples of the Balkans into a lifelong and political active participation and led it to final success in the scientific and literary world. Germany’s Niebuhr and Goethe paid their tribute to Ranke.105 In 1884 he received from the Serbian King Milan I106 the highest science order of the country, the Sankt-Savans-Order of First Class, thanking him for his services to Serbia.107 However, in the opinion of Daniel Fulda, the book was only of small value as the archival source work, and the typical thematic perspective towards European history is missing.108 Whereas Pammer commented that most of Ranke’s works are outdated today, his History of Servia was still worth reading.109 And Helmolt noted that ‘it is acclaimed by some [scholars] as the nicest part in the chain of Ranke’s works, and even of German history literature in general.’110

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  65 In the course of the next two years Ranke continued to travel. In May 1828 he continued his travels to Klosterneuburg, and he was in Venice from October 1828 to March 1829. Of course he did not stay all the time in Venice, but travelled around as well; in October and November he travelled to Bassano, Vicenza, Verona, Mantua, Padua and Castelfranco, and in December he made trips to Treviso and Bassano. In March 1829 he continued his trip towards Rome, travelling through Bologna, Florence, Ferrara and Tasso. Ranke stayed in Rome from March 1829 to May 1830. In October and November he made a round trip through Naples, Terracina, Pompeii, Paestum, Sorrent, Porto Miseno, Vesuvius and Island Ischia, and at the end of December 1830 and early 1831 he was in Naples again, possibly for Christmas and New Year celebrations. For most of these locations Ranke kept a diary with short notes commenting on the town, their art and churches.111 From a bookseller in Venice named Adolfo Cesare he bought some one hundred bound manuscripts that had once been owned by the Nani and Da Ponte families. Through Cesare and Ranke’s friend Francesco Francesconi, a historian at the University of Padua, the young German scholar picked up on this and subsequent trips manuscripts from the Dandolo, Soranzo, Gradenigo and Tozzetti family libraries.112 He rounded out his collection with official copies of relazioni from the state archives. With these materials he rebuilt the edifice of European historiography, treating the relazioni that he had acquired as the supporting timbers of his work, as privileged sources of information collected without bias by ambassadors from neutral Venice.113 John Warren noted that Ranke was often obliged to buy his sources on the private document market; hardly the best way to ensure a thorough and representative assessment. This means that Ranke’s work itself has long been superseded.114 The Venetian relazioni, Ranke thought, liberated him from the tyranny of a priori assumptions which had marred the accuracy of the humanist histories of Thucydides and his successors and made it possible for him to apprehend past facts in order to form a posteriori conclusions. Ranke’s assumption about the character of the relazioni was an illusion.115 Ranke’s so-called liberating method was in fact his unwitting mental prison: the ‘facts’ found in the Venetian relazioni were neither pure nor neutral. They were instead the artifices of a self-absorbed, intellectually closed-off ruling caste. The conservative worldview of the Venetian nobles had singularly isolated Venetian rulers were from the mainstream of European thought, especially after the sixteenth century. Venetian patricians were, as a result, remarkably myopic in judging their own affairs, not to mention those of others.116 With all of Ranke’s journeys, it is usually forgotten today how difficult it was to travel at that time. One needed dozens of permissions to enter and exit numerous states, which is unimaginable today. Here is one sample of such a travelling permission: We, Bogislav Helmuth Baron von Maltzahn, Chamberlain of his Royal Majesty of Prussia, ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to his Imperial Royal Apostolic Majesty, etc. etc.

66  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) Hereby request all military and civilian authorities to permit the free and unimpeded travel, to and back, to the bearer of this, the royal professor of the University of Berlin, Dr. Ranke, who is undertaking scientific travel through Italy via Venice, Florence, Rome, Naples, etc. – protect him and assist him if necessary. Granted (at) Vienna on the eleventh of September 1828 One thousand eight hundred and twenty-eight Weymann.117 At the bottom are a number of handwritten legends which are visa endorsements at various cities through which Ranke passed. One of these legends reads: ‘Seen at the nunziatura [office of the papal nuncio] in Florence and Rome March 19, 1829.’118 In Rome he was less fortunate. As a Protestant he was barred from the Vaticana. But he made the most of the leaner pickings in the family archives of the Roman aristocracy, the Albani, Altieri, Barberini, Chigi and Corsini. In each of these archives he was hard at work, starting at seven in the morning, even before his two copyists arrived,119 and stopping only at sunset. In the evening he went visiting or walking in the fresh air. By all standards of sociability this was not an exciting life. ‘I in my place live quietly for and by myself,’ he reported to a friend. Solitude was part of his work, necessary for it as well as a by-product. ‘You can live very well in innocent happiness, half in solitude, – if you don’t fall under the spell of one of those full-bosomed, proud beauties who teach you the joys and sorrows of the Roman elegists.’120 The company was limited to the German circle in the city, other scholars, writers, young diplomats and travellers of note, a circle where they read Goethe or a Roman poet aloud and discussed politics or literacy news from home. It was the kind of company agreeable to scholars in search of intelligent recreation.121 Even though Ranke had an inconspicuous appearance, he impressed his friends and acquaintances by the general liveliness of his speech and manners. His talk was always interesting and loftily marked by pleasing personal considerations for his listeners. His temperament was known for its serenity.122 For the formal society of the diplomatic legations, on the other hand, he had little taste or ability. As a scholar Ranke lacked the light vein of elegant, noncommittal conversation, and he was aware of it. But in general it seems that sociability, solitude and his personal relation with other people were never an acute problem to him. He did not need society for his happiness.123 It was not the German-speaking salons in Rome which reminded him on the fact that he ‘will always be a poor professor with a limited salary, looked over and loathed,’124 but in the libraries where he felt at home. He wrote to Berlin: ‘In the end I have to say, this is what I have been assigned, for this I am here and was born; herein lies my suffering and joy, my life and my purpose!’125 According to Thomas Brady, Ranke started to plan on his main work History of the Popes, as indicated in a letter to Karl August Varnhagen von Ense in October 1829: ‘I live quietly and collect manuscripts . . . building often in my thoughts the new world history.’126 He reported to his brother Heinrich ‘of a new

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  67 far-reaching work, which I will without a doubt finalise.’127 The topic of this work, as he wrote to a friend in confidence, was ‘the history of modern Rome.’ With this Ranke probably indicated his History of the Popes.128 ‘Modern Rome’ has referred to the Papacy and the Catholic Church since the sixteenth century, as at that time there was no such phrase as ‘early modern times.’ This world Ranke experienced in the churches and galleries of Vienna, Venice and Rome. They remained to him, as he wrote to Varnhagen von Ense, ‘Romanic and strange,’ but, he continued, ‘it is obviously the most important thing in the world, to follow Roman history [. . .] the position and role of the papacy is great, even in recent times.’129 This would match a comment made by Brady that around 1830 the future of the Catholic Church seemed open. Reasons for concern were possibly the role of the clergy at the Catholic Emancipation in Britain in 1829 and the Belgian independence movement a year later. On the other hand, clerical state movements were able to claim success in some smaller states in Germany, for example the foundation of the Ecclesiastical Province of Freiburg in 1830.130 In 1829 Ranke published the article ‘On the history of Don Carlos,’ where he concentrated on Spanish history.131 The main subject was the case study of Prince Don Carlos, his death and presentations of this matter by previous historians. Ranke critically analyzed the sources used by historians in order to assess the life and death of Don Carlos and to investigate whether his father, King Philip II, ordered his son’s murder. Through this critical analysis Ranke used different books, several witness accounts and secondary literature. All these sources were investigated, and he usually ended with harsh criticism of how scholars presented the historical case of Don Carlos. However, this article was a further example of the technique of Ranke’s source criticism and his theory put into practice; it represented one of the few publications in which he only dealt with sources. It was noteworthy that Ranke was still on a research trip when this article was published, but especially noteworthy was that the events of the civil war in Spain were indirectly referred to in the narrative. Ranke also attacked the poet Frederick Schiller, who published historical works as well, but his play on Don Carlos was less historical. Ranke did not view him as a historian but more as a poet and playwright. This can be seen in the introduction of the article, where Ranke justified his choice of Don Carlos as a case study: not only because he represented, in Ranke’s opinion, an important personality at a time of change in European history but also because the story and the legends around the death of Don Carlos had been a topic for many stories, histories and in particular plays. In this article Ranke manifested his opinion that historians should only report and analyze events, not become part of the quarrel. Otherwise ‘the narrative would turn into a weapon and history turns into politics.’132 Therefore history would turn into a fable, and if the playwrights got the upper hand in historical writing, myths and fables would be victorious. Following Ranke, many poets and playwrights such as Schiller used history as a political weapon and to make a name for themselves but did not use their topic to write history. Ranke commented that certain events or tragedies were always arousing

68  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) attention by historians and poets alike and that the question would be what was historically correct: So it happened that the heterogeneous and apocryphal opinion, the fairy tale, carried on with victory. [. . .] However, it is not refutable that it strengthened the opinion, which existed anyway and was dependent on it. So it is just like this with a historic novel and a play. Readers know well that the author was not bound to report them the truth. But when coming to the real history with no opinion or no illusion and emotions, they get the impressions left by novel and play, and they connect to the names which were given by the first, but they unavoidably connect a wrong impression by the latter. Who did not know if it was the same in this case? And now we came to the last moment. You had to hold back, to realize such testing necessary of what was believed for so long.133 Ranke’s work stood in severe contrast to others, which tended to be historical novels, such as the works of Schiller, who since the late 1990s has been regarded as the father of modern German historiography and not Ranke. This new trend can be found in Germany, where in recent years German historians tried to find the foundation of German historiography – not as a general history but German ‘national’ history. Ranke did not fit these categories, though he may have been a conservative; he was by no means a nationalist. After his research in Rome he went up to the north of Italy again. In April 1830 he travelled up to Campagna and continued to research from May to July in Florence. In July he travelled through a couple of towns such as Assisi, Otricoli, Spoleto, Fuligno, Spello, Perugia and Pisa. From July 1830 to January 1831 he stayed in Venice again, with a quick trip in July and August to Bologna. In July 1830 and the following months Europe experienced a couple of revolutions and revolts against conservative kings and governments. The movement started in France, prompted by Charles X’s publication on 26 July 1830 of four ordinances dissolving the Chamber of Deputies, suspending freedom of the press, modifying the electoral laws so that three-fourths of the electorate lost their votes and calling for new elections to the Chamber in September. Strikes and protests were followed by armed confrontations. The royal forces were unable to contain the insurrection, and after three days of fighting, Charles abdicated the throne and fled to England. The radicals wanted to establish a republic and the aristocracy were loyal to Charles, but the upper middle class were victorious in their decision to offer the crown to the Duke of Orléans, Louis-Philippe, who had fought for the French Republic in 1792. Louis-Philippe agreed to be ‘King of the French.’ Liberals throughout Europe were encouraged to hope for a general social revolution, but most were disappointed. Louis-Philippe did not want a war and, contrary to expectations, did not support the Poles, who had revolted against the  Russian  tsar. The uprising began on 29 November  1830 in  Warsaw  when young Polish officers revolted. They were soon joined by large segments of Polish society, and the insurrection spread to the territories of Lithuania, western Belarus

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  69 and the right bank of Ukraine. Their revolt was ruthlessly suppressed, and Poland was incorporated into the Russian Empire. Revolts in  some  German  kingdoms such as Hanover and Saxony were equally unsuccessful. The Belgian Revolution broke out on 25 August 1830, after the performance of a nationalistic opera (La muette de Portici) in Brussels led to a minor insurrection among the capital’s bourgeoisie, who sang patriotic songs and captured some public buildings in the city, protesting against Dutch rule imposed in 1815. The situation in Brussels led to widespread unrest across the country. Between 23 and 28 September 1830, heavy fighting took place between Dutch forces and Brussels revolutionaries, who were reinforced by small contingents from across the country. The Dutch were eventually forced to retreat, and the revolution spread around Belgium. Belgian independence was officially proclaimed on 4 October, and Belgium was recognized in 1831 as a separate nation. French king Louis-Philippe had promised revolutionaries in Italy such as Ciro Menotti134 that he would intervene if Austria tried to interfere in Italy. Fearing he would lose his throne, Louis-Philippe did not, however, intervene in Menotti’s planned uprising. At the same time, other insurrections arose in the Papal Legations of Bologna, Forlì, Ravenna, Imola, Ferrara, Pesaro and Urbino. These successful revolutions, which adopted the tricolore in favour of the Papal flag, quickly spread to cover all the Papal Legations, and their newly installed local governments proclaimed the creation of a united Italian nation. This prompted Pope Gregory XVI to ask for Austrian help against the rebels. In 1831 Carbonari insurgents briefly controlled the little duchies of Parma and Modena and a sizable part of the Papal States. The revolutionaries counted on French assistance, but the July Monarchy had no intention of risking war with Austria. In the spring of 1831, the Austrian army began its march across the Italian peninsula, slowly crushing resistance in each province that had revolted. The young historian Leopold Ranke, residing in Venice during the late summer and fall of 1830, was terrified. It has never been acknowledged before, but Ranke had just visited Bologna in August 1830, a few weeks before the outbreak of the rebellion, so he may have experienced some sort of pre-rebellious ambitions. When the rebellions broke out, several places were affected on the northern part of the Papal States, and Ranke stayed in Venice, just 50 km away from these events. Just about a month before Austrian troops marched past Venice, Ranke returned to Germany. Although never a revolutionary, Ranke had sympathized with the liberal and democratic cause during the 1810s and 1820s.135 Now he saw only destruction and disorder. In his letters, he grieved that he suddenly found himself in ‘decisive opposition to public opinion.’ He worried that the ‘plebs’ would seize Germany before his homecoming and could not accept a government of ‘journeymen and street urchins.’ He considered the ‘incessant blabbering about governing’ to be a threat to European peace, described the new revolutionary spirit as ‘a kind of contagion,’ and foresaw a ‘horrible catastrophe’ and ‘most unhappy times.’136 These comments make more sense knowing that Ranke at least partially witnessed some of these uprisings. We also need to understand that the established authority had just given him access to archives; therefore, he remained loyal to them.

70  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) Ranke’s first publication after the July Revolution was a small book entitled Über die Verschwörung gegen Venedig im Jahre 1618. The book, written in Venice between August and December 1830 and printed in Berlin in the summer of 1831, summarized some of his recent findings in the archives of Austria and Italy. But I think that he also referred to contemporary events. On the surface it had no connection to contemporary politics. When he first proposed the book to Perthes in February  1831, Ranke doubted if a second edition would be necessary and estimated that it would sell 750 copies, if not immediately, then over time.137 The conspiracy, Ranke explained in a letter, was a ‘distant, complicated. . . [and] in itself not a very important matter.’138 In this work Ranke dealt with the background of the conspiracy against Venice in 1618139 and its presentation in newspapers, documents and scholarly books. This book as a whole represented source criticism to all materials in relation to the topic. He described the Venetian archives in detail in over ten pages and gave a large appendix of 50 pages. Ranke’s book marked an important point in modern historiography. It delivered a paradigmatic example of how historians ought to work and established the archive as the most important site for the production of historical knowledge. This ‘archival turn’ in modern historiography and Ranke’s concurrent political turn were not unrelated.140 In January 1831 Ranke left Venice, travelling in January through Brescia, Milan and Como, and on 28 January 1831 Ranke came through Lindau and touched German ground again. From January to March 1831 he stayed with Prof. G. Heinrich Schubert141 in Munich in order to chill out; Schubert was the father-in-law of his brother Heinrich. The first newspaper Ranke took in Munich announced the death of Barthold Georg Niebuhr, and his first conversation with Schubert gave him the information of the death of Achim von Arnim, the husband of Bettina. In both he had lost great supporters. Their loss meant that Leopold had to rebuild his connections in Berlin, especially in view of his position in the university and the new political situation in Europe. His position as a lecturer was by no means secured yet. Then in March he continued travelling back, going through Ingolstadt, Rückersdorf, Wethau, Weißenfels and Halle, and in May going through Halle, Merseburg, Wiehe, Erfurt and Quedlinburg. He arrived in Berlin on 22 March 1831.142

Notes 1 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 37. 2 With the help of Ingrid Hecht I was able to compile a list with all the places Ranke mentioned during his trips. We used the letters as published in Alfred Dove (ed.), Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte (Leipzig, 1890); Leopold von Ranke, Das Briefwerk (Hamburg, 1949); and Leopold von Ranke, Neue Briefe (Hamburg, 1949). A full list of the travels is available in the appendix in Andreas Boldt, The life and work of the German historian Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886). An assessment of his achievement (New York, 2015), pp. 253–268. 3 Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation’, p.  48. See also letter of Ranke to Karl August Varnhagen von Ense, 9 December 1827. In: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 128. 4 Hofbauer, Clemens Maria (1751–1820), Moravian hermit and later priest of the Redemptorist congregation. He has been declared a saint by the Catholic Church, and

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 71

5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

due to his extensive services in Vienna, he is called the ‘Apostle of Vienna,’ of which he is a co-patron saint. Ibid, pp. 48–49. See also letter of Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 4 October 1827, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 115. Ibid, p. 46, See also letter of Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, end of November 1827,. in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 123; and also the letter from 4 January 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 133. Ibid, p. 49. Letter of Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 16–30 April 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 160. In regard to Ranke’s suspicion that Heinrich Leo was the source of gossip see also K. Mautz, ‘Leo und Ranke’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, 27 (1953), pp. 207–235. Ibid, p. 49. See also letter of Ranke to Rahel Varnhagen von Ense, 25 April 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 157. Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, p. 13. Ibid, p. 49. See also letter of Ranke to Heinrich von Kamptz, 3 July 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p.  163; and also letter of Ranke to Friedrich Perthes, 30 July  1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 163. Ewers, Johann Philipp Gustav von (1779–1830), German legal historian and founder of Russian legal history as a scholarly discipline. He was Rector of the University of Dorpat from 1818 until his death. Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, p. 144. Swedish King Gustav Adolph founded the university in 1632, based on a previous institution founded by King Stefan Batory of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. For a few decades the University was part of the Swedish Empire, when the town was occupied by Russia. However, it was reopened by the Baltic Germans in 1802 and was run as the University of Dorpat, with the teaching language being German. Dorpat was in the nineteenth century the eleventh largest German university and educated the local Baltic German leadership and professional classes as well as staff, especially for the administration and health system of the entire Russian Empire. With the foundation of the new state of Estonia in 1918, the name changed to University of Tartu. Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation’, p. 49. See letters of Ranke between 6 February and 20 August 1828, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 138–140, 142–143, 145, 148–149, 154, 167; and Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 102–106. Ibid, pp. 49–50. Eskildsen, ‘Leopold von Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 444. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 119. Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 111. Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 191. Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 171. Gentz, Friedrich von (1764–1832), German diplomat and writer. Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 444. See also B. Dorn, Friedrich von Gentz und Europa: Studien zu Stabilität und Revolution 1802–1822 (Bonn, 1993); G. Kronenbitter, Wort und Macht: Friedrich Gentz als politischer Schriftsteller (Berlin, 1994). Knechtl, Josef (1771–1838), Austrian archivist. Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 444. Ibid, pp. 444–445. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 126–127. Ibid, p. 445. Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 37. Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 445, See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 109. Ibid. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 110. Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 169–170. Brogan, Pace and Weinberger, The Leopold von Ranke Manuscripts of Syracuse University, p. 22.

72  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 31 Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, pp. 134, 143. Zedlitz, Joseph Christian Freiherr von (1790– 1862), Austrian dramatist and epic poet; had worked for the Austrian Foreign Office since 1837. 32 Platen-Hallermünde, August von (1796–1835), German poet and dramatist. 33 Fugger, Friedrich Karl Count (1795–1838). 34 Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 47. 35 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 36. 36 For more details see Escher, ‘Leopold Ranke’, pp.  115–117; Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, pp. 133–163. 37 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 39. 38 Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 441. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 164. 39 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 52. 40 Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 441. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 195. 41 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 214. 42 Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation’, p. 50. 43 Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, pp.  445–446. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 126–127. 44 Ibid, p. 446. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 113. 45 Ibid. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 137–138. 46 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 220–221. 47 Ibid. See also Leopold Ranke, Ueber die Verschwörung gegen Venedig, im Jahre 1618. Mit Urkunden aus dem Venezianischen Archive (1831), p. 57. 48 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 221. 49 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 211. 50 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, March 1820, In: Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 18. 51 Ibid. 52 In: Ranke, Ueber die Verschwörung, p. 44. 53 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. xxx. 54 Ibid, pp. xxx–xxxi. 55 This sentence is taken from the lecture series for the Bavarian King Maximilian II given by Ranke in 1854. The text became better known as Ueber die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte and was posthumously published as the last chapter in Weltgeschichte, vol. 9 (1888). The English translation was taken from Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 21, and the text was translated by Wilma A. Iggers. 56 These quotes are taken from Ranke, Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker, p. 177. 57 Cook, James (1728–79), British explorer, navigator, cartographer and captain in the Royal Navy. 58 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 48. 59 Eskildsen, ‘Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 440. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 128, 130, 154–155, 186–187, 208. 60 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 115. 61 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 121–122. 62 Columbus, Christopher (1451–1506), Italian explorer, navigator and colonizer; generally known for his ‘discovery’ of the New World. 63 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 123. 64 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 126. 65 Falko Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin. Zur Vergeschlechterung der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft 1780–1900 (Göttingen, 2015), p. 289. 66 Ibid, p. 290. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 121. 67 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 180. 68 Ibid. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 460. 69 Ibid. See also Ranke, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte (Sämmtliche Werke 53–54), p. 63.

Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31)  73 70 Ibid. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 108, footnote 2: The presence of the sheet is today unknown. A request at the Austrian state archive could not verify it. 71 Ibid, p. 291. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 357. 72 Ibid. See also Conrad Varrentrapp, ‘Briefe von Savigny and Ranke und Perthes’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, 100, 2 (1908), pp. 334–335. 73 Letter from Frank Bigeschke to Andreas Boldt, 9 February 2018. 74 Arnim, Carl Joachim Friedrich Ludwig von (1781–1831), German poet, novelist and a leading figure of German Romanticism. 75 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 291. 76 Ibid, p. 292. 77 Ibid. 78 Ibid, p. 299. 79 Ibid, p. 301. 80 Ibid, p. 362. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 121. 81 Ibid. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 230. 82 Ibid, p. 369. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 115. 83 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 67–68. 84 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 369. 85 Ibid, p. 378. See also Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 22. 86 Ibid. 87 See also Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 106, 139. 88 Ibid, p. 378. 89 Kopitar, Jernej Bartol (1788–1844), Slovene linguist and philologist working in Vienna. 90 Karadzhich, Vuk Stefanovich (1787–1864), Serbian philologist, language reformer of the Serbian language, ethnologist, translator, poet and diplomat. 91 Franklin L. Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society (1975), p. 63. 92 Petrovic, Dorde (1768–1817), better known as Karadjordje, Serbian revolutionary leader during the First Serbian Uprising 1804–13. 93 Ibid, p. 62. 94 Obrenovic, Miles (1780–1860), Prince of Serbia 1815–39 and 1858–60. 95 Ibid, p. 63. 96 Karageorgevich, Alexander (1806–85), Prince of Serbia 1842–58. 97 Ibid, p. 63. 98 Ibid. 99 Ibid, p. 64. 100 Leopold Ranke, Die serbische Revolution. Aus serbischen Papieren und Mittheilungen (1829) [History of Servia and the Serbian revolution, 1847] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 43–44]. 101 Ranke, Die serbische Revolution, p. 11. 102 Rainald Strohmeier, ‘Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik’, Diss. (Heidelberg, 1950), p. 46. 103 Ibid, p. 47. 104 Ibid. 105 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 37. 106 Obrenovic, Milan (1854–1901), ruler of Serbia from 1868–89, first as prince (1868– 82), subsequently as King Milan I (1882–89). 107 Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, p. 70. The original certificate is located at SUL, GMC 582. 108 Fulda, Wissenschaft aus Kunst, p. 373. 109 Pammer, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, p. 14. 110 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 39.

74  Ranke’s first research trip (1827–31) 111 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 201–220. 112 Edward Muir, ‘Leopold von Ranke, his library, and the shaping of historical evidence’, in: Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, XXII, 1 (1987), p. 7. 113 Ibid, p. 8. 114 John Warren, The past and its presenters: An introduction to issues in historiography (London, 1998), p. 110. 115 Muir, ‘Leopold von Ranke, his library, and the shaping of historical evidence’, p. 8. 116 Ibid. 117 Manuscript reproduced and translated in Syracuse Scholar, Leopold von Ranke, 9, 1 (1988), p. 10. 118 Muir, ‘Leopold von Ranke, his library, and the shaping of historical evidence’, p. 10. 119 Ibid, p. 50. 120 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 37. 121 Ibid, p. 38. 122 Ibid. 123 Ibid. 124 Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation’, p. 50. 125 Ibid. 126 Ibid, p. 51. 127 Ibid. 128 Ibid. 129 Ibid. 130 Ibid. 131 Leopold Ranke, ‘Zur Geschichte des Don Carlos’; in: Jahrbücher der Literatur, xlvi (1829), pp. 227–266 [‘On the history of Don Carlos’] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 51–52]. 132 Ranke, ‘Zur Geschichte des Don Carlos’, p. 228. 133 Ibid, p. 244. 134 Menotti, Ciro (1798–1831), Italian patriot. 135 Eskilden, ‘Leopold Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 426. 136 Ibid. 137 Ibid, p. 427. See also Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 231. 138 Ibid. See also Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 158. 139 Leopold Ranke, Ueber die Verschwörung gegen Venedig, im Jahre 1618. Mit Urkunden aus dem Venezianischen Archive (1831) [The conspiracy against Venice, in the year 1618. With documents from the Venetian Archives] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 42]. 140 Eskilden, ‘Leopold Ranke’s archival turn’, p. 427. 141 Schubert, Gotthilf Heinrich von (1780–1860), German physician and naturalist. 142 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 61.

4 Academic establishment and fame during the Vormärz (1831–43)

Ranke’s lengthy research trip to southern European archives, and the European revolutions of 1830, which occurred near the end of it, produced a significant shift in his relationship to the Prussian state. His scholarly drive to gain access to, excerpt and understand the documents that embodied the political perspective of the diplomats and political movers and doers of the past also brought him into contact with the ‘men of affairs’ of the present. In Vienna he spent long evenings in political discussion with the conservative social theorist Friedrich Gentz and through him met not only other conservative thinkers, like Friedrich Schlegel and Adam Müller,1 but also the Austrian Chancellor Count Metternich. In Venice he developed a relationship of mutual admiration with the travelling Prussian crown prince and future Frederick William IV and certain members of his entourage, especially the diplomat and future foreign minister Friedrich Ancillon.2 Being loaded with giant mass of copies, notices and excerpts and original documents, in his head the idea of a papal history, made a return unavoidable. After a journey ‘without tobacco smoke and gossip’ he arrived in Berlin in March 1831. A lot of things had changed; old friendships dissolved and new ones developed.3 It soon became evident that his new political perspective implied significant revisions in the patterns of social and political association he had formed in the 1820s. Although Bernstorff soon fell from power, Ranke’s associations with highranking officials in the Foreign Office continued under his more conservative successor, Ancillon.4 Such ties to the governing elite, however, had their counterpart in the loosening of Ranke’s associations with the liberal cultural circles he had frequented in the 1820s. The deaths of Achim von Arnim in 1831 and Rahel Varnhagen in 1833 may have contributed to Ranke’s growing distance from his former friends, but the central issue in this estrangement was clearly political. Both Varn­ hagen and Bettina came to view Ranke as an uncritical supporter of established authority.5 In context to this, Thompson commented that Ranke ‘was a paid agent of the Prussian government, secretly commissioned in the 1830s to use his growing academic prestige to publish attacks upon radicals and democrats.’6 This was the period of political reaction better known as Biedermeier or Vormärz (1815/30–48). Cautious statesmen turned away in distrust from the revolutionary spirit initiated by France. Scholars were urged to strengthen the foundations of existing society by reviving knowledge of an illustrious past. It was a period most favourable to historical studies. By conservative methods of reconstruction,

76  Academic establishment and fame scholars and statesmen hoped to build up Germany anew. Friedrich Eichhorn7 studied early Germanic law and institutions, and the brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm8 read Germanic folklore and language. Savigny investigated the history of Roman law in the Middle Ages and Niebuhr wrote his Roman history. At the patriotic instance of Freiherr vom Stein, a historical society was founded at Frankfurt am Main in 1818 for the reconstruction of German history from its very foundations. By Stein’s recommendation, Georg Pertz,9 with whom Ranke maintained a close friendship, was engaged to edit the original sources of German history, which developed into a magnificent series of volumes called the Monumenta Germaniae Historica (MGH).10 The Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift11 was founded under the initiative of Count von Bernstorff. In founding the journal, von Bernstorff had had two purposes in mind. He wished to provide an organ for the defence of the policies of an enlightened Prussian bureaucracy against its numerous liberal critics on the left. But he also wished to distinguish the position of the Prussian government from that of the reactionary right. He recognized the rising role of the middle classes and the need for Prussia to assume active leadership in satisfying the national and economic demands of this class.12 At the same time, von Bernstorff wished to do this within the framework of the existing political structure of Prussia and Germany through the agency of a benevolent and relatively progressive Prussian bureaucracy and with minimal concessions to political liberalism. Accustomed to royal absolutism and used to obedience rather than to deliberation, he probably underestimated the force of liberal and national feeling, as well as the entrenched opposition of the vested interests of the old regime.13 For Hamburg publisher Perthes, this journal should have been a recent addition to his – since 1828, edited by Heeren and Ukert – series of History of the European States, and an advert promised in the Allgemeine Zeitung that this journal ‘is to give particular, factual comments especially of the last decades.’14 Perthes had to find the main editor: Who was supposed to write the texts? He tried to win over Varnhagen von Ense and begged him, but Varnhagen von Ense was rejected due to his liberal opinions; his second choice, the poet and official of a Prussian ministry Joseph von Eichendorff,15 was also rejected.16 As co-workers the historians Leo, Ranke and his friend Stenzel were suggested, all of whom had published books with Perthes and who also worked for his History of European States.17 However, Ranke fell out with Perthes as he printed another 1,000 copies of the History of Serbia, without asking Ranke for permission. Ranke was not happy, in particular as royalties and the proportions of what Vuk may get were not cleared yet.18 Juhnke pointed out that without question, Perthes was the spiritual father of the journal and the major force behind it, yet its success depended on the financial support of the Prussian government. The ones in power liked Ranke’s approach, and they believed that he appropriately represented their interests and politics. So, with annoyance, Perthes had to accept Ranke as the editor, as well as his ideas and concept of the journal.19 Ranke gladly accepted the offer: ‘Not again will I so easily find such a good opportunity to become acquainted with the affairs, the situation, and the interests

Academic establishment and fame 77 of the present world,’ he wrote to his brother. The example of Gentz, who had made a splendid success as a publicist, must have appealed to a young man who was still flexible enough to try a promising new career grasping a chance of influential political activity.20 Critics of the twentieth century interpreted this career choice of Ranke’s negatively, but we have to remember that he still did not have a secure permanent position and was therefore searching for anything in order to improve his situation. Nevertheless, the picture of this conservative, monarchist Ranke persists until today. Ranke was unable to enlist many writers or readers for his journal, and he himself had to write a number of the articles that appeared in its short run of eight issues (1832–36). The topics ranging in this journal usually took up contemporary events and issues, and it can be regarded as a historical-critical journal in respect of explaining daily politics of the German Vormärz. This of course had a bitter taste for most other journalists of newspapers and magazines, who tended to publish and celebrate liberal ideas. Due to the fact that this work was actually a journal and not an academic book in the traditional sense, the work represented many of Ranke’s opinions. What he described was political and economic history, analyzed from documents and his own time, at which point he created contemporary history. His narrative was particularly interesting: Ranke asked many questions and continued his argumentation to the next level. The first volume was a historical-political discussion of revolutionary events and their background from around 1800 to 1832. The main countries dealt with were Germany and France; the volume finished with a critical article on flyers and pamphlets. In the introduction Ranke mentioned the differences of the traditional and revolutionary ideas.21 He also indicated that whatever happened in the past would affect the present and future as well.22 In the first article Ranke dealt with Restoration Europe, which in his opinion was important for Europe. He showed a critical discussion of political aspects, the position of the middle class, their striving for a voice and the intention of the French king to unite old and new ideas into a harmonic system. The second volume contained three articles. In the first one Ranke presented General Scharnhorst as a hero. General Scharnhorst was born in the old system and therefore represented the old order, but he died to free his kingdom from Napoleon I. Ranke indicated that the German states (in 1832) could only be free because people of the old system had freed occupied Germany. The second article dealt with the unity and division of the German states during the sixteenth century, especially under the reign of the emperors Ferdinand I and Maximilian II. Ranke mentioned that a single language would not necessarily mean a unity of the state, but that the different regions must have other similarities. In the third article he again assessed the unity and division of Germany, but this time he referred to Prussia mainly as a great power. Ranke expressed details and backgrounds of the freedom of press in Prussia and suggested a federal state system as the future for the German states. Indirectly he opposed a unification of Germany, as Ranke preferred a federalist system following the example of the Holy Roman Empire.

78  Academic establishment and fame Volume three contained six articles, but only four were written by Ranke. The volume dealt in particular with the role of the classes within the constitutions, philosophical theory and the comparison of Italian pamphlets to German ones. The second article dealt with the constitution of Saxony, and the third article with the Italian pamphlets. The next two articles dealt with the theories and public opinion of politics – it was in the format of a more philosophical discourse. It is interesting to note that from article four to six, Edmund Burke was mentioned and referred to several times. The fourth volume contained six articles, and again four of them were written by Ranke. The first one, on the state of German universities, was written by Savigny and the author of the fifth is unknown, but the writing style was not Rankean and it also referred to land, work and produce. The second article was written by Ranke; it was very lively and dealt with the freedom of the press and its actual value of information. The third and fourth articles dealt with the history and administration of the Vatican State in Rome. Ranke assessed its institution, state and culture and compared it indirectly to Germany. The article is a forerunner of the History of the Popes a few years later. Ranke stressed the Index of the Catholic Church and that he disagreed with it.23 In the sixth article, Ranke dealt with a theoretical discussion of states. In volume five one can find five articles in total. The first article was on ‘The Great Powers’ (1833) and covered the European powers, France, England, Austria, Russia and Prussia. Ranke was quite positive on Prussia, and the section on it was much longer in comparison to the other ones. He concluded with the French Revolution and a discussion of its reasons. The other articles dealt with trade politics, the history of trade in Germany and Europe and the political structure of Switzerland (using it as an example of how the German states could be governed). The last article dealt with the freedom of farmers in the state of Prussia and how political decisions changed people, agricultural usage, methods and, ultimately, the production of goods. This article was pure economic history. Iggers stressed that ‘The Great Powers’ contained an excellent illustration of what Ranke meant by the ‘leading ideas’ or ‘tendencies’ in history and states becoming succinctly the basic theme supporting all of his great works on modern history. The system of the balance of power was the instrument by which order is maintained. Ranke examined the history of international relations from the age of Louis XIV to the post-Napoleonic Restoration, the recurring threats to the balance of power, and the forces within the system that led to the re-establishment of the legitimate order whenever it was temporarily threatened or disturbed.24 A world government or the hegemony of one power over the rest would be disastrous for mankind: ‘A mixture of them all would destroy the essence of each one.’25 The future of the world rested in continued diversity, which requires the continuation of a balance of power in shaping the European world: The prestige of Prussia rests upon her military power. Everyone concedes that the peace of Europe has more than once been maintained by its powerful reputation. Military power requires that the demands of the military be

Academic establishment and fame 79 satisfied incessantly and unstintingly. It demands unity and strict subordination. How easily would a minor, even a carefully executed interference with their omnipotence endanger the status quo and thus the general significance of the German element in the European community.26 This sentence contains the hard crystal core of Ranke’s argument. The German patriots should not clamour for a Prussian constitution if they at all valued the position of ‘the German element’ in the world. Ranke’s argument, as well as Bernstorff’s policy, were forerunners of Bismarck’s incorporation of the unreconstructed Prussian monarchy into the German Empire for the sake of German security and power.27 While Ranke continued to struggle with this difficult problem of defining the themes of world history, his most direct influence upon the writing of history was in his definition of the ‘nation’ and ‘state’ for modern history. Ranke recognized the significance of the ‘nation’ in history, but his notion of what forms a national culture was most often limited to general national characteristics and was of interest to him only as it emerged in the particular form of the state. And he identified the ‘state’ less in its internal constitutional than in its external diplomatic-military form. The definition of the field of history, then, was understood as the interaction among states, and Ranke provided the basic terms for its study: a ‘great power,’ for instance, was a state that needed a coalition of other states to defeat it, and ‘Europe’ was that group of states that regularly interacted diplomatically and militarily.28 Elvert believed that Ranke explained with his ‘Great Powers’ the principle of balance of power as a basis of the European state system. With this he aligned himself with the tradition of the enlightened political thinkers of the eighteenth century. For example, David Hume gave in his essay ‘On the balance of power’ (1752) a historical dimension to the balance of power. Like Ranke, Hume used ancient history as his guidance and found that large empire structures were against human nature. Jean-Jacques Rousseau declared, similar to Hume, that the ‘wellraised balance’ was not created by somebody, but was just there and would only need itself in order to sustain. Even if you obstruct or hurt it at one point, it will counteract and restore itself at another spot.29 The sixth volume of the Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift was published in 1834 and consisted of three articles. In the first article, on Bosnia (1834), Ranke continued to deal with the history of Serbia and Montenegro and their uprisings. This article was a continuation of the last chapters of his book History of Serbia. The second article dealt with England in respect of its political, geographical and economical aspects and correctly analyzed the importance of coal and steam for this country. He included critical paragraphs portraying England’s treatment of Ireland. The third article was reporting on the recent results of the Saxon parliament in 1833. The seventh volume was published in 1835 and contained six articles, of which five were written by Ranke. In the first article he dealt with the history of Venice in Morea (1685–1715). The subsequent articles dealt with Switzerland, King Henry IV, the idea of the sovereignty of nations in the Jesuit scripts and finally an assessment of two bigger pamphlets.

80  Academic establishment and fame The last volume was published in 1836. It contained four articles, all of which were written by Ranke. In the first article Ranke dealt with the recently edited memoirs of Cardinal Richelieu. The second article was describing Empress Maria Theresa, her Austrian state and her court in 1755, which was further followed by results from the Saxon parliament in the year 1834. His final article was his famous ‘Dialogue on Politics.’ Here he wrote a historical-philosophical dialogue on the state and constitution. Following the description of Iggers, Ranke argued that the state was not a conglomeration of individuals bound by a social contract, nor was it a mere concentration of power. Rather, every state rested on a spiritual basis. ‘States are individuals,’ and as such they were manifestations of an individualized, eternal idea in history. All states ‘are motivated by special tendencies of their own,’ and ‘these tendencies are of a spiritual nature.’30 A state’s fundamental idea directed its development and ‘penetrates and dominates its entire environment.’31 This idea was of divine origin. ‘Instead of the passing conglomerations which the contractual theory of the state creates like cloud formations,’ Ranke perceived, ‘spiritual substances, original creations of the human mind – I might say, thoughts of God.’32 Each state was unique, but it differed from all other states in its idea, its spirit, its development and needs. Ranke believed that similarities between states were purely formal – such as similar constitutions – but these formal similarities did not touch the essence of the state. ‘There is an element which makes a state not a subdivision of general categories, but a living thing, an individual, a unique self.’33 The ‘Dialogue on Politics’ was a dialogue between two brothers in which it was generally and probably rightly assumed that Friedrich represented the views of Ranke. The exchange of opinions reached its climax with the sentences in which the creation of state was discussed based on civic constitutions, production and probably other factors. With all caution and restraint before over-rating the state, which ‘through its nature it is a much more closed entity than a nation,’ was seen by Ranke (in the person of Friedrich) as the angle point of a development: ‘the moment at which independence has been fought for and taken into possession. [. . .] The level of independence depends on the rank in the world and at the same time it demands the necessity to control all inner affairs to that use that they can sustain. This it is highest priority.’34 As it can be seen, Ranke did not use the expression of the ‘Primacy of the Foreign Policy’ by himself; it was first used by Wilhelm Dilthey. ‘Primacy of the foreign policy’ did not mean for Ranke only the primate of the state. He mentioned once that ‘between state and power is perhaps no difference; as the idea of the state arises from the thought of an independence, which cannot sustain itself without corresponding power.’35 It was probably this aspect which Baberowski criticized that Ranke was only interested in diplomacy and governments as representatives of nations.36 Was Ranke perhaps right in the sense that the foreign policy was the most important one within the complete policy of a state, but its negligence could be more catastrophic than that of some other one? This shows that it is difficult to reject Ranke’s thesis completely, and the idea kept generations of historians busy and even uneasy to the present day.

Academic establishment and fame 81 It has never been connected before, but in relation to the different articles published and Ranke’s personal diary notes, one can find a strong relationship between the two. For example, we find many comments in the early to mid-1830s on several authors and publications, such as on Heinrich Ritter’s book Über die Erkenntnis Gottes in der Welt, published in 1836,37 and comments on the natural sciences based on Schimper’s38 book, published during the 1830s.39 Under the subheading of aesthetics and literature40 we find comments on Karl Gutzkow,41 Wally, die Zweiflerin (published in 1835), Calderon, Lope de Vega,42 Charlotte Stieglitz,43 Bettina von Arnim and Goethe’s Wahlverwandschaften. This is interesting insofar as several female writers of his time were commented on here – but the general perception on Ranke portrayed his perspective differently. In the early 1840s he commented on Lessing’s44 Nathan, who represented personalized religion, and on Rückert and Platen, both of whom he thought were talented in the way they sounded, but their thoughts were lacking. On his comments on the philosophy of history45 he wrote in the 1830s on the totality of literature: ‘The scripts from a time period form a great totality: unique in themselves, from which only a little remains. The smallest resembles the greatest, and even the writing techniques are similar.’46 On social history he commented: ‘It must be possible to write a world history on the European nations which includes the progressive development of population numbers and their major occupations.’47 This shows that Ranke was fully aware of aesthetics in history and also social history. Although scholars liked to highlight Ranke’s neglect of social history, this indicates that although he did not write about it, he was well aware of social history. His commentaries on contemporary politics are amazing, and here we find many similarities to his articles in the Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift. For example, he commented in short sentences on the Prussian state, their role in office and their privileges, the role of independent courts, universities and the army. He commented on religion and on the hierarchical structure of the state from communities, villages and towns to provinces.48 He continued under political wishes in the mid-1830s: It would be wishful 1 the recognition of civil lists 2 the budget is true fully to be questioned 3 limitations of officials.49 In another commentary he referred to power in a modern state tackling the question of who has the highest power in a state. He compared German states with France, the roles of assemblies and the elements of democracy: ‘France is the unity of the country the same as the unity of the nation. The Prussian state would be unthinkable without the dynasty.’50 He continued with a discussion on the differences between the German and French state (after 1835),51 several general discussions of various elements of a state itself and commenting that ‘a political thought is stronger than a whole nation.’52 Outstanding were the comments on

82  Academic establishment and fame affairs in European countries for the 1830s.53 For the years of 1831–32 alone we find pages on pages commenting on affairs in France, Italy, Belgium, Poland, Russia, Portugal, the German states, Sweden, Holland and England. Although for the years 1833 to 1837 the entries became shorter, he still kept an eye on the German states, Turkey, Poland, Greece, Spain and Hungary. A few more notes referred to events in Poland, Luxembourg and Spain in 1839 and for 1840 in particular on the new Prussian king. Overall, Ranke had neither a conservative, reactionary, or revolutionary opinion, but what he wrote shows that, historically and politically, Ranke was in favour of reform. Stromeyer emphasized that in the early 1820s the new journal would probably have found favour with several readers, including the Berlin salons. But now there were barely any readers left, and therefore the journal had barely any effect; it barely got any reviews or importance and influence.54 This can be the only reason why essays such as ‘The Great Powers’ or ‘Dialogue about Politics’ remained unnoticed. It was only at the time of Ranke’s edition of the Sämmtliche Werke that these essays were recognized.55 Stromeyer quoted a letter to Staegemann56 indicating the effect of the journal: ‘As much as the journal of Ranke makes sense overall, I have to admit that I was not particularly attracted to it.’ Ranke was better educated for the area of medieval history than ‘for the agile modern politics which does not fix well on the Berlin Professor.’57 Baur listed further critics: ‘Poor Ranke, that pretty talent to paint little historical figures’ – sneered Heine in 1833 about Ranke describing him as a ‘Jesuit.’58 Friedrich Köppen59 called Ranke the diplomatic ‘arabesque-painter’ and servant of the Prussian king, and Heinrich Leo said he would like to give Ranke some porcelain vases for his little tiny objective flowers.60 It was also Leo who joked about Ranke as ‘the naked historian’ because of his silly search for ‘naked facts’ – a confusing project, which must have been paid for by the pre-democratic Prussian state, as Heine cunningly added. Following Heine, Karl Marx61 later appointed Ranke a ‘born chambermaid of history,’ faithfully serving the reactionary Prussian monarchy. The older Marx called Ranke a ‘capering little troll,’ but as a young man he praised Ranke’s article on the ‘Restoration in France,’ perhaps because of its dialectical argumentations.62 The Leipzig Literatur-Zeitung complained in 1833 of the ‘political smoothness’ and ‘sceptic to this journal with its principles and endeavours of the time without giving a clear path of solutions.’ And the Allgemeine Literatur-Zeitung in Halle/ Leipzig added in February 1833: ‘Where one expects clarity, he created misty figures, where he hoped for a strong and decisive opinion, he disheartened his open mind.’63 The Berliner Politische Wochenblatt announced the new journal only briefly and criticized immediately Ranke’s rejection of all political doctrines  – in another article they place ‘the constant mirror of customs and law’ against Ranke’s ‘atomistic superficial way’: ‘That is the task of our time, not to divest into any doctrine, as we have to doubt and are more of the opinion that the bad cannot be fought by just complete negation but only through the good.’ Also the liberal Blätter für die literarische Unterhaltung emphasized the decidedness of Ranke’s journal, as he mystified it in order to hide the reactionary interests of the Prussian

Academic establishment and fame  83 court, and as the court-man Ranke was supposed to help appease the good Germans with his historical nonsense talk.64 Soon after the publication of the first number, Ranke’s reputation sank so low that due to lack of interest in the planned 30 volumes, only eight could be published. And it did not help that from the 1,600 published pages of the journal, nearly 1,200 were written by Ranke himself. With his article on ‘The Great Powers’ in number 5 from August 1833, he created the best of his historical writing. Nevertheless, Ranke failed completely with his project – Baur believed he would never find the confidence for a similar project again.65 One cannot imagine how this must have been for Ranke; what started so promisingly in 1817–18 was not exactly going his way.66 Ranke rejected the last call for professorship with astonishing pride in 1828, but a new call for an orderly professorship did not happen after that.67 When Ranke wrote his ‘Great Powers,’ he reached, according to Baur, the end of his career. He wrote to survive, or better: he wrote for his academic reincarnation.68 While working on the Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift, Ranke started to write on The History of the Popes.69 Within this work Ranke examined, in his opinion, the most interesting power of the Mediterranean: Italy. However, as Italy was not a nation state, it would be better to describe it as the Catholic Church with the Pope as its acting head and Rome as its central seat. Other European countries named in this work are Spain, France and mainly the German states. Nevertheless, nearly all other European countries are briefly dealt with, as well as Russia, America, Africa and Asia. With an introduction to the beginnings of Christianity and the development of the Catholic Church throughout the Middle Ages, the book started with a detailed presentation of Pope Leo X. Throughout this work Ranke analyzed all aspects of the institution: persons, the church, its organization, administration, policies and general culture. A major centre piece formed the Reformation and CounterReformation leading to the Thirty Years’ War, 1618–48. From there on he summarized the history of the Catholic Church and concluded with Napoleon I and 1815. Because this work was based mainly on Rome, one will find a concentration of the narrative on a number of popes and influential clerics, especially the popes Sixtus V, Paul IV, Pius V and Ignatius Loyola. Nevertheless, Ranke also included aspects on arts and culture, literature, trade and social issues, especially in the first volume of the Popes. While some Protestants thought the work was too impartial and the papacy condemned it as hostile, Ranke was widely praised for his description of the Catholic Church as a historical phenomenon and the interplay of religious and secular issues in the Counter-Reformation. Although Ranke’s personal Protestant viewpoint was quite clear, his own opinion was erased throughout most of the narrative. Objectively he examined both sides: the successes as well as defeats, both positive and negative aspects.70 Ranke showed strengths and weaknesses of the Catholic Church as an institution and its structures. Sometimes he included his opinion within the text, but mainly to guide the reader into an observing direction. At some stages he criticized the Vatican very heavily, but he also acknowledged

84  Academic establishment and fame with praise positive developments. This did not change the fact that at times he ‘forgot’ his objectivity, such as his condemnation of the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre in France.71 His research led to a conclusion that ‘in Europe it was never possible for a power, a spiritual or even political idea to develop into a complete reign of total power.’72 Ranke described the outbreak and the early years of the Thirty Years’ War in detail, whereas its completion somehow disappeared at the end. The History of the Popes interested him less for its own sake, as the Papacy no longer exercised any essential influence, but it did in respect of the overall development of the modern world. It included not only the immediate sphere of the popes’ political influence in Italy, nor merely their impact as spiritual head of the Catholic Church, but also the course of Catholic religion in an emerging modern world. Nowhere was this more evident than in his treatment of the life of Sixtus V.73 Interwoven in his biography was a long disquisition on the ‘Idea of Modern Catholicism,’ a section that clearly expressed what Ranke saw as the impact of the papacy on European history in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. If the Church had once fulfilled the purpose of moulding the Germanic and Latin peoples of Europe into a common Christian civilization and the existence of the papal authority was necessary in the earlier phases of the world’s progress, this power was now challenged by the new forces of nationality and of the modern monarchies in a period when the ecclesiastical power was no longer as necessary to the well-being of nations.74 Important for the History of the Popes was the different style of writing. From here on, Ranke used the words Moment, Augenblick and Element more often in his work and the words were used in a precise literary and meaningful way. Ranke’s work had been reviewed several times, and one of the key aspects historians looked at was the use of words. One of the most assessed keywords was the ‘historische Moment,’ the historical moment. This phrase was typical for all of Ranke’s work. The phrase indicated a moment which would change events, opinions or the direction of national and world history and has to be understood in connection with something higher, further reaching and changing. This moment can be a second, as regards a decision or the outcome of a battle, but it also explained characters of persons or institutions and was seen as a milestone to understand the development of European and world history. The way he used the wording was as follows: ‘In this moment was the change of events,’ or ‘In this moment, what did the Pope do?’ or ‘In just this moment the biggest internal opposites came through.’ Sometimes the historical moment was also written in a satirical, cynical and literary way; for example, when a king had major plans for enlarging his influence and death put a stop to them. The word Augenblick, also translated as ‘moment,’ is similar as Moment, but in general it has less importance. It was also used in a literary way in order to keep the flow of the narrative. With the word Element, the element, Ranke tried to describe something universal which was not tangible, such as the element of literature, life or of a particular feeling within society. Another major keyword was Prinzip, the principle. The word described a very particular system which followed its own rules, such as a natural law. There

Academic establishment and fame 85 was the principle of democracy, of kingdom or of absolutism, and each form of state follows its own rules. The same was used for any other structure which follows specific rules. Although the Princes were intended as one set of historical research, a difference between the editions of 1827 and 1834–36 was noticeable. Somehow, the first volume did not fit together with the remainder. On the other hand it shows that Ranke had planned his work all along and the Popes were regarded as part of the intended project – even though it was set apart in later years; it remained like this to the present day. The Popes formed an individual block in the set and were differently constructed. One major difference between the two parts were the materials used: the Princes related to printed documents of the relazioni and other materials in Berlin (he mentioned that he used 48 volumes of relazioni not only for their political history but also the content of cultural and country descriptions), whereas the Popes represented the results of years of archival research. Amongst the many cities to which Ranke travelled, he researched in archives in Vienna, Rome, Florence and Venice. The work of the Popes was based on the discovery and usage of primary sources, and the appendix related only to this work. In the introduction to History of the Popes, he explained where he got his sources and how the project was mapped out. The text was a formidable three volumes comprising 914 pages of narrative, each volume divided into ‘books,’ plus 274 pages of archival documents and a number of illustrations. This level of effort was typical of Ranke, a prolific, versatile, innovative historian.75 The concluding appendix of his papal history displayed 165 primary documents, suggesting tireless diligence in tracking down and confirming usable evidence. Especially valuable were private collections and libraries opened to him.76 This pattern of division of volumes and books and the attachment of the appendix can be found for all of his major works and became his trademark. Furthermore, the style of the narrative and the usage of language had changed and indicated the professionalization of Ranke’s historical craft. Ranke’s style was indeed something of a surprise. One might reasonably expect to see the father of scientific history avoiding, as far as possible, all literary devices in his narrative. In fact, as Peter Gay argued, Ranke ‘displayed the gifts we normally associate with storytellers or playwrights: speed, colour, variety, freshness of diction, and superb control . . . he establishes his characters with the precision of a novelist.’77 In his opinion Ranke wrote in old-fashioned phrases which were supposed to describe reasons and the driving forces behind historical processes, i.e. ‘it happened’ (‘es geschah’), ‘that’s what happened’ (‘so geschah es nun’), ‘now it happened’ (‘nun ereignete es sich’), ‘it happens’ (‘es begibt sich’), ‘it’s the nature of things’ (‘es liegt in der Natur der Dinge’), ‘it should not be’ (‘es sollte aber nicht sein’), ‘but God wanted’ (‘Gott wollte aber’) or ‘God did not want’ (‘Gott wollte nicht’), ‘a divine destiny’ (‘ein göttliches Geschick’) and ‘it is not given to us’ (‘es ist uns nicht gegeben’).78 According to Schleier, Ranke used these phrases in order to leave it to the reader to create their own opinion about the events, and it followed the rules of a historical play, which was vividly described with Ranke as director.79 Dickens believed that with these phrases Ranke returned to

86  Academic establishment and fame Melanchthon’s thesis: that God’s hand was upon human history, and especially in the contribution of every devout life. He did not follow Melanchthon’s literalism in seeing God as playwright and puppeteer of the human drama. Ranke’s deity resembles more Luther’s deus absconditus: the Nominalist God we must seek, but cannot possibly know, save through his unique manifestation in Christ.80 Ranke did not deny his art in his historical writing. Few German historians have polished their work with so much conscientiousness in style. Every new edition showed new corrections. He figured out a way to make the language an instrument for his thinking. His expression was thoughtful; it reflected the finest shades and allowed him to present the main frame clearly. It was always respectful and never lost itself in empty emotionalism; it avoided the use of contemporary keywords and was still able to reflect quietly political tendencies of the time.81 Travellers from Protestant Europe are drawn to Catholic Rome, Ranke wrote, because it is ‘adorned with matchless works of art.’ He arouses the reader’s memory of Rome by making the History of the Popes a kind of guidebook: he explained the origin of Rome’s most famous palaces and villas, like the Palazzo Farnese and the Villa Farnesina; he described with technical detail the reaction to one of Rome’s landmarks, the obelisk on the square before St. Peter’s; an entire section of the work was devoted to the building projects of Sixtus V, which gave the city its present vista.82 The manner in which Ranke presented his story was meant to allow the reader to build up his own picture of a person’s character – as in a novel, in which the good and bad sides of an individual emerge only gradually.83 Ranke was not only praised for his principle of source criticism; in fact, Oliver Daddow believed that he abused it. According to him, Ranke was distinctly uncritical of the sources he used, ignoring or overlooking the fictive elements of the primary sources he scrutinized: ‘Most poignantly when we talk about historians’ bias, it is apparent that he manipulated his evidence to fit an ideologically predetermined story about events.’84 The Venetian and Italian diplomats knew from experience what was essential in the politics of their time. But Ranke, starting as a philologist and academic historian, never questioned their most fundamental assumptions or the comprehensiveness of their analysis. The facts of economics, of industrial production, of mass movement, the evidence of ‘noiseless change,’ all so important in modern society but of no significance to the Venetian ambassadors, had no place in Ranke’s research. For that reason his accounts of history, despite his use of the facts of religion, art, literature, and culture in general, never fully escaped the old-fashioned, rather personal character of cabinet politics.85 Ranke did not get real criticism for his Popes in this relatively quiet time, in spite of the ‘Cologne confusion’ (‘Kölner Wirren’) in 1837. Only the neutral Literarische Zeitung critically reviewed the book in 1836, emphasizing Ranke’s impartial position, although a stronger positioning of the Protestant view may have been advantageous. Also, they believed that the books had a lack of clarity.86 In England in particular Macaulay wrote a review praising Ranke’s book. He classified it as ‘among the English classics.’ A partial explanation for this can be found from the positive remark of the Catholic and friend of Ranke Alfred von Reumont,87 who said that there are ‘many spiritual sketches, written as strict

Academic establishment and fame 87 history. But it is just this approach which contributed to the success of the book.’88 And also the Hegelian Jahrbücher für wissenschaftliche Kritik spoke of the most important publication of historical literature of the last recent years. The impartiality was praised, just it was conceived as not a historical completed work. At that time the Popes was already received as the foremost that he had ever written, and that praise is still acknowledged today.89 With the Popes Ranke had moved to the top position of German historiography.90 When the Dublin Review published the first review in 1836, it was based on the German edition of the History of the Popes. Papencordt stressed that it is read with greater facility than the generality of German works, but we are struck in every page with the author’s efforts to produce an effect, or strike out a happy thought [. . .] The narration is much enlivened by M. Ranke’s endeavours to imprint on it a local character, by relieving it with description of several parts of Rome [. . .] The antiquarian reader will only regret that in speaking of Roman antiquities, M. Ranke is seldom correct.91 On the other hand Papencordt praised Ranke as the first Protestant who was able to show a history of the popes that included both the institution and private lives of the popes, and he concluded that Ranke did not ‘look upon it [. . .] as extremely prejudicial to the Catholic Church.’92 Papencordt’s93 view is surprising because in 1838, Ranke’s History of the Popes had been discussed in Rome with regard to placing it on the Index librorum prohibitorum, the index of books that Catholics were prohibited from reading or possessing.94 Papencordt stayed in Rome at that time and was partly involved in this discussion. Allegedly he also produced a document signed with ‘P.’ condemning Ranke’s work.95 Papencordt was friendly with two other Irish churchmen: Paul Cullen96 and Nicholas Wiseman.97 Although, due to the influence of the Irish churchmen, the banning of Ranke’s Popes did not take place in 1838, the book nevertheless appeared on the Index in 1841 and remained there until the Index was abolished in 1966.98 It is the only one of his works which was ever restricted in some countries. However, the ban from Catholic readership did not stop Irish Catholics from continuing to read Ranke’s Popes. The revision of the English translation by Sarah Austin was differently reviewed in 1843 by John Ennis, who heavily criticized Ranke for being too narrow-minded and for not questioning other issues such as the status of Protestants in German states.99 Two years later, Ennis reviewed Ranke’s Reformation in Germany and praised it as ‘the best guide in our search through that reformed land.’100 Although the work had a ‘more stubborn character’ than the Popes, Ennis pointed out that Ranke depicted Luther as a German hero.101 That a Protestant historian would deal with an exclusively Roman Catholic topic gave the work the greatest explosive force at its publication. The resounding approval which the reviews gave to the Popes was remarkable and was the basis for Ranke’s reputation.102 The History of the Popes was written in the opinion of an evangelist historian, and it must have interested the Papacy, and with it the Roman Curia in particular, to get their attention. Even more so, Ranke may not

88  Academic establishment and fame have achieved access in Rome to Vatican archives, but he found a way around this and researched in private collections of Roman nobility and papal helpers.103 Ultimately, we are not sure what actually happened, but while researching the reasons for this, an unpublished report came to light: a handwritten report of the consultant Antonio De Luca written on 23 August 1838, just ten days after the first consultant assembly. De Luca positioned himself against the Jesuit Michele Domenico Zeccinelli and suggested not indexing Ranke on the forbidden books. This means that the opinions on his book were diverse. Obviously his concerns and arguments were so strong that his opinion was able to convince the cardinals in their assembly on 27 August  1838; therefore Ranke’s Popes remained untouched.104 For the year 1838 there was another, but undated, report on Ranke’s Popes written by Zecchinelli. It also contains a proper printed protocol for the cardinal assembly with Ranke’s Popes listed as an orderly item of the agenda. It seems that the issue was discussed as well, and a handwritten note on the protocol was: non expedire prohibitionem. Another verification of this decision dated 27August 1838 also concluded that the Popes were not to be indexed. The indexing was not published, although the report of Zecchinelli supported it strongly. The surprise: the cardinals did not follow the suggestion to index the work in 1838.105 In spite of this, a handwritten vote on Ranke can be found. It was dated 15 September 1841 and was used as the basis for the meeting and vote the following day. Usually reports were submitted in writing so the cardinals could make adequate decisions and have time to prepare. Then the reports were printed. This did not happen in Ranke’s case. A presented report was written by Pater Augustin Theiner,106 a Silesian and previous liberal church critic who had some influence on church politics in Germany.107 The decree of 16 September 1841, which indexed the History of the Popes, also contained an unprinted meeting protocol for the assembly of cardinals. This protocol, however, did not include Ranke’s name, which meant that the topic was brought in during the meeting and may have surprised the cardinals as this was against the usual regulations dating back to Pope Benedict XIV (1740–1758).108 Alongside the History of the Popes Ranke published an article on the history of Italian poetry.109 The article dealt with literary works from Italy and reviewed them from a critical and historical position. Italy and France were mentioned most, but countries such as England, Ireland and Spain were also mentioned. Due to the nature of this article Ranke relied on and utilized the works of such authors as Luigi Pulci, Matteo Maria Boiardo, Ariosto, Berni, Bernador Tasso, Luigi Alemanni and Torquato Tasso. In the introduction Ranke wrote that every nation had a different history with different traditions, events, governances and churches. Therefore, the different nations also had their own style of literature and poetry, which represented their deepest wishes and past events. Poets come and go, their styles may always change, but the essence of their works would remain constant and familiar in any given nation. In order to underline his theory Ranke presented a number of different writers and poets. In particular, he wrote to Luigi Pulci saying that his works would express the feelings of his age when the ideas of medieval knighthood were still in people’s memories, but they were confronted with

Academic establishment and fame 89 fresh ideas and movements of the approaching new age of the Renaissance and early modern Europe. In Ranke’s opinion such poetry can show the mind-set of the people and the problems they were confronted with. The poetry of Luigi Pulci contained wilderness and chaos and can give a good impression of general life in those times. Generally this article was a by-product of Ranke’s researches in relation to the History of the Popes and contained detailed research which he could not cover in the same work. However, this article was an example that he covered all areas of history, including literature and cultural aspects, and it was originally a presentation for the Prussian Academy of Sciences on 5 November 1835.110 The numbers of students in Ranke’s lectures varied. In 1831 he had about 30 students. The aspect that Ranke lectured in summer 1833 for the last time on ‘Universal History’ had not only theoretical but simply other reasons: only three students were interested in the general overview of ‘Universal History,’ whereas 20 to 30 students visited the following lecture on ‘the most recent History.’111 In 1835, he had for the first time more than 50 students, a number he was able to exceed with his medieval history. Two years later, he had more than 100 students, reaching the peak in the winter semester of 1841–42 with 153 students. After the revolution of 1848 the numbers decreased again quickly. In 1860 he had around twenty students left, and his last lecture had to be cancelled as the students had left him.112 Whereas Ranke tended to give two classes before his research trip (a major class for three hours and a minor one for one hour), he taught overall only one class of four or five hours per week. Most of the classes taught between 1831 and 1843 dealt with modern history from around 1500 (16 of 27 classes in total), followed by classes on German history (four classes), then medieval history (four classes) and others such as ‘Universal History’ or ‘On the study of history’ (three classes). The numbers alone don’t say much, so we have to compare them with his colleagues, the total number of students and the context of historical events. When Ranke arrived in Berlin, Friedrich von Raumer warned him of disappointments as some lectures had just four to six students. Leopold was glad; he informed his brother that he had on average 30 students, while better-known von Raumer had an almost empty classroom! At that time there were 164 students registered; this rose to 291 in 1835, two years later 324, and in the winter semester of 1841–42 there were 437 students registered. If we compare these numbers with Ranke’s classes, we notice a specific increase in his percentage. In winter 1841–42 around 35% of registered students were taking his lectures  – the actual numbers may have been much higher.113 This was noticed as well in a hostile article by Friedrich Köppen in his ‘Berliner Historiker’ in the Hallischen Jahrbücher in 1841, when he commented that Ranke’s lectures were, since the death of Eduard Ganz,114 ‘definitely the most visited ones amongst all history classes, so that he has in general around 60 to 70 students.’115 In his study from 1968 Berg had identified 481 students who studied under Ranke, of which 275 also joined the historical seminar.116 Mittler & Sohn published in 1866 a registry of Ranke’s seminar students, and one finds 446 students listed for the time period between summer semester 1833 and winter semester

90  Academic establishment and fame 1865–66; however, some names appeared twice.117 Even though we don’t know the exact numbers, it indicates that actually a large number of students had joined the new type of classes and lectures. A lot of students came from foreign countries such as Denmark, France, Great Britain, Luxembourg, the Ottoman Empire, Austria, Poland, Russia, Switzerland, Hungary and the United States. As far as it is possible to ascertain with a number of shortened forenames, there was not one woman amongst them.118 This probably had something to do with university regulations, which forbade women from registering, than his own choice not to include women. Back in Frankfurt he gave history classes to women, but they were voluntary and taught outside school hours in more of an informal format. Schnicke believed that if Ranke wanted to continue teaching women, he could have achieved that, but after his calling for lectureship nothing can be found in his correspondence anymore.119 We don’t have many scripts from Ranke’s classes left, but for a few of them we have some notes and typescripts from his students.120 The following example is the lecture introduction ‘Idea of universal history’ for 1831–32, and the first part described the character of historical science: History is distinguished from all other sciences in that it is also an art. History is a science in collecting, finding, penetrating; it is an art because it recreates and portrays that which it has found and recognised. Other sciences are satisfied simply with recording what has been found; history requires the ability to recreate. As a science, history is related to philosophy, as an art, to poetry. The difference is that, in keeping with their nature, philosophy and poetry move within the realm of the ideal while history has to rely on reality. If one assigned philosophy the task of penetrating the image which has appeared in time, it would be involved in discovering causality and conceptualising the core of existence: and is philosophy of history not also history? If philosophy of history would assign to poetry the task of reproducing past life, then it would be history. History is distinguished from poetry and philosophy not with regard to its capacity but by its given subject matter, which imposes conditions and is subject to empiricism. History brings both together in a third element peculiar only to itself. History is neither the one nor the other, but demands a union of the intellectual forces active in both philosophy and poetry under the condition that the last two be directed away from their concern with the ideal to the real. [. . .] In modern times one has, in cases of doubt, dealt only with the element of reality or has insisted on science as the sole principle. One has gone so far as to make history disappear as a part of philosophy. However, as has been said, history must be science and art at the same time. History is never the one without the other. But it is possible for the other to be more pronounced. In lectures history can, of course, appear only as a science. For just this reason it is necessary that we undertake presently to deal with the idea of history.

Academic establishment and fame 91 Art rests on itself: its existence proves its validity. On the other hand, science must be totally worked out to its very concept and must be clear to its core. Therefore, I would like to clarify the idea of world history in some preliminary lectures – by dealing in succession with the historical principle, the scope, and the unity of world history.121 After this he continued to describe the historical principle: ‘First of all, philosophy always reminds us of the claim of the supreme idea. History, on the other hand, reminds us of the conditions of existence.’122 Towards the end of the general introduction he came to the particulars: ‘Now that we have vindicated our supreme principle, we have to consider what demands result from it for historical practice.’123 The following are some of his key points: 1 Pure love of truth. 2 A documentary, penetrating, profound study is necessary. 3 A universal interest. 4 Penetration of the causal nexus. 5 Impartiality. 6 Conception of totality. Ranke never had a strong or clear voice, and he generally lectured sitting down – though this made very little difference, since he was barely five feet tall even when standing. Andrew D. White,124 first president of Cornell and a former student at Berlin, described the master before a class as follows:125 He had a habit of becoming so absorbed in his subject as to slip down in his chair, hold his finger up toward the ceiling, and then, with his eye fastened on the tip of it, go mumbling through a kind of rhapsody, which most of my German fellow-students confessed they could not understand. It was a comical sight: half a dozen students crowding around his desk listening to the professor as priests might listen to the Sibyl on her tripod, the other students being scattered through the room in various stages of discouragement.126 We find that the embodiment of research within a person was found in the emphasis of his body description: the ‘large head with dark curly hair on top of the small figure,’127 ‘the disharmony between upper and lower body,’128 ‘the fine thin mouth’ or the unrest in face and body during his presentations.129 Wilhelm von Giesebrecht130 remembered from 1837: He (Ranke) stood in full youth, everything on him was in movement and eagerness and appeared so much strangely that he attracted attention. Even seeing him in the road his quick gesticulations, the bouncing walk and even more the disharmony of upper and lower body. The small statue was not in proper proportion to the large head and his sharp outlines, covered with dark

92  Academic establishment and fame full hair. With the large blue eyes and their penetrating beam his face got a strange shine. The feeling of astonishment increased when one sat before his lecturing desk and listened to his lecture. The unusual vividness was confusing in the beginning. The lecture was well prepared, the booklet was before the lecturer, and yet his words came forth in a moment and sometimes it seemed that the content was too much for him. Rarely would the presentation flow in one go, so it was difficult to follow him, or he suddenly stopped completely, because the speaker could not find the accurate word which was able to describe his picture of phantasy. This type of lecture, where in which a lot depended on spontaneous inspiration, attracted many students in high numbers.131 With his weak voice and insignificant figure, Ranke had none of the graces of the popular lecturer and he was, according to all reports, not an inspiring lecturer. W.W. Story,132 an American visitor to Berlin in 1850, described him in extremely unflattering colours: I have also been hearing Ranke, whose style is the acme of flippancy, without dignity, grace or intelligibility. He is a little round-faced man, with a baldish forehead, a high voice and thin hair; his head just appears above his desk, and he rolls himself round, looking up at the ceiling and jerking out with the extremest rapidity and nonchalance, and in a most equivocal tone, which one knows not whether to take as jest or earnest, little fragments of sentences. . . . Ranke seems . . . like a garden fountain which keeps spurting up little futile jets and then stopping.133 This type of lecture repelled many students, and they presented their impressions with sarcastic mockery of his jerky manner, his chin pointing upwards or his fingers catching the air.134 Only a few seemed to have no problems understanding him, and their reports sound enthusiastic.135 Jakob Burckhardt136 for example wrote on his lectures, ‘If you would not learn anything with him, so at least you would learn presentations with him,’ and Kurd von Schlözer137 noted, ‘Leopold Ranke started a revolution in me. Until now I worshipped the muse of history, but he opened up its spirit.’ And even a half year later Ranke still inspired him more and more.138 Almost 60 years later, on the occasion of Ranke’s death, his great pupil Heinrich von Sybel139 thus described the master:140 The first impression which Ranke’s appearance made in the pulpit was a certain wonderment. The great head framed by dark curly hair set on the little figure, the incessant movement which followed the course of thought with hasty gestures, the lecturer himself, now standing still in search for the right expression, now again rushing forward in headlong rapidity and therefore often difficult for the ear to grasp, all this appeared curious yet not quite attractive. . . . Ranke spoke very freely, but had previously thoroughly worked out the subject in writing and thereby secured complete control of it

Academic establishment and fame  93 for his oral presentation. . . . Lectures always were to him mainly a source of general education for youth, the preaching of the spiritual content in the concentration of human fates; every semester he took up a large field of world history or some 15 centuries of German life, knowing full well that fruitful results were impossible only in wide surveys.141 This description was confirmed by the testimony of many of Ranke’s German pupils, such as Rochus von Liliencron,142 Moriz Ritter,143 Karl Marx, Willibald Beyschlag,144 Johann Caspar Bluntschli,145 Felix Dahn,146 Alfred Dove, Eduard Hanslick,147 Philipp Jaffe,148 Georg Heinrich Pertz and Julian Schmidt.149 Between these two extremes a number of students expressed their difficulties in following the class, but they believed they were richly rewarded with the lecture. Probably the fairest and most understanding opinion was given by Wilhelm Dilthey:150 I still see him, the eyes not on the students, but directed internally to the historical world. There was never a trace of a rhetoric in him, and no connection to the listeners: totally with no connection to them he lived in the view of the historic world: he saw, how the pictures moved past him: his large eye seem to watch them internally. It was all a creation of the moment and sometimes he found the happy expression and he loved it.151 Ranke’s notes were usually folded into half, which created two columns: on the right Ranke quoted the source, and on the left he left space for his own comments, additional notes or references. In most of the cases the left column remained empty. During his lectures, his students agreed, Ranke barely looked at his notes. He tried to experiment and often lost himself in details. Despite this, the notes were only used for preparation, not for the actual class; therefore Ranke’s voice became itself a source which several students took down in short notes or excerpts.152 Ranke established one of the central elements of modern historical research with his creation of a graduate seminar in history at Berlin in 1833. This made possible the systematic training of young historians and the passing on of knowledge and techniques from one generation to another. The combination of research and teaching meant that there was a steady supply of graduates to enter the seminar and take up research. It also served the vital purpose of compelling the scholars to describe their work in an understandable form and so checked the constant tendency of academic research to wander off into the obscure and abstruse.153 The famous Ranke seminar, characterized by teamwork, took place in his private library with just a few students, who worked on Ranke’s books and manuscript sources. Until the end of his life Ranke rejected any university or government subsidies for his seminar, so that it might stay free of outside control. However, in 1882 it was officially inaugurated as the ‘Berlin Historical Seminar’ at the University of Berlin.154 Ranke’s library became the base not only for an early team of students who found their way to him despite the thorny myths surrounding him but also for many other well-known historians. Burckhardt,

94  Academic establishment and fame Roscher,155 Dilthey, Johann Gustav Droysen, Lord Acton,156 John Lincoln, Andrew White, Herbert Adams,157 Charles Adams,158 John Burgess,159 Hirsch,160 Dönniges,161 Waitz,162 Schmidt, Giesebrecht, Sybel, Köpke,163 Wilmans, George Comfort, Charles Bennet and even Herbert Osgood164 caught a glimpse of the old Ranke; Francis Lieber165 was a friend of Ranke’s from 1823, and also George Bancroft,166 who from 1867 to 1874 was the United States ambassador to Berlin. Ranke had more than 30 students who achieved a high reputation as historians, all of whom had sat in his library and spread their ideas of his ‘Historical Seminar’ across the scientific world.167 Out of these seminars came the scholars who edited and contributed to the Monumenta, the Historische Zeitschrift, the Preußische Jahrbücher, the Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, the Deutsche Städtechroniken, the publications of the Bavarian Historical Commission and various other source collections and became the role model for historical seminars and future education of historians. Schnicke emphasized that Ranke’s seminar had a couple of forerunners which he may have integrated into his own: in Leipzig he joined a philological seminar taught by Christian Daniel Beck,168 and Henz listed Ranke’s school classes under Adolph Gottlob Lange169 in Schulpforta and the ‘Greek Society’ under Gottfried Hermann in Leipzig.170 When jubilee scripts for Hermann were written in 1840 in relation to the 50th anniversary of his PhD, a list called Index Sodalium Societatis Graecae A. 1799–1840 was added which contained 159 members and three honouree members including Ranke.171 That Ranke used his seminar to further his program is clear from the following passage: ‘I am still astonished at the talent and application of the young men who gathered around me. . . . In this circle work thrives. We came upon the Chronicon Corbeiense, whose spuriousness I first recognized without being able to prove it. The members of the seminar made the investigation which proved its falseness.’172 During the historical seminar several exercises took place. Usually they dealt with older epochs, materials from which were easy to obtain, but Ranke would also deal with modern times if students requested it. Either the work of the students was critically discussed – here it was the greatest if Ranke took over the discussion himself – or they read sources together. This meant that Ranke would deal with comments from several authors.173 The class was in no way systematic, and Wimmer described it as ‘everything and nothing in particular.’174 The students were supposed to learn historical criticism as an interpretation in rough traits. This criticism for the whole was characterized by the love for the historical detail. Dilthey described Ranke in the seminar as a ‘powerful organism, who had embodied the chronicles, the Italian politicians, ambassadors, historians, Niebuhr, Fichte and Hegel’ and changed it into a vivid presentation of the past.175 He added that Ranke seemed to be the ‘appearance of historical wealth’ himself.176 The source interpretation in the seminar was an oral historical writing ‘off the cuff.’177 Afterwards he ‘could break out in loud laughter and real jubilation, when he managed to destroy the false tradition.’178 It is reported that the students were astonished by Ranke’s ability to quote large excerpts out of memory and to give a deeper interpretation immediately, with a detailed source analysis to follow.179

Academic establishment and fame 95 The emergence of this Rankean school of archival research provoked strong reactions.180 As early as 1837 the liberal Berlin historian Droysen, who had studied under Hegel and remained inspired by his philosophy of history, complained that the new ‘Rankean school of sources’ regarded ‘the accuracy of the facts as the only purpose of historical studies; this [accuracy] they think they achieve, when they examine the primary sources.’181 Varnhagen von Ense, a pillar of Berlin’s intellectual community who, during the 1820s, had been a friend and supporter of Ranke, in 1847 condemned not only Ranke’s new politics but also his ‘delusion that the essence of history is located in those materials that he is the first to open and use.’182 In 1841 another critical observer, writing in the Hegelian Hallische Jahrbücher, noted the formation of a Rankean school based upon archival research, and he commented that Ranke has not only more than any other of our historians reverted to the archive, the handwritten records and documents; but he also loves to create primarily, yes exclusively, from these. . . . Only within these, he thinks, one can find thorough and secure knowledge; only from these, one can learn the true and original interrelationship between the events and their ultimate causes.183 While assessing primary sources students also had to question the role of the historian, and Ranke made it clear that one’s own perception and biases should not be included into the writing of history. If we want to establish ‘how things really were,’ we have to view and analyze the time period and how issues were viewed at that contemporary historical moment, and we are not allowed to let ourselves get carried away with today’s views or ideological beliefs. It is true that ‘history will always be rewritten,’ as Ranke noted in his diary in the 1840s.184 He was fully aware that most historians constantly impose the ideas of their own time on their historical writing. History can never be viewed or reviewed from one side, and in his Epochs about the Modern History Ranke noted, ‘The truth lies possibly in the middle.’185 Ranke’s thoughts on how to write history and that history has to remain free of any influences become more and more important at times when history becomes an issue of political actions. In a letter written in 1828, Ranke expressed his feeling on this issue in just one sentence: Instead of basing their political opinion on history, which is the research of facts, many people want to control history through the general opinion; an undertaking which would destroy all freedoms of science, if it should succeed.186 Of course, Ranke realized that every generation and every nation views itself throughout history as being more advanced and civilized than the previous one, and previous generations would be judged based on this basis. Therefore Ranke thought that history was always a depiction of the historian’s own time. Selfcriticism was also an important task of the historian, and numerous times Ranke was not happy with his own work and rewrote it just before it was supposed to

96  Academic establishment and fame be printed. In this way he was able to remain as objective as much as possible. He always enforced and encouraged his students to use the method of objectivity; however, he was aware himself that this was one of the most difficult tasks for the historian. It remained the utmost ideal to be fully objective in a work of history, and even Ranke never fully reached this self-set goal. However, ‘research demands the duty of impartiality,’187 and ‘objectivity is at the same time impartiality.’188 With his best students at the time, Waitz, Hirsch, Köpke, Giesebrecht, Wilmans and Dönninges, he published the results of his students from the historical seminars in the Jahrbüchern des Deutschen Reichs unter dem Sächsischen Hause.189 Ranke acted as chief editor for this work, which consisted of two volumes and was published within four years. The work contained six articles from his students. All articles dealt with a reassessment of the history of German emperors from the House of Saxony, which was a collection of sources and excursions into different historical aspects. He only wrote the introduction to this work and outlined the necessity of archival research and the publication of newfound sources giving researchers the possibility to widen their knowledge and to fill gaps in general research. Such publications would also give non-professional audiences the possibility to gain more information than just joining the lectures alone. Usually unknown and neglected, this work allows a view into historical seminars run by Ranke during their early days and how they operated. This work also shows that Ranke afforded his students the opportunity to publish their first articles and gives an insight into some of the topics discussed in the seminar. Each student wrote on a different emperor. The first emperor was Henry I, which was followed by Otto I the Great. Another article on Otto I followed which was preceded by an introduction of W. Dönnings, lecturer in Berlin. The next emperors were Otto II and Otto III; on the latter we find an introduction by Dr Roger Wilmans. The last article was a critical source analysis on the document Chronicon Corbejense, and it was written by Siegfried Hirsch and Georg Waitz. Ranke wrote not only on German history but the history of a number of states in nineteenth-century Europe. His historical writing created an awareness of their own history in a number of states – in America as well – and an international network of historians was developed. This international network can be traced in the private papers, which give only a slight idea of the huge network which operated from Ranke’s home. Just recently I have found two unpublished letters addressed by American scholars to Ranke, which show that his network did not only operate in Europe but also in the United States. One letter was written by W.H. Prescott190 from Boston on 20 May  1839, and indicated the exchange of scholarly information: I take the liberty to send you, through my countryman, the American Minister, Mr. Wheaton, a copy of the ‘History of Ferdinand and Isabella’, which you will confer a favor by accepting from me. The work was published last year, both in London and in my own country. I prefer to send you an American copy, as somewhat more copious and correct than the English, and in the belief, also, that it may afford you some additional interest, as a specimen of

Academic establishment and fame 97 the mechanical execution of book-making in the New World. With the wish that the work was more worthy of the acceptance of one who has done so much to enlighten and delight the world, by his own writings.191 Amongst all of his work, we cannot forget that Ranke travelled each and every year between 1831 and 1843. Sometimes he travelled for just a month – for example, in the years 1833 and 1840 – and sometimes the research trips lasted for a few months, such as in the years 1835 to 1837. In those cases he researched in the local archives. Amongst the 38 towns and cities he travelled to were Amsterdam, Aschaffenburg, Bayreuth, Bonn, Brussels, Cologne, Dresden, Düsseldorf, Erfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Göttingen, Halle, Hamburg, Kassel, Koblenz, Leipzig, Magdeburg, Paris, Potsdam and Weimar. The year 1836 changed Ranke, as both of his parents died in that year. As he had already been away from Wiehe for several years, he faced the problem of what to do with the land he inherited. Instead of selling the land, he changed it into an entail (Majoratserbe), which meant that the land never could be sold and must always pass to the first-born son. As Ranke had, in his youth, good connections to the Petzoldt family in Langenroda, he leased four hectares of land to them around the modern Ranke-Memorial, and another two hectares of gardens and grass. In the lease it was stipulated when and how trees should be cut, what way the land should be looked after and so on. It shows Ranke’s deep connection with his home and marks him out as one of the early conservationists of the rural landscape. This does not mean that Ranke was a conservative person but only that he had foresight and perhaps, some of the spirit that we associate today with the modern Green Party. The first tenant was Johann Gottfried Petzoldt (1796–1865). This leasehold was renewed until 1960, when it was abolished by the introduction of LPGs (Landwirtschaftliche Produktionsgenossenschaft), the new agricultural production units of socialist East Germany.192 Fruit, especially, had to be sent to Ranke in Berlin, and what was left had to be sold in the markets of Wiehe. But the relationship did not remain a landlord–tenant one. Several pictures, silver forks and spoons, given as presents and at visits, show a close friendship.193 In 1834, Ranke was promoted to a full professorship, but the promotion was instigated by his friends at the Foreign Office and pushed through without consultation with his faculty and against the wishes of the university senate. His salary was paid from a secret government fund for another two years. After the departure of Ritter for Kiel in 1833 and the death of Schleiermacher in 1834, Ranke’s only close friend at the university was Savigny. But Savigny himself had largely withdrawn from university affairs because of the influence of his Hegelian critic Eduard Gans in the law faculty and had made his scholarly home in the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences, where Hegelians had been successfully excluded, where royal patronage rather than collegial solidarity ruled and to which Ranke had been admitted in 1832.194 This inaugural lecture, De Historiae et Politices Cognationae atque Discrimine, in Latin as was still customary at the time, was given shortly after the discontinuation of the magazine, in October 1836.195 The speech was also later published,196 and in it Ranke discussed the academic and

98  Academic establishment and fame practical areas of history and politics, presented their differences and similarities and provided his own understanding to this matter. Following Ranke, it was the office of history to establish the causes of the rise and fall of states, and this approach needed to be critical. The subject of history had to follow its goal in recounting and analyzing the past, and it needed to be careful not to drift off its proposed path. Ranke believed that states and politics are not the same as people: people will come and go, whereas states survive the life span of individuals by generations and remain similar through this time. Ranke gave the example of Venice. Therefore he believed that it was the duty of history to assess the essence of states, and only with this knowledge would it be able to understand and develop politics. As Ranke said, ‘The knowledge of the past is uncompleted without the knowledge of the present; but an understanding of the present is not possible without the knowledge of earlier times.’197 He also mentioned that politics tries to achieve higher developments and growth, and history should do the same: only by reaching the highest can it further develop; otherwise history has reached its own end. Ranke had a large paragraph included where he compared the differences and similarities between politics and history, which could be compared to practical and theoretical philosophy. Iggers believed that in the inaugural lecture Ranke presented his political views in a more concrete form. His position was very similar to that of Edmund Burke’s198 reflections on the French Revolution, although he did not mention Burke by name. He emphatically rejected the Enlightenment notion that all states should be ruled according to universal ethical standards, and he stressed again that every state has a unique character that excluded the application of such standards.199 Iggers proposed that Ranke saw the error of the liberals of his day in their wishing to make a clean slate of the past, which, as the French Revolution showed, resulted in chaos and the rule of the mob. Politics must be guided by an understanding of the past. Nevertheless, like Burke, he believed that there is a place for reforms if these were built on institutions with historical roots.200 This article and speech combined Ranke’s recent experience of history and politics during the Vormärz and his Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift. He tried to develop this aspect to a conclusion because such theoretical discussion, except his Über die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte, was not undertaken in other works again. The speech also contained a number of important passages on how to understand history in general, such as that ‘history has to be understood by its nature as universal’ (Historia natura sua [. . .] universalis est).201 It is often remarked that Ranke’s conception of historical explanation and representation was fairly fixed by 1850 or thereabout and that it did not significantly change or develop in the next 30 years or so. The revolutions of 1848–51 and 1870–71 had no real effect on him.202 Reflecting on all of the events, I would suggest that with the key year of 1836, overall his conception was finished. During the 1830s Ranke became a famous figure in Berlin. He was seen walking through Unter den Linden and Tiergarten, attracting strange looks for his quick gestures, his hopping walk and his ever-present smile. The small stature of his body was out of proportion to his huge head with his dark full hair. Still,

Academic establishment and fame 99 some people regarded him as a beauty. His huge blue eyes gave him a special glance.203 At the same time Ranke became friendly with the Mendelssohn family in Berlin and a relative of theirs, Wilhelm Hensel,204 painted Ranke in later years. The Mendelssohn family did not only remain in contact culturally but also looked after financial matters for Ranke. In Joseph Mendelssohn’s205 letter to his son, Georg Benjamin,206 Ranke is mentioned as viewing a manuscript by Georg Benjamin in 1834.207 During the 1830s it was still King William III on the Prussian throne. It was during this time when Ranke experienced his breakthrough at the University of Berlin, but the court was completely unknown to him: ‘I saw the king really now for the first time. Bent deeply, dragging his feet on the ground but with the highest honourable expression. He is intelligent, – but more negative with everything that is presented to him, he recognizes the wrong, then the right, so that he could decide the rightful. It makes a good impression, this court with the king in the middle.’208 Ranke then described how the king reacted to a courtier who complained that the Prussian court was in comparison to others very simple, as follows: ‘The king did not answer for a long time, he poked in his teeth, and Rüchel, who believed to make an impression, continued with his case. Finally Frederick William answered that he had always seen so far that with all theatre kings, it will always make a bad ending.’209 Ranke witnessed royal-imperial theatre in London, Paris and Vienna, and he enjoyed the glamour of courts. But the authenticity, as given by the Bourbons, Habsburgs, Wittelsbachs and Hohenzollern, was the carrier of the crown who was also as modest as this peace-loving king in the castle of Berlin.210 In a retrospective autobiographical account, Ranke claimed that with Frederick William IV’s accession to the Prussian throne in June 1840, the horizon in Berlin was ‘totally transformed.’ This transformation was produced when the political and academic party to which Ranke had tied his loyalties during the 1830s became the ruling patriarchal ‘family.’ The crown prince, his patron, admirer and personal acquaintance since the late 1820s, was now king. Eichhorn, his closest associate within the governmental elites, headed the ministry of culture, thus providing Ranke with direct, personal access to a government minister whose decisions most immediately influenced his scholarly and professional life. Savigny, his academic mentor and closest personal friend, moved even closer to the centres of power as head of the new Ministry of Justice for Legislation. Although the new king was ‘a man of his age’ who ‘lived and breathed in its great contradictions,’ he claimed, ‘he at the same time made a partisan commitment to the positive and the historical.’211 During the early 1840s, it also seemed that Ranke might become more involved in the academic collegiality of the university. Attendance at his lecture courses rose dramatically during the first years of the regime, and in 1841–42 he served as dean of the philosophical faculty, the only time he ever participated in university governance.212 In the years 1839 to 1847 Ranke published his History of Germany in the period of the Reformation.213 Materials for this work were found in the proceedings of the German Diet from 1414 to 1613 at Frankfurt am Main. These archives

100  Academic establishment and fame proved almost as important as the relazioni of the Venetian ambassadors. More than 60 volumes of records and reports were digested by Ranke for his history on the Reformation. With remarkable liberality, the authorities at Frankfurt allowed Ranke to take selections from this collection to Berlin for use in his own library. Other archives were opened to his researches, for example the records at Weimar and the royal archives of Prussia and Saxony. It was always Ranke’s aim to draw new contributions from fresh sources of information when compiling his historical work. Due to his approach, he was appointed to the position of royal historiographer by King Frederick William IV of Prussia in 1841. This work consisted of six volumes and covered German history from around 1517 to the 1550s. The main state is obviously the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation, but other countries played a major role as well: Spain, England, France, Hungary, Poland, Italy and Switzerland were mentioned and dealt with; other European countries, Northern Africa, the Ottoman Empire and Asia were also noted. This indicates that the work was not German history by itself, but placed in a European and even global context. The first volume contained the summary of German history from Charlemagne until 1517. Then Ranke analyzed German and European political affairs in context to the early Reformation period. He also compared different reform movements of the Catholic Church with those of Islam and Buddhism. The centre point of the work is the political struggle for power between the Emperor and the Pope. The second half of the book deals with German history from 1517 to 1521. Ranke finished with the Edict of Worms, which left Luther’s future open, but also the reaction of the oppositions of the Pope and Emperor. Within the narrative the German state and constitutional history was compared with France and England. The old conflict between state and church and who should execute the most influential power was dealt with. Within this context Luther was presented as a ‘play ball’ between these two parties. The second volume dealt with German and European history between 1521 and 1529. Luther disappeared more into the background as the fight between worldly and ecclesiastical powers in connection with Luther’s ideas continued, as well as the Peasants’ Revolt and further fights between states and even countries for power sharing. At the end of the book Ranke finished with an apparent victory of Protestantism in Europe as it seemed that the old powers had been defeated. The third volume dealt with European history from the late 1520s to the mid1530s. Luther completely stepped back and his movement took over European events completely. Ranke included a large chapter on the Reformation in Switzerland, but the Reformation in England was only briefly noted. America was mentioned, including the brutality of religion in the colonizing process as well as the secularization of monasteries only in connection to pay off the debts of the various states. Ranke did not hide the fact that the Reformation went hand in hand with power, trade and economy and did not always view events from the perspective of religion. We can also see the first indications of a split of the German states into different blocks of interest.

Academic establishment and fame 101 The fourth volume covered the events from the mid-1530s to the 1540s and concentrated on the spread of Protestantism and the change of their political and military tactics. The second half of the book dealt with the Schmalkaldian War. The death of Luther and the Reformation in England were only mentioned in short. The last volume dealt with the time period of the 1540s until 1555, and the fate of Protestantism remained open. With the Treaty of Augsburg 1555, Ranke dealt with the constitution of the Empire and stressed the individuality of several independent states. Reviewing the work overall, Ranke tried to assess the development of the state structure of the Holy Roman Empire. Particularly the connection between the independent states to the empire led to the question of how far it was a unity and a continuous contrary development. Of interest was the aim of the city states and smaller states to gain more influence in the decision-making process for the empirical structure state, and Ranke stresses this movement as an indication of a lack of absolute monarchy, but as an early form of democracy. Some city states such as Münster and Lübeck which have developed a form of a republic were presented by Ranke as perfect examples of the ‘democratic principle.’ When it came to the peace treaty of Augsburg in 1555, Ranke acknowledged that the constitution of the Holy Roman Empire had found its final version after decades of struggles. Indirectly, he indicated that this constitution worked for the following decades and involved all states of the empire, including the third class, with which Ranke hinted at the constitutional problems of German states in the nineteenth century. Despite the major political implications caused by the Reformation, Ranke reviewed in several separated chapters cultural and class aspects of German society. Particularly the development of education, literature and science seemed to be important to him, whereas the discussion of classes remained connected to trade and the struggle of city states and smaller principalities for influence within the German Empire. The work was concluded with a large appendix containing numerous different sources. The German History in the era of the Reformation is the most personal of Ranke’s works in that it clearly revealed his German Protestant background while still achieving a remarkably balanced account. In his work, Ranke saw the Protestant Reformation not merely as a religious phenomenon but also as a political one – the struggle of the German princes against the control of both the emperors and the popes. In the introduction Ranke noted that he viewed this work as the continuation of the Popes, but with more of an emphasis on the Protestant side of events. However, Ranke dealt with a difficult part of German history during the time period of the early Reformation. Usually this work is mistaken as a work on the German Reformation itself, placing Martin Luther as the key figure of the period. This is not correct, and Luther remained a satellite figure throughout the whole narrative. According to Stromeyer, the History of the Reformation was often described as the largest work, sometimes as the most classic.214 Especially during the time of publication of the six volumes, there were strong confessional disputes in

102  Academic establishment and fame Germany as a result of the Cologne Confusion (‘Kölner Wirren’). It was because of this that the hate against Prussia evolved in the Rhineland.215 The critics against the work from its publication to today came mainly from the Catholic, antiPrussian side.216 Catholics would disagree with Ranke’s basic idea, as he described the collapse of the ecclesiastical system in the late medieval times as the reason for the Reformation, but they presented it that Ranke referred to this in respect of the full period of the Middle Ages.217

Notes 1 Müller, Adam Heinrich (1779–1829), German publicist, literary critic, political economist, theorist of the state and forerunner of economic romanticism. 2 Toews, Becoming historical, p. 376. 3 Metz, Grundformen historiographischen Denkens, p. 38. 4 Toews, Becoming historical, p. 376. 5 Ibid, p. 377. 6 Daddow, ‘The ideology of apathy’, p. 426. 7 Eichhorn, Johann Albrecht Friedrich (1779–1856), Prussian Minister for Culture, 1840–48. 8 Grimm, Jacob Ludwig Carl (1785–1863) and Grimm, Wilhelm Carl (1786–1859), German folklorists and philologists. Between 1812 and 1822 they published three volumes known as Grimm’s fairy tales. Jacob’s Germanic grammar (1819) is perhaps the greatest philological work of the age. 9 Pertz, Georg Heinrich (1795–1876), German historian. 10 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 109–110. 11 Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift (1832–1836) [Historical-political journal] [Some articles were re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 24, 49–52]. 12 Iggers, The German conception of history, p. 70. 13 Ibid, p. 71. 14 Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, p. 71. 15 Eichendorff, Joseph Freiherr von (1788–1857), Prussian poet, novelist, playwright, literary critic, translator and anthropologist and Prussian civil servant. 16 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 67. 17 Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, p. 71. 18 Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 63. 19 Ibid, p. 69. 20 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 69. 21 Leopold Ranke, Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift, vol. i (1832), p. 2. 22 Ibid, p. 7. 23 It cannot be proven, but did this article have the impact that Ranke’s History of the Popes was placed on the Index in 1841? 24 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 27. 25 Ibid. 26 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 78. 27 Ibid. 28 Benjamin C. Sax, ‘Jacob Burckhardt and national history’, in: History of European Ideas, 15, 4–6 (1992), p. 846. 29 Elvert, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 144. 30 The original text is in Leopold Ranke, ‘A dialogue on politics’, in: Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift (1836). The English translation was taken from Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 66. 31 Ibid.

Academic establishment and fame  103 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid, p. 61. 34 Alexander Novotny, ‘Über das Primat der äußeren Politik. Bemerkungen zu einem Gedankengang Leopold von Rankes’, in: Hugo Hantsch (ed.), Österreich und Europa (Vienna, 1965), p. 312. 35 Ibid, p. 317. 36 Jörg Baberowski, Der Sinn der Geschichte. Geschichtstheorien von Hegel bis Foucault (Munich, 2005), p. 68. 37 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 160–161. 38 Schimper, Karl Friedrich (1803–67), German botanist, naturalist and poet. 39 Ibid, p. 162. 40 Ibid, pp. 174–180. 41 Gutzkow, Karl Ferdinand (1811–78), German writer. 42 De Vega, Lope (1562–1635), Spanish playwright, poet, novelist and marine. 43 Stieglitz, Charlotte (1806–34), wife of poet Heinrich Stieglitz (1801–49). 44 Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim (1729–81), German writer, philosopher, dramatist, publicist and art critic, and one of the most outstanding representatives of the Enlightenment era. 45 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 237–240. 46 Ibid, p. 239. 47 Ibid, pp. 239–240. 48 Ibid, pp. 245–246. 49 Ibid, p. 247. 50 Ibid, pp. 247–248. 51 Ibid, pp. 249–250. 52 Ibid, pp. 250–251. 53 Ibid, pp. 246–319. 54 Stromeyer, Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik, p. 48. 55 Ibid, p. 49. 56 Staegemann, Friedrich August von (1763–1840), Prussian politician and diplomat. 57 Ibid, p. 50. 58 Siegfried Baur, ‘Franz Leopold Ranke, the Ranke library at Syracuse, and the open future of scientific history’, in: Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, XXXIII (2001), p. 30. 59 Köppen, Karl Friedrich (1808–1863), German teacher and political journalist. 60 Ibid. 61 Marx, Karl (1818–83), German philosopher, economist, historian, political theorist, sociologist, journalist and revolutionary socialist; mainly known for his work Das Kapital and The Communist Manifesto. 62 Ibid. 63 Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, p. 76. 64 Ibid. 65 Ibid, p. 77. 66 Ibid. 67 Baur, Versuch über die Historik, p. 147. 68 Ibid, pp. 147–148. 69 Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Vornehmlich aus ungedruckten Gesandschaftsberichten (vols. i–iv; vol i from 1827, vols ii–iv between 1834–1836). [Princes and peoples of Southern Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Mainly taken from unpublished diplomats reports]. Vols. ii–iv are also known as Die römischen Päpste, ihre Kirche und ihr Staat im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert [The history of the popes, their church and state during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries] [History of the Popes (1840) and History of the Ottoman and Spanish Empires (1843)] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 35–39].

104  Academic establishment and fame 70 For further details see Gilbert, History: Politics or culture?, pp. 39–45. 71 See also Leopold Ranke, Die römischen Päpste, vol. ii, p. 68. 72 Ibid, p. 190. 73 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. xxxvi. 74 Ibid. 75 Kenneth R. Stunkel, Fifty key works of history and historiography (New York, 2011), p. 103. 76 Ibid, p. 104. 77 Warren, History and the historians, p. 64. See also Gay, Style in history, p. 62. 78 Hans Schleier, ‘Geschichtstheorie und Geschichtsschreibung bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Wolfgang J. Mommsen (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), p. 118. 79 Ibid. 80 A.G. Dickens, Ranke as reformation historian (Reading, 1980), pp. 3–4. 81 Eduard Fueter, Geschichte der Neueren Historiographie (Munich, 1911), p. 482. 82 Felix Gilbert, ‘What Ranke Meant’, in: The American Scholar, 56 (1987), p. 395. 83 Ibid, p. 396. 84 Daddow, ‘Still no philosophy please’, p. 493. 85 Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 121. 86 Stromeyer, Ranke und sein Werk, p. 52. 87 Reumont, Alfred von (1808–87), German scholar and diplomat. 88 Ibid, p. 48. 89 Ibid, p. 52. 90 Ibid, p. 54. 91 F.P. Papencordt, ‘Ranke’s history of the popes’, in: Dublin Review, v (1838), p. 49. 92 Papencordt, ‘Ranke’s history of the popes’, pp. 50–51. 93 Papencordt, Felix P. (1811–41), born in Paderborn. He studied history in Bonn under Niebuhr, turned later to philosophy in Berlin, but returned to history under the influence of Ranke and continued his studies in Rome until 1840. 94 Hubert Wolf, Dominik Burkard and Ulrich Muhlack, Rankes “Päpste” auf dem Index, Dogma und Historie im Widerstreit (Paderborn, 2003). 95 Ibid, pp. 61–62. 96 Cullen, Paul (1803–78), born in Ireland. He studied in Carlow and Rome and became in 1829 a priest in Rome. In 1838 he was the consultor of the index congregation, 1850 Irish Primate, 1852 Archbishop of Dublin and 1854 founder of the Catholic University Dublin. 97 Wiseman, Nicholas Patrick Stephan (1802–65), Roman Catholic churchman. He was one of the founders of the Dublin Review. His appointment as the first Archbishop of Westminster and a cardinal in 1850 led to the passing of the Ecclesiastical Titles Assumption Act. 98 Wolf, Burkard and Muhlack, Rankes “Päpste”, pp. 12–23. 99 John Ennis, ‘Is Ranke an historian?’, in: Dublin Review, xiv (1843), pp. 321–379. 100 John Ennis, ‘German reformation and its times’, in: Dublin Review, xviii (1845), p. 284. 101 Ibid. 102 Wolf, Burkard and Muhlack, Rankes “Päpste”, p. 16. 103 Ibid. 104 Ibid, p. 21. 105 Ibid, p. 20. 106 Theiner, Augustin (1804–74), German theologian and historian. 107 Ibid, pp. 19–20. 108 Ibid, p. 19. 109 ‘Zur Geschichte der italienischen Poesie’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1835), pp.  401–485 [Towards the history of Italian poetry’] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 51–52].

Academic establishment and fame 105 Oncken, Rankes Frühzeit, p. 62. Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 56. Ibid, pp. 56–57. Ibid, p. 57. Gans, Eduard (1797–1839), German jurist. Ibid. Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 521. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid, p. 522. See Ranke, Vorlesungseinleitungen, pp. 72–147. Iggers, Theory and practice of history, pp. 8–9. Ibid, p. 10. Ibid, p. 12. Andrew Dickson White (1832–1918), American historian and educator; was also an American ambassador to Germany and Prussia. 125 Franklin L. Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society (1975), p. 64. 126 Ibid, p. 65. 127 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 510. 128 Ibid, p. 511. 129 Ibid. 130 Giesebrecht, Friedrich Wilhelm von (1814–89), German historian. 131 Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, pp. 60–61. 132 Story, William Wetmore (1819–1895), American sculptor, art critic, poet and editor. 133 Ibid, p. 176. 134 Lord Acton, ‘German schools of history’, in: The English Historical Review, 1, 1 (1886), p. 16. 135 Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, pp. 61–62. 136 Burckhardt, Jacob (1818–97), Swiss historian and influential figure in historiography and cultural history. 137 Schlözer, Kurd von (1822–94). 138 Ibid, p. 62. 139 Sybel, Heinrich Karl Ludolf von (1817–95), German historian. 140 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 176. 141 Ibid. 142 Liliencron, Rochus von (1820–1912), Germanist and historian, editor of the biographical reference work Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie 1875–1912. 143 Ritter, Moriz (1840–1923), German historian; president of the Historical Commission 1908–23. 144 Beyschlag, Johann Heinrich Christoph Willibald (1823–1900), German theologian. 145 Bluntschli, Johann Caspar (1808–81), Swiss jurist and politician. 146 Dahn, Felix (1834–1912), German law professor, German nationalist author, poet and historian. 147 Hanslick, Eduard (1825–1904), German Bohemian music critic. 148 Jaffe, Philipp (1819–70), German historian and philologist. 149 Günter Johannes Henz, ‘Rankes fälschlich so benannte Vorträge Über die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte. Eine Untersuchung zu Schein und Sein der Überlieferung’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, 83, 3 (2009), p.  425. Schmidt, Heinrich Julian (1818–86), German journalist and historian of literature. 150 Dilthey, Wilhelm (1833–1911), German philosopher and historian of ideas. He taught at Basle, Kiel and Breslau and was Professor of Philosophy at Berlin (1882–1911). 151 Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, p. 62. 152 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, pp. 51–52.

110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124

106  Academic establishment and fame 153 Davis, Empiricism and History, p. 32. 154 A.W. Daum, ‘Wissenschaft and knowledge’, in: J. Sperber (ed.), Germany 1800– 1870 (Oxford, 2004), p. 150. 155 Roscher, Wilhelm Georg Friedrich (1817–94), German economist. 156 Acton, John Emerich Edward Dalberg (1834–1902), English historian, editor and politician. 157 Adams, Herbert Baxter (1850–1901), US historian and educator. 158 Adams, Charles Kendall (1835–1902), US historian. He reformed the study of history following the German model. 159 Burgess, John William (1844–1931), American political scientist. 160 Hirsch, Siegfried (1816–60), German historian. 161 Dönniges, Wilhelm von (1814–72), German historian and Bavarian diplomat. 162 Waitz, Georg (1813–86), German historian and politician. 163 Köpke, Rudolf (1813–70), German historian. 164 Osgood, Herbert Levi (1855–1918), American historian, especially of colonial American history. 165 Lieber, Francis (1800–72), US political scientist. He studied in Berlin but immigrated to the US for political reasons in 1827. 166 Bancroft, George (1800–91), US historian and politician. He established in universities a school using advanced European methods. 167 Baur, ‘Franz Leopold Ranke’, pp. 35–36. 168 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 523. Beck, Christian Daniel (1757–1832), German philologist, historian, theologian and antiquarian. 169 Lange, Adolph Gottlob (1778–1831), German philologist of classics and teacher. 170 Ibid, p. 523. 171 Ingrid Hecht, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Dissertation’ (2017), paper, p. 4. 172 Thomson, Historical writing, p. 183. 173 Wimmer, ‘Rankes Quellen’, p. 52. 174 Ibid. 175 Ibid. 176 Ibid. 177 Ibid. 178 Ibid. 179 Ibid. 180 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 433. 181 Ibid. 182 Ibid. 183 Ibid. 184 Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlaß – Tagebücher, vol. i, p. 241. 185 Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlaß – Über die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte, p. 445. 186 Ranke, Briefwerk, p. 156. 187 Letter of Ranke to his editor, 11 November 1868. In: Carl Geibel (ed.), Aus den Briefen Leopold von Ranke’s an seinen Verleger (1886), p. 10. 188 Leopold Ranke, Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780 bis 1790 (1871), p. viii. 189 Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reichs unter dem Sächsischen Hause (1837–40) [Books on the German Empire during the reign of the house of Saxony] [the introduction only was re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 51–52]. 190 Prescott, Wilhelm Hickling (1796–1859), American historian and Hispanist. 191 Letter of W.H. Prescott to Leopold Ranke, 20 May 1839, in: ‘Stars of my life’, last page. 192 The leaseholders were: 1. Johann Gottfried Petzoldt ∞ Friedericke, 2. Michael Petzoldt ∞ Berta, 3. Franz Petzoldt ∞ Berta, 4. Selmar Petzoldt ∞ Marie, 5. Martin Petzoldt ∞ Anneliese.

Academic establishment and fame 107 193 194 195 196

Interview with Mrs Anneliese Petzoldt, 7 August 2002. Toews, Becoming historical, p. 377. Laue, Leopold Ranke, p. 82. ‘De historiae et politices cognatione atque discrimine oratio’ (1836) [‘On the connection and differences of history and politics’] [German title is ‘Ueber die Verwandschaft und den Unterschied der Historie und der Politik’. Both published in: Ranke, Leopold von, Abhandlungen und Versuche, Erste Sammlung, Sämmtliche Werke, 24 (1877), pp. 269–279 (Latin), pp. 280–293 (German)]. 197 Leopold von Ranke, Abhandlungen und Versuche, Erste Sammlung, Sämmtliche Werke, 24 (1877), p. 288 (German). 198 Burke, Edmund (1730–97), Anglo-Irish statesman, author, orator, political theorist and philosopher. 199 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 28. 200 Ibid. 201 Ranke, Abhandlungen und Versuche (1877), p. 291 (German), p. 277 (Latin). 202 Hayden White, Metahistory: The historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe (Baltimore, 1975), p. 164. 203 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 552. 204 Hensel, Wilhelm (1794–1861), German painter and brother-in-law to Felix Mendelssohn. 205 Mendelssohn, Joseph (1770–1848), German Jewish banker, oldest son of philosopher Moses Mendelssohn and father of Felix Mendelssohn. 206 Mendelssohn, Georg Benjamin (1794–1874), German scholar, geographer and writer. 207 Letter of Joseph Mendelssohn to Georg Benjamin Mendelssohn, 25 April  1834, Staatsbibliothek, Preußischer Kulturbesitz Berlin, Mendelssohn-Archiv, Nachlaß 6, 1–2, 12. 208 Dünisch, ‘Ranke als “Berater der Könige” ’, p. 47. 209 Ibid, p. 48. 210 Ibid. 211 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 378. 212 Ibid, p. 379. 213 Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (1842–1847) [History of the Reformation in Germany (1845–1847)] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 1–6]. 214 Stromeyer, Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik, p. 55. 215 Ibid, pp. 55–56. 216 Ibid, p. 56. 217 Ibid, p. 57.

5 Ranke’s wedding and the first years of his marriage (1843–48)

The year 1843 was significant for Ranke because it was the year in which his whole life changed. Ranke intended to visit Paris in the spring of 1843 but visited the graves of his parents at Erfurt instead.1 He did not get to Paris until the summer of that year in order to research for necessary sources on Prussian history. Ranke has told us in his autobiography how, in view of the insufficiency of state papers at his disposal, he was obliged to give up his undertaking, and how at the same time, chance threw in his way a most valuable account of Prussian affairs in the eighteenth century. These were the letters of Valori, French ambassador at the court of Frederick the Great, which contained some very interesting information about the policies of the Prussian king.2 ‘With the permission of my friend Mignet3 the historian,’ said Ranke, ‘I took a copy of this, and provided with this valuable prize I returned to Berlin. . . . This was the beginning of my work Nine Books of Prussian History, in which I sought to explain how the Brandenburg Electorate had become a first-class power.’4 When his arrival in Paris was recorded in the local newspapers, Clarissa Graves read the notice and asked Professor Karl Lanz to arrange an introduction with Ranke.5 When and how the two met for the first time is not known because neither has left an account. The earliest document showing that the two had met is a letter from Caroline to James Graves on 15 August 1843: Mamma has met indeed with a serious accident, how sad to think, that the power of walking is taken away for the time being from one so active, but I bet she will soon be better. Clara and she are much delighted with the society of the famous Professor Ranke, ‘whom kings and queens delight to honour’. He reads English with and to them sometimes, and is montrocely [monstrously] agreeable.6 According to this letter Leopold and Clarissa met much earlier than previously believed. It can be suggested that they met around July or August 1843 because they knew each other well by the middle of August. In a letter to his brother Ferdinand, Leopold mentioned in July from Paris that ‘from the local acquaintances I cannot say much yet; but everything seems to go well and I hope to bring back something essential. [. . .] The hotel is quiet. I am happy to have escaped from the

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 109 trouble of the streets in the city centre.’7 The letter went on to indicate that Ranke met historians and librarians and that he might bring back copies of manuscripts. Nevertheless the ‘local acquaintances,’ about whom Leopold cannot say much, may indicate that he met other persons such as Clarissa. Two days later Ranke went on a trip to Honfleur, and that evening he wrote a note about this trip in his diary, concluding his thoughts with the sentence: ‘But during the whole day I had such a pain as if friendship and hope had departed.’8 Several days later he went on a trip to Le Havre and reported to Ferdinand, ‘A few days ago I made a pleasant trip to Havre with very nice company. In a small chapel near Honfleur, which you could search for on a map, and with a beautiful view over the sea, alone, I had pleasant moments.’9 Was this an indication that he was there with Clarissa, possibly getting to know each other? Ranke made several diary entries, and they indicate some of the places he had visited with Clarissa Graves. He mentioned that he walked with Clarissa in the Tuileries Gardens. On the same day, when Caroline wrote the first known note of the acquaintance with Leopold, the latter described in his diary several portraits at Versailles, and the descriptions were humorous and satirical.10 It was interesting anyway how for the autumn of 1843 numerous diary entries have survived, in particular on art history with detailed descriptions in Paris, Versailles and Hampton Court.11 Also the notes on contemporary history with comments on Paris, London and the English parliament are insightful.12 The fact that his diary notes were discontinued until 1847 is interesting, and I believe that these notes only survived due to romantic reasons: meeting his future wife. But who was Clarissa Graves? The origins of the Graves family in Ireland go back to 1649, when Colonel Graves of Mickleton in Gloucestershire commanded a regiment of horse in the army of Parliament that volunteered for service in Ireland in the same year.13 As a result of the Cromwellian Settlement, Colonel Graves acquired lands and, later, public office in Limerick.14 He was the founder of what was in effect an intellectual dynasty. Colonel Graves had two sons, both, unusually, named Richard. [Henry]15 Richard (1) settled in Waterford and his brother Richard (2) lived in Thomastown, Co. Kilkenny. Reverend James Graves (1815– 86), who was born in Kilkenny and was a distinguished antiquary, descended from the line of Richard (2).16 The line of [Henry] Richard (1) settled in Waterford, Limerick and Dublin. The family line continued through John Graves and James Graves (1710–83), to the brothers Thomas (1745–1828), dean of Connor, and Richard Graves (1763–1829), dean of Ardagh.17 Before being appointed to Ardagh, Richard Graves was a senior lecturer at Trinity College Dublin,18 and while there his most famous student, from 1793 to 1798, was Robert Emmet.19 After the rebellion of the United Irishmen in 1798 the investigation led also to students in Trinity College Dublin. Graves was questioned by the investigators in April 1798 and tried to defend Emmet, but nevertheless Emmet was forced to resign from college.20 Richard Graves had two sons. Richard Hastings Graves (1791–1877) was a theological writer and became rector of Brigown in the diocese of Cloyne.21 His brother, Dr Robert James Graves (1796– 1853) became a prominent doctor in Dublin and introduced new clinical methods to

110  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years the Meath Hospital and the Park Street School of Medicine, which he helped found. He was appointed professor in the Institute of Medicine in the Irish College of Physicians. He wrote essays and lectured on physiological topics, and he was president of the Irish College of Physicians in 1843 and 1844. Dr Graves died in 1853.22 Thomas Graves, dean of Connor, was the eldest son of Rev. James Graves. He was born in 1745 and educated in Kilkenny, and he became a scholar of Trinity College Dublin in 1763.23 Graves was a man of some literary accomplishments, and it was due to his mode of instruction that his brother’s success in college is largely owed. Thomas was the author of a Sermon before the Association for Discountenancing Vice, preached on 12 June 1800 and published in Dublin 1801. His sons broke with the ancestral traditions of becoming clergymen – three sons joined the army, and John Crosbie Graves remained in Dublin, working as a commissioner for the state.24 John Crosbie Graves was born in 1776 and was the second son of Thomas and Anne Graves. John studied at Trinity College Dublin between 1793 and 1795. During the holidays he stayed on the family property in Sackville (Ardfert, Co. Kerry), together with his sisters Arabella and Ann Catherine Graves. While Graves spent his time in the army, he lived with a woman with whom he had three illegitimate children.25 Nevertheless, Graves became a barrister in Dublin and lived until 1805 in Carrickfergus. The same year he moved to 17 Duke Street in Dublin and acquainted himself with Helena Perceval. In January 1806 they married, and shortly afterwards they moved to 11 Lower Merrion Street.26 Helena Graves came from the well-known Perceval family who had lived in Ireland for centuries. The family originated in Normandy. Ascelin Goval de Perceval, lord of Yvery and Breberal, defended the castle of Yvery on the NormandyBrittany border in 897. It was claimed that Robert Perceval came to England with William I as cup bearer and was made lord of Cary and Stanwell. It is also claimed that the first Perceval came to Ireland with his cousin Strongbow in 1170.27 During the reign of Elizabeth I, a Richard Perceval decoded an important message from Spain to the Netherlands and translated it into Spanish, Latin and English. Elizabeth I made him a secret agent and gave him a generous pension of ₤400. He was also given a large estate in the south of Ireland and was made her paymaster general. Due to a rebellion in Ireland that lasted three years, Perceval had to sell most of this land as the queen could not pay her troops. He became an MP for Richmond, and he and his son were successful land speculators in Ireland, during which time he built up a fortune for the later earls of Egmont (Perceval being the family name of the earls of Egmont). Richard Perceval is buried in Westminster Abbey.28 His grandson George Perceval married Mary Crofton of Temple House, thereby founding the Perceval line at Temple House, Co. Sligo.29 Because of the cachet associated with Helena Graves’ claim to royal descent from several medieval kings, including those of England (Edward I), Ireland (MacMurrough), France (Charlemagne and Henry I) and Scotland (David I), the Perceval name was widely adopted by the children.30 Helena Graves assisted her husband in his career and social position in Dublin, and shortly after their marriage, Lord Redesdale, who was Helena Graves’

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 111 patron, appointed John Crosbie Graves as Commissioner of Bankruptcy in 1806. Graves’ career prospered, and in 1821 he was appointed chief police magistrate for Dublin. Soon after the Graveses settled in Lower Merrion Street, they moved in 1810 to 13 Merrion Square and after 1814 to 12 Fitzwilliam Square, which became the permanent home of the Graves family.31 John and Helena had six children: John Thomas (1806–70), Clarissa Helena (1808–71), Robert Perceval (1810–93), James Perceval (1811–82), Charles (1812–99) and Caroline Frances Henrietta (1819–55). From various letters it was possible to establish that the children were sent away to different schools in England. In a letter to his father in January 1815, John described his arithmetical progress under Mr  Samuel Field in Westbury, England. The letter also included greetings to his aunt and uncle Perceval and mentioned a note that Clarissa will write soon.32 This indicates that both of them were sent away for primary education at the age of nine (John) and seven (Clarissa). Following the 1798 Rebellion, the British government decided to abolish the Irish parliament, concentrating parliamentary representation through legislative union in Westminster, but maintained Dublin Castle as the seat of government in Ireland. After the Union of 1801, the economy of Dublin began to decline. In a major shock to Dublin’s economy over the following 30 years, Belfast developed into the industrial capital of Ireland while Dublin was marked by influential intellectual development and increasing slum quarters. The Act of Union also had a major impact on Anglo-Irish society: not only did it destroy the atmosphere of the ‘Golden Age’ overnight, but the power shift into the hands of the Catholic majority also commenced at this time. Protestants could no longer speak for the Irish nation, and as the years went by, their position became more marginalized. In the years that brought Catholic Emancipation (1829) and the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland (1869), Protestants were increasingly seen as little more than members of a colonial garrison whose prerogative was loyalty to England. If the Union had seen the departure of many wealthy peers who retreated to England, other Protestants, most of them belonging to the middle classes, dominated commercial and professional life. Dublin squares glistened with the brass plates of doctors and attorneys, while the railway age opened up opportunities for new prosperity. But many of the possibilities of creating wealth were not open to those who saw themselves as aristocratic. They, in effect, denied their children the chance to join the professional classes, largely limiting their roles to the traditional pursuits of their class, the British armed forces or the declining Church of Ireland.33 This situation was reflected within the Graves family as well. John Crosbie Graves mentioned the disastrous economic situation of Ireland several times in his letters. In 1816 he noted, for example, the economic problems in England and its unavoidable effects in Ireland, such as the downfall of linen manufacturing and the crash of the Nenagh Bank.34 Contact by letter was important within the Graves family, and some 3,500 letters still survive. If a member did not write for a long time, others in the close-knit family got either concerned or angry.35 The first known letter of Clarissa Graves, dated 1817, gave an account of her health and was accompanied by what was

112  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years probably a Christmas present, an indication, in its own way, that the family spent long periods separated from each other.36 But Clarissa did not stay for long in Westbury. In the summer of 1818 she was sent to Sclessin, near Liège, in Belgium, to learn French at the age of ten. In a letter to John she described the site of the battlefield of Waterloo. Another letter to her parents gave a good insight of education there: My dear Papa I am ashamed, that this is the first time I have written to you, since I have been at Sclessin, but I hope to be more attentive for the future. – About a week past the Emperor of Russia, and King of Prussia passed, we watched for them above three, or four hours, before the Emperor came; he was a very fine Man, but I  cannot say so of his Carriage, and horses, as they were covered with dust – being just returned from a journey, he is daily expected at Liege from Maestrickt, perhaps we shall have another opportunity of seeing him. – The next concert we are going to have will be in the course of a fortnight, when I am to play. The Dancing Master came for the first time about three weeks ago, he now attends us twice a week, a French, and Drawing Master likewise. – I understand perfectly what they all say – we have got a new French Governess whose name is Mademoiselle Caroline, I like her much better than Miss Charlotte who was there before. – Though I do not deserve it dear Papa when you have time, will you have the kindness to answer my letter. – [. . .] [My] dear Mamma I hope your next letter will inform me that your health is better, than it was when you last wrote: the weather here has been beautiful for a long time, but I was sorry to hear it rained in Ireland, as bad weather always disagrees with you. – As I wish much to write to my Aunt Caroline next month, I will if I am permitted, send you a few lines in French of my own composing, my kind love to my dear Brothers, and Aunt Caroline. – 37 The letter revealed that Clarissa was educated in French, music, dancing and drawing. Around this time the final contract and regulations for the Congress of Vienna was signed at Aachen by the Tsar of Russia, the Prussian king and the Austrian emperor. Even if Clarissa had not been an eyewitness at the time of Napoleon on the continent, she witnessed at ten years of age the final touches being applied to the restoration process that was to underpin political order in Europe until 1848.

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  113 Shortly after becoming chief police magistrate for Dublin, John Crosbie Graves reported to Lord Wellesley in February 1822 about the Irish situation. The problems with the tithe system were emphasized and disturbances mentioned in the South and West of Ireland. Graves stressed three reasons why the lives of Irish families were difficult: the increase of population, ‘particularly in [the] very low class of society,’ the rise in rents and the division of land made the survival of people more and more difficult. He stressed also that republican fanatics might return and that he had to watch the smallest speech of political interest, as a danger of a fresh rebellion lay in the air.38 Thomas Graves, Dean of Connor and father of John Crosbie Graves, died late in 1828. He had retired in his late years and lived in Cove Cottage, Kinsale, together with his sisters Ann Catherine and Arabella.39 Manuscripts from Trinity College Dublin show that Thomas was a benevolent landlord who helped his poorer tenants. Over the years he incurred several debts,40 and only three months after his death in 1828, Cove Cottage was sold to pay the ₤4,000 owing to creditors.41 His sisters were forced to move out. Ann Catherine went to England; Arabella lived in different places in Ireland and ended up in an asylum in Mitchelstown. This contrasts with the previous affluent lifestyle of the Graves family. Despite having highly paid jobs and enjoying titles and positions such as that of professor, reverend or Crown Solicitor of Ireland, the financial difficulties of the family were not alleviated. In later years further properties, like Sackville in 1845, were lost.42 Ann Catherine Graves, called Aunt Annie, had a close relationship with Clarissa. Clarissa had been heavily influenced by her aunt’s perception of life and her deeply religious nature. Some of Clarissa’s personal traits were probably influenced by her aunt. She was friendly and helpful to those less fortunate than herself, regardless of their religion. This combination of prayer and close connection to God surfaces later in Clarissa’s response to her debilitating disease. Of what is known of Clarissa at that time is that she would have been mediumsized, dainty and delicate, had fine red-blonde hair and a refined touch of sensibility. As a child she read, played music and sang.43 In her teens she developed an interest in poetry, and her own later poetry was significantly influenced by William Wordsworth.44 Soon after becoming a dean, Robert Graves moved to Bowness in Westmoreland, England, where he met Wordsworth, Robert Southey,45 Samuel Taylor Coleridge46 and other members of the Lake School of Poets. Robert, who also had a close friendship with Hamilton,47 explored the realms of Wordsworth’s poetry and philosophy and defended him against the charge of pantheism, concluding that ‘you are like many of you going soon to the country. His poems, if you study them aright, will help you, better than a novel, to receive all its best influences. Take your WORDSWORTH with you.’48 Clarissa discussed poetry analytically during the 1830s and was able to identify stylistic influences in the works of other poets such as Byron.49 The father never really recovered from his illness and died the following year. This was one of the major events in Clarissa’s personal life. In her sonnet ‘The loss I had in my Father’s death,’ she lamented not only the death of her father and friend, but also the loss of the innocence and untrammelled gaiety of youth, which

114  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years he symbolized.50 In the following years, while Clarissa’s brothers continued their careers in Dublin or in England, Clarissa joined her mother, Helena, on trips abroad. A very deep friendship was kindled in these years between Charles and Robert Graves and Hamilton, and several letters show that their relationship was not only based on a discussion of mathematics but of history and poetry as well.51 Helena Graves travelled through Europe again. In previous years she had made several trips to England, France and Germany, where she met many famous people, the most renowned of whom was probably Ludwig van Beethoven.52 In her commonplace book, the first notes begin in 1818, mentioning excerpts of personal letters of Beethoven to Bettina von Arnim. Further on, various compositions were mentioned, especially ‘La ci darem la mano’ from Mozart’s53 Don Giovanni, evidently a favourite, as well as further details of Beethoven’s life together with comments on his works and his opinion that Mozart’s Zauberflöte was the best opera.54 Helena Graves had a close relationship to Beethoven. She had been on cure during the summer of 1818 and met Beethoven on her trips. When exactly they met, we don’t know, but it can be reconstructed that they met in the months of June and July 1818. It is the same period in which the famous letter of Beethoven to his ‘immortal beloved’ on 6 and 7 July was written. At this stage Helena was of an advanced age, had children and was, due to her family background, well educated; this is exactly the type of the usual lovers of Beethoven. Helena was not the only one of the family to like his music as Clarissa displayed a fondness for it as well. There is a strong possibility that Helena Graves had an affair with Beethoven, as she became pregnant soon after. Strangely enough, she lived during her pregnancy with her patron, Stephen Rolleston, and not in Dublin. Also, John Crosbie Graves mentioned the newborn the first time when he wrote to his sister in June 1819, but only in a few brief words at the end of the letters. Caroline Henrietta Graves had not been accepted as a member of the family from the male side of the Graves family, possibly because she was a child out of wedlock, and is usually left out of the family history. According to her letters, Caroline began to suffer a serious illness in the early 1830s.55 In later letters, especially between 1839 and 1842, her condition is described as being very poor, with references to her losing her mind, becoming angry and shouting and spending sleepless nights56 with ‘violent explosions of anger.’57 Then there were times when Caroline felt better again and was visited by Clarissa.58 At those times, Caroline felt like a foolish girl, and she hoped to get better in body and mind ‘till I can learn to think and act for myself, which is very difficult.’59 In most of Caroline’s letters it is difficult to decipher and make sense of her sentences and, therefore, of her thoughts. From these symptoms it can be suggested that Caroline might have had bipolar disorder. Her sentences are usually quite accelerated and pressured and can be regarded as cognitive symptoms. She changed topics in mid-sentence or used irrelevant and idiosyncratic phrases. Although much of what she wrote was understandable to others, the accelerated and disjointed nature of her speech made it difficult to follow her train of thought, and she sometimes seemed distracted by new and more exciting thoughts and ideas. Sometimes she seemed to be ‘high’ in mood and overactive in behaviour, and her judgement was poor.

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 115 In the more severe form of mania, the person is wildly excited, rants, raves (the stereotype of a wild ‘maniac’) and is constantly agitated and on the move. These symptoms aptly describe Caroline’s behaviour. Hallucinations and delusions may appear as a history of sleeplessness for long periods. Because some individuals may be uncontrollable and be frequently dangerous to themselves or to others, physical restraint and medication are often necessary.60 This was one of the reasons why physicians had to look after Caroline. Germany had been the world leader in psychiatry during the nineteenth century, but England in comparison lagged behind.61 Caroline was treated by Dr  Nasse,62 whose daughter Theoda (Oda) married Ranke’s brother Ernst in 1842, and lived in Bonn for three and a half years from 1839. Nevertheless, Caroline remained the favourite of the family and was especially looked after by Clarissa and her mother, Helena. In the 1830s Clarissa met several people who came to fame in later years, such as Florence Nightingale.63 She met William Wordsworth and was also in contact with his wife, Dora, to whom some letters have survived.64 After the death of her father, Clarissa accompanied her mother on several trips throughout Europe after 1836. Through a number of letters it can be reconstructed that Helen Graves and her children Charles, Robert and Clarissa went on a trip through Germany and Austria in the summer of 1839 and visited the towns of Innsbruck, Munich and Wiesbaden.65 During the summer of 1840 John travelled with his mother and sister Clarissa through Belgium, Holland, France and Germany. His mother intended to stay for the winter in Germany and she had thought to go to Munich, but it had been suggested to go to Wiesbaden, Heidelberg or Vienna.66 Over the coming year, Clarissa and her mother travelled through western Germany, using Bonn as a central base city because it enabled her to visit Caroline. In the summer of 1842 Clarissa and her mother travelled to Italy and spent a long time in Rome. It was there Clarissa met the Danish sculptor Bertel Thorvaldsen67 and the language specialist Guiseppe Mezzofanti,68 who was fluent in 70 languages.69 However, the most important meeting she and her mother had was with Pope Gregory XVI,70 when they attended an audience with him. Clarissa claimed afterwards that it was because the pope wished to meet descendants from the distinguished house of Ivery! So, when Clarissa met Ranke, it seemed in August  1843 that both were impressed with each other: Ranke with the very bright personality of Clarissa, she with his work and ideas. They had several similar interests. Both shared a religious tradition in the family. Both fathers broke this tradition, and both had two brothers who became vicars, continuing the family clerical tradition. Both were highly educated in languages and arts and shared a great interest in literature. From the beginning both discussed books, as Caroline had described. Other shared interests were travel and a similar sense of humour. But most importantly, both shared the same feelings about Europe. This feeling can be best described as a ‘shared European cultural identity,’ which continued throughout their lives. Having so many similarities, the age difference and Clarissa’s higher social status became irrelevant.71 In the middle of August  1843 Ranke planned to travel to London, not only to do archival research but also to observe the queen’s speech at the opening of

116  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years parliament on 25 or 26 August. But he had in his heart already deep feelings for Clarissa, and on 17 August he wrote his first English letter to Clarissa Graves: My dearest Schoolmistress, The first english letter, I ever wrote, is meritoriously directed to you; – it will be one weak in grammar a[nd] style, – a half-english letter, – but not empty of some substancial [sic] news. Hear! [. . .] I think to arrive at Bologne the 23; I have already taken my place at the mailp[ost] for the 22nd. Whilst I am very glad, to see you sooner, than we supposed, I must subjoin, that I do not hope, to be attended by your goodness in the to further journey; a[nd] I know not, if it will [be] possible, to remain so long, as I wish, at Bologne; the next steamboat will carry away (perhaps) your old pupil; most probably you shall not be ready to go on with him. But I count confidently, that, you shall follow the soonest possible, take your lodging in the proxonity [sic] of Carltonhouse, a[nd] continue your most agreeable school on the other side of the channel. [. . .] These lines are directed also to you. My soul desires to hear a chapter of the h[oly] bible from your mouth. Thousand thanks for your kind letters.72 This letter not only shows the devotion of Ranke towards Clarissa but also that he wished her to follow him from France to London, and that after her arrival she could stay close to where he was staying.73 The form of addressing Clarissa as schoolmistress had caused confusion, but because Clarissa founded a school in Bowness in 1838,74 it actually shows that they had already exchanged several intimate personal details. Also Clarissa’s letters, mentioned at the end of Ranke’s letter, and his remark that his soul desired a reading from her mouth indicated that the two of them were already very close. Karl von Bunsen, Prussian ambassador to the Court of St James throughout the 1840s and early 1850s, fitted the common stereotype of the Prussian who served in that post. He loved England perhaps as much as his own country. He gained a reputation for assisting Germans in London, mostly those who shared his own interest in history, and he did much to facilitate research by German historians of England.75 The person who profited most from this was Leopold Ranke. He made a few entries in his diary during his stay commenting on his general impression of England, and they show that he was largely reserved towards the English. One entry referred to Ireland as well: All the great states are falling into economic regression. The greatest economic power rests in England, but it is countered by an undeveloped Irish element, where it can only fight against its purely [?] religious and democratic activities with ‘convictional methods’. [. . .] This much is sure: the government has become unable to govern the country.76 In letters to Clarissa, Ranke described what he had seen in London – Westminster, the National Gallery, the British Museum, the Tower, the tunnel and the docks.77 The ‘tunnel’ was the first underwater tunnel in the world. Building commenced

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 117 shortly after 1800, but it took nearly 40 years to finish the ‘Thames Tunnel,’ which could only be used as a footpath in the beginning. In the 1860s it was converted into a railway tunnel for the East London Railway. It was opened only a few months before Leopold arrived in London, and the legend of its length of construction and death rate were well known.78 But Ranke did not have to wait for very long. Clarissa followed with her mother to London, and several notes in his diary about London and England relate to that time, when they discussed the poetry of Wordsworth, Byron79 and Pope80 on the one hand and politics and art on the other.81 Nobody in Germany at this time knew about Ranke’s relationship with Clarissa. On 1 October 1843,82 he and Clarissa were engaged, and it seemed – according to his letters – that everything was going well.83 In a letter written to Ranke from John Graves, there appeared, however, to be a slight complication: Graves doubted Ranke’s commitment and, for a time, attempted to break up the relationship. The day after the engagement, however, Graves apologized to him for his behaviour: My dear Sir. I cannot refrain from telling you that the prospect of your union with my sister Clara fills me with emotions of the liveliest pleasure; although, from my recent conduct, you may have supposed me desireous [sic] of backing off the connexion [connection]. The truth is that I feel for her a very warm affection, and that, from the beginning, I entertained an admiration of your masterly and comprehensive intellects to which longer acquaintance has added high respect for your character and personal regard. That your intentions were serious and honourable was my firm conviction, but it appeared to me that these were obstacles which occasioned a thug [tug] in your mind. At length, inferring from various circumstances that you deemed those obstacles insurmountable, I thought that my sister’s intimacy with you was too close to be continued without injury to her peace of mind. This was the sole motive which determined me, if I could to break off the connexion [connection]. If, in my efforts to accomplish this object, I have done anything that seemed calculated in the least degree to offend you or give you pain, it is my earnest wish that you would now consider it as undone or retracted. I now rejoice most sincerely that the connexion [connection] is with God’s blessing, to become more intimate. The result proves to me that my original observation of your intentions led me to a correct view, and that you formed your happiness too dependent on Clara’s friendship and affection to admit of your suffering a separation from her that should be abrupt and complete. You have won a lady, who is, I firmly believe, well fitted by her virtues, her amiable qualities, and her mental endowments, to make your home peaceful, cheerful, and happy. For my own part, I should be proud and delighted to be honoured with a continuance of your intimacy. And request that you believe me to remain, ever, my dear Sir, with undiminished esteem and regard, Yours very faithfully, John T. Graves.84

118  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years The news of the engagement spread around Clarissa’s friends and relatives, but Ranke did not write a single word indicating that he would marry within the next few weeks. Evidence of the spreading news is found in a number of letters to Clarissa. Her brother Robert received the news on 3 October.85 William Perceval Graves congratulated Clarissa on 9 October and mentioned that, with Ranke, she may have found someone with the intelligence and wisdom that equalled her own high standards.86 Alfred A. Perceval wrote to Clarissa on 12 October and mentioned that the wedding should be good, as Germans were described as being good.87 A good friend of Clarissa was very much delighted when she heard of the news of Clarissa’s engagement with Ranke, even in the knowledge that Clarissa would be leaving England to return with him to Berlin. In her letter from 6 October she wrote: My own dear Claïrchen (now indeed, more Clairichen than ever) I know not when I have been so gladdened as by the delightful news you have communicated, and which I thank you a thousand times for imparting to me so promptly, with such a loving trust in my heart and joyful congratulations. I do think, my dear friend, that if I had been a Fairy, and allowed to endow you with all earthly happiness the lot which now lies before you, would have been the very one I would have chosen for you – for you, with your loving, charming nature to have a partner whom you can ‘honour’ so entirely that it will be a delight to ‘obey’ him, and of whose selection you have such reason to be proud. [. . .] How singular it is, that my sister, no less than myself, always thought you had so much about you of the Deutschen Mädchen and that all our pet names for you have been German ones! Depend upon it, all this has been arranged long, long ago, and your late semi naturalisation has been the forerunner of your being transplanted to another.88 On 10 October Clarissa went back to Bowness to sort her belongings and to await the arrival of Ranke.89 Her mother remained with him in London. Nevertheless, both of them stayed in contact, writing letters to each other. From these letters only one has survived: Dear Clara. Do you know, where I read your first letter from the lakes? Not surrounded, you believe, by the newspapers of the Atheneum club – nor midst the German friends at Carlton-house-terrace – nor even, to be sure, in the small study-room, too replete by books and writings of a different kind. I read your letter in Kensingtongardens [sic] under one of the lofty proud trees we admired here together: in pure air and not too powerful sunshine of an October afternoon [sic]; alone with myself and you. You see, my walking and writing proves it, that the fruit of the witch not had killed your friend. You will see him again within a few days in the, perhaps doubtful, reality he possesses.

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 119 I wish with all my heart that it may be Sunday next: though I fear, that your mother, who is very kind and busy in our little affairs, finds difficulties in so early a day. She will write you; I am content, whatever you may determine. The most probable is, that we will arrive Tuesday midday; surely no later; it is very necessary, that we sail from Hull Saturday following. They assure me, that we can hope after the equinoctial storms, which are over, a tolerably quiet sea. Generally, sweet Clara, I flatter myself with the prospect of quietness and a peaceful love, as that of your brother Robert. Reading your letter, I feel again all the confidence you have impressed into my heart, which, I think, will be steady and rather increasing as yours for me.90 Meanwhile preparations for the marriage and the imminent move to Germany were planned. Clarissa’s mother was very busy, but Ranke ran away from the places he usually frequented in order to read and answer Clarissa’s letters in absolute peace. This letter also gave an insight into the kind of places Ranke visited in London in 1843, not only to the Carlton Terrace house of Karl von Bunsen91 and the British Museum, but also the to Athenaeum club, which was a literary club with a large scientific library and which encouraged well-known academics to join during their stay in London. While still researching the archives, Ranke collected materials, and some of them were published just a year later in the article ‘Über den Ausbruch des siebenjährigen Krieges. Aus Mitchell’s ungedruckten Memoiren.’92 In this article, which was written in 1843 and published in 1844, Ranke used one particular source. Schmidt, the editor of the journal, wrote a short introduction in relation to the Seven Years’ War, which was followed by the primary source text provided by Ranke. At first a German translation was provided, which was followed by the English original. The manuscript itself was taken from the Mitchell papers, vol. 67, British Museum, London. The article represented a pure source reproduction and stood in connection to Ranke’s History of Prussia, which was published a few years later. The manuscript was copied during Ranke’s trip to London in 1843 shortly before he got married to Clarissa Graves. Nobody back in Berlin expected a Ranke wedding. It was actually his brother Ferdinand to whom Ranke wrote first on 19 October: Something else has happened which you will not expect. I will bring back something else other than books and manuscripts. I will not come back alone. I am ashamed that the old confined bachelor has now come to an end. If you see it with human eyes it is nothing other than as follows. I will bring back an English, or rather an Irish-girl friend. Excuse me from describing the story! You will see [my wife], and you will certainly accept my choice. You are the first man to whom I tell of this.93 In the very same letter Ranke asked his brother if he could request the landlord to clean several rooms above his own apartment and to make them available, as Clarissa would use them. He also asked for a servant.94

120  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years Two days before Ranke left London together with Mrs Graves, he made a note in his diary about the picture collection at Hampton Court, where he viewed the Raphael cartoons once more.95 On 24 October he went to Bowness.96 On the day of his arrival in Bowness he did not see much of Clarissa because several documents, including the marriage agreement and indenture, had to be written and signed on that day. Clarissa would get the lands of Ballymuddy in the Barony of Coshmore and Coshbridge in Co. Waterford as her dowry, and Ranke would receive a sum of ₤2,000.97 On the following day, Wednesday, 25 October, Robert Graves, curate of Windermere, took Ranke for a trip to Rydale and Hawkshead and in the evening a great party took place.98 The following day was frosty and fine. On 26 October 1843, Ranke married Helena Clarissa Graves (later also known as Clara/Klara Ranke) in the parish of Windermere in Westmoreland. Robert married them according to the rites and tradition of the Church of England. After the marriage the whole group had breakfast at the parsonage.99 On the same day the newly married couple returned to Berlin, where they were welcomed by ‘surprised Berliners.’100 A day after his return to Luisenstraße 16, Ranke wrote letters to his brothers informing them of his marriage. To his very surprised brother Heinrich he wrote on 4 November: And how did I come back again? One word describes it – ‘married’. The splendid confirmed bachelor, your oldest brother got married. I  married in the small village chapel of Windermere in Westmoreland on Thursday, 26 October. And how shall I describe her to you? Her name is Clara. Her father was a barrister in Dublin named Graves. Her mother comes from the house of Perceval, one of the oldest in Ireland. Her brothers call themselves Perceval-Graves. I got to know her in Paris. Along with her mother she followed me to London. There, on the 1 October, if you so wish to describe it I got engaged to her. Oda101 knows her. For some time she was in Bonn helping a sister who was staying with [Professor] Nasse. She says that she was at that time very shy and would not have given forth the best impression of herself. [. . .] And so I was married in one of the most beautiful regions of England, surrounded by mountains and lakes reflecting the sun, by her brother who is a priest in Bowness.102 On the very same day Ranke reported his marriage to his brother Ernst, mentioning that Clarissa had witnessed the marriage of Ernst and Oda Ranke: While you married in Bonn, two young English ladies, wishing to witness a German wedding, were present but went unnoticed by you as the Pastor Wichelhaus blessed yourself and Oda [on 16 September 1842]. One of these, the youngest, Caroline Graves, had just recovered from a serious illness in

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 121 the house of your father-in-law. The other one, several years older, was Clara Graves, who came over to take care of her.103 Ranke continued that he would tell Ernst about the first meeting in detail and he could write a poem about it, but it is not known if this poem exists. In another letter to Ernst in January 1844 he mentioned how Clarissa heard of him for the first time. Although your wife will discover much of what she wanted to know from the enclosed English letter of my wife, she will not learn everything. For example, she will not learn that it was in Rome where Clara first heard of my name. She remembers by chance seeing it in a newspaper wherein my arrival was mentioned. She asked a visiting German professor [Karl Lanz] about me.104 A journal in London published a short notice written by the historian Johann Wilhelm Zinkeisen,105 editor of the Preußische Staatsanzeiger: The scientific community of London has been honoured by the visit of Professor Ranke from Berlin. By surprise and even without considering it, that our distinguished guest would have left the State Papers Office, we read in the Times the announcement of his marriage at the shores of the romantic lake of Cumberland. No soul, even at the Prussian delegation, had the slightest idea about such sudden decision. And as far as we know Mrs Professor Ranke is the sister of Prof. Graves at the London University and part of a large family from the north of England. For the moment my best congratulations which I will renew in the coming days personally. Dr. J.W. Zinkeisen.106 The news of Ranke’s marriage quickly spread throughout Berlin. Most people in Berlin, including the royal family, were surprised ‘as everyone had been convinced that he would live and die a Bachelor.’107 Baur found the following quote through the Berlin Grimm-Society: ‘[Ranke explained] Do you know what? I have married and have brought back a wife, and then everybody answered, that could not be true. And the Savigny: History is your wife. [. . .] And now everybody was excited to see the foreign bird.’108 By the end of 1843 everybody knew about the marriage, although Wilhelm Ranke, a brother of Leopold had most problems with, was the last one within the family to know about it. During the first years of their marriage, Ranke remained at home quite a lot and during the remainder of the 1840s he barely travelled. It is reported that the newly married couple read and discussed books, politics and current events. Clarissa followed all kinds of development in the arts and sciences, and she loved nature as much as Ranke. With her knowledge of languages, old as well as current, she was able to read with him several passages from the original texts. One example is the book ‘Tobi’ or ‘Tobit,’ an original Greek text, probably dating back to the second century BC. At first it was read in Greek, then in Latin, and after that Ranke and

122  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years Clarissa discussed the text, identifying Islamic and Jewish elements, coming to the conclusion that the text itself was ‘original’ and very poetic.109 Many years later Ranke wrote to his son Otto that he and his wife had had a plan: In the beginning of our marriage your mother and I had the idea [to travel to the Orient]. We probably would have done it, had we stayed alone and especially if your mother remained healthier. I wanted to write then of the life of Jesus with local colours; without fantasies, which try to create the unbelievable as a poetical religious truth.110 Just back in Berlin by 11 days, on 14 November 1843, Ranke received a message from the king asking him to write a report in how far the political will of Frederick II the Great should be published or kept secret for the future. For this Ranke was given several original documents immediately, and within days he had to return them with his report. Without hesitation and without permission, both Ranke and Clarissa copied all these secret political wills. This was a huge issue as the documents dealt with the political situation of the Prussian state as a major power!111 As Baur noted, Ranke suggested in his report112 against a publication. Some of these copies have wax dots which indicate the work at night, with candlelight. Afterwards Clarissa bound them into small booklets with red thread.113 This type of work, in which both of them copied files in several towns and archives, created over time a large collection: from Berlin and Karlsruhe, Brussels, London, Paris or The Hague; no matter which language they were written in (Italian, German, French, English or Spanish), the documents generally dealt with papal history, Prussian history, history of Louis XIV or the English civil war.114 Ranke’s fame rose, and in May 1844 the theological faculty of Marburg University awarded him an honorary degree.115 In November 1844 Ranke mentioned in a letter to Heinrich that he and Clarissa read and discussed Friedrich Rückert’s116 book Saul und David. Ein Drama der heiligen Geschichte (1843), especially in the context of the death sentence by the king on Tschech,117 on whom Ranke commented extensively in his diary.118 In the same letter he wrote: But you do not have to think that we always deal with serious matters. Mainly we read English; sometimes a poet, other times a new novel, where Clara reads the story first and reads aloud the strangest and important parts to me. So most of my evenings I stay quietly at home, where once I went to different societies staying until midnight, like Faust, while the wine and conversation lasted.119 One of the most-read poets in Ranke’s home was Wordsworth. It has been suggested that he disliked Wordsworth, but in a letter from October 1846, Clarissa mentioned that Theremin, a vicar in Berlin, had a deep discussion with the couple about poetry and that Ranke tried to convince him to translate the work of Wordsworth.120 Clarissa wrote that ‘he was the only German I have met who admired and understood Wordsworth’s poems. Leopold encouraged him to translate them

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  123 or rather to render them into German because they both agreed that they were not calculated for literal translation.’121 The letter shows that Clarissa had been in contact with Professor Richter, professor of poetry at the University of Berlin, and that they had had a long discussion. She promised to lend him a copy of Wordsworth’s poems. Clarissa was already writing several poems during this time. In the same letter it is mentioned that Clarissa played piano, mainly Beethoven as well as Christoph Willibald Gluck’s Overture to ‘Iphigenia in Aulis,’ stressing that Gluck122 was Ranke’s favourite composer and that she tried to play his choice in music. This letter also provides an insight into his taste in painting, because it seemed that he wished to decorate his home. Clarissa asked Robert if he could get in contact with Henry Graves and ask him about the price of a set of engravings of Raphael’s cartoons, first published in 1816 by Halloway, R. Stann and T.S. Webb, and that Ranke intended to buy them as a present for Clarissa.123 At the same time, Clarissa read Carlyle’s124 Frederick the Great and Robertson’s Sermons.125 In August  1846 Clarissa received a letter from Mrs Bardeleben,126 who advised her to commission Mr Vogelstein for a painting: ‘Let him show you the bench, it will give you an agreeable hour, and if you can persuade your dear husband, to sit for half an hour, I am sure Mr Vogelstein will be happy to paint this really distinguished company.’127 Ranke gave special presents to his wife on her birthdays. In 1844 he gave her a new dress, a cookbook and a painting of the Madonna.128 At another birthday he took Clarissa out for a walk in the botanic gardens129 because he knew that nature in bloom and the experience of smell and colour would make Clarissa happier. It was reported that both of them walked several times a week in the Tiergarten and along Unter den Linden. Life did not remain quiet in Ranke’s house. In a letter to Ernst, Wilhelm thought that Ranke would never have a chance of having children,130 yet in April 1844 he indicated that Clarissa was pregnant.131 On Monday, 12 August 1844, at around eleven o’clock in the morning, their first son was born. It was on the feast day of Clarissa (Klaratag). Ranke told his son Otto in his later years: ‘You were born just at the right time. At 12.15 pm I had class in the university and you arrived around one hour before, time enough to welcome you and congratulate your mother, before I had to leave for class.’132 In Otto von Ranke’s memoirs, he could not remember if his parents published the birth of their first son in a Berlin newspaper. However, in The Times in London a note was published in late August 1844: ‘At Berlin, on the 12th inst, the lady of Leopold Ranke, Professor in the University of Berlin, of a son and heir.’133 This was mentioned in a letter from Helen Graves to her son Robert that Ranke wrote to her on the seventeenth and that she ‘must keep Ranke’s original [letter] to show John when I see him the end of the week.’134 Probably following that note of Ranke’s, either Helen Graves or one of her sons, Robert or John, sent a notice to The Times. Again, Ranke notified his brothers a little bit later than his Irish relatives; the first notice was written on 20 August to his brother Heinrich.135 Even if there was no notice in a local newspaper, Ranke

124  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years evidently was proud of the English advertisement because he liked to refer to the phrase ‘son and heir,’ which was not common in German. For example, when a son was born to the crown prince of Bavaria in 1845, Ranke referred in his congratulatory note to that English expression: ‘I do not need to hide from your Majesty my happiness of the news, that to your Majesty, as the English say, a son and heir was born.’136 Leopold and Clarissa were happy and content with the birth. A very good impression struck Starriett M. Owen – a close friend of Clarissa’s – who happened to visit the Rankes a few weeks before Otto’s birth and travelled in August along the Rhine, returning back to Rhylton in November 1844. Among the letters awaiting her was one from Ranke: The Professor’s announcement of the happy event is indeed, most interesting and original. I can quite understand his distinction between ‘big and great’, one being meant for fat and the other tall, which in German he would probably have expressed by ‘dicker’ and ‘grosser’ [sic]. By this, I trust you have heard from Clara herself, with many more particulars of her little treasure, in the possession of which she is, no doubt, too happy to regret for a moment its not being a little girl, which she told me she should herself prefer.137 The fact that Clarissa preferred a girl is interesting. Maybe because of her situation, coming from a family dominated by boys, Clarissa preferred a daughter – whereas a son clearly was the preference of Ranke in order to secure an heir for his own family. He was very happy with the birth of his first child and was ultimately unperturbed as to whether it was a boy or a girl. He wrote to his brother Heinrich on 20 August 1844: For the first time I write to you as a father, of which as somebody told me lately, there is no greater honour, and which you have already. Last week Clara gave birth to a boy. It was her feast day: she thought the pain she had was not as bad as she expected and she feels quite well. The boy is strong and large: his face is not without character: I only wish that he will become someone [significant]. I do not want to tell you, what I have seen and learnt: You know it already: I have never been so close to the first entrance of a human being into this world. Although helpless, the vibrant infant, fully alive with capabilities of brain and character has made a huge impression on me; it is a wonder, both of God and nature. Above all I believe, that a new obligation has begun for me.138 In September Robert wrote a congratulatory note to Clarissa: I congratulate you most heartily, my dear Clara, on the mercy you have received in being so happily made a mother and join with you most sincerely a thankfulness to God for it. When I remember the pleasure & intent you

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 125 always took in all children, I can imagine you so finally happy in one of your own especially when you have its Father’s joy to add to your own. To him also give my heartfelt felicitations may his first born leave a worthy heir of the distinction he will hand down to him & be to him & you a life long joy & comfort.139 Naming the first son seemed to have been something of a problem. Robert Graves for example preferred Lovel Perceval, ‘the oldest Perceval name on record.’140 In a different letter by Helen Graves it was mentioned that Clarissa intended the name Reinhold.141 But the final decision was made by the parents and on 1 October 1844, the boy was baptized as Otto Karl Egmont. The reason for this name was given by Ranke in a letter to Heinrich: The last name we gave him, as the head of the English family has this title; it is in old German Agimund. Karl is his name, as both of his Godfathers, Minister von Savigny and our brother [Carl Ferdinand Ranke], as different they are, but in the name they are the same; Otto in honour of the Saxon Emperors and of our Memleben-Wiehe valley.142 Before Otto’s birth, Ranke’s old flat proved too small, and it was decided to move into a bigger apartment. At the end of 1844 the Rankes moved from Luisenstraße 16 to Luisenstraße 24a, where the family resided until Ranke’s death in 1886.143 During these months Helena Graves sent Clarissa a memorandum which contained a list of furniture for the nursery and a list of food proper for infants, as well as a list of baby-care tips, things in a press in her room and a nurse’s list. Further on it contained different recipes and knitting instructions for different things.144 Clarissa’s mother sent her daughter a number of children’s books, for example Mrs Barbauld’s Lessons for Children (new ed., 1841).145 It was around this time that Clarissa composed a poem called ‘To Otto’s Father’: To Otto’s Father The little Otto cannot speak, But take him on thy knee – And then his smile and dimpling cheek Will tell his love for thee. Small now the pleasure that he gives Like an unfolded flower, But if thy head of promise lives Beyond the matin hour. Oh may cause his Father joy And well repay his case By finding in his little boy To his bright mind, the heir.146

126  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years In one of his letters Ranke mentioned at this time that his marriage did not harm his professional work, and as proof of that, he had just published a new reprint of his book on Serbian history.147 Ranke’s salary was not enough to cover the expenses incurred by marriage and the arrival of his first child. In a letter to Friedrich Eichhorn, the Prussian minister for culture, in September 1845 Ranke asked for a higher salary, mentioning that he had never asked for funding for his scientific travels between 1833 and 1843 and that he did not intend to take money which did not belong to him.148 In 1846 a daughter was born. Both parents developed a deeper and much more personal relationship with her than with their other children. Ranke several times recalled in a joke that the girl ‘jumped’ out of the fire horn, as during her birth a large fire broke out in the neighbourhood and the fire brigade drove with a loud fire horn to the fire.149 Karl Immanuel Nitzsch150 noted the baptism a few days after the event: Yesterday I went to a baptism at Professor Ranke [his home], the historian. I have never seen so many famous people together in one room. Godfathers were: The Crown Prince of Bavaria, Schelling and Jakob Grimm; then there were Tieck,151 Ritter,152 Lachmann,153 Jacoby,154 Theremin, Hollweg and other men of similar position.155 The presence of the crown prince as a godfather was most unusual. The Rankes had agreed on the baptism day, the priest Theremin took over the ceremony and a large number of well-known intellectual figures had been invited. Unexpectedly the crown prince asked Ranke if he could arrive for a discussion, and when he was told of the baptism going ahead on the same day, he answered: ‘Then I will most certainly come. May I become a Godfather?’156 The girl was named Maximiliane Marie Helene.157 Maximiliane (later on at first nicknamed Maxhelena and then Maxa) after the Crown Prince, the future King Maximilian II of Bavaria; Marie after his wife, a Prussian princess; and Helene after her grandmother, Helena Graves.158 Soon Clarissa became pregnant again. As Ranke had preferred the previous children to be raised in a German manner, he promised his wife that if this child was a girl, the child could be raised in an English fashion and could be baptized according to the Church of England. Clarissa was thrilled with this idea, which she recounted in a long letter to Robert.159 On 17 September 1847 the child was born, a second son. He was baptized by Leopold’s brother Ernst on 15 October. Again, one of the first letters Ranke wrote to announce the birth went to Robert Graves on the same day: I have to tell you that today 17th Sept. dear Clara had her boy, with the rising morning; a big well made boy, to be called after a dream of hers, Reinhold. Till now (God bless them) they are both well. I hope good John won’t refuse to be Godfather. How strongly the Graves’s and the Ranke’s shall be connected together!160

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 127 Giving the new boy a name seemed to cause a problem again. Clarissa was again in favour of Reinhold, but Ranke had a different opinion. A few days before the birth he met Jakob Grimm. Grimm complained that in Germany at that time, fewer true German names were being given to children. Ranke asked which name Grimm was in favour of, and Grimm answered, ‘For example Friduhelm.’ And Ranke replied: ‘If I will have, hopefully in the next few days, a son; I will call him Friduhelm.’161 It is also possible that the names of the Hohenzollern dynasty, the ruling family of Prussia, Friedrich Wilhelm, were put into one. As Clarissa was still in favour of Reinhold, everybody was surprised to find out the final name: Friedhelm Johannes Arnold. Friedhelm was entered by mistake in the church register. He was baptized Friduhelm. The name Johannes was given in honour of John Perceval Graves, and the name Arnold was also found in the Graves family. In October 1847 Clarissa mentioned in a letter that ‘at present and for some [time] to come I shall be leading a complete mother’s life, nursing & taking care of my little boy; our Wohnzimmer [living room] I have converted into a nursery, where I, and the Kinderfrau and all the children sleep.’162 Notwithstanding having several children during the early period of their marriage, Ranke’s home became a place to go and be seen for several famous personalities. From the late 1840s the house because a cultural and intellectual meeting point, which gradually developed into the ‘Salon Ranke.’ It reached its height after the revolutionary years of 1848–49 and continued, despite Clarissa’s increasing illness, to be an important one for Berlin society during the 1850s and 1860s. Before the Revolution, people like Strauβ,163 Starriett Owen, Rev. John Lord,164 Jenny Lind,165 the families of Schelling, Puchta,166 Bellson, Heman and Napier, Friedrich von Raumer,167 Prof. Richter, Minister Eichhorn, the brothers Grimm, Tieck, Ritter, Lachmann, Jacoby, Theremin, Hollweg and the Crown Prince of Bavaria, later King Maximilian II of Bavaria,168 were regular guests.169 It was not only history that was discussed at their evening meetings. When infants were crawling around the house, there were only occasional visitors because Clarissa, especially after the birth of Friduhelm, used the living room as the children’s room. Therefore, space for visitors was limited to Ranke’s library. During these hours Clarissa and Leopold sat together, looking after the children and discussing the daily business. This incorporated literature as well as political and familial events. It was mainly Clarissa who wrote letters, and she discussed them with Ranke. Not many letters have survived from this time, but it is striking that during the early years of her marriage, Clarissa already had the role of intermediary between England, Ireland and the German states. In a letter Clarissa was asked by a Mr Grohmann for some help on his travels through England and for advice on the places that he should visit. Not surprisingly, Clarissa advised him to visit Dublin as well.170 People from all over the world visited the Rankes. Rev. John Lord171 got advice from Helena Graves to travel around Germany and visit the Rankes. He wrote her the following note: I have just returned from Germany, very tired & very stupid. Still, I take the first occasion to express to you the pleasure which I had in a visit to Prof.

128  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years Ranke. Madam Ranke was extremely kind & cordial and introduced me to the Prof. Although he was very busy. And I never spent 2 hours more delightfully in my life. I liked him exceedingly, and, what is seldom the case, came away, from the presence of a great man with [.  .  .  ?] and respect. But his attainment & his genius are enough to drive all other people to despair. I am going to burn all my historical work & lectures and seek comfortable but inglorious obscurity. What can I do! And amongst all of this, Clarissa of course did a number of translations for her husband or managed such translations: Baur was able to find the earliest trace in Wiehe, which keeps a small blotter book written probably in the early months of 1844, containing a translation of several passages from Ranke’s History of Servia into English. She particularly translated the passages about the poetry.172 Possibly due to her pregnancy and birth with Otto, Clarissa was forced to pass on the translation work to Mrs Luise Kerr, which translation appeared in London in 1847 as History of Servia and the Servian Revolution.173 So Clarissa looked after translators for her husband and therefore made him known in the English-speaking world. Jo Tollebeek remarked that Clarissa von Ranke was active in the translation market and carefully checked the English editors of her husband’s works. She also took care of the promotion of this work, together with her brothers.174 Thanks in large part to a succession of educated English ladies – Mrs E. Foster, Lady Duff Gordon,175 Mrs Alexander Kerr and Miss Sarah Austin176 – no fewer than twelve of the major works, ranging from his earliest one to the beginning volume of Universal History, were translated in Great Britain during their author’s time.177 In Berlin during the 1840s Ranke was mockingly described as the ‘small Ranke.’ In fact his large head, the bird-like formed nose and the appearance of a gloriole created by his white hair gave him a nearly owl-like appearance.178 Maybe it was for this reason that Jacob Burckhardt also described him as ‘a strange screech owl.’179 During his seminar classes the professor often had an effective and lasting effect on the students; however, in the lecture theatre his appearance seemed just average and at times catastrophic. Eduard Hanslick remembered: ‘That was no lecture but a mumbled, whispered and grunted monolog with random interruptions of which we could only understand a few words.’180 It was no wonder, then, that sometimes students fell asleep. One day Willibald Beyschlag reported: ‘Ranke reached out from the teacher’s desk in order to wake up a sleeping student right in front of him with the effective words: Please mister, not so loud!’181 Despite this mockery and criticism ‘the small Ranke’ rose – as Brady described it – to an international superstar of historiography. Without a doubt he had been the most read, the most translated and the most imitated historian of the European culture world during the 1840s.182 During the mid-1840s Ranke gave nine lectures, of which three classes dealt with early modern history, two classes each on the Middle Ages and contemporary history and one class each on German history and modern history.183 In one of the class introductions, given in the summer semester 1845 on ‘History of our time since 1815,’ Ranke referred to current affairs and pointed out that history was

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 129 not politics. He mentioned that ‘from earlier times most of the facts will remain forever unknown. Of the later ones the archives still uphold information.’184 He continued: ‘Like any other science history is never completed.’185 Ranke could tell students his political opinions or his opinion to liberal principles – ‘but I will do none of that.’186 History should only represent the past187 and he referred to the students: The stay at universities is not only there to prepare for a particular job which you have chosen, but in particular to gain, to strengthen and explain general perceptions in which we live. Therefore I believe it would be a deficiency if you would not also find the time to be taught on most worldly events, which effects influence our lives in an academic way. I believe that this is useful and good to give lectures of this kind and therefore I will try it.188 It seems that Ranke, the lecturer, cared for students more than is usually known. This striving for impartial history was also mentioned by Guilland, when at a congress of historians a zealous Protestant, author of a history on the Reformation, equally noted for the orthodoxy of his opinions and for his partiality, accosted Ranke and said to him, with vainglorious pride: ‘We have this in common, you and I, dear colleague: we are both historians and Christians.’ ‘But,’ replied Ranke, ‘there is one difference between us: I am a historian first and then a Christian.’189 Clarissa and her brothers discussed Ranke’s work in detail, especially the search for translators of the History of Serbia and the History of the German Reformation. A great deal had been written on the translation by Sarah Austin of the History of the German Reformation. For example, Helen Graves read this work in February 1845190 while her husband Robert discussed the content with Clarissa. Clarissa wrote back: We admired your Sonnet very much, which made us attach more interest to Mrs Fletchers’s fresh bright-minded note, so full of deep and stirring feeling. Leopold was much pleased with her idea that his history of the Reformation has appeared to furnish an answer to the Tractarians, the sort of compliment gives him the same sort of pleasure as such as one which would prove that his writing have a good practical power in expelling error and bringing truth to light, in grateful acknowledgement he begs his compliments to her with a warm shake of your hand.191 But Clarissa later noted a newspaper critique on the same work: I have referred to the chief points in your letter excepting thanking you for the Newspaper critique on Mrs Austin’s translation of the Reformation, it is excellent – admirably written and conceived. Have you any idea who was the author? Leopold was highly delighted at the observation that the German people and not Luther alone was ‘his Hero’, who was the organ manifesting the spirit of his times.192

130  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years It is interesting that, privately, Ranke did not approve Austin’s translation, yet Price noted that ‘of the English [translations], Mrs Austin’s is the best from a literary point of view, and was warmly approved by the author.’193 Worthington praised Austin’s translation for ‘her perfect knowledge of her author, complete intuition into his sentiments, and thorough mastery of the subject matter.’194 Clarissa’s private correspondence presents a different picture. There appears to have been great annoyance with Austin’s translation because Clarissa mentioned in a letter a short time later: I have read nothing the whole summer but intend to begin & compare Mrs Austin’s History of the Reformation with the original. Leopold does not like to find fault, but he is much annoyed at having the title of his book changed, his work is ‘The history of Germany in the time of the Reformation’ & he would have written quite a different book had he intended to write the History of the Reformation and he thinks considering it as such his work must appear imperfect & irrelevant. Did it strike you as such?195 Robert and Helen Graves wrote letters to the Spectator196 and Literary Gazette,197 dealing with the critics and expressing Ranke’s annoyance at Austin’s translation. Harsh criticism came from Clarissa’s mother as the translation gave ‘a false colour to the work,’ was composed for marketing purposes and because Ranke’s reputation suffered ‘injurious consequences.’198 This ongoing discussion of Austin’s translation ended with a comparison by Clarissa: I have lately been comparing Mrs Austin’s translation’s with Leopold’s original works & am actually shocked to find how often she dares the [. . . ?] & logic of her subject, not unfrequently making decided & upon that mistakes, & yet such is the perfection of her [. . . ?] that she gains popularity by her writings while undoubtedly the original Author must be deemed [. . . ?] & [. . . ?] by every thinking mind, I feel sure that I sufficient force in composition I could (time & health allowing) be a more faithful translator than she is.199 Nevertheless Clarissa had to sacrifice the work of translation in favour of her ‘homely occupations.’200 Due to the difficulties they experienced with Austin, Clarissa and her brothers looked carefully for a translator of Ranke’s future works, and Leopold did not give her permission to translate the remaining four books on the History of the German Reformation.201 At the same time in 1846 Ranke published another article entitled ‘Über die Versammlung der französischen Notabeln im Jahre 1787.’202 In this article Ranke dealt with the restoration of finances of the three major parties involved during the American War of Independence: the future United States, England and France. In the introduction he described the background and the war of independence and how the war over-stretched the three countries economically and financially. Ranke also viewed the situation in the United States and England and how they solved the problem before he concentrated on how France managed

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  131 with the financial problem in all its details. Whereas the other two countries were able to recover, France could not resolve the problems and its debts continued to rise. This issue was particularly connected to two people: Charles de Calonne and Charles, Count Vergennes. Overall Ranke dealt with the main reasons for the outbreak of the French Revolution. It is suggested that he was partly influenced by the Weberaufstand in Silesia in 1844 and possibly with the first signs of unrest in Ireland at the start of the Great Famine in 1846. Ranke heard about Ireland’s situation through first-hand reports from his wife, Clarissa. The article may need to be understood from this perspective, as well as that Ranke wanted to portray the similarities of previous revolutions and warn the governments about this. In the end Ranke was actually right: just two years after its publication, the European Revolutions started. The main content may only deal with economic history, but it contains indirect social history as well. Clarissa repeatedly reported about Ranke’s work in her letters. She mentioned, for example, in 1846 a historical conference that he attended in Frankfurt: Leopold has just returned from a philosophical meeting at Frankfurt on the Maine where many literary men had the pleasure of forming friendships with each other but where little else was done excepting through Leopold’s influence & wish to establish a great historical Union.203 Clarissa referred to a meeting taking place from 24 to 26 September 1846. Due to newly awakened interest in German law, language and ancient history, linguists came together to form a society. Ranke suggested the creation of a general German history association. After a lot of debate over the next two days, the formation of such an association was concluded on the 26th. On 28 September 1846, fourteen of these new members, amongst them Ranke, composed a memorandum for the German Federal Assembly in order to ask for financial support of future historical works.204 In the same letter Clarissa also stated that she sorted Ranke’s letters and that she regretted previously destroying several of Robert’s letters.205 A short while later Clarissa sent her husband’s Latin inaugural address to Robert, requesting a translation: I am ashamed of having so long forgotten today that Leopold would be much gratified by your translating his Latin inaugural address – he fears the subject is too dry for a review, but of that you are the best judge & you are most welcome to give it publishing in whatever way you plan.206 In other letters Clarissa wrote about German culture. In 1846 she mentioned the differences in wedding ceremonies between England and Germany, and she had a major political discussion about German Catholics seeking a government led by the church, which was seen by many (like Ranke) as a threat. Ranke would publish his work on Prussian history by the end of 1846 and planned to travel to London in 1847 to search archives and observe the sittings of parliament.207 In another letter of 1847 she described the death of Johann Friedrich Dieffenbach208

132  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years and Felix Mendelssohn209 with great grief and in detail.210 For 1847 Ranke entered significant notes in his diary commenting on events in that year: he wrote on the role of the king, the Prussian assembly, ideas of the proletariat and for April 1847 comments on Prussia and the Prussian Assembly.211 But Clarissa’s interest did not simply remain in Germany or Continental Europe. She shared an immense interest in events in Ireland with her family. As the contents of her letters were discussed with Ranke, it can be surmised that he was well informed of what was happening in Ireland. In a letter to Robert in October 1846, she asked ‘what you think of the state of Ireland. Is it on the eve of famine as is reported here? Here there is a security – bread is [. . . ?] & small swing to Sir R. Peel’s bill, you all eat too much in England & will in the end starve your poorer neighbours!’212 In another letter written a year later, Clarissa wrote: We have had the most extraordinary mild winter here, and the Spring is already wonderfully advanced, should a blight come,  & winter return, (as some fear) the consequence might be awful. On the contrary if the early vegetation is unchecked what promise of plenty there is! God grant this may be the case in Ireland, & that abundance may succeed the present scarcity & misery there. Were the Potatoes diseased in your neighbourhood? I think great charity might be – evinced by the English supplying the poor Irish with some grain & potatoes for food.213 These two excerpts show that Clarissa thought not only about her brothers but also the (Catholic) Irish population in general; they also show that Clarissa and Leopold were well informed on social issues and current affairs, at least in Ireland and Britain. Another interesting element in Clarissa’s letters is the discussion of social issues, which she not only engaged in with her own brothers but also with her German cousins, Amalie and Selma Ranke. In a letter to Amalie in July 1847 she disagreed with the opinion that girls should not be fully educated. She wrote that ‘so many people have a prejudice to a girl’s knowing anything whatsoever else.’214 The belief that a woman’s place was in the home has a long tradition in Germany. Calls for women to fulfil their domestic destiny escalated in the eighteenth century, which witnessed the emergence of a proto-democratic public sphere restricted to men, an increasing belief that the division of labour between men and women was rooted in nature and the rise of the novel as an agent for disseminating new attitudes towards love and the family.215 The men of the middle class took pride in their new family values as they struggled to wrest moral, as well as political, authority away from what they perceived as a decadent aristocracy. Normally women were expected to restrict their attention to health and home and to remain silent in public. In fact, some women began to speak out in literary texts aimed at the growing body of German readers, both male and female. German women published in increasing numbers throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries and became some of the most widely read authors of the period. They did not concern themselves exclusively with private issues in

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  133 the domestic sphere. They participated in the political debates of the nineteenth century, at times directly, by voicing their opinion about issues ranging from the industrial poor to Jewish emancipation, at other times indirectly, by using representations of family life to comment on patriarchal politics. The revolution of 1848 marked a turning point for German women writers, who turned away from the open radicalism of Vormärz authors. Middle-class German women began to organize for the first time, yet they tended to work for moderate reform within the existing system. They tended to be intelligent, self-reliant young women who did not hesitate to condemn injustice and stand up for their beliefs. Eventually, however, each woman gladly sacrificed her independence in exchange for marriage and motherhood.216 According to Rosenhaft, the educated middle-class household was not that strictly bound. Both sexes’ roles in the public and private spheres overlapped and were interdependent. The household was more a meeting place of both. Men invested both time and emotional energy in the domestic sphere as husbands and fathers. They took interest in the education of their children as well as in their own careers. Rosenhaft also stressed that the household of a married couple of the educated middle class was a focus for sociable interchange across sexes and generations that underpinned political, economic and intellectual networks. A number of scholars such as the Brothers Grimm did their work at home, in ‘sociable cooperation’ with female family members and assistants. This changed in the latter part of the nineteenth century, when the migration of scientific and scholarly practice to universities and academies reinforced its masculinization.217 Rosenhaft’s description would fit the household of the Rankes, and Clarissa has to be understood from this background: she led a salon, wrote poetry and could speak several languages. Although Ranke could never overcome his own struggle between the emancipation of his wife and daughter within society and his patriarchal position within the family and wider community, he welcomed the education of women. Clarissa bowed to the given order, respecting her husband’s role and acknowledging her limitations of activity within this order.

Notes 1 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 95. 2 Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians, p. 99. 3 Mignet, François-Auguste Marie (1796–1884), French journalist and historian of the French Revolution. 4 Ibid. See also Ranke, ‘Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte’, pp. 73–74. 5 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 95. 6 Letter of Caroline Graves to James Graves, 15 August 1843, Graves Archive, Trinity College Dublin (hereafter TCD), MS 10047/34/53. 7 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Ferdinand Ranke, 8 July  1843, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 297–298. 8 Diary entry, 10 July 1843, in: Leopold von Ranke, Aus Werk und Nachlaß, Tagebücher (Munich, 1964), p. 68. 9 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Ferdinand Ranke, 30 July 1843, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 299–300.

134  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 10 See also Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 68, 181–185, 224–249, 252, 320–321; Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 299–300. 11 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 224–230. 12 Ibid, pp. 320–347. 13 British Library, MS Stowe 749. 14 Note of Charles Graves, Royal Irish Academy (RIA), Miscellaneous Photostats, Parcel I, No. 14; Jim Cooke, ‘The Graves family in Ireland’, in: Dublin Historical Record, l, 1 (1997), p. 25. 15 Following the family tree of the Graves Family Association, ‘The Graves family of Yorkshire and Mickleton Manor, Gloucestershire, England, genealogy 68’, available at: Graves Family Association, Wrentham, Massachusetts, USA, www.gravesfa.org/ gen068.htm [14 January 2005]. 16 Note of Charles Graves, RIA, Miscellaneous Photostats, Parcel I, No. 14. A clergyman in the diocese of Ossory, he became interested in archaeology and published the results of his researches in the Kilkenny area. He founded the Kilkenny Archaeological Society, which later evolved into the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, with its aim of preserving, examining and illustrating the ancient monuments of Irish history. 17 Graves Archive, TCD, Manuscript Department, MSS 10047. 18 See also David Huddleston, ‘Graves, Richard’, available at: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, www.oxforddnb.com/articles/11/11314-article.html [12 October  2004]. 19 Emmet, Robert (1778–1803), United Irishman. Leader of the Irish rising in 1803. 20 Ruán O’Donnell, Robert Emmet and the rebellion of 1798 (Dublin, 2003), pp.  22, 63–65. 21 See also David Huddleston, ‘Graves, Richard Hastings’, available at: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, www.oxforddnb.com/articles/11/11315-article.html [12 October 2004]. 22 Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047; Davis Coakley, Robert Graves: Evangelist of clinical medicine (Dublin, 1996); Karl, Magee, ‘Graves, Robert James’, available at: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, www.oxforddnb.com/articles/11/11317article.html [12 October 2004]. 23 He was rector at Ballymacelligott and Nohoval in Ardfert from 1711 to 1828. He held the deanery of Ardfert from 1784 to 1802, the deanery of Connor and the rectory of Islandmagee from 1802 to 1811, and the rectory of Rincurran from 1811 to 1828. 24 Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047. 25 Mentioned in a letter of Helena Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 1840s, Syracuse University Library, MS Y157, hereafter SUL Y157. 26 Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/9. 27 This was told by Clarissa and her family, although Sidney Lee, Dictionary of national biography, Paston – Percy, vol. xliv (London, 1895), pp. 368–369, 372, 374; and Bernard Burke, Burke’s peerage and baronetage, 105th edition (London, 1976), p. 915, indicate that Richard Perceval was the first who came to Ireland in the sixteenth century and his sons finally settled there. 28 For further details see Lee, Dictionary of national biography, vol. xliv, pp. 374–375. Another memory was not right: Perceval was buried in St. Audeon’s Church, Dublin, not in Westminster Abbey. 29 Confirmed by Bernard Burke, A genealogical and heraldic dictionary of the landed gentry of Great Britain and Ireland (London, 1858), p. 937. 30 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 3–4. 31 Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/9. 32 Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/14/1. 33 More details see W.H. Vaughan, A new history of Ireland, Ireland under the union, 1801–1870, vol. v (Oxford, 1989).

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  135 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72

Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/28/34. Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/9. Letter of Clarissa Helena Graves to John Crosbie Graves, 18 December 1817, SUL Y4. Letter of Clarissa Graves to John Crosbie and Helen Graves, 16 November  1818, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/14/8. Letter of John Crosbie Graves to Lord Wellesley, 20 February 1822, British Library, Add. 37298 ff. 247–252. Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/1–3. Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/11/25. Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/11. Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/28; 10047/14; 10047/34/73. Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 4–5. Wordsworth, William (1770–1850), English poet. Well-known for his poetry exploring lives of humble folk living in close contact with nature and founder of Romantic poetry. Southey, Robert (1774–1843), English poet and writer famous for his prose works. Coleridge, Samuel Taylor (1772–1834), English poet who created a new poetry in reaction against Neoclassic artificiality. Hamilton, Sir William Rowan (1805–65), Irish mathematician. Cooke, ‘The Graves family in Ireland’, p. 29. Ranke-Museum, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, MS 75, hereafter Wiehe, Englische Briefe 75. Clarissa von Ranke, ‘Stars of my life’. British Library, Add. 37189; Add. 37193. Beethoven, Ludwig van (1770–1827), German composer. Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus (1756–1791), Austrian composer. Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/27. Letters of Clarissa Graves to Robert Graves, 1830s, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 78, 197. Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/34/12. Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/36/3. Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/34/17; 10047/34/24. Letter of Caroline Graves to James and Charles Graves, 1 September 1841, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/34/31. For more details on mania see David Sue, Understanding abnormal behaviour (Boston, 2000), pp. 332–333. For more details see Roy Porter, Madness, a brief history (Oxford, 2003), pp. 95–139; Edward Shorter, A history of psychiatry (New York, 1997), pp. 35–49. Nasse, Christian Friedrich (1778–1851), German physician and psychiatrist. Nightingale, Florence (1820–1910), English social reformer and statistician and the founder of modern nursing. Siegfried Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’ (paper, 2007). The letters are kept in Syracuse University Library (SUL). Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/34/10. Letter of Robert Graves to John Graves, 26 July  1840, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/36/3. Thorvaldsen, Bertel (c. 1768–1844), Danish neoclassical sculptor. Mezzofanti, Guiseppe (1774–1849), Cardinal for the Vatican. Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, p. 5; Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/34/34. Gregory XVI (1765–1846), Pope 1831–1846. Fuchs described Clarissa in his introduction in Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. xxxv–xxxvi, as a cool-hearted woman who remained throughout her life in her English world. He also described her spiritual interests as typical for an upper-class lady. Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Graves, 17 August 1843, SUL X21.

136  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 73 Krieger, Meaning of history, pp. 186–188, described the relationship as a difficult one between Ranke and his wife. He thought to prove that the marriage ‘provided him with the routinization of his personal concerns’ and aspects of his limited love to his wife. Even if Krieger mentioned Ranke’s positive side as a father, the reader gets the impression of a hard-hearted marriage. A different version is given by Guglia, Rankes Leben und Werke, pp. 285–287, who depicted a very happy marriage. 74 Diary of Mrs  Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 1838, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 75 McClelland, German historians and England, p. 63. 76 Diary of Leopold Ranke, 1843, in: Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 252, 322. 77 Letter from Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Graves, 27 August 1843, SUL X22. 78 Ben Weinreb and Christopher Hibbert (eds.), The London encyclopaedia (London, 1983), p. 860. 79 Byron, Lord George Gordon (1788–1824), English poet, peer, politician and leading figure in the Romantic movement. 80 Pope, Alexander (1688–1744), English poet. 81 See also Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 185, 229–230, 323–324. 82 Fuchs gave in a footnote a wrong date, 17 October 1843, even though he published letters of Ranke, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 320. 83 See also Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 95. 84 Letter of John Graves to Leopold Ranke, 2 October 1843, SUL Y224. 85 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 3 October 1843, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 16446. 86 Letter of William Perceval Graves to Clarissa Graves, 9 October 1843, SUL Y174. 87 Letter of Alfred A. Perceval to Clarissa Graves, 12 October 1843, SUL Y76. 88 Letter from an unknown woman to Clarissa Graves, undated, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 3. 89 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 10 October 1843, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 90 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Graves, 17 October  1843, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 320–321. 91 Bunsen, Christian Karl Josias von (1791–1860), Prussian historian and ambassador in England. 92 ‘Über den Ausbruch des siebenjährigen Krieges. Aus Mitchell’s ungedruckten Memoiren’, in: W.A. Schmidt (ed.), Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft (Berlin, 1844), pp. 134–163. [‘On the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War. Excerpts from Mitchell’s unpublished memoirs’] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 51–52]. 93 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Ferdinand Ranke, 19 October  1843, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 301. 94 Ibid, pp. 300–301. 95 Diary, Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 230. 96 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 24 October 1843, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 97 Indenture made between Helena Clarissa Graves and Leopold Ranke declaring the dowry for Clara Graves, SUL O A8; Articles of agreement for marriage of Leopold Ranke and Helena Clarissa Graves, 24 October 1843, SUL Z7; also a copy in Wiehe, Leopold von Ranke, 175, Englische Briefe 196, 286. 98 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 25 October 1843, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 99 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 26 October 1843, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 100 Friduhelm von Ranke, Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke von seinem Sohne Friduhelm von Ranke (Berlin, 1996), p.  6; see also Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 95.

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  137 101 Oda Ranke, wife of Leopold’s brother Ernst Ranke. 102 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 4 November  1843, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 321–322. 103 Ibid, p. 322. 104 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Ernst Ranke, January 1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 323. 105 Zinkeisen, Johann Wilhelm (1803–1863), German historian, since 1840 editor of the Preußischen Staatsanzeigers. 106 Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’ (paper, 2007). The quoted article is in SUL, Y81. 107 Letter of Starriett M. Owen to Helen Graves, 5 November 1844, Graves Archive, TCD MS 10047/20/52. 108 Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’. 109 Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 129. 110 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Otto von Ranke, 25 May 1873, in: Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, pp. 192–193, footnote 169. 111 Siegfried Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’. 112 Also published in Sämmtliche Werke 53/54, pp. 667–668. 113 Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’. 114 Ibid. 115 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 97. 116 Rückert, Friedrich (1788–1866), German poet, translator and professor of Oriental languages. 117 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 26 November  1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 328–329. Tschech, Heinrich Ludwig (1789–1844), former town major of Storkow who attempted to assassinate King Friedrich Wilhelm IV on 26 July 1844. Executed on 14 December 1844. 118 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 325–326. 119 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 26 November  1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 328–329. 120 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 16 October 1846, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 32. 121 Ibid. 122 Gluck, Christoph Willibald (1712–1787), composer. 123 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 16 October 1846, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 32. 124 Carlyle, Thomas (1795–1881), Scottish philosopher, satirical writer, essayist, translator, historian, mathematician and teacher. 125 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 277. 126 Wife of Bardeleben, Heinrich Adolf (1819–1895), German surgeon. Professor in Greifswald in 1848 and since 1868 in Berlin. 127 Letter of De Bardeleben to Clarissa Ranke, 19 August  1846, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 5/1/11–12. 128 Letter of Wilhelm Ranke to Rosalie Schmidt, 9 April  1844, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 8/9. 129 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 254. 130 Letter of Wilhelm Ranke to Ernst Ranke, 4 March 1844, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 8/9. 131 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 13 April 1844, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 309–310. 132 Otto von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke in seiner Familie’, in: Daheim, 59, 35–50 (1923), p. 6. 133 Ibid. 134 Letter of Helen Graves to Robert Graves, 1844, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 80.

138  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years 135 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, pp. 6–7. 136 Ibid, p. 6. 137 Letter of Starriett M. Owen to Helen Graves, 5 November  1844, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/20/52. 138 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 20 August  1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 327. 139 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 11 September 1844, SUL Y175. 140 Ibid. 141 Letter of Helena Graves to Robert Graves, 1844, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 80. 142 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, October 1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 328. 143 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, p. 6. 144 Wiehe, Englische Briefe 64. 145 J.C. Jackson, ‘Leopold von Ranke and the von Ranke Library’, in: Syracuse University Library Association, The Courier, ix, 4 & x, 1 (1972), p. 42. 146 Poem of Clarissa Ranke, SUL Y87. 147 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, October 1844, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 328. 148 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Johann Albrecht Friedrich Eichhorn, 9 September 1845, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 314–315. 149 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, p. 7. 150 Nitzsch, Karl Immanuel (1787–1868), German theologian. Professor of systematical theology in Bonn in 1822 and since 1847 in Berlin. 151 Tieck, Johann Ludwig (1773–1853), German Romantic writer and critic. Well-known for dramatized versions of folktales. 152 Ritter, Karl (1779–1859), German geographer. Professor of Geography at Berlin (1829) and laid foundations of modern scientific geography: the relation between man and his natural environment. 153 Lachmann, Karl Konrad Friedrich Wilhelm (1793–1851), German philologist. He was professor in Berlin and is a founder of modern textual criticism. One of his editions is the Nibelungenlied. 154 Jacoby, Johann (1805–77), German physician and politician. 155 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, p. 7. 156 Ibid. 157 Clarissa wrote to Robert on 16 October 1846: ‘People say she is like me, so you may conclude she will never be a beauty’, in: Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, p. 4. 158 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, p. 7. 159 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 254. 160 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Robert Graves, 17 September 1847, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 239. 161 Ranke, ‘Ranke in seiner Familie’, p. 8. 162 Letter from Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, 10 October 1847, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 6. 163 Strauβ, Gerhard Friedrich (1786–1863), Court Preacher in Berlin who published in 1835 a work on the life of Jesus. 164 Lord, Rev. John, American clergyman. 165 Lind, Jenny (1820–87), Swedish soprano. She reached international popularity as the ‘Swedish nightingale.’ She founded and endowed musical scholarships and charities in Sweden and England. 166 Puchta, Georg Friedrich (1798–1846), German jurist. Lecturer of Roman law since 1842 in Berlin. 167 Raumer, Friedrich Wilhelm Georg von (1781–1873), German historian and politician. He held a professorship in political science and history at Berlin from 1819 and

Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years  139 was elected MP for centre-right in the National Assembly in 1848 and later in the Prussian House of Lords. 168 Maximilian II (1811–64), Bavarian king (1848–64). 169 A list of visitors is given in Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Ranke und seine Familie’, Appendix, pp. 5–113. 170 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Helen Graves, 25 December 1845, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/14/40. 171 Lord, John Chase (1805–1877), American Presbyterian minister, lawyer, writer and poet. 172 Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’. 173 Ibid. 174 Jo Tollebeek, ‘Writing history in the salon vert’, in: Storia della Storiografia, History Women, 46 (2004), p. 37. 175 Duff Gordon, Lady Lucy (1821–69), English author and translator; her mother was Sarah Austin. 176 Austin, Sarah (1793–1867), English editor, linguist and translator from German. 177 Franklin L. Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society (1975), pp. 65–66. 178 Brady, ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation’, p. 43. 179 Ibid. 180 Ibid. 181 Ibid, pp. 43–44. 182 Ibid, p. 44. 183 Gunter Berg, Leopold von Ranke als akademischer Lehrer (Göttingen, 1968), pp. 243–245. 184 Ranke, Vorlesungseinleitungen, p. 160. 185 Ibid. 186 Ibid, p. 161. 187 Ibid. 188 Ibid, pp. 162–163. 189 Guilland, Modern Germany & her historians, pp. 82–83. 190 Diary of Mrs Robert Graves [Helen Graves], 13 February 1845, National Library of Ireland, Butler-Archive, MS 15446. 191 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke; Englische Briefe 274; Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Ranke und seine Familie’, p. 30. 192 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 274. 193 William Price, ‘A contribution toward a bibliography of Leopold von Ranke’, in: American Historical Association, i (1897), p. 1266. 194 J.W. Worthington, ‘Ranke’s History of the Popes’, in: Foreign Quarterly Review, xxvi (1840), p. 28. 195 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 16 October 1846, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 32. 196 Letter of Robert Graves to the Spectator, 1847, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 84. 197 Letter of Helena Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 14 June 1847, copy of letter in Literary Gazette, SUL Y147. 198 Ibid. 199 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 142. 200 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 254. 201 Noted in a footnote of a reprint. In 1905 the remaining books were still not translated, although the footnote commented that ‘these extracts are of immense value in themselves, and are a striking testimony to the industry of research which is so characteristic of all Ranke’s work. They are in each case presented with explanatory

140  Ranke’s wedding and early marriage years introductions and criticisms, which are of even greater value to the student of this period of history’, in: Ranke, Leopold von, History of the Reformation in Germany, trans. by Sarah Austin, ed. by Robert A. Johnson (London, 1905), p. 775. 202 ‘Über die Versammlung der französischen Notabeln im Jahre 1787, vornehmlich aus noch unbenutzten Documenten der Pariser Archive’, in: W.A. Schmidt (ed.), Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Geschichte, vol. v (Berlin, 1846), pp. 1–44 [‘On the constituting of the French notables in 1787, mainly taken from unpublished documents from Parisian archives’]. 203 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 16 October 1846, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 32. 204 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, pp. 99–100. 205 Ibid. 206 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 254. 207 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 15 April  1846, Bäcker-von Ranke 50. 208 Dieffenbach, Johann Friedrich (1792–1847), German surgeon. Professor of surgery at Berlin. Pioneer of transplant surgery, improved techniques relating to plastic surgery and blood transfusion. 209 Mendelssohn (-Bartholdy), Jakob Ludwig Felix (1809–1847), German composer. He is the grandson of Moses Mendelssohn, and the son of a Hamburg banker who added the name Bartholdy. 210 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 1847, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 163. 211 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 334–351. 212 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 16 October 1846, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 32. 213 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 254. 214 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, 13 July 1847, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 5. 215 See also Kontje, German realism, p. 18. 216 Ibid, pp. 18–19. 217 Eve Rosenhaft, ‘Gender’, in: J. Sperber, Germany 1800–1870, p. 215.

6 European revolutions and Ranke’s role as political advisor (1848–52)

In 1848 Europe was on the brink of drastic changes. Behind its apparently static political façade, Europe was experiencing revolutionary changes, including the processes of urbanization and industrialization. The changes were essentially quantitative: there were more people, reproducing at a faster rate than ever before. From the beginning of the century, numbers had risen by 50%. Europe’s population in 1848 was not only larger than ever before, it was also more urbanized. Towns were bigger than they had been half a century earlier. Moreover, a new type of urban unit had appeared in Britain: the industrial conurbation. These cities – Manchester, Birmingham, Liverpool, Glasgow and Leeds – show how far Britain had moved from the country village, county town and capital city hierarchy that still characterized the rest of Europe. Germany had only two large cities: Hamburg and Berlin.1 After King Frederick William IV of Prussia appointed him to the position of royal historiographer in 1841, Ranke penned a history of Prussia in the late 1840s.2 As the title suggested, the focus of the work was Prussia, but several important German states and European powers from England and Spain to Russia play a key role in his narrative. The first three books of the work dealt with the development of the young state of Brandenburg evolving into Prussia from 1670 to 1740, and Ranke explained many reasons why Prussia developed a strong army. The remainder of the work concentrated on King Frederick the Great and the early years of his reign, the Silesian Wars and the role of Prussia within Europe. In the first volume Ranke dealt with Prussian history from the late medieval times until 1740 with a clear concentration on the time period 1670 to 1740. A third of the volume concentrated more on European history, and another third concentrated on Polish and Russian history. The narrative tried to describe Prussia’s position within Europe with the explanation of creating a balance of power. In the last third of the volume, Ranke dealt with the administration of the military in absolute detail, ranging from the military dress code to shooting techniques. He also noted that Protestants, Catholics and Freemasons were able to have an open discourse on religion in the educational sector and in the universities, and he further referred to the different classes, such as the assemblies. In the third part Ranke referred to the overall agricultural system and its reform, including production, trade and foreign exchange. He also dealt with literature and education. The

142  European revolutions and Ranke’s role main part he referred to is the consolidation of Prussia as a state. King Frederick William I was described as a despot, but one who knew his limits of power. Ranke presented a young state which was surrounded by established powers, and it saw the need to hold a strong army in order to survive. The second volume dealt with the start of the reign of Frederick II and the first Silesian War, 1740–1742. The middle of the volume dealt with a lot of European history and an explanation of Frederick’s motives for the conquest of Silesia. Ranke wrote in the context that it is not the duty of the historian to act as a judge in legal matters but to show what happened – and the historical evidence indicated that the House of Brandenburg acted in well-reasoned judgement. Ranke continued with reforms, in this case the reform of the military and its excessive punishment methods. The third volume continued with Prussian history. A third of the volume dealt with a European presentation of affairs in 1843. Each one of the established powers was presented here: their country, situation and connection to the Silesian issue (England, France, Austria, Prussia, Sweden and Russia). A third part of the book dealt with the second Silesian War. In this section Ranke showed his insight into marriage policies of Prussia with Sweden and Russia and then focused more on Northern and Eastern Europe. In this volume he also dealt with economic and administration reforms, manufacturing development and the colonization of the Oderbruch. Generally King Frederick had an interest in how his people handled the reforms. Ranke also referred to a wide selection of literature and academic works of universities, the works of Voltaire and the publications of Fredrick the Great. Throughout the work, classes, culture and economy were mentioned. Ranke showed details of reforms in farming, production and trade as well as general education. The nine books of Prussian History were in a sense a continuation of Ranke’s work on the Reformation as a study of the major Protestant German state. It followed the history of the Hohenzollern family from the fifteenth century on, but focused on the eighteenth century and particularly on the reign of Frederick the Great, during which Prussia emerged as a major power. Ranke’s study did not attempt to read a German national mission into Prussian history or to portray Austria as the main antagonist of German unity, as Johann Gustav Droysen did in his history of Prussia. Rather, Prussia emerged as a major force in the eighteenth century to fill the power vacuum in Northern Germany and offset the European balance of power.3 The work on Prussian history was the first one by Ranke in his position as the Prussian historiographer. It was deeply influenced by the events of the 1840s in Prussia (Weberaufstand and the revolution) and caused several problems. Ranke had to be very careful with the materials he used so he would not be disrespectful with a highly explosive topic. Even if this was one of his most celebrated works in later years (particularly by nationalists and during the Third Reich), giving Ranke the position of being an apparent nationalist, this work was in comparison to all of his books relatively small and unimportant, and put into comparison, it was also the weakest one. It is interesting that Ranke concentrated on Frederick the Great

European revolutions and Ranke’s role  143 and Silesia. Furthermore he went against the new upcoming opinion of celebrating Frederick the Great, which evolved from the 1830s onwards, even if the king was condemned by the people after his death. Ranke positioned himself as the middleman by explaining the positive and negative sides of the Prussian king and the connection between Silesia and Prussia. Due to its politically difficult aspect of Prussian history, many Rankean aspects of the interpretation of history can be found here, particularly for impartiality. As Baur noted, the work was published in three phases, and accordingly it received three different reviews. The first volume, published in 1847, received positive and negative reviews, whereas in early 1848 they were only negative ones and in late 1848, when the revolution had more or less failed, the reviews were completely positive. So Baur concluded that the reviews reflected different stages of ‘public opinion.’4 The spring of 1848 changed, not only the post-restoration period but also the Rankes’ private life. The years 1848–49 are well known as a time of European revolutions, but even before the outbreak in Berlin, the Rankes had anticipated some of the trouble to come. In January the Sicilians set up a provisional government of their own, independent of Naples, while the death of the king of Denmark highlighted the Schleswig-Holstein problem once more. The revolution started in France on 22 February, and the republic was formed two days later. A few days after that, the revolution swept over to the first German states, beginning on 27 February in Baden and Württemberg and gradually moving eastwards, bringing the whole restoration system down. In early March, Adolphe Comte de Circourt5 and his wife, a member of the new French republican government, visited the Rankes. In a letter to Sarah Austin, who had translated the Popes and the History of the German Reformation in previous years, Mrs Bardeleben wrote about this meeting in April 1848. Apparently Circourt’s family was happy to find people in Berlin who shared their revolutionary ideas. Friedrich Christoph Dahlmann,6 Grimm and Arnim were mentioned favourably as well, but others, like Savigny, were shocked by these visits.7 The appearance of Circourt in Ranke’s salon shows that revolutionaries as well as conservatives were welcomed to the salon. During the first days of the revolution not many letters were written, but it was reported that ‘Ranke warned his wife to be more careful, when she mentioned to a piano tuner her royalist preferences. Ranke thought she had to be careful with her comments as no one could know how things would go.’8 As in other German towns, the revolution in Berlin grew from a series of rallies which took place from 6 March onwards. Again and again, large numbers of people streamed into the Tiergarten, and when the Borsig machine factory dismissed 400 workers at the beginning of March, they began to express their hatred of capitalism in a series of actions led by a group of literary figures who favoured democracy. The dynamics of the revolution were intensified in Berlin because it was the political centre of Prussia. Soldiers had been moved in and were stationed at strategically important points from 13 March. They had a profound impact on the situation, transforming the initially non-violent demonstrations

144  European revolutions and Ranke’s role into emotionally charged arenas of tension between civilians and the army. The first deaths whipped up the atmosphere dangerously. On 15 March, Metternich’s resignation became known. On 17 and 18 March, the king of Prussia, Frederick William, made several political concessions, including the lifting of censorship.9 During these days the disturbances were described in several of Clarissa’s letters. The first riots were described in a letter to Robert: You can have no idea of the beauty & holy eloquence of the kings speech from the English translation, but it was far from giving general satisfaction in a political view, on the contrary, it is [sic] in some degree honed a revolutionary spirit in those who expected more than found would ever be granted, we have had riotous outbreaks in the city owing to the scarceness of provisions, when the Bakers, butchers & confectioners shops, & especially the potato sellers were plundered, it was dangerous to go out of the house, for two or three days, until Government interfered to lower the prices of provisions for the poor. Nearly a hundred of the military were stoned & wounded by the populace in endeavouring to disperse the riotous  – English soldiers would not have suffered this.10 The announcements of King Frederick William were made in a situation that had already acquired its own psychological dynamic through the presence of the army and the masses of people who felt under threat. The consequences of this were revealed on 18 March, when a large crowd of people gathered in the palace square, prepared to cheer the king for the proclamations made earlier that day. Two shots – perhaps intentional, perhaps fired in error – were enough to initiate bloody street battles and barricade fighting, which took place after the king had ordered that the army be used to force the people to leave the square. The call spread through the streets like wildfire: ‘To arms! To arms! The citizens defending us in front of the palace are being beaten up and shot to pieces!’11 In a letter written at the end of March 1848, Clarissa gave her impressions of 18 March and the following days: But, dear child, we have passed through the greatest danger on that terrific night of the 18th. One shot entered the window beneath us, within two yards of a woman I know, the opposite house has four balls still to be seen indented in it, so you see in [sic] our vicinity to two soldier’s barracks made our street a scene of action, we were also not far from two great fires, and my terror and that of our servants was excessive, but Leopold was perfectly composed and even wrote in the night of the firing, he deplores on every account this bloody and treacherous revolution, which has reduced all order in the State, to a scene of anarchy, but ‘the evil,’ he says, ‘has happened, and must be endured, what would it help us to fly, or to despair? Let us be quiet and content to be as we are, and make the best use of our time, in doing our duty.’ – His health is quite good and he is in himself quite unchanged by what has passed, but as a Physician alters his system of treatment as disease develops

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 145 himself, he thinks it now necessary that much more popular measures should be adopted in forming a new constitution than he would have thought fitting in conserving and repairing an old one. I am quite determined to take no care for the morrow, altho’ I have little hope that peace and concord will soon be re-established. Do you and your Father believe in the second coming of our Lord? I firmly do, and believe that what has happened is but the beginning of sorrows to prepare for that great and terrible Day! God give us grace and courage to endure unto the end! – Your cousin Richard was as you imagined in the midst of the fight, but escaped unhurt, he and your Uncle Ferdinand have now to carry arms in defence of the city. A war with Denmark is talked of as certain. – Many families fled in terror from Berlin – the Schellings are safe and well – the Bellsons are gone to England. The Frau Puchta and her family and her widowed daughter who now lives with her and has a baby – they are all well. The ‘champions of liberty’ who fell belonged mostly all to the discontented rabble. The poor brave soldiers who live are one and all hurt to the quick, The newspapers give not only a one-sided but a false view of affairs, they are indeed a source of strong delusion to many, the less you read them, dear child, the better.12 Karl August Varnhagen von Ense,13 a friend of the Ranke family, described Ranke’s reaction to the revolution in a different way. But it is suggested that his view might have been over-exaggerated because Clarissa described her husband as being afraid, yet composed, as he reacted to the situation: Ranke became completely mad, he screams and rants, thinks everything is lost for ever, he thinks of the downfall of the educated world and barbarism of wild violence, something [that] has never been before. Bad people guard the King, the mob reigns as they like and all order and religion is gone! He wants to flee, but he does not know to where!14 The outcome of the Berlin barricade battles led to misunderstandings that influenced the political judgement of the middle classes and were, therefore, of prime importance to the further course of the revolution, particularly with regard to the aims and strategies adopted. The king ordered the unconditional retreat of the army from the palace on 19 March, and then from the city altogether. He conveyed his deepest sympathy for all 187 people who had died and whose bodies were laid out on the palace square. Convinced that they had scored a victory over the princes and the army, the revolutionaries believed that they were stronger than they actually were. They had only forced the army to retreat, however, and they did not control it. The troops did not join the revolution, but remained loyal to the king.15 The news from Berlin came as a shock to Clarissa’s relatives. On 3 March, John Graves wrote a letter to the Rankes, mentioning that a possible visit should go ahead soon.16 Especially after the violent days the family might need a change, and John even went a step further: ‘Should Ranke and you determine on coming

146  European revolutions and Ranke’s role at once to settle in this country, tell him, with my affectionate regards, that I shall be happy to give him any information.’17 John, however, enclosed details of the route to Cheltenham as well as the train schedule despite not having received the request from Ranke.18 Despite easing tensions in Berlin, the Rankes seemed to remain in danger. This may have had something to do with his work on Prussian history, which was published the previous year, and its representation of the house of Hohenzollern. In the eyes of the revolutionaries the king embodied the old regime with its three central purposes of representing their own power, assisting the church and providing entertainment for the elites. Ranke’s work attempted to demonstrate that the Prussian king was the first servant of the state and followed the tradition of Frederick the Great. The royal family, however, needed to portray themselves as good solid bourgeois, simultaneously combining power and culture.19 Ranke was regarded by the reviewers as a ‘little helper of the old regime’ and a conservative, and he was closely watched by them. This was indicated in a letter from Clarissa to Oda Ranke at the end of March 1848: May He [God] give us strength and courage for the time to come, for I fear, this is but the beginning of sorrow’s [sic]. Leopold although he has the most wonderful courage and calmness is not hopeful for the future, it is easier to throw down, than to build up. However all is quiet here. Notwithstanding the great agitation and dissention of opinions pervading all classes of the universal anarchy that prevails. I feel it come in my little household, little is done, and all order is out of the question, so much gossip goes on and so many false and terrific reports circulated, that almost all the time is wasted in foolish agitation and dismay. The Prince of this world has had the chief hand, I do think in the late occurrences and I firmly believe such things must be, to prepare for the second coming of our Lord.20 At the end of March 1848, Ranke congratulated Maximilian II, who had been crowned the new king of Bavaria. As Bavaria had also been affected by the revolution, Ranke expressed his good wishes along with his political viewpoint and the current situation of revolutionary tendencies.21 In April 1848, Helena Graves wrote to her daughter mentioning that she had met fellows from Oxford telling them about Ranke and Berlin, and asked them to try to obtain a place for him. Details followed about a possible professorship in history or languages.22 John wrote to Robert reporting problems Clarissa faced in Berlin. He mentioned: I believe you have seen Clara’s last letters. My mother now has in view for Ranke a Professorship of Modern Languages which will shortly be established at Oxford. I should almost be sorry to see him taken out of his proper line. Though it would give Clara a pleasanter position than she has at present.23 Clarissa’s mother persisted in searching for ways in which the Rankes might settle in England or Ireland because she feared the possibility that Clarissa and

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 147 her family could be killed. In a letter to Clarissa, Helena mentioned that if they wanted to come to England, a cottage close to London or another big city should be bought because country life was regarded as much healthier.24 The news of minor troubles continued until June 1848 and Helena Graves still feared for the safety of her daughter.25 But the Rankes had already planned to visit their relatives in England. So at the end of June 1848, John wrote to Ranke asking if he would visit his family and offered to introduce him to the administration of the Poor Law:26 If you should come to England, as I hope you will, I shall be happy to take you with me as often as you like, in my official tours and to show you what I can of the administration of the Poor Law. My district lies in the least interesting part of England for scenery. Two beautiful counties. Herefordshire and Monmouthshire, have lately been detached from it, and I have no sea – but still I think I could show you some things that would interest you. Country society I am not able to enjoy much of, as the rapidity of my journeys prevents me from cultivating the acquaintances I make but still, with me, you would be able to see a little of English country society. Oxford is in my district. I hope you will bring Clara with you. I shall be happy to lodge her, and her children too, though I am so circumstanced, from the precarious health and advanced case of my father-in-law, that my wife must feel herself free from the restriction of remaining with me and Mme Henes. I am unable to invite you and Clara and the little ones to my own house (from which I am myself continually about), but, while you are upon your travels, I would endeavour to make them comfortable elsewhere. [. . .] There is some fear of an outbreak in Ireland, and the condition of the Poor in some parts of Yorkshire is unsatisfactory but we do not expect a revolution in this country yet. [. . .] When I before invited Clara to come to England, I did not suppose that she or you were in personal danger, and I felt that you were quite right in remaining in Berlin in the time of trouble.27 It may have been intended that Ranke should travel to Ireland, but the country was regarded as too unsafe because it experienced local disturbances in Kilkenny, Tipperary and Waterford in July. William Smith O’Brien28 led the rising of 1848. The British parliament suspended habeas corpus in early July 1848, but the rising failed after one week due to lack of support. One day after John’s letter had been written, Charles got a licence to hold a gun in his house.29 These licences were given to several Protestant families and organizations as tensions were high and revolts in Tipperary and Dublin endangered the political situation. During this time the situation in Berlin had calmed. In Clarissa’s letter to Amalie Ranke, she wrote that ‘Berlin is now – thank-God – much quieter than it was, although the elements strife & insubordination still exist. – So many of my Friends have fled – Mrs Bellson among the rest, but the Schellings & Eichhorn’s have had the courage to weather the storm.’30

148  European revolutions and Ranke’s role The danger in Germany eased and life returned to normal, although several letters, especially those of Helena Graves, contained alarming news about revolutionary movements in Ireland. In a letter written around the winter of 1848–49 from Clarissa to her brother Robert, she mentioned the political situation in Prussia. This letter is important because the contents would have been discussed with Ranke and his opinion would have been reflected in her lines also: These affairs are at the most critical & important juncture, the two Chambers have met, & the struggle for the upper hand between the democrats and the conservatives will be very close & desperate in the second Chamber, which has the most power  & is the most influenced by, –  & has the most influence on the People, if the Democrats prevail, then general anarchy, insecurity and bloodshed will ensue; if the Conservatives, then we may hope for the preservation of order, although Freedom will & must now be granted to the very verge of recklessness to fulfil the Kings conscience & to conciliate the Rebels. The Prussians evince no genius for politics & have hitherto played their part in their new Parliament worse than English school boys might be expected to do. L[eopold] who has made them [the] study of his life, is rather ashamed of the bad figure his countrymen made, & of the turn [of] affairs owing to the government yielding rather than governing. I now take more interest in politics than I ever thought I should have done because our very security depends on the turn they may take.31 Clarissa’s letters give a very good insight into the political events in Berlin. At the end of April 1849 she reported to Robert: The town is in a state of stifled rage to-day, only military force enforces peace, some agitators were shot last night. The sudden dissolving of the second chamber is looked upon as an act of encroaching tyranny by the Democrats, whose great engine of power it was. But unless a new law of election is made, the same members will be most likely again returned by the people. The king is acting a consistent dignified part now, & is retrieving the confidence he lost last year. – Though not energetic or great – he is at last firm & clear slighted as to his real position, & the web of romance he veiled himself with, is vanishing. His favourite Bunsen is loving influence though not favour. He has done a great deal of mischief in not having negotiated peace with the Danes.32 The Schleswig-Holstein question between Denmark and Prussia was a legal battle. The two countries were on the verge of war for decades, and the issue was finally solved following the wars of 1864 and 1866. The German Revolution failed in 1849 when the Prussian king rejected the imperial crown. The king’s response was hedged in restrictive clauses. He would accept the crown, but only if the ‘free agreement of the crowned heads, the princes and the free cities’ was acquired.33 For the post-revolutionary governments the events of 1848/49 were an

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 149 aberration, an accident, a ‘mad year,’ whose consequences had to be reversed as quickly and effectively as possible.34 For the year 1848, when revolutionary movements shook many parts of Europe and the ‘German Question’ reached its zenith in a time when wide areas of social life were highly politicized, Ranke gave a class in the Prussian capital on the history of antiquity. Do we have to consider this as political escapism?35 Ernst Schulin agreed with this question and spoke of Ranke’s ‘escape.’ It is noticeable that for the whole duration of the revolutionary period of 1848–49, all classes were on the history of antiquity or, in the summer semester of 1849, on the Medieval Ages. It was only from then on that Ranke concentrated more on modern history (four classes), medieval history (two classes) and Roman history (only one class, in 1852). But this ‘escape’ did not mean that Ranke became completely ‘unpolitical’ and did not take part in political discussions. One can notice that Ranke, as a contemporary historian, tried to give political recommendations: ‘In order to acknowledge the situation of the moment, one needs to advise the justtimely past.’36 Between May 1848 and January 1851 Ranke wrote a number of political pamphlets addressed to the crown. These pamphlets were given to his friend Edwin von Manteuffel,37 who was a political advisor to King Frederick William. As Hecht outlined in her biography on Manteuffel, he had to report daily to the king on events taking place in Berlin during the summer of 1848, and he was appointed to negotiate a peace settlement for the province of SchleswigHolstein between Denmark and Prussia. During the negotiations other powers were involved (England, Russia and Austria), and in the end he had to accept the terms as he could not risk a war of Prussia against these other powers and Denmark.38 Ranke did not suggest any particular action in his pamphlets, but he attempted to analyze the revolution from a historical point of view, exploring its consequences and the prospect of the restructuring of the German states’ system. In one of his pamphlets Ranke also mentioned that the Prussian king could accept the imperial crown, but he would need the agreement of other kings and princes in order to legitimate this.39 Ranke’s memoranda were at first characterized as analytical reports on political developments and parties. He did not analyze the relationship between the German states but interpreted the revolutionary processes as ‘a general European’ phenomena.40 The year 1848 appeared to be the initial stage of a chain of attempts of the ‘revolutionary spirit,’ which tried to ‘tear down the erected order’ after the Napoleonic Wars.41 In his memoranda from July and October  1848 Ranke included his experience from 1830, and the historical analysis had a strong political, Machiavellian and strategic power content. Ranke referred to the situation in England and questioned the role of supreme power between the crown and parliament. The memorandum from September 1850 was directly addressed to Manteuffel and outlined the strategic power situation of Prussia in the peace negotiations led by Manteuffel. Ranke, with great authority, was able to prove the militarily weakened position of Prussia and that the state itself would not be able to lead a war against other powers of Europe in 1850.42 This memorandum may have had some influence on the negotiator Manteuffel and may have been the reason

150  European revolutions and Ranke’s role why Ranke was awarded the order of the Red Eagle Second Class by Prussia in January 1850.43 How Ranke wished to see the political order in Germany, one can see best in his memorandum from October 1848: here he wished for a constitutional state with a united German Empire, yet with the stipulation that this empire had ‘no unlimited power with a revolutionary tendency.’ In order to control this, one had to acknowledge ‘the self-reliance of independent states and the concept of German principality.’ Strangely Ranke was against a Germany dominated by Prussia, but he reflected the constitutional monarchy back to the principality of each separate German state. The constitution was not allowed ‘to be the outflow of the people’s will,’44 which contained the danger of republicanism, but the acknowledgement of specific sovereign people’s rights through the monarchy.45 As a title for such a new German state Ranke suggested ‘Emperor of the German Federal State’ or, even better, ‘Emperor in the German Federal State.’46 His ideas were therefore ‘small German’ as they do not include Austria. They should be included in this federalist system, and for their loss one will need to find an ‘Ausgleich’ – compensation – but a military alliance towards other European states may be useful.47 At the same time one can find a diary note on the members of parliament in the Frankfurt National Assembly, ‘that the German parliament seems like a literary attempt: – they came all together, did not do anything and just tore each other apart; – the talent of critique previously exercised on books, has thrown itself now at persons; but it is the same lottery system.’48 It is interesting that Ranke already had at this time a fair insight, implying actions which were realized around twenty years later (such as the Ausgleich). During this unsettled period, the family was unable to move around or travel outside of Berlin, and therefore home life was strengthened. During these years the establishment of Clarissa’s salon continued, and social evenings were either held in Luisenstraße or the Rankes were themselves invited out to parties. Before the outbreak of the revolution in Berlin, Clarissa had met a French clergyman whose real name is not known, but who had been familiar at least to Robert. About this person she wrote: I met lately at a small soiree, a young French clergyman who got introduced to me with peculiar eagerness, he told me the happiest days of his life had been spent with Mr  John Thomas  & Mr  Robert Graves in the year 1842. I am not very bright in catching or retaining names, but I think he called himself ‘De Boisee’ you will probably guess who he was, such warm  & grateful recollection I never heard expressed, his wonder and admiration of John’s extensive learning, of his mathematical knowledge  – of his  & your disinterested kindness of him!!! He asked all sorts of questions about you both & spoke about the Lakes & all your acquaintances there as if he had been at Bowness a month ago – particularly about the Swinburnes – all his eloquence ceased when I told him of Mrs Swinburnes’ death, he was not the same man for the rest of the evening – he asked after ‘Miss Wolf’, I was a little puzzled at first to know whom he meant. Mrs Fletcher seems also to have

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 151 made a great impression on him. The Miss Watson’s, Mr Wordsworth were all duly enquired after. He complained that neither you or Mr Thomas – after all your kindness – ever asked him to write to you, I encouraged him to do so & I expect you will soon have a letter from one of your greatest admirers – I felt a great satisfaction in hearing your praises from him, for he struck me as being a remarkably high minded & intellectual young man of the best feeling.49 In March 1849 Clarissa recorded a dinner with Minister Eichhorn where she had a discussion with Jacob Grimm. She wrote to Robert: I dined at the old Minister Eichhorns on his Birthday  & sat next to Jacob Grimm. He asked if I had Brothers I told him Yes! Brothers who knew I had a respect for him, & that my youngest Brother intended to call his next child after him – this pleased him beyond measure, & he immediately drank the health of little Jacob & desired me to give all my Brothers & Charles especially his kindiest greetings.50 It was not only poetry but also the political order that was discussed during such meetings. In the following letter Clarissa probably had a discussion with her husband when she wrote to Amalie Ranke: The University is in the greatest state of disorder, the students are mostly idle, mischievous Politicians, who contaminate each other, & do little beyond sauntering about with their red or tri coloured capes & swords, & fighting with each other, your Cousin Richard (entre nous) is not going on well, & causes his Father some anxiety. Indeed all Parents, whatever their political opinions may be, are desireous of sending their sons away from this scene of temptation; my Friends Dr. & Madame Pertz have parted with their eldest son to study in Bonn, although they would infinitely have preferred his remaining with them. It is a great pity when young men enter too soon into politics, before their judgement is perfected or their minds sufficiently stored with knowledge. Your Uncle says a little politics is as dangerous in wordly affairs, as a little religion in spiritual, the latter leads to disbelief, the former to false ideas of liberty & right.51 In a few letters during the early 1850s Clarissa mentioned different religious sects in Berlin, thereby starting a general theological discussion. She probably had the same discussion with her husband, because she often quotes his opinion in her letters. In 1851 W.G. Watson visited the Rankes on the advice of Charles Graves. He wrote from Dresden in June 1851 about this meeting, after receiving a letter of introduction to Professor Ranke: The Professor was engaged in lecturing when I first called and I did not return to ask for Mrs Ranke not wishing to intrude upon an invalid. But on my

152  European revolutions and Ranke’s role calling again she was kind enough to admit me and to ask me to come in the evening and take coffee with her and the Professor. I trust sincerely that Mrs Ranke is now recovering from the very dangerous illness from which she has suffered. The day before I called she had been out in a carriage for the first time and did not seem to have suffered from the exertion. I spent a very pleasant and interesting couple of hours with them and added much to my store of agreeable recollections of Berlin. I saw Mrs Ranke again the evening before I left Berlin, but did not venture to do more than just take leave of the professor.52 For his work Ranke also received help from Charles Graves, who in particular was interested in questions of antiquity. He was one of the first to write an article on the old Irish Ogham script, and he also began to learn Irish. In the early nineteenth century many Protestants in Ireland believed that by learning the Irish language, the Irish nation would rise again – but of course without undermining the Protestant superiority. Many viewed it as an honour to learn Irish, and yet it remained the privilege of a minority. Irish was greatly reduced in social prestige because commoners could speak Irish but rarely read it. Even if Irish was recognized in some circles as a ‘national language,’ there was no concept to define the Irish nation based on the Irish language. Therefore the Irish euphoria as a romantic version of nationalism of the 1840s as an Irish dream of a nation speaking their own language simply followed the other ‘national’ examples in Europe.53 Following Ranke’s example, Graves asked the English government for financial help for the publication of the Old Irish Brehon Laws. His suggestion was taken on board, and he was called as a member to the according commission. Graves was also a member of the English Historic Manuscripts Commission. Charles also played an influential role for Ranke: In 1849, Ranke was made an honorary member of the Royal Irish Academy. At a meeting on 17 September, the Committee members Rev. W.S. Drummond, Dr Butcher and Rev. Charles Graves [. . .] took into consideration the list of names of persons proposed as eligible to be elected Honorary Members of the Academy in the department of Polite Literature. It was resolved to recommend to the Council the names of the following continental Scholars Jacob Grimm Bopp54 Lepsius55 Guizot56 Leopold Ranke.57 Two days later the Council added Alexander von Humboldt to the list, and on 30 November all recommended scholars were elected.58 Other honorary members of the Royal Irish Academy admired by Ranke and Clarissa were Goethe (1825),

European revolutions and Ranke’s role  153 Wordsworth (1846) and Charles Darwin (1866),59 who also received the order Pour le Mérite from Berlin in 1868 and thanked Ranke in a letter.60 The major event of 1849, however, was the birth of a fourth child on 15 November 1849. Clarissa wrote concerning the name-giving and christening in a letter to Amalie: I cannot be sufficiently thankful to God for His gracious care of me. I was so weak I greatly feared my confinement, but He brought me through with scarcely any suffering and blest me with a strong healthy boy, he looks very nice, as if he would be a little Professor, but has no pretensions to beauty – he was christened on the 27th of last month. August Edwin Albrecht after his Godfather, the good Professor Neander, the Herr von Manteuffel, & the Prince Albrecht. We had a small, quiet party consisting in all of sixteen persons. Strauss the Hof-Prediger made a beautiful exhortation. Leopold wished your Father could have heard it & gave the blessing twice, he had prepared a discourse for the occasion, but after seeing our joyous children, he said, he gave way to their influence, enjoying upon us all how we were to be children in heart & affection. The Prince is a very tall, thin steely looking personage, in whose presence I expected to have been reserved & tumbling, on the contrary I was more at my ease, he was like a relative in the room doing the honours & speaking to every one, he played with the children & thanked us when he was going away for the pleasant evening he had spent.61 The beginning of the year 1850 was clouded by the deteriorating health of Clarissa’s mother. Helena Graves had become so weak that she was unable to speak, and she suffered much pain.62 On 2 February John informed Ranke of her death:63 You will be prepared to hear that my beloved mother departed this life today at about ¼ to 5 o’clock p.m. Her end was peaceful, and attended with little pain. We all feel deeply thankful to God for his mercy in releasing her without painful struggle from a disease usually accompanied in its last stages with severe suffering. Charles and I were present in her room. Let us know soon how Clara bears her affliction. I hope much from her Christian fortitude, though her bodily strength is small.64 In his diary Leopold Ranke noted the difficulties he had in telling his wife the sad news. Under 8 February he noted: Before going to bed I received the news that the mother of my beloved wife died on 3rd February. I did not tell her the news but my good night kiss was much more affectionate and it helped to give her a good night. – She died, at the time, or shortly after, she wrote her last farewell. Her virtues and her mistakes were important in forming our marriage.65

154  European revolutions and Ranke’s role However, a worse shock for both Leopold and Clarissa was the death of their youngest child. On 11 July 1850 Albrecht died, and Clarissa wrote to John: I have had a loss dear John – but God can and does comfort me – I have lost my sweet, happy, baby – my little Albert, who was my comforting angel in all my sorrow; Only last Thursday evening the day after I  last wrote to dear Helen, he became seriously ill, and yesterday (Wednesday the 10th inst) his spirits gently fled at about 3 o’clock in the afternoon. I had weaned him about a fortnight ago – about a week after he got his first tooth, attended with diarrhoea, of which his nurse did not inform me, and he was so happy and abounding in good humour I had no anxiety about him, though he too bad [. . . ?] very much reduced: on Thursday he began to reject every thing from his stomach the doctor came on Friday and pronounced his case at once very dangerous. I took care of him night and day, gave him constantly nourishment, real tea, arrowroot, Hungarian wine – but nothing remained in his little frame. He dwindled away hourly – he suffered three nights dreadfully, but he died so sweetly that he reconciled me to death. – He was a beautifully formed child, but in health his little face was so round and smiling that we observed little beauty in it, but as he grew thin his eyes came out large – and every feature became refined and perfect, and when he died his father said ‘I never saw anything so wonderfully beautiful!’ He is still lying there and I go to see him very often & delight myself in looking at him. At such moments one feels the full blessed power of Christianity, what could soothe a mother’s grief, what could comfort and raise and exalt her, but this only true and blessed hope! I know not how, but I feel my sweet smiling child is accepted through our Saviour’s merits into glory and that I am mother of an angel in Heaven, I have not yet told the other children of baby’s death. It will be a great grief to them, they love him excessively I cannot tell you what a sweet, good, pleasant child he was! My heart is very weak & though I have hope and comfort I mourn for my little one. He has been my nearest, dearest, thought and occupation for months past.66 At the end of her letter, Clarissa added that ‘Ranke is now only father & husband – he feels with me & supports me.’67 In his diary, Ranke noted his son’s disease but also mentioned that after the first tooth, five more followed at once.68 He expressed his sorrow thus: Death seemed like freedom, redemption, but was especially beautiful. This death angel, which flew over him, has been like him full of innocence and depth. In front of us lay the life that had been born, with a forehead, behind which thoughts should have developed, with a special dignity full of goodness and purity, but now that life is over. It really is.69 Due to the loss of his youngest child, Ranke decided to buy a family grave near the Sophienkirche which contained one of the oldest cemeteries in the city. According

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 155 to the notes of Otto von Ranke in his later years, Ranke bought a family grave near a wall, which divided the Christian cemetery from the Jewish one. Following the rules, a Jewish cemetery was so holy that it could never be sold or destroyed. Ranke desired to have the family grave behind the cemetery in which his youngest son was laid to rest. In later years, however, the Jewish cemetery was sold and several crosses and stones from the Christian cemetery were removed. In a letter from Clarissa around this time it was noted that a cross was to be erected on Albrecht’s grave: But my heart is full of grief for the loss of my favourite little Albrecht, and I can scarely [sic] think of any thing else, he is buried close to the Sophien Kirche which is contrary to the general German practice but pleasing to my English ideas. We intend erecting an iron cross at the head of his grave with the inscription ‘Selike [sic] ist das Himmelreich’ [Blessed is heaven]. Indeed he was such a sweet tempered happy good child that I fancy he was even when here a little angel. He was very tall and more beautifully formed than my other children and he was very great comfort and delight in this year to me of sorrow and tears.70 Both Clarissa and Leopold had difficulties in dealing with the loss of their son. Clarissa wrote several letters expressing her sorrow, and several people shared in her grief. Ranke tried to deal with the loss in a different way. He left on a long trip in order to research in the summer of 1850. During this trip he wrote several long and detailed letters to Clarissa. While staying at Paris in September and October 1850, he wrote to her recalling the summer of 1843 when they had first met.71 Charles’ admiration for Ranke can be seen in a letter to Clarissa in June 1852, in which he also mentioned his own historical work and the hopes for an ‘Irish Ranke’: While my health was very delicate I took up the study of the Irish language & Ancient History of Ireland as a recreation & alternative. . . . Besides this, my position as Secretary of Council to the Royal Irish Academy obliges me to give attention to matters of Irish Archaeology; & I have felt it to be a duty to use what influence I [have] for the accomplishment of objects which any Irish literary men believe to be of the greatest importance. Some day or other, an Irish Ranke will arise to use the materials of history which I am endeavouring to make accessible & then I shall be recognised as a useful though an humble labourer.72 At the same time Graves was very positive for further grants from the English government for the further edition of the Brehon Laws. In February 1852 the Royal Irish Academy put through a further request and received, like in previous years, another £200 each year. The request was also successful in that many letters of recommendation from international academics such as Francis Madden, Henry

156  European revolutions and Ranke’s role Hallam,73 Prof. Guizot and Jacob Grimm were attached.74 Amongst these letters was also one from Ranke: (Extract.) Berlin, 2 August 1851. It was with much interest I received the information that several influential members of the Royal Irish Academy are occupied with the project of publishing that very remarkable monument of old Irish legislation called the Brehon Laws. Perhaps those laws, thus preserved, are not so very ancient as has been supposed. It is also possible that in their composition old Northern and Germanic influences have not entirely excluded. But they cannot fail to contain a rich stock of genuine historical knowledge. In the institutes of the old Irish judges, derived from early manners and customs, the primitive ideas of the nation may be discovered; and it will be also particularly curious to investigate the analogy and the dissimilarity between the Irish and Welsh laws. Imperfect fragments of the Leges Brehonicae have been already presented to the public; but they have merely tended to awaken curiosity; whereas a complete collection of them, well deciphered and faithfully interpreted, would be a valuable acquisition to science; and I consider that their publication would not only be meritorious, but is in fact a national duty. Rev. Charles Graves, D.D. (signed) Leopold Ranke.75 This article, ‘Zur Kritik Preuβischer Memoiren,’76 was presented to the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin, and in it Ranke assessed the historical memoirs of von Pöllnitz and the Countess of Bayreuth in contrast to other contemporary works such as La Martiniere and Fassmann. This article was a critical source analysis with the conclusion that von Pöllnitz was not an authority for general Prussian history, as he was not a trained historian. However, he represented a good source for the Prussian Court (during the reign of Frederick II the Great) while he served there due to the fact that he was able to recount his views and dealings with the court. Therefore, Ranke believed the source of von Pöllnitz to be important and original. This could not be said for the memoirs of the Countess of Bayreuth: most of her accounts would not represent the full historical truth even though she was the daughter of one of the most influential men in Prussia (‘Soldier’ King Frederick William I). Ranke compared her accounts to five other original works and can only conclude that she has a low credibility when it comes to important sources for historical studies. After the publication of his Prussian History and the extensive criticisms he received by revolutionary-minded scholars in 1848 and 1849, Ranke composed this article to ease most of the criticism he received and to regain some credibility again. He chose in particular two sources which would deal with reigns of kings mainly dealt with in his Prussian History and which have been controversial in German history: Frederick William I and Frederick II the Great. Both of these kings were regarded as the founding fathers of modern Prussia, which, during the

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 157 revolution of 1848–49, was a focus of dismissal by liberal forces of the Prussian educated and middle classes. Even today these two kings would cause discomfort as on one hand they may be celebrated for the creation of a powerful state, while on the other hand they are blamed for the creation of a state which was doomed to lead to the Second World War and the Holocaust. The salon, as Tollebeck indicated, had long been recognized as a location for female scholarly activity. Thus in the Ranke home could be found two important intellectual locations that historians have identified as strongly gendered. Few analysts of Ranke’s historical teaching and writing have, however, referred to his wife’s salon. It would be worth exploring, in a comprehensive fashion, the intellectual, personal links and overlap between the seminar and the salon in the Ranke household.77 In his memories of his father Friduhelm von Ranke noted the intensive friendship with the wife of General von Manteuffel, as well as Ranke’s admiration for Princess Sophie of Holland, Queen Marie of Bavaria, the Grand Duchess of Baden and Queen Elisabeth of Prussia, whom he visited frequently in Sanssouci or Charlottenburg in Berlin.78 A very important friend and supporter was Prince August of Prussia, whose daughter Mrs von Waldenburg was always visiting the salon. When Frieduhelm was young, Prince Albrecht was always visiting. And once, when Ranke was still unmarried, he followed an invitation by the Prince. When preparing to get ready a beggar arrived and without thinking Ranke grabbed the first pair of trousers from his cupboard and is believed to have given him the good pair. When he was ready to leave he realized that he gave away his good pair and therefore had to go to the prince’s court with his outworn pair of trousers. Friduhelm noted that during the revolutionary years many letters were written between the prince and Ranke and that the prince came to visit the professor often, not in the salon, but in his study. Friduhelm noted that Prince Albrecht was the only person ever permitted to smoke in Ranke’s study.79 In the early 1850s several American scholars visited the Ranke family. The American clergyman John Lord was advised by Clarissa’s mother, Helena Graves, to travel around Germany and visit the Rankes. After his visit to Germany he wrote her the following note: I have just returned from Germany, very tired & very stupid. Still, I take the first occasion to express to you the pleasure which I had in a visit to Prof. Ranke. Madam Ranke was extremely kind & cordial and introduced me to the Prof. Although he was very busy. And I never spent 2 hours more delightfully in my life. I liked him exceedingly, and, what is seldom the case, came away, from the presence of a great man with [.  .  .  ?] and respect. But his attainment & his genius are enough to drive all other people to despair. I am going to burn all my historical work & lectures and seek comfortable but inglorious obscurity. What can I do!80 In France too, Ranke maintained a number of scholarly contacts. In October 1850, he wrote from Paris to tell his wife of visits to Abel-François Villemain,81 who had been Minister of Education under King Louis-Philippe, and to Mignet, Michelet,82

158  European revolutions and Ranke’s role Thierry83 and Thiers.84 Times were hard for these men since the overthrow of the July Monarchy; the visitor from Berlin spoke of his sympathy not only for those who had fallen from high places but also – and this must have come less naturally to him – for ‘the democratic Michelet,’ now that a new Napoleon was in power.85 Probably due to his loyalty, maybe due to his ‘political memoirs,’ Ranke received from the young Bavarian king Maximilian II the Commander of the Order of Merit of the Holy Michael (Komtur des Verdienstordens vom Heiligen Michael) in February 1852.86 Due to the revolution, Ranke did not travel at all in 1848. In July and August  1849, he went ‘home’ and visited Nordhausen, Wiehe, Schönewerda, Donndorf, Langenroda and Weißensee. The international travels commenced again in 1850 when he travelled in August and September to Hanover, Brussels, Cologne, Paris, Vincennes, Charenton and Fontainebleu. In September 1851 he travelled again to Strasbourg, Frutingen, Lausanne, Zurich, Gemsbach, Baden, Basel, Bern, Interlaken, Leuker-Bad and Sitten. In 1852 he travelled with the family. In July and August he travelled to Dortmund, Düsseldorf, Brussels and Ostende, staying for August and September in London, in September in Cheltenham, Cardiff, Windcliffe and Chipstow and in October returning to Berlin, passing London, Paris, and Cologne. It should be noted that in Düsseldorf and Brussels Clarissa helped again to make copies of manuscripts for Leopold.

Notes 1 See also Sperber, Germany 1800–1870; Wolfram Siemann, The German Revolution of 1848–49 (New York, 1998), pp. 13–52; Charles Breuning, and Matthew Levinger, The revolutionary era, 1789–1850 (New York, 2002), pp. 238–248, 270–289. 2 Neun Bücher Preußischer Geschichte (1848–1849) (Memoirs of the house of Brandenburg and history of Prussia, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (1848– 49) [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 25–29]. 3 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. xxxvii. 4 Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, p. 78. 5 Circourt, Adolphe de (1801–79), French diplomat and historian. 6 Dahlmann, Friedrich Christoph (1785–1860), German historian and politician. He was professor at various German universities and was elected for the centre-right in the National Assembly in 1848. 7 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 103. 8 Ibid, p. 104. 9 Siemann, The German revolution, pp. 63–64. 10 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, March 1848, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 35. 11 Siemann, The German revolution, p. 64. 12 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, 18 March 1848, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 10. 13 Varnhagen von Ense, Karl August (1785–1858), German diplomat and writer. 14 K.A. Varnhagen von Ense, Briefe an eine Freundin (Hamburg, 1860), pp. 70–71. 15 Siemann, The German revolution, pp. 65–66. 16 Letter of John Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 3 March 1848, SUL Y245. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 For details on sacralization and the power of culture, see also T.C.W. Blanning (ed.), The Oxford illustrated history of modern Europe (Oxford, 1996), pp. 128–129; T.C.W. Blanning, The culture of power and the power of culture (Oxford, 2002), p. 232.

European revolutions and Ranke’s role 159 20 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Oda Ranke, 28 March 1848, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 7/2/59–60. 21 Hecht, Leopold von Ranke, p. 231. 22 Letter of Helena Graves to Clarissa Ranke, April 1848, SUL Y148. 23 Letter of John Graves to Robert Graves, 22 April  1848, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/36/9. 24 Letter of Helena Graves to Clarissa Ranke, SUL Y156. 25 Letter of Helena Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 3 July 1848, SUL Y145. 26 For further details see also Adrian Rice, ‘Graves, John Thomas’, available at: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, www.oxforddnb.com/articles/11/11311-article.html [12 October 2004]. 27 Letter of John Graves to Leopold Ranke, 23 July 1848, SUL Y246. 28 Smith O’Brien, William (1803–1864), Irish nationalist MP and leader of the Young Ireland movement. 29 Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/48/49. 30 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, 28 July 1848, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 11. 31 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 9 March 1849, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 37. 32 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 29 April 1849, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 12. 33 Siemann, The German revolution, p. 197. 34 Ibid, p. 1. 35 Jordan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, p. 36. 36 Ibid. 37 Manteuffel, Edwin Freiherr von (1809–85), Prussian general and military politician. 38 Ingrid Hecht, ‘Die Arbeit selbst ist das Vergnügen’, Briefwechsel und Schriften 1870 bis 1884, Leopold von Ranke – Edwin von Manteuffel (Halle, 2005), pp. 28–31. 39 For more details see Conze, ‘Der Historiker als Politikberater’, pp. 24–37. 40 Ibid, p. 36. 41 Ibid. 42 Hecht, ‘Die Arbeit selbst ist das Vergnuegen’, all memoranda see pp. 183–212. 43 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 105. 44 Ibid, p. 37. 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. 48 Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 351. 49 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 35. 50 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 9 March 1849, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 37. 51 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 8. 52 Letter of W.G. Watson to Charles Graves, 12 June  1851, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/48/100. 53 R.V. Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation (London, 2003), S. 131–139. 54 Bopp, Franz (1791–1867), German philologist. Professor of Indo-European grammar in Berlin. 55 Lepsius, Karl Richard (1810–84), German egyptologist. He was professor in Berlin from 1846 and is well known for his work on early Egyptian history. 56 Guizot, François Guillaume (1787–1874), French historian and statesman. As the king’s chief advisor (1840), he promoted reactionary methods of government. 57 Royal Irish Academy (RIA), Committee for Polite Literature, vol. i, May  1785 March 1877, p. 166. 58 RIA, Minutes of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. iii, April 1849–April 1856, pp. 25–26.

160  European revolutions and Ranke’s role 59 RIA, Pamphlet ‘Royal Irish Academy’ (Dublin, 2003), p. 6. Darwin, Charles Robert (1809–82), English naturalist. 60 Letter of Charles Darwin to Leopold von Ranke, 5 February 1868, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 5/1/69. 61 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 56. 62 Letter of John Graves to Robert Graves, 30 January  1850, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/36/13. 63 For details of her will, see letter of John Graves to Leopold Ranke, 2 March 1850, SUL Y252. 64 Letter of John Graves to Leopold Ranke, 3 February 1850, SUL Y251. 65 Diary entry of Leopold Ranke, 8 February 1850, GStA PK, FA Geschwister Ranke, Nr. 22. This entry is not known to other scholars and was discovered by the author amongst documents dealing with Ranke’s brothers. 66 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to John Graves, 11 July 1850, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 265. 67 Ibid. 68 Diary of Leopold Ranke, 12 July 1850, GStA PK, FA Geschwister Ranke, Nr. 22. 69 Ibid. 70 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 13. 71 Letters from his trips in 1850 see also Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 341–349. 72 Letter of Charles Graves to Clarissa Graves, June 1852, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 73 Hallam, Henry (1777–1859), English historian. 74 Report of Commons appointed by Lord Lieutenant to inquire concerning Ancient Laws and Institutes of Ireland, Chair Francis Blackburne, 1952, Paper series: House of Commons Papers; Reports of Commissioners (356), xviii.543, S. 1–10; available at: House of Commons Parliamentary Papers Database, http://gateway.proquest. com/ openurl?url_ver=Z39.88–2004&es_dat=xri:hcpp&rft_dat=xri:hcpp:fulltext:1852– 028213 [1 January 2006]. 75 Printed excerpt of the letter of Leopold Ranke to Charles Graves, 2 August 1851, in: Ibid, p. 5. 76 ‘Zur Kritik Preußischer Memoiren’, in: Abhandlungen der Koeniglichen Preuβischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1851), pp. 517–544. [‘On the criticism of Prussian memoirs’] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 24]. 77 Ilaria Porciani and Mary O’Dowd, ‘History women’, in: Storia della Storiografia, History Women, 46 (2004), p. 13. 78 Friduhelm von Ranke, Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke von seinem Sohne Friduhelm von Ranke, ed. by Peter von Blanckenburg (Berlin, 1996), p. 9. 79 Ibid, p. 13. 80 Letter of John Lord to Helen Graves, 4 September  1845, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/20/55. 81 Villemain, Abel-François (1790–1870), French politician and writer. 82 Michelet, Jules (1798–1874), French historian. 83 Thierry, Augustin (1795–1856), French historian. 84 Thiers, Adolphe (1797–1877), French statesman and historian. 85 Franklin L. Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society (1975), p. 60. 86 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 107.

7 Ranke’s daily life, Clarissa’s illness and her ‘Salon Ranke’ (1852–59)

Reports of Ranke’s private life depend mainly on the accounts of his sons Friduhelm and Otto. Friduhelm’s account is the more detailed, but both brothers praised their father and recalled him fondly. Leopold’s life was dedicated to history and his daily routine was largely unchanging, except when he was on research trips abroad. He slept through the early morning, especially in winter, because he did not like to work with lamplight. On rising he first went to the bedrooms at the other end of the apartment where his wife and children were and greeted them. From there he moved to have breakfast, which consisted of two cups of tea. When his family grew up, Leopold insisted that one of them read a passage from the Bible to him. Leopold rarely spoke a word at this meal and disappeared into his study and library, which consisted of four rooms. His study was located at the rear of the apartment, away from the noise of the road, so his concentration would not be broken.1 His working time and his study were sacred, and he did not permit members of the family to disturb him. At least four mornings a week he prepared his classes. In his early years he preferred to stand, dressed in a long dressing gown and homemade slippers, working at a high desk, which still survives in the Ranke-Museum. At around 11:30 in the morning the barber arrived. He would bring news and a personalized weather forecast, which was usually inaccurate and was therefore the cause of a lot of laughter in the house. When the barber had left, Leopold freshened himself up and walked quickly to the university, passing the workers in the artillery workshop in the Dorotheenstraße. At the university Leopold took his class between twelve and one o’clock. This was followed between one and two o’clock on Thursdays by the historical seminar, which took place in Leopold’s private library at home.2 After his classes, Leopold went for a solitary walk through the Tiergarten over the Großer Stern and towards the zoological gardens. He diverted from this pattern only on the hottest summer days, when he preferred to walk in the morning and late evening around the garden of the Tierarzneischule which, at that time, was still stocked with large trees. He also walked in the Invalidengarten, which was his favourite one.3 Lunch was usually at three o’clock. He is described as often being as hungry as a ‘wolf’4 and then he would storm up the stairs and eat lunch immediately.

162  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness The meal generally consisted of soup, meat and a dessert. Depending on the time of year, a special meal was made for him, which was usually shared with his family. A blotter book belonging to Clarissa containing around 80 recipes details the kind of meals, desserts and drinks the Rankes consumed: plum-bread, rice-flour cake, light bread for breakfast-rolls, veal cutlets, French veal pie, carrot soup, lemon pudding, boiled oysters, almond cheese cake, cream pancakes, fricassée of eggs or cherry brandy, to mention some.5 On the table was usually a bottle of Haute Sauternes. Leopold would drink a glass or two and then solemnly re-cork the bottle. He drank no more than this lest it interfere with his concentration. His conversation dwelt on the events of the day rather than on his classes or research. He had a keen eye and liked to recount comical scenes that he had witnessed while all letters were read openly and discussed in English.6 Leopold would then disappear to his study and only ceased his work for a few minutes at seven o’clock to look at the newspaper and have a cup of tea with the family. It displeased him if a member of his family was missing. After tea, Leopold would continue his work until eleven o’clock and then return to discuss common matters with Clarissa. He then went to bed, where he usually slept for seven or eight hours.7 Leopold would spend eleven to twelve hours a day working. If he joined one of Clarissa’s social gatherings, his working day would be shorter. Leopold’s time for his family was limited, but Friduhelm said that he made the most of it. Ranke was a permanent optimist and was usually in a good mood with his family. He had jokes for everyone and liked to cheer them up. He enjoyed playing with his children, pretending to fight with them and playing hide and seek through the various rooms of the house. Friduhelm’s account said that the children were overjoyed when they caught Ranke, but he would then free himself and the game would start all over again with lots of noise and screaming.8 In middle-class households, by the mid-century, fathers had a decidedly patriarchal role, interpreted today as representing the order of the ‘real world’ in the domestic sphere, where they were disciplinarians and authorities of last resort, leaving the everyday business of family life to their wives. According to Rosenhaft this role was not universal, nor did it exclude shows of affection, but it points to a deepening division of roles in the shared educative functions of mothers and fathers.9 The Ranke children’s perception of their father, which was doubtless influenced by Clarissa, was of a great man who was an example to them of knowledge, spirit and diligence, being superior, inaccessible, infallible and monumental in everything. During their adolescence Otto and Friduhelm continued to see their father as an untouchable man and consequently they remained shy. A full trust could not develop. The relationship between father and daughter, however, was different. He loved Maximiliane and listened to her advice; she acted for him in the role of a diplomat. The children feared the dissatisfaction of their father most, and it was impossible to get his attention if he did not wish to cooperate.10 Juhnke referred to Henz who had described Leopold as provocative, unrestrained and needy for prestige. At home he was a full-fledged patriarch and acted with the

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  163 highest authority to his servants, and he decided who was allowed to visit his wife and children. Apparently, he kept his wife financially dependent, although it was her dowry which became the base of the family wealth. His sons were intimidated by the father, and he was often temperamental and peremptory.11 As with every other family, we find some issues and problems in family life, which we also find with the Ranke family. However, I  do not believe that he decided who was allowed to visit his wife or children. How would he keep control of Clarissa’s salon with sometimes more than a hundred guests at a time? Differences of opinion were accepted between the married couple, and if Leopold disagreed with guests, he would simply disappear to his study. Also the famous critique that he kept his family financially short we have to view relatively. Due to Clarissa’s experience of relatives and their lost family fortunes and Leopold’s historical perspective on the rise and fall of influential families, they knew quite well that money would not last forever. We also have to keep in mind exactly what expenses there were. Historians like Henz look only at the publications and Leopold’s research. They forgot other expenses: accommodation, cost for food and living, expenses for the children and their education, expenses for the son’s study and military career, Maximiliane’s dowry, expenses for a permanent physician for Clarissa and medical expenses, and we cannot forget expenses for running a salon and enabling the Ranks to accommodate more than hundred guests. All of this costs money, and it is not surprising if Leopold kept an eye on expenses. This did not mean that the education was cut short or Clarissa had to shut down her salon; it just meant that, in order to continue a certain lifestyle, they could not afford everything. Leopold was not involved with the details of the children’s education, something which is difficult to understand because Clarissa could not move in her later years. The little attention to education followed his principles. He did not believe that permanent supervision had a good effect on children and thought that the character of a person was innate and God-given. Leopold was not a supporter of schooling, viewing its effects as making children silly and disrupting their individuality. While his sons Otto and Friduhelm were sent to a public school, Maximiliane was not allowed to go to school and a governess, Mrs Ottilie Gombert, was hired. She stayed for several years.12 In one matter Leopold tried to influence the education of the children. From a young age they were allowed to speak only German. He did not want his children to speak both languages at once. Only after they were able to speak German fluently was an English governess hired, and she also taught them French. Maximiliane secretly got Italian lessons and surprised her father in 1858, when at the age of twelve, she wrote to him in Italian while he was in Venice. Leopold expected her lessons to finish after her confirmation, when she would be fourteen. After that, her education was her own responsibility. Mrs Gombert left the house and a servant took her place. This demonstrates Leopold’s view of female education. He was of the opinion that a woman’s education was her own responsibility. He had nothing against the female sex and he respected women, but he saw their duty as being primarily to the house and family life.13 Although schooling for girls of

164  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness the middle and upper classes was well established in most German states by the mid-century, it did not involve, and sometimes expressly excluded, studies that would qualify them for higher education.14 This means that Leopold’s view was commonplace. Friduhelm remembered something similar: Leopold was not against the education of women in general, he was just against a woman gathering up facile knowledge. According to her own personality, she should search for her own knowledge. Her main task he saw in the household. Friduhelm noted that this would not mean that Leopold would think any less of women; on the contrary, he would allow her to do what she wanted in the house and to win the heart of the husband. He was always an admirer of beautiful and intellectual women. He remembered his mother with great love: her birthday on 9 June was always filled with memories of her. His relationship to his sister Rosalie was, until the end, purely affectionate, and he always spoke of his great friends in Frankfurt Mrs Vicar Ahlemann and ‘Demoiselle’ Karoline Beer.15 On Sundays Leopold spent more time with his family than usual. During breakfast the children sang and read from the Bible. Although he was a believing Christian, Ranke rarely went to church, except on important holidays. Even then he only attended services which took place at twelve o’clock or later. However, the family church visit rarely took place. Usually at one o’clock the family took a walk together. These walks were taken in the direction from Moabit, at that time still a village, to Charlottenburg. After walking through the palace park the way went back along the Lützowstraße and through the Tiergarten. The walks were special to the family, and it was then that the children got a glimpse of their father’s character and of his love of nature. He would enquire about school-life from the children and respond by telling them of his childhood.16 In 1852 the whole Ranke family planned to travel to England, but due to her spinal disease, Clarissa was unable to move. Robert Graves mentioned on 3 March that Clarissa had a plan to visit him, but due to her illness she could not travel. Robert cancelled a meeting in order to meet her.17 At first it was thought that Clarissa might visit Ireland as well, but this plan was abandoned in August.18 Leopold’s and Clarissa’s arrival, as well as the visit of John Graves to Cheltenham, were mentioned by Ranke to his brother Ferdinand on 2 September: With several tribulations but with no accident we were able to reach OldEngland over Ostende. Again I was amazed with the magnificence and the noise of London and I am delighted with the silence and simplicity of our manor. The region is quite beautiful. The hills remind me of Wiehe, but they are used much more. I can recognise now, what brothers are. The oldest brother of my wife treated us with lots of love, care and consideration. Also present is another brother from Dublin, with his pleasant wife, who is not at all an insignificant man.19 While Leopold returned to London for his studies, Clarissa remained in Cheltenham. Nevertheless only a few days passed before Leopold wrote to her on 4

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  165 October that ‘I want nothing but your presence.’20 The following morning Leopold wrote to Clarissa very enthusiastically: I saw the Twinning’s, the Napier’s, the Gordon’s, the Hebeler’s and also Charles and Selina. That couple is still here, I hope to dine with them this evening. If you arrive Wednesday at five o’clock, I won’t fail to be at the Paddington Station. Then we may proceed immediately to the very nice house Twinning at Clapham, where I should think, you may find a very good accommodation.21 While in London Leopold had been invited to meet several distinguished families, including the Napiers. Robert expressed his delight to Miss E. Napier on 12 October: Your account of Ranke’s evening in the midst of your home party was most entertaining & delightful, thank you very much for taking the trouble to give us so full and graphic detail of it. I am truly glad that he gave so much enjoyment to your father & all of you. The more I know of him the more I admire him as a man of extraordinary intellectual power & memory & of right honest principles & true kindness of heart, when his busy absorbed intellect & old bachelor habit allow his heart to act. What a spectacle he is of happiness arising from a healthful energy! Seeing so much as we did of him in private, both C. & J. could not help taking notice that about matters of every day life, & some others too, he was overhasty in forming conclusions, which accordingly were not often wrong (& were frequently candidly retracted by him) and we found a difficulty in reconciling this with his undoubtedly great historical faculties & habits. I am inclined to conclude that his eminence is rather in intuitive acuity & power of decision than in patient exploring & weighing of all the facts of his subject, so that I can suppose him likely to be wrong upon many points, while his sense, his penetration & his decisiveness would keep him on the whole right than wrong, & make his conclusion telling. I neither know history in general nor his works in particular well enough to say how far his writings tally.22 After their return to Berlin, Clarissa heard of another death, that of her brother James. She mentioned in a letter to Amalie Ranke in February 1853 that ‘I have only three brothers now, one died about three months ago, which was a sad twist to me.’23 Clarissa had another significant relative: her cousin Robert James Graves. He was born in 1796 in Dublin and was educated at Trinity College Dublin, graduating in medicine in 1818. During his early travels Graves met the artist John Mallard Turner in 1819.24 After pursuing studies at London, Edinburgh and Berlin, he returned to Dublin in 1821 and became physician to the Meath Hospital. Graves was president of the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland in 1843 and 1844 and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1849. One of his greatest reforms

166  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness was the substitution of adequate nourishment and stimulants for the traditional ‘lowering treatment’ in the cases of fever. He also advocated a network of medical observatories to record the rise, progress and character of diseases. Robert Graves died in Dublin on 20 March 1853.25 Only a few days later Leopold wrote about Robert Graves’ death in a letter to a friend that ‘we had to suffer a big loss in Ireland regarding Dr Robert Graves, a close relative of my wife.’26 Clarissa suffered from a disease affecting her spinal cord for much of her married life. From around 1850 onwards she noticed a decline in her health as first her fingers, then her whole hand lost its function. This condition continued to spread to her feet and other parts of her body. Clarissa’s letters show the different stages of this development in detail. She wrote of her disabled hands in her Christmas letters, of being unable to cut meat on the plate by herself, of a damp weakness in her left leg and the necessity to rest longer and more often on her sofa. Her handwriting in her letters deteriorated from month to month and in 1862 she finally stopped writing. At this stage Clarissa could barely move her fingers or arms. Clarissa mentioned to Robert in 1856 that ‘I cannot raise my foot up one step, & with great help can scarcely drag myself across the room.’27 In the same year Charles complained to Robert about Clarissa’s bad health, stating that German physicians were not good. He also complained that Leopold was not looking after her and that Charles ‘would watch the husband with a jealous eye.’28 We do know that the illness affected Clarissa’s spinal cord, and it is generally accepted that she suffered from multiple sclerosis; however, it has never been fully determined if this was the actual disease. Due to this, I  and Ingrid Hecht wanted to figure out with the help of a retrospective diagnosis if she may have suffered from a different disease. As Hecht pointed out, we have the problem that a number of illnesses and diseases were misdiagnosed at first due to insufficient knowledge on diseases in general. In our research we found out that another possibility may be the case: a slow and chronic lead poisoning, which may have already started during her childhood and teens in Dublin. The first surviving document, which indicates the onset of the disease, was a prescription to acquire medicine in January 1850. The prescription was for a nerve cream (‘Rp. Ung. nerving.’) and some oil (‘mixt. ol. bals.’).29 The prescription was given by Prof. Romberg,30 who published many works during his career on nervous diseases; the most commonly known one was A manual of the nervous diseases of man, translated by E.H. Sieveking (London, 1853).31 He remained Clarissa’s main physician until her death in 1871. In a letter from January 1857 Clarissa described her latest illness in detail: I must not, cannot, write much. I have again been wandering in the shady valley, but thank God! thank God! have found my way back again (with kind help) to my Darlings here. Oh! dearest Helen, you have been anxious & suffering & care – some & plagued, but I have been very very ill, gasping for life, fearing to die, I will tell you how it was, a fortnight ago, I had written to Mrs Owen, in the afternoon I sat in my large too cold drawing-room trying to speak Italian

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  167 with a Friend; after tea, I played in the same cold room with my dear little girl, – & afterwards I lay back on my chair to rest, but when I tried to move again, I could not in the smallest, I was not only quite sensible, but terrified at my present insensibility. No force I believe could have bent my joints. I was carried to bed, & when I began to warm – oh my head got into convulsive pain, & cramps took possession of my body, till I was almost warm, screaming from agony. I passed some days almost quite maimed, without sleep, full of fear & agitation; thank God, I did not die then. – at the end of the week I began to get better, to feel & feed myself again, all this time my back & stomach were frightfully swelled & inflamed but without boils. My old Doctor Romberg attended me with great diligence. Leopold was very kind, the children very good, Fraulein Gombert indefatigable in nursing me night & day, now I am better, but very weak & helpless although my fingers hold my pen steadier than I expected.32 In August 1859 Maximiliane wrote a letter to Helen Graves about a treatment her mother received and that ‘a gentleman from England, a very curious man, has begun a cure with her, which is called shampooing. This cure consists of two things: beating and bathing. Mamma is well beaten every day by Mrs Gratton, a friend from Bonn.’33 As her condition became worse Clarissa wrote down nursing instructions in 1860. According to Hecht this document is impressive because private instructions to a nurse are almost unknown at this time. It described in detail when she was to get up and have meals, how she wanted her bed made and how she wanted to be lifted either into bed, chair or wheelchair, how she wanted to be given her medicine, how she wanted to get her hair washed or combed and how she wanted to have her knees moved, or the manner in which she might be brought out to take the air.34 After 1862 Clarissa was unable to write, and in November 1864 she described her disability to her brother: ‘My hand is so stiff I can hardly expect to write much more. This is my greatest loss. Dictation is so different to me from what writing in my own hand is. I have more than usual to say, if I could only write it.’35 Of course Clarissa’s condition affected her husband. He mentioned in several letters that he would come home as soon as possible, although he often sent his children ahead to look after her. In 1862 Clarissa herself reported his anxiety for her when he failed to find his family in the house: On the evening of the 23 Leopold returned at an unexpected hour, he ran through our rooms downstairs quickly seeking us, finding nobody, was in a little despair, the servants then told him, I was upstairs, there he found us sitting with poor Otto, of whose illness he had heard nothing; the surprise of both parties was so great, that not a word was said for some time. I felt much comforted by his return.36 In the beginning Clarissa tried to fight the disease. She travelled to Wildbad, Rehme and Doberan for bath cures, in an attempt to get the most expensive

168  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness medicines. She took baths in mercury fluids and drank Emser Water, which at that time was regarded as a curative. But nothing cured her and a long hopelessness enveloped her, during which she knew that only death would take her sufferings away. She became weaker towards the end of her life and had to be fed and washed. She could no longer turn the pages of a book and during the last days she was unable to move her head from one side to the other. This illness lasted almost two decades, from around 1850–51 until 1871. From 1860 onwards Clarissa used a wheelchair. One important way in which she dealt with her disease was through her poetry and her circle of friends, better known as ‘Salon Ranke.’ This salon was well known for its musical parties, poetry classes and discussions of literature (especially Shakespeare), politics and history. Clarissa also gave classes in various languages including French, Italian and English. During the nineteenth century Berlin was known as a city of salons. Prussia gained the prestigious reputation, during the Napoleonic era, of the champion of German freedom. The foundation of Berlin University in 1810 and the economic success during the time of free trade after the Zollverein in 1834 made it lucrative for high-ranking and well-known personalities to come to Berlin. Until 1833 the best-known salon had been that of Rahel Varnhagen, which Ranke had visited several times during his early period in Berlin. According to Applegate, the salons of the urban patriciate, especially in Berlin, created semi-public spaces with their own quasi-formal rituals of performance, whether conversational or musical. Under the cover of sociability, people tested out ideas and performed compositions, not only for each other, but also for an imagined audience of the educated and refined.37 Clarissa’s salon was unique as the only internationally minded one in Berlin at which artists, composers and academics were welcome, as distinct from the salons that entertained nobility, diplomats and soldiers only. This is one of the reasons why the salon was rarely recalled in German memory.38 Clarissa’s openness and interest in all matters were widely noted. She aided her acquaintances whenever she could, and she helped many of them secure jobs or exchanges. She was occasionally asked for her advice on what places to visit in Britain. London she regarded as the most important place, followed by Dublin and the Irish countryside. Moreover she was involved in student exchange programs particularly after 1866, in which year Alexandra College in Dublin was founded for the education of young girls and Clarissa’s brother Robert was one of the founders. Soon Clarissa became the head of an education circle for young English and Irish ladies in German schools, and she was listed as one of eight referees on a leaflet.39 This education circle went hand in hand with the foundation and promotion of Alexandra College as well as with girls’ schools in England and Scotland. The interest in promoting the education of young girls probably had its basis in Clarissa’s own upbringing. She left home at the age of seven to be educated in England, Scotland, France and Belgium. This education was not unusual for upper-class Anglo-Irish boys, but very unusual for girls during the first half of the nineteenth century. Clarissa used her own experiences to foster a better education

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  169 for young girls in a cross exchange between her home country, Ireland, and her new home country, Germany. Altogether the Ranke family were in contact with at least 400 persons. In the early years of their marriage there were a number of persons from Ranke’s early years in Berlin, like Bettina von Arnim and Alexander von Humboldt, but Clarissa was unable to build up a friendship with them. However, her husband’s friends came regularly to Luisenstraße, and she established friendships with several of them. Among them were the famous scholar of law and Prussian justice minister Friedrich Karl von Savigny, Professor Puchta40 and his wife, the Culture Minister Eichhorn, the philosopher Schelling, the Brothers Grimm,41 the theologian Neander,42 the nature philosopher Steffens,43 the poet Ludwig Tieck,44 the Shakespeare translator August Wilhelm von Schlegel45 and the musical composer Giacomo Meyerbeer.46 As the years went on Clarissa became more housebound, but many more people came to visit her rather than her husband. Nonetheless, the famous names lessened, although the intellectual and spiritual life continued. Friends of this period included Hertha von Manteuffel,47 the wife of Leopold’s close friend Marshall Edwin von Manteuffel; the Prussian Ambassador in London, Karl von Bunsen and his family; the writer Elfriede von Mühlenfels,48 whose nickname was ‘the boat’ because she promoted the construction of a Prussian fleet; the nature researcher Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg;49 the Senior Court Preacher, Wilhelm Hoffmann, and the Court Preacher, Strauβ. British diplomats such as Sir Andrew Buchanan50 and Lord Francis Napier51 were permanent guests. Clarissa’s closest friends were the writer Ida von Düringsfeld52 and the Prussian Prince Georg,53 general of the cavalry, who was known as the Poet Prince.54 Further guests in the salon were Ritter, Enke,55 Trendelenburg and Lepsius.56 Friduhelm von Ranke remembered that one day Alexander von Humboldt came to the apartment and told his mother that the father had received the order Pour le Merite. Great friendship existed with the family of Georg Pertz,57 for whom Leopold had high respect and had always been on his side when he was heavily criticized in his later life.58 Friduhelm remembered Herman Grimm,59 who had been a young person at that time. An unforgettable moment for Ranke’s children was, according to Friduhelm, the visit of the Bavarian King Maximilian II in 1857. The visit was mainly to see Leopold, and for about an hour they stayed in Leopold’s library rooms, but then he appeared to see the others and spoke friendly with the children, especially with Maximiliane, his God-child. The children were proud to witness the friendship which connected these two men and was based on similar worldviews and interests, even though their view in regards of the German question differed. The king always showed his previous teacher the same admiration and thankfulness and showed his happiness for his frankness and naturalness.60 Also Leopold showed the king his greatest admiration, not only personally, but also for his admiration for historical studies in Germany. He never forgot that the call to Munich in 1853 indirectly led to a pay rise in Berlin to 1600 Thaler, which was important for him and, as the children grew up, fewer students came to his lectures and his income through the publications was still quite small.61 Further

170  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness visitors were the American George Bancroft,62 the English literature professor and governor to the prince Thomas Solly, Graf von Redern,63 the sculptor Johann Friedrich Drake,64 the writer Georg Hesekiel65 and his daughter Ludovica,66 Mathilde von Waldenburg,67 daughter of August Prince of Prussia,68 or the painter Schrader69 and his family. The traditional English tea-time, in the early evening, was the time when friends arrived in the salon of ‘Madame Ranke.’ Once a week Clarissa’s Shakespeare class gathered to read Shakespeare and other English authors, and they sang songs and ballads before and after class. Beginning in 1862, a so-called ‘open evening’ took place on Fridays. The number of guests was generally around 70 or 80 and sometimes over a hundred. Tea was served with biscuits and followed by wine as the evening proceeded. On occasion, piano concerts took place, followed by poetry presentations and party games. During carnival time, before Lent, fancydress balls and concerts were organized and at the last one, held in 1869, an Italian comedy was performed. It was because of these activities that Leopold’s brother Heinrich called the house ‘the happy island.’70 Music was an essential component of representational culture, and it did not only reflect Ranke’s position as historian but also the open-minded mentality of both Clarissa and Leopold to wider European culture.71 These celebrations ended with Clarissa’s death, after which Leopold lived as he had prior to his marriage. He occasionally went to parties, but he never organized one in his own house anymore. His home remained quiet until his death.72 Clarissa’s ink drawings recorded many of the plays and concerts performed in her house. Her activities lessened after 1862, when it became too difficult to write letters and poetry or to compose music, but there are accounts of her lying on her sofa, surrounded by her friends discussing current affairs. A special circle developed to discuss religion and biblical knowledge. Clarissa continued to discuss the Bible with her brother Robert until she died. After 1862 she managed to cope with her disability by dictating letters, by performing songs and by religious devotion. During the 1850s and 1860s English, Irish, American, French and Italian visitors became acquainted with Clarissa and her husband. Clarissa had a well-developed, critical approach to English literature. She favoured the works of Wordsworth and Tennyson.73 The works of Walter Scott74 she thought well-written, but the biography of Frederick the Great by Carlyle75 she regarded as boring and preferred to read Robertson’s76 Sermons. She respected the sermons of Cardinal Newman77 and had a liking for most other theological and pedagogical literature.78 She mentioned Newman critically to Robert, saying that she had ‘lately read “Newmans answer to Kingsley” and was much interested in it although, as a Roman Catholic, Newman went beyond all my sympathies. Do you remember when I read his Sermons at Bowness and how they interested me?’79 Clarissa also read several German books, including Verlorene Handschrift by Gustav Freytag,80 the geographical works of Raumer81 and the poetry of Eichendorff. Other works were read in their original language – Don Quixote in Spanish, Voltaire in French, although Clarissa disapproved of

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 171 the latter’s style, saying that in her opinion he entertained his readers with the ‘lowest bestiality.’ Italian, Portuguese, Lower German works were read also in their original languages.82 She found aspects of Germany quite strange. The customs of German youth seemed to her rough and uncouth. Marriage, in her opinion, was guided more by the mind and not enough by feeling. Engagements took place far too soon, but the waiting time for marriage was too long, and she thought it was comical that the bride had to obtain a dowry consisting of everyday clothes. She found the same in the German customs of giving birthday presents based on everyday things that would be necessary anyway, only enriched by sweets and flowers. On the other hand, Clarissa believed that socks, trousers and other things should have a personal touch. The jubilee system, which entailed formal awards after a certain number of years of marriage, seemed to her simply indecorous. However, she believed the German officers and their educational system were the best in Europe, and she also believed that the English military system was not quite as good.83 With her husband, Clarissa admired the Prussian monarchy. In her letters she proudly described the frequent visits of the royal family to their home, especially the princes Albrecht, father and son. Prince Albrecht (senior) became the godfather of her youngest child. When King Frederick William IV showed the first signs of dementia, Clarissa expressed much anxiety. She emotionally reported to her brothers how the monarch could not find words to express his thoughts and that conversations took a long time. The unsuccessful treatments by physicians touched her deeply, probably mindful of her own illness. King William I, later first emperor of a united Germany, was described. She met him quite regularly during her walks along Unter den Linden, sometimes exchanging a few words. Although she respected him, she maintained a distance. The new wave of cousinly marriages within the Hohenzollern family damaged her belief in the monarchy because she regarded them as almost incestuous.84 In all her letters, especially those written from the middle of the 1850s onwards, Clarissa mentioned politics, enriched with Ranke’s personal comments. She regularly commented on the friendship between England/Ireland and Prussia/ Germany. She was especially disturbed during the 1860s and at the time of the Franco-Prussian War. After the unsuccessful conference in London which was held to solve German-Danish disputes, Clarissa grew more troubled because Prussian public opinion held England in a very bad light and this, it seems, was expressed with much hatred. She asked her brothers if the reverse opinion was held in England and Ireland. In her salon she disliked any expressions of hatred and promoted respect between the two countries, stating that the English should not behave so arrogantly and should acknowledge the help of Prussia as an ally at the battle of Waterloo.85 Apart from socializing and running her own salon, Clarissa loved to write poems. Starting in her childhood, poems became of great importance to her during her time in Berlin. They helped her not only deal with her disease but also

172  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness cope with the absence of her closest relatives in Ireland. According to Clarissa, the collection ‘Stars of my life’86 had a central place for her, giving people whom she had met or was impressed by a lasting monument. The original was carefully written. The specially selected poems were marked with illustrations and photographs of the people involved. The collection was divided in two major parts, one called ‘Family’ and the other one ‘Celebrities.’ The first part was marked with her oldest memories of Dublin, ‘Childhood,’ ‘Our old Home,’ ‘The loss of my Father,’ as well as poems on her brothers, on Leopold, his brothers and Clarissa’s own children. The section on ‘Celebrities’ covered all the individuals already mentioned as visitors to her salon, and also King Maximilian II of Bavaria, the Countess of Stolberg-Werningerode,87 the composer Mendelssohn and Florence Nightingale. Altogether, the poems and the visitors to her salon give an idea of the number of people that Clarissa knew, met and stayed in contact with. Her poems were marked with a clear use of words and with a large touch of romanticism.88 During the last years of her life Clarissa returned to the subject of her family. There was a poem on Heinrich Ranke and his wife Selma called ‘Thinking of my brother-in-law the Consistorial-Rath Heinrich Ranke, and his wife Selma, the only Daughter of Dr Gotthilf Heinrich v. Schubert, the reverend Philosopher.’89 Another of her poems, written around the end of the 1860s, demonstrated the kindness and courage that were typical of her as well as the witness she gave of her husband’s constant work:

Dialogue between Ranke and his invalid wife WIFE:  Where

have you been, my Love! You look so gay, Your eyes so sparkling with bright happiness. R.  Where have I been my Love! Now try to guess. W.  How can I feel where young hearts choose to stay, Enchanted by the queenly moon’s soft ray, And spirited by thoughts all fancy rife? Come make confession to your little wife Who counts the weary hours when you are away. R.  The oldest friends I’ve seen of long ago And in the past, the merry past I’ve been, When I was young and they were growing old. Through thirty years our memories have ranged, And many tales of those old times we’ve told, Feeling ourselves the same, yet oh! how changed.90 Clarissa’s poetry was largely modelled on the sonnets of Shakespeare. In this Dialogue between Ranke and his wife, the poem assumed the style of the sonnet, composed in iambic pentameter in fourteen lines; the subject was the effects of time, and the final couplet sums up the sentiments expressed before. However, whereas Shakespeare’s sonnets favour rhyming couplets, only three such couplets can be found here. The questions are made up of halt rhymes and free verse, while the dramatic dialogue lends a personal touch.

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  173 This poem, and the one that follows, were written for Ranke’s birthday. They reflect the closeness of the couple and the consolation that Clarissa received during her disease: Hail to thee, Day, the shortest of the year! For though so keen and chilling in thine air, though bereft of flowers and of [all] verdure bare, Thou art to me most full of inward cheer – and save one day, of every day most dear. How could I all alone my burden wear? Alone I long had yielded to despair, Were there not one to share it ever near! And such a one, who born in winter’s night, Dispels earth’s gloom and brings the past to sight. Long may he live to bring the truth to light, Long may he live still adding to his fame! And ever live his world-illustrious name!91 Clarissa left further 24 books, mainly exercise books and notebooks, with more than 2,600 pages of poems. Two of them were called ‘Continental Lore’ – translations of poems from different European countries. Amongst the German poems that Clarissa translated into English are those of the poets Geibel, Kinkel, Brentano, Herwegh, Heine, Tieck and Lenau; amongst the French ones, those of Victor Hugo, Pierre Jean de Beranger and Marie Andre de Chessier; amongst the Italian, those of the humanist Poliziano, and of the Danish, several by Andersen. There were also translations from Greek, Indian, Polish, Persian, Russian, Spanish, Swedish and Hungarian. Clarissa was an excellent linguist, speaking English, German, Italian, French, Greek, Latin, Spanish, and Flemish fluently. Her disappointment is understandable, then, when she mentioned in a letter to her brothers in 1865 that her children could ‘only’ speak four languages fluently.92 One collection was called ‘Sonnets, Sentiments and Thoughts,’ another offered ‘Some verses written by me in my early days and now somewhat corrected’; another was entitled ‘Autumn Leaves’ and contained the poems ‘Confession’ and ‘The Birds on the Trees’ separately.93 Amongst her letters were eight poems by Sir William Rowan Hamilton, in his own hand, written in the observatory of Trinity College Dublin, which he sent to Clarissa.94 The friendship with Hamilton was not only on a professional basis with Clarissa’s brothers but also on a literary one with the entire Graves family. Although Clarissa discussed with Robert if she should publish her poems, she could never make up her mind how many and which ones. She then created her large scrap-book ‘Stars of my life.’ She was quite excited yet unsure what to do, and she tried to get advice from Robert when Prof. Thomas Solly95 asked her for

174  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness poems for publication. This idea came from Ranke. In a short letter she sought advice from Robert: Two evenings ago Leopold met Mr Solly in Company who told him, he was in the act of bringing out in collection of the prettiest English poems, and to my infinite wonder what do you think Leopold said: You must publish one or two of my wife’s poems. Accordingly Mr Solly sent me the next day to ask for two poems lyrical or descriptive and both of them not exceeding 64 lines with room for spaces. My answer was then I could promise nothing without consulting you, dear Robert, have I ever written anything worthy of standing amongst a collection of selected poems? I doubt it and I should not like to enter a society to which I do not belong and where I should only be sure of humiliation! But supposing you could find me one or two pretty little pieces or sonnets that you think praiseworthy do you think it honest or judicious of me to put my best foot forward? Now dear Robert shall I say yes or no? If yes pray send me immediately what you choose for Mr Solly is preventing the print coming to a close before he gets your answer. You see it is a very hurried affair. If you send me anything I shall send you the book when it makes its appearance. I said at once no but my children and Leopold so much wish me to publish something that I am irresolute about it, and will be entirely guided by your advice.96 Robert’s advice is not known. A short time later Clarissa decided to give Prof. Solly two poems for publication. Her poems ‘Wishes for a supposed admirer, composed as a companion piece to Crashaw’s “Wishes for the supposed mistress” ’ and ‘A sonnet, partly suggested by a German song’ were published by Solly in 1864.97 Clarissa dealt with Mr Solly for a number of years, but the relationship evidently declined because at the end of 1868 he tried to avoid her. It may have been that he was uncomfortable with Clarissa’s disease. In her New Year’s letter of 1869 she mentioned this fact to Robert: I must tell you what you will be surprised to hear, that professor Solly has cut my acquaintance because – I am sure I don’t know why, because he thinks I have slighted him and his wife. I feel very innocent and do not feel guilty of the pride of which he accuses me. He is very huffy.98 Letter writing formed a large part of Clarissa’s daily life. She remained in contact with Robert and Charles continuously, perhaps even more with Robert, because he suffered a disease as well, which affected his own career. The sickness itself is not known, but it is reported that he became unconscious a number of times during his research or when preaching in church. Therefore, both of them had a good understanding of each other’s sufferings and problems, and they both supported each other in their respective situations. In a letter to Helen Graves in 1855, she

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 175 not only mentioned her bad health and Caroline’s death but also asked if Helen could draw a coat of arms for Ranke: Your last letter was respectably long & as genial & affectionate as ever, & I thank you for it with my whole heart. Oh! if you know how much a real letter revives & cheers me you would perhaps oftener give yourself the time & trouble to write to me. Now I am anxious to hear again how Robert is. I expected he would suffer after all his exertions & excitement in going to poor Caroline’s funeral, besides the returning spring is always most trying & inimical to us poor ailing mortals. I now feel as if my little fixus [?] were all rotted to [. . . ?] the trees, actually to sit or stand upright is more than I can well manage, & when I attempt to move I feel like a baby to long for leading strings or to be put is a falling bucket, for I so often stumble about, that I am covered with many coloured bruises. If I were to begin complaining, you would think all the contents of Pandora’s box had been poured out on my devoted head, but though I suffer much yet life is dear to me, for I feel my utmost exertions are my necessary to keep the little household a giving – My wish to get you to compose a coat-of-arms for Ranke mostly gives me energy to write. Oh what a vain thing I am with one leg in the grave, I have some vanities knowing their folly you ask for instructions – what can I say? Leopold’s Father was a lawyer but his grandfather & ancestors for three preceding generations were clergymen, the family possesses neither arms nor crest but L. having more commerce with the world than the rest adopted a ship as a crest until he took a fancy to the Perceval thistle. The Queen lately gave him a little drawing to cleryphor [?] – [. . . ?] the tendril of the grave is called Ranke in German – would you make any use of that flowing idea? Then you must recollect L. is a Knight of seven high orders. Knight commander of two & a Noble in virtue of his Wuerttemberg order – his greatest Spirit however is that he is a ‘Staatsrath’ a real privy Counsellor. Can’t you trump up something out of all this my children could adopt if they live.99 It is clear that the wish for a coat of arms came from Clarissa, and it seems that her husband was not much involved. Her desire for a coat of arms lay within the Irish tradition where every family holds a coat of arms, whereas in Germany only members of the nobility were eligible. The Ranke coat of arms was most likely created in 1855, and it had some similarities to the Irish ones. The ‘eagle displayed’ was probably a borrowing from the arms of Graves whereas the ‘chief indented’ appeared to have been copied from the arms of Perceval. The inclusion of a book reflected Ranke’s position as an academic and historian, but the other symbols had a wide European currency.100 The origins of the motto, on the other hand, seem more difficult. ‘Labor ipse voluptas’ was associated with the English family of Lovelace101 and with the English historian John Nichols,102 whose family were publishers.103 Baur suggested that Ranke might have created the motto himself. As a philologist Ranke knew the writers of the ancient world, and in the

176  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness work of Livy Ab urbe condita (5,4,4) there was the phrase ‘labor voluptasque,’ and Martial had the phrase ‘iuvat ipse labor’ in his work Epigrammata (1/107), from which it was an easy task to mix the two together.104 Falko Schnicke pointed out that the nobility slogan may also have another background. He believed that with Labor ipse voluptas, Leopold may also have picked up a trend of capitalism since the eighteenth century which was the interconnection of work, activity and happiness as a conceptual revaluation of the connectivity of burden and complaining.105 In other letters the crisis of the Irish education system and the tensions concerning the ‘Protestant’ Queens Colleges were discussed, stressing that the Catholics wanted to establish their own Catholic university and refused a mixed system.106 Clarissa also read a number of English newspapers like the Spectator, even though she did not always agree with its contents. In 1858 she was furious about one of its articles: I have not read an English Newspaper for the last months the last I read was a Spectator – an article in it – on the Irish Primacy made me feel like an Irish rebel at all events it made me feel what a stepmother’s fashion England treats poor Ireland again.107 The Indian Mutiny was an important international topic in 1857. In September 1857 Clarissa asked if the ‘English [have] not been too proud and overbearing? I  think the English have been cruel  & wrong in fomenting Rebellion on the Continent. I try to think as little as I can on these subjects & yet they pursue me.’108 In another letter Clarissa noted the opinion of her husband: L[eopold] is quite of your opinion that the Muslims conspired to excite the Mutiny in India. He say’s they are a most vainglorious case and were too set up by their victories in the Crimean (for they do not consider themselves as at all beholden to the French or English) that they think the crescent will conquer the cross, & that when the English are beat out of India that they will establish their rule there again.109 Robert’s letter to his sister provided an impression of the disease he suffered: My health continues good. I have preached frequently since I wrote last & on no occasion have suffered from the exertion, but I still have a remnant of the winter bow-pain and it is pronounced to arise from irritation of the membrance with lines the frontal sinus.110 Due to his bad health, Robert was unable to undertake the full work of a parish minister and he only could assist another clergyman. This situation had an effect on his life and mind, making him question his faith as well as his suitability for the job of minister. Nevertheless, with the help of his wife and Clarissa, he

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 177 remained positive about his situation and found his niche in the clerical system. He described it in 1860: [. . .] that in my present position I am able to discharge a not unimportant function – which in general the parish clergyman is unable to attend to – namely to meet the difficulties & to strengthen the faith of educated intelligent persons, not a few of whom have sought in this way my counsel & support, & by the thought that after all I had not to choose, even in reference to public ministrations, between doing a great deal & doing nothing, for that in all probability my assistance to the new Clergyman, occasionally in the pulpit & often in the reading desk, & in visiting the poor, will probably be welcomed by him as well as by the parishioners. . . .111 This led to strengthening his mind, and in the following year of 1861 he gave Maximiliane counselling for her confirmation.112 One of the great events of 1858 was the comet, which Clarissa described and pictured in her letters, as her brothers were unable to observe it.113 After the event she wrote in October 1858 to Robert: ‘O the Comet! The glorious Comet! That was a night of lights! Worth living for. I was so thankful to have lived to see it. It was beyond all my expectations. We had beautiful weather generally for witnessing it & I could see it from my windows.’114 In her letters to Robert, family issues in Berlin and Ireland dominated as much as her literary work and her concern about her brother Charles’ career. Sometimes accidents were mentioned, such as the fire in the Rankes’ house: Our house was one day on fire owing to a dirty chimney, but the skill of the fire men soon put it out. I had no fear as they told me that they would give the earliest notice of danger and that no harm to anybody or anything could happen as long as they were there.115 But the years 1852–59 were marked for Clarissa not only by her disease but also by the establishment of her salon. One of the reasons for her interest in the salon was the absence of Leopold, who went on several trips to France, England, Italy and the German states during this time. As Clarissa was unable to travel, Leopold wrote several letters to her, describing places and events in detail and stressing that he missed her and the children. Alfred Dünisch noted that Ranke was very friendly with the Bavarian king. During the Crimean War, at a time when the fall of Sevastopol had been reported in the newspapers all over the world, Ranke had been a guest with the king in Berchtesgaden. He had studied as a 20-year-old under Ranke in Berlin and had known him since 1831. After Ludwig I stepped down and Maximilian became king, he thought it adequate to call Ranke for a professorship to Munich in 1853. But Ranke was already bound to Berlin, Prussia and the Prussian monarchy so he could not accept the calling. Furthermore, as generous as the Bavarian

178  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness king had been with his salary, Prussia offered Ranke a larger one, which also included expenses for his extensive research trips abroad. One could say that as a replacement for this it came to the so-called talks of Berchtesgaden,116 in which Ranke constructed for the first time his principle of a universal history.117 King Maximilian II also awarded Ranke with the Knighthood of the order of Maximilian (Ritter des Maximiliansorden). These nineteen presentations on ‘On the Epochs of Modern History’ were described by Helmolt ‘as a jewel of German historiography.’118 Iggers translated some parts of the text. Here are excerpts from Ranke’s first lecture to the king, referring in particular to progress in history: [.  .  .] Thus, in every epoch of mankind a certain great tendency manifests itself; and progress rests on the fact that a certain movement of the human spirit reveals itself in every epoch, which stresses sometimes the one and sometimes the other tendency, manifesting itself there in a characteristic fashion. If in contradiction to the view expressed here, however, one were to assume that this progress consisted in the fact that the life of mankind reaches a higher potential in every epoch – that is, that every generation surpasses the previous one completely and that therefore the last epoch is always the preferred, the epochs preceding it being only stepping stones to ones that follow – this would be an injustice on the part of the deity. Such a generation which, as it were, had become a means would not have any significance for and in itself. It would only have meaning as a stepping stone for the following generation and would not have an immediate relation to the divine. But I assert: every epoch is immediate to God, and its worth is not at all based on what derives from it but rests in its own existence, in its own self. In this way the contemplation of history, that is to say of individual life in history, acquires its own particular attraction, since now every epoch must be seen something valid in itself and appears highly worthy of consideration. The historian thus has to pay particular attention first of all to how people in a certain period thought and lived. Then he will find that, apart from certain unchangeable eternal main ideas, for instance those of morality, every epoch has its own particular tendency and its own ideal. But although every epoch has its justification and its worth in and by itself, one still must not overlook what came forth from it. The historian must therefore, secondly, perceive the difference between the individual epochs, in order to observe the inner necessity of the sequence. One cannot fail to recognize a certain progress here. But I would not want to say that this progress moves in a straight line, but more like a river which in its own way determines its course. If I may dare to make this remark, I picture the deity – since no time lies before it – as surveying all of historic mankind in its totality and finding it everywhere of equal value. There is, to be sure, something true in the idea of the education of mankind, but before God all generations of men appear endowed with equal rights, and this is how the historian must view matters.

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 179 Insofar as we can follow history, unconditional progress, a most definite upward movement, is to be assumed in the realm of material interests in which retrogression will hardly be possible unless there occurs an immense upheaval. In regard to morality, however, progress cannot be traced. Moral ideas can, to be sure, progress extensively; and so one can also assert in cultural matters that, for example, the great works which art and literature have produced are enjoyed today by larger numbers than previously. But it would be ridiculous to want to be a greater writer of epics than Homer or a greater writer of tragedies than Sophocles. [. . .]

Dialogue KING MAX:  You

spoke above of moral progress. Were you thinking here also of the inner progress of the individual? RANKE:  No, but only of the progress of the human race. The individual, in contrast, must always raise himself to a higher moral level. KING MAX:  But since mankind is composed of individuals, the question arises whether when the individual raises himself to a higher moral level this progress does not also encompass all of mankind. RANKE:  The individual dies. His existence is finite; that of mankind, on the other hand, is infinite. I accept progress in material matters because here one thing proceeds from one another. It is different in moral affairs. I believe that every generation is equal in moral greatness to every other generation and that there is no higher potential of moral greatness – we cannot, for example, surpass the moral greatness of the ancient world. It often happens in the spiritual world that intensive greatness stands in inverse relation to extensive greatness. We need only compare our present literature with classical literature to see this.119 [. . .] Henz noted that it was believed that Ranke spoke freely during his presentations, but one should not believe that his comment, ‘not having a trace of a book with him,’120 to make the conclusion he did the presentations without any preparations. The topic to be presented was already known through the correspondence between the two for around two months, but there were indications that Ranke at least partially used notes and bullet points. Henz took the conclusion from the fact that even the stenogram had many bullet points, and he believed that Ranke wanted to forward these.121 Unsuccessful in drawing Ranke to Munich permanently, Maximilian II did succeed in persuading him to accept the chairmanship of the newly formed Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in 1858. Despite its Bavarian title and the financial support it received from the Bavarian state, the Commission was a central institution for the scholarly study of German history throughout the German-speaking world; Heinrich von Sybel, Ranke’s former student, was its secretary. Ranke chose the first members, and the Commission brought together the leading German-speaking historians. Up to this day it publishes major series

180  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness of sources and monographs as well as the comprehensive German biographical dictionary. In 1859, with the support of the Commission, Sybel began to publish the Historische Zeitschrift, which has been the central journal of the German historical profession ever since. Despite all this Ranke continued to publish. In his article ‘On the criticism of Francean-German empirical writers of annals’122 two scholars were assessed: Einhard and Lambertus von Herzfeld. It was a critical discussion, and its sources were critically assessed on different specific events and the general time period. In relation to Einhard, Ranke concluded that his work may be easy to read, but it appeared to be full of historic mistakes. In his assessment, Ranke also referred to the publication series of the Monumenta Germaniae Historica. This article was a commentary in respect of the general source research and was most likely a by-product of his work on French History and his royal presentation of ‘On the epochs of modern history.’ In 1857 Ranke went to England, and he visited it again in 1862. On seeing his relatives he wrote to his wife that ‘I heard that Charles Graves was appointed Senior Fellow and has now other big plans. I have not heard anything from John but I  saw Emilie Graves for a moment.’123 Charles, a brother of Clarissa, was educated at a private school near Bristol and at Trinity College Dublin. He graduated with distinction in mathematics and mathematical physics. Graves became a fellow of Trinity College in 1836, professor of mathematics in 1843, dean of the Castle Chapel, Dublin in 1860, dean of Clonfert in 1864, and finally bishop of Limerick, Ardfert and Aghadoe in 1866, a position he held until his death. He was president of the Royal Irish Academy from 1861 to 1865; he was re-elected in 1865 but resigned from the position on his appointment as bishop of Limerick. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1880. Graves was the last of the great antiquarian scholar-bishops. He died in Dublin on 17 July 1899.124 Ranke’s next major work was French History,125 and it belonged to the circle of European history. The main country it dealt with is obviously France, while the other countries are England, Holland, Switzerland, Spain, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Austria, Poland and Ireland; America, Africa and Asia were mentioned in respect of trade and colonies. The first volume dealt with the developments of the French Empire and the development of the state. Ranke concentrated on the reigns of Franz I and Henry II, Henry III and Henry IV. Over half of the book focused on the Reformation in France and the events connected to it, such as the religious wars and in particular the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre. The first volume concluded with the religious conversion of Henry IV to Catholicism and the end of religious wars in France. In the second volume Ranke dealt with the establishment and changes in the French administrative state system within 50 years, in the time from 1594 to 1642. It started with the reign of Henry IV, then the reign of Queen Maria de’ Medici and finally the concentration of power in the hands of Cardinal Richelieu. The narrative described the peace movements between the confessions with the Catholic Church strengthening, which was also controlled by Cardinal Richelieu. Ranke indicated that in the times of absolutism the power never rested

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 181 fully in the hands of the king, but more with the first minister (in this case, Cardinal Richelieu). At this point he explained the structure of French power during Richelieu’s term in office, the strengthening of this power within Europe and the involvement in the Thirty Years’ War in Germany. In this volume Ranke engaged with the continuing conflict between the two confessions and observes how Catholicism gained the superior position. He was also able to present a state which was able to establish itself as a European super-power, defended this position in Europe and started to expand. In the third volume he dealt with French history under Cardinal Mazarin and King Louis XIV in the years 1643 to 1686. Especially under King Louis XIV, the royal monarchy was able to reach absolute power in France and in Europe. Other aspects such as reaching the current size of France were dealt with, as well as how the German states lost a number of cities and regions, such as Alsace and Strasbourg. In this volume Ranke often took over the narrative and included his opinion with phrases such as ‘I don’t know,’ ‘I do not believe that,’ ‘I would suggest’ etc. Ranke also extensively explored the areas of culture and trade in this volume as well as economic reforms and the increasing role of the third class in France. He mentioned that France underwent a number of revolts in the country when financial and tax reforms were carried out. In this volume Ranke dealt with the development of a royal-centralistic government. It also became evident that a lot of developments within the state were strongly connected to finances. The next volume continued with the reign of Louis XIV until the 1770s and his involvement with the Spanish succession war. At the end of the volume we hear of the first signs leading towards the French Revolution. Ranke placed a large emphasis on literature and described several works of different authors, such as Argenson, Condillac, Voltaire, Diderot, Montesquieu and Rousseau. In his introduction Ranke stressed the role of France in Europe in saying that ‘great states and people have a double job: a national and a world historical one.’126 This also indicated Ranke’s interest in the position of kings, their parliaments and the role of culture in France. Due to the power politics France reached great power in Europe; however, Ranke analyzed it in just one sentence, which also expressed all European history up to today: ‘it lies possibly in the nature of European affairs that an arising power, attempting to become the superior one, will always create a strong counter-power.’127 The history of France dealt with the consolidation of monarchical power in France, which contended not only with the internal opposition of the nobility but also with the power of the Spanish Habsburgs. The story was told in terms of politico-religious conflicts, which were seen not only as clashes of doctrines or struggles for power but also in relation to the international balance of power. The latter, especially the threat of the Habsburgs, forced the French state to place political over confessional considerations. For his work Ranke used many unpublished sources from all over Europe, in particular the collection of the Venetian relazioni. This was reflected in the last volume of his work, which is solemnly dedicated to the edition of seventeenth-century unpublished materials: excerpts from the Venetian relazioni, French manuscripts, memoirs and critics to the memoirs.

182  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness After the traumatic experience of the late 1840s and his publications on Mediterranean states in the 1820s and 1830s, Ranke concentrated on the history of another foreign country. Ranke tried to explain several contemporary events: the French Revolution and the aftermath, Napoleon I and the revolutions of 1830 and 1848 as well as the crisis year of 1840 in the relationship between France and Germany. This work not only described French history in detail but also placed France into the centre of Europe and highlighted the connections and conflicts between France and Germany. Several of the conflicts served to explain the political situation of the nineteenth century. Of course we find the issue of aesthetics in this work, and I have selected a sample which we could describe as a prime example of Ranke’s narrative. Late in book VII of his French History, Ranke approached a critical moment in French history: the assassination of Henri IV. For scores of pages, Henri IV, one of Ranke’s favourite world-historical figures, had dominated his account; now, in 1610, the king was bursting with imaginative plans for France and for the European balance of power.128 Yet Ranke now stopped: ‘It is all too easy,’ he wrote, pondering possibilities, to find oneself in the realm of the improbable; suffice it to say that this prince was filled with great ideas. He fancied that he still saw his star hovering over him, destined to do something marvelous.129 But one of Henri’s nightmares was about to come true; a hideous destiny emerging from dark underground regions awaited him. Ranke reported the unfolding of that destiny: he characterized the assassin with a few derisive epithets as a wild uneducated fellow and then speculated about Ravaillac’s motives. He opted for religious mania. But he immediately added that the assassination, though the act of a madman, was a windfall for Henri’s mortal enemies, for the Jesuits, the Spaniards and dissident French grandees.130 Having raised this point, Ranke seemed to retreat from it; he offered no comment, expressed no opinion. Instead, he told three stories. The first was about a nun in faraway Normandy who, they say, proclaimed Henri’s death at the very hour, but who insisted that she had heard it from the birds in the air. The second reported that Pope Paul V saw the thrust of Ravaillac’s knife as a divine chastisement for the king’s worldly loves and ambitions. The third set out the sentiments of the Spaniards in the words of the Cardinal of Toledo, telling the assembled Council of State: ‘If God is with us, who can be against us?’131 With this complacent, even triumphant, rhetorical question, Ranke brought book VII of his History of France to a close. He set the next book, ‘The Regency of the Queen, Maria de’ Medici,’ into motion with a stark, one-sentence paragraph: ‘There was one man less in the world.’132 The effect is stunning. Ranke had staged a memorable scene in a few tautly written paragraphs; he had individualized the main actors with a handful of choice adjectives; he had aroused grave suspicions about a major power and an august institution with three pointed anecdotes. By bringing down the curtain, not with the victim but with the suspected villains, and by ushering in the next act with a tight-lipped, ostentatiously understated reference to the actor who had just left the

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness  183 world stage forever, Ranke had secured for Henri IV the most monumental statue. Just as Hamlet, dead, dominated the closing moments of his play, so Henri, dead, dominated his country as Louis XIII began his nominal reign.133 This sample passage was characteristic of Ranke’s style. In more than 60 years of indefatigable scribbling and in more than 60 works, Ranke displayed the gifts we normally associate with storytellers or playwrights: speed, colour, variety, freshness of diction and superb control. He cunningly used absences; he took care never to spoil climaxes with elaborate explanations; he established characters with the precision of a novelist. Ranke was an active storyteller in the nineteenth-century German vein; as we hear the author’s voice in the tales of Wilhelm Raabe134 or Gottfried Keller,135 so we see Ranke unrolling his narrative and arranging his scenery.136 Uwe Hebekus noted the use of maps in Ranke’s historical writing, for example in the historic figure of Louis XIV where Ranke used the map as a metaphor: ‘Only he alone had the full overview of singular actions and knowing the relevance for the whole.’ And then ‘One sees him, with the view on the map, to follow the movements of the troops.’137 Hebekus noted that this was also an indication to use the map in relation to modern mass tourism and to use it as a row of pictures. Vierhaus had sought to defend Ranke against the frequent accusation that he neglected the role of the social and economic forces in history and had no understanding of the great emerging social forces of the nineteenth century. Ranke, Vierhaus argued, had no narrow political concept of society for which only the cultured elite composing with authority were significant. ‘Any reading of his works leaves . . . the impression that Ranke did not ignore the masses but took them seriously as an important factor of historical movement.’ Ranke ‘wrote no line without being conscious that historical life is not only determined by the thoughts and deeds of the few great men but just as much by the interests, needs, abilities, fears and desires of the many.’ Vierhaus rightly pointed out that Ranke was not entirely blind to social and class conflict. Nevertheless, Vierhaus’ documentation did not really change the traditional image of Ranke. Indeed, in the 1830s, in his diary Ranke himself suggested that a world history be written which would emphasize the growth of population and stress economic and cultural activities; colonization, knighthood, the building of churches, art and religion in the Middle Ages; agriculture and public works in the eighteenth century and the ‘tremendous development of industry and highway’ in the nineteenth century. However, this was an isolated remark.138 As Hans Schleier noted, the attempts to recount the instances of Ranke’s preoccupation with economic and social questions only underline how marginal these problems were to Ranke’s historiography and how little he understood the social forces of the nineteenth century. Vierhaus himself admitted how poorly informed Ranke was about the economic conditions of the working class and how little understanding he had of the social questions of his time. Ranke, analogous to many of his contemporaries, saw the vision of an amorphous mass threatening all culture and civilization, and he failed to appreciate the significance of industry. He saw many social changes, of which the rise of the ‘third estate’ was the most important to take place.139 The central social problem for Ranke was, Vierhaus

184  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness admitted, a political one, that of fitting the bourgeoisie into the framework of the old state, at the same time excluding the masses who lacked all prerequisites for political responsibility. Ranke’s concept of the state remained a static one. The continental monarchical great power, as it had arisen in the struggle between princes and estates and the religious civil wars between the sixteenth and the eighteenth centuries, remained for him the model by which the states that existed in history were to be judged. This concept of the state reflected Ranke’s attachment to legitimacy, his religiosity, and the impact of the political thought of German Idealism on his thinking. But this viewpoint of the state remained inadequate for an understanding of the pre-absolutist state or of the political forces that emerged in the nineteenth century.140 I can follow this point but have to comment that Ranke knew well about the importance of the economy. The correspondence of his wife documents this, as well as a number of articles he wrote for the Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift. Just because he did not concentrate his narrative on social aspects alone, this does not mean that he was not aware of it. Assessing all of his major works, his main interest lay in the development of state power, which left little room for social history. Nonetheless, we have seen in several publications so far that most of them, especially the larger ones, also included cultural and social aspects – one might say they were marginal to the whole composition, but they were included. It is to his credit that in an age of rising nationalistic sentiment in historiography, Ranke did not sacrifice his belief in a European community. For him, state and nation were never identical, although he recognized the tendency of nations to form states and realized the strength which nineteenth-century states had gained from the rise of national feeling. Ranke studied all major states, which he described as the Germanic-Romanic world, in terms of their interaction within this broader European context.141 Wilhelm Dilthey described French History as Ranke’s biggest work, which was at that time barely acknowledged – if one looked at the size and significance of this work. Stromeyer noted that the issue of Reformation, Counter-Reformation and beginning of Absolutism seemed to his contemporaries as so foreign, they could not relate to it. Therefore proper critical reviews did not appear.142 Gooch judged that ‘it is free from the disparagement which disfigures the paly of Sybel and Treitschke, Ranke wrote not as a German but as a European.’ Some scholars today judged this work a classical masterpiece.143 Ranke continued with his classes; however, a slight change took place. Starting in 1854 he gave classes on English history, which were also connected to his work: the development of the English state or its constitution, its empire and its power cover three classes (although one was cancelled due to a research trip to London in 1857). Out of the fifteen given lectures he taught as usual, most of them on modern history (seven lectures) and then two lectures each on the Middle Ages and German history. One class ( just in 1852) was on Roman history, and one class (just in 1855) was on the French Revolution. It is noticeable that Ranke taught more on topics of his major literary work as well as on modern and contemporary history, which ceased during the years of revolution.

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 185 Of course Ranke travelled a lot. In September 1853 he visited Laeken, Hanover, Brussels, Gent and Bruges, and a year later from September to October 1854, he was in Munich, Wimbach and Berchtesgaden. In August and September 1855 he visited Paris and Versailles. In 1857 he went on a longer trip to England: from March to July he was in London, with visits to Cambridge, Manchester and Oxford. In July he travelled back again through Calais. In November he was in Potsdam. In October 1858 he was in Munich and Venice. From September to November 1859 he travelled through Berchtesgaden and Wimbach, Ansbach, Munich, Gunzenhausen, Nurnberg, Erfurt and Wiehe. During this time Ranke commented on a few authors, such as Raumer or Schleiermacher.144 Oustanding and giving an insight into an angry Ranke is an entry made during the 1850s on Bettina von Arnim. Due to publications by her, she commented angrily on him. Ranke ranted that she loved self-deification and indirectly mentioned a few more of her books.145 Especially in her book Ilius Pamhilius und die Ambrosia, Bettina made a couple of negative comments on Ranke, as he did not actively support the Göttingen Seven, which were a group of seven professors from Göttingen. In 1837, they protested against the abolition or alteration of the constitution of the Kingdom of Hanover by Ernst August and refused to swear an oath to the new king of Hanover. Leopold saw in her a friend, yet she could not understand him. In his entry he commented that he assessed critically whether it is allowed in the first place to renounce a constitution. In his mind the professors had more a sort of religion in mind than politics. Bettina was not able to distinguish between these two. As Ranke saw that she was unable to do so, he left, being annoyed with her ‘presumption and narrowness.’ As a result, she wrote the story on Ambrosia.146 In his diary notes for contemporary history one can find numerous comments on France (1852), the state of Poland in 1853, comments on Turkey in 1857, the state of the Prussian king after his stroke in 1857, and England in 1858.147 Outstanding is a diary entry dated 23 September 1853, when he met King Leopold I of Belgium in Laeken. His entry documented the discussion they had and opinions of the king and his regret not to have accepted the crown of Greece in 1830. They discussed the situation of the Ottoman Empire, especially Constantinople, and Ranke attested to his great knowledge of European affairs and politics.148

Notes 1 Friduhelm von Ranke, Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke von seinem Sohne Friduhelm von Ranke, pp. 6–7. 2 Ibid, p. 7. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Blotter book of recipes, 1850, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke, “Buch 17”. 6 Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 7–8. 7 Ibid, p. 8. 8 Ibid. 9 Rosenhaft, ‘Gender’, in: Sperber, Germany 1800–1870, p. 215. 10 Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 8–9.

186  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness Juhnke, Leopold Ranke, p. 128. Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 9. Ibid, pp. 9–10. Rosenhaft, ‘Gender’, p. 215. Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 8. Ibid, pp. 11–12. Letter of Robert Graves to Miss Emilie Napier, 3 March 1852, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/40/63r. 18 Letter of John Graves to Robert Graves, 13 August  1852, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/36/18. 19 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Ferdinand Ranke, 2 September 1852, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 347–348. 20 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Ranke, 4 October 1852, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 348–349. 21 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Ranke, 5 October 1852, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 349. 22 Letter of Robert Graves to Emily Napier, 12 October  1852, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/40/82r–83r. 23 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, 17 February  1853, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 14. 24 Turner, John Mallard (1775–1851), English landscape artist and watercolourist. 25 See also Henry Boylan, A dictionary of Irish biography (Dublin, 1999), p. 153; Coakley, Robert Graves; Magee, ‘Graves, Robert James’. 26 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Christian Karl Josias Freiherr von Bunsen, 26 March 1853, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 354. 27 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 1856, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 140. 28 Letter of Charles Graves to Robert Graves, 14 April  1856, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/35/47. 29 Prescription of Prof. Romberg to Clarissa Ranke, 16 January 1850, Ranke-Museum, Wiehe, A.II.1.2.2.16/1/1850. 30 Romberg, Moritz Heinrich (1795–1873), German physician. Published many works on nervous diseases. 31 For further studies and publications on him, see the Wellcome Library, London. Some studies on him were published: Elinor Jacoby, Der Neurologe Moritz Heinrich Romberg, 1795–1873 (Frankfurt, 1965); H.L. Klawans, The medicine of history from Paracelsus to Freud (New York, 1982); Michael Shterenshis, ‘Origins of clinical neurology: M.H. Romberg and his “Lehrbuch der Nervenkrankheiten des Menschen” (1840–1846)’, in: Koroth, xiii (1998–1999). 32 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 30 January  1857, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 17. 33 Letter of Maximiliane Ranke to Helen Graves, 24 August 1859, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 114. 34 Clarissa Ranke, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 89. 35 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 2 November  1864, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 23. 36 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 28 October  1862, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 24. 37 Celia Applegate, ‘Culture and the arts’, in: Sperber, Germany 1800–1870, p. 124. 38 Clarissa’s salon was described in detail in two English autobiographies: Leonora Pertz (ed.), Autobiography and letters of George Henry Pertz (London, 1894); Thomas Sadler (ed.), Diary, reminiscences and correspondence of Henry Crabb Robinson (London, 1869). 39 Printed pamphlet, Wiehe, A.II, 1.2.1.[n.d.], No. 572. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 187 40 Puchta, Georg Friedrich (1798–1846), German jurist. 41 Jacob Grimm (1785–1863), founder of German studies, and Wilhelm Grimm, 1786– 1859, germanist. 42 Neander, Johann August Wilhelm (1789–1850), German theologian. 43 Steffens, Heinrich (1773–1845), German philosopher and natural scientist. 44 Tieck, Ludwig (died 1853). 45 Schlegel, August Wilhelm von (died 1845). 46 Meyerbeer, Giacomo (1791–1864), German composer of operas. 47 Manteuffel, Hertha von (1815–79), wife of Edwin von Manteuffel, born von Witzleben. 48 Mühlenfeld, Elfriede von (1810–84), German poetess. 49 Ehrenberg, Christian Gottfried (1795–1876), German naturalist. His works on microscopic organisms founded a new branch of science, and he discovered that phosphorescence in the sea is caused by living organisms. 50 Buchanan, Sir Andrew (died 1882), ambassador in Denmark and Spain, in Berlin 1864–66. 51 Napier, Lord Francis (died 1898), ambassador to United States and Russia, in Berlin 1862–64. 52 Düringsfeld, Ida von (1815–76), German writer. 53 Prince Georg of Prussia (1826–1902), member of the royal house of Hohenzollern and Prussian general, poet, writer and playwright. 54 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 8–10. 55 Encke, Johann Franz (1791–1865), astronomer and director of the Berlin Observatory. 56 Lepsius, Richard (1810–84), founder of Egyptology. 57 Pertz Georg Heinrich (1795–1876), historian and editor of Monumenta Germaniea Historica. 58 Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 10. 59 Grimm, Herman (1828–1901), art and literature historian. 60 Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 11. 61 Ibid. 62 Bancroft, George (died 1891), in Berlin in the 1820s and 1860s. 63 Reedern, Friedrich Wilhelm von (1802–83), German general, composer and politician. He was one of the key personalities of the cultural life in Berlin of the 1830s–1840s and influenced three Prussian monarchs for over 50 years. 64 Drake, Friedrich (1805–82), German sculptor. 65 Hesekiel, Johann George Ludwig (1819–74), German journalist and writer, editor of the Berliner Revue. 66 Hesekiel, Ludovica Karoline Albertine Emanuele (1847–99), daughter of Johann, and German writer and author for the Berlin Baracken. 67 Waldenburg, Auguste Friederike Mathilde von (1817–84), German baroness. 68 Prince Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich August von Prussia (1779–1843), Prussian general. 69 Schrader, Julius, Friedrich Antonio (1815–1900), German painter. 70 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Amalie Ranke, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 8. 71 For more details on music as representational culture, see Blanning, Oxford illustrated history of modern Europe, p. 135; Blanning, The culture of power, p. 83. 72 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 9–10. 73 Tennyson, Lord Alfred (1809–92), Poet Laureate of the United Kingdom. 74 Scott, Sir Walter (1771–1832), Scottish historical novelist and poet; see also Clarissa’s poem in the appendix, No. 184. 75 Carlyle, Thomas (1795–1881), Scottish writer and historian. 76 Robertson, Frederick William (1816–53), English preacher. 77 Newman, John Henry (1801–90), English Roman Catholic priest and Cardinal. 78 For further literature on Newman, see Colin Barr, Paul Cullen, John Henry Newman and the Catholic University of Ireland, 1845–1865 (Herefordshire, 2003); F.M. Turner, John Henry Newman (New Haven, 2002).

188  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness

79 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 257. 80 Freytag, Gustav (1816–95), German dramatist and novelist. 81 Raumer, Friedrich Ludwig Georg von (1781–1873), German historian. 82 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 10–11. 83 Ibid, p. 11. 84 Ibid, pp. 11–12. 85 Ibid, p. 12. 86 A copy was made available to the author by Dr Graf von der Schulenburg, descendant of Ranke; blotter books were made available by Bäcker-von Ranke in the RankeMuseum, Wiehe. 87 Stolberg-Werningerode, Luise Gräfin (1771–1856), was for three years abbess of Drübeck Abbey. 88 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 20–21. 89 Poem of Clarissa von Ranke, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 263. 90 Gisbert Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Clarissa von Ranke geb. Graves Perceval, die Ehefrau des großen Historikers’, Paper (1967), pp. 19–20. 91 Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Clarissa von Ranke, die Ehefrau des großen Historikers’, p. 20. 92 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 69. 93 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 20–21. 94 Poems of Sir William Rowan Hamilton to Clarissa Ranke, 8 December 1849, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 161. 95 Solly, Thomas (1816–75), professor of English literature at the University of Berlin. 96 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, 26. 97 Thomas Solly, A coronal of English verse, or a selection from English and American poets (Berlin, 1864), pp. 207–211. 98 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 2 January 1869, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 42. 99 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Helen Graves, 1855, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 41. 100 Letter of Michéal Ó Comáin, Herald of Arms in Ireland, to Andreas Boldt, 13 January 2004. 101 Family of Lovelace: The most famous one is John Lovelace, third Baron Lovelace of Hurley (1638–1693), who held a seat in the Commons and got later involved in the ‘Glorious Revolution’. For further details on him and other members of the Lovelace family, see Sidney Lee, Dictionary of national biography, Llwyd–MacCartney, vol. xxxiv (London, 1893), pp. 165–172. 102 Nichols, John Gough (1806–1873), F.S.A., English printer and antiquarian. His grandfather John Nichols was the founder of the Nichols printing tradition, which produced a number of the finest editions of works in England. For further details on J.G. Nichols and other members of the Nichols family, see Sidney Lee, Dictionary of national biography, Nichols–O’Dugan, vol. xli (London, 1895), pp. 1–8. 103 Letter of Michéal Ó Comáin, Herald of Arms in Ireland, to Andreas Boldt, 13 January 2004. 104 Letter of Siegfried Baur to Andreas Boldt, 20 January 2004. 105 Schnicke, Die männliche Disziplin, p. 312. 106 Letter of Charles Graves to Robert Graves, 15 January 1857, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/35/61. 107 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 21 September  1858, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 154. 108 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 17 September  1857, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 134. 109 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 1857, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 51. 110 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 6 July  1858, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke.

Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 189 111 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 21 January 1860, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 112 Counselling letter of Robert Graves to Maximiliane Ranke, 3 March 1861, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 16. 113 Donat’s Comet (1858), discovered on 2 June 1858 by the Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Donati (1826–1873). 114 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 6 October 1858, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 139. 115 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 2 November 1864, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 23. 116 These lectures became known under the title of ‘Ueber die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte’ [‘On the epochs of modern history’] and were posthumously published as the last chapter of Ranke’s Universal History, vol. 9 (1888). 117 These presentations of Ranke only survived because King Maximilian II asked for stenographists to take notes of all lectures. 118 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Werk, p. 108. 119 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, pp. 21–23. 120 Letter to his wife, 1 October 1854, in: Ranke, Briefwerk, pp. 386–390. 121 Günter Johannes Henz, ‘Rankes fälschlich so benannte Vorträge Ueber die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte. Eine Untersuchung zu Schein und Sein der Überlieferung’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, 83, 3 (2009), p. 424. 122 ‘Zur Kritik fränkisch-deutscher Reichsannalisten’, in: Abhandlungen der Koeniglichen Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1854), pp. 415– 458. [‘On the criticism of Francean-German empirical writers of annals’]. 123 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Ranke, 27 August 1862, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 422. 124 Boylan, Dictionary of Irish biography, pp.  152–153; David Huddleston, ‘Graves, Charles’, available at: Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, www.oxforddnb. com/articles/11/11308-article.html [12 October 2004]. 125 Französische Geschichte vornehmlich im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert (1852–1862) [History of civil wars and monarchy in France (1852), only vol. i was translated] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 8–13]. 126 Leopold Ranke, Französische Geschichte, vol. i (1856), p. iii. 127 Ibid, p. 94. 128 Peter Gay, Style in history (New York, 1988), p. 59. 129 Ibid. 130 Ibid, p. 60. 131 Ibid. 132 Ibid. 133 Ibid, pp. 60–61. 134 Raabe, Wilhelm (1831–1910), German novelist. 135 Keller, Gottfried (1819–90), Swiss poet and writer of German literature. 136 Ibid, p. 62. 137 Uwe Hebekus, Klios Medien. Die Geschichtskultur des 19. Jahrhunderts in der historischen Historie und bei Theodor Fontane, p. 59. 138 Ibid, p. 87. 139 Ibid. 140 Ibid, p. 88. 141 Ibid. 142 Stromeyer, Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik, pp. 65–66. 143 Ibid, p. 68. 144 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 186, 189.

190  Ranke’s daily life and Clarissa’s illness 145 Bettina von Arnim wrote Goethes Briefwechsel mit einem Kinde (1835), Dies Buch gehört dem König (1843), Ilius Pamphilius und die Ambrosia (1848), and Gespräche mit Dämonen (1852). 146 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 186–188. 147 Ibid, pp. 355–369. 148 Ibid, pp. 358–360.

8 Ranke and his largest work on a nation: English History (1859–65)

In 1858 King Maximilian II of Bavaria founded in Munich the ‘Commission for the German historiographical and sources research at the Royal Bavarian Academy of Sciences,’1 which was renamed later into the ‘Historical Commission.’2 Ranke became its first president and remained in this position to the end of his life.3 Several new research directions were initiated by him which dominated the direction of the Commission and its realization through publications; these were the Jahrbücher der Deutschen Geschichte, the Deutsche Reichstagsakten, and the Chroniken der deutschen Städte vom 14. bis ins 16. Jahrhundert.4 As Jordan noted, the commission followed a ‘German’ national aim, where they referred to ‘German’ in relation to the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation or the states of the German Confederation. The Commission was from this aspect not contemporary as historians from both Protestant and Catholic states belonged to it – at a time when confessional opposite opinions hardened in historiography and the historiography of Catholic states became from the point of methodology and historical theory more residual in comparison to the Protestant states.5 They were ‘national,’ but in the sense which was characteristic for Ranke’s own national understanding: it was an important national voice within an international concept.6 Ranke wrote in the memorandum of the foundation of the Commission in 1858: ‘However, science has no national border; one has to remain in constant visualization, knowing that what the general scientific activity of the world produces rests on great importance still coming from national participation.’7 Another project Ranke wanted to realize was the creation of a national biography. Something similar had been discussed in several other European countries and was first realized in Belgium in 1866 with the Biographie Nationale. In Germany it led to the foundation of the Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB), the first volume of which was published in 1868. Even the title is extraordinary: it was not, like other European projects, just a national one, and it was not called ‘German Biography’ or ‘German Biographical Dictionary,’ but the word general was added. This indicated that it was dealing not only with German personalities from all areas of German public life but also with those from outside of the German-speaking regions, as far as they could be identified as representatives of German culture.8 Equally important was the foundation in 1859 of the Historische Zeitschrift by one of Ranke’s pupils, Heinrich von Sybel. Davis commented that this was

192  Ranke and his largest work on a nation the first professional historical journal with all of the features that are now familiar, such as reviews of publications and articles based on original research and reviewed for publication in the journal by other scholars. The ‘learned journal’ provided a forum for discussion and debate among scholars about the subjects of their research. It also provided a place where ‘interim reports’ could be made on continuing research, and as the years went by, it came to embody the collective memory of the profession.9 In 1859 Ranke made several diary entries on the Austrian-French war over Italy,10 the burial of Alexander von Humboldt,11 and the constitutional crisis in Prussia for the years 1859 to 1862.12 Two entries in particular are interesting: the first was written in December 1861 and analyzed the development of the great powers since 1830. Ranke commented that there existed an antagonism between the powers, but one which did not shake the balance of power.13 The other entry from 1862 described major ideas of statesmanship in the world: in Italy we would find the ideas of the papacy and state unity; in Turkey the Ottoman power and Christian nationalities were present. For Austria he described the main ideas being the unity of administrative power and subjugated nationalities, such as Hungary, and for France he commented that ‘Louis XIV lives, but the revolution as well.’ In Germany we had the ideas of unity and the old dynastical principalities but also a very quick moulding of a powerful Prussia to an organic entity. For Prussia itself we had a military state and the old aristocracy. Russia and Poland lived through the old historic contrasts of 1770 to 1815; in England we had the church, and in the United States we find the contradiction of human rights and their restriction contained by the constitution. Ranke would reform these state systems: In Turkey he would be radical, in Russia absolute, in Italy maintain the papacy and in Prussia keep both sides of the constitution.14 These entries indicate that Ranke followed contemporary events very closely. And the last entry of 1862 correlated to a talk he gave to the Bavarian king as Karl Alexander von Müller was able to find a document dated back to 1862 which had escaped the attention of most researchers. It is entitled ‘A moment of time’15 and is 35 pages long.16 Alfred Dove had mentioned in the ninth section of Ranke’s Universal History on the presentations for King Maximilian II, and that he gave a talk in Hohenschwangau in 1862, but ‘of which content we don’t know anything.’17 Müller outlined that the talk started with the French July revolution in 1830 and the English Reform, including a short summary of universal history. Every word of this talk was filled with the belief that the past continued to live in the present.18 It is possible to see that Ranke’s historical picture was always influenced by contemporary events, but he also underestimated contemporary strengths of movements. For example he believed in 1862, a year after the death of Cavour,19 that the unity of Italy may not be completed; it may turn into a new Greece or Belgium, which would represent a danger for Europe.20 International connections thrived, and many scholars stayed in contact with both Leopold and Clarissa. That these contacts were not entirely based on scholarly work shows the example of the American ambassador Bancroft, who was in

Ranke and his largest work on a nation  193 the 1860s a frequent visitor in the ‘Salon Ranke’ and who also joined the historical seminar in Ranke’s private library. Besides a dedicated poem in her ‘Stars of my life,’ an original letter of George Bancroft had been bound into the book, which was addressed to Clarissa: ‘I regret to say that I brought no letters with me from America, & so can make no contribution to the store of autographs. This I regret.’21 The poem that was written on the left page of the book indicates that she may not have agreed with everything of what Bancroft thought; nevertheless, she fully respected him for who he was: Thinking of Mr Bancroft (American Ambassador) Aye yes! he is a representative Of that young giant and still growing Land That may become a Model to each strand If birth to men like Bancroft still it give! His judgements like an intellectual sieve Disparts nutritious truth, with heart and hand, From all the error, dress and barren Sand, On which the careless Spirit pain would live, Historian, Statesman, patriot at heart, Of his own land he takes a jealous part, And gives the Mother-country signal blame, But let it be – to us ’tis all the same, I still will prize him, echo to his fame, And think his censure but a touch of Art.22 Another letter found was written by Alexis Caswell on 6 November 1861. From the State of Rhode Island he introduced another historical scholar to Ranke, who went to Germany to fulfil the expected four-year training: The writer of this note retains a most agreeable recollection of a conversation with you while riding from Hof to Nuremberg on the 27th of September of last year. You will doubtless remember the conversation and the exchange of cards. Encouraged by your courtesy and your large acquaintance with American History and Literature I take the liberty of introducing to you my learned & most esteemed friend, the Rev. Dr. Aloah Hovey. Dr. Hovey is the Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the Newton Theological Institution near Boston. He visits Germany mainly for the purposes of professional improvement, & hopes to derive benefit & pleasure from the personal acquaintance of men eminent from Historical & Philological Learning. I am sure that you will appreciate his object and give him the benefit of your suggestions.

194  Ranke and his largest work on a nation Your ‘Lives of the Popes’ translated by Mrs. Austin are now before me. Let me express the sincere hope that you may live to perform the pleasing task of writing the Life of the last of the Popes.23 At the Berlin University, from thirteen lectures that were supposed to be given from 1859 to 1865, two were actually cancelled due to research trips for his English History (summer semesters 1862 and 1865). We find the usual tendency of Ranke’s classes: The majority of the classes dealt with modern or contemporary history (seven classes, one was cancelled), followed by three classes on the Middle Ages, two classes on England (one cancelled) and one class on German history. It should be noticed that in the lecture introduction to his ‘Parliamentarian history of England in modern times’ (summer semester 1865), Ranke referred to the current state of literature and research, which is one of the rare moments when he connected classes with his current research and book writing: [. . .] Especially for the latest history since the Glorious Revolution of 1688 there is such a desire. The latest publications on English history which can be read tend to break off and we have no proper work on the general interconnection of events in recent times. I want to concentrate on this in particular, insofar it can fit the academic lecture schedule.24 Of course Ranke made a couple of journeys as well. From April to May  1860 he researched in Paris, and in September and October the same year he was in Babelsberg, Munich, Partenkirchen and Dresden. In 1861 he was very busy travelling: in July and August to Amsterdam, in August and September to The Hague, in September to Brussels and Paris and of course in October to Munich, Berchtesgaden and Wiehe. In 1862 he was in Paris from May to June with a quick visit to Versailles, en route to London visiting Boulogne and Folkstone. He researched from July to September in London with a visit to Oxford, and in October in Munich. In 1863 he just travelled in October to Munich and Venice. And in 1864, in September he was in Lodersleben, Querfurt, Wiehe and Munich, and in October and November also in Ansbach and in Marburg. Ranke’s largest work concentrated on the history of England;25 however, many more countries were mentioned in connection to English history: the closest countries, Scotland and Ireland, and then Spain, the Holy Roman Empire, Holland, Italy, France, Sweden, Denmark and the colonies in America, Africa and Asia. The introductory volume of Ranke’s History of England surveyed English history from the time of the Romans to the early seventeenth century, emphasizing Henry VIII, the Reformation and the struggle between Queen Elizabeth I and Mary Queen of Scots. The second volume covered the reign of Charles I and his problems with Scotland and parliament. The Civil War, including the rebellion in Ireland and the execution of Charles I, were the main themes of the third volume. Volume four examined the period of the Commonwealth, the conflict between parliament and Charles II, the restoration of the Anglican Church and the formation of a new constitution. The fifth volume dealt with the emergence of Whigs

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 195 and Tories and the ‘Glorious Revolution’ of 1688. The sixth volume looked at the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, with the main focus on the years between 1688 and 1691 and the reign of William III. Events in Ireland between 1688 and 1691 were treated by Ranke as fundamental to the further development of the ‘revolution,’ and they covered almost half of the chapter dealing with this crucial period. Ranke concluded his work in the seventh volume with a short summary of the reigns of Anne, George I and George II, ending in 1760. The seventh and eight volumes contained a selection of documents in different languages that Ranke found relevant to English history and which derived from archives all over Europe. He reviewed the development of the state in regards to the power struggle between the crown and the parliament as well as monarchs’ obsession to unite the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland into one entity and one country. Also, the role of the third class in regards of the parliament was reviewed. When the Commonwealth was created, the classes gained importance because it was the citizen who took over the control of the state. For the general development of England Ranke stressed the importance of trade, particularly with Holland and the colonies. Despite this, Ranke included several long chapters on the development of philosophy, science and literature. He questioned the ‘Glorious Revolution’ in regards to how far it was actually a revolution, and Ranke believed that it was more likely another conquest. Ranke portrayed the direct involvement of German Protestant states and especially of Holland in the events of 1688 as motivated not merely by religious convictions, but by cold reason of state. Due to the fact that English History was Ranke’s largest work, I will spend some more time assessing his use of sources and the composition of his narrative as an example of his work as a historian. In the assessment, I make a distinction between Britain and Ireland, as Ireland was in the 1860s still a part of the British Empire  – but already seeking at that time independence from Westminster. This was achieved by 1921, when at first the ‘Irish Free State,’ and later with the ‘Republic of Ireland’ since 1949, gained independence from Westminster. As Ranke was well aware of these issues, the conflict between England and Ireland was also a key aspect for his historical narrative. In the preface Ranke wrote: Once more I come forward with a work on the history of a nation which is not mine by birth. It is the ambition of all nations which enjoy a literature culture to possess a harmonious and vivid narrative of their own past history. And it is of inestimable value to any people to obtain such a narrative, which shall comprehend all epochs, be true to fact and, while resting on thorough research, yet be attractive to the reader; for by this it would attain to a perfect self-consciousness and, feeling the pulsation of its life throughout the story, become fully acquainted with its own origin and growth and character. But we may doubt whether up to this time works of such an import and compass have ever been produced, and even whether they can ever be written. For who could apply learned research, such as the progress of study now renders necessary, to

196  Ranke and his largest work on a nation the mass of materials already collected without being lost in its immensity? Who again could possess the vivid susceptibility requisite for doing justice to the several epochs, for appreciating the actions, the modes of thought, and the moral standard of each of them, and for understanding their relations to universal history? We must be content in this area, as well as in others, if we can but approximate to the ideal we set up. The best-written histories will be accounted the best. When then an author undertakes to make the past life of a foreign nation the object of a comprehensive literary work, he will not think of writing its national history. This would be a contradiction in terms. In accordance with his natural vantage point he will direct his attention to those epochs which have had the most effectual influence on the development of mankind; only so far as is necessary for the comprehension of these will he introduce anything that precedes or comes after them. [. . .]26 In his preface to the History of England, Ranke wrote that he used ‘native’ presentations of English history for his work as they contained the best insight. He stressed that he used more sources and documents than ever before. Ranke stated that documents recording some historical events, particularly of important parliamentary affairs, were missing. In the Public Record Office and in the British Museum, Ranke found unpublished material but, excluding pamphlets, he gave no details about the kind of sources he found there. Ranke stressed the importance of documents by foreign ambassadors, particularly of Venice, Rome and Spain, but also of the Netherlands and Germany. As foreign policy also influenced English history, Ranke tried to use known documents and books as well as unpublished archival material from London, Dublin and the continent.27 Ranke’s footnotes revealed his sources in the form of authors’ names and volume numbers, but in general, he did not list the titles of books. There was no bibliography at the end of his work, but this was not unusual in the nineteenth century. More than half of the sources dealt with the English ‘Glorious Revolution’ of 1688–91. He, however, could not have used those listed 38 books in the footnotes alone. Another way to determine what books he used is to examine his private library, which is now kept at Syracuse University, New York. In total 211 books dealing with English or Irish history are present, all of which were printed before 1868, when Ranke finished the History of England. The oldest book in his library was published in 1590, and most books were published between 1801 and 1868. Books dealing with English and Irish history, but published after 1868, are not present at all; apparently, Ranke did not update his collection of books after completing his History of England. A further investigation of the books shows that those written in English were mainly used for his work. It also bears out Ranke’s dictum that one had to use ‘native’ historians if one wished to write the history of another nation.28 Nearly one-third of the books are printed primary sources such as letters and memoirs. Ranke used a large number of general books and books dealing with the Irish rebellion and with Oliver Cromwell. On the other hand, only eighteen of the 211

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 197 books dealt with the ‘Glorious Revolution’ and William III, which was the most important and detailed part of History of England. It is evident that, for this time period, he used several original documents; some of them were reprinted in his last volume under the title ‘History of the war in Ireland,’ which contained reports of the French general Lauzun and extracts from the diary of a Jacobite for the years 1689 and 1690.29 Under the chapter ‘Criticism of the historians’ Ranke discussed the historical works of Clarendon, King James II and Bishop Burnet.30 Another work of importance, even though a dictionary, was the Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste (General encyclopaedia of arts and science). Under the keyword Irland, Ranke found notices of geography and statistics, economic details and a long account of Irish history, language and literature.31 Under the keyword Dublin he found a good account of Dublin’s history.32 It is interesting, though, to look at the authors of these two accounts. The entry for Dublin was written by Bernhard Eiselen,33 who was a follower of ‘Turnvater’ Jahn in Germany, to whom Ranke had connections during his early academic career and whose desk he bought in the 1820s, using it to write all of his books until the end of his life. Johann Martin Lappenberg34 wrote the account on Irland. Lappenberg was, in the early 1830s, interested in Britain’s Anglo-Saxon heritage. He conducted valuable literary and analytical studies of the sources which were printed at the end of each volume. Lappenberg was the first German to seriously occupy himself with English history prior to 1154, and introduced thoroughness as well as Ranke’s source criticism into the field of English historical research.35 Ranke received a copy of the keyword Irland by Lappenberg, probably in thanks to Ranke for tutoring him. This work certainly influenced Ranke’s account of the Irish economy. A little mark can be found on page 87, a sentence dealing with the prohibition of marriage between Catholics and Protestants. This sentence can be found indirectly again in Ranke’s work in connection with the Anti-Catholic policy of William III in the late 1690s.36 In his younger years, Ranke would quite often underline the text or add notes on the top or bottom of the pages of his books. In his later years, this became quite rare. Nevertheless, there are still a number of books in his library which contain his notes. Some of them are only underlined, have added notes, dates or corrections of grammar. Sometimes the reader can find a row of numbers where Ranke tried to sum up troop sizes and verify if they tally. Even though they are merely corrections, these notes demonstrate what Ranke considered to be important when he read the books. In the following paragraphs I will give therefore some examples. The two-volume work with the title The Earl of Strafforde’s letters and dispatches: with an essay towards his life, published in 1739, has a number of underlinings. In January 1638 Wentworth reported the developing economy of Ireland in a paragraph that Ranke marked with a cross: ‘The Trade increaseth daily, and the Land improves mightily, I dare say all Men’s Rents a third Part better than when I set first Footing on Irish Ground, and very clearly will still grow, if Peace continue.’37 The passage has some importance, as Ranke stressed Thomas Wentworth’s work on the Irish economy: ‘Wentworth bequeathed to the Irish no

198  Ranke and his largest work on a nation contemptible monument of his autocratic sway. He founded their linen manufacture, in the first instance at his own expense, with the definite expectation that it would form an inexhaustible source of wealth for the country. Wentworth has left a strong monument of autocracy for the Irish.’38 Ranke’s description of the manner in which Ireland was ruled by Wentworth,39 which can be summarized as the ‘reward and punishment system,’ may have been taken from a letter by Wentworth to the king in 1636, as Ranke double-marked the passage.40 It seems that Ranke had quite a positive picture of Wentworth, which he may have gained from this work. He mentioned Wentworth’s strong will and his use of sharp words, his deep Protestant faith and his interest in increasing the economic strength of Ireland. Although his political system of ‘reward and punishment’ was regarded as the only means of ruling Ireland in order to give the king absolute control and power over it, Ranke did not criticize this system, but he placed Wentworth in the overall context of British history.41 Another important work for Ranke was Eugène Sue’s Histoire de la Marine Francaise. This work was quoted by Ranke and has a number of marked passages relating to Ireland, especially in volume four. The first mark notes James II’s dilemma when William of Orange landed in Ireland, whether to resist or burn Dublin or whether to lay waste to the entire country and retreat region by region, which would destroy any functioning infrastructure.42 Burning Dublin seemed too cruel to James II, so he decided to resist.43 Drogheda is mentioned in connection with his resistance, and Ranke corrected the spelling of ‘Drohada.’44 Another correction is found in connection with a bridge over the river Boyne, ‘pont de Selen,’ where Ranke noted ‘Slaine’ [Slane] beside it.45 Further down the text another word is underlined, again a bridge: ‘d’Oldebridge.’46 The defence of ‘Oldbridge’ was mentioned in Ranke’s work, and his footnote corresponds with the underlined ‘Oldebridge.’47 A large number of marks occur in Oliver Cromwell’s letters and speeches. All of the marked passages deal with events in 1649 and 1650. The first marked letter dates to September 1649, and the marked passage dealt with Cromwell’s treatment of the Irish, saying ‘that softness without rigour, rigour as of adamant to rest upon, is both sloth and cowardly baseness; that without justice first, real pity is not possible, and only false pity and maudlin weakness is possible.’48 In another of Cromwell’s letters, two sentences are double-marked: ‘Sir, you see the work is done by a Divine leading. God gets into the hearts of men, and persuades them to come under you.’49 There are no indications that Ranke used these notes, but they may well have influenced his personal condemnation of Cromwell’s storming of Drogheda in 1649.50 Ranke’s manuscript collection in the State Library of Berlin contains a large collection of transcripts which he copied in archives. The problem with most of the manuscripts is that the original location of the manuscripts is not always noted. Few of the copies are in Ranke’s hand because he had a variety of people copying for him. He had a large collection of documents concerning Charles II and James II, but no further dates are given.51 A number of reports of the French ambassador Sabrians, written in French, are documented for the years 1644 and 1645.52

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 199 Important copies of documents on Oliver Cromwell were made by Nicolas E. Hamilton in the British Museum in 1857.53 Another collection, in French, contains letters of M. de Grignon from 1646 to 1648.54 An important collection contains the letters of Lord Clarendon, which Ranke probably used for his assessment on Clarendon’s work in his appendix,55 some of which dealt with the Irish situation in the 1660s.56 Another collection of documents was copied in Brussels and contains reports of the Spanish ambassador Ronquillo for the years 1674 to 1689.57 The collection of reports of Bonnet for the years 1685 to 1701 is two inches thick58 and was used by Ranke in his assessment in the appendix.59 An interesting extract from 1688 is written in English and deals with ‘Father Peter’s’ confession to the French king, mentioning Ireland and giving an account of the military and religious situation of England.60 Detailed accounts were copied from The Hague, Netherlands, by a local archivist. Dr van der Wulp documented the military situation and battles in Ireland for the years 1689 and 1690 in English, French and Dutch.61 One of the most valuable reports represents the fragment of a Jacobite Diary from 1689–90, which was copied in Cheltenham in the archive of Sir Thomas Phillips and is probably written in the hand of Ranke’s son Friduhelm.62 Other major items in Ranke’s Manuscript Collection, all copied in Cheltenham, were the letters of the Earl of Nottingham, 1690 to 1693, French documents about the war in Ireland, 1689 to 1697, and letters of Lord Godolphin from the year 1695.63 Further to this there is a collection of letters by Mr Gard from 1697, all copied in the Public Record Office in London.64 These deal with discussions in parliament about the size of the English army. These discussions appeared in Ranke’s work with the same army numbers,65 but in the manuscripts Ireland was mentioned as receiving 10,000 soldiers, a figure that might increase.66 When Ranke wrote his History of England, there was no contemporary history of Ireland available to him based on critical archival research. He wrote his work before the Public Record Office of Ireland was established in 1869,67 and he had to make do with a short visit to the archives in the Custom House and at Dublin Castle. The contents of the English and Irish Public Records Offices only became fully available to scholars after 1870 with the publication of their contents. Ranke possessed a copy of Thomas Leland’s History of Ireland from the invasion of Henry II (Dublin, 1773), which is noted as being more balanced than earlier Protestant histories, but its treatment of 1641 remained very polemical.68 Ranke’s only current framework of Irish history was that provided by Macaulay. He was effectively forced to create his own narrative of Irish history. The two sources published in his appendix relating to Irish history 1688–90 were printed for the first time. His assessment of Clarendon was also important for the light it shed on the years between 1641 and 1650, even though Ireland is not specifically mentioned. By looking at different historians, a change can be noticed in the writing of Irish history – the use of sources and their interpretation as well as the interpretation of events themselves. English history written in the nineteenth century was strongly marked by a polemical element. English historians did not write

200  Ranke and his largest work on a nation ‘objective’ history, as Ranke required. In England, history was a form of political writing; the historian wrote either as a Whig or a Tory, as a Catholic or a Protestant. The discussion of Home Rule for Ireland influenced many historians from 1870 onwards.69 Furthermore, English historical writing was strongly marked by accounts of individual historical ‘characters’ and the importance of heroic individuals, in the hope to ‘capture the spirit of the age that created that individual.’70 Comparing the two works of Macaulay and Ranke, a number of differences can be found. Macaulay regarded the Irish civilization as inferior to the English: ‘The new settlers were, in civilization and intelligence, far superior to the native population.’71 The creation of one nation between the English and Scottish population had already been reached, while the melding together of the English and Irish peoples had yet to be undertaken.72 The description of Irish society in his twelfth chapter showed the Irish situation as being historic, which meant, in his understanding, that their behaviour could be changed and a positive development of civilization could take place.73 He believed that the Irish possessed no morality and had a lack of strength of character. The best example he gave was the Act of Attainder from 1689, which was described by him as a ‘law without a parallel in the history of civilized countries’ and being of ‘reckless barbarity.’74 Ranke, by contrast, had no colourful descriptions of Ireland at all. He treated the country with understanding and respect. Although his narrative of the siege of Londonderry 1688–8975 may indicate that Ranke wrote history from the victor’s perspective, the besieged do not get a better moral treatment and their situation was not portrayed as a victorious one from the start due to the flight of Commander Lundy.76 Macaulay had the tendency to reduce the religious difference in Ireland to a mere matter of politics. He expected that the Irish religious identity would gradually disappear with the erosion of Irish national identity.77 Ranke, on the other hand, recognized religious conflict as a historical phenomenon and explained it as part of mankind’s deepest identity as a community.78 There were also differences between the two historians in the way they arranged their narratives; for instance, the manner in which they described the first military actions in Ireland, the twelfth chapter of Macaulay and the sixth chapter in the nineteenth book of Ranke’s work.79 Both had more or less the same source materials, but Macaulay wrote with the benefit of hindsight, whereas Ranke tried to write as if the future was still open and undetermined. While Macaulay finished with the image of James II fleeing after the battle of Newton Butler,80 Ranke indicated that this is too early and finished, instead, with the boost of confidence of the Irish. In his last paragraph of this chapter Ranke wrote that Scotland was temporarily neutralized and James II even had an advantage in Ireland and, with French help, was also master of the sea. England was weakened because of disagreements of the parties in parliament with their new government.81 The 1690 Battle of the Boyne itself was treated by Ranke as a drama, with two main characters who met at the battle for the first and the last time after the revolution in 1688.82 Macaulay viewed it like a paradigmatic situation in which character came to the fore, thereby showing the superiority of the English civilization.83

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 201 For Macaulay, William III embodied the best example of a military leader who was not only morally superior but also shared the problems with his soldiers.84 Ranke partly shared this viewpoint when depicting William III as an eagle;85 nevertheless, he also gave credit to James II and his military leadership.86 Macaulay contrasted James II, watching the battle and then fleeing, with the fighting and wounded William III, a sign for him of the difference of character between a coward and a hero, between self-love and self-control.87 Both historians realized that the Battle of the Boyne represented the final stage of a series of events forming the ‘Glorious Revolution.’ For Ranke it was the final stage of the battle between France and Europe; Catholicism versus Protestantism; England versus the other two states of the British crown, Scotland and Ireland; of James II and William III; or, in his own words, ‘the great religious and political strife in which Europe was engaged found its fullest expression in Ireland.’88 Ranke must be given credit for publishing primary sources. The critical examination of sources and the critical appraisal of the reasons for the 1641 rebellion were features that set his history accounts apart from earlier writers. Ranke thought that the Irish had the right to rebel in 1641 because of their situation and national feelings. Only when writing about the storm of Drogheda 1649 did Ranke fall back on literary style and condemned in harsh words the fanaticism of Cromwell and his belief in carrying out the Justice of God.89 It had also been realized that the denunciation of Ranke’s work as a history of the victors was unfair to him, because he only told us what happened: every loser was able to become the victor in time, and only time was the permanent victor. Nations come and go, everybody gets their chance, and everybody reaches the top of the mountain of history and power. It is suggested that in the case of Ireland, it had been at the top of civilization during early Christianity, though not a power in political terms. While struggling against England, Ireland may have lost the main battles of the seventeenth century, and Great Britain may have become a world power, but Ranke’s positive treatment of the Irish made these developments relative because the Irish might rise successfully at a later time. As Ranke regarded each epoch and each nation and its people as unique entities, this also meant that states would embody positive values. And this also means, in the words of Benedikt Stuchtey, that ‘in this way, history makes sense, but as a result, historiography acquires an ethical relativism if all historical phenomena possess their own value.’90 In previous works it had been pointed out that Ranke used the word ‘Volk’ (people) negatively.91 The people were a crowd, an unwilling mob, in contrast or opposition to king and parliament. In the case of Ireland, however, ‘Volk’ was used positively – the people are understood to be the whole population of Ireland.92 Sometimes Ranke used ‘Leute’ for Irish people, in general less respectfully than ‘Volk.’ In the case of the Irish Rebellion of 1641 he used ‘Leute’ very negatively, but when referring to Cromwell’s execution of the garrison in Drogheda, the word is used positively, with respect and sympathy.93 The word ‘fatherland’ (Vaterland) is not often found in Ranke’s works. Previous authors mentioned that, in the case of England, he translated the English word

202  Ranke and his largest work on a nation ‘kingdom’ as Vaterland.94 Once this word was used for the ‘fatherland’s property,’ which the Irish wished to have returned. It is suggested that Vaterland was used in the sense of ‘ancestral land’95 and indicated Ranke’s awareness that land ownership was a great national issue of identity and autonomy in nineteenth-century Ireland.96 The use of the word ‘nation’ (‘Nation’) had surprising connotations in this work. Previous scholars suggested that the word does not mean unity of the state, but of the population itself.97 In other words, it was used to express national feeling as well. In the case of Ireland, Ranke made it clear that ‘nation’ covered not only its population but also the unity of the state and the Catholic Church. Church and state/people were always one. In the wars against England, the Irish nation fought against English units.98 For Ranke it was always the Irish nation that fought, whereas with England or Scotland, it was the troops that fought. In these cases England was not seen as a nation or another unity.99 Ranke recognized Ireland as a nation. He probably realized during his studies of Irish history that the island of Ireland had been recognized as a single political entity throughout most of its history.100 As already mentioned, he regarded the ‘nation’ of Ireland in a different way than expected. States exist, but they do not cease to exist like epochs,101 and the ‘nation’ of Ireland as a distinct political entity had been well established by the twelfth century. For Ranke, nations could only establish themselves if people shared the same tradition and interests and formed, thereby, some kind of collective identity. This can only happen over a long period of time within which this collective identity and institutional structures grow ‘naturally.’ A collective identity cannot be created either with a revolution or by the annexation or union of two different nations because the ‘naturally grown identity,’ or, as Ranke formulated it, the ‘God-given system,’ would have been destroyed.102 This was the reason he thought of the nation as, to use the words of H.W. Smith, a ‘mysterious something’ that ‘precedes every constitution.’103 Based on the ideas of Fichte and Hegel, the nation, or state, was seen in German historiography as an ethical entity and was ranked above the individual and the idea of the social contract. It was therefore concluded that nations would pursue their own destiny, possess their own particular historical laws and would be distinguished from each other by the role of the Weltgeist.104 In contrast to this, Humboldt, Savigny, Niebuhr and Ranke emphasized the significance of each particular age, the uniqueness of its culture and its independence from previous and subsequent periods. As Ranke put it, each age was immediate to God, ‘implying that there was not necessarily a teleological link between past, present and future.’105 However, in the words of Stuchtey, ‘the understanding of the past, or an accurate empathy for it, could help as a guide to the present if the historian could identify historical trends that were part of a continuity.’106 Charles Breuning gave a good description of what was understood as a nation in the nineteenth century. The word nation was not new. The Latin term natio, meaning ‘tribe’ or ‘race,’ dated from the era of the Roman Empire. In Central Europe, the ‘Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation’ had been known by that name since the fifteenth century. But these early uses of the word differed significantly from the modern concept of nationhood. In medieval and early modern

Ranke and his largest work on a nation  203 Europe, the term nation denoted, at most, an amorphous linguistic and cultural community. In the modern era, by contrast, the ‘nation’ is seen as a political entity consisting of the entire native population living within a contiguous and bounded territory.107 This was what Ranke understood. He did not share the Hegelian understanding of ‘one nation – one land – one language’ when he spoke of Ireland. He never stressed the importance of the Irish language. The unity of the people, their shared Catholic religion and traditions and the island as a boundary for the nation were indication enough for Ranke that it was a nation. With this view of the Irish nation, the question arises of how Ranke placed the Protestants as a possible part of this nation. Were they at all a part of the Irish nation? Or is there a possibility that Ranke was influenced by another discussion of Irish origin – the Celts? The work responsible for starting the European cult of things Celtic, historically and culturally, was The works of Ossian (1765), published by James Macpherson (1736–96), a Scottish man of letters. Ossian was a Gaelic warrior and bard who was supposed to have lived in the third century AD. However, when challenged, Macpherson could not produce the manuscripts he said he had used. It seems he took his material from certain oral ballads and his own vast imagination.108 The work was nevertheless an instant success in Britain and on the Continent: it figured prominently in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Die Leiden des jungen Werthers (1774) and inspired a number of famous German poets, such as Friedrich Gottlieb Klopstock109 and Johann Gottfried Herder. Several historians dealt with the Celtic historic tradition and constructed a connection between the Celts in Britain, Ireland and the Continent, especially in France. One of these historians was François Guizot, who noted in his History of England the connection between the British Celts and the French Gauls.110 His description of druids, who ‘were standing, clothed in their long white robes, [. . .] their heads shaved, their beards long,’111 followed the usual Romantic description. Over time the Irish developed to a point of being typically Celtic. This is not because of the fact that the Irish were pure Celtic – especially after invasions of Vikings, Normans and English – but nineteenth-century Irish nationalism formed this. So Ireland became Celtic, not because the Irish were Celtic but because the Irish wanted to be Celtic. And for the nationalists, this was essential to form a different identity in opposition to the colonial power of England.112 Ranke, on the other hand, did not follow this understanding of Celticism. He would only consider materials which he thought to be true and which were reliable. It also indicates that he simply did not bother to investigate further into the Celtic traditions and history; documents were scarce and could not deliver him a proper foundation. Due to his previous studies on European powers, Ranke was certainly aware of the fact that the definition of a Celt as someone who speaks, or whose recent ancestors spoke, a Celtic language was an eighteenth-century innovation, and it was wrongly applied to the inhabitants of Britain and Ireland.113 Ranke knew very well that the word Celtic did not stand for a nation, but a language group which opposed the Germanic one. There were many indications that the English had connections to the German people and their Germanic language,

204  Ranke and his largest work on a nation but Ranke would never have considered the English and Germans as being one nation. According to this, he found it plausible that the ‘native’ people were Catholic and should form their own nation, viewing the English Protestants as invaders. Further to this, Ranke stressed that in 1641, ‘the Catholics of the old settlements viewed themselves as natives.’114 Definitely from this point, Ranke did not differentiate between the Irish and Old English anymore. The term ‘Celtic-Irish’ used by him from the 1850s has to be understood as ‘Gaelic-Irish.’ But there are also other indications that Ranke knew very well how to deal with the national question. He mentioned, in relation to James I, a rewritten genealogy referring to the Milesian kings.115 Although he did not go into further details, it shows his knowledge of Gaelic-Irish origins, which were well known and publicized in the mid-nineteenth century. Probably because of his wife’s knowledge, Ranke did not bother to check the truth behind this myth.116 Another indication of his awareness of Irish identity throughout the centuries, which was undoubtedly influenced by his wife, Clarissa, and her brother Charles Graves, was that the Irish called the English ‘Saxons’ in Gaelic sources.117 Ranke may have become aware of the works of Philip O’Sullivan Beare (c. 1590–c. 1634), who declared, ‘All the Catholics of Ireland, irrespective of background, should be called Irish.’118 It is from him that Ranke might have got the idea, and he emphasized this designation in his work when he wrote about Irish rebellions and revolts in the seventeenth century. In the case of 1641, Ranke put this provocatively into a question when assessing the reasons for the Irish revolt: ‘No doubt the Old Irish antipathy of the natives against the Saxons was stimulated thereby; how could it be otherwise?’119 And in the same paragraph the aims of all Catholics – Old English and Gaelic-Irish origin – meld together into one, and indirectly – in Ranke’s view – the Catholic nation was born. This work was the last one of a series of histories on European states and closed a circle. It was also the largest work on one country. It is interesting that Ranke collected materials for over 30 years before he actually penned his English History. This could have something to do with his Anglo-Irish wife, Clarissa, who influenced Ranke in reviewing the history of Ireland. She also played a major role in securing access to materials and archives in England. There is a hint in one of Ranke’s letters that he was prompted to write the History of England as a response to Macaulay’s History of England.120 Ranke recorded that he met Macaulay and discussed his book with him. James Joll described the meeting as follows: The two men met only once, at breakfast in 1843; and it was clearly not a very satisfactory occasion. Ranke apparently did not (or would not) speak English, though in the same year he married an English wife; Macaulay did not speak German, though he read it, and he found Ranke’s French, in which language the conversation was conducted, unintelligible. Nevertheless, the two historians respected each other. For Ranke, Macaulay was ‘the incomparable man whose works have a European or rather worldwide circulation to a degree unequalled by his contemporaries’. And Macaulay wrote in similar terms of Ranke: ‘The original work of Professor Ranke is known and esteemed

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 205 wherever German literature is studied. . . . It is indeed the work of a mind well fitted both for minute researches and for large speculations. It is written also in an admirable spirit, equally remote from levity and bigotry, serious and earnest, yet tolerant and impartial.’121 This meeting was witnessed by Charles Greville, whose account of the meeting changed a dramatic moment into a comic one: [. . .] I went to breakfast with George Lewis to meet Ranke, the author of ‘The Popes of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century.’ He had got Macaulay, who had reviewed his book, to meet him, Sir Alexander Duff Gordon and his wife (daughter of Mrs. Austin, his translator), and Sir Edmund Head. I went prepared to listen to some first-rate literary talk between such luminaries as Ranke and Macaulay, but there never was a greater failure. The professor, a vivacious little man, not distinguished in appearance, could talk no English, and his French, though spoken fluently, was quite unintelligible. On the other hand, Macaulay could not speak German, and he spoke French without any facility and with a very vile accent. It was comical to see the abundance of his matter struggling with his embarrassment in giving utterance to it, to hear the torrent of knowledge trying to force its way through the impediment of a limited acquaintance with the French language and the want of habit of conversing in it. But the struggle was of short duration. He began in French, but very soon could bear the restraint no longer, and broke into English, pouring forth his stores to the utterly unconscious and uncomprehending professor. This babel of a breakfast, at which it was impossible for seven people to converse in any common language, soon came to an end, and Ranke was evidently glad to go off to the State Paper Office, where he was working every day. After he was gone, Macaulay held forth, and was as usual very well worth listening to.122 Another reason for writing an English history was the success that attended Macaulay’s work. Macaulay123 was elected as Honorary Member of the Royal Irish Academy in November 1852, three years after Ranke.124 In 1857 Ranke visited England and saw Macaulay several times. Again, Ranke was impressed by the quality of English daily living, but he remained reserved. One meeting with Macaulay is described in a letter to Clarissa: On Tuesday I  visited Macaulay. I  found him near Kensington Gardens, through which we once walked together as if in a country house. He has become prosperous through his book. I had great satisfaction in hearing him speak good English. He speaks just as he writes, with the same interest, definiteness and political opinion. Without agreeing with his every point I told him that I admired the style of his writing and especially the way in which he explained the present through the past. That I wish to occupy myself with English history does not appear to him to be quite right.125

206  Ranke and his largest work on a nation Only a few days later Ranke saw Macaulay again. This time it was at a ‘historical dinner’ organized by Lord Granville126 to honour the famous German guest. At this dinner Ranke met George Grote,127 and later noted to Clarissa that Macaulay ‘would not shut up.’128 Ranke disagreed with Macaulay on several matters. Helmolt suggested that Ranke’s History of England may have been occasioned as a result of competition with Macaulay and the Prussian king Frederick William encouraged Ranke with the words ‘Do it, perhaps you will have success!’129 Ranke did not only write a work of English history but also placed his own theory of objectivity and historical correctness into his work. One of the best-known sentences, ‘I would like to extinguish myself and let the events speak,’ is found in the second volume.130 According to Helmolt, Ranke wanted to establish historical truth in its last detail and consequently always wanted to conduct thorough research. To Ranke, Macaulay was historian who presented a one-sided view of English history, and Ranke saw it as a moral duty to test his own objectivity.131 Ranke intended not only to compete with Macaulay but also to formulate an interpretation of such completeness that it would not collapse with the addition of further facts. Only at the conclusion of the work was the reader able to view English history in what he saw as its full light and meaning, and he also offered a view of the future.132 Within Ranke’s history a clear division of work is recognizable. He dealt with theoretical problems in prefaces, introductions and added reflections, but not in the historical narrative. Ranke maintains the integrity of his narrative and does not break it up for theoretical reflections.133 Little is known about the archives Ranke used while in London. The State Paper Office – to most historians unknown – was under the control of the Office of Foreign Affairs, and readers needed special permission to study in these archives. In the ‘Catalogue of the Orders of Admission to the State Paper Office,’ a number of comments can be found: for August 1843 the object of research was ‘To examine documents relative to the history of Germany of the 18th century & 1756’; in September 1852 it was ‘To examine papers relating to the History of Europe, especially of England and France, during the 17th century’ and for April 1857 we find ‘To have copies of Domestic papers of the 17th century.’ For June 1865 we find two entries: ‘To peruse & make extracts from the Foreign Correspondence with the German Courts, more particularly with the Court of Berlin, during the reign of William III’ and ‘To make copies or extracts of documents in the correspondence with Prussia for 1692 & 1696, according to list supplied.’134 For the year 1843, nine letters concerning Ranke’s research are recorded in a space of one and a half months. He desired especially to consult ‘the correspondence of the British Embassy [Mr Robinson] at Vienna in the years 1740 to 1756.’135 Henry Hobhouse,136 the keeper, checked 29 volumes of correspondence and allowed Ranke to read them and to take as many copies as he desired.137 In the year 1852 Ranke contacted Hobhouse again, and eight letters were recorded within a month. This time Ranke’s interest moved from German history to French, and his ‘attention is at present directed to the Reign of Louis the 14th in order to elucidate some obscure points in that history. I wish therefore, in the first instance,

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 207 to examine the dispatches of the English Ambassadors at that Court in the year 1679 and a few of the following ones.’138 When the State Paper Office was painted in the summer of 1852, Ranke asked for and was granted a separate room in which to study.139 Although he was allowed to read most of the correspondence and was permitted to take copies, the French correspondence with the British Embassy for the year 1638 was restricted, and Ranke could only take ‘short notes or extracts only, and in no instance whole copies.’140 Ranke faced this restriction again in 1865. He wished to read two volumes of the foreign correspondence with Prussia in 1692 and 1698. The documents in question were checked, and ‘there appears to be nothing objectionable in them unless indeed the Letter dated Berlin 21.May 1692 (in Prussia No. 3) be considered offensive to the House of Hanover.’141 In the end, Ranke was not allowed to see the particular volume. As time moved on, Ranke became more and more reserved towards England and his personal opinion of the country changed. He also developed a greater interest in the political development of Ireland rather than England.142 In 1858 he described in his diary the background and the reasons for the Great Indian Mutiny and how the English subjugated India. Full of disgust, Ranke wrote at the end of his entry: ‘Almost as Cromwell treated the Irish. But is this fair? Is this not excessive violence?’143 In 1859 John Murray asked permission to translate Ranke’s first volume of the History of England.144 Ranke broke his studies when he heard the news of Macaulay’s death at the end of 1859. Clarissa wrote to Robert Graves on 31 January 1860: ‘Macaulay’s death must have made a great sensation – Only [. . . ?] as a speciman [sic] of foolish flattery Leopold was told he had poisoned Macaulay with his new history! He was a good Friend to Leopold and a great loss to him.’145 In another letter, Clarissa stated that the second volume was published in 1860 and that Ranke continued his work as usual.146 Ranke tried to show that the history of a nation did not only consist of events in that particular nation, but also that there was an interconnectedness in European affairs. He tried to connect historical universalism with the great general political themes of his present. He mentioned to Manteuffel that ‘you know that I study all this not as the history of France, or of England, but as general European, as world history, in which one epoch joins on to the other.’147 By 1862 Ranke’s work was already well known, although it was only published in German. It is not clear if John Murray progressed with his proposal or not, but in August 1862 there seemed to be renewed hope because Robert mentioned that he ‘was very glad to hear that there was a prospect of Ranke’s English history being translated into English.’148 By this time Ranke had already established an international network to acquire copies of works dealing with English history. In February 1863 Lord Acton149 apologized for a false translation made by one of his students and that Acton made the correct translation himself. He also assured Ranke that he wanted to make Ranke’s work known in England, along with his manuscript collection.150 Ranke received a lot of help from Charles Graves. Charles was very interested in Irish antiquarian subjects. He was one of the first to publish on the ancient Irish

208  Ranke and his largest work on a nation Ogham script, and he started to learn Irish. In the early nineteenth century it was believed that in learning the Irish language, one could rediscover the Irish nation but still remain Protestant. Irish learning was to reside in many a humble abode, but it remained the property of a minority.151 Irish was greatly reduced in social prestige because commoners could speak Irish but rarely read it.152 Although Irish was regarded by some as the ‘national language,’ there was still no concept of nationality based on Irish language.153 It was in the 1840s that the Romantic version of nationality, that is, to have one language and one nation, following the other ‘national’ examples of Europe, arose.154 Graves also prompted the government to publish the Old Irish Brehon Laws. His suggestion was adopted, and he was appointed as a member of the Commission to do this.155 He was also a member of the [English] Historic Manuscripts Commission.156 From 1858 onwards it is quite likely that Ranke asked Charles for manuscript copies from the Dublin archives and libraries, or at least for a list of the kind of material kept there. Letters dealing with this request date back to 1862, when Ranke stayed in London. Clarissa wrote to Robert: ‘As to the Dublin Archives, Charles introduced to me a clever young Irishman, and told me that Dr Todd only knew the contents of the Dublin University Library, and had the keeping of it, was absent in London or Paris at present.’157 And again, [. . .] if you know to what subject the documents that exist in the Archives in Dublin refer to the times of the Restoration and the Revolution – he thinks Charles may be too busy to afford him time to answer to these questions – and that you are still in Dublin. Can you [. . . ?] to get him any information?158 The reply to this letter came only a few weeks later from Robert Graves: I did not forget to put to Charles the question you desired as to whether there existed in Dublin documents relating to the era of history in which Ranke is at work. He says there certainly are such documents, but he cannot say whether they are of value. Lord Macaulay was told of them, but did not take the trouble to examine them.159 The History of England marked the completion of a grand circuit of European history by Ranke. When meeting American historian Frederick Bancroft, he stressed that the completion of his work was only possible due to the great assistance of his wife in his study of English affairs.160 In the 1860s, most reviews considered Ranke’s work as unhistorical because, as a German, he was considered unable to handle the events and characters of English history. An exception to this, however, was the critic for the Saturday Review, who rated Ranke’s work as ‘the most important work’ of the last years.161 Another described Ranke as a Tory because writing about English history meant supporting one party, and since Ranke was a conservative in Germany, he had to be a Tory in Britain!162 Lord Acton criticized the work also, but the critics focused their attention on Ranke’s treatment of English rather than Irish history.163 Lorenz

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 209 gave a good critical review to the appendix of Ranke’s work in 1868 in which he put special emphasis on Ranke’s assessment of Clarendon and Burnet, letters dealing with Henry VIII and Anne Boleyn and finally with Charles II in exile.164 And with the reviews I  finish the long assessment on English History. Most scholars have tended to assess Ranke’s earlier works from the 1820s and 1830s, whereas his later works – and only the multi-voluminous ones, neglecting articles and small volumes completely – were only occasionally assessed. With this example I am able to show several aspects of Ranke, the historian: his assessment methods of sources, the selection of documents for his narrative, the composition of his narrative in particular when portraying key events, the task of contacting archives and access to sources – which was not always successful – and the important role of his wife, Clarissa, in contacting scholars and archives and influencing Leopold’s perspective of a country. In particular the role of Clarissa has been completely neglected in the past – yet she influenced Leopold’s scholarship.165

Notes 1 Kommission für deutsche Geschichts- und Quellenforschung bei der Kgl. Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 2 Historische Kommission. 3 Jordan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, p. 37. 4 Ibid, p. 38. 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Davis, Empiricism and history, p. 32. 10 Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 369–372. 11 Ibid, pp. 372–373. 12 Ibid, pp. 373–387. 13 Ibid, p. 380. 14 Ibid, pp. 385–386. 15 The full title is: Leop. Ranke. Ein Moment der Zeit. (Vortrag gehalten vor Sr. M. dem Könige in Hohenschwangau Oktober 1962). 16 Karl Alexander von Müller, ‘Ein unbekannter Vortrag Rankes aus dem Jahr 1862’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, 151, 2 (1935), p. 311. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid, p. 328. 19 Count of Cavour, Camillo Pado Filippo Giulio Benso (1810–61), Italian statesman and a leading figure in the movement towards Italian unification. 20 Ibid, p. 329. 21 Letter of George Bancroft to Clarissa von Ranke, 28 April 1868, in: ‘Stars of my life’, second last page. 22 Poem on George Bancroft, in: ‘Stars of my life’, third last page. 23 Letter from Alexis Caswell to Leopold Ranke, 6 November  1861, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz (SBB), Nachlaß Leopold von Ranke, Registration Nr. Erg. 24 Ranke, Vorlesungseinleitungen, p. 389. 25 Englische Geschichte vornehmlich im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert (1859–1868) [A history of England, principally in the seventeenth century (1875)] [reedited in Sämmtliche Werke 14–22].

210  Ranke and his largest work on a nation 26 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. 96. Original text taken from History of England, vol. i (Oxford, 1875), p. v. Revised by Konrad von Moltke and Georg G. Iggers. 27 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. I, pp. xiii–xvi; History of England, vol. I, pp. xii–xiv. 28 Ibid, pp. xi–xii; History of England, vol. I, pp. xii–xiii. 29 Ibid, vol. vi, pp. 102–144; History of England, vol. vii, pp. 1–68. 30 Ibid, pp. 3–88; History of England, vol. VII, pp. 109–155. 31 A.G. Hoffmann, Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste (Leipzig, 1845), pp. 1–105. 32 Johann Imanuel Ersch and Johann Gottfried Gruber, Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste (Leipzig, 1836), pp. 116–120. 33 Eiselen, Ernst Wilhelm Bernhard (1793–1846), German gymnastic pedagogic and follower of ‘Turnvater’ Jahn. After the arrest of Jahn in 1819, he continued the gymnastic and nationalist movement in Germany. 34 Lappenberg, Johann Martin (1794–1865), German historian. 35 Thompson, History of historical writing, pp. 345–349. 36 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, p. 469; History of England, vol. vi, p. 217. 37 T.W. Earl of Strafford, The Earl of Strafforde’s letters and dispatches: With an essay towards his life, vol. ii (London, 1739), p. 270. 38 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, p. 54; History of England, vol. ii, p. 222. 39 Ibid, pp. 377–378; History of England, vol. ii, pp. 183–184. 40 Earl of Strafford, Letters, vol. ii, p. 21. 41 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, pp. 217–219, 222, 377–378; History of England, vol. ii, pp. 50–51, 54, 183–184. 42 This marked passage sounds frightening as this policy of ‘burned ground’ was used by Hitler and Napoleon when their troops were forced to retreat from Russia, with devastating results. 43 E. Sue, Histoire de la marine francaise, vol. iv (Paris, 1836), p. 332. 44 Ibid. 45 Ibid. 46 Ibid. 47 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, p. 170; History of England, vol. iv, p. 607. 48 O. Cromwell, Oliver Cromwell’s letters and speeches: With elucidations, vol. ii (London, 1857), p. 47. 49 Ibid, p. 90. 50 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. iii, p. 33; History of England, vol. iii, pp. 347–348. 51 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 7. 52 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 26/II, Lage 4. 53 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/II, Lage 5. 54 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 26/I, Lage 5. 55 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vii, pp.  109–136; History of England, vol. vi, pp. 3–28. 56 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 7; Faszikel 25/II, Lage 6. 57 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 22, Lage 2. 58 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 22, Lage 1. 59 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vii, pp.  155–195; History of England, vol. vi, pp. 45–87. 60 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 7. 61 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 26/III, Lage 1. 62 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 8. 63 All documents in SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 7 + 8. 64 SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 8. 65 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, pp.  428–429; History of England, vol. v, pp. 187–188.

Ranke and his largest work on a nation 211 66 67 68 69

SBB, Nachlass Ranke, Faszikel 25/I, Lage 8. S.J. Connolly, The Oxford companion to Irish history (Oxford, 1999), p. 467. Ibid, p. 313. See also R.G. Richardson, The debate on the English revolution (London, 1977), pp.  52–73; B. Mac Cuarta, Ulster 1641, aspects of the rising (Belfast, 1993), pp. 173–186. 70 N. Jackson, ‘Historiography Britain’, in: C.J. Murray (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the romantic era (New York, 2004), p. 505. 71 T.B. Macaulay, The history of England from the accession of James the Second, vol. i (London, 1858), p. 109. 72 Ibid, pp. 134–135. 73 Ibid, vol. iv, pp. 134–255. 74 Ibid, pp. 224, 226. 75 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, pp.  107–114; History of England, vol. iv, pp. 556–560. 76 Ibid, pp. 108–110; History of England, vol. iv, pp. 557–558. 77 Macaulay noted for example that Cromwell ‘resolved to put an end to that conflict of races and religions which had so long distracted the island, by making the English and Protestant population decidedly predominant’. in: Macaulay, The history of England, vol. i, p. 134. 78 Ranke gave the rebellion of 1641 as an example. For further details see Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, pp. 506–508, History of England, vol. ii, pp. 283–285. 79 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, pp.  106–117, History of England, vol. iv, pp. 555–564. 80 Macaulay, The history of England, vol. iv, pp. 254–255. 81 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, p.  117; History of England, vol. iv, pp. 563–564. 82 Ibid, pp. 160–174; History of England, vol. iv, pp. 600–616. 83 Macaulay, The history of England, vol. v, pp. 254–270. 84 Ibid, pp. 260–267. 85 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, pp.  171–172; History of England, vol. iv, p. 609. 86 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, pp.  168, 170; History of England, vol. iv, pp. 606–608. 87 Macaulay, The history of England, vol. v, pp. 260, 262, 269. 88 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. iv, p. 556; History of England, vol. vi, p. 107. 89 Ibid, vol. ii, p. 208; History of England, vol. iii, p. 33. 90 B. Stuchtey, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: C.J. Murray (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the romantic era (New York, 2004), p. 926. 91 W. Mommsen, Stein, Ranke, Bismarck (Munich, 1954), pp.  95–115; R. Vierhaus, Ranke und die soziale Welt (Munster, 1957), pp. 57–71. 92 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. i, p. 507, vol. ii, p. 505; History of England, vol. i, p. 387, vol. ii, p. 284. 93 Ibid, vol. ii, p. 511, vol. iii, p. 346; History of England, vol. i, p. 288, vol. iii, p. 33. 94 Mommsen, Stein, Ranke, Bismarck, pp. 95–115; Vierhaus, Ranke und die soziale Welt, pp. 57–71. 95 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. vi, p. 84, History of England, vol. iv, p. 537. 96 Terence Dooley, ‘The land for the people’, the land question in independent Ireland (Dublin, 2004), pp. 2–3. 97 Mommsen, Stein, Ranke, Bismarck, pp. 95–115; Vierhaus, Ranke und die soziale Welt, pp. 57–71. 98 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. i, p. 457; History of England, vol. i, p. 345. 99 Ibid, pp. 457, 464, 586, vol. ii, pp. 505–506, 510; History of England, vol. i, pp. 345, 349, 422, vol. ii, pp. 208, 213.

212  Ranke and his largest work on a nation 100 R.V. Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation (London, 2003), pp. 14–15. 101 W. Hardtwig, Die Geschichtserfahrung der Moderne und die Ästhetisierung der Geschichtsschreibung: Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 1986), p. 35. 102 Hardtwig, Geschichtserfahrung der Moderne, p. 35; A. Kemiläinen, Die historische Sendung der Deutschen in Leopold von Rankes Geschichtsdenken (Helsinki, 1968), pp. 65–67. 103 H.W. Smith, ‘Nation and nationalism’, in: Sperber, Germany 1800–1870, p. 248. 104 Stuchtey, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 508. 105 Ibid. 106 Ibid. 107 C. Breuning and M. Levinger, The revolutionary era 1789–1850 (New York, 2002), pp. 203–204. 108 See also M. Chapman, The Celts: The construction of a myth (London, 1997), pp. 120–122. 109 Klopstock, Friedrich Gottlieb (1724–1803), German poet. 110 F. Guizot, The history of England from the earliest times to the accession of Queen Victoria (London, 1877), pp. 1–3. 111 Ibid, p. 10. 112 C. Eluère, Die Kelten (Ravensburg, 1994), pp. 175–176. 113 J. Collis, The Celts: Origins, myths, inventions (Wiltshire, 2003), pp. 223–224. 114 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, p. 506; History of England, vol. ii, p. 284. 115 Ibid, vol. i, p. 507; History of England, vol. i, p. 387. 116 Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation, pp.  51–65; D. Murray, Romanticism, nationalism and Irish antiquarian societies 1840–1880 (Maynooth, 2000), p. 27. 117 Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation, pp. 56–57; Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, p. 506; History of England, vol. ii, p. 285. 118 Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation, p. 59. 119 Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vol. ii, p. 284; History of England, vol. ii, p. 506. 120 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Ranke, 26 March 1857, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 415. 121 Joll, National historians, p. 7. This was not the only meeting of Ranke and Macaulay, but it was the first. 122 Charles Greville, The Greville memoirs: A journal of the reigns of King George IV, King William IV and Queen Victoria (London, 1903), p. 207. With minor changes also in Patrick Bahners, ‘Das Bild der Glorious Revolution im Werk Rankes und Macaulays, ein historiographiegeschichtlicher Vergleich’, unpublished M.A. thesis (Bonn, 1989), pp. 1–2; and R.L. Schyuler, ‘Macaulay and his History – a hundred years after’, in: Political Science Quarterly, lxiii, 2 (1948), p. 180. 123 Macaulay, Thomas Babington (1800–59), English essayist, historian and politician. 124 RIA, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol. v (Dublin, 1853), p. 331. 125 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa Ranke, 26 March 1857, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 415. 126 Earl Granville, George Leveson-Gower Granville (1815–91), English statesman. 127 Grote, George (1794–1871), English political radical and classical historian. 128 In: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 419. 129 In: Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 110. 130 Own translation of ‘Ich wünschte mein Selbst gleichsam auszulöschen, und nur die Dinge reden [. . .] zu lassen’, in: Leopold von Ranke, Englische Geschichte, vornehmlich im 17. Jahrhundert, vol. ii (Berlin, 1860), p. 1. Translated in Leopold von Ranke, A history of England, principally in the seventeenth century, vol. i (Oxford, 1875), p. 467, as: ‘It has been my wish hitherto in my narrative to suppress myself as it were, and only to let the events speak.’ 131 Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 110. 132 Bahners, ‘Bild der Glorious Revolution’, p. 12.

Ranke and his largest work on a nation  213 133 Ibid, p. 5. 134 ‘Catalogue of the Orders of Admission to the State Paper Office, 1800–1877’, Public Records Office (PRO), PRO 6/325, pp. 56, 83, 100, 132, 133. 135 Letter of Henry Hobhouse to Lord Canning, 13 September  1843, PRO, SP 45/41, p. 260. 136 Hobhouse, Henry (1776–1854), archivist. He was solicitor to the Treasury 1812–17, under-secretary of state for the Home department 1817–27, and keeper of the state papers 1826–54. 137 See also PRO, SP 45/41, pp. 253–254, 259–263, 265–266, 269, 272–274, 278. 138 Letter of Leopold Ranke to ?, 21 September 1852, PRO, SP 45/44, p. 156. 139 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Henry Hobhouse, 27 September 1852; letter of Henry Hobhouse to Leopold Ranke, 29 September 1852, PRO, SP 45/44, pp. 158–159. 140 Letter of Lemon to ?, 4 October 1852, PRO, SP 45/44, p. 161. 141 Letter of J.D. Hardy to ?, 20 June 1865, PRO 3/15. 142 Eugen Guglia, Leopold von Rankes Leben und Werke (Leipzig, 1893), p. 315. 143 Diary of Leopold Ranke, 1858, in: Ranke, Tagebücher, p. 368. 144 Letter of John Murray to Leopold Ranke, 1859, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 5/1/236–237. 145 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 31 January 1860, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 90. 146 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 47. 147 Krieger, Meaning of history, p. 220. 148 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 18 August 1862, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 149 Dahlberg-Acton, John Emerich Edward (1834–1902), English Catholic historian, politician and writer. 150 Letter of John Dalberg-Acton to Leopold Ranke, 14 February 1863, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 5/1/71–72. 151 R.V. Comerford, Ireland: Inventing the nation (London, 2003), p. 134. 152 Ibid, p. 131. 153 Ibid, pp. 136–137. 154 Ibid, pp. 138–139. 155 Graves Archive, TCD, MSS 10047/48–102. 156 Huddleston, ‘Graves, Charles’. 157 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 1862, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 252. 158 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 106. 159 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 28 May 1862, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 160 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 114, 124. 161 Stromeyer, ‘Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik’, pp. 69–70. 162 Ibid, pp. 71–72. 163 Ibid, pp. 170–177. 164 Ottokar Lorenz, Analecten zur englischen Geschichte des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1868). 165 The only exception is Ingrid Hecht, Clarissa von Ranke. Im eigenen Körper gefangen mit blühendem Geist (2013).

9 Ennoblement, rise of titles, but waning of fame and the death of Clarissa (1865–71)

The New Year 1865 started with a number of problems and disappointments. Maximiliane could not get married due to problems with her dowry, among other reasons. In March  1864 Maximiliane had got engaged to Wilhelm von Kotze.1 Clarissa had been so excited that she reported immediately to John and his spouse: I am sure, you will both participate in the happiness we all feel in the good fortune it has pleased God to bestow upon us Maxa has engaged herself to a very excellent young man the Herr Wilhelm Baron von Kotze, Lieutnant in the Dragoon Guards. He is now only 23 so the marriage is not to take place immediately; of course he is now quite dependent on his Father, who has large estates in Thuringia, adjoining the neighbourhood, where Leopold and all the Rankes were born and bred. As his Father is a man of 72 the young man will soon have to take possession of the estates.2 The couple could not marry immediately because Wilhelm was considered too young, as Clarissa said in her letter. The other reason was his father. He rejected Ranke as ‘a stupid chap’ whose ‘knowledge with wisdom bit off his head’ and who tried to ‘pair off’ his son with Maximiliane.3 Also, devastating news reached Clarissa at the end of January when Robert informed his sister that he refused to take a job in Berlin: And now, dearest Clara, I must say with my open pen how truly sorry I am in feeling obliged to refrain from meeting your affectionate wish about the Berlin Chaplaincy, to be near you & in any degree by being so to minister to your comfort & happiness would have been a true pleasure to me . . . but I felt the duties could not creditably be performed except by a person who spoke German & French with some ease. I am now too old to undo my wants in these respects. I feel too that my age dictates the desirableness of even settling in some spot with, if possible, a duty attached to it, where I may spend my days without working for further change on earth.4 This was quite disappointing for Clarissa because she hoped to have a member of her own family close to her in Berlin. Her other major problem concerned

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 215 her youngest son’s final examination. Friduhelm was left quite weak following months of studying. Clarissa wrote to John in March 1865 about the details of his exams: What a foolish mother you will think me but only recollect how our dear father used to feel it at the time of your examination, and afterwards write to his father all the particulars of them, you will make allowances for me, and though it may not so much interest you, it will lighten my heart to tell you how my boy got off. At first Fred was not so fortunate as was to have been expected, three young men were dispensed from the oral examination because all their themes were so good, my brother-in-law, the Direktor of the school came to me to say, that Fred would have been dispensed, had he made a good German theme, but that he curiously failed in doing so, although his other compositions and exercises were excellent. Fred accounted for this, saying the theme did not interest him and he thought it stupid. His father was not at all sorry at his failure because if he has any especial talent it is for writing on any subject. So he went into his examination wearing a frock coat, a hat and a white cravate for the first time in his life. He went at seven o’clock in the morning, at one o’clock I got a depeche from my brother-in-law saying that Fred’s beautiful, childlike face and dear ready selfpossessed answeres interested the hearts of all the Examinors. When the examination was over, the chief school counsellor congratulated all the young men, saying that they had made a very good examination, then he came up to Fred, shook hands with him and said, I can congratulate you especially; your answering afforded me great pleasure and especially because you are so young. Fred said: I am not so young as you think. I am seventeen. Well, he said, is that not young for you. Yesterday Fred was praised in the school an unusual thing. He has not a natural talent for mathematics as Otto has, but he distinguished himself in them in his examination. I feel altogether very happy about him. Still, I wish to know your advice about him what he should do to strengthen his body and what do you advise about a profession?5 While Clarissa was left at home with her worries, Ranke accepted invitations, although many were apparently against his wishes: Leopold has been quite well and has been to a great number of balls and entertainments at the Court and the ministries and ambassadors. Of course it is no pleasure to him to go, but he has the opportunity thus of speaking with Statesmen and other great men, that he only meets at such places.6 Early in 1865 Clarissa mentioned her husband’s work again, when she ‘wished to say that if any of your clever friends wished to translate my husband’s history of England, this would be the time to do so, now that the 6th volume has appeared and that the 7th and last is in hand.’7 Even when concluding his history, requests were sent to Ireland. In February 1865 Clarissa wrote that ‘Ranke wishes

216  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame if you could that you would tell him, how many families of the old Irish nobility still exist and what the titles are.’8 In the following months Clarissa thanked her brother Charles for the details of Gaelic and Anglo-Irish noble families, their history, position and estates. It seems that Charles translated Gaelic manuscripts into English and sent them to Ranke in Berlin. On 22 March 1865, Ranke was ennobled by royal decree. Since the eighteeenth century, noble status in Prussia could only be achieved by outstanding service in the army or to the state.9 William I, King of Prussia, had raised Ranke to the state of nobility on account of his literary and historical merit. It is from this moment on that Ranke was allowed to carry a coat of arms, and he immediately adopted the coat of arms designed by his wife ten years earlier. Clarissa described how she first heard of the discussion: This morning early Leopold came into my room, saying: Good morning Frau von Ranke. I said, what have I got a letter? And from whom, for I very often, as you know have my letters directed Fr.v.R. Leopold said: No but I have got a letter from the King saying: He has raised me to the state of nobility on account of my merit.10 In a letter written a day or two later to Robert, Clarissa remained more formal and the news of the distinction was less emotional; she wrote [.  .  .] that on the King’s birthday he, the King, wrote to my Husband at a very early hour in the morning to tell him, that he had raised him to the state of nobility on account of his literary and historical merit, at the same time intimating that he wished, that Leopold would dedicate his talents again to the History of his own country. I did not know at first, that this was so great a distinction as I now find it is. Everybody from high to low think it necessary to congratulate and certainly I am very happy to find, that the learned men especially think that the promotion of my Husband is an honour done generally to science. I was also much pleased at being greeted as a ‘Stammmutter’ [sic], ancestress of a new line. To Leopold this is a vain distinction, but for the children it is very agreeable.11 Only a few days later, 3 April, Robert replied with pleasure: You may be sure the intelligence contained in your last was hailed with pleasure & the best of good wishes by all of us here, & I now in the name of all congratulate most heartily both parents & children in this elevation in rank. To Leopold first must we give joy on his receiving a distinction which his history & historical labours had made a reward of merit. . . . He is now in Prussia what Lord Macaulay was in England as to position before the public eye; as to his relative merit & as historians I have no right to pronounce a judgement, but I am very sure that in some important points Leopold is much his superior.12

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 217 All this time contemporary political events were discussed in Clarissa’s salon, for example, the cause of the American Civil War. Whereas Clarissa and most of her visitors shared sympathy for the American Confederate States, everybody hated the ‘Yankees’ who fought fiercely and unfairly and had greater resources in men and money. Ranke did not share this opinion and did not join the political discussion – in his opinion the Southern cause was already lost and a united confederation of the American States under the leadership of the North would be able to become, in time, a great power and may even overpower their motherland, England. In a letter to her brother Robert several years later, Clarissa changed her opinion and expressed this view to him: And I believe the day is coming and will come when the Americans after they have recovered from their Civil War, will unite, North and South against England, for you contrived by your policy to exhaust both parties and I feel certain that they will revenge themselves on you. I know so many Americans, they surround me because I speak English and because my husband is famous and I feel their hatred to the English in spite of all their flattery and politeness.13 The assassination of Abraham Lincoln,14 president of the United States of America, on 14 April 1865, moved Clarissa deeply. She wrote a poem about him for ‘Stars of my life’ and she mentioned to Robert: ‘What a dreadful tragedy the murder of Lincoln and the attempted assassination of Seward15 was!’16 Although it was presented to the Prussian king in 1854, the article ‘On the oriental question’ was only published in 1865.17 The editors had written an introduction to the speech which was related to the Crimean War in 1854, and they tried to analyze the effects on the Middle East and Europe since then. The editors referred to the Ottoman Empire in the known language of Imperialists, describing the state as the ‘sinking empire’ or ‘the sick man.’18 The editors also compared the presentation of Ranke to other reports, in particular a Russian one; however, they stressed the better-structured and approachable ideas of Ranke in this report. The report of Ranke was actually less than half of the length of the article. In Ranke’s presentation, he analyzed the problem of the Ottoman Empire and the European governments in relation to the power policy and the ‘balance of power.’ He also viewed the political structures of the Ottoman Empire and the other involved conflict powers. This presentation was a direct reaction to the Crimean War and the crisis in the Middle East. When the presentation was made, it coincided with Ranke’s time as a historical and political advisor to both the Bavarian and Prussian kings. On the evening of 6 May 1865, Ranke and his youngest son, Friduhelm, left for Paris. Although he was 69 years old, Ranke was described by his son as ‘being completely fresh, mastering all kind of bodily strains and indefatigable.’19 While travelling he chatted cheerfully with other travellers and found it interesting to extract information from them. During the night he slept well without lying down or covering himself. After a trip of 24 hours, he arrived in Paris and showed no

218  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame evident tiredness.20 This research trip stood in connection with his English History, and as I have analyzed the work in more detail, I will therefore present this research trip in more detail as well, using it as an example of how Ranke travelled and socialized during his research trips. Both stayed in the Hotel de Londres, which Ranke had visited for over 25 years. It was located in the narrow Rue Bonaparte, and in the opinion of Friduhelm the building was ugly, with thick walls and small, low, unfriendly rooms, and the service was bad. On the other hand, the inn had been practical for Ranke, located as it was in the centre of the city, on the left bank of the Seine, five minutes’ walk from the Louvre and close to the libraries and archives.21 Ranke looked forward to the following day because he was permitted to see the archives of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Friduhelm was not allowed to enter, but Ranke continued searching in other archives and eventually found a means of access for Friduhelm to the archive of the Ministry of War, in which Friduhelm had to copy materials each day, many of which were subsequently printed in the appendix to the History of England. In Paris, Ranke was already a highly respected figure among scholars.22 Ranke began his typical visits on the first day. Together with Friduhelm, he went to the orientalist von Mohl23 and his wife, who were major attractions for him during his stay. They were welcomed to their salon. Friduhelm described Mrs von Mohl24 as a small, extraordinary lively and spirited lady who had broad interests and could speak English, German and French fluently, which meant that representatives of these three nations met regularly in her salon. Ranke had been in good spirits on his first day: he emerged from the archive and compared himself to a hunter who had just shot many worthy animals.25 During later days, a visit with Louis Adolphe Thiers26 followed, by whom Ranke was welcomed heartily. Thiers, described by Friduhelm, was about the same age as Ranke, around the same size and showed the same freshness. The conversation between Ranke and Thiers was like one between brothers. Thiers had been funny and elegant in the use of language; he liked to crack jokes, but he could also stubbornly maintain an opinion while remaining pleasant and understanding.27 Around 1865 Thiers had been at the height of his power in the parliamentary opposition. His speeches made him a popular figure in Paris. In his house several friends and guests met after dinner every evening. While the Rankes were there, French affairs were rarely mentioned. Instead the main topic was Prussian affairs: how far Bismarck’s policy could be accepted by a French parliament which did not show any understanding of Bismarck or King William I. At a later stage Thiers actually admired Bismarck’s policy. On the occasions when politics were discussed, François-Auguste Mignet,28 a permanent guest in Thiers’ salon, was much admired by the Rankes.29 Ranke was invited to meals and parties daily, while Friduhelm was given money so he could enjoy himself. Sometimes they went to the opera, once with the family of Graf Schlieffen Sandow to see Meyerbeer’s ‘L’Africaine.’ They sat in a box, and though Ranke could not see properly, he enjoyed the whole

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 219 ambience of the great opera house, although he disliked the director’s interpretation of the score.30 The stay in Paris was a happy one, and hot days were interspersed with thunderstorms. On Sundays, Ranke’s business was different. In the morning he dealt with letters, using Friduhelm as his secretary. Ranke wrote his letters very cautiously, thinking about every word so as to avoid misunderstandings; if a letter was not good enough, it had to be rewritten. Usually the first letters were to his wife, followed by those to his brother, then to Manteuffel and so on. At the same time, he worked on his books. Scripts, which were sent over from Berlin, were read and corrected, not only for stylistic or factual errors but also for their content. The publishing house Duncker & Humblot in Berlin found it difficult to read Ranke’s problematic handwriting.31 At lunch time, Ranke would freshen up and would then call on friends. Once, he was invited by the Empress Eugenie. The afternoon was used for trips into parks or gardens of friends, where he ate lunch. He had lunch with Ivan Turgenev32 in Rueil and with Baron Henry Labouchere33 in Versailles. Ranke liked Paris and the way of life of the Parisians, both of which he described in his letters to his wife.34 Trips lasted late into the evening, and Ranke liked travelling in overcrowded trains and enjoyed imagining that he was a Parisian. They left Paris on 7 June and arrived at Charing Cross Station in London the following morning. They hired a cab and went to the neighbourhood of the British Museum, where they viewed a number of furnished apartments and rented one in a side street off Oxford Street, which had several simple rooms.35 In London Ranke quickly found his way to the archives. The Prussian ambassador, Albrecht Graf von Bernstorff,36 looked after Ranke and secured invitations to a drawing room and a concert ball, at which Princess Helen represented the queen. Ranke also met several other historians. Friduhelm disliked copying old manuscripts for three weeks in the British Museum, and he was not invited to some events. The money he received from his father could cover his meals but could not also cover theatre tickets, so Friduhelm spent the evenings walking along Regent Street and Piccadilly. Sometimes Friduhelm was permitted to attend evening soirées, such as that of Mrs Tiarks, the grandmother of his future wife. In her salon, political discussions took place, and to Friduhelm’s approval they shared a sympathy for the American Confederate States. Ranke did not share this opinion and did not join the political discussion. In his opinion everybody merely repeated what they had already read in the Times. When conversation turned to Prussia, it seemed as if everybody in England believed that the state was on the edge of a revolution and would collapse.37 During their stay in London the weather was very hot and dry. On Sundays they went on trips, during one of which they saw Windsor Castle, but when it came to food, they could not find a restaurant that was open. Only back in London, in the late evening, were they able to obtain some cold beef. Friduhelm noted that he never, even during his military career, went hungry like that again, yet Ranke did not seem to have a problem with it.38

220  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame In the meantime, Clarissa remained in Berlin but stayed in close contact with her husband and her brothers through her correspondence. In a letter to Robert, she stressed her wish that Ranke, and especially Friduhelm, would visit her relatives in Dublin: You will receive this [letter] from Charles, to whom I have written to beg that if convenient he would invite Leopold & Fried to visit him about the middle of July they are staying now at Mrs Alderton’s, 34 Dean Street, Soho Square, Lo[ndon]. I wish you would write to them also, dear Robert, to press their going to Dublin. I am so afraid of anything happening to prevent Leopold putting his intention into practise, and I do so wish that Fried should see you all!39 Charles invited Ranke in the ensuing days, not only to visit him and his family but also for the conferring of an honorary degree. Ranke answered only a few days later, mentioning two manuscript copies he had received from Charles: Your duplicates are both arrived. Receive my best thanks for the care, you took, your good intentions and for your kind invitation. Certainly I shall come with Fridhelm to Dublin before you and dear Selina leave it. For what could we do there without you? I wish, to see you in your own usual residence with your family. Now I come to the principal point. You conceive, that I could not arrive the precise day of your comitia, if I was not before assured, I say not pretty sure, but assured beyond doubt, that the honour you speak off, should be really bestowed upon me. But in this case, I should really arrive to the precise day and not fail. I think about the first of July we shall be in Cheltenham in the house of dear John. Here we shall stay certainly till to the 24th of June. Pray give me a further notice of the prospect of the case and of your home arrangement. Is it possible without inconvenience for you to receive us both in your house and to take us both with you to Parknasilla? I should like indeed staying with you for a little while in the country; only it must not be in any way troublesome to you nor make you and your family uncomfortable.40 Robert wrote to Clarissa on 22 June. The letter shows how far preparations had advanced in Dublin: Charles wrote to tell Ranke that if he would undertake to be here by the 5th July, he would undertake that on that day (the annual day of Commencements in Degrees) the University here would confer the mutual honour of a Degree of Doctor of Laws upon him. Ranke has very munificently accepted the offer. On the day of the Commencements there will be a grand Banquet in the Dining Hall at College at which of course Ranke will be one of the principal guests. Lord Wodehouse has the intention of writing Ranke to be a guest at the table of the Vice Royal Lodge.41

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 221 On 22 June Ranke wrote a note to John mentioning his arrival over the next few days: London begins only now to be London for me. But your propositions shall be our law. Our worrying shall be finished and, I think, it can be Saturday afternoon. At two o’clock we shall be in Paddington, at seven in Cheltenham. I hope you give us a writing table for bringing in order not only our papers but also for writing down the ideas resulting from them. I think really to be in Dublin the 4th July. I am governed by the Graves and follow blindly their advice. With the hope of finding Mrs Graves and yourself in full health.42 Only a few days later Ranke and his son went to Cheltenham to stay with John, Clarissa’s eldest brother and Friduhelm’s godfather, who lived unmarried there. He wrote to his wife how he saw the house: The house of your brother, in which we stay, is not really splendid and great, but roomy and comfortable, so we feel fine staying here. I never had a better bedroom which was furnished for me. Opposite of it is the library full with mathematical books where we just write. This is on the first floor, on the second is Fried’s bedroom, downstairs are the drawing and dining rooms, everything is very comfortable. In the house is a bathroom as well. The garden which surrounds the house, was very dried out when we arrived as there was no rain for five weeks. Since yesterday we have rain and at every hour you can see more green coming through. The bushes are still low but in a few years they will give plenty of shadows. Even the Greenhouse is not missing and already on the first night we visited the stables. John and Amelia have their own house, daily they drive out – except on Sundays. We feel being accommodated very well. Friduhelm receives here as well plenty of approval. The long hair suits him and gives his appearance something of charm and strange which is liked here in the same way as in Paris, London and Clapham.43 It was planned that Ranke’s one-week stay would be entirely devoted to relaxation rather than work. However, as it happened, he discovered another archive on his first evening there. He described to Clarissa how he met Sir Thomas Phillipps: And how do we live here? On the first evening we walked through meadows side-lined with trees and fresh hay laid there to dry. We got involved in a little war with the youth in which we (which means me as well) threw hay toward each other and sometimes hit each other as well. When we left the field, we met an honourable gentleman, who questioned me about Mr von Bismarck and who predicted in a short time a Prussian revolution. Something similar has been written in a newspaper the previous evening.44 According to Friduhelm’s memories, the next day they visited Sir Thomas Phillips,45 who lived at Northwick House, close to John. Phillips had been described

222  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame by Friduhelm as a middle-sized 74-year-old gentleman, his face full of wrinkles with a long white beard, and who lived as a hermit but was devoted to collecting treasures. His large collection of paintings was not special, but his library contained, according to Friduhelm, around 20,000 manuscripts. Usually he rested during the day, while he read at night. Friduhelm thought of him as a ‘wizard,’ and very much to Friduhelm’s sorrow, Phillips possessed full parliamentary records from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This proved to be Ranke’s greatest discovery, and the next day he and his son searched through the manuscripts.46 He himself described the collection as follows: The strangest thing, you have in and around Cheltenham, is a house filled up with books and manuscripts (and they are originals) in boxes, in which a collector of the first rank, Sir Thomas Phillipps, has his residence. It is the former Northwick House which was built for a gallery and which still has a large collection. The owner is an elderly gentleman, who never leaves but only lives in between his books and collections and welcomed us heartily to his house. He gave me a catalogue of his collection, which I brought to my house and only then I realised what drove me subconsciously to leave London so early and come to Cheltenham. Amongst his manuscripts, the total number of which is around 18,000, some of them are very pertinent to my current studies and are of high value to me. It is difficult for the owner to find them in the boxes, but he is the happier when he actually does find them. With a strange mixture of self satisfaction and goodwill for others he brought the manuscripts and is happy to see them being used. He proudly mentioned that once Dr Pertz stayed with him in Middlehill for a couple of months. With the help of Friduhelm I started with the work, but I am afraid I have to come back another time, in the hope of not neglecting my historical duty, of which he himself reminded me. On Monday we travel to Dublin. But the thought of going to Parknasilla or to Scotland I have to give up.47 While still in Cheltenham, Ranke checked with Charles and Robert about his arrival and stay in Dublin. To Charles he wrote: My purpose is to leave Cheltenham Monday next and my hope, to find you all in good health in the new dwelling at Dublin Castle Tuesday in the morning. I am told we shall arrive already at 7 o’clock. I suppose, that everything about the honorary degree is quite settled. Perhaps you will have time to give me as far as it is possible an official notice of it. If so, we shall come certainly. Dear Charles, I hope my presence in Dublin wont be burdensome neither to you or to Selina, whom I am longing very much to see. My kindest love to you both as well as to Robert and Helen. I am vexed, that I shall miss Georgina and her children, because I should have wished to prove to my son acquaintance with the whole of the English Family.48

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  223 And to Robert, Ranke wrote: I think it is rather presumptuous to accept an invitation in Dublin, when one is still in the midst of England. But well, trusting that I  shall safely pass St Georges Channel I accept your invitation as well as the other two, which I received in this moment to a dinner in Trinity College and another at Lord Woodhouses. If you would be kind enough to tell it to Charles, who forwarded me those invitations. I hope to find you in good health and all the force at your spirit. Believe me, that it shall give me the greatest pleasure to enjoy your and dear Helens company sometimes when I am in Dublin. We read always your letters to Clara with great appreciation of your kindness and sense. You enter always much in our conversation at home.49 Before Ranke left Cheltenham for his trip to Dublin, he wrote to his friend Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel that ‘I am considering going over to the green island and to stay for one week in Ireland, which I have not yet seen.’50 At eight o’clock on the evening of 3 July, Ranke left Cheltenham with his son. They took two trains to Holyhead. As they changed trains, Friduhelm had to lead his father to the express, because they had only a few minutes before it departed. The steamboat left around three o’clock in the morning from Holyhead. Ranke met Prof. Miller, Prof. Adams from Cambridge and two other professors of mathematics from London and Cambridge. All of them came for the same reason as Ranke. In the morning they arrived at Kingstown and were brought to Dublin.51 Ranke was indeed conferred with an honorary doctorate by Trinity College Dublin on 5 July 1865. In the Register of Trinity College two entries are present: June 6 [. . .] Con. of degree

Dr  Graves gave notice that he would move that an honorary degree of LLD be conferred to L.d von Ranke of Berlin.

June 21st [. . .] Honourable Degree for Prof. Von Ranke

The Grace of the House for the degree of LLD [Doctor of Laws] honouris causa was granted to Professor von Ranke of Berlin.52

The proposal for conferring Ranke with an honorary degree came from Charles Graves, and this was probably not unrelated to the fact that Charles Graves had become a Senior Fellow shortly before. But he had earlier connections with Trinity College. Walter K. Kelly from Trinity College translated two works of

224  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame Leopold’s: The history of the Popes into English in 1843 and The Ottoman and Spanish empires into Spanish in 1857.53 Ranke must have been informed immediately because only two weeks later, on 5 July 1865, the commencements took place in the examination hall. On a printed leaflet the following notice was given: Comitia Aestiva Habita Quinto die Julii, 1865. [. . .] Doctores in utroque Jure [. . .] Leopoldus Von Ranke Berolensis, Prof. Historiae gratiam pro gradu Doctoratûs in utroque Jure adeptus est (Honoris causâ)54 The following day The Freeman’s Journal gave notice of the Trinity College Dublin commencements:

TRINITY COLLEGE SUMMER COMMENCEMENTS The summer commencements were held yesterday in the examination hall. The degrees were conferred by the Lord Justice of Appeal, Vice Chancellor. In the list of Doctors of Law, it will be observed, are the names of the Earl of Enniskillen, Dr Adams, who contended with Le Verrier for the honour of having discovered one of the recent planets, and Von Ranke. [. . .] Doctores in utroque Jure [. . .] Leopoldus Von Ranke, Berolensis Prof Historiae gratiam pro gradu Doctoratues in utoque adeptus est (Honoris causa).55 The Irish Times had the same account, with the difference that it only listed the names in Latin and omitted the introductory paragraph.56 The newspapers, however, were absorbed with the election to the Westminster Parliament and no further notes appeared. For Ranke, this doctorate was very important.57 He wrote to his wife a few days later: Here in the far west I became truly a doctor of both laws. I wear the hat of the university and the robe of a doctor. I was the only one who did not have to swear the usual oath because Queen Victoria is recognised as one’s Queen.

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 225 Instead I received a diploma which I want to bring back with me. The robe of the chancellor, black and gold of strong texture and a bit heavy, made the best impression while the gown of the doctor is light. During the banquet I had one of the most distinguished seats beside Lord Clancarthy, an older man, who has seen the world and was able to give me some information about the Ionian Islands.58 The oath was a usual procedure in Trinity College at this time. The Dublin University Calendar for the Year 1866 added the following: At these Commencements, the private grace of the House was read, for conferring the Honorary Degree of Doctor in Laws on Professor Leopold von Ranke, of Berlin, who, being the subject of a foreign state, could not take the oath of allegiance, which is required by Act of Parliament for the Full Degree.59 In a letter to his wife, written in his apartment in Dublin Castle, Ranke described his impression of Dublin: We are now really here, my dearest Clarissa, in your mother town. I drove with Robert along Fitzwilliam Square to Merrion Street. He showed me your old family houses, where the one or the other of you were born and grew up, where you lived as a little house mouse with the name Clarissa. Fridhelm will be able to visit all that much more. He is very happy coming to your family with the two cousins, a couple of talented young folks; both of them enjoy jokes; the one more in conversation, the other one even writes small satires, they behave well and they are well taught. Cousin Helena is helpful and clever; Selina, my old girl-friend, is very nice, always busy in her, large family, still quite beautiful and for us a very good landlady. And now Robert’s wife, Helen Graves: she is nice and, as far as I can see, quite happy with her small house and takes part in anything dealing with us with her full heart. And now your brothers! Charles is busy, in full health and very comfortable in Dublin. He is a Senior Fellow in the College, he does not hove to lecture himself but he is always busy there; at the same time he is the spiritual counsellor to the Viceroy, whose trust it seems he enjoys to the highest level. The apartment we stay in belongs to the government and all of the furniture is roomy and comfortable. The apartment lies opposite to that of the Viceroy. On the wide stones which divide the middle of the court, the guards march up and down in their colourful costume. However, Robert does not give the impression of being a strong man: he tires easily, but nevertheless he is well off and full of duty and brotherly friendship. If only he would write a little literary work it would help him. It is a pity is that Archbishop Trench is not present, because I will not have the chance to talk to him.60

226  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame According to Friduhelm the stay in Dublin was a continuous celebration: every night there were parties, honours, awards and tributes. He remembered that the Irish understood how to arrange things properly. He also had the feeling, that the ‘Author of the Popes’ was a far more famous and popular figure in Dublin than at home.61 Ranke was not in Dublin only to receive his honorary doctorate. During his stay he visited the sights, met historians and important politicians and searched in Dublin’s archives for sources. He also went to an American art exhibition hosted in the Royal Dublin Society. He gave his impressions of Dublin: Dublin is the only capital city in the world in which the majority of the population are Catholic, but is ruled by a Protestant minority. If one goes into a Catholic Church, one can see confessionals and people in silent prayer. If one asks the nearest neighbour on the street, he will claim to hate and reject all of Catholicism. The opposition of both confessions rules feeling and opinion. In the middle, stands the statue of William III on horseback, an object venerated by one side, detested by the other. The state which he founded still exists. It still governs. If I looked towards the population, I recognised a lot of genuine figures and expressive faces, which were sometimes beautiful, other times ugly, but always worth watching. For an artist, a fruit merchant of all ages offers a good study. There is however little talk of genuine Irish art.62 In his letters, Ranke mentioned three people he had met in Dublin: Dr Petrie, Sir Thomas Larcom and Lord Wodehouse. George Petrie (1790–1866) was a historian and archaeologist whom Ranke described with much respect. Sir Thomas Larcom was under-secretary for Ireland (1853–68), and John Wodehouse, Earl of Kimberley (1826–1902), was lord lieutenant of Ireland from 1864 to 1866.63 He was described as an intelligent man with an extensive knowledge of Europe and with whom Ranke discussed politics.64 As a historian, Ranke’s main interests were the archives of Dublin: In Dublin I visited the archives. One of them, which has documents concerning finance and property, is located in the Custom House with lots of vaulted rooms, which are free of all haze and of the smell of dust that normally makes a stay in such rooms quite uncomfortable. During his last 30 years of duty the archivist with the name of Harding was able to sort out his documents, so he is able to find each one at any time. It occurred to me several times how many archivists love their job. Mr Harding is very happy with his work. He showed us the more exceptional documents as if they were his own. He said: ‘We have this, and I have the original of that and of that as well, would you like to see it?’ [. . .] The more political and genealogical records are kept in the tower of Dublin-Castle. The castle once had four towers of which only this one is left, but it has been attractively furnished and there the papers are kept. The vaults, in which they are kept, are clean and are aired. Here lived the archivist with the name of Burke [Sir John Bernard Burke (1814–92)]

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 227 who was also the [Ulster] king of arms. [. . .] But now enough: I have seen several old books, but I was not able to read everything, because they were written in the Old-Irish language, knowledge of which is fast disappearing; because only a few study it.65 George Petrie, who met Ranke in 1865, also maintained contact with him. Petrie’s work on round towers was specially mentioned by Ranke, which shows that he kept abreast of current Irish historical work. Returning to Berlin, Ranke brought several copies of manuscripts with him. This is shown by the example of the Brehon Laws, which he obtained during his stay in Dublin in 1865. He never mentioned the Brehon Laws in his work, though they show the legal system of early medieval Ireland. Ranke conveyed his ‘thanks to the Commission for the Copy of the Brehon Laws I read in this moment’ in November 1865.66 Ranke also mentioned in the same letter that he had received from Burke a genealogical work containing a number of ‘strange’ notices, and that he would bring the work back to Berlin.67 Then Ranke described the large collection of Irish antiquities located in the Royal Irish Academy: Charles brought me to the collection of Irish antiquities, that he knows in detail. Some of the runes he could translate immediately. We followed the development of mill stones from the oldest rough form, with which it must have been hard to make flour, to the younger ones, where it must have been much easier. These were without any doubt the oldest native ones but there might have been already some Roman influence. Besides these heavy instruments the jewellery, with ornaments for women and men, made a much greater impression. They are heavy, pure gold, and the smaller ones delicate originality. These are reproduced now on copies of brooches. There are a number of weapons as well, mainly made of bronze, and you can see clearly that they were not suitable enough to resist the Roman sword. Charles left me when we arrived at the Christian antiquities. The new guide knew everything as well, but he was afraid of the treasury he looked after. He said, that somebody might kill him someday for that. There were monuments of Christian ancient times with greatest strangeness mixing symbols of superstition with religion. Today’s Catholics do not want to know of this. In fact a number of the monuments had more of an oriental and Greek influence than a Roman one.68 While walking in Dublin and visiting friends Ranke witnessed the election campaign for the parliament. He described his impressions to Manteuffel on 3 July 1865. He thought that it was influenced by religious feelings and the Presbyterian spirit, especially, astonished him. In Dublin the religious confrontation was much greater than in England, but Ranke described it with a less emotional pen: During the last days in Dublin one heard of nothing else other than the elections for the next parliament. The parties remain in sharpest contrast more

228  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame precipitously than anywhere else. Down in the bank, in the old parliament building, not far away from the statue of King William, we find pictures of his victory at the Boyne and of the heroes of that time (Schomberg and Walker) who freed the country of the tyranny of Catholicism. In the town hall O’Connell is especially glorified along with some of his ancestors who were able to shake the power of Protestantism. Between these oppositions the country is still moving.69 Nevertheless, Ranke stressed his interest in witnessing election campaigns and the various speeches in the north and south of Ireland, but due to time limits he was forced to cancel.70 But it also shows that Ranke had a greater interest in the cultural, historical and political development of Ireland than that of England. Ranke wished to see the place where the fate of Ireland had been decided: the location of the Battle of the Boyne in 1690. Together with Charles and Robert Graves, he made a trip to the Boyne on Saturday, 8 July.71 He described to his wife what he saw and what his impressions had been while visiting this place: The river Boyne is at the centre of old Irish history. The castle of Tara was the residence of the old kings whom all clan chiefs served. On the other bank is Newgrange: an artificial hill made from stones with a narrow entrance. Charles, who threaded his way through it in his younger years, told me that in the centre was a large burial chamber. However burial remains are not to be found anymore. It is here that St Patrick did his first conversion with the help of the river. It is the scene of Old Irish poetry, which often included speeches between heroes and priests. This, however, was not my main interest; rather I wanted to know more about the battle of the Boyne, which was to seal the fate of Irish history many years later. Charles had a relative who owned several fields in this area. After some waiting, the old man adjusted himself and sat into the cart with us that was pulled by a strong horse. We had the good fortune to have a warm and sunny day between all the wet ones. The beauty of Ireland exists in its hills, which surround the island. The Boyne valley is one of the most beautiful sights. The trees lining the graceful river and the green meadows were unlike any I have ever seen before. Further up the river is a ford, which an army unit of William III once occupied. We drove brashly and despondently through it. The landlord – his name is Coddington – somewhat aged, yet able-bodied and active, showed us the way. [. . .] He had an old map, which showed us all the forts, which were defended by one army and occupied by another. The area has since been altered by the building of a canal, although not so much that one cannot follow the movements of the army. We saw the hill from which King James watched the battle and made a dash for freedom; the graves of the defeated, and the monument of the victors. The gentleman explained, that the father of the carpenter of his greatgrandfather had told of how he brought the corpse of Schomberg on his cart to Dublin, where he was laid to rest in St Patrick’s. That is a thread of a living tradition that was passed down to us from that time. So were the explanations

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 229 about the local traditions, which took place during the battle. I had good reason to often discard what I heard and somehow managed to convince my companions. We discussed the matter and returned satisfied, although we did not get any dinner. We decided against one hostelry and the other one in which we hoped to get food only offered a cup of tea.72 Ranke had seen many sights in Dublin. His son Friduhelm probably saw even more as he had more time. According to Ranke’s descriptions, Charles and Robert Graves showed him around. He visited Trinity College Dublin, Dublin Castle, the Royal Irish Academy, the Custom House, the old Parliament Building, the Royal Dublin Society, City Hall, the equestrian statue of William III, Fitzwilliam Square, Merrion Square and some churches. Ranke recorded that he walked through a number of parks, probably Phoenix Park, Stephens Green, Merrion Square Park and Fitzwilliam Square Park. A note in the visitor book of Marsh’s Library made by the keeper Thomas Russell William Cradock described for Thursday, 13 July, that ‘Two strangers to see Ly [Library].’73 It is possible that these two strangers were Ranke and his son. The plan to travel to Parknasilla, to the north of Ireland and to Scotland was dropped, and Ranke returned to Cheltenham to copy documents.74 A week after they left Dublin, Clarissa wrote a letter to Robert: I long to thank you for all your kind brotherly attention to Leopold, for which he is very grateful and for your fatherly kindness to my boy, who never in his whole life was so happy, as when he was in Dublin. His letters have filled me with interest; they are so natural and graphic; he tells me, when he was on boardship before arriving at Kingstown, he felt quite oppressed, he should be disappointed and that you would all not like him, but your kindness first measured him and when he arrived at the Castle, the reception he meet with there, seemed almost to open the Heavens to him. O! His uncle Charles’s kiss, the first he had received since he left home, made him so happy! How he admires Charles, his beautiful face and his sweet heart and his aunt Selina the most beautiful of matrons and his sweet quiet sensible cousin Helen, with whom he had so much pleasant conversation and his two cousins Alfred and Arnold, such a contrast to each other and both so excellent and interesting to him that now he liked one and now the other best! How grieved he was to leave Dublin, without going on to Parknasilla to see all his other cousins. I tell you all this, for he is sometimes a little stiff and cold in his exterior and one has little idea, how much fire and affection is in his heart. With a very sad heart he returned to Cheltenham, where he was only glad to see his uncle John, and in despair to be again imprisoned in the dirty rooms of Thirlestaine House. At Thirlestaine Lodge he made acquaintance with Mr and Mrs Williams, Frank and Amy. Mrs Williams, as he calls his aunt Georgy, he says shocked him; she provoked, offended and disgusted him; he does not say why; Amy he liked better and Frank he gets on with, but he says, he is very different and very inferior in moral tone to his cousins Alfred and Arnold, who are so noble and honourable minded.

230  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame But all this will be rather dull news to you. I only wish to give you a key, to my boy’s sensitive feelings; I  am sorry his uncle Charles should have had no time or opportunity of testing him in his studies; it would have been interesting to me to know, what his acquirements were, compared with his cousins. Fried will have told you, he is not mathematical, that is he has not a decided turn for mathematics as Otto has but his mathematical tutor told General v. Manteuffel, he had the clearest head, he ever met with. General Manteuffel wishes very much to get Friedhelm into the army; he says, that he has the head they want. Leopold was greatly pleased with his stay in Dublin, particularly with the day he spent with you and Charles on his visit to the sights of the battle of the Boyne. He has written me a long learned description of it in a long letter which I daresay will be published one of these days, making honourable mention of the kind and learned gentlemen, who showed him attention. Next to having been in Dublin myself, it gave me pleasure to have Leopold and Fried there and to find them both so charmed with their visit.75 During their second visit to Cheltenham, Ranke stayed almost all the time in Phillips’ house examining documents. Friduhelm was asked to copy as much as possible, a task he very much disliked. Nevertheless, they made several field trips to the countryside. Sometimes they witnessed parliamentary campaign speeches, and during one particular speech, the crowd became very restive when the speaker claimed that the Prince of Wales had kissed the feet of the Pope.76 Ranke’s reserved attitude towards England reached its zenith during his visit in 1865. Ranke met the royal family in Buckingham Palace, but commented in a letter to his wife that ‘the veneration of a power, which is actually very limited, by a glamour and rich class, which itself possess the essence of power, is astonishing.’77 A week later Ranke wrote to a good friend, Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel, expressing his disappointment regarding the matters of religion and politics: Do you know what has astonished me here in England most of all? It is the harsh, vibrant Protestant spirit or one would say the reformationalPresbyterian spirit that I feel here at the moment. Next week the elections for a new parliament will be held. All other questions that could possibly be discussed are treated indifferently. It is only the religious one that evokes interest. The conservatives are the most ardent Protestants. The Whigs, defending the general liberal principals, are more papist. We attended a meeting here, which was announced as a Protestant one. For a provincial town it was well visited. Every word that the speaker – a Mr Harper – said against the Whig ministry and the financial support of Catholic institutes e.g. the College of Monmouth [Maynooth?] was welcomed with applause. [. . .] It seems like the times of King James are back again and the present Prince of Wales is under Catholic influence. I am too far removed from it to share this opinion.78

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  231 Ranke’s notice of Monmouth has a local reference because there is no evidence of a college or of a Catholic institution at Monmouth, and it is likely that he misunderstood the name. In 1865 it was well known that one major Catholic institute existed: St Patrick’s College at Maynooth in Ireland. Under an act of Parliament in June 1845, the conservative Peel ministry made permanent the British government’s annual grant to the Catholic seminary of St Patrick’s College, Maynooth, and increased the endowment nearly threefold, together with additional building funds. The bill, better known as the ‘Maynooth grant,’ was part of Peel’s reorganization of higher education in Ireland, but was designed primarily to win support from Catholic clergy, who were effective advocates of Repeal agitation. Liberals in England considered the bill to be state support of popery and opposed it. Since that time, Maynooth College has been the subject of several debates in parliament. Under these circumstances it seems that Ranke misheard the name, as the place names Monmouth and Maynooth can sound quite similar to a German. Ranke and his son enjoyed their relatives’ circle of friends. He liked the company of Mrs Williams and joked with her all the time.79 When Ranke left, she gave him her picture with a note: ‘From a curious little woman, to a coorious little man.’80 This was a jibe at Ranke’s English. Although his English was fluent, his pronunciation was quite bad and he often made the same mistakes. On a bus in London he once caused much laughter with his questions which were always pronounced in a different way. However, he did not mind and he laughed with them. Another time he and Friduhelm travelled in the underground and went too far, as they could not understand the station name of Paddington properly.81 When they were asked to pay the difference, Ranke said: ‘But it is only a little mistake.’ The conductor answered: ‘Yes Sir, but people pay for mistakes.’82 Ranke found the answer so amusing that he regularly told the story for many years to come.83 They travelled back through London to Rotterdam. On 1 August they worked in the archives at Gravenshaag, and on 12 August they returned to Berlin. I have specifically reported on this research trip a little more in detail as it not only adds to the historiographical part of English History but also gives us details on Ranke, the private man. The details have given us insights into how he travelled and enjoyed the sights as much as his seriousness when it came to historical research. We have heard how he interacted socially and that he was obviously admired and apparently had been a very much welcomed and entertaining guest at salons or meetings. Friduhelm noted that Ranke was not liked by the masses of students in the late 1860s. The reason was possibly his opposition to the liberal worldview of the young; on the other hand, his way of lecturing was difficult to follow. When he stepped to the lecturing desk, he would sit back, put his left hand to the side and look up into the unknown. Friduhelm himself witnessed his lectures on the history of parliamentarian England in the winter semester 1865–66.84 The year 1866 began with the wedding of Maximiliane and her consequent move from home.85 In a letter written in broken English, Friduhelm described his sister’s wedding with Wilhem von Kotze (1840–1901), which occurred in

232  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame Ranke’s library on 1 January 1866. In passing he mentioned that there had been trouble with his father-in-law, von Kotze, who disliked Ranke: I am finishing my letter giving you notice of the though happy but nevertheless for me and my family so very annoying fact of my only & beloved sister’s marriage. He is no make a Ranke. He is now the Bavarian von Kotze. About 7 o’clock last night, 30 persons, for the most part young people assembled in our Salon. At half past 7 the clergyman, the ‘Oberhofprediger’ (the court preacher) Snethlage arrived, & he gone, after the young couple, followed by large numbers of bridemaids and brideleaders, & all the rest of the company, had gone into my Father’s great Library room, where Maxa once was Christened, a very good & brief sermon, of which mamma will perhaps fine an account to Uncle Robert. After the ‘Ja-Wort’ (‘Yes’ or ‘I will’) was spoken, a [. . . ?] party with many tears endued. Then after 10 o’clock the young couple left the house, & I had lost my sister, my dear, own, little pretty sister.86 At first she stayed in Berlin, but after the death of her father-in-law she moved to Lodersleben in Thuringia, about twenty kilometres from Wiehe. Back in Berlin, Clarissa held large gatherings in her Friday salon, now mainly visited by Americans and English, but where sometimes Ranke appeared, generally at a later hour when most of the guests had already arrived. Usually he disappeared back into his study again, especially if the guests did not reflect his own interests or opinions. Ranke regularly accepted invitations for dinner. In the 1850s and especially in the late 1860s, he had been a guest of families such as the Itzenplitzs,87 Wichmanns,88 Senfft von Pilsacks,89 Manteuffels, Kreusers and Hitzigs.90 He also attended the Prussian court, visiting Prince Karl von Preußen as well as ministers and ambassadors. He tended to be the intellectual centre at such gatherings. Typically, on such days he would work long hours and freshen himself quickly, and then have the children arrange the insignia of the honours and orders bestowed upon him such as the ‘Red Eagle,’ or the Prussian ‘Großkomturkreuz des Verdienstordens vom Heiligen Michael.’ The most important orders were placed in such a manner that they would be seen first. In company Ranke observed correct social etiquette. He talked initially to the most important people, men and women, before moving on to talk to the younger women, whose beauty delighted him. Ranke still went on long trips to Munich. Clarissa disliked his stubborn behaviour and feared for Leopold travelling on his own at his advanced age because ‘he has the same old conservative spirit and he never likes to give up anything he has begun doing. I am always anxious about him, when he goes away from home, as he forgets he is an old man and does what only young men should do.’91 Clarissa did not only comment on her husband’s work or report on her health, but also had deeper discussions about the position of women. In an answer to one of Clarissa’s letters in 1866, Selina wrote that she disliked women who were [. . .] living only to eat, drink, sleep, dress themselves, receive visits, return them & answer letters. I think God intended us for something better. I am concerned we should be happier, if we all had duties to our neighbours or else

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  233 artistic occupation which fitted up our time & that we should indulge [. . . ?] in pleasures, pretty much as business men & women do. The woman head of a house has enough to do with managing her Household prudently, attending to her Husband, issuing her invitations, preparing her hospitalities, looking after her young people, & last of all most important, preparing herself for the other world by religious reading.92 And in the same letter Selina mentioned about the poor: We live a terribly luxurious life in England. I tremble for the crisis that must come. Ladies & Gentlemen cheer so extravagantly, eat so delicately, spend so much money on themselves & sympathize so less with the poor that I feel as if a cry was rising up to Heaven.93 Alexandra College was founded in Dublin in 1866, and Robert was proud to report to Clarissa that he was teaching in the college and why such a college for women was needed: Robert Scott & I are to be brother lecturers at a Ladies’ College which the Archbishop (Trench) is founding, he in natural sciences, I in Latin, Charles, as Principal, in Arithmetic, Algebra, & Geography. [. . . ?] I trust the Institution would get on its part & do good, there is a great want of solid instruction of ladies in Dublin.94 At this time Clarissa still tried to publish her ‘Stars of my life.’ She contacted a large number of publishers in Germany, Ireland and England, hoping that Robert would help her. She received a reply from one, Archibald Constable, whose father had been a publisher: I regret very much, my dear Mrs Ranke, that I have been unable to accomplish anything with your poems. It has been a pleasure to me to go through them. I believe that a pleasant little volume might be made from all that you have, including a number of the less known translations, or translations from the less known literature. Anyway, I fancy, [it] stands almost alone in the richness of its volkslieder & Love-songs. But I am sorry to say that no publisher with whom I am acquainted will undertake the risk of publication, and this is a fatal objection. My father is no longer a publisher.95 Only a few days before the note was written to Robert, Mrs Agathe Plitt, a pianist and composer, held a surprise house-musical before Christmas in the home of the Rankes. The musical was composed for Clarissa and contained Mrs Plitt’s music, but also included works by Bach and Mendelssohn.96 Concerts like these were also organized by Leopold, simply to give his wife the enjoyment of a weekly musical society.97 But Clarissa soon faced a problem in the friendly relationship between Prussia and England because of the war that broke out in 1866 between Prussia and

234  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame Austria over Schleswig-Holstein. The Schleswig-Holstein question had been ongoing for decades. At the end of 1863, Frederick VII of Denmark died and the question of Schleswig-Holstein came up again. This time there was no fudging the issue: the people of the duchies wanted to determine their own fate, and the legal heir to the duchies was the duke of Augustenborg, not the new king of Denmark. When the Danes stated that they would not surrender without a fight, the German Confederation was momentarily non-plussed: it had a war on its hands, but no army with which to fight it. All it could do was ask its two senior members, Franz Joseph of Austria and William I, the new king of Prussia, to invade the duchies on the Confederation’s behalf, trusting that when they had conquered them, they would turn them over to Augustenborg. After the successful war of 1864, relations between Prussia and Austria were strained in their joint administration in Schleswig-Holstein. When Austria brought the matter back to the Confederation in 1866, it breached the 1864 agreement of joint administration with Prussia, and Prussia declared war on Austria. Considering that the Austro-Prussian War involved two major powers and several minor ones, it was surprisingly short, sharp and decisive: it lasted only seven weeks.98 Prior to its outbreak, Clarissa wrote about the war in May 1866 to her brother Robert: ‘I fear that you are right in saying it is now too late to avoid war, Ranke said you hit upon exactly the right point, Prussia’s applying to Italy’s example.’99 Italy was mentioned because it sought unification of the different Italian states in 1861, and both Ranke and Robert thought that the German states would try to follow the Italian example. Ranke did not like this move at all because he feared for the existence of the German Confederation, a governing structure he preferred because it was close to that of the Holy Roman Empire. As an Old Prussian (Alt-Preuße) Ranke desired a strong Prussia within the Confederation, but he did not support the view that Prussia should rule all of Germany, as the New Prussians (Neu-Preuße) wanted. He felt that such a structure would involve enormous risks for Germany’s future. Although the events of 1866 were welcomed by many Germans, Ranke reminded his colleagues in his opening speech at the meeting of the Historical Commission in Munich in 1867 of the positive effects of the Confederation: In the previous year our meeting was prevented by an event, which is one of the most important and influential that has happened to the German nation. The Confederation, which lasted for fifty years, is shattered. Despite the difficulties the Confederation had  – if I  am at all allowed to say a word on these matters – well, despite its drawbacks the Confederation affected Germany in a positive way. It gave us a period of peace, which was very important for the internal development of material and intellectual interests, for industry, trade, urban life and agriculture, but especially for the arts and sciences.100 Although Ranke was very concerned with the historical and political outcome of the war in 1866, Clarissa continued to report on the war and the kind of effort

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  235 made by the women left behind to ease the suffering of wounded soldiers. Her own involvement also became clear when she wrote to Robert in July 1866: The English are obliged to acknowledge the bravery of Prussia, but you have very little idea from the chary accounts in the Times, of all the glory our troops have been winning. They behave with the greatest dignity treating their enemies with respect and humanity, sharing their very food and comfort with them. Otto goes to a lazareth [hospital for soldiers], where Prussians, Austrians, Hungarians, Serbians, Swabians, Saxons, and every nation lie together, and talks and prays with the poor men as far as his knowledge of languages goes. He has a friend who talks Italian as well, and the dear hand who writes this can also write Hungarian and has already made some poor Hungarians happy by talking and writing for them in their own language. I have written a few lines on the Prussian banner, for which my young friend has drawn a pretty design which we mean to be published and sell for the benefit of the Prussian soldiers, every copy will cost 10 gr. that is 1 Schilling, could you sell some for me? And I would send you copies by Fanny Russell when she returns to London. The young friend of whom I just spoke is a Fräulein Elisabeth von Tape, who has lately lost her only brother in the battle of Königgrätz and I try to keep her occupied with something relating to the war, and it would make her so happy to make some money that she can herself dispose of. Everybody is trying to do something for the poor sufferers. Frl. v. Langen is occupied every day in [. . .?], cutting out, receiving packages in the Central-Comitee and think! that yesterday 3000 woolen [sic] bandages were made there, to protect the troops against Cholera which is now getting very prevalent.101 The poems mentioned were sold in Berlin to 250 people. Clarissa fully backed the Prussians and encouraged several relations and friends to sell her poems. She contradicted the claims of English commentators who claimed that Otto von Bismarck102 was very unpopular,103 and she stressed the chivalrous behaviour of Bismarck in a letter in August 1866: Pray don’t let people abuse our good King or Bismarck, they seem to have revived chivalry, they are so simple in their own wants, Bismarck actually spent a night lying upon the stones in the market-place in Gitzin, because he would not take any of the hay from the wounded, he has also suffered hunger and thirst longer than others to let others to be first helped. And our King, never was a more noble-hearted, simple, pitiful, compassionate and valiant old knight.104 In the same letter she described the general situation in Berlin, her own efforts for soldiers’ relief and that her son Otto was involved as well: I am very sorry, you all take so little interest in the success of Prussia, if you were here, I am sure you would greatly admire the liberality and kindness

236  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame of all parties, I can give you no idea of it by letter. Almost all our ladies are either engaged in working for or in visiting the wounded soldiers, some of my friends have cut up most of their house-linen for bandages indeed there is nothing they have that they would not willingly give for the relief of the sufferers. Otto has gone very regularly to read and pray with the sick and dying, he is not now quite well, and I am afraid has got some fever-infection as he never avoided Cholera or Typhus patients. My friend, who writes this, has been very busy as her especial mission was to visit the Hungarians and to write letters for them home and interpret their wishes and wants in the hospitals. I was quite ashamed of sitting idle at home, but I have turned into a beggar and already Elisabeth von Pape and I have got above 30 rth. [Reichsthaler] in selling our banners. Some of my friends who are very abstemious in their families have given dozens of bottles of champagne for patients recovering from fever, and it is not only Prussian soldiers who are so well attended to, but all the wounded prisoners.105 Only a few days later, on 1 September, Clarissa wrote to Charles: I wish Helen was here now for in this month we expect great doings when the victorious troops will make their triumphal entry into Berlin. 43 regiments are expected and I believe they are able to line in the Tiergarten, please God the weather is fine and the illuminations are to surpass all the illuminations that ever have been! I am sure if you lived more amongst us, you would have more sympathy for us Prussians and not think that every country must be governed in exactly the same way as England. [. . .] Leopold is working away as usual in his study.106 In October Clarissa described to her brother Robert how her husband received another title within Prussia: I have a little piece of news to tell you, you know that Drake our famous sculptor made this summer a bust of Ranke, it succeeded admirably and was put by him in the exhibition of art under the title of Dr Geheimrath [Privy Counsellor] v. Ranke. My husband was invited to the Queen Dowager’s where there was a reunion of the royal family, the subject [. . .?] upon the Kunstausstellung [art exhibition] and Leopold’s first bust was much admired, ‘But Herr Professor you are not a “Geheimrath”, are you?’ said one of the Court Ladies. ‘No’, he answered, ‘but I am tired of protesting against people calling me by that title, I can’t help it, as I can’t do nothing to prevent it.’ At this everybody laughed and the King also smiled. Shortly after this we read in the newspaper that the King had given my Husband the title of ‘Geheimer Regierungsrath’ [Government Privy Counsellor], so pray, when you write to me next address your letter by that title instead of my old Frau Professor.107

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  237 In the same letter Clarissa mentioned briefly that Ranke travelled together with Manteuffel to the town Sömmerda, close to Wiehe, in order to visit von Dreye,108 who invented the Zündnadelgewehr and who also surveyed the fabrication of the guns. After the visit Ranke continued to travel to Wiehe in order to receive honorary citizenship of the town. The interesting fact is, that Ranke was interested in the latest technological developments, as this gun was first used in the PrussianAustrian war in 1866 by the Prussians and which gave them the upper hand. It indicates that Ranke included technical developments into his historical understanding of the past – past and contemporary ones. In 1867 Ranke celebrated his fiftieth jubilee in the state service, which was held on 20 February 1867. Dozens of professors and students from Berlin University gave Ranke their honours, songs were sung and poems presented. Along with this, Ranke received dozens of congratulatory notes from European and American universities. In the same year he became the Chancellor for the Prussian order Pour le Mérite, a position that he held for many years. He granted the order to numerous European personalities, most notably Charles Darwin. Clarissa gave an account of the jubilee celebrations: My Husband’s Jubileum was such a glorious day of love & triumph. I must try & give you an account of it, for you English people have no idea of the honour that Prussians & Germans generally, pay to their distinguished man when they reach their 25th or 50th Jubileaum. On the 20th we were all up early, & at 8 o’clock received my brother in law Ferdinand Ranke (the Director of the College) & some schools, with 16 of their best singing scholars, who sang a choral, the 23 Psalm  & the Te Deum, and then my brother in law made a lovely speech of thanks & praise to Leopold, in the name of all the family, & of all the schools. Then we breakfasted, that is, only Coffee & Cake, were distributed. Then the Minister Makler came from the King bringing him the Star of the Red Eagle, and the King of Bavaria also sent him a Star. The Queen Mother of Bavaria sent her congratulations in a telegraphic dispatch. Letters innumerable arrived from all parts of Europe, friends & relations, – every half hour telegrams arrived from almost all the German Universities, Diplomas  & addresses came tumbling in! at [sic] 11 oc [o’clock] the University of Berlin, executed by the Rector & thankful Professors visited us – the Rector, arranged in his gold chains & medal made a splendid speech, which Leopold replied to. Then the Royal Academy sent a deputation. Drs. Perty & Haupt read the address – Then scholars began to arrive from all parts of Europe – from Jena, Göttingen, Halle, Bonn – from Switzerland, Zurich, Basle, from Vienna, & many from Servia. Prof. Köpke spoke in the name of the Scholars, with affection & gratitude calling Leopold ‘Lord & Master’ this etc. At a later hour Leopold, his sons, son in law, & brother been entertained at a great public dinner where people of the most opposite opinions sat beside each other in love & concord. The Queen herself wrote to Ranke to congratulate. The Queen Dowager invited him the preceeding evening to offer

238  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame her congratulations. Prince Carl sent beautiful flowers. Prince Albrecht paid me a long visit, Ranke not being at home. On the 22nd I gave a party to all these Professors & scholars, about 200 people. It went off famously. Prince George, Lord Augustus Loftus, the Marquis of Lorn, the Minister von Itzenplitz & many other distinguished persons, & fashionable & beautiful women, were present. Our rooms looked very well. Leopold’s room arranged with busts, was much admired. His presents of books were laid out, & a picture by Häbner of Clio –  & all his new diplomas. I was very much tired, as you may imagine, sitting up in a state so long but I have quite recovered. Leopold, though very happy, took things so quietly that he did not feel at all the worse, rather the better for so much pleasant excitement. He got no letter of congratulation from England – but it is not English fashion to regard such jubilees. An excellent likeness of Ranke, was made from Drake’s bust & distributed to all the scholars & friends. The number of poems that were addressed to him was quite surprising, most of them were published, & his brother Ernest wrote him a very beautiful one which was given to friends. I send you a Latin poem which was read to him, & which, he says, is beautiful Latin.109 Because of his jubilee, Ranke had several copies of his bust made and sent them to friends or universities. It had at one stage been planned to send one copy to Trinity College Dublin, but he changed his mind when Dr Weise was refused professorship there. The struggle for the chair of German went on in 1866 with the result that Albert Maximilian Selss, who studied in Tübingen and Trinity College Dublin, was appointed to the chair.110 The chair of German at Trinity College, which was established in 1775, was the oldest chair of German outside the Germanspeaking countries.111 Clarissa wrote in a letter to Robert: I was very sorry to hear the poor Weise did not obtain the fellowship, the more so, as I felt guilty of having induced him to look after it and to have put him to all the expense of a journey to Dublin etc. in vain. As soon as I get photographs of the new bust, I will send you one. Lately I asked Leopold if he would not send a bust to the university in Dublin he said: now certainly not, it would not take my recommendation about Weise; I did not recommend him because he was my friend, but because I was sure he was the best man they could have, for though blind he would have been sure to do more than he had undertaken and that he would have been a curiosity and an ornament to it. Do you not see that, he was a little angry.112 Nevertheless she did not lose her sense of humour, as the following extract from July 1867 demonstrates: Now I must tell you another history à propos of marriage which will interest Robert more than you as he knew the lovely hero niece (Maxa thinks, think of a woman having two husbands and six children in one year!!!!!), Frl. Gombert, who for four years was Maxas governess, oh! she was beautiful, with large

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  239 bulls eyes and teeth that steeck out like a grinning maistiffs and her gums had remarkable quality of being almost always seen bleeding, besides, her taste in dress was wonderful, she had generally holes in her dresses under her arms, I supposed to cool herself, she was also very economical and sewed her old black woollen stockings with patches of dirty linen, oh she was charming not very young either being on the verge of forty.113 In 1867 Ranke started a new series of publications: his own works re-edited better known as Sämmtliche Werke, or ‘Collected Works,’ published from 1867 until 1890. For the collection he stayed with the publishing house Duncker & Humblot, with which he had good relations.114 Soon thereafter Ranke published an article on the correspondence of Frederick the Great with William IV of Orange.115 This article was another example of Ranke’s source editions, which he considered as important. In his introduction of 22 pages, he commented and explained the background of mentioned persons, the time and sources, and he expressed the importance of the letters in a wider European context. These letters would make ‘it possible to understand motives of European policies from that time much better.’116 The topic of Europe had been continued, and Ranke stressed that Prussian history in itself did not exist and was not the issue in his article, but it needed to be understood as an important part of Europe; therefore, many events in Prussia could only be explained in context with European history. This opinion was underlined by Ranke referring to other authors: ‘An opinion which is shared by many others; as Mitchell has expressed it: if Frederick would lose, the freedom of Europe would be lost.’117 On the following 70 pages, the letters appeared, edited in the original French language and in their full length, including dates and addressees. The article was published in connection with his work English History. He was not able to include these letters in the appendix, so a separate article was created. It can also be suggested that the article was indirectly attacking the policies of Bismarck as Ranke disagreed with the creation of a united Germany. In 1867–68 he was already able to foresee the aims of Bismarck, and in correspondences with his Irish relatives Ranke stressed that Germany follow the example of Italy creating a national state. Ranke preferred a federalist system as it existed until 1867 or even during the Holy Roman Empire. And on 26 October  1868, the Rankes celebrated their silver wedding. In a detailed letter to Robert, Clarissa wrote on 2 November: Last Monday the 26th. Just you may remember was the anniversary of my 25th Wedding day, consequently my Silver Wedding in Germany [. . .] I was no sooner up in the morning, than Otto placed me in my chair, in the middle of the room, when Maxa, William, Fried, my little Granddaughter, Ferdinand, all my nieces & all the other members of our family were assembled, to congratulate Leopold & me. First of all Lilly & her Father brought Leopold a silver [. . .?] and me a beautiful silver [. . .?] wreath, then my brother in law commenced the ceremony by a few blessing words, after which a long

240  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame beautiful Choral was sang by boys in the next room. Then Otto prayed, really beautifully, again a Choral & the morning celebration was finished. Throughout the whole day I received the most beautiful bouquets you can imagine, white roses, lilies, camellias, violets & [. . .?] with silver flowers, in the greatest profusion, & all who congratulated were invited in the evening. When I had another great surprise my children having appointed the chief themselves of the Dom choir to sing. Certainly the whole world could not have afforded such a musical treat, I never heard anything so perfect and heavenly, it made me feel that Music indeed was a part of the Communion of Saints – You will laugh to hear that Leopold wore his original Wedding coat, which (with the exception of the tails being too pointed) looked quite in the fashion. He was in great grief that the buff waistcoat could not be found.118 Apart from family news and sonnets, the Irish Question came up quite often in Clarissa’s and Robert’s letters during the late 1860s, and the disestablishment of the Irish Church was often discussed. Two letters reveal Robert’s opinion; in fact, he witnessed the situation in Dublin and the rest of Ireland because he had moved back to Dublin in 1865 and experienced the unsuccessful Fenian Rising of 1867. In 1869 Clarissa’s cousin Nelly Graves was married in Ireland. Clarissa had a problem in finding a proper present for Nelly and mentioned Ranke’s reaction: I almost feel ashamed of writing to you again, when I think, what a foolish old Clara I must have appeared to you in my last letter to Helen, in which I asked her what present I should sent to our little Nelly for her wedding! That was that my darling Maxa was insisting that nothing would give Nelly so much pleasure as a leather travelling box containing all lady’s necessaries, and writing to get it for me by all means; but I was not quite of her opinion and subdued her impatience by saying I would write to know Aunt Helen’s opinion. Maxa went to the country two weeks ago, and since then I made up my mind, what I could send; don’t look as much astonished, as Leopold was, when I told him, I was giving a pocket-handkerchief to her. ‘One pockethandkerchief’, he said, ‘have they no pocket-handkerchiefs in England’? This led him to give one of the ‘Hildesheimer models’ [vase model] to her.119 Nevertheless Nelly was very happy with both presents, Clarissa’s handkerchief and Ranke’s exquisite vase.120 Charles reported back to Clarissa that ‘every person of taste thinks Ranke’s present of the Vase most exquisite – We were greatly greatly gratified at his recollection of our dear good child.’121 At the same time Ranke worked on his next book: a biography on Wallenstein;122 however, Ranke still dealt a lot with German and European history in the time period of 1624 to 1634, with a concentration on the 1630s. The main country he dealt with was obviously the Holy Roman Empire, but countries such as Denmark, Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Sweden, Poland, England, France, Italy and Ireland played a major role as well. At the end of the book, Ranke added an appendix with comments to the different sources and excerpts from documents.

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 241 Particularly in the introduction, Ranke emphasized the difference between a history and a biography, and he indicated that the history would always influence a biography and in some cases vice versa. Several military events in Germany were compared to European events, for example Cromwell in Ireland, Monk in Scotland and Wallenstein in Schleswig. The background of the book is to be found in connection with the Austrian-Prussian wars in 1864 and 1866, and Ranke used the historic figure of Wallenstein from a different time to pinpoint the dimension of inner diversity of Germany, but also the impact of different powers to seek dominance in Europe. Generally, the work gave a great insight into the Thirty Years’ War; however, it had several weaknesses as a biography, which was not Ranke’s strong point. Clarissa’s diary survives for the year 1870.123 It was an octavo ‘ladies almanac’ (Damen-Almanach) of over 250 pages. It recorded two days per page and set aside space for recording family birthdays and addresses. On the title page it stated that it was the fourth annual edition, itself an indication that the maintenance of diaries and appointment books was increasingly viewed as a necessary activity of educated middle-class women. In it Clarissa provided a daily record of her visitors, of the events in her salon, of family activities, and of letters sent and received. Some of the daily entries are very brief, ‘Visit from Miss Riley, Frl. v. Bita’ (20 January  1870); others are larger: ‘Otto preached for the queen-dowager at the Charlottenburg. Leopold went to the Ordensfest. The usual family party. The Mr Taquemot red [sic] a beautiful sermon, text: Our Father which art in heaven’ (31 January 1870).124 In all, over the course of the year, Clarissa mentioned over 150 visitors, showing that, despite her illness, she kept up an active social schedule in the last sixteen months of her life. In March  1870 John Graves died, and both Clarissa and her husband were shocked at his death.125 At the same time Clarissa mentioned that she had destroyed thousands of letters: I have lately made a great rummage among my old letters, and have destroyed thousands, I have kept yours dear Robert, should you like to have them with a few of Mrs  Owens? Etc. All my dear Helen’s were long ago destroyed, because she once begged of me earnestly always to tear up or burn her letters. It made myself quite miserable and nervous destroying my old letters.126 France had a problem with Prussia’s increasing power to arm and revitalize its own forces. Emperor Napoleon III had been preparing the French army since 1866. In 1870 the Spanish throne, vacant since a liberal revolution in 1868, was offered to a Prussian prince. The French refused to accept the Prussian king’s word that the offer had been turned down as a sufficient reassurance; they demanded that the king declare the candidature would never be resumed. In 1870 the tensions between France and Prussia finally led to war. Clarissa described in her letters the situation of families in Berlin facing the beginning of the Franco-Prussian War in 1870. She hoped that the English fleet would ensure the safety of the unsecured German coast. To stress her point, she wrote three anecdotes of the glory of

242  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame three Prussian soldiers and sent them to her friends and relatives.127 This hope was destroyed by the news that England had sent weapons to France. Clarissa was so angry that she described the ‘Isles-Empire’ being served by Mammon and blinded by avarice. Clarissa quoted her husband, wrote that the reproaches against Germany and their bombing of Paris were not correct and mentioned what Ranke had said, that if the English and French were talking of German cruelty, they should better think of the numerous innocent victims of their own revolutions. At least nobody was hanged from lampposts in Berlin or defenceless people tortured.128 In times of political crisis Stefan Jordan pointed out that usual discourses get politicized as well, including science, as happened in general in 1914. Very often outer political crisis led to radicalization to political positions and a stronger patriotism. Therefore, it is interesting to assess Ranke’s nationalistic positioning after the outbreak of the war.129 One would believe that Ranke would become quite anti-French, but Jordan noticed that this was not the case with Ranke, quite the opposite: in his two opening speeches for the Historical Commission for 1870 and 1871, he reminded everybody of the origins both nations had.130 Jordan believed that his speeches showed two things: that there was a cultural national understanding for both peoples, which can already be found in his first work. Ranke said in 1870 that ‘no nation is by itself.’131 He pointed out that maybe French history and politics were the ‘anti-Prussian’ aggressor, and blamed France for the outbreak of the war (being not completely free of national pride); however, ‘in general it seems to me, if it is not France, which we fight, but the general idea of the universal republic.’132 As regards the foundation of the German Empire, Ranke saw the idea of the German Confederation realized with the assembly of all kings and surrounded by one German Emperor. Therefore, in his mind, not William I was the unifier, but Ludwig II of Bavaria: ‘The king of Bavaria, the most powerful amongst them, took the initiative; because the old tradition is that only the princes were able to resurrect the Empire. The fact is connected with the centuries of our history: it is the expression of the general national feeling.’133 This was clearly opposing the thoughts of a power state, which many thought to see in Prussian strength as the main base for a united Germany.134 During the year 1870 Dr  Philip Schaff135 witnessed Ranke’s meeting with Thiers, which he reported as a characteristic anecdote about Ranke: Ranke met Thiers during the Franco-Prussian war in 1870, and was asked whom the Germans were fighting; whether Napoleon, the Republic, or the French nation. He replied with special emphasis to the last question, ‘No’. ‘Whom are you fighting, then?’ asked the French statesman. ‘Louis XIV’, answered the German historian. Thiers was astonished at the long memory of the Germans.136 Franklin Ford noted the same story slightly differently: that Ranke was in Vienna in October 1870, once again to forage in the archives, and he wrote a report to the Prussian envoy, telling of what must be the most famous encounter between a German and a French historian during the war which had already toppled the

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame  243 latter-day Napoleon. Adolphe Thiers had arrived in Austria en route from St. Petersburg to Florence, on the tour of capitals he had undertaken for the postBonapartist regime in the vain hope of securing foreign support for France. As luck would have it, the French diplomatic party stopped in the hotel where Ranke was staying; in the course of an evening talk, otherwise friendly enough, it would appear, Thiers asked whom the king of Prussia was fighting, whether Napoleon III or the new French government or the people of France. By his own account, Ranke replied: ‘The King of Prussia is no longer fighting Napoleon, who has been captured, nor France as such; he is fighting the idea of Louis XIV, who in the time of German disunity and weakness without any right took unto himself Strasbourg and Alsace.’137 As in 1864 and 1866, Clarissa asked and begged continuously for gifts for German soldiers in 1870–71 as well. Many ladies of the upper classes did likewise, but only a few on such a large scale. On letter paper, as the top of which the new symbol of the Red Cross had been colourfully imprinted, Clarissa begged her friends and relatives in England and Ireland for monetary donations and material relief for soldiers. The military hospitals in Berlin welcomed everything Clarissa acquired from Ireland; even the antiseptic towels – unknown in Germany – were appreciated.138 Following the example of her English friend, Florence Nightingale, she tried to collect money, clothes and clinical material for the wounded soldiers and the soldiers at the front. Her two sons were involved as well: Otto looked after the wounded in hospitals in Berlin, Friduhelm enrolled as a soldier and marched with the army to Paris. His letters to his mother and his uncle Robert give a good insight about the war and also an eyewitness account of the emergence for the first time of a new type of warfare which later produced the horrors of the First World War. When soldiers arrived in hospitals in Berlin from different nations such as France, Germany, Austria, Italy and Hungary, Clarissa organized, with several friends, a service to write letters for the soldiers to their families back home. Baur commented that Clarissa was brought to a couple of hospitals in order to supervise her help-efforts: the Invaliden-Lazareth, Garnison-Lazareth, DorotheaLazareth, the hospital in the Anklamer Street, the Augusta-Hospitel in Scharnhorst Street, the Lazarus-Hospitel in Invaliden Street, the Elisabeth-Hospital in Blücher Street, the Charité in Luisen Street and several smaller private lazareths. In addition, of course, Ranke was included as well: it was reported that once he was going with his daughter Maximiliane to the barracks near the Moabit hospital.139 In connection with this the ‘Iron Cross for Ladies’ played an important role, entrusted by the ‘Women’s Committee for National War Relief’ under the leadership of Prince Karl for deserving and esteemed benefactors. These patriotic associations were formed by middle-class women as an outlet for their energies and as an expression of their image of solidarity with the war, and they were based on an informal alliance between women volunteers and public authority.140 Clarissa reported that medallions were filled with the hair of girls and women who donated their hair for the fatherland, so much so that nobody knew what to do with the hair. At first Clarissa was not quite sure if she should offer them to her relatives, but she was wrong, and the sales went so well that she could only satisfy her British

244  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame relations. It was important for Clarissa that all recipients should write a letter of thanks to the chairwoman of the Committee, Mrs von Ohlen und Adlerskron. Her sister-in-law, Helen, wrote such a moving letter that it was read in public and occasioned loud applause.141 With the coronation of the Prussian king as Emperor William I in January 1871, Germany became the strongest power in Europe overnight. Although the urbanization process continued in England at a much greater speed than on the continent, the new German empire now had the largest population and a much stronger economy compared to England. While most countries in Europe continued to grow in population and the urbanization and industrialization process started to shape European society, Ireland, in contrast, continued to decline. When the war came to an end Clarissa looked forward to seeing the kingemperor, and she hoped that English-German relations would improve. Nevertheless, she was so weakened by her disease that she could not watch the return of the troops, and gradually she stopped dictating letters.142 On 30 April 1871, Clarissa von Ranke died in Berlin at half past eight in the morning.143 Ranke described her death in detail and his considerable grief to Manteuffel and his brother Heinrich.144 Her sons preferred to write to their Irish relatives and friends. Otto described her death on 1 May to Helen Graves: Mama departed this Sunday 30 April half past eight o’clock. – Her death was so smooth and so quiet, that we hardly remarked it. Friday and Saturday she had many pains – and the illness proved itself as dropsy, till half past two this morning she had to battle with life, but after that time she slept, her last remarked sign of life was at half past nine. As the Doctor did not expect the end so suddenly only her faithful servant was with her and in morning she was dying when I saw her – O God how gracious he is, not to have left her to more trials.145 And Friduhelm wrote in broken English to Fanny North two days later: Mama is now gone – by! Last Sunday morning God released her from her pain and took her into his eternal Kingdom. She slept away, no agony death, only peace of contentment was to be seen on her dear sweet face, which we still aisew [?] so often, when it was cold. We thank God for the mercy he showed us in keeping her so long, I shall be grateful for all my life, that I could see her returning from the long war. Oh! how much love did she not show to me, when I was absent! She was full of love, of affection of kind thoughts till to the last. ‘Bless me my son’, were the last words she said to me, when I was obliged to leave Berlin on Friday. I should not see her again living. Yesterday the funeral took place. I can not find words to write you, what we felt, seeing her carried away from the room and the house, where she had always lived for us, from the moment we were born. My Brother Otto was strong enough, to perform the holy and last ceremony. Never we shall forget the beautiful words he said: they were so touching and so comforting.146

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 245 Otto von Ranke sent a copy of his address translated into English147 to a variety of people in England and Ireland: Charles Graves, Helen Powys, Mrs Miller (Cambridge),148 Mrs North, Mrs Twinning,149 Mrs  Scott (London)150 and Dr Whitley Stokes.151 At Clarissa’s coffin, Ranke swore to give up his classes straight away.152 His last class dealt with ‘Modern History’ and finished after the first session.153 Ranke experienced considerable difficulty in dealing with the loss of his wife. Although he threw himself into literary work, he mentioned his pain and isolation in a number of letters.154 He would walk up and down the rooms at midnight, talking to himself.155 A few weeks later, on 16 June 1871, another death occurred in the Ranke family. Friduhelm reported his uncle’s death in a letter to Robert on 10 July: ‘We are all in good health. Papa has given up lecturing in the University. One of his brothers, William, died lately on his possession near Berlin quite alone and under very sad and mysterious circumstances.’156 The circumstances, however, are not known. In his last few years in his career, Ranke taught a number of different classes; the one for English history in the summer semester 1865 had to be cancelled due to his research trip. However, the following two semesters he taught English history and returned then to his usual time period of modern (European) history and the Middle Ages. For the summer semester 1871 his class on contemporary history was cancelled, and Gunter Berg believed it was because of too few students.157 In the introductory comments of his last class, ‘Introduction to modern history since the Peace of Westphalia,’ given in the summer semester of 1870, he referred a couple of times to the contemporary war situation between Germany and France, comparing to the situation in the seventeenth century.158

Notes 1 Engagement announcement of the Ranke family, 2 March 1864, SUL Z6. 2 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to John and Emilia Graves, 1 March 1864, SUL X8. 3 Letter of Wilhelm von Kotze senior, 3 March  1864, Archive of Graf von der Schulenburg. 4 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa Ranke, 28 January 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 5 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to John Graves, 5 March 1865, SUL X2. 6 Letter of Clarissa von Clarissa Ranke to John Graves, 1 March 1865, SUL X1. 7 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to ?, 1865, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 1. 8 Letter of Clarissa Ranke to Robert Graves, 22 February  1865, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 29. 9 See also Blanning, The culture of power, p. 198. 10 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to John Graves, 22 March 1865, SUL X16. 11 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 170. 12 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa von Ranke, 3 April 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 13 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Perceval Graves, 28 July 1870, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 65. 14 Lincoln, Abraham (1809–65), American statesman and lawyer and sixteenth president of the United States. 15 Seward, William Henry (1801–72), governor of New York and United States Senator, United States Secretary of State 1861–69.

246  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame 16 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 213. 17 Leopold von Ranke, ‘Zur orientalischen Frage. Gutachten im Juli 1854 Sr. Majestät König Friedrich Wilhelm IV vorgetragen’, in: Historische Zeitschrift (1865), pp. 406– 433. [‘On the oriental question. A report presented to his majesty King Friedrich Wilhelm IV in July 1854’]. 18 Ibid, pp. 407–408. 19 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 188. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid, pp. 188–189. 23 Mohl, Julius von (1800–76), German orientalist. 24 Mohl, Mary von (1793–1883), ran one of the most popular intellectual centres in Paris for nearly 40 years; many visitors were coming from England. 25 Ibid, p. 189. 26 Thiers, Louis Adolphe (1797–1877), French statesman and historian, and later president of France. 27 Ibid. 28 Mignet, François-Auguste (1796–1884), French historian. His best-known work is L’Histoire de la Révolution francaise (1824). 29 Ibid, pp. 189–190. 30 Ibid, p. 190. 31 Ibid, pp. 190–191. 32 Turgenev, Ivan Sergeyevich (1818–83), Russian novelist. 33 Labouchere, Henry, Baron Taunton (1798–1869), member of the House of Commons in England from 1826, and became in 1860 a member of the House of Lords, vicepresident of the board of trade. 34 Ibid, p. 191. 35 Ibid. 36 Bernstorff, Albrecht Graf von (1809–73), Prussian ambassador in England. 37 Ibid, pp. 191–192. 38 Ibid, p. 192. 39 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 16 June 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 271. 40 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Charles Graves, 16 June 1865, SUL X25. 41 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa von Ranke, 22 June 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 42 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to John Graves, 22 June 1865, SUL X20. 43 Letter of Leopold Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 30 June 1865, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, pp. 453–455. 44 Ibid. 45 Phillips, Sir Thomas (1792–1872), English antiquary and book collector. 46 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, pp. 192–193. 47 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 30 June  1865, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensbeschreibung, pp. 453–455. 48 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Charles Graves, 27 June 1865, SUL X18. 49 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Robert Graves, 28 June  1865, Wiehe, RankeNachkommen 3. 50 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel, 3 July  1865, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 447. 51 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 193. 52 Entries in the Board Register/Minute Book for the year 1865, pp.  158–159, TCD MUN/v/5/12.

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 247 53 Price, ‘Contribution toward a bibliography of Ranke’, p. 1266. Kelly translated various books; one example is W.K. Kelly (ed.), The elegies of Propertius (London, 1874). 54 Printed leaflet in Board Register/Minute Book of the year 1865, pp. 161–162, TCD MUN/v/5/12. 55 Freeman’s Journal, Thursday 6 July 1865, vol. xcviii. 56 Irish Times, Thursday 6 July 1865. 57 Only mentioned in Helmolt, Rankes Leben und Wirken, p. 202, footnote 232. 58 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, written in Dublin Castle, 7 July  1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 473. 59 Dublin University calendar for the year 1866 (Dublin, 1866), p. 92. 60 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, written in Dublin Castle, 7 July 1865, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, pp. 456–458. 61 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 193. 62 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, written in Dublin Castle, 7 July 1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 473–474. 63 Sidney Lee, Dictionary of National Biography, vol. xxxii (London, 1892), pp. 143– 144; Sidney Lee, Dictionary of national biography, second supplement, vol. iii (London, 1912), pp. 695–698. 64 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 7 July  1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 478–479. 65 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 13 July  1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 476–478. 66 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Charles Graves, November 1865, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 186. 67 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 13 July  1865, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, pp. 458–462. 68 Ibid. 69 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 13 July  1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, p. 479. 70 Ibid, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, p. 462. 71 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 7 July 1865, in: Dove, Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, p. 458. 72 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 13 July  1865, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 474–476. 73 Marsh’s Library Visitor Book, 1865–1867, entry by Thomas Russell William Cradock on 13 July 1865, Marsh’s Library [ML.3]. 74 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 193. 75 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 17 July 1865, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 27. 76 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 194. 77 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Clarissa von Ranke, 25 June 1865, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 470. 78 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel, 3 July  1865, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 448–449. 79 Friduhelm von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 194. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid. 82 Ibid. 83 Ibid. 84 Friduhelm von Ranke, Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke von seinem Sohne Friduhelm von Ranke, p. 13. 85 See also Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel, 1 January 1866; in Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 458–460.

248  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame 86 Letter of Friduhelm von Ranke, 1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 2. 87 Itzenplitz, Heinrich August Graf von (1799–1883), German jurist and Prussian Trade Minister. 88 Wichmann, Ludwig Wilhelm (1788–1859), German sculptor. 89 Senfft von Pilsach, Ernst Karl Wilhelm Adolf Freiherr (1795–1882), Prussian administrator and member of the Prussian Upper House. 90 Hitzig, Julius Eduard (1838–1907), German neurologist and psychiatrist. 91 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 31 August 1870, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 207. 92 Letter of Selina Graves to Clarissa von Ranke, 1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 93 Ibid. 94 Letter of Robert Graves to Clarissa von Ranke, 3 March  1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe, Akte Robert Graves an Clara Ranke. 95 Letter of Archibal Constable to Clarissa von Ranke, 23 March 1870, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 59. 96 Musical programm leaflet by Agathe Plitt, 22 December 1868, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 121. 97 Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, vol. xxvii, Quad–Reinald, reprint of the first edition of 1888 (Berlin, 1970), pp. 265–266. 98 See also Sperber, Germany, 1800–1870, pp. 69–90. 99 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 21 May  1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 167. 100 In: Ranke, Leopold von, Abhandlungen und Versuche (Leipzig, 1888), p. 522. 101 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 24 July 1866, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 36a. 102 Bismarck, Otto Eduard Leopold Fürst von (1815–98), German statesman. First chancellor of the German Empire and influenced German and European politics for three decades. 103 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 12–13. 104 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 18 August 1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 262. 105 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 8 August 1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 262. 106 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Charles Graves, 1 September 1866, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/58/12. 107 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 31 October 1866, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 253. 108 Dreye, Johann Nikolaus von (1787–1867), German firearms inventor and manufacturer. 109 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to ?, 1867, SUL Y2. 110 Joachim Fischer, Das Deutschlandbild der Iren 1890–1937 (Heidelberg, 2000), p. 479. 111 Ibid. 112 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 39. 113 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Helen Graves, 14 July  1867, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 44. 114 The original German titles and volumes are as follows: Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (vol. 1–6), Zur deutschen Geschichte. Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum dreißigjährigen Kriege (vol. 7), Französische Geschichte (vols. 8–13), Englische Geschichte (vols. 14–22), Geschichte Wallensteins (vol. 23), Abhandlungen und Versuche. Erste Sammlung (vol. 24), Zwölf Bücher preußischer Geschichte (vols.

Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning fame 249 25–29), Zur Geschichte von Österreich und Preußen zwischen den Friedensschlüssen zu Aachen und Hubertusburg (vol. 30), Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780–1790 (vols. 31–32), Geschichte der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494 bis 1514. – Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtsschreiber (vols. 33–34), Die Osmanen und die Spanische Monarchie im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (vols. 35–36), Die römischen Päpste in den letzten vier Jahrhunderten (vols. 37–39), Historisch-biographische Studien (vols. 40–41), Zur Venizianischen Geschichte (vol. 42), Serbien und die Türkei im 19. Jahrhundert (vols. 43–44), Ursprung und Beginn der Revolutionskriege 1791 und 1792 (vol. 45), Hardenberg und die Geschichte des Preußischen Staates von 1793–1813 (vols. 46–48), Zur Geschichte Deutschlands und Frankreichs im 19. Jahrhundert (vols. 49–50), Abhandlungen und Versuche. Neue Sammlung (vols. 51–52), Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte (vols. 53–54). 115 ‘Briefwechsel Friedrich des Groβen mit dem Prinzen Wilhelm IV. von Oranien und mit dessen Gemahlin, Anna, geb. Princess Royal von England’, in: Abhandlungen der Koeniglichen Preuβischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1868), pp. 1–92. [‘The correspondence of Frederick the Great with the Prince William IV. of Orange and his wife Anna née Princess Royal of England’] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 24]. 116 Ranke, ‘Briefwechsel Friedrich des Grossen’, p. 7. 117 Ibid, p. 21. 118 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert Graves, 29 November 1868, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 269. 119 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 16 June  1869, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 47. 120 Letter of Helen Graves to Leopold von Ranke, 25 July 1869, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 31. 121 Note of Charles Graves, 1869, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 91. 122 Geschichte Wallensteins (1869) [History of Wallenstein] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 23]. 123 SBB PK, Ms.germ.oct.644 (Tagebuch Clarissa von Ranke). 124 Ibid. 125 Letter of Clarissa and Otto von Ranke to Robert Graves, 29 March 1870, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 60. 126 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to Robert and Helen Graves, 7 March  1870, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 56. 127 Letter of Clarissa von Ranke to ?, 1870, Wiehe, Clarissa von Ranke 95. 128 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, pp. 13–14. 129 Jordan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, p. 38. 130 Ibid. 131 Ibid. 132 Ibid, p. 39. 133 Ibid. 134 Ibid. 135 Schaff, Philip (1819–93), US Presbyterian theologian. 136 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 120. 137 Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, pp.  60–61. See also Ranke, Tagebücher, pp. 398–407. 138 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, p. 14. 139 Baur, ‘Die Rankes in der Luisenstrasse’. 140 For more details see Rosenhaft, ‘Gender’, in: Sperber, Germany 1800–1870, pp. 220–222. 141 Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau, p. 15. 142 Ibid, pp. 14–18.

250  Ennoblement, rise of titles, waning of fame 143 Pamphlet of Death notice of Clarissa von Ranke, 30 April  1871, GStA, PK, FA Geschwister Ranke, Nr. 14. 144 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Manteuffel, in: Ranke, Das Briefwerk, pp. 509–512; Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 549–552; Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 30 April 1871, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, 550–552. 145 Letter of Otto von Ranke to Helen Graves, 1 May  1871, Wiehe, Englische Briefe 121a. 146 Letter of Friduhelm von Ranke to Fanny North, 3 May  1871, Wiehe, RankeNachkommen 4. 147 Sermon of Otto von Ranke on the funeral of his mother Clarissa von Ranke, printed leaflet, 2 May 1871, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/32/10. 148 See also Clarissa’s poem to her husband in the appendix, No. 141. 149 See also Clarissa’s poem to Mara Twinning in the appendix, No. 181. 150 Wife of Robert Scott; see also Clarissa’s poem in the appendix, No. 116. 151 Stokes, Whitly (1830–1909), Irish physician. 152 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Maximiliane von Kotze, 4 May  1885, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 727–728. 153 Rudolf Vierhaus, ‘Rankes Verständnis der “neuesten Geschichte” ’, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, xxxix (1957), p. 86. 154 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Maximiliane von Kotze, 26 May 1871, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 554–555. 155 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 28 November 1871, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 566–567. 156 Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Wilhelm Ranke’, p. 8. 157 Gunter Berg, Leopold von Ranke als akademischer Lehrer (Göttingen, 1968), pp. 243–245. 158 Ranke, Vorlesungseinleitungen, pp. 468–469.

10 Retirement, old age and the last masterpiece (1871–86)

After the passing of his wife, Ranke threw himself into work, resulting in several publications during the 1870s: first publications of works on German and European history, but also the continuation of his collected works. For example, in the book The sources of the Seven Years’ War, Ranke dealt with the situation of European powers during the 1750s.1 Especially Prussia, Austria, France, England and Russia were mentioned, but also the other European states and American colonies. He analyzed the political and economic backgrounds in detail as well as family connections for each of the countries, with which countries they had friendly affiliations and what issues moved the countries into the war. At the end of this work he added 40 pages of appendixes with excerpts from documents and critical comments. In the introduction, Ranke stated clearly that this work was the result of recent contemporary events and that he wanted to show similarities to another time period when Europe was in a state of crisis. Ranke particularly expressed his disagreement with the unification wars of Germany and the foundation of the German Kaiserreich. The next book, The German powers and the Princes League, concentrated on the German states (especially Prussia, Austria and Bavaria), Belgium (AustriaHolland), the Ottoman Empire, England, France, Russia and Poland.2 The key element of this work lay in the last few years of the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation and the Princes League, the position of the emperor, the Reichstag and the urge of reforms. In the first volume of the work, Poland and the Ottoman Empire played as much a key role as the position of German states within Europe and the balance of power. Ranke assessed in detail how much policies were based on personal and power-searching urges. The second volume emphasized two main aspects: how the empire dealt with the Ottoman Empire and the loss of Belgium (Austrian Netherlands). Particularly for Belgium, Ranke analyzed the parliament and the class situation. It was interesting that the loss of Belgium took place at the same time as the French Revolution; however, the events in Belgium were much more peaceful than in France. Generally Ranke brought into his discussion major issues of classes, culture and literature. He analyzed the position of the third class in detail as well as the structure of the class system after the death of Frederick II the Great in Prussia. A large concentration can be found on the aspect of literature: he analyzed the development of it and came to the conclusion that the Protestant

252  Retirement and the last masterpiece movement on the one hand, but also the disunity of the German states and their competition with each other on the other hand, created a massive opportunity for competing authors and a diverse booming literature culture. Ranke believed that in particular small states had a major impact on the evolution of literature, as they may have been politically weak, but they were culturally strong.3 Out of all of the different authors, Ranke emphasized Lessing, Klopstock and Johannes von Müller. The work reflected his opinion of recent events in Germany and the creation of the Deutsche Kaiserreich. Ranke preferred the confederation, which was reflected in several passages. His next book, On the correspondence of Frederick Wilhelm IV and Bunsen, represented another sources edition and with Ranke in the position of a Prussian historiographer.4 Ranke had selected letters with comments to persons, events and connections, and generally there are only a few footnotes. Although he edited letters, Ranke stressed that a critical analysis of them was not possible at that moment as too many contemporary people were still alive. However, he tried to be as objective as possible. It should be acknowledged that Ranke obviously would not have the intention of criticizing King Frederick William IV because his father managed to secure him the position as professor in the University of Berlin, and Frederick William IV and Bunsen both helped Ranke on his research trips. With his next book on German history, Ranke described the state of the Holy Roman Empire from the 1550s until 1619, with a clear concentration on the reigns of Emperors Ferdinand I and II, Maximilian II and Rudolf II, their policies and the general state of the empire.5 However, other countries were mentioned as well, especially Russia, Portugal, Sweden, England, Holland, France and Italy. Ranke also referred to trade and the economy of the Holy Roman Empire as well as the development of literature and natural sciences. The work was concluded with a long appendix and marked out with an extensive use of footnotes. In comparison to earlier works, the narrative of this text was very dramatic. Ranke used for this work in particular the Venetian relazioni and other manuscripts he found in Vienna, Rome, Florence and Venice. However, this work was one of his weaker ones; it only filled a gap within his Sämmtliche Werke and it fell into the political discussion of the Kulturkampf during the 1870s, which he indirectly emphasized in his introduction. Another book dealt with the history of the two biggest German powers: On the history of Austria and Prussia between the treaties of Aachen and Hubertusburg. In this, he mainly re-edited previous published materials.6 The first article described Maria Theresa, her state and court in the year 1755.7 The second article described the reasons of the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War, and it was published under its own title in a separate book in 1871. The third article was a new one and assessed the Seven Years’ War itself. The main countries described are Prussia, Austria and other German states, as well as other European states such as Poland, France, England and Russia. The article described all events of the war with a concentration on events taking place in Germany (1756–63). Treaties of European powers and the war in America were included.

Retirement and the last masterpiece  253 The book, Reasons and the beginning of the Revolutionary Wars 1791 and 1792, analyzed two years of European history and questioned the reasons why European powers intervened in revolutionary France.8 The main countries Ranke mentioned were France, Prussia, Austria, England and Russia, but also Poland, other European countries and North America. He discussed the situation of France in detail, particularly the strengthening power of the Jacobites towards the end of his work. It also included the Polish Question. However, the main theme of the book was the balance of power in Europe. The work concluded with the usual appendix with documents. In this work Ranke included his life experience and contemporary political events. It was a good historical work as regards the reasons for the development of events in Europe, with the particular emphasis on becoming a supreme power, a movement which Ranke stressed was still in place by the 1870s. The edition Papers and trials: First attempts contained previously published articles such as ‘The great powers,’ ‘Towards criticism of the Prussian Memoirs,’ ‘On the fall of Minister von Danckelmann (1697–98),’ ‘On the first work on the history of the Silesian Wars by King Frederick II,’ ‘On the correspondence of Frederick the Great’ and ‘Towards the history of political theories.’9 The book concluded with an appendix. In his work Hardenberg and the history of the Prussian State, Ranke wrote a biography on the Prince von Hardenberg and the history of the Prussian state from 1793 to 1813.10 The history of Prussia in particular concentrated on political history. Further countries mentioned were other German states, particularly Austria, and France, England and Russia. The work had two main appendixes, one on the memoirs of the Count von Haugnitz, the other on Hardenberg. This work had several changes in comparison to earlier works of Ranke. Keywords such as Moment, Element and Augenblick were not as clearly defined. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that in the first volume and partly in the third volume, he wrote on Hardenberg; however, the remainder of the work dealt with general states’ history of Europe. Another change can be seen in the length of his chapters, which tended to be in some cases very short (ten to twenty pages), which was not the case in comparison to his earlier works. The usage of his footnotes was also changing. Sometimes there were several footnotes followed by pages with none at all. Furthermore, Ranke tended to use very long footnotes; the longest one went over three pages. It is interesting that the first volume had Romantic tendencies. In the last volume Ranke mentioned several personalities with whom he had contacts himself, such as Goethe and Niebuhr. This work was another failed effort of his to write a biography. Nevertheless, his strengths remained in the area of general European history, although a change in the style was noticeable; the biographical parts had a tendency to Romanticism. The edition Historic-biographical studies concentrated on the states of Italy and Spain and their crisis moments in modern history.11 The work was divided into four sections: one deals with Spain and Don Carlos and the other three with Italy. The first section dealt with the Vatican State in the years 1790 to the 1830s and with the problems of sustaining and keeping the Vatican state united, the

254  Retirement and the last masterpiece conflicts of Cardinal Consalvi and Pope Pius VII with Napoleon I and the restructuring of the state during the times of Restoration from a mainly ecclesiastical state into a worldly one. Ranke showed here in particular the political, financial and juristicial aspects and concluded the part with the publication of two documents as an appendix. In this appendix he included a personal description of the situation of the Roman affairs from the year 1829. It is interesting that in the first part of that section, Ranke referred several times to Niebuhr and his historical work. The second part of the book dealt with Savonarola and the Florentine Republic during the 1490s and also concluded with two appendixes: one was the first publication of Florentine chronicles, and the other one was a critical analysis of the historical writing of Savonarola by Pico and Burlamacci. The third section of the book dealt with Italian history and with Filippo Strozzi and Cosimo Medici, the first Arch-duke of Tuscany, in the years 1500 to 1550. The last section of the book referred to the history of Spain and Don Carlos. This article was divided: the first half was a reprint from the 1829 version, and then followed an account on the general history of Don Carlos. The book had a tendency to very long footnotes. Generally this work had to be understood as a book against the unification and nationalism of Germany. All topics dealt with the crisis moments of Italy and Spain, and in the case of Italy, revolutionary tendencies were mentioned as well. The main task was how the princes dealt with these moments but remained in control of their state. The topic of Savonarola discussed it as an ecclesiastical revolution and hinted indirectly towards the Kulturkampf. With the case of Don Carlos, Ranke interpreted it as a case of being objective in writing history and leaving nationalism out. In the last book, Ranke dealt with two biographies on Frederick the Great and Frederick William IV.12 It is recognizable that the text was not typically Rankean due to the lack of footnotes and different writing style. But the editor had noted that the text was written for the Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, which also meant that the target group of readers was completely different, including the type of the publication. Nevertheless, the text gave several comments on the persons and background information to the historical time and events. This publication shows that Ranke could change his style of writing and he could write noncritically, with no footnotes or appendixes. All of his research and the foundation of his publications were based on his private library. Edward Muir13 gave us an idea of the size: Most of the manuscripts were in Italian and pertained to the history of Venice. The original owners of most of Ranke’s bound manuscripts were the Venetian patrician families of Nani and Da Ponte, who sold at least parts of their private libraries through a bookseller named Adolfo Cesare. According to evidence from bookplates or from the texts themselves, other manuscripts came from the Dandolo, Soranzo, Gradenigo, and Tozzetti family libraries. Beginning with his trip to Venice in 1827, Ranke probably purchased these bound manuscripts from Cesare and other dealers, and, according to Wiedemann, he possibly acquired some from his friend, the historian Francesco Francesconi of the University of Padua. The unbound manuscripts

Retirement and the last masterpiece 255 were the disbound parts of larger bound manuscripts, odd lots, or copies ordered at Ranke’s behest. Ranke’s collecting continued throughout his life, and his manuscript library reflected his interests in the history of the popes, Reformation and imperial Germany, the Turks, France, Britain, Spain and the Italian city states, on diplomacy and statecraft. The manuscripts consisted principally of Venetian chronicles, constitutional sources, colonial records and diplomatic relazioni; Ranke used these for most of his histories. Besides documenting Ranke’s historical methods, the worth of the manuscript collection remained as an archive for the history of Venice, its terraferma and overseas possessions, and its relations with other powers. As a source for the history of Venice, Ranke’s collection paralleled and in some respects surpassed the notable collections outside of Venice in Vienna, Paris, and London. Baur had the greatest insight into what the library actually contained: it held around 24,000 volumes of books concerning nearly any aspect of European history, mainly based on source editions, memoirs, correspondences, pamphlets and journal collections, files from the German Diet, relazioni etc.14 But one would also find a mountain of academic papers of around 50,000 sheets: original sources and copies of sources from archives all over Europe, excerpts, manuscripts, notices, work- and literature lists, maps, town panoramas etc. Adding to this was a large correspondence of scholars consisting of around 3,000 letters, lecture notes, manuscripts for new publications (i.e. on Ottoman history), note books (i.e. a political diary from 1850) and diplomas of orders.15 Baur found further materials: excerpts of nuntio notes from Rome, copies of diplomatic reports from Venice, pamphlet copies of Cromwell’s times, excerpts from the German Diet from the period of the religious wars, copies of orders from Charles V from Brussels, copies of the ‘Jacobite Diary’ from the Sir Thomas Phillips collection in Cheltenham, copies of the political will of Frederick II the Great or the memoirs of Podewil. Then there are fragments of manuscripts of his later works, ranging from his first draft and source critical comments and notes, such as the following one he wrote at the end of one transcript on the Peace of Westphalia: ‘The envoys were tired; the authors are tired; the reader is tired: I am also a bit tired.’ Then further dossiers on the situation of Serbia in 1878 or a diary of Hardenberg can be found; documents on the assembly of the notables just before the French Revolution; eyewitness reports on the palace revolt of the later czarina Elisabeth in 1741; a battle drawing of Fredrick the Great.16 In addition to the more than 400 Venetian relazioni and 1,000 chronicles, annals and Reichstag files, what makes the Ranke library so valuable is Ranke’s pamphlet collection, which contained approximately 2,500 ‘items’ dating from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries. Baur found other examples: Ranke’s original manuscript on Torquato Tasso and the now-forgotten article from 1831 on the ‘History of Italian Art.’ Baur also found a script marked as RN 34.C / 339f in Berlin. On the first page, Ranke casually characterized the European origins of the United States as follows: ‘Hence, there, ideas were able to thrive that could find no place in Europe, and which could not have been anything but estranged from

256  Retirement and the last masterpiece European conditions; hence, there, in the American forests, the religious ideas of an uprooted Christianity and their visionary offshoots were able to spread in combination with the institutions of the old Germanic world.’17 Bernhard Hoeft described the Ranke library in detail.18 He noted that the library was already famous during Ranke’s lifetime and had been described by his helpers or secretaries, or amanuensis as Ranke called them, of whom he had ten, amongst them Paul Bailleu,19 Georg Winter, Wilhelm Pfeifer from Bibra near Wiehe, Wilhelm Altmann and Paul Hinneberg. Paul Bailleu described his experience with Ranke in the summer of 1873, when he helped Ranke as a student in his sixth semester.20 He was astonished by the rows of bookshelves, but he made the comment which was characteristic for the library, that once he had to search for a book for Ranke ‘which was never at its supposed place,’ and the impatiently waiting old man answered then: ‘Well, you won’t find it anyway; I know, there is a goblin who messes everything up and lets things disappear.’21 Georg Winter, who worked for Ranke for two and a half years as an assistant, noted in his memoirs on Ranke that his library was known by specialists as the most valuable private library in Germany. It filled five big rooms, and items were stacked so closely in shelves that you had often two and even three rows in one shelf.22 Winter estimated the library between 20,000 and 25,000 volumes. Thompson noted that Winter became Ranke’s assistant in 1877 – Ranke was then 82 – and the first thing the master said to the pipe-smoking young man was: ‘Can you not quit that habit? It is utterly impossible for me to endure the smell of tobacco.’23 His method of work with his assistants was interesting. They brought documents from the archives and read them to him due to his blindness, caused by a cataract in the early 1870s. Ranke would listen quietly and suddenly explain: ‘Omit that, it is not essential’; or, ‘Hold on! That is significant; we must make an exact copy.’ From these extracts he wrote his histories.24 Prof. Dr Wilhelm Pfeifer worked for Ranke for 13 months (in 1880–81) and described the library as following: You know that the main body of books was located in three rooms, which were the office, the adjunctant bedroom with one window and another backroom with bad lights with not well sorted shelves. The search for books lying under thick dust and barely readable spines were for me the most uncomfortable duties. It was often without results, and often unnecessary, as he used for the third and fourth volumes of the Universal History books from the states and university library. There were also books in rooms on the upper floor, but I had nothing to do with them.25 Dr  Theodor Wiedemann, from Königsberg, had been the longest assistant for Ranke. Ranke’s son Friduhelm described him as a ‘grey haired private scholar, bachelor and eccentric.’26 The most detailed description of the library we have from him: The library was, when I saw it the first time in 1854, divided between five rooms, of which only three had a window, one was at the same time Rankes

Retirement and the last masterpiece 257 bedroom, two were his office and a fourth one served as a front room; some books, but not too many, were located in a chamber on the third floor of the house just above the living quarters of the Rankes on the second floor. In order to save space many books stood on the shelves in two rows; also the walls behind the couch, the resting seats, tables and writing desks were used, which caused sometimes problems accessing them. After the death of the wife another two rooms with a window were also used for the library; two further rooms serving as supposedly living rooms were supposed to remain free of books. Originally Ranke had of course the wish to leave these rooms in the original condition as they were when his wife was still alive, but it became unavoidable to use them as well with the ever growing collection. Especially parts of the French and English literature and journals were placed here.27 Of course Ranke would speak with his assistants at some stage about the scenario of what should happen to his estate after his passing. Wiedemann noted that Ranke had at some stage a plan to acquire close to Berlin a small estate with a large garden and a manor-like building, which could house the library and could continue as a family foundation. But it was mentioned that this could cause a problem of financing the estate as the lands may not generate enough profits. Ranke was not too happy with the idea that the Prussian state may take over his collection as he believed that his library may be broken up into smaller collections.28 It seems rather strange that a large number of historians from America became acquainted with Ranke and observed him work in his library, which spread over four rooms in his apartment. It was connected with the education methods at American universities. It was only in the second half of the nineteenth century that universities with similar European standards were established in the United States. During this time, lecturers who wanted to continue their academic career had to undertake a four-year study period at German universities because the universalistic spirit of the German universities was highly respected. European scholars met until the first half of the twentieth century several American historians who underwent this path in their career.29 But how did Ranke work in his old age? How was he described during these years? Michael Bently noted that even in old age he foxed those who knew him well. Lord Acton looked back in 1895 on their last meeting: I saw him last in 1877, when he was feeble, sunken, and almost blind, and scarcely able to read or write. He uttered his farewell with kindly emotion, and I feared that the next I should hear of him would be the news of his death. Two years later, he began a Universal History, which is not without traces of weakness, but which, composed after the age of 83, and carried, in 17 volumes, far into the Middle Ages, brings to a close the most astonishing career in literature.30 Jeremy Black and Donald MacRaild31 emphasized that Ranke’s generation saw the foundation of important national journals dedicated to the history of

258  Retirement and the last masterpiece politics and state, and several of them were impacted by Ranke. Among the most important were the Historische Zeitschrift (under the editorship of Heinrich von Sybel, Germany, 1856), the Revue Historique (France, 1876), the Rivista Storica Italiana (1884), the English Historical Review (1886) and the American Historical Review (1895).32 It is also noted that his quote of ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen’ that Ranke was not claiming his history was absolute; only that he wanted to tell what happened rather than imposing some grand design on history. Thus he was surely taking a step away from those who would use the past for their own designs.33 After 1874 Ranke regularly visited his daughter Maximiliane, living at Lodersleben, close to his birthplace, Wiehe. Nevertheless, the Rankes and the Graveses remained in constant contact during the following years. They exchanged family information and commented on the political situations in their own countries. These included Home Rule in Ireland and Bismarck’s policies in Germany. In 1874 Friduhelm asked Robert: ‘I wonder, if you ever have leisure to read about German and Prussian politics in the papers. I am very much afraid, that Bismarck will have exactly the opposite result, he aims at, in his campaign against the Roman Catholic Church.’34 According to Iggers, Ranke followed Bismarck’s policies with little enthusiasm. Even after 1849, he still hoped for a strengthened confederation under joint Prussian and Austrian leadership which would permit political diversity and not threaten the traditional pluralism that he considered so important to the cultural development of German nationality. Bismarck’s concession to the liberals disturbed him even more deeply, although he never opposed it openly. When he failed Bismarck after his break with the National Liberals in 1879, it was not because he saw in him the founder of the German Empire, but rather he saw the man who defended Europe from social revolution.35 In 1872 Ranke contacted the Clarendon Press in England with regard to a translation of his History of England. He wrote to Bartholomew Price: I thank you for the notice you gave me, March 12, 1872, of the intention of the delegates of the Clarendon Press to publish a translation of my History of England into English. Indeed I heard of it already by Prof. Max Mueller and have not the smallest difficulty to transfer the right of the translation of my work to the delegates of the Press.36 In due course Ranke’s work was translated. According to Price the ‘translation was made at the suggestion of Bishop Stubbs when he was regius professor of history at Oxford.’37 As time went on Ranke became very excited with the translation of his book, which is evident in a letter he wrote to his daughter Maximiliane von Kotze in 1873: This morning Plummer the fellow from Oxford visited me, who I forgot to write to in Lodersleben. He is involved with the translation of History of England, which will be published shortly or at least within the next year in eight

Retirement and the last masterpiece 259 volumes. It will open a whole new readership all over the world. I am eagerly looking forward to the response the book will command.38 In January  1875 Price informed Ranke that the translation of the History of England39 was complete and was to be published within days.40 Eight members of the University of Oxford translated the book: C.W. Boase (Exeter College), W.W. Jackson (Exeter College), H.B. George (New College), H.F. Pelham (Exeter College), M. Creighton (Merton College), A. Watson (Brasenose College), G.W. Kitchin (Christ Church) and A. Plummer (Trinity College).41 After the publication of the translation in 1875, Ranke received many reviews. He was delighted by the response, as mentioned in a letter to his brother Heinrich in 1875: At the moment I am overburdened by lots of reviews in several languages. It was a real pleasure for me to do the translation of my History of England into the English language last year. Everything that I have heard up to now from there shows me that it found a relatively good response.42 The History of England was reviewed in the Dublin Review by Anne Hope, who published her review of Ranke’s work in two articles covering about 50 pages. While the first article covered another book,43 the second one dealt only with Ranke and reviewed the work much more clearly.44 In Hope’s opinion Ranke ‘has been betrayed by religious prejudice and political motives into gross falsifications of facts.’45 When reviewing the history of Ireland she gave Ranke credit for the publication of the appendix, although it depicted the events of 1641, 1649 and 1690 in a negative sense and viewed the Irish as ‘uncivilised.’46 This point of view seemed typical of Unionism influenced by the Home Rule discussion since 1870. Hope continued that ‘Ranke’s account of the Popish Plot, however, outdoes all his other falsification of history.’47 Despite faults, she still believed that the work ‘is a valuable contribution to English history.’48 Nevertheless, Hope’s final paragraph was less than positive: ‘In concluding our article we must once more express our regret that the great writer, who has just completed his 50 years of historical authorship and renown, should have cast a shade upon his own fair fame, and robbed his interesting and valuable work of its full claims on our confidence, by degrading the noble science of history to the furtherance of unworthy political aims and the gratification of religious bigotry.’49 In August 1877, when his doctor had given permission for a vacation away from Berlin, Ranke accepted an invitation from his old friend Baron von Manteuffel to spend a fortnight at the latter’s estate in the New Mark of Brandenburg, some 30 miles east of the Oder, Topper. Georg Winter, one of the historian’s two assistants at the time and later the author of a most useful set of reminiscences, told of the relief with which Ranke’s staff saw him off, carrying not one piece of reading material, though the faithful housekeeper, Frau Loppe – a character out of every bourgeois play or novel ever written – predicted that her employer would go crazy without some scholarly endeavour to keep him occupied. Frau Loppe was right, not about Ranke’s going crazy, but about his inability to take things

260  Retirement and the last masterpiece easy for two weeks. As Winter told it, the 81-year-old professor came home with three things he had not had when he boarded the train for the east: (1) a beard, of which he was excessively proud and which he now proceeded to let grow to flowing white length; (2) a biographical article on Frederick the Great, dictated to an unnamed conscript at the country place and almost ready for a publication he had proudly shared in launching, the Allgemine Deutsche Biographie; and he drew out a manuscript and handed it to the surprised assistant with the words: ‘Here I have a biography of Frederick the Great, which I dictated at Topper.’ (the biography was dictated without books or notes – from memory!);50 and (3) a firm decision to start his World History, the first volume of which was to be published in 1880. Whether the fortnight had left Manteuffel exhausted by learned conversation or indignant as the neglected host is not recorded.51 Ranke’s last major work was Universal History and consisted of nine volumes.52 It was supposed to cover all known world history at that time, starting with the first known empires and mainly concentrating on Europe. He managed to complete and edit six volumes, but he died mid-way through the seventh volume. The remaining two volumes were edited by other scholars. Even though he was concentrating on European history, Ranke had a few sections dealing with Asian history, particularly with the history of China. He had enough material prepared to cover American and African history as well, by the time he would have reached the period of the discovery of the New World; however, Ranke passed away before he could do so. The preface to his Universal History started as follows: The earth had become habitable and was inhabited, the nations had separated and had established manifold relations with each other; they possessed the rudiments of civilization long before writing, on which history is totally dependent, had been invented. The province of history is limited by the means at her command, and the historian would be overbold who should venture to unveil the mystery of the primeval world, the relation of mankind to God and nature. The solution of such problems must be left to natural science and religious thought. From this primeval world we pass to the monuments of a period less distant but still inconceivably remote, the vestibule, as it were, of History. These monuments have hitherto excited the admiration and defied the intelligence of successive generations, but during the last hundred years we have obtained more accurate information and a clearer understanding of them than were possessed before. In our own day the ruins of buried cities have been disinterred, and buildings have been discovered on the walls of which the mightiest monarchs of their day caused their deeds to be inscribed. Archaeological investigation is now everywhere pursued with a sort of filial affection, while art and antiquity have become almost identical conceptions. These monuments of the past are naturally connected with the relics, unfortunately all too fragmentary, of the ancient religions, rituals, and constitutions which have survived to our time. Around the various areas of investigation have grown

Retirement and the last masterpiece  261 up fields of study, each of which forms a department by itself and demands the devoted attention of a lifetime. Lastly, a universal science of language has arisen, which, based upon knowledge as intricate as it is extensive, undertakes with success the task of distinguishing and contrasting the relationships among the nations. For the direction of all who are interested in these researches as well as for the instruction of the public at large, nothing could be more desirable than a scientific synopsis and correlation of these fields of study. Such a work would fittingly adorn an encyclopedia of historical knowledge, but it cannot be introduced into Universal History, which claims as its province only the ascertained results of historical research. History first begins at the point where monuments become intelligible and documentary evidence of a trustworthy character is forthcoming, but from this point onward her domain is boundless. Universal History, as we understand this term, embraces the events of all times and nations, with this limitation only: that they shall be so far ascertained as to make a scientific treatment of them possible.53 The first volume started with the history of Egypt and reached to Greek history at a time when Athens was at the height of its power. He concentrated on Greek literature and followed up with Greek history during the fourth and third century BC before he concluded with Alexander the Great and listed the empires after his death. The second volume dealt with Roman history to the conquest of Carthage, the revolts of the Gracchen and the rise of Emperor Augustus, with a large concentration on Caesar. The third volume started with the invasion of Rome to Germanic territory until Emperor Constantine the Great. The second half of the volume was a large appendix which focused mainly on the Roman Empire. The fourth volume continued with Constantine and followed up the history until the end of WestRome. After the end of the West Roman Empire, Ranke concentrated on Emperor Justinian, the Great Migration and the formation of the first new empires such as Italy, Spain, Gallia and Britain. This was followed by a large appendix. The fifth volume dealt with the history of Islamic belief and its spread and the history of the Merovingians. In the first article we find an introduction to the social and state history of India. The narrative continued with the newly established tribe of the Francs, the development of the Arabs and the Empires of the Byzantine and Charlemagne. Ranke concentrated in particular on the history of Charlemagne, which then followed with an appendix. The sixth volume dealt with the Normans and the empire of Charlemagne to Emperor Charles II and Byzantine. Ranke included a large chapter of ecclesiastical literature. He continued with the history of the Arabs until Emperor Otto the Great, and this was one of the largest chapters in the whole work. The seventh volume continued with the reign from Otto II until Emperor Henry V. The eighth volume continued with German emperors and the Crusades. Chapter 16 dealt with the history of Mongolia, China, India and Russia. The last volume started with Emperor Henry VII until around 1500–10, which concluded with a view on the state of Germany, France and England. Chapter 7 focused on the class system and trade of German cities. Chapter  13 dealt with

262  Retirement and the last masterpiece the history of China, India and Turkey. At the very end of the volume, one finds speeches and presentations given by Ranke for King Maximilian II in 1854. The most famous speech is ‘On the epochs of modern history’ and was mainly a short listing of key aspects of history since the Roman Empire. Ranke had a historical discourse with the king, who asked him several questions. These lectures, which were only published posthumously in 1888, have been considered quite significant. Together with Droysen’s Historik (Principles of History) and Burckhardt’s Weltgeschichtliche Betrachtungen (Force and freedom, an interpretation of history), which were also published posthumously, they are seen as one of the three greatest works on German historical theory in the nineteenth century and of continued significance for historical thought. It is the only time that Ranke presented a comprehensive view of Western history, or what he considered to be universal history, from the Roman period to the nineteenth century, foreshadowing what he had in mind in the uncompleted Universal History.54 There is controversy today over the degree to which this was actually the work of Ranke. No text written by him of the lecture series exists, but only a stenographic account and a written version prepared for him, which at many points deviates from the stenographic text. Ranke did not assign a title to these lectures; the title by which we know the lectures was formulated by Alfred Dove, Ranke’s student and the editor of his work.55 Strikingly, the thread of progress ran through his Universal History, which sought to show how human development influenced material and social progress and how religions evolved over centuries. Ranke argued that ‘since Christendom and with it true morality and religion appeared, there can be no progress in these areas.’56 His history turned out not to be universal in the sense that he had prescribed, embracing of ‘the events of all times and nations,’57 but was a history of the West. Admittedly China had developed a civilization, but it stagnated and converted to barbarism. The same was true of the early stages of the Muslim caliphates. In his view, all other societies in Asia and all of Africa still represented barbarism in his contemporary era.58 Generally speaking Ranke continued with his style in using footnotes and appendixes; however, he referred more often to the literature of the time period and wrote in a generally more romantic style. Volume seven is striking because the whole text seemed cramped and summarized, and there was a considerable reduction in the usage of footnotes. Also the style was different than usual, whereby the editors of this volume, Alfred Dove and Paul Hinneberg,59 had finished the work because Ranke died in the middle of it, which means it is only semi-Rankean. However, this volume underlines the thesis of Baur that Ranke wrote his text first and then added the footnotes afterwards. The last two volumes were edited as well: the text was compiled from notes and the chapters summarize the text; they do not go into any details. Ranke had a much further influence on American historiography. Due to the fact that many American scholars went over to Berlin and got acquainted with Ranke, his ideas were brought over to America.60 Some of these were a central association of history – the best example was the Historical Commission of the

Retirement and the last masterpiece  263 Bavarian Academy of Science, of which Ranke was the first chairman for many years – and the promotion of academic journals. Eventually this led to the foundation of the American Historical Association (AHA) in 1884. History in America had only recently emerged as a distinct academic discipline. The first few professors in the field of history had only been appointed at major universities in the 1870s. Up to that point, wealthy men with the leisure time to pursue such endeavours did most of the writing of history and collection of historical manuscripts and archives. Recognizing that a distinct field was emerging, a number of historians in the academy proposed an organization to establish high professional standards for historical training and research. In 1884, ‘professors, teachers, specialists, and others interested in the advancement of history in this country’61 were called to gather at the annual meeting of the American Social Science Association (ASSA) in Saratoga, New York. The central figure in this initiative was Herbert Baxter Adams, an associate professor in history at Johns Hopkins University, who became the first secretary of the AHA and who was also well trained by Ranke. Andrew Dickson White, n historian and president of Cornell University, was selected as the AHA’s first president. The main aim of the Association was ‘the promotion of historical studies, the collection and preservation of historical manuscripts and for kindred purposes in the interest of American history and of history in America.’62 This formulation of aims also came close to what Ranke had taught his students. At the forefront of the Association’s activities was the support of new historical research. As part of its annual reports, the Association began publishing new historical research, typically papers presented at the annual meetings. In 1898 the Association began to subsidize the financially strapped journal the American Historical Review (AHR), which had been established by two AHA members.63 Soon the question came up of how the AHA could thank one of the biggest teachers of American historians: Ranke. As a German, he could not become a direct member of the Association, and soon after its foundation the establishment of an award for honorary foreign members was suggested. The Association established the Honorary Foreign Membership in 1886 to recognize historians working outside the United States for their distinguished scholarship and assistance to American scholars working in their country. Their first honorary member became Leopold von Ranke in 1886 as a significant appreciative gesture towards him. For many years the Honorary Foreign Membership remained for only highly distinguished scholars, and after Ranke only four more scholars received this award until the mid-1940s. Only since then has it become more common that every one to two years new honorary memberships have been awarded.64 Due to his English History, the scholar Reginald Lane Poole from Oxford asked Ranke what he would think of a new journal series of history. Poole also sent Ranke a draft print and waited for his reply, which was more than approving, and a short time later the first volume of the English Historical Journal appeared, a journal still published today and which became the starting point of several further renowned academic journals in England and America. It is amazing to note that the journal was only published after Ranke gave his blessing. Again, one can see Ranke’s influence on historiography on Britain and Ireland.

264  Retirement and the last masterpiece The Times published seven articles or notes on Ranke in 1885–86, starting with a congratulatory note on Ranke’s 90th birthday,65 an interview with Ranke66 (possibly the only known one), detailed notes on Ranke’s health in May 1886 shortly before his death and two death notices.67 The interview with Ranke was held about a week after his 90th birthday. At the beginning Ranke expressed his admiration for England and that he was ‘always glad to see an Englishman.’68 The interviewer continued with a description of Ranke: I could not help comparing the figure of the nonagenarian historian with a fine painting overhead representing him in the bloom of manhood, trim, shorn and shaven – a very marked contrast, indeed, to the singular personality who seemed to have actually stepped into one’s presence out of the Middle Ages. Clad in a loose dressing-gown, with careless slippers ‘thrust upon contrary feet,’ his venerable beard falling on his breast, his eyes bleared with inflaming particles of book-dust, and the forehead of his tête carrée knotted and gnarled with the life-long habit of mental concentration – Leopold von Ranke looks like a perfect specimen of those medieval philosophers who spent their days and nights in front of huge, outspread folios, with no companion but a pensive cat, and no furniture or ornament to their cells save skulls and crossbones, sand-glasses, elixir phials, and chemical retorts. But, though outwardly resembling such a Dr. Faust, Dr. von Ranke has nothing whatever in him of morose taciturnity or surly snappishness. On the contrary, his nature is still almost as sunny and simple as that of a child. It is impossible to conceive literary greatness combined with more unaffected ways, genuineness, and affability; and in these respects he forms a happy contrast to so many of his class in Germany, with whom the unwary foreigner cannot come into personal contact twice without having bitter cause to rue his disregard of the maxim ‘Cave hominem unius libri’. The historian of the Popes has nothing whatever in common with the astronomical professor who will transfix you with an icy stare if you ask him what he thinks of So-andso’s new volume of poems, or with the great metaphysician who dreamily hands you the salt if you beg him to pass the sherry. There is a certain class of professors in the Fatherland who only enter drawing-rooms to sit silently, and be stared at like Greek busts, or to pass their hands wildly through their long hair, and mutter strange sounds and uncanny incantations. But Leopold von Ranke never did, and never does, affect any of these disagreeable eccentricities of genius. On the contrary, every one who converses with him must be tempted to ask himself whether it be possible that such an extremely simple little man can be so great a writer. Of his qualities as a writer one can only judge by going through the 50 odd volumes which embody his historical researches, but a few minutes’ conversation with the author of this library will suffice to convince his visitors that he is as skillful at entertaining with his tongue as with his pen. And even now, with 90 summers, or rather winters, on his brow, his talk is as firm, fluent, and continuous as ever it seems to have been. His enunciation is clear and forcible; he requires not to stop and

Retirement and the last masterpiece  265 search for the right word; you never see him interrupt his story to pass his hand across his brow, in the effort to regain some forgotten fact or fleeting idea, but all goes on swimmingly, and he will occasionally emphasize a sentence by a motion of his hand, or a flash of his bright, penetrating eye, which is still the index to his mind, and the redeeming ornament of his time-worn face. He spoke to me sadly, and with a thankful reference to the will of God, or other members of the human race who had attained, or nearly so, to his own marvelous age – of Sir Moses Montefiore, of Thomas Carlyle (who was born in the same year and month as Ranke), and of Sophocles, who might have even lived to be a centenarian, but for the fabled eagle and its tortoise. ‘But that will never be my fate’ said the historian, ‘for I do not live so much in the open air as did Sophocles.’ ‘But your Excellency’ – for, being a ‘Wirklicher Geheimer Rath,’ he is entitled to this appellation – ‘But your Excellency,’ I observed, ‘still takes regular out-door exercise.’ ‘Oh, yes,’ was the reply, ‘I still do my two hours walking, or thereabouts, when the weather is good; but I don’t like driving, it is too much of a bore. And this interval of exercise enables me to get through an average of eight hours hard work every day. My first spell is from 10 to 2, and I return to my desk at 9 till about 1 in the morning. Midnight is my most congenial hour, and this is the time, I find, when I can produce most.’ ‘And your Excellency can still write with ease!’ ‘No, my writing days are done, but I have two secretaries, whom I keep busily engaged in reading, looking up authorities, making excerpts, and writing from my dictation. I have written little or nothing with my own hand since the appearance of my English History, and, strange to say, some of the works I thus dictated have been better received than others. Dictation sometimes enables one to be less fastidious, and more natural. Of course, I have to be very careful with my mode of life. I have never been a smoker, but I always can enjoy a glass of good wine, and, thank God, my nights are still free from sleeplessness, or I should never get on at all. You may think this house of mine’ – a secondfloor flat in the Luisen Strasse, with the high-level metropolitan railway trains screaming past – ‘you may think this house of mine rather a humble, illsuited, and unfashionable abode; but I  have lived in it now for more than the last 40 years, and cannot make up my mind to leave it. One good thing about it is that the sun can never get into my working-room; and then I have all around me here about 30,000 volumes, which I never could get properly removed and re-arranged.’69 Ranke continued with his work on his Weltgeschichte, and when asked for his opinion on Egypt and England, ‘but only, mind you, as an historian, and not as a politician,’ [. . .] [he] declared his conviction that the course of history and the developments of events all pointed to the absolute necessity of the English converting Egypt into another link in the chain which binds India to England.70 With regard to Macaulay, Ranke said that he was not only impressed, but ‘overpowered’ by him. He added that he had been invited to dinner by Lord Granville with

266  Retirement and the last masterpiece the ‘chief literary “lions” of the day’ and he has also arranged to meet Bunsen and Carlyle.71 A few months later the readers of The Times learned of Ranke’s sickness: I regret to say that Leopold von Ranke is seriously ill, and but faint hopes are entertained of his recovery. On inquiry this evening at the house of the historian I learned that he has been confined to bed for the last week, with intermittent attacks of fever, combined with the growing weakness of his great age. It will be remembered that he celebrated his 90th birthday with great ceremony in December last, when he expressed the hope that he might still live to finish, his ‘Weltgeschichte’, or Universal History, of which the sixth volume has already appeared; but it now looks as if this great work were doomed to remain a torso.72 A few days later it was reported that ‘though Leopold von Ranke rallied a little yesterday, he relapsed today into semi-unconsciousness, and there is no hope of his recovery.’73 Leopold von Ranke died in his house in Berlin on 23 May 1886. Receiving the death notice the same day, Robert wrote to Friduhelm in considerable grief: I wish I had written at once on receiving your letter with its sad tidings of the good Father’s rapidly declining state. First I waited, expecting that every hour would bring the telegram announcing the end, & then an attack of something like lumbago quite disabled me. I have since seen in the ‘Times’ that, after you wrote to me, your Father rallied a little, but had fallen away again into a semi-unconscious state. If I had written at the first moment my affectionate farewell and that of my brother & Antella might perhaps have reached him, & he might have sent a farewell message to us in return. However, I know he felt sure of our affection for him & for his children, & that must content us. This sudden illness & termination of his great career is indeed a disappointment to us, from the account given of his powers on the Birthday, we had counted, perhaps too confidently, on his having many days of strength & work before him. The All-Wise has otherwise decided, & we must submit, thankful that in your Father He has given to us all so noble an example of lofty truthful aim in his function as an Historian, & of steadfast diligence, almost unrivalled, in its fulfilment.74 Otto von Ranke recorded the details of Ranke’s last days in German, and then translated the text into English for his Irish relatives.75 Shortly after Ranke’s death a mailing list for the death notice was made. In this list two of Clarissa’s brothers appear: ‘Mons. [sic] Reverend Charles Percival Graves, Bishop of Limerick. Robert Percival Grave[s] esq, Dublin.’76 On 25 May 1886, The Times reported that if Germany had ‘a Pantheon or a Westminster Abbey, the remains of Leopold von Ranke would certainly find a

Retirement and the last masterpiece  267 place in it; but, as it is, they will be quietly interred in one of the simple churchyards of the metropolis.’77 After Ranke had passed, two more works and the concluding ones for the Sämmtliche Werke were posthumously published. The first one was On the history of Germany and France during the nineteenth century and had three major sections, of which two had been previously published:78 ‘On the Restoration and the July Revolution: Towards French and German history from 1815–1836,’ previously published in the Historical-Political Journal; and excerpts from ‘The correspondence of Friedrich Wilhelm IV and Bunsen,’ published in 1873. The third section was a collection of ‘Political pamphlets from the years 1848 to 1851. Addressed to the King Friedrich Wilhelm IV and his adjutant Edwin Freiherr von Manteuffel.’ The political pamphlets were originally not supposed to be published because Ranke himself was in trouble during those years. The pamphlets have a similar character as the Historical-Political Journal because the events were explained from the historical perspective. The last volume Paper and trials: New Collection was edited by Alfred Dove and Theodor Wiedemann two years after Ranke’s death.79 The main content is the re-edition of different articles, speeches or presentations of Ranke, most of them published during Ranke’s lifetime, except for five articles. The newly edited articles were usually in connection to literature. The previous published articles and speeches were ‘A note on the mother of Manfred,’ ‘Towards the history of Italian poetry,’ ‘On the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War,’ ‘Frederick II, King of Prussia,’ ‘Frederick Wilhelm IV, King of Prussia,’ ‘Introduction of the year books of the German Empire under the Saxon House’ and speeches. Five articles had not been published before, and these were ‘The biblical flood,’ in which Ranke dealt with different aspects of literature; ‘The tragedies of Seneca,’ where he also dealt with aspects of literature and where he stressed the importance of the influence of Greek and Roman literature and theatre. The next article was on ‘Paulus Diaconus,’ where he also deals with aspects of literature when a person tried to write and summarize events affecting the Germanic tribes for the first time. The next article is ‘On the history of Italian art,’ where he dealt with aspects of art referring to his visit in Italy 1828 to 1831. When Ranke was not able to view the archives, he enjoyed the architecture and art galleries and churches in the different locations he had been. The last article was ‘On the historical commission,’ written down in 1867; this was a small speech, but one where Ranke criticized the events of 1866 and 1867 with the foundation of the Northern German Confederation. Ranke emphasized the five decades of peace, which the old system allowed to give the Germans a full development of arts and sciences in the German states. The old confederation may have had its weaknesses, but it strengthened German art and culture, sciences and trade, the economy and city life. A long life came to an end. No other historian has ever produced so many books and articles and yet had so much impact on the development of history as a discipline, during his lifetime and thereafter.

268  Retirement and the last masterpiece

Notes 1 Der Ursprung des siebenjährigen Krieges (1871) [The sources of the Seven Years’ War]. 2 Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780 bis 1790 (1871–1872) [The German powers and the Princes League. German history from 1780 to 1790] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 31–32]. 3 Leopold von Ranke, Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780 bis 1790, vol. i (Berlin, 1871), p. 100. 4 Aus dem Briefwechsel Friedrich Wilhelms IV. mit Bunsen (1873) [On the corresondence of Frederick Wilhelm IV. and Bunsen] [re-edited in Sämmtliche Werke 49–50]. 5 Zur Deutschen Geschichte. Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum dreißigjährigen Krieg (1874) [German history. From the religious peace to the Thirty Years’ War] [Sämmtliche Werke 7]. 6 Zur Geschichte von Österreich und Preußen zwischen den Friedensschlüssen zu Aachen und Hubertusburg (1875) [On the history of Austria and Prussia between the treaties of Aachen and Hubertusburg] [Sämmtliche Werke 30]. 7 See also Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift, vol. ii, no. 8. 8 Ursprung und Beginn der Revolutionskriege 1791 und 1792 (1875) [Reasons and the beginning of the Revolutionary Wars 1791 and 1792] [Sämmtliche Werke 45]. 9 Abhandlungen und Versuche. Erste Versuche (1877) [Papers and trials. First attempts] [Sämmtliche Werke 24]. 10 Denkwürdigkeiten des Staatskanzlers Fürsten von Hardenberg (1877–78) [Different title in Sämmtliche Werke 46–48: Hardenberg und die Geschichte des preußischen Staates von 1793–1813 (1879–81)] [Hardenberg and the history of the Prussian state 1793–1813]. 11 Historisch-biographische Studien (1877–78) (Historic-biographical studies) [Sämmtliche Werke 40–41]. 12 Friedrich der Große. Friedrich Wilhelm der Vierte (1878) [Frederick the Great. Frederick William IV.] [Sämmtliche Werke 51–52]. 13 Edward Muir, The Leopold von Ranke manuscript collection of Syracuse University. The complete catalogue (Syracuse, 1983). 14 Baur, ‘Nachlass lass nach’, p. 64. 15 Ibid. 16 Baur, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin’, p. 17. 17 Ibid. 18 Bernhard Hoeft, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, in: Historische Studien, 307 (1937). 19 Bailleu, Paul (died 1922), second director of the Prussian States Archive in Berlin-Charlottenburg. 20 Ibid, p. 8. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid, pp. 8–9. 23 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 180. 24 Ibid, p. 181. 25 Hoeft, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, p. 9. 26 Ibid, p. 10. 27 Ibid, p. 13. 28 Ibid, pp. 16–17. 29 Interview with Prof. Dr Heinrich Brüning, former Chancellor of the Weimarer Republic, undertaken by Gisbert Bäcker(-von Ranke) and Renate Kleese in Cologne on 16 November 1951. Report is located in Ranke-Museum, Wiehe, A.II.1.1.2.16/11/1951. 30 Michael Bentley, Companion to historiography (London, 2002), p. 421. 31 Jeremy Black and Donald M. MacRaild, Studying history (New York, 2000).

Retirement and the last masterpiece  269 32 Ibid, p. 41. 33 Ibid, p. 42. 34 Letter of Friduhelm von Ranke to Robert Graves, 1 January  1874, Graves Archive, TCD, 10047/37/28. 35 Iggers, The German conception of history, p. 86. 36 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Bartholomew Price, March  1872, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, pp. 572–574. 37 Price, ‘Contribution toward a bibliography of Ranke’, p. 1268. 38 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Maximiliane von Kotze, 18 August 1873, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 605. 39 Ranke, A history of England, principally in the seventeenth century (Oxford, 1875). 40 Letter of Batholomew Price to Leopold von Ranke, 1 January  1875, GStA PK, FA Hoeft, Paket 7/2. 41 The Times, 10 August 1875. 42 Letter of Leopold von Ranke to Heinrich Ranke, 27 November 1875, in: Ranke, Neue Briefe, p. 627. 43 Anne Hope, ‘Ranke’s and Green’s histories of England’, in: Dublin Review, xxv N.S., lxxvii O.S. (1875), pp. 308–341. 44 Anne Hope, ‘Ranke’s History of England’, in: Dublin Review, xxvi N.S., lxxviii O.S. (1876), pp. 332–350. 45 Ibid, p. 332. 46 Ibid, pp. 345–350. 47 Ibid, p. 334. 48 Ibid, p. 332. 49 Ibid, p. 350. 50 Thompson, A history of historical writing, p. 181. 51 Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story right’, p. 64. 52 Leopold von Ranke, Weltgeschichte (1881–1888) [Universal history (1884), only vol. 1 translated]. 53 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, pp. 102–103. 54 Ibid, p. xxxviii. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid, p. xxxii. 57 Original text is the preface to Universal History. This text is taken from Ibid, p. 103. 58 Ibid, p. xxxii. 59 Hinneberg, Paul (1862–1934), German historian and publisher. 60 See also Ferdinand Schevill, Six historians (Chicago, 1956), p. 125. 61 From AHA web site, available at: www.historians.org/info/ahahistory.cfm [11 July 2007]. 62 Ibid. 63 For further details see the ‘Brief history of the AHA’, available at: Ibid. 64 For a full list of members, see also ‘AHA Award Recipients – Honorary Foreign Member’, available at: AHA web site, http:// www.historians.org/prizes/awarded7honorary winners.htm [11 July 2007]. 65 The Times, 22 December 1885, 20 January 1886. 66 Ibid, 4 January 1886. 67 Ibid, 18 May 1886, 21 May 1886, 24 May 1886, 25 May 1886. 68 Ibid, 4 January 1886. 69 Ibid, 4 January 1886. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid, 18 May 1886. 73 Ibid, 21 May 1886. 74 Letter of Robert Graves to Friduhelm von Ranke, 23 May 1886, Wiehe, Leopold von Ranke 218.

270  Retirement and the last masterpiece 75 The last days of Leopold von Ranke, translated by Otto von Ranke, May 1886, Graves Archive, TCD, MS 10047/33/36–45. 76 List of names for mailing announcements of death of Leopold von Ranke 1886, SUL GMC577. 77 The Times, 25 May 1886. 78 Zur Geschichte Deutschlands und Frankreich im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (1887) [On the history of Germany and France during the nineteenth century] [Sämmtliche Werke 49–50]. 79 Abhandlungen und Versuche. Neue Sammlung (1888) [Papers and trials. New collection] [Sämmtliche Werke 51–52].

Epilogue The perception of Ranke since 1886

Although Ranke made a significant impact on nineteenth- and twentiethcentury historiography and many of his books were standard works, his methods and theories have proven to be controversial. Over the past 140 years, hundreds of historians have dealt with his methods, and usually Ranke was criticized for his approaches. It would be impossible to present all criticism or praise written on him; however, in this chapter around 80 different scholars from England, Germany and America have been presented and their comments give an insight into the large variety of issues written on Ranke. Due to this large variety, I have tried to order them following the main issues addressed. It is noticeable that some reviewers address more the ideas and theoretical aspects of Ranke, whereas others criticize his literature style and search for sources. Some would remark on his Historical Seminar and his self-stylization. After presenting the reader with a biography on Ranke, I will not comment on these perceptions of him but let the reader decide which opinions to agree or disagree with.

Critical views on Ranke’s role in historiography and objectivity For instance, Manfred Asendorf examined the issue of partiality as a key question within historiography. He analyzed Ranke’s meaning of objectivity and came to the conclusion that what Ranke understood by objectivity was ‘a power, which determines the direction and evolution of history, the world or universal history.’1 In Asendorf’s opinion Ranke’s historical understanding developed out of his opposition to the liberal and radical-democratic ideas of the middle classes2 and Ranke developed a personal conception of objective world history.3 A.G. Dickens investigated Ranke as a Reformation historian. He analyzed Ranke’s personal connection with religion before discussing Ranke’s History of the Reformation in Germany and the Peasant’s Revolt of 1524–25. Dickens compared Ranke with a number of other historians and pointed out that Ranke simply copied earlier works on the Reformation. On Ranke’s own career Dickens wrote that ‘the general direction of his early progress was from the airy-fairy to the nitty-gritty. This vulgarism has a certain pragmatic truth, yet it remains superficial.’4 Dickens concluded that ‘a good deal has been written concerning Ranke’s philosophy of history, but

272  Epilogue personally I cannot see that he possessed any mental contraption which deserved so grandiose a title.’5 B.G. Smith shared a similar opinion: ‘For all the invocations of Ranke’s written works, his books have long been superseded by other scholarship and are rarely read.’6 But he acknowledged that Ranke’s seminar continued ‘to generate a powerful cultural influence.’7 Smith explained that the seminars began as ‘historical exercises’ and ‘Ranke’s seminar brought chosen young men to his home for the close scrutiny of documents. There students felt initiated into the processes of Ranke’s “workshop” as they watched in wonder at displays of his scholarly virtuosity and erudition. Rapt in admiration, they were also amused at Ranke’s “jubilation” at exposing a forgery or a mistaken scholarly move.’8 Smith, however, had to admit that the most valuable outcome of these seminars were the publications of the Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reiches unter dem Sächsischen Hause.9 Walter Webb analyzed Ranke very critically; Ranke’s name is synonymous with the ‘scientific’ historical method, ‘but I  have never heard anyone speak of his basic idea, his main purpose, or the amazing program of investigation that he carried on for sixty years, resulting in fifty published volumes.’10 Following Webb, Ranke ‘was not an imaginative man; he seemed to evolve slowly from his first task based on a compact body of documents through the history of the popes and of the national states of Europe, culminating his work with a World History, which he completed shortly before his death. One might think he never had that fine moment of insight to set him off on his course and give direction to all he did.’11 Therefore Webb posed the question: ‘What made him in his day the leading historian of the world? Was it primarily because of his method he taught or was it because of the vast program he carried out?’12 Stefan Berger, Heiko Feldner and Kevin Passmore reviewed Ranke very critically and came to the conclusion that ‘on the whole, however, Ranke’s contribution to the rise of empirically grounded, critically researched and objectively written historiography should not be overrated. He was neither the originator of objectivity in historical writing, nor did he invent the historical-philological method of source evaluation.’13 In the opinion of Oliver Daddow, Ranke was ‘distinctly uncritical of the sources he used, ignoring or overlooking the fictive elements of the primary sources he scrutinized. I go on to explore the way Ranke compiled his narratives. Most poignantly when we talk about historians’ bias, it is apparent that he manipulated his evidence to fit an ideologically predetermined story about events.’14 Daddow therefore believed that Ranke was ‘as ideological as they come, making it extremely problematic for historians to fall back on Rankean or quasi-Rankean principles as a way of defending history against postmodernism.’15 For Daddow the judgement on Ranke is clear: ‘he was an agent of the Prussian government paid to commemorate the achievements of the Prussian state under the guise of objective, impartial history, supposedly delivered to him by the sources he found.’16 John Arnold believed that there are good reasons for questioning Ranke’s claim for fatherhood and for perhaps wanting to escape from some of the parental influence he still enjoys.17 Arnold concluded after a careful investigation that many of Ranke’s methods and ideas had already been established by other historians; he

Epilogue  273 asked: ‘Was he therefore no more than a great pretender?’18 A similar opinion is shared by Roger Spalding and Christopher Parker, who emphasized that ‘Ranke did not invent the practice of going to the archives, but he became the best known and most influential of a new breed of academically-based historians who wanted to establish history as a prestigious academic discipline.’19 J.H. Robinson spoke of Ranke’s ‘proud boast that he proposed to tell the truth and of his inability to realize that the critical method constituted merely the bare preliminaries of scientific history.’20 For H.E. Barnes, Ranke’s contribution had been primarily ‘his formulation of the principles of internal criticism and his insistence upon entire objectivity in the treatment of the past.’21 In the opinion of F.J. Teggart, Ranke ‘represented an earlier stage in the development of science which was concerned with the accumulation of facts rather with induction. In short, Ranke, by intellectual predilection no less than in point of date, antecedes the period of Darwinian biology.’22 Charles Beard believed that Ranke ‘did not in fact follow the logic of his procedure to its empirical conclusion’23 and reflected religious and political prejudices in his writings; ‘he rejected philosophy, proclaimed positive history, and still was controlled by a kind of Pantheisms.’24 For Otto Diether, Ranke ‘was a pedantic historian of the eighteenth century who was unable to see the new forces, parties, and mass movements of the nineteenth century.’25 But even for Diether, Ranke was not a mere collector of facts. Christoph Freiherr von Maltzahn believed that Ranke wrote history from the perspective of governments. He concentrated only on the powerful nations, and the smaller ones were neglected. Even though he was so close to sources, Maltzahn believed that Ranke only wrote cross moments, never analyzed history; nevertheless, the general position of Ranke within historiography remains. Maltzahn stressed that Ranke played an important role in the development of historical sciences to the first educational power in Germany.26

On Ranke’s philosophical views and the ‘Volksgeist’ M.-J. Zemlin pointed out that Ranke made differences between ‘vivid’ and ‘abstract’ historical writing; the first one being the proven one which is complete and objective, representing history, and the latter one that comes close to philosophy.27 While comparing Ranke with Hegel and Kant, Zemlin depicted Ranke’s historical understanding as a ‘vivid’ (‘anschaulich’), understandable and analytical approach to history bound up with the desire to create a ‘total history.’28 Karl Milford assessed Ranke from the aspect of the philosophical treatment of nations. He suggested that Ranke based his philosophy of history on the Aristotelian form of essentialism. Milford wrote that ‘he believed that the social institutions and the history of a nation are realizations of its specific spirit, i.e. its Volksgeist or essence. In his view humanity is divided into nations according to a divine plan.’29 Each nation is therefore an organic unit, endowed with a unique spirit – the Volksgeist – that reveals itself during the historical development of the people. Milford believed that ‘a nation’s essence or its Volksgeist comes into existence in the cultural and political emanations of a people. The state itself is an emanation of the Volksgeist

274  Epilogue and therefore a unique historical experience of a people. Thus genuine knowledge of social phenomena, for instance of a nation, requires the study of their historical development, for essences are in the things themselves and are actualized only in the course of historical development.’30 Milford continued that in Ranke’s view, the Volksgeist of a nation can realize itself, but it can only do it by self-assertion: nation-states ‘have to fight each other because only in this way can they preserve their identity. The history of mankind is the history of nation-states fighting for supremacy. Nation-states are thus eo ipso expansionist and their success is determined by their moral energy; those with weak moral energy perish.’31

Critical views on Ranke as a religious, political and nationalist historian To Johannes Süßmann, however, Ranke did not want to show facts in his first work, but simply wanted to present new historical ideas.32 While evaluating the History of the Latin and Teutonic nations, Süßmann acknowledged its importance for Ranke’s further academic career.33 On the other hand, the introduction was not recognized as ground-breaking at the time.34 He also stressed Ranke’s interest in one-sided ‘monarchical’ writing and his religious understanding when using the keyword of ‘Gottes Finger’ (‘God’s finger’).35 Ferdinand Schevill, who sarcastically described Ranke as ‘the German master and patron saint,’36 noted that ‘Ranke accepted neither the eighteenth-century “progress” nor the nineteenthcentury “socialist” conception of the development of mankind.’37 He stressed that Ranke, ‘as a deeply religious man, [. . .] held it to be high presumption to forecast a future for mankind on the basis of purely secular considerations. In his view the future rests with God, who is forever inscrutable.’38 A recent publication39 contains several articles by leading German historians on Ranke. Three of the contributors, Volker Dotterweich,40 Thomas Brechenmacher41 and Ulrich Muhlack,42 deal with Ranke’s bibliographical situation and the proposed new Ranke edition. All three discuss the issue quite well, but none contributes new ideas or directions to solve the present unfortunate circumstance of Ranke’s unpublished manuscripts, which is still the case ten years later. Nevertheless, in another article Dotterweich offered a full bibliography of works written about Ranke between 1886 and 1993,43 while Muhlack summarized current knowledge on Ranke in an article in 2003.44 Other contributors were Eckart Conze,45 H.-C. Kraus46 and Jürgen Grosse,47 who compared Ranke’s thoughts on history to Burckhardt’s and discussed Ranke as a contemporary historian and political advisor. Benjamin Sax investigated Ranke as a political and national historian. He believed that the most direct influence upon the writing of history was in Ranke’s definition of the ‘nation’ and ‘state’ for modern history. As Sax outlined, Ranke recognized the significance of the ‘nation’ in this history, but his notion of what forms a national culture was most often limited to general national characteristics and was of interest to him only as it emerged in the particular form of the state. He identified the ‘state’ less in its internal constitution than in its external diplomaticmilitary form. Sax concluded that the definition of the field of history was

Epilogue 275 understood as the interactions among states, and Ranke provided the basic terms for its study: ‘a “great power,” for instance, was a state that needed a coalition of other states to defeat it, and “Europe” was that group of states that regularly interacted diplomatically and militarily.’48 Hoeft49 and Fuchs50 edited a number of Ranke’s letters in 1949, and this publication has been praised for its insight into Ranke as a private man.51 Many letters, however, were shortened, and Fuchs tried to give the impression of a religious Ranke, which was perpetuated in most publications of post-war Germany. One example of the ‘religious Ranke’ interpretation is provided by Hans Liebeschütz, who did not try ‘to defend nor to attack Ranke but to explain him,’ mainly from the religious viewpoint that affected Ranke’s political thoughts and his historical writing.52 Emil Michael, on the other hand, had proven over 60 years earlier in his critical analysis of Ranke’s Universal History that Ranke was not religious at all, but nevertheless, the myth of a ‘religious Ranke’ has survived until today.53 Another example is given by Peter Gay, who suggested that ‘Ranke’s serene dramatic conception governed his historical perceptions from beginning to end.’54 He believed that Ranke ‘recognized that the mere piling up of documents and eyewitness relations, no matter how reliable, would only introduce a new kind of distortion into history, by presenting history as a spectacle of a casual, disorderly, ultimately meaningless accumulation of facts, in desperate need of the ordering hand.’55 Gay concluded that ‘drama, as long as it had a happy ending, was congenial to his temperament, but it also impressed him as the appreciate form for a history that God had conceived dramatically.’56 At this point Gay suggested that literary writing and God came together: ‘Ranke’s God was not the Deists’ watchmaker God who, having created the world and all its laws, withdraws from his creation. He was much closer to Calvin’s God, who has left man with intimations of his decrees. He gives continuous evidence of himself in history, and has called a few exceptional men to testify to it, truthfully. That is why the historian is so important: he is the critic who, after devout study, accepts God’s work and sees that it is good. Ranke’s God was the immortal dramatist who has written the play, designed the sets, supervised the production, and who continues to observe the actors speaking their lines. And, since God is never dull, it is the historian’s highest duty not to be dull, either. Style, for Ranke, was a form of prayer.’57

Criticism on Ranke’s self-stylization and self-monumentalism A new complete letter edition was commissioned by the Historische Kommission in Munich, who asked Ulrich Muhlack and Oliver Ramonat to edit and comment on every letter from and to Ranke.58 The project aimed for a six-volume edition; however, after the first volume was just published, so many mistakes were found in the most prestigious project of the Historical Commission that it had to retrieve the edition. Günter Johannes Henz published a critique of this edition and unfolded a catalogue of mistakes: he surveyed only a third of the edited letters, but within these letters Henz found over 1,200 reading mistakes from the originals (Letter 193 has, with 46 mistakes, the most), mistaken comments, misleading

276  Epilogue interpretations and unqualified attempts of editing letters in general.59 The supposed biggest project became the biggest disaster, particularly if scholars try to work on Ranke, but yet ‘forget’ any of his taught methods! In the introduction of the edition Muhlack noted that everything of his academic life seemed important and monumental. Following Muhlack, nobody other than Ranke himself worked on this perception with his posthumous edited autobiographies, the organization of the 54 volumes of Sämmtliche Werke and even his general intellectual life. His successors were supposed to see him the way he wanted to be seen, and Ranke was therefore successful in generating his own memorial. For many years it was difficult for critics and admirers to move out of the shadow of this memorial: some wanted to crush it, some wanted to preserve it.60 Muhlack declared that the search for new letters was not only given up but proclaimed to be useless.61 The same idea of Ranke’s possession to be eternal, both in his monumental work and his historic achievements, is presented by Muhlack in another publication where he emphasized Ranke’s self-stylization and self-monumentalism.62 Despite the major criticism on the letter edition by Muhlack and Ramonat, Henz published a work in 2014 which basically followed the ideas of Muhlack. His two-volume work, which was misleadingly entitled Leopold von Ranke in history thoughts and research, created expectations on a complete overview of Ranke’s work, as Helmolt had done in 1921 with the materials available to him at that time. Without a doubt, Henz undertook with the collection of reviews and receptions a mammoth work.63 However, he did not give an overview of Ranke’s life and work and primarily let critical views of others speak. As this included very few positive views on Ranke, one quickly gets the impression that Henz only wanted to show the dark shadows of Ranke. He concentrated on mocking Ranke’s looks, his small bodily figure or his vulgar behaviour. Furthermore, he presented a chaos of historical research without including realistic contexts to contemporary events. Ranke is viewed as a bad author with little competency for historical writing.64 While Henz found for his research on the reception of Ranke from his contemporaries to the present only positive words, he denied these by refusal of acknowledging Ranke’s work as he attested his incompleteness and subjectivity. To deny such accomplishment as ‘the Father of scientific history’ of the nineteenth century, who had been described by Karl Lamprecht as being the Mozart of historians65 and whose works have been, and still are, the basis for further research on European history, seems to me as if one strives to moved further away from the truth, as if Henz had not fully understood what was connected with the personality of Ranke. How could Ranke have become so famous if he really had been so vulgar and in such deficit of knowledge? If he really was this incompetent, how then would his research methods have become fundamental worldwide? In the second volume of his work Henz dealt with the differences of publications, listing all correspondences, archives, pamphlets, conversations and lectures. This material could be very helpful for further research, but the meaningfulness is limited due to the missing discussion within the contemporary context. Henz, who judged other historians rather harshly during the last decade, cannot justify his highly acclaimed academic claim. Very often he referred to Wikipedia,66 and

Epilogue 277 materials from archives were not correctly indicated;67 other documents for example, from England and Ireland, were completely omitted or incorrectly mentioned as unpublished.68 In several cases he cannot name the authors in his publication lists.69 Recent publications of historians whom he previously criticized were not included in his work; otherwise these mistakes would not have happened. As Henz left out major parts of Ranke’s private life, he also could not include for the creation of his work another important part in family and academia: his wife, Clarissa von Ranke.70 To have excluded her gave the work another limitation as Clarissa had an influence on Ranke’s later works. Due to the partially very aggressive choice of quotes of critics without further questioning what their relationship to Ranke was or the contemporary connection and the dismissal of any positive views, it seems that the author had not understood Ranke at all. Also there were comments such as ‘embarrassing education of the editors’71 which were not exactly helpful. Despite working on Ranke, Henz just neglected all requests of Ranke as to how historians should work. We find the subjectivity which is supposed to be avoided while source criticism and a further questioning of sources is missing. Henz remained one-sided in his presentation following an ideological idea which stems from the 1960s and 1970s.

Reviews on Ranke as ‘the father of modern history’ and his leading role on history and literature As a contemporary of Ranke, Lord Acton was a critic as well as an admirer. It was due to Lord Acton that the critical research method taught by Ranke was introduced to English scholarship. In his opinion Ranke did not only write ‘a larger number of mostly excellent books than any man that ever lived, but he has taken pains from the first to explain how the thing is done. He attained a position unparalleled in literature, less by the display of extraordinary faculties than by perfect mastery of the secret of his craft, and that secret he has always made it his business to impart. For his most eminent predecessors, history was applied politics, fluid law, religion exemplified, or the school of patriotism. Ranke was the first German to pursue it for no purpose but its own.’72 Lord Acton stressed that Ranke never expected ‘professional knowledge in his readers’ and that he never wrote for specialists.73 Lord Acton summarized Ranke’s historical writing as follows: ‘As he writes history, not biography, he abstains from the secrets of private life; and as he writes history, not dogma, he never sorts men into black and white according to their bearing in vital controversies. His evildoers escape the just rigour of the law, and he avoids hero-worship as the last ditch of prehistoric prejudice. He touches lightly on matters pertaining to the jurist and divine, but he has not their exclusiveness. His surface is more level than theirs, but his horizon is wider. The cup is not drained; part of the story is left untold; and the world is much better and very much worse than he chooses to say.’74 M.A. Fitzsimons celebrated Ranke as the ‘modern founding father of critical history and patron saint of devourers of archives,’75 who also wrote the masterly histories of Reformation Germany, Prussia, England, France and the papacy.

278  Epilogue Fitzsimons expressed his opinion that ‘his histories recounted the making of the community of Europe, the republic of great powers.’76 But Ranke ‘was no Old Testament prophet denouncing his age in the name of God and yet did speak as one who saw the design of God. Lutheran pietistic theology, German Idealist philosophy, classical studies and German nationalism all enabled him to see what he declared his vision to be.’77 Fitzsimons concluded that Ranke had been ‘blamed for what he wrote, for the misuse of what he wrote and for what he did not write at all.’78 Ranke’s philosophy and his writings are ‘testimony that he was not objective and could not have been objective.’79 Nevertheless, Fitzsimons recognized that this does not logically lead to the conclusion that any viewpoint or historical activity is of equal worth, or that the historian should be a propagandist for revolution, social betterment or corporate capitalism.80 John Moses stated that ‘Ranke stands in the same Olympian relationship to the historical discipline as Johann Wolfgang Goethe does to world literature.’81 Moses believed that Ranke was only the end product of a line of German eighteenthcentury scholars, ‘each of whom advanced the study of the subject a step further with methodological innovations and new theories of periodization which nowadays appear quaint and naive.’82 Ranke ‘retained throughout his long life a serene, naive confidence that world history was somehow working itself out for the good under the benevolence of Almighty God. How, then, did Ranke practice his profession as a universal historian?’83 Moses concluded that ‘above all it is the naive and optimistic notions about political power which must have a disturbing effect on the later twentieth-century student of historiography. There is in Ranke a curious acceptance of and resignation to evil which remains unresolved.’84 Despite this criticism, Moses acknowledged Ranke’s relevance up to this day because ‘of his unrelenting devotion to the ideal of impartiality and his insistence that all sources be subjected to rigorous critical analysis. Without these twin priorities, no history, after all, has the right to be taken seriously.’85 New results were presented by Siegfried Baur, who has shown the development of Ranke’s historical method in his early years until the 1830s.86 In another paper, Baur analyzed how critics from the left and right dealt with Ranke, and he came to the conclusion that ‘whoever misuses history to satisfy ideological needs can never accept Ranke’s histories, critical source-based science, and its autonomous movements.’87 Baur also shattered the myth of Ranke as a born historian: Ranke had to learn like everybody else.88 Other works on Ranke were produced in America, particularly by G.G. Iggers89 and J.M. Powell.90 Both presented new findings on Ranke’s method and ideology. The greatest contribution of Iggers and Powell was a publication on Ranke and the shaping of the historical discipline.91 The book, containing fourteen papers on different aspects of Ranke, is divided into three main parts: first, the context of historical thought in the age of Ranke, then Ranke as a historian and teacher and, finally, the burden of the Rankean legacy.92 Iggers placed Ranke in the context of the German tradition of historical writing and made major contributions by redefining Ranke’s empiricism and analyzing his idealistic conception of history.93 He suggested that ‘probably no historian in the nineteenth century has had an influence on the development of historical

Epilogue 279 scholarship equal to that of Leopold von Ranke. He has been called the “father of historical science.” ’94 Iggers pointed out that truth is essentially a consensus of what is accepted by the ‘scientific community’ and argued that ‘objective’ history had to be understood as ‘history free of its political aims.’95 He also stated that Ranke’s claim to objectivity ‘rested on the highly metaphysical assumptions of German idealistic philosophy.’96 Iggers believed that Ranke’s influence in German and American historical thought ‘cannot easily be overemphasized.’97 From 1824 with the publication of his Histories of the Latin and Germanic Peoples to the present, Ranke has influenced German historiography. ‘Also, since the rise of the academic historians in the late nineteenth century, Ranke has clearly had an impact on American historical thought.’98 Not only were many of the great historians of the nineteenth century – Waitz, Giesebrecht, Dahlmann, Bancroft – students of Ranke. Iggers continued: ‘Indeed, almost every major debate in German or American historical thought on the nature and methods of historical research has centred around, or at least involved, the question of the acceptance or rejection of Ranke’s methodology and philosophy of history. Thus, the image of Ranke became a central issue in the positivist-idealist controversy in Germany in the late nineteenth century; Ranke became the significant intellectual ancestor for twentieth-century historicism.’99 This positive assessment on Ranke went a bit too far: Dominik Juhnke published a biography of Ranke in 2015; however, its extreme positive treatment of Ranke bordered on idolization of him. The author tried to draw out the career of Ranke from the philologically trained secondary schoolteacher to the worldwide respected history professor, from the critical grumbler to the adapted state historiographer.100 However, he failed in the middle of the project. He cannot also fulfil his claim of a critical assessment marked with doubts and contradictions.101 In his narrative Juhnke quoted other historians often, but there was an absolute dominance of Siegfried Baur, whose comments with positive annotations such as ‘aptly analysed,’102 ‘pithy’103 and ‘Ranke-expert’104 quickly give the impression that Ranke was absolutely idolized and seen as a God. Strangely enough, as long as Juhnke was able to base his narrative on Baur’s publications, his biography was very detailed and fluent.105 The narrative began to stumble once the researched time period of Baur was left. He was able to continue the narrative for the 1840s and 1850s disjointedly, but as soon as he entered the last 35 years of Ranke’s life, he fell into a massive hole. The last four chapters show that instead of continuing his biographical narrative, he started a stronger discussion about the historical understanding of Ranke, shaped with longer passages to Droysen, Treitschke, Mommsen and Nietzsche. Suddenly the life description became very general with pointed details taken from nowhere, and detailed descriptions, such as the announcement of his Universal History106 or an English newspaper interview,107 which were very long and the stretched descriptions did not fit into the context of the other narrative. Also, the history discussion in the last four chapters was not kept chronological – the opinions and ideas of Ranke suddenly jump backward and forward between 1820 and 1886. Any type of description of the content of Ranke’s publications was also missing; we hear more details of Ranke’s first book

280  Epilogue and a detailed development description of the Historical-Political Journal and Universal History. The reader does not hear about the content of the publications which led to Ranke’s success and fame. But that is not all. Besides a couple of smaller mistakes,108 for example forgetting Ranke’s stay in Prague at the beginning of his Italian research trip with the important meeting with Dombrowski,109 not mentioning Machiavelli in his first work (which was one of the greatest research results)110 or the background of Ranke’s wife, Clarissa (she saw herself as Irish, not English), one can notice that the referred literature mainly referred to German-speaking publications (leading English or American historians were not even mentioned). The German literature was also limited to a dozen books which Juhnke referred to.111 Again, it is noticeable that he referred to the works and ideas of Siegfried Baur, whose research area was the early Ranke, with pointed descriptions of the later Ranke (such as Universal History or his beard). The descriptions and narrative of the Historical Seminar, as well as the history interpretation of Ranke, all came from Baur. One can find the proof for this in the footnotes, of which nearly 10% referred to Baur and which represent the second largest source (most of the footnotes with around 37% refer to primary sources). Another indication was the fact that Juhnke made 88 references in his narrative to 33 different historians, of which, however, Baur’s opinion is referenced 26 times (or 30%). The next most frequently mentioned historian was Gisbert Bäcker (-von Ranke) at six times. Another indication was presenting Ranke as a civil person – alone the title indicated this (Leopold Ranke) and also the very short comment on his ennobling in 1865 – and not for himself, but so that his daughter could marry a nobleman.112 If Juhnke would have dealt with more additional literature, instead of following the convulsive attempt and trademark of Baur to present Ranke as a civic person and not a man longing for nobility and fame, he would have been able to present a different picture. Excepting a short description towards the end of Ranke’s life, where Juhnke had to use the full name – Leopold von Ranke – due to the interview, he held in his narrative to just ‘Leopold,’ ‘Ranke’ or ‘Leopold Ranke.’ This example shows how historiographically inexperienced the author was, but also how idolized Ranke was presented and described by, willingly or unwillingly, neglecting sources and publications. This extreme positive presentation of Ranke can be seen as a counterpart to the extreme negative presentation of Henz.113 In his review of Juhnke,114 Martin Schippan pointed out that the letter edition was not adequately included and that the author often used ‘un-’ in his narrative, in indications that Ranke had no worries, no happiness, not being welcome, never tired etc. Schippan also questioned if Ranke’s youth was really free of worry. He also noted that Ranke was presented as a hero and that Juhnke used repetitive judgements in the text, such as him being a quirky room scholar.

Positive views on Ranke’s objectivity and his Historical Seminar In various articles on the teaching of history, C.K. Adams, H.B. Adams, E.G. Bourne and Ephraim Emerton saw Ranke’s transformation of the Seminarium

Epilogue 281 as decisive, not only for German historiography but also for scientific writing in the United States. While they all believed that Rankean objectivity, which ‘they identified with the scientific method in history, centred around the establishment of facts through the critical analysis of texts, they believed that a Rankean or scientific approach to history consisted in a search for facts with little or no attempts at generalization and a rigorous renunciation of all philosophy.’115 August Koberstein praised Ranke as ‘one of the most brilliant and thorough writers of Germany,’116 and Hermann Kluge liked Ranke’s ‘strict objectivity and impartiality and his artistic presentation.’117 Ernst Bernheim pointed out that ‘Ranke was not concerned with the collection of dead facts but with the connectedness within universal history. Ranke’s approach to history was essentially genetic,’118 Bernheim observed. He questioned ‘not only the conception of Ranke as an objective historian, but the meaningfulness of a clear distinction between the objective and subjective method in history.’119 Julian Schmidt viewed Ranke ‘as a great artist and as an epic poet of heart.’120 According to Hans Prutz, Ranke ‘hoped to break intuitively through the last mysteries of universal development.’121 In his PhD thesis on the medievalist Friedrich Baethgen, Joseph Lemberg also wrote on the perspectives of the NSDAP on Ranke. He noted that during the Third Reich, most historians had to decide between two directions of historiography: either a voluntarist national socialistic historiography based on Nietzsche or the objective conventional historiography based on Ranke.122 Lemberg was able to show that on one hand the admiration of Ranke from the point of the critical objective approach was in contrast to the proclaimed ‘fighting sciences’ of the NSDAP; on the other hand it did not hinder proclaimed ‘Rankean’ scholars to work with the regime or that the regime – at least on the surface – acknowledged Ranke.123

Reviews on Ranke’s role in historical theories and modernism Despite the popular conception that Ranke had once and for all eliminated philosophy from history, Ottokar Lorenz found that ‘Ranke had sought something behind historical phenomena, which was closely related to philosophy.’124 Yet, following Lorenz, Ranke did not ‘attempt to present a systematic philosophy or a schematized view of history. Rather Ranke attempted to proceed from the contemplation of the particular to the understanding of general truths. His approach is not anti-philosophic in any sense, but anti-aprioristic, opposed to an abstract approach to historical reality. His great realization was that life “can never be grasped conceptually.” ’125 For Lorenz, who perhaps went farthest in emphasizing the subjective character of Ranke’s historiography, the story of Ranke’s objectivity was a fable. Nor could the principles of Ranke’s critical method be defined in any way: ‘Whoever has seen Ranke work in an archive can confirm that all systematic procedure was alien to him. He formulated certain questions for which he sought answers.’126

282  Epilogue Helen Liebel-Weckowicz wrote that it was Ranke ‘who established the modern paradigm for the meta-theory of history.’127 Instead of being considered obsolete by Liebel-Weckowicz, she believed that ‘the essential problems he delineated have helped to shape the current theories of history and their subdivisions: objectivity, subjectivity, individuality, and uniqueness of events versus abstraction and generalization. Included also were such ideas as state, spirit of the age, principles, tendencies, interests, family, church, Volk, and nation.’128 Following Liebel-Weckowicz, ‘historical science was for Ranke the ability to define autonomous principles and concepts. The more rational such empirically-based concepts were, the more scientific they were too.’129 However, Ranke believed in rendering the real world beyond the level of narrative ‘by including an assumption that both language and idea ought to convey a visual image. The current theories of history are then still in need of understanding the importance in history of the psychological theory of spatial imagery.’130 Liebel-Weckowicz continued that ‘if the modernists have not solved all the problems of historical theory, they have made it possible to agree that the historian’s problems belong to the world of all those who seek knowledge honestly and rationally. They have remained loyal to the scientific spirit demanded by the Rankean principle of writing history as it actually was.’131 Thomas Kuhn, physicist and leading philosopher of science, observed that ‘Ranke stabilized the historical paradigm by establishing a general theoretical system of conceptualization. This laid the foundation for subsequent theorizing about history and the realm of possible interpretations.’132 As Kuhn’s view holds, ‘the notion that science approaches ever closer to an ideal world of truth is wrong. Researchers form a research community which is agreed on “its common paradigms,” principles, problems to be studied, texts, and even professional journals. It is in this sense, too, that Ranke became a founder of the modern historical profession.’133 Allan Megill believed that ‘Ranke envisaged three distinct levels of historical concern. The first, the investigation of the particular, even of the single point, evokes what historians today call micro-history. The second, which shows how the particular is part of a larger context, is also visible in present-day historiography.’134 Megill continued with the third level, which is ‘concerned with the great, hidden totality – with comprehending the whole – but the idea of it is familiar to us: it is the idea of grand narrative; of a unified history of humankind.’135 L.A. Cook placed Ranke similarly. In his opinion, ‘whether maligned by English historians for his romantic view of history, criticized by American historians for his neglect of social and economic factors in history, or venerated for his innovative approach to historical research, Ranke’s work possessed a pioneering quality.’136 Cook believed that Ranke’s approach was often a starting point for many admirers and critics from Germany, England and the United States. Following Cook, ‘one major theme ran through Ranke’s works on Germany, France, and England  – that the commonwealth of Western nations formed a historical unit, carrying within itself historical tendencies of the conflict and cooperation of church and state, and the action and reaction of monarchy and representative government.’137 These tendencies, hidden within the appearance of history, formed a

Epilogue  283 dynamic which expressed itself in actual events. In Ranke’s view, the European states were component parts of a common humanity; together they formed the leading unit of civilization. Ranke preoccupied himself with politics and ruling houses because he believed the direction of things, and the dynamic at work in each era’s history was played out on the political stage. Behind nations and rulers lay hidden the spiritual reality of historical life, which, for Ranke, constituted the contemplation of history.138 Cook concluded that in his works, ‘Ranke adopted Luther’s idea of the spiritual meaning of life, broadening it to include the whole of human history.’139 Ranke’s idea of historical tendencies seemed to render his history deterministic. It posed the problem of what place freedom and individual choice play in history. Ranke, as with other idealist literary figures, felt more comfortable with the social whole than with the individual personality. They preferred to write of the flow of events rather than to isolate a unique personage. Cook stressed that Ranke produced only one biography in his career, his History of Wallenstein, which reflects this tendency.140 Following Cook, Ranke was a figure in the generation of German idealists who sought, in the face of their times, to find a new identity to replace the collapsing concepts of the old order. In this search, they relied on their Lutheran spiritual ideals and at the same time gave these ideals a cultural-historical expression. In an important sense, they transmitted Luther’s goals to the modern cultural world. It was Ranke’s task to accomplish this in the philosophy and writing of history. Cook concluded that ‘with Luther as his source, the power of Ranke’s spiritual conception of history has touched students of history for generations. As historians continue to examine their discipline and attempt to plot its future, they must look to their spiritual origins in Luther, Herder and Ranke, to ascertain if these men, to whom history was a living reality, offer an idea-oriented approach to history which is of value in our scientific and technological era.’141

Ranke from the perspective of postmodernism, realism and aesthetics B.D. Whitener believed that historians have asked the wrong questions in order to assess Ranke because their answers were inevitably misleading. He asked the question about Ranke’s conception of history that is not bound by the parameters of the historicist framework: ‘Given the fact that Ranke spent his entire career trying and failing to work out a coherent theory of history, the question is: What was the source of Ranke’s dissatisfaction with his view of history, such that he sought repeatedly to work out its contradictions in both his theory and his writing of history?’142 Whitener believed that ‘Ranke never in fact quite arrived at a final conception of history. Instead, he remained deeply puzzled by fundamental philosophical and theological issues that drove him to reformulate his theory of history throughout his long career. In fact, there is no justification for pointing to any one of Ranke’s pronouncements on historical theory and calling it his “conception of history.” Rather than searching for the historicist Ranke, we might be better served searching for an understanding of the intellectual quest that Ranke pursued.’143

284  Epilogue Whitener believed that because of Ranke’s religious and educational background, and because of the general intellectual climate in Germany in the first decades of the nineteenth century, he ‘absorbed into his mental horizon elements of two conflicting logics about the nature of the world. He tried to work out the contradictions implicit in those elements, first in philosophy and later in history. But because he was never able to understand the underlying ontological presuppositions that informed his outlook of the world, he was never able to break free from the contradictions resulting from them.’144 From early in his life, Ranke was at home in the thought-worlds of two very different kinds of orientations, each of which provided him with intellectual resources that, when combined, produced unique interpretations of history. Whitener argued that if we want to understand Ranke’s ‘Historicism,’ ‘then we must understand the role that naturalist assumptions played in his various conceptions of history. The literature on historicism has not taken Ranke’s naturalism into account.’145 It is for this reason that it has not been adequately understood what motivated Ranke, for example, to see states as individuals. Similarly, failing to discern Ranke’s voluntarist sensibilities, the literature on historicism has taken Ranke’s declarations that ‘all epochs are immediate to God’ as evidence that he was against seeing history as progressive. Therefore, Whitener suggested that by stepping outside the literature on historicism, we can view Ranke’s thought and work in a way that situates him more appropriately in the thought-world that made sense to him.146 Whitener continued that in ‘The great powers’ Ranke began to articulate his view of history in naturalist language. He attributed the movement of history to the natural functioning of an order. Nature ensures that participating members of the social order will self-correct destabilizing conditions. Whitener concluded that ‘wars are merely the mechanisms for maintaining the order’s overall stability. Wars are therefore natural, and as such they are a source of moral authority. They reflect “moral energies” being played out on the stage of human history.’147 Ranke’s thought represents the initial phase of a shift where both naturalism and voluntarism remained credible options for understanding the self and the world. Ranke’s blended ontological horizon illustrates for us the way that many thinkers in Western thought have grappled with competing senses of the good, and with moral sources that attached to antithetical ontological logics. Whitener believed that ‘we have largely misunderstood Ranke and his various conceptions of history because we have viewed his work through voluntarist eyes. We have not understood his view of states as members of an order because a voluntarist view of nature sees only contingency and does not view the idea of inherent order as plausible. Ranke’s thought is thus historicist only when it is viewed from a voluntarist point of view.’148 John Farrenkopf expressed the importance of Ranke as a major intellectual influence upon ‘twentieth-century political realism which has been largely ignored.’149 He noted that many German scholars, such as Weber, had their roots in political realism which ‘can be traced to Ranke’s writings on politics and history.’150 Farrenkopf explained that ‘Ranke played an important role in championing the revival of the eighteenth-century idea of the balance of power in the aftermath of Napoleon’s bid for continental hegemony, applying it to the nineteenth-century

Epilogue 285 world of great power politics.’151 Ranke’s contribution to German historicism and power-political thought is following Farrenkopf twofold. Firstly, he made the history of the modern European states system a preferred theme of German historical studies and international political analysis. Secondly, ‘his notion of the primacy of foreign policy identified the state as the primary actor in international politics and stressed the necessity of formulating and executing foreign policy in strict conformance with raison d’etat.’152 John Cannon assessed Ranke very positively, writing that Ranke ‘wrote a great deal about a great geographic area and a great length of time. He had great narrative skill and told the history of five great states through the actions and thoughts of a relatively small number of great people. Considering all the facts he included and the standard of his time, the pace of his narrative was quick. One can always tell when something happened but he did not overburden his page with dates.’153 Hayden White examined Ranke’s methods and found that Romantic impulses were present in his historiographical writing: ‘They are present in his interest in the individual event in its uniqueness and concreteness, in his conception of historical explanation as narration, and in his concern to enter into the interior of the consciousness of the actors of the historical drama.’154 For White, history was an expression of poetic imagination, i.e. a form of literature. Research did not determine historical writing, but merely served as the subject matter for a historical story. In the final analysis, there were no clear distinctions between the history and fiction. According to Iggers, White fitted Ranke’s histories into a structuralist scheme which predetermined the ways in which Ranke wrote history, his political conservatism, his organicist conception of society and his ‘comic,’ that is optimistic, outlook on history, which are all interwoven.155 However, Iggers criticized White for totally basing his analysis of Ranke on the two famous essays ‘The great powers’ and ‘The political dialogue,’ which he took as the basis of Ranke’s theoretical positions, without referring to Ranke’s great historical works, which rested on extensive research.156 Jörn Rüsen believed that Ranke’s work is a good example of the fact that rhetoric and aesthetics can be mediated with rationality, which defines the academic or scientific character of historical studies. He suggested that Ranke is known for both aspects of historiography: ‘his work represents the new academic standard, won by a process of scientification in the humanities since the late eighteenth century, and at the same time it represents a new literary quality of history writing, which makes it an integral part of the prose literature of the nineteenth century.’157 Therefore, Ranke represents this novelty on both the practical and theoretical levels: practically, Ranke’s main works have ‘an undeniable aesthetic quality; they belong to the great prose literature of realism. This aesthetic quality is not simply the result of Ranke’s unique gift as a writer; it is representative of European historiography of the nineteenth century in general,’ and Rüsen lists Macaulay, Michelet and Mommsen as European examples.158 Omar Dahbour noted that ‘while the re-emphasis on the universalistic aspects of Ranke’s historiography was anticipated in certain earlier German studies, the predominant treatment of Ranke in English has been as a historical empiricist who disregarded questions of theory and meaning for those of

286  Epilogue facts and events.’159 Dabour described Ranke as ‘a fine prose stylist and narrative historian’ who emphasized ‘on both narration of events and generalization concerning historical causality.’160 Due to his philological background Ranke placed more importance on the linguistic aspect. Dahbour believed that in giving history disciplinary autonomy, ‘Ranke transformed an argument about knowledge in general into a more specific conflict – that over the proper approach to the understanding of historical events. Ranke therefore distanced himself from a full-blown historicist epistemology.’161 This is undoubtedly the basis for later interpretations of Ranke, particularly in the English-speaking world, as a scientifically oriented, even positivistic historian. Dahbour also insisted that ‘Ranke’s cosmopolitanism prevented him, unlike some later nineteenth-century German historicists, from complacently centreing his energies and loyalties on a particular nation.’162 Rudolf Vierhaus stated that Ranke’s historical writing always had been more than just an essay on sources, chronicles of events and factual reports – it was a historic presentation which tried to accomplish the interconnections of time and continuities in a geographical and social space.163 Ranke believed that if history wants to be taken seriously, it has to be rested on research and literary presentation.164 Vierhaus stressed that Ranke always understood the historical presentation as literature – or linguistic work of art – which had to be created by the author following literary categories. Therefore Ranke followed the rules of grammar which is embodied with the spirit of a language of a specific educational and cultural level of Ranke’s own contemporary moment. Vierhaus concluded that a work of historical writing is therefore not only a presentation of past realities but also a document for a political and social culture, for the knowledge and interests of the author and the addressed readers of his time.165

On Ranke’s legacy in history up to today Franklin Ford asked, ‘How is one to account for the fact that Ranke is still read, despite the relative narrowness of his range?’166 Ford suggested that the reason for this may be the way the books are written: ‘Ranke’s grasp of detail and his ability to provide fresh information make him far more readable’167 than other historical works of the nineteenth century. Rolf Grunder believed that Ranke’s ‘main achievement was that for the first time he brought together the two elements necessary to establish history as the discipline we know it today, the critical use of contemporary sources and the attempt to reach the utmost objectivity.’168 Following Grunder, Ranke was the first historian who demanded the exclusive use of contemporary evidence. Nevertheless, Grunder criticized that Ranke neglected social and economic affairs and only included to a certain extent cultural factors such as literature and art: ‘In this respect, Ranke’s books seem somewhat oldfashioned to the modern reader.’169 Therefore Grunder summarized that if ‘we praise Ranke as the first critical historian in the modern sense who “remains the master of us all” we should not forget the weak spots.’170 Arthur Marvick wrote that ‘those familiar with lapidary words are often taken aback by the passion, and indeed political commitment, which they find when

Epilogue 287 they come actually to read Ranke’s works. Historians had still to learn that there is a big gap between stating intentions and actually carrying them out.’171 He admitted that Ranke himself was no cold or unemotional scholar.172 Marnie HughesWarrington followed the same train of thought by stating that in recent years many previously unpublished manuscripts had been found, and the discoveries had shown how unfair the negative views had been: ‘Ranke, scholars now claim, was a colourful historian because he sought facts as well as ideas.’173 Alexander Novotny and Hugo Hantsch were admirers of Ranke, and they believed that the content of his works is the most important aspect of his legacy: Europe, the European state system and the European order, which remain for academic discussions to the present day.174 Michael Bentley noted that Ranke used primary sources in archives with a zest and thoroughness quite new to historical scholarship: ‘He taught his students by making them read primary sources under his guidance: the origin of the “special subject” in the university curriculum and the beginning of the “seminar,” albeit of a kind very different from those operating today. Both of these novelties in research and teaching had the most far-reaching consequences and historians of education have a strong case in dwelling on them.’175 Bentley acknowledged that Ranke ‘was the most self-conscious writer of history in the modern age; he consequently reflects helpfully on the climates of opinion around him. He has attracted a battery of modern criticism and exegesis because of that reflection.’176 Roger Wines had a positive opinion on Ranke’s legacy. It was ‘his unique and lasting contribution, after his critical discoveries extended by successors, his surpassed, his archival discoveries extended by successors, his philosophy and politics largely ignored or repudiated by following generations: his vision of the universal history of man. He stood above the rising nationalism of his century like a last monument of the cosmopolitan age of Goethe. For Ranke history was not a meaningless process. Ideas did matter; great men who embodied them did change the course of history; history was free, not determined. Yet he never lost sight of the individual and the limits imposed on him by the general course of events. If he thought in terms of critically derived facts, he also thought of dynamically related facts; the context was never far from his consideration of any particular man, idea, nation, or event. To read Ranke is not merely to experience the perception of history by the vanished school of German Idealism.’177 John Burrow believed that Ranke’s oeuvre was vast, and it is difficult to summarize a modern consensus on him because it is not clear that one exists. Burrow wrote that ‘almost everything seems contested: his almost exclusive devotion to political and, above all, “diplomatic” history; the extent of his influence; the importance to him of metaphysical or mystical notions; even the quality of his narrative, which was much praised for its Olympian detachment.’178 Ernst Breisach had a similar opinion, and in his view Ranke managed to combine methodological achievements of philologists, erudite and legal historians with substantial interpretation and traditional narrative history. Furthermore, he was innovative when he taught young historians in his seminar how to apply the proper methods in their research. Breisach commented that ‘Gatterer had experimented briefly

288  Epilogue with a seminar in Göttingen, yet only Ranke put the seminar into the centre of the education of historians. The young historians were sent to the archives, which just at that time began routinely to open their doors to scholars. The use of these sources under sophisticated critical safeguards seemed to guarantee the objectivity of one segment of the historian’s work, the establishment of facts.’179 Breisach stressed that ‘Ranke’s elaborate methodology was based on classical philology, with its maxim: check the source for trustworthiness and against its own context. For his methodological contribution Ranke has been celebrated as the pioneer of a critical historical science.’180 Breisach emphasized that due to this, Ranke deserved this recognition also because he observed his own rules: ‘He refused, for example, to let his own distaste for the French Revolution or for the papacy sway his findings.’181 Alun Munslow pointed out that ‘Ranke’s importance for the modern historical profession is his emphasis on the factual in pursuing the meaning or pattern he assumed must exist in historical change. This would appear to be a good definition of contemporary constructionist historical practice.’182 In the opinion of Munslow, Ranke believed that ‘an important rider was that the historian had to do this without the distorting lenses of the present or the historians’ favourite models or preferred theories or emplotments (or desire to experiment). Yet also, in a characteristic reconstructionist vein, Ranke was also saying let the record speak for itself. In other words, Ranke wanted to demonstrate through the referential (the documentary source) what he believed actually generated change over time. This realist and referential desire to get the story straight makes Ranke the first among those historians who want the evidence to reveal the givenness of the past, but who, in constructionist practice, also wed empiricism to analysis in pursuit of a full understanding of the meaning of the past.’183 Munslow concluded that ‘Ranke’s ultimate legacy seems to be the belief that historical knowledge cannot rely on the study and analysis of individual events alone, but also on the historian’s conceptual schemes. It is this legacy that makes Ranke so central to historicist as well as reconstructionist and constructionist epistemological approaches to the study of the past.’184 Felix Gilbert, on the other hand, analyzed Ranke’s historical scholarship, embedding it in the scholarly developments that took place in the nineteenth century. He concluded that Ranke’s ‘demand for a critical historical method was intended to achieve more than a technical improvement in the writing of history; it reflected the impact of new ideas about the nature and value of historical scholarship.’185 He believed that Ranke’s achievement ‘has been frequently slighted, if not disregarded: I refer to the literary aspects of Ranke’s work – specifically, his view that history is a part of literature.’186 Gilbert realized that Ranke avoided as far as possible ‘summary statements and lets the narrator disappear from the story so that the reader is directly confronted with facts and events. Ranke wants the reader to feel himself a participant of the story. Ranke’s use of literary techniques allowed him to diminish the distance that separates past from present, to give the story a pattern that changes between forward movement and description, and, above all, to make the work conform to the primary requisite of a literary work: to

Epilogue 289 tell a story that has a structure.’187 The manner in which Ranke presented his story is meant to allow the reader to build up his own picture of a person’s character – and Gilbert added that it is like ‘in a novel in which the good and bad sides of an individual emerge only gradually.’188 A completely different approach was attempted by Wilhelm Mommsen. He noted how often Ranke used certain words in his books; for instance the word nation was used 190 times in French History.189 Mommsen tried to explain Ranke’s historical writing by his use of specific words and his treatment of social classes. John Warren commented that Ranke had often been criticized for diverting history into the restrictions of politics and grand diplomacy, whereas the philosophic historians were interested in a far greater range – including culture, manners and laws. This was unfair in the sense that Ranke was interested in many aspects of history but was led by the nature of his available sources and the sheer scale of his work to focus on political history. According to Warren, it was not his fault that his legacy – as misinterpreted by his followers – was indeed to restrict the scope of history.190 Shih-Chieh Su noted that more recently, in the development of a post1989 historiography of the former Soviet bloc, in nations such as Poland, Ukraine, the Czech Republic and Russia, there had been a resurgence of the Ranke paradigm of historiography, or the so-called ‘Rankean Renaissance,’ in order to institutionally advocate the reconstruction of a more empirical and less ideological discourse of their communist pasts based on ‘factology.’191

Reviews based on Ranke’s private life and his letters These examples demonstrate that it is difficult to investigate Ranke’s concept of objectivity. In order to determine whether Ranke was as ‘objective’ as he claimed, one would have to read all the books in Ranke’s private library, as well as the sources he had used. This would be a lifelong task, and the end result would not necessarily be objective, but rather another subjective assessment. Another approach is to examine Ranke as a private man. E.H. Carr stated that ‘before you study the historian, study his historical and social environment. The historian, being an individual, is also a product of history and of society.’192 One may ask, to what degree did Ranke’s personal and family life influence his historical writing? Or to what extent were his thoughts and ideas mentioned in letters?193 Very few historians have worked on Ranke’s private life. One of the earliest was T.H. von Laue,194 though he concentrated on Ranke’s academic career, or ‘the formative years,’ as the work was entitled. Nevertheless he presented an analysis of Ranke’s early years, giving a good insight into his thoughts as his historical writing developed. Laue believed that ‘it is far easier to analyze a great historian than to write history in his style. But occasionally paying tribute to him adds immediacy to his genius that can guide, in more difficult times, his disciples through their complex scholarly labours.’195 Laue suggested that, ‘with proper adjustments, Ranke provides a model crucially needed in this wide-open age of global interdependence.’196 He emphasized the literary style of Ranke as his ‘prescription of lively interchange between ground-floor data and the loftiest

290  Epilogue reflection will hardly apply where the daily ground-floor experience is so intense and so distant from the global overview. Burdened by the overload of information and impressions from around the world, people more than ever tend to withdraw to narrow ground-floor perspectives. An all-inclusive overview seems too lifeless; it is not based on any existing consensus or concrete reality. The great majority of readers are incapable of soaring so high; they are turned off by the “globalony” of high-flown abstractions.’197 Therefore, Laue concluded, ‘it is no wonder then that the run of academic historians continue in their customary routines, adding endless refinement to the overload of detail, which contributes to the growing intellectual fatigue in their societies. Much of that detail amounts to no more than a “so-what?” variety of history, of interest only to dwindling cliques of specialists. Yet global history does not exclude ground-floor research. It merely requires that the topics picked and the conceptual framework adopted conform to global rather than ground-floor perspectives.’198 Laue hoped that modern day historians would take the opportunity to honour Ranke and his spirit and ‘give global history a try!’199 Cook criticized the work of Laue and Krieger, which belongs to a theme in Ranke research since World War II which has attempted to rescue Ranke from the charge that his work was merely dry factual narration, lacking in any consistent conceptual framework. He criticized Krieger for his doubt that Ranke’s faith is the key to understanding his history: ‘Oddly enough, Krieger gives more weight to a process of psychological sublimation in which Ranke supposedly transferred his sexual desire for women to the original historical documents!’200 Krieger is also criticized by Whitener, who believed that Krieger ‘is persuasive in structuring Ranke’s intellectual development around theoretical problems that are then resolved in his major historical works, but he is not so persuasive in his attempts to explain the causes for Ranke’s dissatisfaction with each of his resolutions.’201 Following Whitener, Krieger makes a plausible case for seeing Ranke as rethinking theoretical positions in the light of contemporary historical events, especially in the wake of the crucial years 1830, 1848 and 1871. He also makes a plausible case for seeing an underlying set of concerns that generated the puzzles that Ranke sought to solve. These puzzles involved questions concerning agency and determinism, individuality and universality, and contingency and necessity. Krieger may recognize that these issues plagued Ranke over his career, but in the opinion of Whitener he offered little more than descriptions of Ranke’s struggles with them.202 In the review on the book of Leonard Krieger, Lothar Kettenacker acknowledged that ‘Ranke is still recognized as the formidable innovator of historical erudition, but his historical theories now seem so obsolete that they do not invite much attention.’203 The attempt by Krieger to cast fresh light upon a great historian whose reputation has suffered from a misguided tradition is, in the opinion of Kettenacker, ‘no doubt an honourable task; yet praiseworthy though the intentions may be, the result is not very convincing.’204 Kettenacker criticized Krieger’s attempt to formulate a final synthesis of Ranke, but ‘no doubt Ranke had “ideas” on history scattered among his letters, lectures, diaries, and published works; but he was not prepared, nor was he able, to assimilate them into one

Epilogue 291 integral system. His antinomies of the general and the particular, of universal and national history cannot be merged into one synthesis by accepting his own dialectics.’205 However, Kettenacker argued that the fact that ‘Ranke strove all his life to reach totality in history, only to fail in the last analysis, is not an admission of failure but a testimony to his intellectual honesty and greatness. To synthesize Ranke is not only a misreading of his personality; it is counter-productive, because it will deprive him of the influence he may still have on future historians.’206 Kettenacker suggested that ‘apparently, Krieger cannot reconcile himself to the fact that Ranke accepted growth and development, notions of organic connotation, but not the idea of overall progress.’207 Ranke’s scholarly career has been reviewed several times, but very rarely has anything been published on his private life. This is most striking when it comes to Ranke’s marriage.208 Several authors never mention his marriage and others do not know any details, and his wife’s origins are described variously as Irish, English,209 Anglo-Irish or British, but no one seems to know for sure. Bäckervon Ranke viewed Ranke’s family from a cultural perspective using the letters of his great-grandmother, Clarissa von Ranke.210 Unfortunately, his dissertation was never published and is quite unknown to academic scholars. Another overlooked work of Bäcker-von Ranke was an account of Clarissa von Ranke published in 1967.211 Ingrid Hecht recently published a popular biography of Ranke, a description of Ranke’s life.212 Her work did not stop there, and she continued with her research and edited the correspondence between Ranke and Manteuffel in which she published unknown letters, which are kept in Polish archives today. These letters also give an insight into the relationship of two friends and the mind of the older Ranke.213 In her research for unknown documents Hecht was able to find a large collection of hundreds of medical dissertations from the University of Berlin, which are now kept with the Ranke collection in Syracuse University Library, New York, USA. This collection of over 500 dissertations, which seem to have nothing in common with Ranke’s library or work, raised the question of why Ranke collected these dissertations. Were at least some of them important to his work? And why can one not find any historical dissertations in Ranke’s library?214 Hecht’s medical background allowed her to assess the dissertations and to review interdisciplinary work between historians and scientists which were needed for closer research on Leopold von Ranke who – if we want to admit it or not – was interdisciplinary. Hecht must be credited not only with having filled another gap in knowledge but also with locating this important new find in the context of a fruitful European scientific discourse of the nineteenth century.

Notes 1 Manfred Asendorf, ‘ “Objektivität” der Geschichte: L. v. Ranke und die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Manfred Hahn and H.J. Sandkühler (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Bewegung und Naturprozeß (Cologne, 1981), p. 50. 2 Ibid, p. 49. 3 Ibid, p. 52. 4 A.G. Dickens, Ranke as reformation historian (Reading, 1980), p. 3.

292  Epilogue 5 Ibid. 6 B.G. Smith, ‘Gender and the practices of scientific history: The seminar and archival research in the nineteenth century’, in: The American Historical Review, c, 4 (1995), p. 1154. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid, pp. 1154–1155. 9 Ibid, p. 1156. 10 W.P. Webb, ‘The historical seminar: Its outer shell and its inner spirit’, in: Mississippi Valley Historical Review, ilii, 1 (1955), p. 11. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Stefan Berger, Heiko Feldner and Kevin Passmore (eds.), Writing history: Theory and practice (London, 2003), p. 13. 14 O.J. Daddow, ‘Still no philosophy please, we’re historians’, in: Rethinking History, ix, 4 (2005), p. 493. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 17 J.H. Arnold, History, a very short introduction (Oxford, 2000), p. 35. 18 Ibid, p. 52. 19 Roger Spalding and Christopher Parker, Historiography: An introduction (Oxford, 2007), p. 8. 20 G.G. Iggers, ‘The image of Ranke in American and German historical thought’, in: History and Theory, ii, 1 (1962), p. 23. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid, p. 24. 23 Ibid, p. 26. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid, pp. 32–33. 26 Rüdinger vom Bruch and Rainer A. Müller (eds.), Historikerlexikon. Von der Antike bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1991), p. 249. 27 M.-J. Zemlin, ‘Die historische Theoria im Geschichtsdenken Rankes’, in: Saeculum, xxxvii (1986), pp.  352–365; M.-J. Zemlin, ‘ “Zeigen, wie es eigentlich gewesen”. Zur Deutung eines berühmten Rankewortes’, in: K.D. Erdmann and J. Rohlfes (eds.), Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, xxxvii (1986), pp. 333–350. 28 Zemlin, ‘Die historische Theoria im Geschichtsdenken Rankes’, pp. 352–365. 29 Karl Milford, ‘Nationalism, Volksgeist, and the methods of economics: A  note on Ranke, Roscher and Menger’, in: History of European Ideas, xv, 1–3 (1992), pp. 164–165. 30 Ibid, p. 165. 31 Ibid. 32 Johannes Süßmann, Geschichtsschreibung oder Roman? (Stuttgart, 2000), p. 248. 33 Ibid, p. 216. 34 Ibid, pp. 218–220. 35 Ibid, pp. 234, 243. 36 Ferdinand Schevill, ‘Ranke: rise, decline, and persistence of a reputation’, in: The Journal of Modern History, xxiv, 3 (1952), p. 219. 37 Ibid, p. 222. 38 Ibid. 39 Jürgen Elvert and Michael Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke (Stuttgart, 2001). 40 Volker Dotterweich, ‘Die gegenwärtige bibliographische Situation des Rankeschen Werkes’, in: Jürgen Elvert and Michael Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke (Stuttgart, 2001), pp. 3–9.

Epilogue  293 41 Thomas Brechenmacher, ‘Zum Stand der am historiographischen Werk orientierten Ranke-Forschung’, in: Jürgen Elvert and Michael Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke (Stuttgart, 2001), pp. 10–16. 42 Ulrich Muhlack, ‘Desiderate der Ranke-Forschung’, in: Jürgen Elvert, and Michael Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke (Stuttgart, 2001), pp. 17–23. 43 Volker Dotterweich, ‘Ranke’, in: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, vii (1999), pp. 1324–1355. 44 Ulrich Muhlack, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Begründung der quellenkritischen Geschichtsforschung’, in: Jürgen Elvert and Susanne Krauß (eds.), Historische Debatten und Kontroversen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 2003), pp. 22–33. 45 Eckart Conze, ‘Der Historiker als Politikberater’, in: Jürgen Elvert and Michael Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke (Stuttgart, 2001), pp. 24–37. 46 H.-C. Krauss, ‘Ranke als Zeitgenosse’, in: Elvert and Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt, pp. 28–50. 47 Jürgen Grosse, ‘Über Systemdenken bei Ranke – mit einem Blick auf Burckhardt’, in: Elvert and Salewski (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt, pp. 78–115. 48 B.C. Sax, ‘Jacob Burckhardt and national history’, in: History of European Ideas, xv, 4–6 (1992), p. 846. 49 Leopold von Ranke, Neue Briefe, ed. by Bernhardt Hoeft (Hamburg, 1949). 50 Leopold von Ranke, Das Briefwerk, ed. by W.P. Fuchs (Hamburg, 1949). 51 Klemens von Klemperer, ‘Das Briefwerk von Leopold von Ranke; Neue Briefe von Leopold von Ranke’, in: The American Historical Review, lv, 4 (1950), pp. 871–873. 52 Hans Liebeschütz, Ranke (London, 1954), p. 2. 53 Emil Michael, Rankes Weltgeschichte (Paderborn, 1890). 54 Peter Gay, Style in history (New York, 1988), p. 94. 55 Ibid. 56 Ibid. 57 Ibid. 58 Ulrich Muhlack and Oliver Ramonat (eds.), Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke, Band 1: 1813–1825 (Munich, 2007). 59 For more details see G.J. Henz, Zur Kritik neuerer Brief-Editionen (Jülich, 2008). 60 Ulrich Muhlack, ‘ “Mein Glück wäre, etwas tüchtiges vollenden”, Zum Briefwechsel des jungen Ranke’, Paper given at the book launch of the letter edition Ulrich Muhlack and Oliver Ramonat (eds.), Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke, Band 1: 1813–1825 (Munich, 2007), p. 1. 61 Ibid, p. 2. Note from the editor: Since 2007, the editor was able to acquire three original letters of Ranke and find 30 undiscovered letters in other collections. 62 Ulrich Muhlack, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Lutz Raphael, Klassiker der Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. 1 (2006), p. 43. 63 G.J. Henz, Leopold von Ranke in Geschichtsdenken und Forschung (Berlin, 2014), contains nearly 1,500 pages. 64 Ibid, vol. i, on lacking competency of history see pp. 55–56, 60. 65 Quoted after A. Guilland, Extrait de la Revue historique, vol. cxxi (Paris, 1916), p. 28. 66 Henz, Ranke in Geschichtsdenken, vol. i, for example p. 518 in relation with Heinrich von Srbik. 67 Ibid, vol. ii, for example p. 326. 68 Ibid, p. 303. The correspondence of Clarissa von Ranke had been already published but was completely ignored by Henz. See Andreas Boldt, The Clarissa von Ranke letters and the Ranke-Graves correspondence 1843–1886 (Lampeter, 2012). 69 Ibid, p. 615. The author of the second entry under 1843, noted as ‘anonymous,’ is John Ennis.

294  Epilogue 70 This fact could be proven in a couple of studies. See also Andreas Boldt, The role of Ireland in the life of Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886): the historian and historical truth (Lampeter, 2007); and Ingrid Hecht, Clarissa von Ranke. Im eigenen Körper gefangen mit blühendem Geist (Göttingen, 2013), pp. 163–164. 71 Henz, Ranke in Geschichtsdenken, vol. ii, p. 183. 72 Lord Acton, ‘German schools of history’, in: The English Historical Review, i, 1 (1886), p. 13. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid. 75 M.A. Fitzsimons, ‘Ranke: History as worship’, in: The Review of Politics, xxxii, 4 (1980), p. 533. 76 Ibid, p. 538. 77 Ibid, p. 534. 78 Ibid, p. 553. 79 Ibid, p. 554. 80 Ibid. 81 J.A. Moses, ‘Ranke revisited: The “dubious” values of a universal historian’, in: Journal of Religious History, xiv, 2 (1986), p. 167. 82 Ibid, p. 171. 83 Ibid, p. 173. 84 Ibid, p. 180. 85 J.A. Moses, ‘Leopold von Ranke one hundred years on: The centenary conference at Syracuse, USA’, in: Storia della Storiografia, xii, 12 (1987), p. 147. 86 Siegfried Baur, Versuch über die Historik des jungen Ranke (Berlin, 1998). 87 Siegfried Baur, ‘Franz Leopold Ranke, the Ranke library at Syracuse, and the open future of scientific history’, in: M.B. Hinton (ed.), Syracuse University library associates courier, vol. xxxiii (Syracuse, 2001), p.  14; see also details in Baur, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie’, pp. 61–85. 88 Baur, ‘Ranke, the Ranke library at Syracuse’, pp. 16–17. 89 G.G. Iggers, The German conception of history (Hanover, 1988). 90 J.M. Powell, ‘The confusing and ambiguous legacy of Leopold von Ranke’, in: Syracuse Scholar, ix, 1 (1988), pp. 5–10. 91 G.G. Iggers and J.M. Powell (eds.), Leopold von Ranke and the shaping of the historical discipline (Syracuse, 1990). 92 Ibid, part one see pp. 1–58, part two see pp. 59–108, part three see pp. 109–180. 93 Iggers, The German conception of history, pp. 63–89; von Moltke Iggers (eds.), The theory and practice of history (New York, 1973), pp. xv–lxxi. 94 G.G. Iggers, The theory and practice of history: Leopold von Ranke (New York, 2011), p. xi. 95 Iggers, Ranke and the shaping of the historical discipline, p. 173. 96 Ibid, p. 175. 97 G.G. Iggers, ‘The image of Ranke in American and German historical thought’, in: History and Theory, ii, 1 (1962), p. 17. 98 Ibid. 99 Ibid. 100 Dominik Juhnke, Leopold Ranke. Biografie eines Geschichtsbesessenen (Berlin, 2015), book cover. 101 Ibid. 102 Ibid, p. 53. 103 Ibid, p. 35. 104 Ibid, p. 26. 105 Ingrid Hecht expressed that the biography more or less represented a detailed commentary on Siegfried Baur, Versuch über die Historik des jungen Ranke (Berlin, 1998), with a couple of new research results and tales. 106 Ibid, pp. 197–199.

Epilogue 295 107 Ibid, pp. 220–223. 108 Further examples Ingrid Hecht pointed out. For example, besides the 24,000 books, there were also thousands of manuscripts transported to Syracuse, but these were not mentioned (p. 6); the family connections between Leopold and his siblings are barely mentioned and there were irregularities in the research trip to Italy (pp. 61–62). 109 Ibid, p. 56. 110 Ibid, p. 34. 111 Ibid. See also comments pp. 255–288. 112 Ibid, p. 151. 113 G.J. Henz, Leopold von Ranke in Geschichtsdenken und Forschung (Berlin, 2014). 114 Martin Schippan, ‘Dominik Juhnke: Leopold Ranke. Biografie eines Geschichtsbesessenen (Berlin, 2015)’, in: Jürgen Elvert (ed.), Historische Mitteilungen, vol. 29 (Stuttgart 2017), pp. 259–263. 115 Ibid, p. 21. 116 Ibid, p. 28. 117 Ibid. 118 Ibid, p. 29. 119 Ibid. 120 Ibid. 121 Ibid, p. 30. 122 Joseph Lemberg, Historiker ohne Eigenschaften. Eine Problemgeschichte des Mediävisten Friedrich Baerthgen (Frankfurt/Main, 2015), p.  297. See also O.G. Oexle, ‘Ranke  – Nietzsche – Kant. Über die epistemologischen Orientierungen deutscher Historiker’, in: Internationale Zeitschrift für Philosophie (2001), pp. 224–244. 123 Ibid, p. 297. 124 Ibid, p. 30. 125 Ibid. 126 Ibid. 127 Helen Liebel-Weckowicz, ‘Ranke’s theory of history and the German Modernist School’, in: Canadian Journal of History, xxiii (1988), p. 73. 128 Ibid. 129 Ibid, p. 78. 130 Ibid, p. 93. 131 Ibid. 132 Ibid, p. 74. 133 Ibid. 134 Frank Ankersmit and Hans Kellner (eds.), A new philosophy of history (London, 1995), pp. 157–158. 135 Ibid, p. 158. 136 L.A. Cook, ‘Luther, Herder and Ranke: The Reformation’s impact on German idealist historiography’, Diss. (Denton, 1983), p. 81. 137 Ibid, pp. 128–129. 138 Ibid. See also p. 139. 139 Ibid. 140 Ibid. 141 Ibid, p. 147. 142 B.D. Whitener, ‘Varieties of historical consciousness in nineteenth-century Germany: Ranke, Dollinger, Marx’, Diss. (Virginia, 2005), p. 17. 143 Ibid. 144 Ibid, pp. 18–19. 145 Ibid, p. 138. 146 Ibid. 147 Ibid, p. 140. 148 Ibid, p. 508.

296  Epilogue 149 John Farrenkopf, ‘The challenge of Spenglerian pessimism to Ranke and political realism’, in: Review of International Studies, xvii (1991), p. 269. 150 Ibid. 151 Ibid. 152 Ibid, p. 270. 153 John Cannon (ed.), The historian at work (London, 1980), p. 37. 154 White, Metahistory, pp. 187–188. 155 Iggers, Theory and practice of history, p. xliv. 156 Ibid, p. xlv. 157 Jörn Rüsen, ‘Rhetoric and aesthetics of history: Leopold von Ranke’, in: History and Theory, xxix, 2 (1990), p. 190. 158 Ibid, p. 195. 159 Omar Dahbour, ‘The origins of modern historical consciousness, 1822–1848: Hegel’s philosophy of history and its critique by Ranke and Marx’, Diss. (Chicago, 1987), p. 117. 160 Ibid, p. 140. 161 Ibid, p. 162. 162 Ibid, p. 168. 163 Rudolf Vierhaus, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Wissenschaft und Kunst’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, cciliv (1987), p. 288. 164 Ibid, p. 289. 165 Ibid, pp. 291–292. 166 F.L. Ford, ‘Ranke: Setting the story straight’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings (1975), p. 70. 167 Ibid. 168 Rolf Grunder, ‘Ranke’s historical theory’, in: Durham University Journal, lix, 3 (1967), p. 141. 169 Ibid, p. 143. 170 Ibid, p. 144. 171 Arthur Marvick, The new nature of history (Hampshire, 2003), pp. 62–63. 172 Ibid, p. 64. 173 Hughes-Warrington, Fifty key thinkers on history, p. 261. 174 Alexander Novotny, ‘Ueber den Primat der aeusseren Politik. Bemerkungen zu einem Gedankengang Leopold von Rankes’, in: Oesterreich und Europa. Festgabe fuer Hugo Hantsch zum 70. Geburtstag (Graz, 1965), pp. 320–321. 175 Michael Bentley, Modern historiography – An introduction (London, 2000), p. 41. 176 Ibid, p. 42. 177 Roger Wines, The secret of world history: Selected writings on the art and science of history (New York, 1981), p. 25. 178 John Burrow, A history of histories (London, 2007), p. 461. 179 Ernst Breisach, Historiography (Chicago, 1997), p. 233. 180 Ibid. 181 Ibid. 182 Alun Munslow, The new history (Harlow, 2003), p. 112. 183 Ibid. 184 Ibid. 185 Gilbert, History: Politics or culture?, p. 20. 186 Felix Gilbert, ‘What Ranke meant’, p. 394. 187 Ibid, p. 395. 188 Ibid, p. 396. 189 Mommsen, Stein, Ranke, Bismarck, p. 95. 190 John Warren, History and the historians (London, 2000), p. 76. 191 Shih-Chieh Su, Modern nationalism and the making of a professional historian: The life and work of Leopold von Ranke (Providence, 2012), p. 14. 192 E.H. Carr, What is history? (London, 1990), p. 44.

Epilogue 297 193 This was actually my very first approach to Ranke when I started my research twenty years ago. Over the years this has led to numerous publications which also can be found in the bibliography. My approach is characterized by assessing the private Ranke in the first place and in particular the find of more than 600 unpublished letters of his wife, Clarissa, located at the Ranke-Museum, Wiehe, Germany, opened new views on the private Ranke, but also his personal and public views – best described in the issue of the translation of his Germany during the Reformation. As I have continued my research I was in particular interested to grasp Ranke as a historian as a whole – and not just the young historian or the historian in relation to a particular work. Soon it became clear that most scholars concentrated on the younger Ranke and seem to leave out his last 30 years – during which time he was even more productive than in his younger years. By using numerous other approaches – for example postmodernist views, amongst many – I was able to carve out a complex personality which cannot be easily explained. My original aim was to show the most outstanding interpretations and reviews on Ranke from other scholars – my personal view can be seen in the introduction and of course in the presentation of this biography. I believe that Ranke was one of the few historians who was able to achieve so much during his lifetime; however, this does not exclude criticism on some of his actions or works when appropriate. 194 Laue, Leopold Ranke, the formative years. 195 T.H. von Laue, ‘Review on Leopold von Ranke und die modern Geschichtswissenschaft by Wolfgang J. Mommsen’, in: History and Theory, xxviii, 1 (1989), p. 78. 196 Ibid, p. 79. 197 Ibid, p. 93. 198 Ibid. 199 Ibid, p. 94. 200 Cook, ‘Luther, Herder and Ranke’, p. 82. 201 Whitener, ‘Varieties of historical consciousness’, p. 18. 202 Ibid. 203 Lothar Kettenacker, ‘Review on Ranke. The meaning of history by Leonard Krieger’, in: History and Theory, xvii, 3 (1978), p. 388. 204 Ibid, p. 389. 205 Ibid. 206 Ibid. 207 Ibid, p. 393. 208 Adams, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, p. 118, dates the marriage wrongly in 1845. 209 Ibid; Demandt, Ranke unter den Weltweisen, p. 8; Joll, National historians, p. 7. 210 Gisbert Bäcker-von Ranke, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Familie: Kulturgeschichtliches Bild einer deutschen Gelehrtenfamilie im neunzehnten Jahrhundert’, Diss. (Bonn, 1955). 211 Gisbert Bäcker-von Ranke, Rankes Ehefrau Clarissa geb. Graves Perceval (Göttingen, 1967). 212 Ingrid Hecht, Leopold von Ranke: Und ich darf es nicht verschweigen (Berlin, 2003), introduction. 213 Ingrid Hecht, Die Arbeit selbst ist das Vergnügen. Briefwechsel und Schriften 1870– 1994 Leopold von Ranke – Edwin Manteuffel (Halle, 2005). 214 Ingrid Hecht, Genial Neues bei Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 2009).

Appendix Chronology

1789–99 1792 1795 1804–15 1804–13 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1810–22 1812 1813–15 1814 1815 1815–17 1817

1818 1818–19 1818–25 1819 1820–29 1821–29 1822 1824 1825–36 1827 1827–31 1828 1829

French Revolution. Revolutionary Wars. Birth of Franz Leopold Ranke in Wiehe. Emperor Napoleon I. Serbian uprising. End of the Holy Roman Empire of the Germanic Nation. Battle of Jena and Auerstedt. Start of the Prussian Reforms. Ranke’s entry at the school at Donndorf. Birth of Clarissa Helena Graves in Dublin. Ranke’s entry at the school at Schulpforta. Foundation of the University of Berlin. State chancellor of Prussia: Hardenberg. March of Napoleon’s Grand Army to Moscow. European Wars of Independence. Ranke’s enrolment at the University of Leipzig. Congress of Vienna. Wiehe became part of Prussia. Serbian uprising for independence. Wartburg Festival and celebration of 300 years of Reformation initiated by Luther. Ranke’s manuscript on Martin Luther. Ranke received his PhD according to the old rituals. Passing exams with the higher education authority. Introduction of constitutions to several German states (Bavaria, Baden, Hanover). Ranke as a teacher in Frankfurt an der Oder. Karlsbader Beschlüsse. Uprisings in Italian states. Greek war of independence from the Ottoman Empire. Elections and civil war in Spain. Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker. Ranke professor extraordinarius for history at the University of Berlin. Fürsten und Völker I. Trip to Southern Europe, visiting archives in Vienna, Florence, Rome and Venice. Offer of full professorship at the University of Dorpat declined. Catholic Emancipation in Ireland. ‘Zur Geschichte des Don Carlos.’ Die serbische Revolution.

Appendix 299 1830

1831 1832 1832–36 1834 1834–36 1835 1836–71 1837 1837–40 1839–47 1840

1841 1841–42 1843 1843–71 1844

1846–49 1846 1847 1848 1848–49 1849 1850

1850–71 1851

Member of the Griechheit (Greek Society). July revolution in France. Belgian Revolution. Rebellion in Warsaw. Uprisings in Germany. Rebellion in Italian states. Über die Verschwörung gegen Venedig. Member of the Prussian Royal Academy of Sciences. Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift. Member of the Gesetzlosen Gesellschaft (Lawless Society). German Zollverein. Fürsten und Völker II–IV, better known as Die römischen Päpste. ‘Zur Geschichte der italienischen Poesie.’ Death of John Crosbie Graves, father of Clarissa. Ranke professor ordinarius for history at the University of Berlin. Death of both of Ranke’s parents. England: Start of Queen Victoria’s reign. Hanover: King Ernst August broke the constitution, which led to protest. Most famous was the educational protest by the ‘Göttinger Seven.’ Jahrbücher des deutschen Reiches unter dem Sächsischen Hause. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation. France demands the land on the left side of the Rhine from Germany (‘Wacht am Rhein’). Death of Frederick III of Prussia. New king of Prussia: Frederick William IV. Ranke became the historiographer of the Prussian State. Member of the Academie Francaise. Dean of the philosophical faculty at Berlin University. Ranke on a visit to France and England. He met Clarissa Graves and married her in England. ‘Salon Ranke.’ Uprisings in Silesia. Creation of the idea of a Great Serbia in the Balkans. Awarded an honorary degree from the theological faculty at Marburg University. Birth of Ranke’s son Otto. ‘Über den Ausbruch des siebenjährigen Krieges.’ Great Famine in Ireland. Birth of Ranke’s daughter Maximiliane. ‘Über die Versammlung der französischen Notablen.’ Birth of Ranke’s son Friduhelm. European Revolutions. Maximilian II crowned King of Bavaria. Rankes consider moving to England. Neun Bücher Preußische Geschichte. Ranke becomes honorary member of the Royal Irish Academy. Birth of Ranke’s son Albert. Death of Ranke’s son Albert. Death of Clarissa’s mother, Helen Graves. Ranke’s trip to Paris. Award of the Red Eagle Order Second Class. Clarissa Ranke suffers from her disease. Royal House Order of the Hohenzollern. ‘Zur Kritik preußischer Memoiren.’

300  Appendix 1852 1852–61 1853 1854

1854–56 1854–64 1855 1857 1858 1859–68 1860 1861

1862 1864 1865

1866 1866–67 1867

1867–90 1868 1869 1870 1870–71 1871

1871–87 1873

Start of reign of French Emperor Napoleon II. Ranke family on trip to England. Französische Geschichte. Death of James Graves, brother of Clarissa, and cousin Dr Robert Graves. Ranke’s trip to Bavaria and lectures to King Maximilian II. Über die Epochen der Neueren Geschichte (published 1888). Awarded the Bavarian Knighthood of the order of Maximilian. Member of the Council of State. ‘Zur Kritik fränkisch-deutscher Reichsannelisten.’ Crimean War. Several trips of Ranke to France, England, Italy and German states. Ranke in Paris. Knight of the Order Pour le Mérite. Great Mutiny in India. Ranke in England. Foundation of the Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in Munich. Ranke first chairman. Englische Geschichte. Honorary medal of the Academie Francaise. Start of Civil War in United States. Unification of Italy. Death of Prussian king Frederick William IV. New king in Prussia: William I. Bismarck became Prussian Minister President. Ranke in England. German-Danish War about Schleswig-Holstein. Ranke in Paris, London, Dublin. Ranke’s honorary degree at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. Ranke enobled: Leopold von Ranke. ‘Zur orientalischen Frage.’ Austrian-Prussian war over Schleswig-Holstein. Maximiliane von Ranke married Wilhelm von Kotze. Honorary citizen of Wiehe. German Confederation; Ranke against it. Northern German Union. Ausgleich for Austria: Creation of double monarchy of Austria-Hungary. Ranke in 50 years’ service in Prussia, jubilee. Awarded the Red Eagle Order with star. Prussian Privy Councillor. Vice chancellor and chancellor of the Order Pour le Mérite. Sämmtliche Werke. ‘Briefwechsel Friedrich des Großen.’ Geschichte Wallensteins. Start of Home Rule discussion in Ireland. Death of Clarissa’s brother John Graves. Franco-Prussian War. Foundation of German Kaiserreich. Death of Clarissa von Ranke. Death of Ranke’s brother Wilhelm Ranke. Ursprung des siebenjährigen Krieges. Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Bismarck’s Kulturkampf in Germany. Briefwechsel Friedrich Wilhelm IV mit Bunsen.

Appendix  301 1874 1875 1875–78 1876 1877–78 1878 1881 1881–88 1882 1884 1885 1886

Zur deutschen Geschichte. Religionsfriede zum dreißigjährigen Krieg. Ursprung und Beginn der Revolutionskriege. Zur Geschichte von Österreich und Preußen. Oriental crisis in Herzegovina and Bosnia against Turkey. Bosnia and Herzegovina in war with Serbia. Member of the National Academy of Italy. Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Hardenberg. Historisch-biographische Studien. Laws against socialists in Germany. Friedrich der Große. Frederick William IV. Coalition between Germany, Austria and Russia. Weltgeschichte. Awarded in addition to his nobility the title ‘Excellency.’ Germany becomes Colonial Power. Awarded the Sankt-Savans-Order of the First Class by Serbian King Milan I. Honorary member of the American Historical Association. Honorary citizen of Berlin. Death of Ranke.

Appendix List of archives and main contents

There are several archives available that have materials ranging from a few documents or letters to larger collections of letters, manuscripts and books. In this appendix I describe some archives and institutions which collectively constitute a corpus of an estimated 30,000 books and 150,000 manuscripts and letters providing an excellent research platform on which to investigate Leopold von Ranke as a scholar and as a private man. Even though most of these materials refer to the historian, an estimate of at least 5,000 manuscripts and letters refer either to Clarissa or her family background. I believe a detailed description of the major archives will help scholars in further research.

Syracuse University Library (USA) Contact address Special Collections Research Center Syracuse University Library E.S. Bird Library, Room 600 Syracuse University NY 13244–2010 USA Phone: 001-(315) 443–2697 Email: [email protected] Main collection • • • • • •

The Leopold von Ranke private library, containing 24,000 volumes About 430 original manuscripts of the Venetian relazioni Over 1,000 chronicles, annals and Reichstag records A collection of 2,500 pamphlets dating from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries The Leopold and Clarissa von Ranke correspondence, consisting of about 400 letters Newspaper clippings, photographs and materials by Theodor Wiedemann about Ranke’s library and manuscript collection

Appendix  303 Further information on the collection In 1886, the year of Ranke’s death, his personal research and lecturing library, assembled over the course of 60 years of work, was regarded as one of the most important intellectual libraries in the world. It was here that Ranke’s historical seminar was developed and practised for almost 40 years. Historians such as Jacob Burckhardt, Heinrich von Sybel and Georg Waitz learned and developed here in collaboration with Ranke. Ranke had left no last will in regards to his library, so it was up to his three children to decide what to do. The only task he left was that the library should remain intact and should not be dispersed. The children offered the library to the Prussian State and several other states and institutions. However, there was little interest in Germany in preserving this crucial repository of sources on the history of historiography. But the American scholars valued the library much more highly than the Germans; thus, the Ranke Library, containing 24,000 books and pamphlets, was sold in 1887 by Ranke’s children to the University of Syracuse, New York State, USA. The transport of the 83 boxes with a total weight of 19 tons caused a serious transport problem, but under the direction of Dr C.W. Bennett – who also acquired the whole collection, under instruction of Dr Reid – the library was safely delivered to Syracuse. The collection was so large that it was necessary to erect a new building to house it, which was then also called the Von Ranke Library. The Document Book of the Syracuse University Library reported for 21 June 1887: The conditional offer of the great Von Ranke Library brings to us once the greatest opportunity and responsibility of our history. It contains fully fifty thousand bound volumes, besides many thousands of pamphlets and manuscripts, the latter of inestimable value. It contains many works which cannot be duplicated and if we secure it we shall probably have the richest collection of historical material in the world.1 Under Prof. J.M. Powell, who initiated and led the ‘1  Million-Dollar Project,’ Ranke’s books were extensively catalogued and restored during the years 1975 to 1985. In 1951 and 1984, catalogues of the Ranke Library in Syracuse were published.2 At the same time Edward Muir edited a complete catalogue of the manuscript collection, which also included the private correspondence of Leopold and Clarissa von Ranke.3 The manuscript collection, consisting of 430 manuscripts, mainly represents the Venetian relazioni and were presented with a comment on each one of them. In the appendix ‘Leopold von Ranke’s and Clara Graves Ranke’s personal and family papers,’ consisting of around 400 letters and documents, were listed. In later years Prof. Powell and the Special Collections team also placed approximately 95% of the Ranke Library’s full bibliography on the internet. Today Syracuse regards Ranke’s collection as ‘a cornerstone of our rare book collection and [as] a primary source for the investigation of Ranke’s own development as a historian.’4 Syracuse holds a treasure embodied within Ranke’s private library: it is possible to research the type of books Ranke used for his research or what kind of

304  Appendix books he found interesting to read. It even goes a step further: in his younger years Ranke put notes, pencil marks and comments into the books. This presents scholars with the biggest task yet to be unfolded: how did Ranke actually approach printed sources, and what, from the marked material, did he actually use for his own research and writing? Recent research in relation to the writing of Irish history brought interesting facts to light. Several underlined and cross-marked text passages showed up in Ranke’s work again – sometimes as just a footnote. In some cases his notes were helpful in order to understand why certain printed sources were not used.5 On the search option of the website, the researcher can find most of the books and several manuscripts; however, it is suggested to ask the Special Collections Research Center first. The collection is so vast that sometimes particular books or manuscripts were registered under a different name or keyword, and because of this, the staff members can find the required materials much quicker. The book edited by Edward Muir is also helpful in regards to the manuscript and letter collections.

Trinity College Dublin (Ireland) Contact address Manuscript Collections Trinity College Library Trinity College Dublin Dublin 2 Ireland Phone: 00353-(1)-896 1189 Email: [email protected] Main collection •

Graves Archive, MSS 10047

Further information on the collection The manuscript collection in relation to the history of the Graves family in Ireland contains about 3,000 documents covering three centuries. The collection is of importance in regards to the background of Ranke’s wife, Clarissa, whose first letter is dated 1817. Altogether, about 200 of Clarissa’s and Leopold’s letters and manuscripts can be found in this collection, including a little pamphlet translated and handwritten by Ranke’s son Otto, in which he described Leopold’s last days. The German original was published in 1886; however, the wording of the translation is much more personal. In particular, Clarissa’s letters before her marriage can be found in this collection, and they offer considerable insight into her life.

Appendix  305 Trinity College Dublin holds major collections of manuscripts, letters and maps on the history of Ireland. The Graves archive is one of these, and parts of it relate to very influential family members within Irish society. Most men were involved with education (mainly at Trinity College Dublin), were vicars in the Protestant Church of Ireland or held other influential public offices such as state commissioners or crown solicitors. The archive also represents a perfect example of a highly educated family and their typical role as Protestants within a changing society in Ireland, at a time when Catholics were gaining more and more influence. The most important collections, however, refer to Clarissa’s brothers Charles and Robert Perceval Graves. Charles Graves played a significant role in Ireland as a senior fellow in Trinity College Dublin, as president of the Royal Irish Academy, the right-hand-man of the viceroy and Bishop of Limerick. Robert Perceval Graves lived for over 30 years in England; however, after his return he was involved in educational issues, such as the foundation of Alexandra College in Dublin in 1866. Another major collection refers to Robert (von Ranke) Graves, the renowned English poet and historical novelist, author of I, Claudius and Claudius the God. He is the grandson of Charles Graves and Ranke’s nephew Heinrich Ranke. Located within the old library building and just beside the main Long Room, filled with thousands of old books, the Manuscript Department reading room is an experience in itself to use. The library has an excellent catalogue with a very exact reference system. Every document is registered and all letters and manuscripts are listed within the catalogue after the authors and receivers, with a short summary of each section. Several unpublished Ranke letters have escaped the attention of many Ranke scholars.

Geheime Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz (Germany) Contact address Geheimes Staatsarchiv Preußischer Kulturbesitz Archivstraße 12–14 14195 Berlin (Dahlem) Germany Phone: 0049-(030) 266447500 Email: [email protected] Main collection • •

VI HA Familienarchive und Nachlässe, FA Geschwister Ranke VI HA Familienarchive und Nachlässe, FA Hoeft

Further information on the collection This manuscript collection, with about 50,000 documents, is situated today in the ‘Secret’ State Archive, Berlin, and mainly contains private papers on the Ranke family.

306  Appendix While most of Ranke’s siblings’ papers are complete (see section FA Geschwister Ranke), a large amount of Leopold von Ranke’s correspondence was destroyed during World War II. Most of his papers only survived as copies made by Bernhardt Hoeft when he prepared the first edition of Ranke’s letters, which was published posthumously in 1949 (see section FA Hoeft).6 This collection is mainly based on the Leopold von Ranke correspondence, and Hoeft concentrated his transcripts on him. Nevertheless several of Clarissa’s letters were registered and some of them were transcribed; however, most of them were destroyed with the rest of her husband’s originals. The Ranke collection of papers can only be viewed through a provisional catalogue, thus presenting the researcher with the unwelcome task of trawling through disorganized boxes with unsorted documents. Most references from here are vague; sometimes it is only a box number, because they have not been catalogued as individual manuscripts. Several scholars have viewed in particular the FA Hoeft collection, which was partly published in 1949, but several unpublished and ‘forgotten’ scripts can still be found in here. Due to the lack of a proper catalogue system, several papers have been mixed up by researching scholars. The other collection, FA Geschwister Ranke, mainly holds papers of Ranke’s siblings; however, several of his originals and excerpts of Ranke’s letters and diaries can be found in here. These papers are usually ‘overlooked’ by scholars who concentrate on the other collection. The archive holds many different and quite large types of collections, including the archives of the states of Brandenburg and Prussia, military archives of Prussia, parliamentary archives of Prussia 1847 to 1933 and archives on the House of Hohenzollern; non-state archives include map collections, territorial archives, archives on parties and organizations as well as estate and family archives. Several of these collections are at this stage available online, and the staff are very helpful with any kind of queries. For older collections which are not available online yet and have provisional catalogues, staff will help as much as possible. When receiving the boxes at check-out, scholars have to sign for it. This alone can be an experience because one can see who has viewed the materials previously, and the lists can extend back several years.

Staatsbibliothek Berlin (Germany) Contact address Staatsbibliothek Berlin Handschriftenabteilung Potsdamer Straße 33 10785 Berlin Germany Phone: 0049-(0)30–266–2841 Email: [email protected]

Appendix  307 Main collection • •

The Ranke Manuscript Collection, consisting of about 50,000 documents Dozens of letters

Further information on the collection The Ranke Manuscript Collection contains about 50,000 documents which he collected in European archives over a period of nearly 60 years, and they cover all parts of European history. However, German scholarship has not utilized these resources to conduct research on Ranke. More than 130 years after his death, the archive has hardly been opened, researched, registered or used to any significant degree. Paul Joachimsen first attempted this in 1922, and W.P. Fuchs and his team tried again in 1962. Both projects failed. Joachimsen and his team left behind nine rather than the one hundred intended volumes, along with a 24-page typed provisional catalogue with a carbon copy; Fuchs completed three of the six planned volumes for the Manuscript Department and 150, instead of the intended 10,000, card indexes. The teams of Joachimsen and Fuchs achieved a respectable amount, but much of the expected help from historians and historical associations was not forthcoming. In the course of World War II a number of documents, especially many of Ranke’s letters, were destroyed or lost. An online database called Kalliope (Web address: www.kalliope.de) was initiated back in the 1960s with the aim of registering large collections and makikng them accessible. Under Dr Jutta Weber, the Ranke collection recently came into focus. It is presently sorted and catalogued by Dr Siegfried Baur, who listed all the manuscripts box by box. With this database the researcher is able to get the registration number, what kind of document and its title, how many pages the document consists of and a short summary and comment, which are only some features presented in the database. Only 20% of this database of the collection is fully available, and it has been discontinued since 2011. Even though this collection largely does not refer to Clarissa, a few letters have an indirect connection to her. Dr Baur was able to prove that a number of documents were copied by her, such as a few documents in relation to Frederick the Great. This new information can help to understand her involvement in the work of Leopold von Ranke and gives a new insight into the family and working relationship between them. The archive holds a number of collections of famous families such as the Mendelssohns. The staff are very friendly and helpful, and the catalogue system is easy to follow.

Ranke-Museum Wiehe (Germany)7 Contact address Mr Rev. Gottfried Braasch Kammradtstraße 2

308  Appendix 06571 Wiehe Germany Phone: 0049-(0)34672–82233 Email: [email protected] Main collection • • • • •

Hundreds of books and secondary literature of and on Ranke, his brothers and their successors Collection of the so-called ‘Clarissa letters,’ amounting to 600 letters Hundreds of letters of the Ranke family and condolence letters on the death of Ranke Original documents, photography and original busts of the Ranke siblings Literature in regards to the familiar, regional and scientific surrounding

Further information on the collection The archive is located in the Ranke-Museum run by the Ranke-Society in Wiehe, Thuringia, Germany, which was newly established in 1993–94. It holds a large collection of Ranke’s works and secondary literature but also hundreds of manuscripts. The heart of the manuscript collection of around 600 unpublished letters are those of Ranke’s wife, Clarissa, which were given to the museum in 1995 by a descendant of Ranke, Dr Gisbert Bäcker-von Ranke. The manuscripts are quite important in understanding Ranke’s private life. While Ranke dictated and corrected many of his own letters, Clarissa wrote her letters without any later editing. This means they contain more spontaneous opinions and descriptions. The Wiehe collection contains copies of several unpublished Ranke letters that have escaped the attention of many Ranke scholars and will be made available to them soon. The unpublished collection of dozens of condolence letters on Ranke’s death and the whole family background are also quite impressive. The core collection of the ‘Clarissa letters’ and most of the other letters were transcribed and catalogued by Rev. Gottfried Braasch, Dr  Siegfried Baur and Dr Andreas D. Boldt from 2002 to 2007, and these are fully available for researchers in the museum. On a decision made by the society, this information will be prepared and made available on the website of the Ranke-Society for worldwide use in the near future. Members of the society are very friendly and helpful, as are the staff of the town hall of Wiehe, in which cellar the museum is located. There are plans to move the museum and archive holdings to the local castle mansion of the Wertherns, which belonged to the House of Werthern from 1452 to 1945. The town of Wiehe came into possession of the mansion in 1996, and it is currently under restoration.

Appendix  309

A selection of other locations with materials on the Ranke and Graves families Austria Vienna Belgium Brussels England (London) British Museum, House of Lords and House of Commons, Public Records Office (now The National Archives, Kew) France Paris Germany Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (Munich), Deutsches Literaturarchiv (Marbach), Freies Deutsches Hochstift (Frankfurt, Main), Generallandesarchiv (Karlsruhe), Germanisches Nationalmuseum (Nuremberg), Herzog-AugustBibliothek (Wolfenbüttel), Landesarchiv (Berlin), Schleswig-Holsteinische Landesbibliothek (Kiel), Stadtarchiv (Hannover), Stadtgeschichtliches Museum (Leipzig), Württembergische Landesbibliothek (Stuttgart), Zentralund Landesbibliothek (Berlin) Furthermore, different university libraries hold materials on Ranke: the Universitätsarchiv Berlin, Bonn, Cologne, Erlangen, Frankfurt, Freiburg, Göttingen, Heidelberg, Koblenz, Magdeburg, Merseburg, Munich, Pforta, Potsdam, Tübingen and Weimar Holland The Hague Ireland (Dublin) Royal Irish Academy, the National Library and the National Archives Italy Florence, Rome and Venice

310  Appendix Poland (Krakau) University Library Bibliotheka Jajiellonska Krakau Switzerland Basel, Luzern and Zurich

Notes 1 Syracuse University Library, Document Book, page 199, Chancellor’s Report, June 21, 1887; printed in: Hoeft, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, p. 41. 2 Siegfried Baur, Die Ranke-collection in Syracuse University library (Berlin, 2004), pp. 1–5, available at: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Handschriftenabteilung, www.kalliope-portal.de [1 July 2004]. 3 Muir, The Leopold von Ranke manuscript collection of Syracuse University. 4 Christian Dupont, ‘Research libraries and the Syracuse commitment to special collections’, in: Mary Beth Hinton (ed.), The library connection (Syracuse, 2003), p. 7. 5 In total, nineteen different book examples in relation to Irish history were listed in: Boldt, The role of Ireland in the life of Ranke, pp. 239–260. 6 Ranke, Neue Briefe. 7 This paragraph was written by Rev. Gottfried Braasch.

Bibliography

I. Ranke’s publications First editions of Ranke’s works, as used for this book Abhandlungen und Versuche. Erste Versuche (1877). Abhandlungen und Versuche. Neue Sammlung (1888). Aus dem Briefwechsel Friedrich Wilhelms IV. mit Bunsen (1873). ‘Briefwechsel Friedrichs des Großen mit dem Prinzen Wilhelm IV von Oranien und mit dessen Gemahlin, Anna, geb. Princess Royal von England’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1868), pp. 1–92. ‘De historiae et politices cognatione atque discrimine oratio’ (1836), in: Leopold von Ranke, Abhandlungen und Versuche. Erste Sammlung. Sämmtliche Werke 24 (Leipzig, 1877), pp. 269–279 (Latin), 280–293 (German). Denkwürdigkeiten des Staatskanzlers Fürsten von Hardenberg, 5 vols. (1877–78). Der Ursprung des Siebenjährigen Krieges (1871). Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation, 6 vols. (1842–47). Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780 bis 1790, 2 vols. (1871–72). Die serbische Revolution. Aus serbischen Papieren und Mitteilungen (1829). Englische Geschichte, vornehmlich im sechzehten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 9 vols. (1859–68). Französische Geschichte, vornehmlich im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 5 vols. (1856–61). Friedrich der Große. Friedrich Wilhelm der Vierte (1878). Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Vornehmlich aus ungedruckten Gesandschaftsberichten, vol. i (1827). Fürsten und Völker von Süd-Europa im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert. Vornehmlich aus ungedruckten Gesandschaftsberichten, vol. ii–iv. Better known under the title: Die römischen Päpste, ihre Kirche und ihr Staat im sechzehnten und siebzehnten Jahrhundert, 3 vols. (1834–36). Geschichte Wallensteins (1869). Geschichten der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494 bis 1535 (1824). Appendix: Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtsschreiber. Eine Beylage zu desselben romanischen und germanischen Geschichten (1824). Historisch-biographische Studien (1878). Historisch-politische Zeitschrift, 8 vols. (1832–36).

312  Bibliography Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reichs unter dem Sächsischen Hause, 2 vols. (1837–40). Neun Bücher Preußischer Geschichte, 3 vols. (1848). ‘Ueber den Ausbruch des siebenjährigen Krieges. Aus Mitchell’s ungedruckten Memoiren’, in: W.A. Schmidt (ed.), Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft (Berlin, 1844), pp. 134–163. ‘Ueber die Versammlung der französischen Notabeln im Jahre 1787, vornehmlich aus noch unbenutzten Documenten der Pariser Archive’, in: W.A. Schmidt (ed.), Allgemeine Zeitschrift für Geschichte, vol. v (Berlin, 1846), pp. 1–44. Ueber die Verschwörung gegen Venedig, im Jahre 1618. Mit Urkunden aus dem Venezianischen Archive (1831). Ursprung und Beginn der Revolutionskriege 1791 und 1792 (1875). Weltgeschichte, 9 vols. (1881–88). Zur deutschen Geschichte. Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum dreißigjährigen Krieg (1874). ‘Zur Geschichte der italienischen Poesie’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1835), pp. 401–485. A separate reprint also exists for the year 1837. ‘Zur Geschichte des Don Carlos’, in: Jahrbücher der Literatur, vol. xlvi (Vienna, 1829), pp. 227–266. Zur Geschichte Deutschlands und Frankreichs im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (1887). Zur Geschichte von Österreich und Preußen zwischen den Friedensschlüssen zu Aachen und Hubertusburg (1875). ‘Zur Kritik fränkisch-deutscher Reichsannalisten’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1854), pp. 415–458. ‘Zur Kritik Preußischer Memoiren’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (Berlin, 1851), pp.  517–544. ‘Zur orientalischen Frage. Gutachten im Juli 1854 Sr. Majestät König Friedrich Wilhelm IV vorgetragen’, in: Historische Zeitschrift (1865), pp. 406–433. Ranke’s collected works (Sämmtliche Werke, 54 vols., 1867–90). Abhandlungen und Versuche. Erste Sammlung, vol. 24. Abhandlungen und Versuche. Neue Sammlung, vols. 51–52. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation, vols. 1–6. Die deutschen Mächte und der Fürstenbund. Deutsche Geschichte von 1780–1790, vols. 31–32. Die Osmanen und die Spanische Monarchie im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert, vols. 35–36. Die römischen Päpste in den letzten vier Jahrhunderten, vols. 37–39. Englische Geschichte, vols. 14–22. Französische Geschichte, vols. 8–13. Geschichte der romanischen und germanischen Völker von 1494–1514. – Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtschreiber, vols. 33–34. Geschichte Wallensteins, vol. 23. Hardenberg und die Geschichte des Preußischen Staates von 1793–1813, vols. 46–48. Historisch-biographische Studien, vols. 40–41. Serbien und die Türkei im 19. Jahrhundert, vols. 43–44. Ursprung und Beginn der Revolutionskriege 1791 und 1792, vol. 45. Zur deutschen Geschichte. Vom Religionsfrieden bis zum dreißigjährigen Kriege, vol. 7. Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte, vols. 53–54. Zur Geschichte Deutschlands und Frankreichs im 19. Jahrhundert, vols. 49–50. Zur Geschichte von Österreich und Preußen zwischen den Friedensschlüssen zu Aachen und Hubertusburg, vol. 30.

Bibliography  313 Zur Venezianischen Geschichte, vol. 42. Zwölf Bücher preußischer Geschichte, vols. 25–29.

English translations of Ranke’s works ‘A Dialogue on Politics’ and ‘The Great Powers’, in: Theodore M. Von Laue (ed.), Leopold Ranke: The Formative Years (Princeton, 1950), pp. 152–218. Ferdinand First and Maximilian Second of Austria, trans. Lady Duff Gordon (London, 1853). History of Civil Wars and Monarchy in France, trans. M.A. Garney, 2 vols. (London, 1852), but only vol. i from the German edition translated. History of England, Principally in the 17th Century, trans. G.W. Kitchin and C.W. Boase, 6 vols. (London, 1875). History of the Latin and Teutonic Nations, 1494–1514, trans. P.A. Ashworth (London, 1887). Translation does not contain the critical appendix ‘In criticism of modern historians’. History of Ottoman and Spanish Empires, trans. Walter K. Kelly (London, 1843). History of the Popes, Their Church and State, and Especially of Their Conflicts with Protestantism in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. ——— trans. S. Austin, 3 vols. (London, 1840). ——— trans. Walter K. Kelly (London, 1843). ——— trans. D.D. Scott, 2 vols. (London, 1851). ——— trans. E. Foster, 3 vols. (London, 1853–56). ——— trans. E. Fowler (London, 1901). History of the Prussian Monarchy from Its Rise to the Present Time, trans. Franz C.F. Demmler, only vol. i translated (London, 1847). History of the Reformation in Germany, trans. S. Austin, 3 vols. (London, 1845–47). History of Servia and the Servian Revolution. With an Account of the Insurrection in Bosnia, trans. A. Kerr (London, 1847). Memoirs of the House of Brandenburg and History of Prussia, During the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, trans. Sir A. and Lady Duff Gordon, 3 vols. (1849). ‘On the Relation of and Distinction Between History and Politics’, in: Roger Wines (ed.), The Secret of World History: Selected Writings on the Art and Science of History (New York, 1981), pp. 106–117. The Theory and Practice of History: Leopold von Ranke, ed. by Georg G. Iggers (London, 2011). Most of the texts were translated by Wilma A. Iggers: ——— ‘The Young Ranke’s Vision of History and God’ (excerpts from a letter to his brother Heinrich from Frankfurt/Oder, end of March 1820). ——— ‘Preface to the First Edition of Histories of the Latin and Germanic Peoples’ (October 1824). ——— ‘On the Character of Historical Science’ (a manuscript of the 1830s). ——— ‘On the Relations of History and Philosophy’ (a manuscript of the 1830s). ——— ‘The Great Powers’ (1833). ——— History of the Popes (selections from the first two books) (1834). ——— ‘Preface to History of the Popes’ (1834). ——— ‘A Dialogue on Politics’ (1836). ——— ‘On the Relation of and Distinction Between History and Politics’ (1836). ——— ‘The Pitfalls of a Philosophy of History’ (introduction to a lecture on Universal History; a manuscript of the 1840s).

314  Bibliography ——— ‘On Progress in History’ (from the first lecture to King Maximilian II of Bavaria ‘On the Epochs of Modern History’, 1854). ——— ‘Preface to History of France’ (1852). ——— ‘Preface to History of England’ (1859). ——— ‘The Role of the Particular and the General in the Study of Universal History’ (a manuscript of the 1860s). ——— ‘Preface to Universal History’ (1880). Universal History: Oldest Historical Group of Nations, ed. G.W. Prothero (London, 1884), only vol. i translated.

Presentation announcements with a short commentary ‘Über die Verfassung der Republik Venedig, besonders des Raths der Zehn’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1836), pp. 102–103. ‘Über eine noch ungedruckte Lebensbeschreibung Kaiser Maximilian’s I. von Hans Jacob Fugger’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1837), pp. 140–141. ‘Über einige noch unbenutzte Sammlungen deutscher Reichstagsacten’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1838), p. 11. ‘Zur Geschichte der italienischen Poesie: Auszug aus dem Abschnitt über Torquato Tasso’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1836), pp. 7–8. ‘Zur Geschichte der italienischen Poesie: Nachträgliche Bemerkung’, in: Abhandlungen der Königlichen Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin (1837), pp. 499–500.

II. Reviews and publications on Ranke Acton, Lord, ‘German schools of history’, in: The English Historical Review, vol. i, no. 1 (1886), pp. 7–42. Adams, C.K., ‘Recent historical work in the colleges and universities of Europe and America’, in: Papers of the American Historical Association, vol. iv (1889), pp. 39–65. Adams, G.B., ‘History and the philosophy of history’, in: AHR 14 (1909), pp. 221–236. Adams, H.B., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: American Academy of Arts and Science, vol. xxii, part 2, pp. 542–558. Adams, H.B., ‘New methods of study in history’, in: Johns Hopkins University Studies in History and Political Science, vol. ii (1884), pp. 26–136. Adams, H.B., ‘Special methods of historical studies as pursued at the Johns Hopkins University and formerly at Smith College’, in: White, A.D., and Allen, W.F. (eds.), Methods of Teaching History (Boston, 1885). Adams, H.B., ‘Seminar libraries and university extensions’, in: Johns Hopkins Studies, vol. v (1887), pp. 437–469. Adams, H.B., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Papers of the American Historical Association, vol. iii (New York, 1888), pp. 101–133. Adams, H.B., ‘Is history past politics?’ in: Johns Hopkins Studies, vol. xiii (1895), pp. 189–203. Altgeld, Wolfgang, Das politische Italienbild der Deutschen zwischen Aufklärung und europäischer Revolution von 1848. Diss. (Passau, 1984).

Bibliography  315 Angermeier, Heinz, ‘Ranke und Burckhardt’, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. lxix, no. 2 (1987), pp. 407–452. Ankersmith, Frank, ‘Historismus: Versuch einer Synthese’, in: Oexle, O.G., and Rüsen, Jörn (eds.), Historismus in den Kulturwissenschaften. Geschichtskonzepte, historische Einschätzungen, Grundlagenprobleme (Cologne, 1996), pp. 389–410. Ankersmith, Frank, ‘The necessity of historicism’, in: Journal of the Philosophy of History, vol. 4, no. 2 (2010), pp. 226–240. Ankersmith, Frank, and Kellner, Hans (eds.), A New Philosophy of History (London, 1995). Apelt, Otto, ‘Rankes Geschichtsphilosophie. Ein Vortrag’, in: Jahres-Bericht über das Carl-Friedrichs-Gymnasium zu Eisenach (Eisenach, 1899), pp. 11–24. Arnold, J.H., History, a Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2000). Aschmann, Birgit, Elvert, Jürgen, and Saleswki, Michael, Überlegungen zum Projekt einer wissenschaftlichen Edition der Werke (1795–1886) (Kiel, 2001). Asendorf, Manfred, ‘ “Objektivität” der Geschichte: L.v. Ranke und die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Hahn, Manfred, and Sandkühler, H.J. (eds.), Gesellschaftliche Bewegung und Naturprozeß (Cologne, 1981), pp. 49–60. Asendorf, Manfred, Geschichte und Parteilichkeit (Berlin, 1984). Assmann, Bernhard, ‘Digitale edition im internet, oder Hätte Ranke einen Scanner benutzt?’ in: Historical Social Research, vol. 21, no. 4 (1996), p. 136. ‘Aus dem Luther-Fragment Leopold von Rankes’, in: Zeitwende, year 2 (Munich, 1926), pp. 71–79. Baar, Simon, Die methodologischen und geschichtstheoretischen Positionen des “Historismus” Rankescher Prägung (2011). Baberowski, Jörg, Der Sinn der Geschichte. Geschichtstheorien von Hegel bis Foucault (Munich, 2005). Bachmann, Adolf, ‘Die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts im Rahmen der öffentlichen Ereignisse. Rektoratsrede’, in: Die feierliche Installation des Rektors d. k. k. dt. Karl-Ferdinands-Univ. in Prag für d. Studienjahr 1902/03 (Prag, 1903), pp. 19–62. Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert, Rankes Geschichtsschreibung im Urteil der deutschen Öffentlichkeit. Hausarbeit. Dem Wissenschaftlichen Prüfungsamt für das Lehramt an höheren Schulen Köln vorgelegt (Cologne, 1952). Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert, Leopold von Ranke und seine Familie: Kulturgeschichtliches Bild einer deutschen Gelehrtenfamilie im neunzehnten Jahrhundert. Diss. (Bonn, 1955). Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert, Rankes Ehefrau Clarissa geb. Graves Perceval (Göttingen, 1967a). Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert, ‘Kondolenzbriefe nach dem Tode Leopold von Rankes’, in: Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, vol. xviii, no. 1 (1967b), pp. 33–40. Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert, Clarissa von Ranke, geb. Graves Perceval, die Ehefrau des großen Historikers (Stolberg, 1968). Backs, Silvia, Dialektisches Denken in Rankes Geschichtsschreibung bis 1854 (Cologne, 1985). Bahners, Patrick, Das Bild der Glorious Revolution im Werk Rankes und Macaulays, ein historiographie-geschichtlicher Vergleich. M.A. thesis (Bonn, 1989). Bahners, Patrick, ‘ “Die göttliche Komödie”. Ranke und White’, in: Storia della Storiografia, vol. 24 (1993). Bahners, Patrick, ‘Generatio praeterit, et generatio advenit. Zeit und Wandel in Rankes Papstgeschichte’, in: Pfusterschmidt-Hardtenstein, Heinrich (ed.), Zeit und Wahrheit (Vienna, 1994), pp. 267–285.

316  Bibliography Bahners, Patrick, ‘National unification and narrative unity. The case of Ranke’s German History’, in: Berger, Stefan, Donovan, Mark, and Passmore, Kevin (eds.), Writing National Histories. Europe Since 1800 (London, 1999), pp. 57–68. Bahners, Patrick, ‘ “A place among the English classics”. Ranke’s history of the Popes and its British readers’, in: Stuchtey, Benedict, and Wende, Peter (eds.), British and German Historiography 1750–1950. Traditions, Perceptions and Transfers (Oxford, 2000), pp. 123–157. Bailleu, Paul, Leopold von Ranke (1895). Bancroft, Frederic, ‘A reminiscence of Ranke’, in: Papers of the AHA, vol. 3, no. 1 (New York, 1888), pp. 121–124. Bann, Stephen, ‘The historian as taxidermist: Ranke, Barante, Waterton’, in: Comparative Criticism: An Annual Journal, vol. 3, no. 1 (Edinburgh, 1981), pp. 21–49. Barg, M.A., ‘Leopold von Rankes Geschichtskonzeption aus der Sicht der heutigen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang, (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 223–263. Barker, John, The Super Historians. Makers of Our Past (New York, 1982). Barnes, H.E., The History and Prospects of the Social Sciences (New York, 1925a). Barnes, H.E., ‘Ranke’s aimless search for what occurred’, in: Barnes, H.E., (ed.), The New History and the Social Studies (New York, 1925b). Barnes, H.E., ‘History: Its rise and development’, in: The Encyclopaedia Americana, vol. xiv (New York, 1932). Barnes, H.E., A History of Historical Writing (Norman, 1937). Baron, S.W., ‘Graetz und Ranke: A methodological study’, in: Baron, S.W. (ed.), History and Jewish Historians. Essays and Addresses (Philadelphia, 1964), pp. 269–275. Bartoniczek, Andre, Imaginative Geschichtserkenntnis, Rudolf Steiner und die Erweiterung der Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 2009). Bärwald, ‘Rezension zum ersten Band der “Englischen Geschichte” ’, in: Grenzbote (1860). Bäthgen, F., ‘Zur geistigen Entwicklung Rankes in seiner Frühzeit’, in: Deutschland und Europa. Festschrift für Hans Rothfels (Düsseldorf, 1951), pp. 337–353. Bauer, Wilhelm, ‘Der Krieg in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung von Leopold von Ranke bis Karl Lamprecht’, in: Das Bild des Krieges im Deutschen Denken, vol. 1, no. 5 (Stuttgart, 1941), pp. 133–183. Baumann, J., Leopold von Ranke en de nieuwere geschiedsschrijving (1900). Baur, Siegfried, ‘Kurze Anmerkung zu Rankes Bibliothek’, in: Schriftenreihe des RankeVereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 85–87. Baur, Siegfried, Versuch über die Historik des jungen Ranke (Berlin, 1998a). Baur, Siegfried, Work in progress: “Free Spaces”: Ranke’s foundation of scholarly history, 1830–1849 (Syracuse, 1998b). Baur, Siegfried, Rankes “Historisch-Politische Zeitschrift” (Frankfurt/Main, 2001a). Baur, Siegfried, ‘Franz Leopold Ranke, The Ranke library at Syracuse, and the open future of scientific history’, in Hinton, M.B. (ed.), Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, vol. xxxiii (Syracuse, 2001b), pp. 7–41. Baur, Siegfried, ‘Die Freiräume der Historie. Anmerkungen zu Aufstieg und Fall der Historisch-politischen Zeitschrift Rankes’, in: Muhlack, Ulrich (ed.), Historisierung und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 2003), pp. 61–85. Baur, Siegfried, Die Ranke-Collection in Syracuse University Library (Berlin, 2004a), available at: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Handschriftenabteilung, www.kalliope-portal.de [1 July 2004].

Bibliography  317 Baur, Siegfried, Die Ranke-Sammlung in der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (Berlin, 2004b), available at: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Handschriftenabteilung, www.kalliope-portal.de [1 July 2004]. Baur, Siegfried, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. Eine Freundschaft von 1820 bis KALLIOPE’, in: Bibliotheksmagazin 1 (2007), pp. 15–22. Baur, Siegfried, ‘Nachlaβ laβ nach. Bemerkungen über den Ranke-Nachlaβ’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), pp. 64–75. Bayly, C.A., ‘Writing world history’, in: History Today, vol. liv, 2 (London, 2004), pp. 36–40. Beard, C.A., ‘Written history as an act of faith’, in: AHR 39, no. 2 (1934), pp. 219–231. Beard, C.A., ‘That noble dream’, in: American Historical Review, no. 41 (1935). Beard, C.A., ‘Currents of thought in historiography’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xlii (1936–37), pp. 460–483. Beck, Martin, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Ein Gedenkblatt zum 21. December’, in: Wissenschaftliche Beilage der Leipziger Zeitung, no. 152 (1895), pp. 605–608. Becker, Carl, ‘On detachment and the writing of history’, in: The Atlantic Monthly, vol. cvi (1910). Becker, Carl, ‘Some aspects of the influence of social problems and ideas upon the study and writing of history’, in: American Journal of Sociology, vol. xviii (1912–13). Becker, Carl, ‘Every man his own historian’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xxxvii (1931–32), pp. 221–236. Beiser, Frederick, ‘Hegel and Ranke: A re-examination’, in: Houlgate, Stephen and Baur, Michael (eds.), A Companion to Hegel (Oxford, 2011). Below, Georg von, Die deutsche Geschichtsschreibung von den Befreiungskriegen bis zu unsern Tagen. Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsauffassung (Leipzig, 1916). Below, Georg von, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Arnim, Hans von, and Below, Georg von (eds.), Deutscher Aufstieg. Bilder aus der Vergangenheit und Gegenwart der rechtsstehenden Parteien (Berlin, 1925), pp. 181–185. Below, Georg von, ‘Wie es eigentlich gewesen’, in: VSWG 20 (1928), pp. 452–460. Below, Georg von, and Schulz, Marie (eds.), ‘Briefe von K.W. Nitzsch an W. Maurenbrecher (1861–1880)’, in: AKG 8 (1910), pp. 305–366, 437–468. Below, Georg von, and Vogel, K. (eds.), ‘Briefe von K.W. Nitzsch an W. Schrader (1868– 1880)’, in: AKG 10 (1912), pp. 49–110. Bender, Rüdinger, ‘Rankes Philosophie der Geschichte als Ethik der Geschichtsbetrachtung’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 54–69. Bennett, Charles W., ‘The Ranke library in America’, in: Papers of the AHA, vol. 3, no. 1 (New York, 1889), pp. 131–133. Bennett, Charles W., ‘The purchase of the von Ranke library’, in: The Courier, vol. 15, no. 2–3 (1978), pp. 19–31. Bentley, Michael, Modern Historiography – An Introduction (London, 2000). Bentley, Michael, Companion to Historiography (New York, 2002). Benzoni, Gino, ‘Ranke’s favorite source: The Venetian Relazioni. Impressions with allusions in later historiography’, in: Iggers, G.G. and Powell, J.M. (eds.), Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline (Syracuse, 1990). Berding, Helmut, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Wehler, H-U. (ed.), Deutsche Historiker (Göttingen, 1971), pp. 7–24. Berdrow, Otto, Rahel Varnhagen. Ein Lebens- und Zeitbild (Stuttgart, 1902). Berg, Gunter, Leopold von Ranke als akademischer Lehrer (Göttingen, 1968).

318  Bibliography Berger, Siegfried, Leopold von Ranke und seine Heimat (Merseburg, 1936a). Berger, Siegfried, ‘Ueber die Familie Ranke’, in: Ekkehard. Mitteilungsbl. Deutscher Genealogischen Abende, vol. 12 (Halle, 1936b), pp. 50–51. Berger, Siegfried, Neue Lebenszeugnisse von Jakob Grimm und Leopold von Ranke (Halle, 1942). Berger, Stefan, ‘The German tradition of historiography, 1800–1995’, in: Fulbrook, Mary, (ed.), German History Since 1800 (London, 1997), pp. 477–492. Berger, Stefan, Feldner, Heiko, and Passmore, Kevin (eds.), Writing History. Theory and Practice (London, 2003). Bernheim, Ernst, Lehrbuch der historischen Methode und der Geschichtsphilosophie (Leipzig, 1894). Berthold, Werner, ‘Zu den Weltgeschichtskonzeptionen Hegels und Rankes: Ein Vergleich’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. xxxvi, no. 5 (1988a), pp. 387–396. Berthold, Werner, ‘Die Konzeption der Weltgeschichte bei Hegel und Ranke’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988b), pp. 72–90. Berthold, Werner, ‘Weltgeschichtskonzeption und Stellung zur Großen Französischen Revolution  – ein Vergleich der “Philosophie der Weltgeschichte” Hegels und der “Epochen der neueren Geschichte” Rankes’, in: Kossok, M., and Kruß, E. (eds.), 1789 – Weltwirkung einer großen Revolution (Berlin, 1989), pp. 599–627. Besser, Kurt, Rankes Ideenlehre, dargestellt im Anschluss an seine “Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation” und seine, dieselbe Periode betreffenden Ausserungen zur “Eigenen Lebensgeschichte”. Diss. (Göttingen, 1920). Besson, W. (ed.), Das Fischer Lexikon-Geschichte (Frankfurt/Main, 1961). Beyer, H.W., ‘Eine Träumerei des greisen Leopold von Ranke’, in: Die Wartburg, vol. 35 (Berlin, 1936), pp. 200–203. Beysig, Kurt, ‘Maßstäbe der Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Die Zukunft 40 (1902), pp. 12–26. Biereye, Johannes, ‘Leopold von Ranke, der größte deutsche Historiker und seine Beziehungen zu Erfukt’, in: Erfurter Allgemeiner Anzeiger, vol. 58, no. 88 (1907). Bilger, Ferdinand, ‘Die italienische Einheitsbewegung im Urteile Rankes, Heinrich Leos und Jakob Grimms’, in: MÖIG 41 (1926), pp. 279–288. Billinger, R.D. Jr., ‘Three German historians in the twenty-first century on four German historians of the nineteenth century: Gruner, Elvert, and Ruppenthal concerning Heeren, Ranke, Sybel, and Treitschke’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, Historische Mitteilungen, vol. 27 (Stuttgart, 2015), pp. 157–159. Black, Jeremy, und MacRaild, D.D., Studying History (London, 2000). Blanke, H.W., Historiographiegeschichte als Historik (Stuttgart, 1992). Blanning, T.C.W., The Oxford Illustrated History of Modern Europe (Oxford, 1996). Blanning, T.C.W., The Culture of Power and the Power of Culture (Oxford, 2002). Blounin, F.X., and Rosenberg, W.G., Processing the Past: Contesting Authority in History and the Archives (New York, 2013). Bödeker, H.E., Iggers, G.G., Knudsen, J.B., and Reill, P.H. (eds.), Aufklärung und Geschichte: Studien zur deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft im 18. Jahrhundert (Göttingen, 1986). Boehlich, Walter, ‘Die Mär der Weltgeschichte. Ranke nach seinen Briefen’, in: Neue Schweizer Rundschau, N.F., vol. 20 (1953), pp. 21–27. Boldt, Andreas, Leopold von Ranke and Ireland, M.A. thesis (Maynooth, 2000). Boldt, Andreas, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Irland’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart 2002a), pp. 51–77.

Bibliography  319 Boldt, Andreas, ‘Leopold von Ranke and the Graves family in Ireland’, in: Kelly, T.A.F., Murphy, Marie, and McHugh, Louise (eds.), NUI Maynooth Postgraduate Research Record: Proceedings of the Colloquium (Maynooth, 2002b), pp. 173–177. Boldt, Andreas, ‘Leopold von Ranke and Ireland: The creation of an Irish identity in Ranke’s History of England’, in: Alcobia-Murphy, Shane, Archbold, Johanna, Gibney, John and Jones, Carole (eds.), Beyond the Anchoring Grounds: More Cross-Currents in Irish and Scottish Studies (Belfast, 2005a), pp. 34–39. Boldt, Andreas, ‘Peter Hart and his enemies’, letter to the editor on the Peter Hart debate, in: History Ireland (September/October 2005b), pp. 12–14. Boldt, Andreas, The Role of Ireland in the Life of Leopold von Ranke (1785–1886): The Historian and Historical Truth (Lampeter, 2007). Boldt, Andreas, ‘Von Ranke in Dublin’, in: History Ireland (2008a), pp. 26–31. Boldt, Andreas, ‘Perception, depiction and description of European history: Leopold von Ranke and his development and understanding of modern historical writing’, in: eSharp, University of Glasgow (2008b), p.  17, available at: www.gla.ac.uk/media/ media_64280_en.pdf. Boldt, Andreas, ‘Migration due to marriage: Clarissa von Ranke and the cosmopolitan cultural atmosphere of the new “home” ’, in: Glenn, Diana, Bouvet, Eric and Floriani, Sonia (eds.), Imagining Home: Migrants and the Search for a New Belonging (Kent Town, 2011), pp. 15–30. Boldt, Andreas, Leopold von Ranke und Irland (Stuttgart, 2012a). Boldt, Andreas, The Clarissa von Ranke Letters and the Ranke-Graves Correspondence 1843–1886 (Lampeter, 2012b). Boldt, Andreas, ‘Ranke: Objectivity and history’, in: Rethinking History, 18/4 (2014), pp. 457–474. DOI:10.1080/13642529.2014.893658. Boldt, Andreas, The Life and Work of the German Historian Leopold von Ranke (1795– 1886). An Assessment of His Achievement (New York, 2015). Boldt, Andreas, Das Leben und Werk von Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 2016). Boldt, Andreas, ‘Leopold von Ranke on Irish history and the Irish nation’, in: Cogent, Arts & Humanities (2017a), 4, 1314629 (19 pages). DOI:10.1080/23311983.2017.1314629. Boldt, Andreas, ‘Longing and belonging within an academic family of the 19th century: The example of Clarissa and Leopold von Ranke’, in: Longing and Belonging/Desir et Appartenance, Fusillo, Massimo, Le Juez, Brigitte, and Seligardi, Beatrice (eds.), Between, VII.13 (2017b), p. 19. available at: www.betweenjournal.it. Bornkammn, Heinrich, Luther im Spiegel der deutschen Geistesgeschichte. Mit auserwählten Texten von Lessing bis zur Gegenwart (Heidelberg, 1955). Borris, Kurt, ‘Zwei Briefe von und an Leopold von Ranke’, in: Archiv für Politik und Geschichte, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1923), pp. 355–361. Borris, Kurt, ‘Vom Werdegang Rankes bis zum Antritt seiner Berliner Professur. Unter Benutzung ungedruckter Papiere aus dem Nachlaß’, in: Archiv für Politik und Geschichte, vol. 5 (Berlin, 1927), pp. 23–38. Borris, Kurt, Preußen im Krimkrieg (1853–1856) (Stuttgart, 1930). Borst, Arno, ‘Ranke und Karl der Große’, in: Vierhaus, R., and Botzenhardt, M. (eds.), Dauer und Wandel. Aspekte europäischer Vergangenheit (Münster, 1966), pp. 448–482. Bossert, A., Histoire de la litterature allemande (Ouvrage couronne par l’Academie Francaise) (Paris, 1904). Bötticher, Hellmuth, Rankes Geschichtsanschauung als seelische Erlebnisform. Diss. (Breslau, 1921). Bourke, Eoin, “Poor Green Erin”. German Travel Writers’ Narratives on Ireland from Before the 1798 Rising to After the Great Famine (Frankfurt/Main, 2011).

320  Bibliography Bourne, E.G., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Annual Reports of the American Historical Association, vol. I (1896a), pp. 65–82. Bourne, E.G., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: The Sewanee Review, vol. 4, no. 4 (1896b), pp. 385–401. Bourne, E.G., ‘Ranke and the beginning of the seminary method in teaching history’, in: Educational Review, vol. xii (1896c), pp. 359–367. Bourne, E.G., ‘Leopold von Ranke. An address before the AHA in Washington, December  26, 1895, in commemoration of the one hundredth anniversary of Ranke’s birth, December 21, 1795’, in: Annual Report of the AHA for the Year 1896, vol. 1 (1897), pp. 67–81. Bourne, E.G., Essays in Historical Criticism (New York, 1901). Braasch, Gottfried, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Familie in Wiehe’, in: Ranke-Verein (ed.), Leopold von Ranke (Wiehe, 1995), pp. 13–22. Braasch, Gottfried, ‘Die Ranke-Familie’, in: Stadtverwaltung Wiehe (ed.), Wiehe (Artern, 1999), pp. 34–39. Braasch, Gottfried, Die Gebrüder Ranke und ihre Beziehungen zu Schulpforta (Wiehe, 2001). Brackmann, Albert (ed.), Deutschland und Polen. Beiträge zu ihren geschichtlichen Beziehungen (Munich, 1933). Brady, T.A., ‘Ranke, Rom und die Reformation. Leopold von Rankes Entdeckung des Katholizismus’, in: Jahrbuch des Historischen Kollegs 1999 (Munich, 2000), pp. 43–60. Brandi, Karl, ‘Die Entstehung von Leopold von Rankes Deutscher Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation’, in: Nachrr. d. Akad. d. Wiss. in Gött. (1947a), pp. 13–23. Brandi, Karl, Geschichte der Geschichtswissenschaft (Göttingen, 1947b). Brandner, Ferdinand, Kritik an Rankes Weltanschauung. Diss. (Graz, 1939). Braun, Otto, Geschichtsphilosophie (Leipzig, 1913). Braw, J.D., ‘Vision as revision: Ranke and the beginning of modern history’, in: History and Theory, vol. xlvi (2007), pp. 45–60. Brechermacher, Thomas, ‘Zum Stand der am historiographischen Werk orientierten RankeForschung’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart, 2002), pp. 10–16. Breisach, Ernst, Historiography (Chicago, 1997). Brennan, Brian, ‘Ranke’s Caesar’, in: Quaderni di storia, Bari 20 (1994), pp. 79–93. Brennan, Brian, ‘Burckhardt and Ranke on the age of Constantine the Great’, in: Quaderni di storia, Bari 20 (1995), pp. 53–65. Bresslau, Harry, ‘Ein Versuch, Leopold Ranke nach Heidelberg zu berufen’, in: SBB d. Heidelberger Akad. d. Wiss., philosph.-hist. Kl. (Heidelberg, 1921). Breuning, C., and M. Levinger, M., The Revolutionary Era 1789–1850 (New York, 2002). Brobjer, Thomas, ‘Nietzsche’s relation to historical methods and nineteenth-century German historiography’, in: History and Theory, vol. 46, no. 2 (2007), pp. 155–179. Brode, Reinhold, ‘Ranke und die Geschichtsschreibung über Friedrich den Großen’, in: Beil. z. AZ, (Munich, 1899), no. 159, pp. 1–4, no. 160, pp. 2–5. Brode, Reinhold, Friedrich der Groβe und der Conflict mit seinem Vater. Zur inneren Geschichte der Monarchie Friedrich Wilhelms des Ersten (Leipzig, 1904). Brogan, H.O., Pace, Antonio, and Weinberger, Adolph, The Leopold von Ranke Manuscripts of Syracuse University (Syracuse, 1951). Brownlee, J.S., Japanese Historians and the National Myths, 1600–1945 (UBC, 1997). Bruch, Rüdinger vom, and Müller, R.A. (eds.), Historikerlexikon. Von der Antike bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1991).

Bibliography  321 Bubitz, H., ‘Lebendige Erfahrung als Grundlage der Begrifflichkeit in den Sozialwissenschaften?’ in: Feyerabend, P., and Thomas, C. (eds.), Grenzprobleme der Wissenschaften (Zürich, 1985). Buchhart, Helmut, Die Darstellung der Geschichte des Papsttums bei Ranke, zu dessen verschiedenen Schaffensepochen. Diss. (Vienna, 1965). Buchholz, Gustav, ‘Ursprung und Wesen der modernen Geschichtsauffassung’, in: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 2 (1889), pp. 17–37. Büchsenschütz, Karl, ‘Schulpforta, eine sächsisch-thüringische Bildungseinrichtung damals und heute’, in: “Ich habe immer gedacht, dass der Historiker alt werden muss.” Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, vol. 2 (Wiehe, 1996). Buck, T.M., ‘Zu Rankes Diktum von 1824: eine vornehmlich textkritische Studie’, in: Historisches Jahrbuch, vol. cxix (1999), pp. 159–185. Burckhardt, Johannes, Die Entstehhung der modernen Jahrhundertrechnung: Ursprung und Ausbildung einer historiographischen Technik von Flacius bis Ranke. Diss. (Göttingen, 1971). Burke, Peter, ‘Ranke the reactionary’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1988a), pp. 25–30. Burke, Peter, ‘Ranke als Gegenrevolutionär’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (eds.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988b), pp. 189–200. Burrow, John, A History of Histories (London, 2007). Bursch, Roland, “Wir dichten die Geschichte.” Adaption und Konstruktion von Historie bei Friedrich Dürrenmatt (Würzburg, 2006). Busse, Ulrich, Das Individuum in Rankes Papstgeschichte und in seinen Frühwerken. Diss. (Hamburg, 1933). Bussmann, Walter, Zwischen Preußen und Deutschland. Friedrich Wilhelm IV. Eine Biographie (Berlin, 1990). Butowsky, H.A., Leopold von Ranke and the Jewish Question. Diss. (London, 1975). Butterfield, Herbert, Man on His Past. The Study of the History of Historical Scholarship (Cambridge, 1955). Caemmerer, Hermann von, ‘Rankes “Große Mächte” und die Geschichtsschreibung des 18. Jahrhunderts’, in: Studien und Versuche (1910), pp. 263–312. Cannon, John (ed.), The Historian at Work (London, 1980). Caprivi, Leopold von, ‘Ranke und die politische Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Die Weltliteratur N.F., vol. 17 (Berlin, 1942), pp. 49–52. Carr, E.H., What Is History? (London, 1990). Cassirer, Ernst, The Problem of Knowledge, Philosophy, Science and History Since Hegel (New Haven, 1950). Champion, Justin, ‘Review of Jonathan Scott, England troubles: Seventeenth-century English political instability in European context (Cambridge, 2000)’, S. 1–4, available at: H-Net review in the humanities and social sciences online, www.H-net.com [1 July 2004]. Chavat, A., ‘The Leopold von Ranke historical library’, in: Chavat, A. (ed.), The History of the Syracuse University Historical Department. Diss. (Syracuse, 1957). Cherbuliez, V. (under the pseudonym G. Valibert), ‘Leopold Ranke’, in: Rev. des Deux Mondes (August 1, 1886), pp. 693–704. Cherbuliez, V. ‘Frederic Guillaume IV et Leopold von Ranke’, in: Rev. des Deux Mondes (September 1, 1887), pp. 201–212. Christ, Karl, Römische Geschichte und deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft (Munich, 1982).

322  Bibliography Clark, Elizabeth, History, Theory, Text: Historians and the Linguistic Turn (Cambridge, 2004). Claus, Peter, and Marriott, John, History: An Introduction to Theory, Method and Practice (Harlow, 2012). Clough, C.H., ‘A forgotten library. The Leopold von Ranke collection of books and manuscripts’, in: Librarium (Zürich, 1964). Collingwood, R.G., The Idea of History (Oxford, 2005). Comfort, G.F., ‘The death of Leopold von Ranke’, in: Warren, O.H. (ed.), Northern Christian, vol. xlvi, no. 22 (Syracuse, 1886). Comfort, G.F., Der Tod Leopold von Rankes. Conze, Eckart, ‘Der Historiker als Politikberater. Leopold von Rankes politische Denkschriften 1848 bis 1851’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. XIV (Stuttgart 2002), pp. 24–37. Cook, L.A., Luther, Herder, and Ranke: The Reformation’s Impact on German Idealist Historiography. Diss. (Denton, 1983). Cornicelius, Max (ed.), Heinrich von Treitschkes Briefe (Leipzig, 1912). Croce, Benedetto, Zur Theorie und Geschichte der Historiographie (Tübingen, 1915). Curthoys, Ann, and Docker, John, Is History Fiction? (Michigan, 2005). Cymorek, Hans, Georg von Below und die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft um 1900 (Stuttgart, 1998). Dabney, R.H., ‘Is history a science?’ in: Papers of the American Historical Association, vol. v (1890), pp. 263–272. Daddow, O.J., ‘Still no philosophy please, we’re historians’, in: Rethinking History, vol. ix, no. 4 (2005), pp. 491–495. Dahbour, Omar, The Origins of Modern Historical Consciousness, 1822–1848: Hegel’s Philosophy of History and Its Critique by Ranke and Marx. Diss. (Chicago, 1987). Dahlmann, F.C., Die Politik auf den Grund und das Maß der gegebenen Zustände zurückgeführt (Berlin, 1924). Daniel, Ute, ‘ “Staaten sind Gedanken Gottes”: Zur Mystifizierung des Staatsgedanken bei Deutschen Historikern des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: Sozialwissenschaftliche Informationen, vol. xxix, no. 4 (2000), pp. 292–298. Davies, Steffan, ‘ “Geschichte Wallensteins”. Ranke’s problem of narrative – and Schiller’s solution”, in: Langford, Rachael (ed.), Textual Intersections. Literature, History and the Arts in Nineteenth-Century Europe (Amsterdam, 2009), pp. 89–105. Davies, Steffan, The Wallenstein Figure in German Literature and Historiography 1790– 1920 (Leeds, 2010). Davies, Stephen, Empiricism and History (Bristol, 2003). Dehio, Ludwig, ‘Ranke und der deutsche Imperialismus’, in: HZ 170 (1950), pp. 307–328. Demandt, Alexander, Ranke unter den Weltweisen. Die Geschichtserfahrung der Moderne und die Ästhetisierung der Geschichtsschreibung (Berlin, 1986). Den Hollander, Jaap, ‘Contemporary history and the art of self-distancing’, in: History and Theory, vol. 50, no. 2 (2011), pp. 51–67. Denkwürdigkeiten aus dem Leben Leopold von Gerlachs, Generals der Infanterie und General-Adjutanten König Friedrich Wilhelms IV. Nach seinen Aufzeichnungen hrsg. von seiner Tochter (Berlin, 1891–92). Dericum, Christa, ‘Ein Papst der Geschichtsschreibung. Leopold von Ranke oder Glanz und Elend des Historismus’, in: Damals 20 (1988), pp. 278–286. Deutsch, Maria, What Would Ranke Say (Norderstedt, 2011). Devulder, Catherine, L’Histoire en Allemagne au dix-neuvième siècle. Méthode et pensée historiques chez Leopold von Ranke, Johann Gustav Droysen et Karl Lamprecht (Lille, 1988).

Bibliography  323 De Wolfe Howe, M.A., The Life and Letters of George Bancroft (New York, 1908). Di Bella, Santi, Leopold von Ranke (Rubbettino, 2005). Dickens, A.G., Ranke as a Reformation Historian (Reading, 1980). Dickens, A.G., Reformation Studies (London, 1982). Diehl, Fritz, Die Kaiseridee und die deutsche Politik Karls V. im Lichte der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung seit Ranke. Diss. (Frankfurt, 1950). Dieterle, Regina (ed.), Theodor Fontane und Martha Fontane: Ein Familienbriefnetz (Berlin, 2002). Diether, Otto, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Johann Gustav Droysen. Eine Parallele’, in: Preußische Jahrbücher, vol. cxlii (1910), pp. 1–20. Diether, Otto, Leopold von Ranke als Politiker (Leipzig, 1911). Dirrigl, Michael, Maximilian II., König von Bayern 1848–1864 (Munich, 1984). Diwald, Hellmut, Das historische Erkennen. Untersuchungen zum Geschichtsrealismus im 19. Jahrhundert (Leiden, 1955). Dockhorn, Klaus, Der deutsche Historismus in England. Ein Beitrag zur englischen Geistesgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen, 1950). Döllinger, J.J.I. von, ‘Mittheilung Döllinger’s an Fr. Böhmer’, in: Janssen, P. (ed.), Böhmer’s Leben und Briefe (Freiburg, 1868), vol. iii, p. 87. Dorn, B., Friedrich von Gentz und Europa: Studien zu Stabilität und Revolution 1802– 1822 (Bonn, 1993). Dotterweich, Volker, Heinrich von Sybel. Geschichtswissenschaft in politischer Absicht (1817–1861) (Göttingen, 1978). Dotterweich, Volker, ‘Ranke’, in: Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, vol. vii (Herzberg, 1999), pp. 1324–1355. Dotterweich, Volker, ‘Die gegenwärtige bibliographische Situation des Rankeschen Werkes. Erfahrungen mit der Werk-und-Nachlass-Edition, Vorschläge zur Organisationsstruktur einer Ranke-Großedition’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart 2002), pp. 3–9. Dove, Alfred, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, vol. xxvii (Leipzig, 1888), pp. 242–269. Dove, Alfred, ‘Ranke’s Verhältniß zur Biographie’, in: Biogr. Bll (Berlin, 1895a), pp. 1–22. Dove, Alfred, ‘Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke. Mit bisher ungedruckten Aufzeichnungen desselben. Zum 21. Dezember 1895’, in: Die Gartenlaube, no. 51 (1895b), pp. 872–875. Dove, Alfred, ‘Von Ranke und von Sybel in ihrem Verhältnis zu König Max’, in: Allgemeine Zeitung (18–19 November 1895c). Dove, Alfred, Ausgewählte Schriftchen vornehmlich historischen Inhalts (Leipzig, 1898). Dove, Alfred, ‘Wiedergelesen: “Ranke’s Verhältniß zur Biographie” von Alfred Dove 1895’, in: BIOS, vol. xiii, no. 2 (2000), pp. 285–308. Dow, E.W., ‘Features of the new history: Apropos of Lamprecht’s “Deutsche Geschichte” ’, in: American Historical Review, vol. III (1897–98). Droysen, J.G., Historik. Vorlesungen über Enzyklopädie und Methodologie der Geschichte (Munich, 1960). Duch, Arno, ‘Zur Rankes Erneuerung’, in: Zeitwende (Munich, 1926), pp. 41–51. Dudenhausen, ‘Eröffnung der Ranke-Tagung’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 11–14. Du Moulin Eckart, Richard Graf, ‘Ranke und die Serben’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 34, no. 3 (1909), pp. 38–48.

324  Bibliography Dünisch, Alfred, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Der Klassiker – seine Zeit – seine Wirkung’, in: HMRG 2 (1989), pp. 91–146. Dünisch, Alfred, ‘Ranke als “Berater der Könige” ’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 46–54. Dunk, Hermann van der, ‘Die historische Darstellung bei Ranke: Literatur und Wissenschaft’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988). Dupont, Christian, ‘Research libraries and the Syracuse commitment to special collections’, in: The Library Connection (Syracuse, 2003), pp. 6–8. Egelhaaf, Gottlob, ‘Die Weltgeschichte von Leopold von Ranke’, in: Vom Fels zum Meer. Spermann’s Illustrierte Zeitschrift für das Deutsche Haus (1887–88), columns 1218–1248. Eggert, Marianne, Ausgewählte Literaturnachweise aus dem Bestand der Akademiebibliothek, Franz Leopold von Ranke, Historiker (Berlin, 2002), available at: BerlinBrandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Akademiebibliothek, http://bibliothek. bbaw.de/eggert/ ranke/literatur.pdf [1 July 2004]. Eibl, Hans, ‘Vom Werte der Geschichte. Betrachtungen aus Anlaß von Rankes Todestag’, in: Neue Jbb. f. Wiss. u. Jugendbildung, vol. 12 (Leipzig, 1936), pp. 289–305. ‘Eine goldene Hochzeit mit der Wissenschaft’, in: Die Gartenlaube (Leipzig, 1867). Elkan, Albert, ‘Die Entdeckung Machiavellis in Deutschland zu Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: HZ 119 (1919), pp. 427–458. Ellis, Steven, ‘The empire strikes back: The historiographies of Britain and Ireland’, in: Ellis Stephen (ed.), Empires and States in European Perspective (Pisa, 2002), pp. 95–110. Elsholz, Konrad, Das politische und religiöse Moment in der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes. Diss. (Marburg, 1947). Elton, G.R., The Practice of History (Oxford, 2001). Elvert, Jürgen, ‘Leopold von Ranke: Der Historiograph des preußischen Staates als Geschichtsschreiber Europas?’ in: Elvert, Jürgen (ed.), Historische Mitteilungen, vol. 27 (Stuttgart, 2015), pp. 139–145. Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart 2002). Emerton, Ephraim, ‘The historical seminary in American training’, in: Methods of Teaching History (Boston, 1883). Emerton, Ephraim, ‘The practice method in higher historical instruction’, in: Methods of Teaching History (Boston, 1885). Engel-Janosi, Friedrich, The Growth of German Historicism (Baltimore, 1944). Erhardt, Ferdinand, Ueber historisches Erkennen. Probleme der Geschichtsforschung. Diss. (Bern, 1905). Ernst, Fritz, ‘Einführung in Ranke’, in: Corona (Munich, 1934), pp. 346–348. Ernst, Fritz, ‘Über Leopold Ranke’, in: Corona, vol. xi, no. 1 (Munich, 1936), pp. 87–98. Escher, Felix, ‘Leopold Ranke’, in: Erbe, Michael (ed.), Berlinische Lebensbilder, Geisteswissenschaftler (Berlin, 1989), pp. 109–125. Eskildsen, K.R., ‘Leopold Ranke’s archival turn: Location and evidence in modern historiography’, in: Modern Intellectual History, vol. v, no. 3 (2008), pp. 425–453. Eskildsen, K.R., ‘Inventing the archive: Testimony and virtue in modern historiography’, in: History of the Human Sciences, vol. 26, no. 4 (2013), pp. 8–26. Essen, Gesa von, ‘Leopold von Ranke zwischen Welthstorie und Nationalbiographie’, in: Schöning, Udo (ed.), Internationalität nationaler Literaturen (Göttingen, 2000), pp. 289–310.

Bibliography  325 Evans, R.J., In Defence of History (London, 2000). Externbrink, Sven, ‘Ludwig XIV. Und die deutsch-französischen Beziehungen bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Louis XIV et le Grand Siècle dans la culture allemande après 1715. Sous la direction de Jean Schillinger (Nancy, 2012), pp. 217–237. Faber, K-G., ‘Objektivität in der Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Rüsen, J. (ed.), Historische Objektivität (Göttingen, 1975). Farrenkopf, John, ‘The challenge of Spenglerian pessimism to Ranke and political realism’, in: Review of International Studies, vol. xvii (1991), pp. 267–284. Fastenrath, Juan, ‘Los historiadores alemanes Leopoldo de Ranke y Jorge Waitz’, in: Revista de Ciencias Historicas, vol. 5, no. 1 (Barcelona, 1887), pp. 16–21. Faulenbach, Bernd, Ideologie des deutschen Weges: die deutsche Geschichte in der Historiographie zwischen Kaiserreich und Nationalsozialismus (Munich, 1980). Fehling, Maria, Bismarcks Geschichtskenntnis (Stuttgart, 1922). Fehrenbach, Elisabeth, ‘Rankerenaissance und Imperialismus in der wilhelminischen Zeit’, in: Faulenbach, Bernd (ed.), Gesch.-wiss. in Dtld. Traditionelle Positionen u. gegenwärtige Aufgaben (Munich, 1974). Ferguson, Niall, Virtual History (London, 2003). Fester, Richard, ‘Humboldt’s und Ranke’s Ideenlehre’, in: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 6 (1891), pp. 235–256. Feyerabend, P., and Thomas, C. (eds.), Grenzprobleme der Wissenschaften (Zürich, 1985). Finkenzeller, Roswin, Die Darstellung des Zeitalters der Religionskriege bei Ranke. Diss. (Frankfurt/Main, 1962). Firth, Sir Charles, A Commentary on Macaulay’s History of England (New York, 1964). Fischer, Dietrich, Die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft von J.G. Droysen bis O. Hintze in ihrem Verhältnis zur Soziologie. Grundzüge eines Methodenproblems. Diss. (Cologne, 1966). Fitzsimons, E.M.A., ‘Ranke: History as worship’, in: The Review of Politics, vol. xxxii, no. 4 (1980), pp. 533–555. Fitzsimons, E.M.A., The Past Recaptured. Great Historians and the History of History (London, 1987). Fitzsimons, E.M.A., Prundt, A.G., and Nowell, C.E. (eds.), The Development of Historiography (Harrisburg, 1955). Ford, F.L., ‘Ranke: Setting the story straight’, in: Massachusetts Historical Society Proceedings (1975), pp. 57–75. Ford, G.S., ‘A Ranke letter’, in: The Journal of Modern History, vol. xxii, no. 2 (1960), pp. 142–144. Frank, Walter, Kämpfende Wissenschaft! (Hamburg, 1934). Frankel, Charles, ‘Explanation and interpretation in history’, in: Theories of History (1959). Franz, Eugen, ‘Wilhelm von Doenniges und König Max II. in der Deutschen Frage’, in: ZBLG 2 (1929), pp. 445–476. Franz, Eugen, ‘König Max II. von Bayern und seine geheimen politischen Berater’, in: ZBLG 5 (1932), pp. 219–242. Freitag, Grete, Leopold von Ranke und die Römische Geschichte. Diss. (Marburg, 1966). Frenzel, Karl, Die Berliner Märztage und andere Erinnerungen (Leipzig, 1912). Freytag, Martin, Leopold von Rankes Staatsauffassung und Stellung zur Zeitgeschichte. Diss. (Jena, 1922). Freytag, Wilhelm, ‘Über Ranke’s Geschichtsauffassung und eine zweckmässige Definition der Geschichte’, in: Archiv für Philosophie, N.F. vol. 6, Jg. 3, no. 3 (1900), pp. 129–155, 311–340.

326  Bibliography Frick, Gerhard, Der handelnde Mensch in Rankes Geschichtsbild (Zürich, 1953). Friedland, Klaus, ‘Der Plan einer Berufung Leopold Rankes an die Göttinger Universität 1873 [1837!]’, in: Göttinger Jb, vol. 7 (Göttingen, 1959), pp. 127–129. Friedrich, J., Ignaz von Döllinger. Sein Leben auf Grund seines schriftlichen Nachlasses (Munich, 1899, 1901). Friedrich, Paul, Weltgeschichte nach Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 1928). Friedrich, Rudolf, Die Jugendentwicklung Leopold von Rankes und J.G. Fichte. Diss. (Leipzig, 1933). Fröhlich, Helgard, ‘Leopold von Ranke und der englische Parlamentarismus’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. xxxvi, no. 8 (1988), pp. 698–702. Fromm, Eberhard, ‘Arbeit ist Glück – Leopold von Ranke’, in: Berlinische Monatsschrift 5, no. 5 (1996), pp. 40–45. Fuchs, W.P., ‘Neuere Ranke-Forschungen’, in: HPB 8 (1960), pp. 1–4. Fuchs, W.P., ‘Der Nachlaß Leopold von Rankes’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. cxiv, no. 1 (1962), pp. 63–89. Fuchs, W.P., Heinrich Ranke. Sonderdruck aus Jahrbuch für fränkische Landesforschung, vol. 25 (Neustadt an der Aisch, 1965). Fuchs, W.P., ‘Der junge Ranke’, in: WuN III (1973), pp. 13–45. Fuchs, W.P., ‘Ranke und die Öffentlichkeit’, in: Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, vol. xxvii, no. 1 (1976), pp. 9–24. Fuchs, W.P., ‘Ranke und Luther’, in: Lutherjahrbuch 45 (1978), pp. 80–101. Fuchs, W.P., ‘Was heißt das: “Bloß zeigen, wie es eigentlich gewesen”?’ in: Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, vol. xxx, no. 11 (1979), pp. 655–667. Fuchs, W.P., Nachdenken über Geschichte. Vorträge und Aufsätze (Stuttgart, 1980). Fuchs, W.P., ‘In aller Geschichte ist Gott zu erkennen’, in: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Frankfurt/Main, 1986). Fueter, Eduard, Geschichte der neueren Historiographie (Munich, 1912). Fulda, Daniel, Wissenschaft als Kunst. Die Entstehung der modernen deutschen Geschichtsschreibung 1760–1860 (Berlin, 1996). Gadamer, H-G., Truth and Method (New York, 1982). Gall, Lothar, Ranke und das Objektivitätsproblem. Diss. (Zürich, 1953). Gall, Lothar, ‘Ranke und das Objektivitätsproblem’, in: Finzsch, Norbert, and Wellenreuther, Hermann (eds.), Liberalitas. Festschrift für Erich Angermann zum 65. Geburtstag (Stuttgart, 1992), pp. 37–44. Galpin, W.F., ‘The Ranke Library’, in: Galpin, W.F. (ed.), Syracuse University (Syracuse, 1952), pp. 88–101. Gardiner, Patrick (ed.), Theories of History (New York, 1959). Gasparian, Aschot, Der Begriff der Nation in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung des 19. Jahrhunderts. Diss. (Leipzig, 1916). Gauck, Joachim, Rede zum Historikertag in Göttingen am 23. September 2014, available at: www.bundespraesident.de/sharedDocs/Reden/DE/Joachim-Gauck/Reden/2014/09/ 140923-Historikertag.html [20 October 2014]. Gay, Peter, Style in History (New York, 1988). Gebhardt, Bruno, ‘Leopold von Ranke als Politiker’, in: Die Gegenwart, vol. 32, no. 37 (Berlin, 1887), pp. 168–170. Geibel, Carl (ed.), Aus den Briefen Leopold von Ranke’s an seinen Verleger (1886). Geiger, Ludwig, ‘Ranke als Litterarhistoriker [sic] und Redner’, in: Die Nation, vol. 6, no. 8 (1888), pp. 115–117. Geiger, Ludwig, Berlin, 1688–1840. Geschichte des geistigen Lebens der preußischen Hauptstadt (Berlin 1895).

Bibliography  327 Gerhard, Dietrich, ‘Zur Geschichte der Historischen Schule. Drei Briefe von Ranke und Heinrich Leo’, in: HZ 132 (1925), pp. 93–105. Gerlach, Jakob von (ed.), Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach. Aufzeichnungen aus seinem Leben und Wirken 1795–1877 (Schwerin, 1903). Gervinus, G.G., Einleitung in die Geschichte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Berlin, 1921). Geyl, Pieter, ‘Ranke in the light of the catastrophe’, in: From Ranke to Toynbee in Smith College Studies in History, vol. xxix (Northampton, MA, 1952), pp. 1–17. Geyl, Pieter, The Use and Abuse of History (New Haven, 1955). Giesebrecht, Wilhelm, Gedächtnisrede auf Leopold von Ranke (Munich, 1887). Gil, Thomas, Kritik der Geschichtsphilosophie. Leopold von Rankes, J. Burckhardts und H. Freyers Problematisierung der klassischen Geschichtsphilosophie (Stuttgart, 1993). Gil, Thomas, Kritik der klassischen Geschichtsphilosophie (Berlin, 1999). Gilbert, Felix, ‘What Ranke meant’, in: The American Scholar, (1987) pp. 393–397. Gilbert, Felix, ‘The professionalization of history in the nineteenth century’, in: Higham, John, Krieger, Leonard, and Gilbert, Felix (eds.), History (Englewood, 1965). Gilbert, Felix, ‘Leopold von Ranke and the American philosophical society’, in: Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 130, no. 3 (New York, 1986), pp. 362–366. Gilbert, Felix, ‘What Ranke meant’, in: The American Scholar 56 (1987), pp. 393–397. Gilbert, Felix, ‘Ranke as the teacher of Jacob Burckhardt’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1988), pp. 19–24. Gilbert, Felix, History: Politics or Culture? Reflections on Ranke and Burckhardt (New York, 1990). Gilbert, Felix, Geschichte, Politik oder Kultur? Rückblick auf einen klassischen Konflikt (Frankfurt/Main, 1992). Goldfriedrich, Johann, Die historische Ideenlehre in Deutschland. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Geschichtswissenschaften, vornehmlich der Geschichtswissenschaft und ihrer Methoden im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1902). Gollwitzer, Heinz, Europabild und Europagedanke. Beitrag zur deutschen Geistesgeschichte des 18. und 19 Jahrhunderts (Munich, 1951). Gooch, G.P., ‘The growth of historical science’, in: Cambridge Modern History, vol. 12 (London, 1910), pp. 816–850. Gooch, G.P., History and Historians in the Nineteenth Century (London, 1913). Gooch, G.P., ‘Ranke’s interpretation of German history’, in: Studies in German History (London, 1948), pp. 210–266. Gooch, G.P., Geschichte und Geschichtsschreiber im 19. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt/Main, 1964). Gothein, ‘An article on Ranke and Stenzel, including some of Ranke’s letters to Stenzel’, in: Beilage der Allgemeinen Zeitung (March 22–23, 1892). Grabert, Herbert, ‘Ranke, Hoggan und die Zeitgeschichte’, in: Deutsche HochschullehrerZeitung, vol. 12, no. 2 (Tübingen, 1964), pp. 2–5. Grafton, Anthony, ‘The footnote from De Thou to Ranke’, in: History and Theory, vol. 33, no. 4 (1994), pp. 53–76. Grafton, Anthony, The Footnote: A Curious History (London, 1997). Gramich, Victor, ‘L.v. Ranke’s Weltgeschichte’, in: Historisches Jahrbuch 5 (1884), pp. 3–51. Grauert, Hermann, ‘Georg Waitz’, in: Historische Jahrbücher 8 (1887), pp. 48–100. Green, Anna, and Troup, Kathleen (eds.), The Houses of History: A Critical Reader in Twentieth-Century History and Theory (Manchester, 1999). Grimm, Hermann, Ernst Curtius, Heinrich von Treitschke, Leopold von Ranke (1896).

328  Bibliography Gross, Mirjana, Von der Antike bis zur Postmoderne. Die zeitgenössische Geschichtsschreibung und ihre Wurzeln (Vienna, 1998). Grosse, Jürgen, ‘Über Systemdenken bei Ranke  – mit einem Blick auf Burckhardt’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart, 2002), pp. 78–115. Grotefeld, Arvid, Die Wertschätzung in der Geschichte. Eine kritische Untersuchung (Leipzig, 1903). Grunder, Rolf, ‘Ranke’s historical theory’, in: Durham University Journal, vol. lix, no. 3 (1967), pp. 139–144. Grupp, Georg, ‘Ranke, seine geschichtliche Methode und Geschichtsphilosophie’, in: HpBll 117 (1896), pp. 657–668, 744–749, 798–809. Grypa, Dietmar (ed.), Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke, Band 1: 1810–1825 (Berlin, 2016), Guglia, Eugen, ‘Ranke und Gentz’, in: Die Grenzboten, vol. 50 (Leipzig, 1891), pp. 409–417. Guglia, Eugen, ‘Vortrag ueber Goethe und Ranke’, in: Chronik des Wiener Goethevereins (December 1892). Guglia, Eugen, Leopold von Rankes Leben und Werke (Leipzig, 1893). Guglia, Eugen, ‘Ranke und Jakob Grimm’, in: MIÖG 33 (1912), pp. 127–129. Guilland, Antoine, L’Allemagne nouvelle et ses historiens. Niebuhr – Ranke – Mommsen – Sybel – Treitschke (Paris, 1899). Guilland, Antoine, Modern Germany & Her Historians (New York, 1915). Gundolf, Friedrich, Cäsar im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1926). Guttmann, Bernhard, ‘Ranke’, in: Die Gegenwart, vol. 3, no. 69 (Freiburg, 1948), pp. 12–15. Haake, Paul, Johann Peter Friedrich Ancillon und Kronprinz Friedrich Wilhelm IV. von Preussen (Munich, 1920). Hacken, Richard, Ranke, Leopold von, 1795–1886 (Provo, 1998), available at: Harold B. Lee Library, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA, www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/ prmss/n-r/ranke.html [1 July 2004]. Haeuser, Martin, Rankes Ideenlehre. Diss. (Marburg, 1921). Hallwich, Hermann, ‘Die neuere Wallenstein-Literatur’, in: Die Gegenwart. Wochenschrift für Literatur, Kunst und öffentliches Leben, vol. 31, no. 7 (Berlin, 1887), pp. 101–104. Hammerstein, Notker, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Renaissance’, in: Buck, A., and Vasoli, C. (eds.), Die Renaissance im 19. Jahrhundert in Italien und Deutschland (Berlin, 1989), pp. 45–64. Handl, Herbert, Ranke und das revolutionäre Problem, eine Studie. Diss. (Vienna, 1951). Hannak, Emanuel, ‘Zur Erinnerung an Leopold von Ranke. Vorgetragen am 7. Dezember 1895’, in: Jahrbuch der Wiener pädagogischen Gesellschaft, vol. 19 (Vienna, 1896), pp. 81–92. Hansen, Reimer, and Ribbe, Wolfgang (eds.), Geschichtswissenschaft in Berlin im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Persönlichkeiten und Institutionen (Berlin, 1992). Harden, Jürgen, Kriegsursachen und Kriegsschuld im Urteil Rankes. Diss. (Zürich, 1953). Hardtwig, Wolfgang, ‘Von Preußens Aufgabe in Deutschland zu Deutschlands Aufgabe in der Welt. Liberalismus und Borussianisches Geschichtsbild zwischen Revolution und Imperialismus’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. ccxxxi (1980), pp. 265–324. Hardtwig, Wolfgang, Die Geschichtserfahrung der Moderne und die Ästhetisierung der Geschichtsschreibung: Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 1986). Hardtwig, Wolfgang, Geschichtskultur und Wissenschaft (Munich, 1990a).

Bibliography  329 Hardtwig, Wolfgang, Über das Studium der Geschichte (Munich, 1990b). Hardtwig, Wolfgang, ‘Historismus als ästhetische Geschichtsschreibung: Leopold von Ranke’, in: Geschichte und Gesellschaft, vol. xxiii, no. 1 (1997), pp. 99–114. Harnack, Axel von, ‘Ranke und Burckhardt’, in: Die Neue Rundschau, vol. 62, no. 3 (Frankfurt, 1951), pp. 73–88. Harnack, Otto, ‘Leopold von Ranke über die Geschichte der Ostseeprovinzen’, in: Baltische Monatsschrift, vol. 35, no. 2 (Reval, 1888), pp. 159–163. Hart, A.B., ‘Imagination in history’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xv (1909–10). Harth, Dietrich, ‘Rankes ästhetischer Sinn’, in: Literaturmagazin 6 (1976), pp. 58–68. Harth, Dietrich, ‘Biographie als Weltgeschichte. Die theoretische und ästhetische Konstruktion der historischen Handlung in Droysens Alexander und Rankes Wallenstein’, in: DVjs 54 (1980), pp. 58–104. Hartung, Paul, Illustrierte Weltgeschichte: Auf Grundlage der Geschichtswerke von Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 1931). Hase, Alexander von, ‘Auf dem Wege zu Rankes “Großen Mächten” Gentz’ Buch “von dem politischen Zustande von Europa vor und nach der Französischen Revolution” (1801)’, in: Saeculum, vol. xxii, no. 1 (1971), pp. 35–47. Hase, Alexander von, ‘Brückenschlag nach Paris. Zu einem unbekannten Vorstoß Rankes bei Karl Benedikt Hase (1825)’, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. lx, no. 1 (1978), pp. 213–221. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Troeltsch und Ranke’, in: Philosophischer Anzeiger, vol. 4, no. 1 (Bonn, 1930), pp. 1–12. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Ranke und Luther’, in: Luther. Vierteljahresschrift der Luthergesellschaft, vol. 13 (Munich, 1931), pp. 102–105. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Rankes Hinwendung zu Preußen’, in: FBPG 48 (1936), pp. 391–395. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Ranke in neuer geistesgeschichtlicher Beleuchtung’, in: Zs. f. dt. Geistesgesch. vol. 3 (Salzburg, 1937), pp. 55–60. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Gottesglaube und Geschichtsdeutung bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Eckart. Eine Monatsschrift, vol. 16, no. 1 (Berlin, 1940a), pp. 9–14. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Karl V. im Geschichtsbild von Ranke bis Brandi’, in: Luther. Mitt. d. Luther-Gesellschaft, vol. 22, no. 3 (Gütersloh, 1940b), pp. 121–125. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Versuch einer neuen Kritik Rankes’, in: HZ 165 (1942a), pp. 72–80. Hashagen, Justus, ‘Ranke als Geograph’, in: Geographische Zeitschrift 48 (1942b), pp. 173–177. Haskell, Francis, History and Its Images: Art and the Interpretation of the Past (New Haven, 1993). Hauser, Heinrich, Leopold von Rankes protestantisches Geschichtsbild. Diss. (Zürich, 1950). Haym, Rudolf, Das Leben Max Dunckers erzählt von Rudolf Haym (Berlin 1891). Hebekus, Uwe, Klios Medien. Die Geschichtskultur des 19. Jahrhunderts in der historischen Historie und bei Theodor Fontane (Tübingen, 2003). Hebekus, Uwe, ‘Geschichte sehen. Zur aisthesis Leopold von Rankes’, in: Crivellari, F., Kirchmann, K., Sandl, M., and Schlögl, R. (eds.), Die Medien der Gesch. Historizität und Medialität in interdiszipl. Perspektive (Konstanz, 2004), pp. 137–162. Hecht, Ingrid, Leopold von Ranke – Und ich darf es nicht verschweigen (Berlin, 2003). Hecht, Ingrid, Die Arbeit selbst ist das Vergnügen. Briefwechsel und Schriften 1870–1994; Leopold von Ranke – Edwin Manteuffel (Halle, 2005a). Hecht, Ingrid, Warum? 3 unverlierbare Rankes, PISA-Ahnen auch nach Leopold von Ranke und PISA-Studie heute; Lebensspuren von drei berühmten Ärzten als PISA-Ahnen (Norderstedt, 2005b).

330  Bibliography Hecht, Ingrid, Genial Neues bei Leopold von Ranke (Berlin, 2009). Hecht, Ingrid, Genial Neues bei Leopold von Ranke: Medizin . . . selbst ein Bestandteil geschichtlichen Wissens (Berlin, 2010). Hecht, Ingrid, Clarissa von Ranke. Im eigenen Körper gefangen mit blühendem Geist (Berlin, 2013a). Hecht, Ingrid, New Discoveries – Medical Dissertations in the Private Library of Leopold von Ranke, translated and introduced by Andreas Boldt. (Lewistown, Queenston, Lampeter, 2013b). Hecht, Ingrid, Dissertation Leopold Rankes, unpublished article (Northeim, June 2016). Hecht, Ingrid, and Boldt, Andreas, ‘Clarissa von Rankes Leben und jetzt erkannte Krankheit’, in: Elvert, Jürgen (ed.), Historische Mitteilungen, vol. 26 (Stuttgart, 2014), pp. 187–220. Hegel, Karl, Leben und Erinnerungen (Leipzig, 1900). Heinßen, Johannes, Historismus und Kulturkritik: Studien zur deutschen Geschichtskultur im späten 19. Jahrhundet (Göttingen, 2003). Heinold, Richard, Die Wandlungen des deutschen Cromwell-Bildes. Diss. (Erlangen, 1953). Heintel, Erich‚ ‘ “Wie es eigentlich gewesen ist”. Ein geschichtsphilosophischer Beitrag zum Problem der Methode der Historie’, in: Erkenntnis und Verantwortung (Düsseldorf, 1960), pp. 207–230. Helberg, Klaus, Rankes Staatsidee. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1955). Helbling, Hanno, Leopold von Ranke und der historische Stil (Zürich, 1953). Helbling, Hanno, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Fassmann, Kurt (ed.), Die Großen. Leben und Leistung der sechshundert bedeutendsten Persönlichkeiten unserer Zeit (Zürich, 1977), pp. 550–557. Helmolt, H.F., ‘Ein verschollener politischer Aufsatz Leopold Rankes’, in: HZ 99 (1907a), pp. 548–563. Helmolt, H.F., ‘Ein merkwürdiger Brief Leopold Rankes’, in: Beil. z. AZ, no. 106 (Munich, 1907b), pp. 253–254. Helmolt, H.F., Ranke-Bibliographie (Leipzig, 1910a). Helmolt, H.F., ‘Ein neuer Ranke-Brief’, in: Luginsland. Monatsbll. f. Lit. u. Kunst, vol. 3, no. 3 (Halle, 1910b), pp. 104–107. Helmolt, H.F., Leopold Rankes Leben und Wirken (Leipzig, 1921). Hennerbichler, Ferdinand, Untersuchungen über Leopold von Rankes terminologische Konzeption des Begriffs Gegenreformation und ihre Aufnahme bis ins beginnende 20. Jahrhundert. Diss. (Vienna, 1971). Henz, G.J., Leopold Ranke. Leben, Denken, Wort, 1795–1814. Darstellende Untersuchungen und Edition (Cologne, 1968). Henz, G.J., ‘Zu Leopold von Rankes Briefwechsel: Forschungsbericht und Nachlese’, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. liv, no. 2 (1972), pp. 285–324. Henz, G.J., Zur Kritik neuerer Brief-Editionen (Jülich, 2008a). Henz, G.J., Zur Kritik neuerer Brief-Editoren. Die Ausgabe des Briefwechsels Leopold von Rankes durch die Historische Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Eine Denkschrift zu ihrem 150jährigen Bestehen (Jülich, 2008b). Henz, G.J., ‘Rankes fälschlich so genannte Vorträge “Über die Epochen der neueren Geschichte”. Eine Untersuchung zum Schein und Sein der Überlieferung’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift, vol. lxxxiii, no. 3 (2009), pp. 408–451. Henz, G.J., Leopold von Ranke in Geschichtsdenken und Forschung (Berlin, 2014).

Bibliography  331 Herbst, Jürgen, The German Historical School in American Scholarship. A Study in the Transfer of Culture (Washington and London, 1965). Herkless, J.L., ‘Meinecke and the Ranke-Burckhardt problem’, in: History and Theory, vol. ix, no. 3 (1970), pp. 290–321. Herkless, J.L., ‘Seeley and Ranke’, in: Historian, vol. liii, no. 1 (1980), pp. 1–22. Herkless, J.L., ‘Economic change and the idealist revival in historiography at the turn of the century’, in: History and Theory, vol. xxvi, no. 2 (1987), pp. 166–179. Herzfeld, Hans, ‘Politik und Geschichte bei Leopold von Ranke im Zeitraum von 1848–1871’, in: FS für Gerhard Ritter. Zu seinem 60. Geburtstag (Tübingen, 1950), pp. 322–341. Herzog, Christina, Leopold von Rankes Rede “Gefühl der Nation” von 1871. Eine Textanalyse (2010). Hesse, R., Geschichtswissenschaft in praktischer Absicht. Vorschläge und Kritik (Wiesbaden, 1979). Heuss, Theodor, Deutsche Gestalten. Studien zum 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 1947). Heussi, K., Die Krisis des Historismus (Tübingen, 1932). Heussi, K., ‘Leopold von Ranke im Urteil von Benedetto Croce’, in: Wiss. Zs. d. FriedrichSchiller-Univ. Jena, gesellschafts- und sprachwiss. Reihe, vol. 3 (1954), pp. 173–178. Heyer, Friedrich, ‘Leopold von Rankes Orthodoxie-Verständnis in seiner Darstellung der “Serbischen Revolution” ’, in: Müller, Gerhard, and Zeller, Winfried (eds.), Glaube, Geist, Geschichte (Leiden, 1967), pp. 402–421. Heyer, Friedrich, ‘Die Bedeutung der serbischen orthodoxen Kirche für die “Serbische Revolution” nach der Darstellung des deutschen Historikers Leopold Ranke’, in: International Congress of South-East European Research Studies (1969), pp. 507–518. Hinde, J.R., ‘Jacob Burckhardt and the art of history’, in: Storia della Storiografia, vol. 30 (1996). Hinneberg, Paul, ‘Eine ungedruckte Replik Rankes’, in: FBPG 5 (Leipzig, 1892), pp. 131–134. Hinrichs, Carl, ‘Rankes Lutherfragment von 1817 und der Ursprung seiner universalhistorischen Anschauung’, in: Nürnberger, Richard (ed.), Festschrift für Gerhard Ritter zu seinem 60. Geburtstag (Tübingen, 1950), pp. 299–321. Hinrichs, Carl, Ranke und die Geschichtstheologie der Goethezeit (Göttingen, 1954). Hinrichs, Carl, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Die großen Deutschen, 2. Edition (Berlin, 1956), pp. 293–312. Hinrichs, Carl, ‘Schelling und “der Konflikt der modernen Welt” in Rankes “Epochen der neueren Geschichte” ’, in: Berges, Wilhelm, and Hinrichs, Carl (eds.), Zur Geschichte und Problematik der Demokratie (Berlin, 1958), pp. 342–359. Hinze, H.F., Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886) (Stuttgart, 1986). Hoeft, Bernhard, Rankes Stellungsnahme zur Französischen Revolution. Diss. (Greifswald, 1932). Hoeft, Bernhard, Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek (Berlin, 1937). Hoeft, Bernhard, Rankes Berufung nach München (Munich, 1940). Hofer, Walther, ‘Der mißbrauchte Ranke. “Konservative Revolution” in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung?’ in: Der Monat, vol. 7, no. 84 (Berlin, 1955), pp. 542–547. Hoffmann, Lars, Die bedeutenden Historiker (Wiesbaden, 2008). Hoffmann, Max, Geschichtsbilder aus Leopold von Rankes Werken (Leipzig, 1905). Hohenhausen, Elise Freifrau von, ‘Berühmte Freundschaften. VI. Leopold von Ranke und Frau von Treskow’, in: Berliner Neueste Nachrichten, vol. 14, no. 386 (1894).

332  Bibliography Hohoff, Curt, ‘Martin Luther bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Internationale Katholische Zeitschrift “Communio”, vol. 12, no. 6 (1983), pp. 543–555. Holborn, Hajo, ‘The science of history’, in: Strayer, J.R. (ed.), The Interpretation of History (Princeton, 1943), pp. 61–83. Holt, W.S., ‘The idea of scientific history in America’, in: Journal of the history of ideas, vol. i (1940), pp. 352–362. Horn, Ingeborg, Die Darstellung und Auffassung der neuzeitlichen Revolutionen bei Ranke. Diss. (Jena, 1952). Hoyer, Siegfried, ‘Leopold Ranke als Student in Leipzig’, in: Wissenschafts- und Universitätsgeschichte in Sachsen im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert. Nationale und internationale Wechselwirkung und Ausstrahlung (Berlin, 1987), pp. 217–225. Höyng, Peter, ‘Kunst der Wahrheit oder Wahrheit der Kunst? Die Figur Wallenstein bei Schiller, Ranke und Golo Mann’, in: Monatsheft f. dt. Unterr., dt. Sprache u. Lit. Department of German at the University of Wisconsin, vol. 82, no. 2 (Madison, 1990), pp. 142–156. Hughes-Warrington, Marnie, Fifty Key Thinkers on History (New York, 2001). Hughes-Warrington, Marnie, World Histories (London, 2005). Huttner, Markus, ‘Historische Gesellschaften und die Entstehung historischer Seminare – zu den Anfängen institutionalisierter Geschichtsstudien an den deutschen Universitäten des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: Middell, Matthias, Lingelbach, Gabriele, and Hadler, Frank (eds.), Historische Institute im internationalen Vergleich (Leipzig, 2001), pp. 39–84. Iggers, G.G., ‘The image of Ranke in American and German historical thought’, in: History and Theory, vol. ii, no. 1 (1962), pp. 17–40. Iggers, G.G., ‘The dissolution of German historism’, in: Herr, Richard, and Parker, H.T. (eds.), Ideas in History. Essays Presented to Louis Gottschalk by His Former Students (Durham, 1965), pp. 288–329. Iggers, G.G., ‘The decline of the classical national tradition of German historiography’, in: History and Theory, vol. 6, no. 3 (1967), pp. 382–412. Iggers, G.G., ‘Historicism (a comment)’, in: Storia della Storiografia. Iggers, G.G., Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft: eine Kritik der traditionellen Geschichtsauffassung von Herder bis zur Gegenwart (Munich, 1971). Iggers, G.G., The German Conception of History (Hannover, 1988). Iggers, G.G., ‘Comments on F.R. Ankersmith’s paper, “Historicism: an attempt at synthesis” ’, in: History and Theory, vol. 34, no. 3 (1995), pp. 162–167. Iggers, G.G., ‘Ranke in Amerika’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 78–84. Iggers, G.G., ‘The crisis of the Rankean paradigm in the nineteenth century’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1998a), pp. 43–50. Iggers, G.G., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Woolf, D.R. (ed.), A Global Encyclopedia of Historical Writing, vol. ii (New York, 1998b). Iggers, G.G., ‘Historiography between scholarship and poetry: Reflections on Hayden White’s approach to historiography’, in: Rethinking History, vol. 4, no. 3 (2000), pp. 373–390. Iggers, G.G., ‘The role of professional historical scholarship in the creation and distortion of memory’, in: Chinese Studies in History, vol. 43, no. 3 (2010), pp. 32–44. Iggers, G.G., The Theory and Practice of History: Leopold von Ranke (New York, 2011). Iggers, G.G., and Powell, J.M., Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline (Syracuse, 1990). Iggers, G.G., and von Moltke, Konrad (eds.), The Theory and Practice of History (New York, 1973).

Bibliography  333 Iggers, G.G., and Wang, Q.E., A Global History of Modern Historiography (Harlow, 2008). Jackson, J.C., ‘Leopold von Ranke and the von Ranke library’, in: Syracuse University Library Association, The Courier, vol. ix, no. 4, vol. x, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1972), pp. 38–55. Jackson, N., ‘Historiography Britain’, In: Murray, C.J. (ed.), Encyclopaedia of the Romantic Era (New York, 2004). Jäger, Andrea, Die historischen Erzählungen von Conrad Ferdinand Meyer. Zur poetischen Auflösung des historischen Sinns im 19. Jahrhundert (Tübingen, 1998). Jäger, Friedrich, and Rüsen, Jörn, Geschichte des Historismus. Eine Einführung (Munich, 1992). Jagic, Vatroslav von, Neue Briefe von Dobrowsky, Kopitar und anderen Süd- und Westslaven (Berlin, 1897). Janssen, P., and Mühlmann, E., ‘Lebenswelt’, in: Ritter, J., and Gründer, K. (eds.), Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie (Darmstadt, 1980), pp. 151–158. Jastrow, ‘L.v. Ranke’, in: Tägliche Runschau, Unterhaltungs-Beilage (May 1886). Jelesijevic, Miodrag, Leopold Ranke: “Die Serbische Revolution”. Vorraussetzungen und Entstehung im Wiener Kreis um Bartholomäus Kopitar und Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic. Diss. (Münster, 2007). Jeng, Chih-Cheng, Die Grundlegung des methodologischen Rationalismus im Werk Max Webers. Diss. (Bonn, 2003). Jenkins, Keith, At the Limits of History (London, 2009). Jennings, J.W., German Historiography and the Evolution of German Political Ideas in the 19th Century. Diss. (London, 1949). Joachimsen, Paul, ‘Das Lutherbild Leopold von Rankes’, in: Luther. Vierteljahresschrift der Luthergesellschaft, vol. 8 (Munich, 1926), pp. 3–23. Joachimsen, Paul, ‘Ranke und wir’, in: Neue Jbb. f. Wiss. u. Jugendbildung, vol. 2 (Leipzig, 1926a), pp. 292–316. Joachimsen, Paul (ed.), Leopold von Ranke. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (Munich, 1926b). Joll, James, National Histories and National Historians: Some German and English Views from the Past (London, 1984). Jordan, Stefan, ‘Der Weltgeist als Betrüger oder Das kleinliche Interesse des Historikers. Elemente geschichtstheoretischen Denkens bei Hegel und Ranke’, in: Jb. f. Hegelforschung 3 (1997), pp. 219–243. Jordan, Stefan, Deutschsprachige Geschichtstheorie in der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahunderts. Die Schwellenzeit zwischen Pragmatismus und klassischem Historismus (Frankfurt/Main, 1999). Jordan, Stefan, Theorien und Methoden der Geschichtswissenschaft (Paderborn, 2009). Jordan, Stefan, ‘Rankes Verständnis von “Nation” und seine Rezeption’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), pp. 34–45. Jordanova, Ludmilla, History in Practice (London, 2000). Jucker, Max, Rankes Idee der Monarchie. Diss. (Zürich, 1954). Juhnke, Dominik, Leopold Ranke. Biografie eines Geschichtsbesessenen (Berlin, 2015). Kaegi, W., ‘Geschichtswissenschaft und Staat in der Zeit Rankes’, in: Schweizer Beiträge zur allgemeinen Geschichte, vol. i (1943), pp. 168–205. Kaerst, Julius, ‘Die Geschichtsauffassung Rankes und Droysens in ihrer nationalen Bedeutung’, in: VSWG 20 (1928), pp. 219–233. Kalz, Wolf, Die Geschichte der Kassandra. Ein zeithistorisches Vademekum (Bad Buchau, 2008). Kämpfer, Frank, ‘Zur Rezeption Vuk Karadzics in Deutschland: Leopold Rankes “Die Serbische Revolution” ’, in: Matesic, Josip, and Heitmann, Klaus (eds.), Südosteuropa

334  Bibliography in der Wahrnehmung der deutschen Öffentlichkeit vom Wiener Kongress (1815) bis zum Pariser Frieden (1856) (Munich, 1990), pp. 153–163. Kantzenbach, F.W., ‘Rügen als Bildungserlebnis. Leopold und Friedrich Heinrich Ranke in Altenkirchen’, in: Baltische Studien, vol. 103 (Hamburg, 1971), pp. 66–78. Kaphan, Fritz, ‘Jacob Burckhardt und die Wiederbesetzung von Rankes Geschichtsprofessur an der Universität Berlin’, in: HZ 168 (1943), pp. 113–131. Karabaczek, Friedrich, Ranke und Pastor und ihre Arbeiten über die Geschichte der Päpste. Diss. (Vienna, 1949). Katsch, Günter, Schwendler, Gerhild, ‘Probleme der Wissenschaftsentwicklung in der philosophischen Diskussion’, in: Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Karl-Marx-Universität Leipzig, Gesellschaftswissenschaftliche Reihe, vol. 35, no. 3 (1986). Kaufmann, Georg, Politische Geschichte Deutschlands im Neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1900). Kaufmann, Georg, ‘Ranke und die Beurteilung Friedrich Wilhelms IV’, in: HZ 88 (1902), pp. 436–473. Keibel, Ludwig, ‘Einige Jugendarbeiten aus dem Nachlaß Leopold von Rankes’, in: HZ 137 (1928), pp. 214–256. Kelly, D.R., Fortunes of History. Historical Inquiry from Herder to Huizinga (London, 2003). Kemiläinen, Aira, ‘Leopold von Rankes Auffassung der abendländischen Christenheit’, in: Historiallinen Aikakauskirja, no. 1 (1950), pp. 65–77. Kemiläinen, Aira, Die historische Sendung der Deutschen in Leopold von Rankes Geschichtsdenken (Helsinki, 1968). Kenyon, John, The History Men: The Historical Profession in England Since the Renaissance (London, 1993). Kessel, Eberhard, ‘Rankes Geschichtsauffassung’, in: Universitas, vol. 2, no. 8 (Stuttgart, 1947), pp. 915–925. Kessel, Eberhard, ‘Ranke und Burckhardt. Ein Literatur- und Forschungsbericht’, in: AKG 33 (1951), pp. 351–379. Kessel, Eberhard, ‘Rankes Idee der Universalhistorie’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, no. 178/2 (Munich, 1954), pp. 269–308. Kessel, Eberhard, ‘Rankes Auffassung der amerikanischen Geschichte’, in: Jahrbuch der Amerikastudien, vol. vii (1962), pp. 19–52. Kesting, Hanno, Geschichtsphilosophie und Weltbürgerkrieg. Deutungen der Geschichte von der Französischen Revolution bis zum Ost-West-Konflikt (Heidelberg, 1959). Kettenacker, Lothar, ‘Review on Ranke. The meaning of history by Leonard Krieger’, in: History and Theory, vol. xvii, no. 3 (1978), pp. 388–394. Keußler, Friedrich von, ‘Ein ungedruckter Brief Leopold von Rankes’, in: Baltische Monatsschrift, Jg. 36, vol. 41, no. 1 (Reval, 1894), pp. 62–64. Kiesewetter, Hubert, ‘Das Schicksal der Ranke-Bibliothek’, in: Historische Mitteilungen, no. 2 (Stuttgart, 1991), pp. 307–314. Kiesewetter, Hubert, Irreale oder reale Geschichte? (Herbolzheim, 2002). Kim, Paul, ‘Ranke als Bahnbrecher der modernen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Lang, Ludwig (ed.), Geschichtsbüchlein (Stuttgart, 1926), pp. 53–59. Kim, Paul, Das Bild des Menschen in der Geschichtsschreibung von Polybios bis Ranke (Göttingen, 1955). Klemmer, Heinrich, Ranke und Pastor. Weltanschauliches in der Geschichtsschreibung (Leipzig, 1931).

Bibliography  335 Klemperer, Klemens von, ‘Das Briefwerk von Leopold von Ranke; Neue Briefe von Leopold von Ranke’, in: American Historical Review, vol. lv, no. 4 (1950), pp. 871–873. Klenk, G.F., ‘Das Absolute im Zwielicht der Geschichte. Von Ranke bis Friedrich Meinecke’, in: Stimmen der Zeit, vol. clxxi, no. 3 (1962–63), pp. 176–187. Klingemann, ‘Zum sechzigjährigen Professor-Jubiläum Leopold Ranke’s’, in: Die Gartenlaube, no. 12 (1885). Klopp, Onno, ‘Geschichte Wallensteins, nach Leopold von Ranke’, in: HpBll 109 (1892), pp. 233–254, 332–347, 389–416. Klopp, Wiard, ‘Die Beziehungen Ludwig Pastors zu Onno Klopp’, in: Jb. d. österr. LeoGes. (Vienna, 1934), pp. 18–64. Kluge, Hermann, Geschichte der deutschen National Literatur (Altenburg, 1886). Koberstein, August, Grundriss der Geschichte der deutschen National Literatur, vol. iii (Leipzig, 1866). Koch, H.W., ‘Was ist das Amt des Historikers? Gedanken über Leopold von Ranke’, in: Critericon 91 (1985). Kohls, E-W., ‘Das Bild der Reformation in der Geisteswissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts (G.W.F. Hegel, L.v. Ranke, J. Burckhardt)’, in: Neue Zs. f. systemat. Theol. u. Religionsphilosophie (Berlin, 1967), pp. 229–246. Kohls, E-W., ‘Leopold von Rankes unfreiwilliger Besuch in Schwabach’, in: Frankenland, vol. 21 (1969), pp. 192–195. Kohn, Gertrud, Friedrich der Große in der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes und der kleindeutschen Historiker. Diss. (Hamburg, 1923). Kohn, Hans (ed.), German History: Some New German Views (Boston, 1954). Kontje, Todd, A Comparison to German Realism, 1848–1900 (New York, 2002). Köpke, R. ‘Address to Ranke on His Jubilee’, in: Köpke’s Kleinere Schriften, pp. 780–782. Koselleck, Reinhart, Preußen zwischen Reform und Revolution. Allgemeines Landrecht, Verwaltung und soziale Bewegung von 1791 bis 1848 (Stuttgart, 1967). Koselleck, Reinhart, ‘Geschichte, Historie’, in: Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland (Stuttgart, 1975), pp. 593–717. Koselleck, Reinhart, Lutz, Heinrich, and Rüsen, Jörn (eds.), Formen der Geschichtsschreibung (Munich, 1982). Koselleck, Reinhart, Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time (Cambridge, 1985). Koselleck, Reinhard, ‘Geschichte, Geschichten und formale Zeitstrukturen’, in: Kosellek, Reinhard, and Stempel, W-D. (eds.), Geschichte, Ereignis und Erzählung (Munich, 1990), pp. 211–222. Koslowski, Peter (ed.), The Discovery of Historicity in German Idealism and Historism (Berlin, 2010). Krammer, Mario, ‘Große Geschichtsschreiber im Leben Berlins’, in: Jb. d. Vereins f. d. Gesch. Berlins (Berlin, 1952), pp. 9–52. Kraus, H-C., ‘Aktualität und Grenzen der Fachtradition: Neue Veröffentlichungen zur Geschichte der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte, vol. iv, no. 1 (1990), pp. 72–79. Kraus, H-C., ‘Ranke als Zeitgenosse. Seine Arbeiten zur Geschichte Friedrich Wilhelms IV.’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart, 2002), pp. 28–50. Kraus, Michael, A History of American History (New York, 1937). Kretzschmar, Hellmut, ‘Ranke in Magdeburg’, in: Geschichtsblatt für Stadt und Land, vol. 56–59 (Magdeburg, 1924), pp. 168–170.

336  Bibliography Krieger, Leonard, ‘Elements of early historicism: Experience, theory, and history in Ranke’, in: History and Theory, vol. xiv, no. 4 (1975), pp. 1–14. Krieger, Leonard, Ranke, the Meaning of History (Chicago, 1977). Krieger, Leonard, ‘Historicism’s revenge’, in: Annals of Scholarship, vol. i, no. 2 (1980), pp. 15–30. Krieger, Leonard, Time’s Reasons: Philosophies of History Old and New (Chicago, 1989). Krieger, Leonard, and Gilbert, Felix (eds.), History (Englewood, 1965). Krill, H-H., Die Ranke Renaissance: Max Lenz und Erich Marcks (Berlin, 1962). Kronenbitter, G., Wort und Macht: Friedrich Gentz als politischer Schriftsteller (Berlin, 1994). Kuczynski, Jürgen, ‘Parteilichkeit und Objektivität in Geschichte und Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. iv, no. 5 (1956), pp. 873–888. Küntzel, Georg, ‘Leopold Ranke und Elsaß-Lothringen’, in: Elsaß-Lothringisches Jahrbuch (1929), pp. 297–310. Küntzel, Georg, ‘Rankes Lehre von den “Großen Mächten” und die Gegenwart’, in: Berliner Monatshefte, vol. 14 (Berlin, 1936a), pp. 845–866. Küntzel, Georg, ‘Friedrich der Große in der Darstellung Leopold von Rankes’, in: Die Neue Deutsche Schule, vol. 10 (Frankfurt, 1936b), pp. 395–406. Kupisch, Karl, ‘Die Hieroglyphe Gottes. Eine Ranke-Betrachtung’, in: Theologia Viatorum, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1949), pp. 178–196. Kupisch, Karl, Die Hieroglyphe Gottes. Große Historiker der bürgerlichen Epoche von Ranke bis Max Weber (Tübingen, 1967). Kurz, Heinrich, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Leipzig, 1861). Küttler, Wolfgang, Rüsen, Jörn, and Schulin, Ernst (eds.), Geschichtsdiskurs (Frankfurt/ Main, 1994). Kuzminski, Adrian, ‘Defending historical realism’, in: History and Theory, vol. 18, no. 3 (1979), pp. 316–349. Labuda, Gerard, ‘Polen und polnisch-deutsche Beziehungen im historiographischen Werk Leopold von Rankes’, in: Arnold, Udo (ed.), Preussen und Berlin. Beziehungen zwischen Provinz und Hauptstadt (Lüneburg, 1981), pp. 49–81. La Capra, D., History and Criticism (Ithaca, 1985). Lamprecht, Karl, ‘Zum Unterschiede der älteren und jüngeren Richtungen der Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: HZ 77 (1896a), pp. 257–261. Lamprecht, Karl, Alte und neue Richtungen in der Geschichtswissenschaft (Berlin, 1896b). Lamprecht, Karl, ‘Was ist Kulturgeschichte? Beiträge zu einer empirischen Historik’, in: Deutsche Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaften, N.F. 1 (1896/97), pp. 75–145. Lamprecht, Karl, ‘Individualität, Idee und sozialpsychische Kraft in der Geschichte’, in: Jahrbuch für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 3. Folge, vol. 13 (1897a), pp. 880–900. Lamprecht, Karl, ‘Über die Entwicklungsstufen der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Zeitschrift für Kulturgeschichte, N.F. 5 (1897b), pp. 385–420, N.F. 6, pp. 1–45. Lamprecht, Karl, Die kulturhistorische Methode (Berlin, 1900). Lamprecht, Karl, and Schleier, Hans, Alternative zu Ranke: Schriften zur Geschichtstheorie (Leipzig, 1988). Lan, Yi, Research on the Rankean Historiography (Shanghai, 2005). Laue, T.H., Leopold von Ranke, the Formative Years (Princeton, 1950). Laue, T.H., ‘Review on Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft by Wolfgang J. Mommsen’, in: History and Theory, vol. xxviii, no. 1 (1989), pp. 78–94. Lebe, Reinhard, ‘Die “spanische Verschwörung” gegen Venedig. Leopold von Ranke auf den Spuren des rätselvollen Komplotts von 1618’, in: Damals, vol. 11 (1979), pp. 539–552.

Bibliography  337 Lee, D.E., and Beck, R.N., ‘The meaning of “Historism” ’, in: American Historical Review, vol. lix (1953–54), pp. 568–577. Leesenberg, A., ‘Frau Clarissa von Ranke, geb. Graves Perceval’, in: Wochenblatt der Johanniter-Ordens-Balley Brandenburg (Berlin, 1974). Leipprand, Ernst, Heinrich von Treitschke im deutschen Geistesleben des 19. Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1935). Lemberg, Joseph, Der Mediävist ohne Eigenschaften. Friedrich Baethgens Werk und Karriere im 20. Jahrhundert. Diss. (Berlin, 2014). Lemberg, Joseph, Der Historiker ohne Eigenschaften. Eine Problemgeschichte des Mediävisten Friedrich Baethgen (Frankfurt/Main, 2015). Lenz, Max, ‘Eine neue Auffassung der Kirchengeschichte’, in: Preuβisches Jahrhuch 61 (1888), pp. 319–352. Lenz, Max, ‘Bismarck und Ranke. Eine Parallele’, in: Die Woche, no. 35–37 (1901). Lenz, Max, Geschichte der Königlichen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität zu Berlin (Halle, 1910). Lenz, Max, ‘Rankes biographische Kunst und die Aufgaben des Biographen. Rede zur Gedächtnisfeier des Stifters der Berliner Universität, König Friedrich Wilhelm III., in der Aula am 3. August 1912’, in: PrJbb 149 (1912), pp. 385–397. Leonhardt, Stefan, “Zwei schlechthin unausgleichbare Auffassungen des Mittelpunktes der christlichen Religion”. Ignaz Döllingers Auseinandersetzung mit der Reformation, ihrer Lehre und deren Folgen in seiner ersten Schaffensperiode (Göttingen, 2004). Leopold von Ranke. Vorträge anläβlich seines 100. Todestages (Munich, 1987). ‘Leopold von Ranke. Leistungen und Grenzen des idealistischen deutschen Historismus’, in: Historiker-Gesellschaft der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik. Wissenschaftliche Mitteilungen I (1987), pp. 51–129. ‘Leopold von Ranke’, available at: Preußen, Chronik eines deutschen Staates, http://300jahre-preussen.de/person.jsp?key=Person_Leopold+von_Ranke [1 July 2004]. ‘Leopold von Ranke, historicism’, available at: Age of the Sage, historical writing, www. age-of-the-sage.org/history/historian/Leopold_von_Ranke.html [1 July 2004]. Liebel, Helen, ‘Philosophical Idealism in the Historische Zeitschrift, 1859–1914’, in: History and Theory, vol. iii, no. 3 (1964). Liebel, Helen, ‘The enlightenment and the rise of historicism in German thought’, in: Eighteenth-Century Studies 4 (1971), pp. 359–383. Liebel, Helen, ‘Reply to Georg Iggers’, in: Eighteenth-Century Studies 5 (1972), pp. 594–603. Liebel, Helen, ‘Ranke’s fragments on universal history’, in: Clio, vol. ii, no. 2 (1973), pp. 145–159. Liebel, Helen, ‘The place of antiquity in Ranke’s philosophy of history’, in: Clio, vol. v, no. 2 (1976), pp. 211–231. Liebel, Helen, ‘Review on the German enlightenment and the rise of historicism by Peter Hans Reill’, in: History and Theory, vol. xvi, no. 2 (1977), pp. 204–217. Liebel-Weckowicz, Helen, ‘Ranke’s theory of history and the German modernist school’, in: Canadian Journal of History, vol. xxiii (1988a), pp. 73–93. Liebel-Weckowicz, Helen, ‘Ranke und Darwin  – Evolution und Weltgeschichte’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988b), pp. 91–114. Liebel-Weckowicz, Helen, ‘Review on history: Politics or culture? Reflections on Ranke and Burckhardt by Felix Gilbert’, in: History and Theory, vol. xxxi, no. 1 (1992), pp. 81–87.

338  Bibliography Liebel-Weckowicz, Helen, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Boyd, Kelly (ed.), Encyclopedia of Historians and Historical Writing, vol. ii (New York, 1999). Liebeschütz, Hans, Ranke (London, 1954). Liebeschütz, Hans, Das Judentum im deutschen Geschichtsbild von Hegel bis Max Weber (Tübingen, 1967). Lincoln, J.L., ‘The historian Leopold von Ranke. Written for the Rhode Island historical society, April  16, 1889’, in: In memoriam John Larkin Lincoln, 1817–1891 (Boston, 1894). Lorenz, Ottokar, ‘Ueber den Schlosser-Ranke Streit’, in: Preussische Jahrbücher (April 1862). Lorenz, Ottokar, Analecten zur englischen Geschichte des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1868). Lorenz, Ottokar, Die Geschichtswissenschaft in Hauptrichtungen und Aufgaben (Berlin, 1886, 1891). Löwenthal, David, The Past Is a Foreign Country (Cambridge, 1985). Lowenthal-Hensel, Cecile, Die Wandlung des Wallensteinbildes in der deutschen Fachliteratur. Einführung in die Geschichte der Wallensteinforschung. Diss. (Erlangen, 1949). Lozek, Gerhard, ‘Der Epochebegriff bei Ranke’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. xxxv, no. 4 (1987), pp. 291–297. Lozek, Gerhard, ‘Der Epochenbegriff bei Ranke’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 176–188. Ludwig, Roland, Die Rezeption der Englischen Revolution im deutschen politischen Denken und in der deutschen Historiographie im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 2003). Luhrmann, N., ‘Evolution und Geschichte’, in: Geschichte und Gesellschaft. Zeitschrift für Historische Sozialwissenschaft, vol. 2/3 (1976). Lupas, Johann, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Mihail Kogalniceanu’, in: Jbb. f. Gesch. Osteuropas, vol. 4 (Breslau, 1939), pp. 322–330. Lutz, Heinrich, ‘ “Ursprung der Spaltung in der Nation”: Bemerkungen zu einem Kapitel aus Rankes Reformationsgeschichte’, in: Max-Planck-Institute (ed.), Festschrift für Hermann Heimpel zum 70. Geburtstag am 19. September 1971, vol. i (Göttingen, 1971), pp. 140–160. Lutz, Heinrich, ‘Rankes Bayerische Politik. Nationale und weltgeschichtliche Perspektiven’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. ccxliv (1987a), pp. 265–284. Lutz, Heinrich, Leopold von Ranke: Vorträge anläßlich seines 100. Todestages (Munich, 1987b). Macaulay, T.B., ‘Von Ranke (October  1840)’, in: The Miscellaneous Works of Lord Macaulay (New York, n.d.), vol. iv, pp. 365–417. Macaulay, T.B., Lord Macaulay über Leopold Ranke’s kirchliche und politische Geschichte der römischen Päpste des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen, 1864). Mac Cuarta, B., Ulster 1641, Aspects of the Rising (Belfast, 1993). Maclean, M.J., ‘Johann Gustav Droysen and the development of historical hermeneutics’, in: History and Theory, vol. 21, no. 3 (1982), pp. 347–365. Maertz, K.A., Die Methorik der Geschichtswissenschaft nach Ranke, Sigwart und Wundt. Diss. (Leipzig, 1916). Mahan, A.T., ‘Subordination in historical treatment’, in: Annual Reports of the AHA (1902), vol. i, pp. 49–63. Makkreel, Rudolf und Rodi, Frithjof, Wilhelm Dilthey: Selected Works, Volume iv: Hermeneutics and the Study of History (Princeton, 2010).

Bibliography  339 Mali, Joseph, ‘Political restauration or cultural renaissance? Historiographical reflections on Ranke and Burckhardt’, in: Tel Aviver Jahrbuch für Deutsche Geschichte, vol. xxv (1996), pp. 97–116. Mandelbaum, Maurice, The Anatomy of Historical Knowledge (Baltimore, 1979). Mannhardt, J.W., ‘Politik und Geschichte in heutiger Sicht’, in: Schicksalswege deutscher Vergangenheit (Düsseldorf, 1950). Mannigel, Holger, Wallenstein in Weimar, Wien und Berlin. Das Urteil über Albrecht von Wallenstein in der deutschen Historiographie von Friedrich von Schiller bis Leopold von Ranke (Husum, 2003). Marwick, Arthur, The New Nature of History (Hampshire, 2003). Masur, Gerhard, ‘Rankes Begriff der Weltgeschichte’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, Beiheft 6 (1926). Maurer, Kathrin, Discursive Interaction: Literary Realism and Academic Historiography in Nineteenth-Century Germany (Heidelberg, 2006). Maurer, Kathrin, ‘The rhetoric of literary realism in Leopold von Ranke’s historiography’, in: Clio, vol. 35, no. 3 (2006), pp. 309–328. Maurer, Kathrin, ‘Footnoting the fictional: Historical novels and scholarly historiography in nineteenth-century Germany’, in: Angermion (2009), pp. 45–56. Maurer, Kathrin, ‘ “Es ist ein Geschichte sehen”: Leopold von Rankes Historiographie und die Ästhetik des Panoramas’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, Aschmann, Birgit, Denzel, M.A., Kusber, Jan, Scholtyseck, Joachim, and Stamm-Kuhlmann, Thomas (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen der Ranke-Gesellschaft, vol. 25 (Stuttgart, 2012). Maurer, Kathrin, ‘Leopold von Ranke and the Panorama’, in: Visualising the Past: The Power of the Image in German Historicism (Berlin, 2013), pp. 27–72. Maus, Lars, Der Objektivitätsbegriff bei Ranke und Droysen. Schriftliche Hausarbeit der 1. Staatsprüfung für das Lehramt (Cologne, 2008). Mautz, Kurt, ‘Leo und Ranke’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 27 (1953), pp. 207–235. Mayer-Kulenkampff, Ilse, Luther in der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes. Diss. (Göttingen, 1943). Mayer-Kulenkampff, Ilse, ‘Rankes Lutherverhältnis: dargestellt von dem Lutherfragment von 1817’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, 172, no. 1 (1951), pp. 65–99. McClelland, C.E., The German Historians and England (Cambridge, 1971). Megill, Allan, Shephard, Steven, und Honenberger, Philip, Historical Knowledge, Historical Error: A Contemporary Guide to Practice (Chicago, 2007). Meinecke, Friedrich, ‘Friedrich Wilhelm IV. und Deutschland’, in: Historische Zeitschrift vol. 89 (1902). Meinecke, Friedrich, Weltbürgertum und Nationalstaat (Berlin, 1907). Meinecke, Friedrich, ‘Ranke und Marwitz’, in: FBPG 21 (1908), pp. 250–252. Meinecke, Friedrich, Die Idee der Staatsräson (Munich, 1924a). Meinecke, Friedrich, Zur Geschichte der Geschichtsschreibung (Leipzig, 1924b). Meinecke, Friedrich, Die Entstehung des Historismus (Leipzig, 1936). Meinecke, Friedrich, Aphorismen und Skizzen zur Geschichte (Leipzig, 1942). Meinecke, Friedrich, Ranke und Burckhardt, Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Vorträge und Schriften, no. 27 (Berlin, 1948). Meinecke, Friedrich, ‘Ranke and Burckhardt’, in: Kohn, Hans (ed.), German History. Some New German Views (Boston, 1954), pp. 142–156. Meinecke, Friedrich, ‘Die Entstehung des Historismus’, in: Meinecke, Friedrich (ed.), Werke, vol. iii (Stuttgart, 1957–79).

340  Bibliography Meinecke, Friedrich, Die Entstehung des Historismus (Munich, 1965). Meinecke, Friedrich, Historism: The Rise of the New Historical Outlook (London, 1972). Meran, J., Theorien in der Geschichtswissenschaft (Göttingen, 1985). Merz, Georg, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Die kirchliche Bedeutung seiner Geschichtsbetrachtung’, in: Jb. d. Theologischen Schule Bethel, vol. 5 (Bethel, 1934), pp. 99–115. Metz, K.H., Grundformen historiographischen Denkens: Wissenschaftsgeschichte als Methodologie; dargestellt an Ranke, Treitschke und Lamprecht; mit einem Anhang über zeitgenössische Geschichtstheorie (Munich, 1979). Metzger, Franziska, Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsdenken im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Bern, 2011). Meyer, Adolf, ‘Rankes Stellung im modernen historischen Denken’, in: Leopold von Ranke, Historische Meisterwerke, vols. 23/24 (1930), pp. 442–458. Meyer, Heinrich, Ranke the Historian – A Nineteenth-Century Thinker (Houston, 1936). Meyer von Knonau, Gerold, ‘In Leopold Ranke’s Heimatsthal’, in: Deutsche Rundschau, vol. 100 (Berlin, 1899), pp. 440–447. Meyer von Knonau, Gerold, ‘Ein Brief eines schweizerischen Historikers an Leopold von Ranke, aus dem Jahre 1834’, in: Anzeiger für Schweizerische Geschichte, Jg. 39, NF vol. 10, no. 4 (Bern, 1908), pp. 356–360. Michael, Emil, Rankes Weltgeschichte (Paderborn, 1890). Michael, Wolfgang, Ranke und Treitschke und die deutsche Einheit. Festrede, gehalten bei der Reichsgründungsfeier der Universität Freiburg (Berlin, 1922). Milford, Karl, ‘Nationalism, Volksgeist, and the methods of economics: A  note on Ranke, Roscher and Menger’, in: History of European Ideas, vol. xv, no. 1–3 (1992), pp. 163–170. Mitrovic, Bojan, ‘Una storia fra modello testimonianza: “Die serbische Revolution” di Leopold Ranke nella storiografia serba’, in: Acta Histriae, vol. 19, no. 1–2 (2011), pp. 281–300. Moldenhauer, Dirk, Geschichte als Ware: Der Verleger Friedrich Christoph Perthes (1772–1843) als Wegbereiter der modernen Geschichtsschreibung (Cologne, 2008). Mommsen, W.J., Stein, Ranke, Bismarck (Munich, 1954). Mommsen, W.J., ‘Die Geschichtswissenschaft in der modernen Industriegesellschaft’, in: Vierteljahreshefte für Zeitgeschichte, vol. 22 (1974). Mommsen, Wolfgang, Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988). Mommsen, Wolfgang, ‘Ranke and the Neo-Rankean school in Germany’, in: Iggers, G.G., and Powell, J.M. (eds.), Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline (Syracuse, 1990), pp. 124–140. Mommsen, Wolfgang, ‘Perspektivengebundenheit und Objektivität historischer Forschung’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. xl, no. 4 (1992), pp. 341–349. Mommsen, Wolfgang, ‘Der Historismus als Weltanschauung des aufsteigenden Bürgertums’, in: Blanke, H.W. (ed.), Dimensionen der Historik: Geschichtstheorie, Wissenschaftsgeschichte und Geschichtskultur heute (Cologne, 1998), pp. 383–395. Monod, G., ‘Du progrès des études historiques en France depuis le XVIe siècle’, in: Revue historique, vol. I (1876). Morrison, J.J., ‘Charles W. Bennet’s “The Purchase of the von Ranke Library”. A prefatory note’, in: The Courier, vol. 15, no. 2–3 (1978), pp. 15–18. Moses, J.A., ‘Ranke revisited: The “dubious” values of a universal historian’, in: Journal of Religious History, vol. XIV, no. 2 (1986), pp. 167–180.

Bibliography  341 Moses, J.A., ‘Leopold von Ranke one hundred years on: The centenary conference at Syracuse, USA’, in: Storia della storiografia, vol. xii, no. 12 (1987), pp. 137–147. Muhlack, Philipp, ‘Das Problem der weltgeschichte bei Leopold Ranke’, in: Hardtwig, Wolfgang, and Müller, Philipp (eds.), Die Vergangenheit der Weltgeschichte. Universalhistorisches Denken in Berlin 1800–1933 (Göttingen, 2010), pp. 143–171. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Hammerstein, Notker (ed.), Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft um 1900 (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 11–36. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Ranke und die politische Schule der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft im 19. Jahrhundert: Zum Verhältnis von Geschichte und Politik’, in: Comparativ, vol. iii, no. 6 (1993), pp. 92–113. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Rankes Päpste auf dem Index und die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft. Ein Beitrag zur katholischen Geschichtskultur im Deutschland des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: Röm. Quartalschr. f. christl. Altertumskunde u. Kirchengesch., vol. 96 (2001a), pp. 163–181. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Von der “Kriminaluntersuchung” zum “Weltgericht” oder Ein juristisches Wort über Rankes Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Fahrmeir, Andreas, and Freitag, Sabine (eds.), Mord und andere Kleinigkeiten. Ungewöhnliche Kriminalfälle aus sechs Jahrhunderten (Munich, 2001b), pp. 91–94. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Desiderate der Ranke-Forschung’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Salewski, Michael (eds.), Historische Mitteilungen, Schwerpunkt: Leopold von Ranke, vol. xiv (Stuttgart 2002), pp. 17–23. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die Begründung der quellenkritischen Geschichtsforschung’, in: Elvert, Jürgen, and Krauß, Susanne (eds.), Historische Debatten und Kontroversen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 2003), pp. 22–33. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Lutz, Raphael (ed.), Klassiker der Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. 1 (2006), pp. 38–63. Muhlack, Ulrich, and Ramonat, Oliver, ‘Leopold von Ranke – Der Historiker wird selbst historisch. Die Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels Leopold von Rankes. Ein Forschungsbericht’, in: Historische Kommission bei der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Munich, 2005), pp. 29–45. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Leopold Ranke, Rom und “Die Römischen Päpste” ’, in: Matheus, Michael, Wallraff, Martin, and Lauster, Jörg (eds.), Rombilder im deutschsprachigen Protestantismus. Begegnungen mit der Stadt im “langen 19. Jahrhundert” (Tübingen, 2011), pp. 1–24. Muhlack, Ulrich, ‘Die Brüder Leopold und Heinrich Ranke im Spannungsfeld von evangelischer Erweckung und historischem Denken’, in: Breul, Wolfgang, and Schnurr, J.C. (eds.), Geschichtsbewusstsein und Zukunftserwartung in Pietismus und Erweckungsbewegung (Göttingen, 2013), pp. 192–220. Muhlack, Ulrich, and Ramonat, Oliver (eds.), Gesamtausgabe des Briefwechsels von Leopold von Ranke. Band 1: 1813–1825 (Munich, 2007). Muir, Edward, The Leopold von Ranke Manuscript Collection of Syracuse University; The Complete Catalogue (Syracuse, 1981). Muir, Edward, ‘Leopold von Ranke, his library, and the shaping of historical evidence’, in: SULAC 22/1 (1987), pp. 3–10. Mülbe, Erich, Selbstzeugnisse Rankes über seine historische Theorie und Methode im Zusammenhang der zeitgenössischen Geistesrichtungen. Diss. (Berlin, 1930). Müller, K.A. von, ‘Ein unbekannter Vortrag Rankes aus dem Jahre 1862’, in: HZ 151 (1935a), pp. 311–331.

342  Bibliography Müller, K.A. von, ‘Tagebuchdiktate Leopold von Rankes aus dem Jahre 1881’, in: HZ 151 (1935b), pp. 332–335. Müller, K.A. von, ‘Nachträge zu den Briefen Leopold Rankes an König Maximilian II. von Bayern’, in: SBB d. Bayer. Akad. d. Wiss. (Munich, 1939). Müller, K.E. von, ‘Identität und Geschichte: Widerspruch oder Komplementarität? Ein ethnologischer Beitrag’, in: Paideuma, vol. xxxviii (1992), pp. 17–29. Müller, Paul, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Zu seinem 50. Todestage’, in: Nationalsozialistische Erziehung. Kampf- und Mitteilungsblatt des Nationalsozialistischen Lehrerbundes für den Gau Groß-Berlin, vol. 5, no. 21 (Berlin, 1936), pp. 265–267. Müller, Philipp, ‘Wissenspoesie und Historie: Rankes Literaturgeschichte der Renaissance als Rekonfiguration ästhetischer Geschichtsphilosophie’, in: German Studies Review, vol. 29, no. 1 (2006), pp. 1–20. Müller, Philipp, Erkenntnis und Erzählung: Ästhetische Geschichtsschreibung in der Historiographie von Ranke, Burckhardt und Taine (Cologne, 2008). Müller, Philipp, ‘Doing historical research in the early nineteenth century: Leopold Ranke, the archive policy and the relazioni’, in: Storia della Storiografia, vol. lvii (2009), pp. 80–103. Müller, Philipp, ‘Entwicklung aus Gegensätzen. Die englische Geschichte in der Historiographie von Augustin Thierry und Leopold Ranke’, in: d’Aprile, Iwan-Michelangelo, and Mak, R.K.S. (eds.), Aufklärung, Evolution, Globalgeschichte (Hannover, 2010), pp. 219–241. Müller, Philipp, Ranke in the Lobby of the Archive: Metaphors and Conditions of Historical Research (n.p/n.d.). Müller, Werner, ‘Der Rankesche Irrtum’, in: Scheidewege, vol. 3, no. 4 (1973), pp. 430–453. Münnich, Margarete, Der historische Moment bei Ranke. Diss. (Munich, 1924). Munslow, Alun, Deconstructing History (London, 1997). Munslow, Alun, The New History (Harlow, 2003). Munslow, Alun, Deconstructing History (New York, 2006). Munslow, Alun, The Future of History (Hampshire, 2010). Münter, Wilhelm, ‘Nationalidee und Europagedanke. Eine Untersuchung an Hand der Werke des Historikers Leopold von Ranke zugleich ein Beitrag zu einem aktuellen pädagogischen Problem’, in: Pädagogische Bll. (Düsseldorf, 1967), pp. 122–140. Muralt, Leonhard von, ‘Zum Problem “Freiheit und Notwendigkeit” bei Ranke’, in: Hortulus amicorum, Fritz Ernst zum sechzigsten Geburtstag (Zürich, 1949), pp. 128–135. Muralt, Leonard von, ‘War Ranke ein protestantischer Historiker?’ in: Reformatio, vol. 5, no. 1 (Schaffhausen, 1956), pp. 19–27. Muraoka, Akira, Ranke (Tokyo, 1959). Nagle, Shane, Histories of Nationalism in Ireland and Germany. A Comparative Study from 1800 to 1932 (London, 2017). Nalbandian, Wahan, Leopold von Rankes Bildungsjahre und Geschichtsauffassung (Leipzig, 1901). Navarro-Perez, Jorge, ‘Fichte, Humboldt und Ranke über die Idee und die historischen Ideen’, in: Philosoph. Jb. d. Görresges., vol. 104 (1997), pp. 361–373. Neumann, Carl, ‘Ranke und Burckhardt und die Geltung des Begriffes “Renaissance” insbesondere für Deutschland’, in: HZ 150 (1934), pp. 485–496. Nevins, Allan, The Gateway of History (Boston, 1938). Nichols Gengenbach, Constance, Ranke. The Development of the Historian’s Craft. Diss. (Chicago, 1975).

Bibliography  343 Niemöller, Josef, ‘Ein Wort über die sogenannten Pack’schen Händel und ihre Behandelung in der Geschichte’, in: HpBll 104 (1889), pp. 178–200. Nietzsche, Friedrich, Unzeitgemäße Betrachtungen, zweites Stück: Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben (Leipzig, 1874). Nippel, Wilfried, ‘Das forschende Verstehen, die Objektivität des Historikers und die Funktion der Archive. Zum Kontext von Droysens Geschichtstheorie’, in: Rebenich, Stefan, and Wierner, H-U. (eds.), Johann Gustav Droysen. Philosophie und Politik – Historie und Philologie (Frankfurt/Main, 2012), pp. 337–391. Nipperdey, Thomas, ‘Historismus und Historismuskritik heute’, in: Nipperdey, Thomas (ed.), Gesellschaft, Kultur, Theorie (Göttingen, 1976), pp. 59–73. Nipperdey, Thomas, ‘Zum Problem der Objektivität bei Ranke’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 215–222. Nissen, Martin, Populäre Geschichtsschreibung. Historiker, Verleger und die deutsche Öffentlichkeit (1848–1900) (Cologne, 2009). Noack, Ulrich, Geschichtswissenschaft und Wahrheit. Nach den Schriften von John Dalberg-Acton, dem Historiker der Freiheit 1834–1902 (1935). Noack, Ulrich, ‘Das Werden unseres neuen Geschichtsbildes im Geiste Rankes. Die Wiederherstellung von Zeit und Raum in der Geschichte’, in: Historisches Jahrbuch, vol. lxxiv (1955), pp. 506–519. Noorden, K., ‘Von Ranke and Macaulay’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. xvii (1867), p. 87. Novick, Peter, That Noble Dream: The ‘Objectivity Question’ and the American Historical Profession (New York, 1988). Novotny, Alexander, ‘Über den Primat der äußeren Politik. Bemerkungen zu einem Gedankengang Leopold von Rankes’, in: Österreich und Europa. Festgabe für Hugo Hantsch zum 70. Geburtstag (Graz, 1965), pp. 311–323. Oechsli, Wilhelm (ed.), Briefwechsel Johann Kaspar Bluntschlis mit Savigny, Niebuhr, Leopold Ranke, Jakob Grimm und Ferdinand Meyer (Frauenfeld, 1915). Oelsner, Ludwig, L.v. Ranke. Festvortrag (December 1885). Oestreich, Gerhard, ‘Die Fachhistorie und die Anfänge der sozialgeschichtlichen Forschung in Deutschland’, in HZ 208 (1969), pp. 320–363. Oexle, O.G., Geschichtswissenschaft im Zeichen des Historismus (Göttingen, 1996). Oexle, O.G., ‘Ranke  – Nietzsche – Kant. Über die epistemologischen Orientierungen deutscher Historiker’, in: Internationale Zeitschrift für Philosophie (2001), pp. 224–244. Oncken, Hermann, Aus Rankes Frühzeit (Gotha, 1922). Oncken, Hermann, ‘Zur inneren Entwicklung Rankes. Mit weiteren Briefen von Ranke an Friedrich Perthes’, in: Karo, G, Salin, E., and Domaszewski, A. (eds.), Bilder und Studien aus drei Jahrtausenden, Eberhard Gothein zum siebzigsten Geburtstag als Festgabe (Munich, 1925). Oncken, Hermann, ‘Leopold von Ranke und die deutsch-serbischen Kulturbeziehungen’, in: Mitt. d. Akad. z. wiss. Erforschung u. z. Pflege d. Deutschtums (Munich, 1928), pp. 950–954. Oncke, Hermann, ‘Deutsche geistige Einfluesse in der europäischen Nationalitätenbewegung des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: Bulletin of the International Committee of Historical Sciences, no. 7 (1929), pp. 305–326. Oncken, Hermann, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Die großen Deutschen, vol. iii (Berlin, 1936), pp. 203–221. Oncken, Hermann, ‘Leopold von Ranke. 1795–1886’, in: Andreas, W., and Scholz, W. (eds.), Die großen Deutschen. Neue deutsche Biographie (Berlin, 1942), pp. 207–225.

344  Bibliography Osgood, Herbert L., ‘Review of Ranke’s Zur eigenen Lebensgeschichte’, in: Political Science Quarterly, vol. vi (1891), pp. 560–562. Osterhammel, Jürgen, ‘Geschichte, Geographie, Geohistorie’, in: Küttler, Wolfgang, Rüsen, Jörn, and Schulin, Ernst (eds.), Geschichtsdiskurs: Die Epoche der Historisierung, Bd. 3 (Frankfurt/Main, 1997), pp. 257–271. Osterhammel, Jürgen, Die Verwandlung der Welt. Eine Weltgeschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Bonn, 2010). Ostwald, Paul, Marx oder Ranke? (Langensalza, 1920). Pahlmann, Franz, ‘Ein Prediktenentwurf Leopold von Rankes’, in Historische Zeitschrift, no. 180/3 (Munich, 1955), pp. 489–505. Paletschek, Sylvia, ‘Ermentrude und ihre Schwestern: Die ersten habilitierten Historikerinnen in Deutschland’, in: Albrecht, Hennig, Boukrif, Gabriele, Bruns, Claudia, and Heinsohn, Kirsten (eds.), Politische Gesellschaftsgeschichte im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Hamburg, 2006), pp. 175–187. Pammer, Michael, ‘Religion und das Handeln in der Welt’, in: Pammer, Michael (ed.), Handbuch der Religionsgeschichte im deutschsprachigen Raum, Band 5: 1750–1900 (2007), pp. 495–514. Pammer, Michael, ‘Leopold Ranke, Historiker’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), pp. 10–17. Pandel, H-J., ‘Wer ist ein Historiker? Forschung und Lehre als Bestimmungsfaktoren in der Geschichtswissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts’, in: Küttler, Wolfgang, and Rüsen, Jörn (eds.), Geschichtsdiskurs, Bd. 1: Grundlagen und Methoden der Historiographiegeschichte (Frankfurt/Main, 1993), pp. 346–355. Pandel, H-J., Geschichtstheorie: Eine Historik für Schülerinnen und Schüler – aber auch für ihre Lehrer (Schwalbach, 2017). Pastor, Ludwig von, Johannes Hanssen. 1829–1891. Ein Lebensbild, vornehmlich nach ungedruckten Briefen und Tagebüchern desselben entworfen (Freiburg, 1892). Pastor, Ludwig von, ‘Briefe von Onno Klopp an Johannes Janssen’, in: Hochland. Monatsschr. f. alle Gebiete d. Wissens, d. Lit. & Kunst, Jg. 16, vol. 2, no. 9–12 (Munich, 1919). Pastor, Ludwig von, Johannes Janssens Briefe (Freiburg, 1920). Pätzold, Kurt (ed.), Biographien zur deutschen Geschichte von den Anfängen bis 1945 (Berlin, 1991). Paul, Herman, ‘A collapse of trust: Reconceptualizing the crisis of historicism’, in: Journal of the Philosophy of History, vol. 2, no. 1 (2008), pp. 63–82. Paul, Herman, ‘Who suffered from the crisis of historicism? A Dutsch example’, in: History and Theory, vol. 49, no. 2 (2010), pp. 169–193. Paul, Herman, ‘Distance and self-distanciation: Intellectual virtue and historical method around 1900’, in: History and Theory, vol. 50, no. 4 (2011), pp. 104–116. Pauli, Elisabeth (ed.), Reinhold Pauli. Lebenserinnerungen nach Briefen und Tagebüchern zusammengestellt von Elisabeth Pauli (Halle, 1895). Paulsen, Sigurd, Leopold von Rankes Lehre vom “organischen Fortschritt”. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1922). Peiler, Ursula, Rankes Kunstform. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1952). Pertz, Leonora (ed.), Autobiography and Letters of George Henry Pertz (London, 1894). Petersdorff, Hermann von (ed.), Briefe von Ferdinand Gregorovius an den Staatssekretär Hermann von Thiele (Berlin, 1894). Peterson, Brent, ‘Muehlbach, Ranke, and the truth of historical fiction’, in: Kontje, Todd (ed.), A Companion to German Realism: 1848–1900 (Columbia, 2002), pp. 53–84. Peterson, R.C., Early Educational Reform in North Germany and Its Effects on PostReformation German Intellectuals (Lewiston, 2001).

Bibliography  345 Pfeiffer, W., ‘Aus Leopold von Rankes Jugend. Aus seinen Lebenserinnerungen mitgeteilt’, in: Kalender für Ortsgeschichte und Heimatkunde im Kreise Eckartsberga auf das Jahr 1904, vol. 9 (Wiehe, 1903), pp. 64–68. Phillipsborn, Leo, Carl von Noorden, ein deutscher Historiker des 19. Jahrhunderts. Diss. (Göttingen, 1963). Plumb, J.H., The Death of the Past (Hampshire, 2004). Poehrmann, Robert, ‘Rankes Weltgeschichte (1884)’, in: Aus Altertum und Gegenwart (Munich, 1895). Pois, R.A., Friedrich Meinecke and German Politics in the Twentieth Century (Berkeley, 1972). Pok, Attila, ‘Rankes Einfluss auf Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsdenken in Ungarn – ein historisierter Historiker’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 201–214. Polcar, Ales, Machiavelli-Rezeption in Deutschland von 1792 bis 1858. 16 Studien (Aachen, 2002). Porciani, Ilaria, ‘Janus-faced Clio. Gender in the historical profession in Europe’, in: Gender and the Practices of History (2010), pp. 11–30. Powell, J.M., ‘The confusing and ambiguous legacy of Leopold von Ranke’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1988), pp. 5–10. Price, William, ‘A contribution toward a bibliography of Leopold von Ranke’, in: American Historical Review, vol. ii (1896), pp. 1263–1274. Prüfer, Thomas, Die Bildung der Geschichte. Friedrich Schiller und die Anfänge der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft (Cologne, 2002). Prutz, Hans, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Ein Essay’, in: Unsere Zeit (August 1886). Puff, Helmut, ‘Männerliebe, Sprache, akademische Maskulinität: Leopold von Ranke und Jacob Burckhardt im Zwiegespräch’, in: Homme, vol. xiv, no. 2 (2003), pp. 298–316. Putz, Hans, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Unsere Zeit, vol. ii (1886), pp. 145–163. Ramonat, Oliver, Leopold Ranke als historischer Archäologe, p. 25, available at: www.lisa. gerda-henkel-stiftung.de. Randall Jr., J.H., and Haines, George, ‘Controlling assumptions in the practice of American historians’, in: Social Science Research Council Bulletin 54, Theory and Practice in Historical Study: A Report of the Committee on Historiography (New York, 1946), pp. 30–34. Ranke, Ermentrude von, ‘Leopold von Rankes Elternhaus’, in: Grundmann, Herbert (ed.), Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. xlviii (Cologne, 1966), pp. 114–132. Ranke, Ernst, Festgabe zum 90. Geburtstag Leopolds von Ranke (Marburg, 1885). Ranke, Friduhelm von, ‘Aus dem Leben Leopold von Rankes. Erinnerungen von seinem Sohne’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 28 (Stuttgart, 1903), January pp. 6–17, February pp. 188–202. Ranke, Friduhelm von, ‘Vierzig ungedruckte Briefe Leopold von Rankes’, in: Deutsche Revue (1904–1906). Ranke, Friduhelm von, ‘Reminiscences of Leopold von Ranke. By his son, General Friduhelm von Ranke’, in: Temple Bar, New Series, No. 3 (1906), pp. 193–215. Ranke, Friduhelm von, Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke von seinem Sohne Friduhelm von Ranke (Berlin, 1996). Ranke, Friedrich Heinreich, Jugenderinnerungen mit Blicken auf das spätere Leben (Stuttgart, 1877). Ranke, Hermann, Stammtafeln der Familie Ranke (1901). Ranke, Leopold von, Das Briefwerk, edited by Walther Peter Fuchs (Hamburg, 1949).

346  Bibliography Ranke, Leopold von, Neue Briefe, edited by Bernhard Hoeft and Hans Herzfeld (Hamburg, 1949). Ranke, Leopold von, Aus Werk und Nachlass, edited by Walther Peter Fuchs and Theodor Schieder (Munich, 1964–75). Ranke, Otto von, Zu Leopold von Ranke’s Heimgang – a Sermon (Leipzig, 1886). Ranke, Otto von, ‘Leopold von Ranke in seiner Familie. Niedergeschrieben von seinem Sohne’, in: Daheim, vol. 59, no. 35–50 (Leipzig, 1923). Ranke, Ruth von, Erinnerungen an meinem Vater, Friduhelm von Ranke (1847–1917) (Weimar, 1967). Ranke-Verein (ed.), Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß (Wiehe, 1996). Rantzau, J.A. von, ‘Das deutsche Geschichtsdenken der Gegenwart und die Nachwirkungen Rankes’, in: GWU 1 (1950), pp. 514–524. Rantzau, J.A. von, ‘Deutsche Geschichte und Politik’, in: Aus Geschichte und Politik. Festschrift für Ludwig Bergsträßer (Düsseldorf, 1954), pp. 197–206. Raphael, Lutz, Geschichtswissenschaft im Zeitalter der Extreme. Theorien, Methoden, Tendenzen von 1900 bis zur Gegenwart (Munich, 2003). Raphael, Lutz (ed.), Klassiker der Geschichtswissenschaft (Munich, 2006). Rargiel, R.R., ‘Wie es gewesen ist. . . ’, in: Brandenburger Blätter (1995). Raumer, Kurt von, ‘Die Ranke-Briefe. Bemerkungen zur Methodik der neuen Briefausgaben’, in: GWU 2 (1951), pp. 584–590. Raumer, Kurt von, ‘Ranke als Spiegel deutscher Geschichtsschreibung im 19. Jahrhundert’, in: Die Welt als Geschichte 12 (1952), pp. 242–258. Reich-Ranicki, Marcel, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Reich-Ranicki, Marcel (ed.), Der Kanon. Die deutsche Literatur. Essays, vol. 2 (Frankfurt, 2006), pp. 11–56. Reidy, Ann Elizabeth, Histories of Realism. Stifter, Storm and Meyer in the Age of Ranke. Diss. (Michigan, 2000). Reill, P.H., ‘Review on Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Aufklärung und Historismus. Johannes von Müller and Friedrich Christoph Schlosser by Michael Gottlob’, in: History and Theory, vol. xxx, no. 2 (1991), pp. 232–246. Repgen, K., ‘Kann man von einem Paradigmenwechsel in den Geschichtswissenschaften sprechen?’ in: Leidinger, P. (ed.), Geschichte, Politik und ihre Didaktik, Sonderheft 3 (Paderborn, 1982a). Repgen, K., ‘Über Rankes Diktum von 1824: “Bloss sagen, wie es eigentlich gewesen” ’, in: HJb 102 (1982b), pp. 439–449. Requadt, Paul, Johannes von Müller und der Frühhistorismus (Munich, 1929), pp. 162–198. Rethwisch, Conrad, Leopold von Ranke als Oberlehrer in Frankfurt a. O. (Berlin, 1908). Reumont, A.V., ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Historisches Jahrbuch, vol. vii (1886), pp. 608–635. Reusch, F.H., Ranke und Döllinger in jesuitischer Beleuchtung’, in: Beilage Nr. 109 zur AZ, no. 130 (Munich, 1892), pp. 1–4. Richardson, R.G., The Debate on the English Revolution (London, 1977). Richtscheid, Hans, ‘Rankes Kritik an Hegel, erörtert im Hinblick auf das Problem der menschlichen Existenz’, in: Bll. f. dt. Philosophie. Zs. d. Dt. Philosoph. Ges., vol. 11, no. 3 (Berlin, 1937), pp. 241–271. Rickert, Heinrich, Die Probleme der Geschichtsphilosophie. Eine Einführung (Heidelberg, 1904). Ritter, Gerhard, ‘Scientific history, contemporary history, and political science’, in: History and Theory, vol. 1, no. 3 (1961), pp. 261–279.

Bibliography  347 Ritter, Heinrich, An Leopold von Ranke über deutsche Geschichtsschreibung: Ein offener Brief (Leipzig, 1867). Ritter, Moritz, Leopold von Ranke. Seine Geistesentwicklung und seine Geschichtsschreibung. Antrittsrede (Stuttgart, 1896). Ritter, Moritz, ‘Über die Gründung, Leistungen und Aufgaben der Historischen Kommission’, in: HZ 103 (1909), pp. 274–301. Ritter, Moritz, Die Geschichte der Geschichtswissenschaft an den führenden Werken betrachtet (Munich, 1919), pp. 362–421. Ritter, Ralf, ‘Kulturgeschichtsschreibung bei Leopold von Ranke. Rankes Studien zur italienischen Renaissance’, in: Fenske, Hans, Reinhard, Wolfgang, and Schulin, Ernst (eds.), Historia Integra, Festschrift für Erich Hassinger zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin, 1977), pp. 201–217. Ritthaler, A., ‘Ranke und Vivenot’, in: Neue Preussische Zeitung, vol. 82, no. 229 (Berlin, 1929). Robinson, J.H., The New History (New York, 1912). Roessler, Constantin, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Preußische Jahrbücher, vol. lviii (1886), pp. 64–74. Romstorfer, Leopold, Religion als geschichtsbildender Faktor bei Leopold von Ranke. Diss. (Vienna, 1935). Roscher, C., ‘Wilhelm Roscher an Leopold Ranke. Ein Stück Wissenschaftsgeschichte’, in: PrJbb 133 (1908), pp. 383–386. Rosenberg, Alfred, Der Mythos des 20. Jahrhunderts. Eine Wertung der seelischgeistigen Gestaltenkämpfe unserer Zeit (Munich, 1933). Ross, Dorothy, ‘On the misunderstanding of Ranke and the origin of the historical profession in America’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1998), pp. 31–42. Ross, Janet (ed.), Three Generations of Englishwomen: Memoirs and Correspondence of Mrs. John Taylor, Mrs. Sarah Austin and Lady Duff Gordon (London, 1888). Rothacker, Erich, Einleitung in die Geisteswissenschaften (Tübingen, 1920). Rothacker, Erich, ‘Savigny, Grimm, Ranke. Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Zusammenhang der Historischen Schule’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, no. 128 (1923), pp. 415–445. Rothfels, Hans, ‘Ranke und die geschichtliche Welt’, in: Deutsche Beiträge zur geistigen Überlieferung (1953), pp. 97–120. Rotthaus, Karl, Der dynamische Zusammenhang äußeren und inneren Staatenlebens bei Ranke. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1915). Rotthaus, Karl, ‘Staatsform und auswärtige Politik. Eine Rankestudie’, in: PrJbb 179 (1920), pp. 1–35. Ruehlmann, Paul, ‘Der junge Ranke. An der Wiege der historischen Quellenkritik’, in: Deutsche Rundschau, Jg. 59, vol. 236 (1933), pp. 116–120. Rüsen, Jörn, ‘Probleme und Funktionen der Historik’, in: Ölmüller, W. (ed.), Wozu noch Geschichte? (Munich, 1977). Rüsen, Jörn, Historische Vernunft. Grundzüge einer Historik: Die Grundlagen der Geschichtswissenschaft (Göttingen, 1983). Rüsen, Jörn, Rekonstruktion der Vergangenheit. Grundzüge einer Historik II: Die Prinzipien der historischen Forschung (Göttingen, 1986). Rüsen, Jörn, ‘Rhetoric and aesthetics of history: Leopold von Ranke’, in: History and Theory, vol. xxix, no. 2 (1990), pp. 190–204. Rüsen, Jörn, Konfigurationen des Historismus. Studien zur deutschen Wissenschaftskultur (Frankfurt/Main, 1993). Rüsen, Jörn, Historik. Theorie der Geschichtswissenschaft (Cologne, 2013).

348  Bibliography Sadler, Thomas (ed.), Diary, Reminiscences and Correspondence of Henry Crabb Robinson (London, 1869). Salewski, Michael, ‘Die Mär der Weltgeschichte’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß der Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 14–29. Salomon, Ludwig, ‘Leopold von Ranke, der Begründer der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Westermanns Illustrierte der Monats-Hefte für das gesamte geistige Leben der Gegenwart, vol. 32, no. 64 (Braunschweig, 1888), pp. 741–758. Salzer, Ernst, ‘Noch ein Brief Rankes an Gentz’, in: HZ 108 (1912), pp. 333–336. Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und Thukydides’, in: Forschungsbericht der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 34 (2000), pp. 338–350 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Der junge Ranke als Oberlehrer am Friedrichsgymnasium in Frankfurt an der Oder (1818–1825)’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 36 (2002), pp. 204–214 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Das Friedrichsgymnasium in Frankfurt an der Oder zur Zeit Leopold von Rankes als Oberlehrer’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 37 (2003), pp. 211–222 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Die Begründung der modernen Geschichtswissenschaft bei Leoplold Ranke, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung seiner Schrift “Zur Kritik neuerer Geschichtssschreiber” (1824)’, in: Forschungsbericht der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 40 (2006), pp. 193–204 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Leopold von Ranke in der Auffassung Ernst Troeltschs’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 41 (2007a), pp. 162–168. Sato, Shinichi, Die historischen Perspektiven von Ernst Troeltsch (Waltrop, 2007b). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Friedrich Meineckes Erlebnis des Ersten Weltkrieges und die Veränderung seiner Auffassung von Leopold von Ranke’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 42 (2008), pp. 163–174 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Goethe und Ranke’ in der Historismus-Auffassung Friedrich Meineckes’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 43 (2009), pp. 179–186 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, Geschichte der europäischen Geschichtswissenschaft (Tokyo, 2009) (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und Hegel’, in: Forschungsbreichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 44 (2010), pp. 122–132 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und die französische Julirevolution’, in: Forschungsbericht der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 45 (2011), pp. 86–96 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und Pertz’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 46 (2012), pp. 161–170 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und Gentz’, in: Forschungsberichte der Musikhochschule Kunitachi in Tokyo, vol. 47 (2013a), pp. 182–192 (in Japanese). Sato, Shinichi, ‘Ranke und das Ehepaar Varnhagen von Ense unter besonderer Berücksichtigung eines Berliner Salons’ (in Japanese), in: Morihara, Takashi (ed.), The “Symbiosis” History of European Political Culture (Tokyo, 2013b), pp. 106–125. Sax, B.C., ‘Jacob Burckhardt and national history’, in: History of European Ideas, vol. xv, no. 4–6 (1992), pp. 845–850. Schaff, Adam, ‘Why history is constantly rewritten’, in: Diogenes, vol. 8, no. 30 (1960), pp. 62–74. Schalper, Adda, Die Stellung der Literatur in der Geschichtsauffassung und ihre Bedeutung in der Geschichtsdarstellung Rankes. Diss. (Munich, 1932).

Bibliography  349 Schellmann, Brigitte (ed.), Ehrenbürgerinnen und Ehrenbürger Berlins 1813–2002 (2002). Schemann, Ludwig, ‘Ranke und die weltgeschichtliche Rolle der Germanen’, in: PolitischAnthropologische Monatsschrift für praktische Politik, für politische Bildung und Erziehung auf biologischer Grundlage, vol. 16, no. 8–12 (Berlin, 1918). Scherr, Johannes, Allgemeine Geschichte der deutschen Literatur, vol. 2 (Stuttgart, 1875). Schevill, Ferdinand, ‘Ranke: Rise, decline, and persistence of a reputation’, in: The Journal of Modern History, vol. xxiv, no. 3 (1952), pp. 219–234. Schevill, Ferdinad, Six Historians (Chicago, 1956). Schieblich, Walter, Die Auffassung des mittelalterlichen Kaisertums in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung von Leibnitz bis Giesebrecht (Berlin, 1932). Schieder, Theodor, ‘Ranke und Goethe’, in: HZ 166 (1942), pp. 260–286. Schieder, Theodor, ‘Das historische Weltbild Leopold von Rankes’, in: GWU 1 (1950), pp. 138–135. Schieder, Theodor, ‘Die Entstehung von Rankes “Epochen der Neueren Geschichte” ’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, CIC, no. 1 (1964), pp. 1–30. Schieder, T., and Graubig, K. (eds.), Theorieprobleme der Geschichtswissenschaft (Darmstadt, 1977). Schiemann, Theodor, ‘Ein Brief Rankes aus dem Jahre 1852’, in: Zeitschrift für osteuropäische Geschichte, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1911), pp. 241–246. Schilfert, Gerhard, ‘Die Behandlung der Rolle der Volksmassen und ihrer Führer durch Leopold von Ranke’, in: Forschen und Wirken. Festschrift zur 150-Jahrfeier der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (Berlin, 1960), pp. 113–130. Schilfert, Gerhard, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Streisand, Joachim (ed.), Deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft vom Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts bis zur Reichseinigung von oben (Berlin, 1963), pp. 241–270. Schleier, Hans, ‘Die Ranke-Renaissance’, in: Streisand, Joachim (ed.), Studien über die deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. ii (Ost-Berlin, 1965), pp. 99–135. Schleier, Hans, ‘Die Auseinandersetzungen mit der Rankeschen Tradition Ende des 19. Jh. in Deutschland. Die deutschen Historiker und die Herausforderungen an die Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Jahrbuch für Geschichte, vol. xxxii (1985), pp. 271–287. Schleier, Hans, ‘Leistungen und Grenzen des idealistischen deutschen Historismus: Leopold von Ranke’, in: Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft, vol. xxxv, no. 5 (1987), pp. 955–970. Schleier, Hans, ‘Geschichtstheorie und Geschichtsschreibung bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988a), pp. 115–130. Schleier, Hans (ed.), Karl Lamprecht. Alternative zu Ranke. Schriften zur Geschichtstheorie (Leipzig, 1988b). Schmeidler, B., ‘Zur Entwicklung der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes. Ein Versuch ihrer theoretischen Würdigung’, in: Schmollers Jahrbuch, vol. xxvii (1903). Schmidt, F.J., ‘Ranke und König Maximilian II. von Bayern über den moralischen Fortschritt des Menschengeschlechts’, in: Delbrück-Festschrift (Berlin, 1908), pp. 47–64. Schmidt, Julian, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Deutsche Rundschau, vol. xlvii (1886), pp. 218–236. Schmidt, Hans, ‘Napoleon in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung: Ludwig Litzenburger zum 80. Geburtstag dankbar gewidmet’, in: Francia, vol. xiv (1986), pp. 530–560. Schmückle, Karl, ‘Zur Kritik des deutschen Historismus. Ranke und das Legitimitätsprinzip’, in: Unter dem Banner des Marxismus 2 (Moskau, 1929), pp. 281–297.

350  Bibliography Schnabel, Franz, Deutschlands geschichtliche Quellen und Darstellungen in der Neuzeit (Leipzig, 1931). Schnabel, Franz, Deutsche Geschichte im 19. Jahrhundert, vol. iii (Freiburg, 1954), pp. 86–100. Schnädelbach, Herbert, Geschichtsphilosophie nach Hegel. Die Probleme des Historismus (Freiburg, 1974). Schnitzer, Joseph, Savonarola. Ein Kulturbild aus der Zeit der Renaissance (Munich, 1924). Schoeps, H-J., Deutsche Geistesgeschichte der Neuzeit. Ein Abriß in fünf Bänden, vol. 4 (Mainz, 1979). Schöffler, Peter, ‘Ein Klassiker, der Schwierigkeiten macht’, in: Historicum, N.F. I-II (2015), pp. 18–21. Schott, Hermann, Ausgewählte historische Parallelen aus Rankes Werken mit Bemerkungen und Beiträgen (Regensburg, 1899). Schreiber, Albert, ‘Leopold Ranke, Heinrich Ritter und Friedrich Perthes. Ein Beitrag zu ihrer Charakteristik. Mit Auszügen aus 36 ungedruckten Briefen’, in: HVjs 27 (1932), pp. 619–630. Schröder, H-C., ‘Rankes “Englische Geschichte” und die Historiographie seiner Zeit’, in: Vierhaus, Rudolf (ed.), Frühe Neuzeit – Frühe Moderne? Forschungen zur Vielschichtigkeit von Übergangsphasen (Göttingen, 1992), pp. 27–47. Schrodt, R.P., ‘Five renaissance chronicles in Leopold von Ranke’s library’, in: SULAC 23/2 (1988), pp. 57–72. Schulenburg, Elisabeth Gräfin von der, Erinnerungen. Schulenburg, Elisabeth Gräfin von der, Erinnerungen an den Park in Lodersleben. Schulenburg, Hardnak Graf von der, Ahnen und Nachkommen des Leopold von Ranke (Hovedissen, 1973). Schulenburg, Sigrid von der (ed.), Briefwechsel zwischen Wilhelm Dilthey und dem Grafen Paul Yorck von Wartenburg (Halle, 1923). Schulenburg, Werner von der, Der junge Jacob Burckhardt. Biographie, Briefe und Zeitdocumente (1818–1852) (Stuttgart, 1926). Schulin, Ernst, Die weltgeschichtliche Erfassung des Orients bei Hegel und Ranke (Göttingen, 1958). Schulin, Ernst, ‘Rankes erstes Buch’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. cciii, no. 3 (1966), pp. 581–609. Schulin, Ernst, ‘Luther’s position in German history and historical writing’, in: Australian Journal of Politics and History, vol. xxx, no. 1 (1984), pp. 85–98. Schulin, Ernst, Neuzeitliche Universalgeschichte und Nationalgeschichte bei Ranke. Zum Gedenken an seinen 100. Todestag. Paper (Berlin, 1986). Schulin, Ernst, ‘Ranke’s universal history and national history’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. IX, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1988), pp. 11–18. Schulin, Ernst, ‘Universalgeschichte und Nationalgeschichte bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Mommsen, W. (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die moderne Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1999), pp. 37–71. Schulin, Ernst, ‘Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886)’, in: Duchhardt, Heinz (ed.), EuropaHistoriker (Göttingen, 2006), pp. 129–151. Schultz, G. (ed.), Geschichte Heute. Positionen. Tendenzen. Probleme (Göttingen, 1973). Schultz, Werner, ‘Der Einfluß lutherischen Geistes auf Rankes und Droysens Deutung der Geschichte’, in: Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte. Forschungen zur Geschichte des Protestantismus und seiner Weltwirkungen, vol. 39 (Leipzig, 1942), pp. 108–142.

Bibliography  351 Schulze, Winfried, Einführung in die Neuere Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1991). Schuster, W., Chronik von Lodersleben (Querfurt, 1941). Schuyler, R.L., ‘Macaulay and his history, a hundred years after’, in: Political Science Quarterly, vol. lxiii, no. 2 (1948), pp. 161–193. Schwab, Michael, Leopold von Ranke und das Mittelalter. Diss. (Munich, 1953). Schwarz, Adolf, Studien zu Leopold Rankes politischer Entwicklung, vornehmlich an den verschiedenen Fassungen der drei ersten Werke. Diss. (Leipzig, 1923). Schwarz, Adolf, ‘Rankes Bedeutung für unsere Zeit. Zu seinem 40. Todestag am 25.5.1926’, in: Der Deutsche Gedanke, vol. 3, no. 10 (Berlin, 1926), pp. 614–616. Schwarz, Albert, ‘Leopold von Ranke und seine Nachfolge’, in: ZBLG 29 (1966), pp. 727–732. Schwarz, Anny, ‘Der Anteil des Stenographen Leinfelder an Rankes Vorträgen “Über die Epochen der neueren Geschichte” ’, in: Neue stenographische Praxis, vol. 18, no. 4 (Bonn, 1970), pp. 69–77. Schweitzer, Elisabeth, ‘Leopold von Rankes Schulrede aus dem Jahre 1818. Eine Quelle zur Geschichte des Neuhumanismus’, in: Neue Jbb. f. d. Klass. Altertum, Gesch. u. dt. Lit. u. f. Pädagogik, Jg. 25, vol. 50 (Berlin, 1922). Schweitzer, Elisabeth, ‘Das Lutherfragment von 1817’, in: Joachimsen, Paul (ed.), Leopold von Ranke. Deutsche Geschichte im Zeitalter der Reformation (Munich, 1926), pp. 311–399. Schweitzer, Elisabeth, ‘Das Bildungsziel der höheren Schulen nach Leopold von Ranke’, in: Bayerische Bildungswesen, vol. 2, no. 12 (Munich, 1928), pp. 711–720. Schwenzel, Elisabeth (ed.), Gedanken von Ranke (1941). Seewald, Berthold, ‘Ranke und die griechische Revolution’, in: Merzinger, Patrick (ed.), Geschichte, Öffentlichkeit, Kommunikation. Festschrift für Bernd Sösemann zum 65. Geburtstag (Stuttgart, 2010), pp. 223–242. Seleskovic, M., ‘Ein unveröffentlichter Brief Vuks an Leopold von Ranke’, in: Zs. f. Slav. Philol. 16 (1939), pp. 283–286. Seleskovic, M., ‘Einige Quellenangaben zu Rankes “Fürstentum Serbien” ’, in: Zs. f. slav. Philol. 17 (1941), pp. 42–48. Seuffert, Burckhard, Rankes Schrift Die großen Mächte. Betrachtungen (Graz, 1935). Shotwell, J.T., ‘The interpretation of history’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xvii (1912–13). Sickinger, Richard, Soziale Probleme in der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes. Diss. (Vienna, 1950). Sieburg, H-O., Deutschland und Frankreich in der Geschichtsschreibung des 19. Jahrhunderts (Wiesbaden, 1954). Sieburg, O-H., ‘Aspekte deutscher Historiographie über Frankreich zwischen 1871 und 1914. Strömungen, Modellfälle und Tendenzen’, in: Timmermann, Heiner (ed.), Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik. Deutschland – Frankreich – Polen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Saarbrücken, 1987), pp. 223–242. Siemann, Wolfram, The German Revolution of 1848–49 (New York, 1998). Sieper, Ernst (ed.), Hermann Hüffer. Lebenserinnerungen (Berlin, 1912). Simmel, Oskar, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Das christliche Bild seiner Briefe’, in: Stimmen der Zeit, vol. 146 (Freiburg, 1950), pp. 295–301. Simon, Christian, ‘Monod-Waitz-Winkelried: Geschichtswissenschaft zwischen Patriotismus und Quellenkritik’, in: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte, vol. xxvi, no. 4 (1986), pp. 443–454. Simon, Ernst, ‘Der Einzelne und die Masse in Hegels Geschichtsphilosophie und Rankes Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Ethos, vol. 1, no. 3 (Karlsruhe, 1926), pp. 390–408.

352  Bibliography Simon, Ernst, ‘Ranke und Hegel’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, Beiheft 15 (1928). Simson, Bernhard von, Über Leopold von Ranke und seine Schule (Freiburg, 1895). Skalweit, Stephan, ‘Ranke und Bismarck’, in: HZ 176 (1953), pp. 277–290. Skalweit, Stephan, ‘Friedrich Wilhelm I. und die preussische Historie’, in: Jb. f. d. Gesch. Mittel- u. Ostdtl.s 6 (1957), pp. 107–131. Small, A.W., ‘Some contributions to the history of sociology. Section V: Ranke and documentation’, in: The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 29 (Chicago, 1924), pp. 69–77. Smith, B.G., ‘Gender and the practices of scientific history: The seminar and archival research in the nineteenth century’, in: American Historical Review, vol. c, no. 4 (1995), pp. 1150–1176. Smith, B.G., The Gender of History: Men, Women and Historical Practice (Cambridge, 1998). Smith, Steven, ‘Historical meaningfulness in shared action’, in: History and Theory, vol. 48, no. 1 (2009), pp. 1–19. Smith, T.C., ‘Written history as an act of faith’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xxxix (1933–34). Snowman, Daniel, Historians (Hampshire, 2007). Southgate, Beverly, What Is History For? (London, 2005). Spalding, Roger, and Parker, Christopher, Historiography. An Introduction (Oxford, 2007). Spengler, Oswald, The Decline of the West (Oxford, 1991). Sperber, J. (ed.), Germany 1800–1870 (Oxford, 2004). Srbik, H.R. von, ‘Zu Leopold von Rankes Universalismus und Nationalbewußtsein’, in: MÖIG 52 (1938), pp. 355–384. Srbik, H.R. von (ed.), Leopold von Ranke: Politisches Gespräch (Leipzig, 1941). Srbik, H.R. von, Geist und Geschichte vom Deutschen Humanismus bis zur Gegenwart (Salzburg, 1950). Srbik, H.R. von, ‘Leopold von Ranke und sein Geschichtsbild’, in: Universitas 6 (1951), pp. 393–398. Stadelmann, Rudolf, ‘Jacob Burckhardt und das Mittelalter’, in: HZ 142 (1930), pp. 457–515. Stadelmann, Rudolf, ‘Grundformen der Mittelalterauffassung von Herder bis Ranke’, in: Deutsche Vierteljahresschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 9 (1931). Stam, D.H., Syracuse University Library History (Syracuse, 2003), available at: Syracuse University Library, New York, USA, http://libwww.syr.edu/ publications/sulhistory.html [1 July 2004]. Stede, Wilhelm, ‘Die Berufung von Ranke nach Dorpat’, in: SBB der Gelehrten Estnischen Gesellschaft (1924), pp. 94–104. Steinbüchel, Theodor, ‘Rankes Idee der Universalgeschichte und ihr Verhältnis zur Hegelschen Geschichtsphilosophie’, in: Jahresbericht der Görres-Gesellschaft (1939), pp. 20–41. Steinbüchel, Theodor, ‘Ranke und Hegel’, in: Stadelmann, Rudolf (ed.), Große Geschichtsdenker. Ein Zyklus Tübinger Vorlesungen (Tübingen, 1949), pp. 173–215. Stengel, E.E. (ed.), ‘Jugendbriefe von Georg Waitz aus der Frühzeit Rankes und der Monumenta Germaniae’, in: HZ 121 (1920), pp. 234–255. Stenzel, K.G.W., Gustav Adolf Haral Stenzels Leben (Gotha, 1897). Stern, Alfred, ‘Ranke. Ein Nachruf’, in: Die Nation, vol. iii (1885–86), pp. 510–513. Stern, Alfred, ‘Gedächtnisrede auf Leopold von Ranke und Georg Waitz’, in: Jahrbuch für schweizerische Geschichte, vol. xii (1887), pp. xi–xxxvi.

Bibliography  353 Stern, Carola, Der Text meines Lebens: Das Leben der Rahel Varnhagen (Hamburg, 2001). Stern, Fritz, The Varieties of History from Voltaire to the Present (New York, 1973). Stern, Leo, Gegenwartsaufgaben der deutschen Geschichtsforschung (Berlin, 1952). Stinson, Robert (ed.), The Faces of Clio. An Anthology of Classics in Historical Writing from Ancient Times to the Present (Chicago, 1987). Stoll, Adolf, Friedrich Karl von Savigny. Ein Bild seines Lebens mit einer Sammlung seiner Briefe (Berlin, 1927). Stolze, Wilhelm, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Adolphe Thiers in Wien im Oktober 1870’, in: Deutsche Rundschau, vol. 193 (1922), pp. 290–293. Stromeyer, Rainald, Ranke und sein Werk im Spiegel der Kritik. Diss. (Heidelberg, 1950). Strout, Cushing, ‘Historical thought in America’, in: Virginia Quarterly Review, vol. xxviii (1952), pp. 242–257. Stroud, R.S., ‘ “Wie es eigentlich gewesen” and Thucydides 2.48,3’, in: Hermes 115, no. 3 (1987), pp. 379–382. Stuchtey, Benedict, and Wende, Peter (eds.), British and German Historiography 1750– 1950. Traditions, Perceptions and Transfers (Oxford, 2000). Stuchtey, Benedict, ‘Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886)’, in: Murray, C.J. (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Romantic Era, 1760–1850 (New York, 2004), pp. 925–926. Stuckenberg, J.H.W., ‘Ranke and his method’, in: Andover Review, vol. VII (1887), pp. 117–137. Stunkel, K.R., Fifty Key Works of History and Historiography (New York, 2011). Stupperich, Robert, ‘Vier Briefe Leopold von Rankes an Willem Groen van Prinsterer aus dem niederländischen Staatsarchiv im Haag’, in: HZ 150 (1934), pp. 559–563. Stutzer, E., ‘Rankelektüre in Prima’, in: Lehrproben und Lehrgänge aus der Praxis der höheren Lehranstalten, no. 98 (Halle, 1909), pp. 60–70. Su, Shih-Chieh, Modern Nationalism and the Making of a Professional Historian: The Life and Work of Leopold von Ranke. Diss. (Providence, 2012). Süßmann, Johannes, Geschichtsschreibung oder Roman? Zur Konstitutionslogik von Geschichtserzählung zwischen Schiller und Ranke 1780–1824 (Stuttgart, 2000). Süßmann, Johannes, ‘Vom Arcanum zur Hieroglyphe: Das Geheimnis der frühneuzeitlichen Staaten im Geschichtsdenken Leopold Rankes’, in: Zeitsprünge. Forschungen zur frühen Neuzeit (Frankfurt/Main, 2002), pp. 496–509. Suhrkamp, Peter, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Suhrkamp, Peter (ed.), Der Leser. Reden und Aufsätze (Berlin, 1960), pp. 161–164. Sundhaussen, Holm, Geschichte Serbiens. 19. bis 21. Jahrhundert (Vienna, 2007). Sütterlin, Berthold, ‘Volk und Staat bei den politischen Historikern. Ranke – Droysen – Treitschke’, in: Die badische Schule, vol. 6 (Brühl, 1939), pp. 225–229, 284–288. Suzuki, Shigetaka, Ranke und die welthistorische Wissenschaft (1939). Sybel, Heinrich von, ‘Über den Stand der neueren deutschen Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Kleinere historische Schriften, vol. 1 (Stuttgart, 1880–1897). Sybel, Heinrich von, ‘Gedächtnisrede auf Leopold von Ranke’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. lvi (1886), pp. 463–481. Syracuse Scholar. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Ideas. Theme: Leopold von Ranke (Syracuse, 1988). Szczepanski, Max von, ‘Rankes Anschauungen über den Zusammenhang zwischen der auswärtigen und der inneren Politik der Staaten’, in: Zeitschrift für Politik, vol. 7 (Berlin, 1914), pp. 489–623. Taillandier, Saint-Rene, ‘Historians Modernes de l’Allemagne’, in: Revue des Deux Mondes (March 1854).

354  Bibliography Teggart, Frederick, ‘The circumstances or the substance of history’, in: American Historical Review, vol. xv (1909–10). Telman, D.A.J., Clio Ascendant: The Historical Profession in Nineteenth-Century Germany. Diss. (1993). Tennessen, H., ‘The science of history and notions of personality’, in: Youngrau, W., and Breck, A.D. (eds.), Physics, Logic, and History (New York, 1970), pp. 59–77. Tessitore, Fulvio, ‘Rankes “Lutherfragment” und die Idee der Universalgeschichte’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 21–36. Thomas, R.H., ‘Leopold von Ranke and Friedrich Meinecke’, in: The Contemporary Review, vol. 181 (London, 1952), pp. 296–300. Thompson, J.W., A History of Historical Writing, vol. II (New York, 1962). Thompson, Willie, Postmodernism and History (New York, 2004). Titz, Heimo, Ranke und Gentz. Eine Historisch-Politische Studie. Diss. (Vienna, 1965). Toeche, Theodor, Leopold von Ranke an seinem 90. Geburtstag (Berlin, 1885). Toews, J.E., Becoming Historical. Cultural Reformation and Public Memory in Early Nineteenth-Century Berlin (New York, 2004). Tollebeek, Joe, ‘Writing history in the salon vert’, in: Storia della Storiografia, History Women, no. 46 (2004). Trappe, Ulrich, Phantasie und Historik. Eine Untersuchung über ein ungeschichtliches Ordnungselement im historischen Denken bei Leopold von Ranke, J. Burckhardt und J.G. Droysen. Diss. (Mainz, 1950). Troebs, Karl, ‘Ranke’, in: Deutsches Volkstum, vol. 16 (Hamburg, 1934), pp. 661–667. Troebs, Karl, ‘Ranke und das Reich’, in: Das innere Reich (Munich, 1936a), pp. 1396–1417. Troebs, Karl, ‘Ranke und der deutsche Idealismus’, in: Freie Welt, vol. 16, no. 377 (Gablonz, 1936b), pp. 169–181. Troeltsch, E., Der Historismus und seine Überwindung (Aalen, 1966). Tucci, Ugo, ‘Ranke and the Venetian document market’, in: SULAC 22/1 (1987), pp. 27–38. Turner, Frederick, ‘The significance of history’, in: The Early Writings of Frederick Jackson Turner (Madison, 1938). Uhlig, R., Historische Grundlagenforschung als Problem der Geschichtswissenschaft. Zur Analyse der historischen Aussage, Historische Forschungen, vol. 17 (Berlin, 1980). Ullmann, Wolfgang, ‘ “Die Wahrheit ist nie trostlos”. Zu den theologischen Voraussetzungen der Geschichtsschreibung Rankes’, in: Schriftenreihe des Ranke-Vereins in Wiehe, Ich habe immer gedacht, daß ein Historiker alt werden muß, no. 2 (Wiehe, 1996), pp. 70–78. Valjavec, Fritz, ‘Ranke und der Süddosten. Neue Beiträge’, in: Mitt. d. Akad. z. wiss. Erforschung u. z. Pflege d. Deutschtums (Munich, 1935). Varnhagen von Ense, K.A., Briefe an eine Freundin (Hamburg, 1860). Varrentrapp, Conrad, ‘Rankes religiöse Anschauungen’, in: Die christliche Gewalt, vol. 19 (1905), columns 531–536. Varrentrapp, Conrad, ‘Rankes Historisch-politische Zeitschrift und das Berliner Politische Wochenblatt’, in: HZ 99 (1907), pp. 35–119. Varrentrapp, Conrad, ‘Briefe von Savigny an Ranke und Perthes’, in: HZ 100 (1908), pp. 330–351. Varrentrapp, Conrad, ‘Briefe an Ranke von älteren und gleichalterigen deutschen und französichen Historikern’, in: HZ 105 (1910), pp. 105–131. Varrentrapp, Conrad, ‘Briefe an Ranke von einigen seiner Schüler: Sybel, Carlson, Herrmann, Pauli und Noorden’, in: HZ 107 (1911), pp. 44–69.

Bibliography  355 Vierhaus, Rudolf, Ranke und die soziale Welt (Munster, 1957a). Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Rankes Verhältnis zur Presse’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. clxxxiii, no. 3 (1957b), pp. 543–567. Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Rankes Verständnis der “Neuesten Geschichte” ’, in: Goetz, Walter, Grundmann, Herbert, and Wagner, Fritz (eds.), Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. xxxix (Cologne, 1957c), pp. 81–102. Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Ranke und die Anfänge der deutschen Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Faulenbach, Bernd (ed.), Gesch.wiss. in Dtld. Traditionelle Positionen u. gegenwärtige Aufgaben (Munich, 1974), pp. 17–34, 169–171. Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Rankes Begriff der historischen Objektivität’, in: Koselleck, Reinhart, Mommsen, W.J., and Rüsen, Jörn (eds.), Objektivität und Parteilichkeit in der Geschichtswissenschaft (Munich, 1977), pp. 63–76. Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Leopold von Ranke. Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Wissenschaft und Kunst’, in: Historische Zeitschrift, vol. ccliv (1987), pp. 285–298. Vierhaus, Rudolf, ‘Die Idee der Kontinuität im historiographischen Werk Leopold von Rankes’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 166–175. Vincent, John, History (London, 1995). Vischer, Eduard, ‘Zu Leopold von Rankes Briefen’, in: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte 1 (1951), pp. 275–291. Vischer, Eduard, ‘Leopold von Rankes “Neuere Geschichte” von 1833. Ein Hinweis’, in: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte 3 (1953), pp. 385–425. Vischer, Eduard, ‘Niebuhr und Ranke’, in: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Geschichte, vol. xxxix, no. 3 (1989), pp. 243–265. Vogler, Guenter, ‘Leopold von Rankes Bild vom Täuferreich zu Münster’, in: Donnert, Erich (ed.), Europa in der Frühen Neuzeit (Weimar, 1997), pp. 263–280. Vogt, Joseph, Wege zum historischen Universum: Von Ranke bis Toynbee (Stuttgart, 1961). Völkel, Markus, Geschichtsschreibung (Cologne, 2006). Von der Dunk, Hermann, ‘Die historische Darstellung bei Ranke: Literatur und Wissenschaft’, in: Mommsen, Wolfgang (ed.), Leopold von Ranke und die Geschichtswissenschaft (Stuttgart, 1988), pp. 131–165. Voss, Harro, Die Wandlung des Cromwell-Bildes in der Geschichtsschreibung von 1845– 1951. Diss. (Kiel, 1952). Vossler, Otto, Der Nationalgedanke von Rousseau bis Ranke (Munich, 1937). Vossler, Otto, ‘Ranke und die Politik’, in: Born, K.E. (ed.), Historische Forschungen und Probleme. Peter Rassow zum 70. Geburtstage (Wiesbaden, 1961), pp. 240–255. Wach, Joachim, Das Verstehen. Grundzüge einer Geschichte der hermeneutischen Theorie im 19. Jahrhundert (Tübingen, 1933). Waehler, Martin, ‘Leopold von Ranke’, in: Mitteldeutsche Lebensbilder (Magdeburg, 1987), pp. 171–186. Wagner, Fritz, ‘Rankes Geschichtsbild und die moderne Universalhistorie’, in: Archiv für Kulturgeschichte, vol. xliv, no. 1 (1962), pp. 1–26. Waitz, Eberhard, Georg Waitz. Ein Lebens- und Charakterbild zu seinem hundertjährigen Geburtstag (Berlin, 1913). Waitz, Georg, Die Historischen Übungen zu Göttingen. Glückwunschschreiben an Leopold von Ranke zum Tage der Feier seines Fünfzigjährigen Doktorjubiläums (February 1867). Waitz, Georg, ‘Leopold de Ranke’, in: Revista de Cienclas Historicas, T. V, no. 1 (1887). Wallauer, Hannegrete, Rankes Stellung zu den politischen Bewegungen seiner Epoche. Diss. (Bonn, 1953).

356  Bibliography Wallerstein, Immanuel, ‘History in search of science’, in: Review: Journal of the Fernand Braudel Centre, vol. xix, no. 1 (1996), pp. 11–22. Walter-Schomburg, K.L. (ed.), Ranke – Treitschke: Weltgeschichte der Neuzeit in ihren leitenden Ideen (Berlin, 1939). Walther, Gerit, ‘Biographie als Experiment. Leopold von Rankes “Geschichte Wallensteins”: Aufbau und Absicht’, in: Bahlcke, Joachim, and Kampmann, Christoph (eds.), Wallensteinbilder im Widerstreit. Eine historische Symbolfigur in Geschichtsschreibung und Literatur vom 17. bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Cologne, 2011), pp. 245–261. Wälti, Hubert, Burkard, Dominik, and Muhlack, Ulrich, Rankes “Päpste” auf dem Index, Dogma und Historie im Widerstreit (Paderborn, 2003). Warren, John, The Past and Its Presenters (London, 1998). Warren, John, History and the Historians (London, 2000). Webb, W.P., ‘The historical seminar: Its outer shell and its inner spirit’, in: Mississippi Valley Historical Review, vol. xlii, no. 1 (1955), pp. 3–23. Weber, Wolfgang, Priester der Klio: Historisch-sozialwissenschaftliche Studien zur Herkunft und Karriere deutscher Historiker und zur Geschichte der Geschichtswissenschaft (Frankfurt, 1987). Wegele, F.X. von, Geschichte der deutschen Historiographie seit dem Auftreten des Humanismus (Munich, 1885), pp. 1041–1061. Wegele, F.X. von, Deutsche Historiographie (Leipzig, 1887). Weinberg, G.L., ‘The end of Ranke’s history’, in: Syracuse Scholar, vol. ix, no. 1 (Syracuse, 1988), pp. 51–60. Wehler, H-U., ‘Anwendung von Theorien in der Geschichtswissenschaft’, in: Kocka, J., and Nipperdey, T. (eds.), Theorie und Erzählung in der Geschichte (Munich, 1979), pp. 17–39. Wehler, H-U. ‘Was bedeutet Leopold von Ranke heute?’ in: Wehler, H.-U. (ed.), Aus der Geschichte lernen? Essays (Munich, 1988), pp. 98–100. Wehler, H.U., ‘Geschichtswissenschaft: Aufklärung oder Sinnstiftung?’ in: Niess, Frank (ed.), Interesse an der Geschichte (Frankfurt/Main, 1989), pp. 124–134. Weisse, Sophie, ‘Reminiscences of Berlin, 1884–86’, in: The Eclectic (October 1886). Welskopp, Thomas, ‘ “Die Menschheit, wie sie ist. . . ” Individualität, Kausalität und groβer Zusammenhang bei Leopold von Ranke’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), pp. 22–33. Werding, Vera, Die Französische Revolution im politisch-historischen Denken Rankes und Droysens (Marburg, 1999). White, Andrew, ‘How I was educated’, in: The Forum: A Magazine of Constructive Nationalism (New York, 1887), pp. 559–573. White, Hayden, Metahistory: The Historical Imagination in Nineteenth-Century Europe (Baltimore, 1975). White, Hayden, ‘An old question raised again: Is historiography art or science? (Response to Iggers)’, in: Rethinking History, vol. 4, no. 3 (2000), pp. 391–406. White, Morton, G., Social Thought in America. The Revolt Against Formalism (New York, 1949). Whitener, B.D., Varieties of Historical Consciousness in Nineteenth-Century Germany: Ranke, Dollinger, Marx. Diss. (Virginia, 2005). Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Sechzehn Jahre in der Werkstatt Leopold von Ranke’s’ Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte seiner letzten Lebensjahre’, in: Deutsche Revue (1891–1893). Wiedemann, Theodor (ed.), ‘Leopold von Ranke und Varnhagen von Ense. Ungedruckter Briefwechsel’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 20, no. 3 (1895a), pp. 175–190, 338–355.

Bibliography  357 Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Bettine von Arnim’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 20, no. 2 (1895b), pp. 56–71. Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Briefe Leopold von Ranke’s an Varnhagen von Ense und Rahel aus der Zeit seines Aufenthaltes in Italien. Zur Säcularfeier von Rankes Geburt  – 21 Dezember 1795’, in: Biogr. Bll. Jb. f. lebensgeschichtl. Kunst u. Forschung (Berlin, 1895c), pp. 435–447. Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Varnhagen von Ense vor Rankes italienischer Reise’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 21, no. 3 (1896a), pp. 197–209. Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Leopold von Ranke über das Trauerspiel von Friedrich von Uechtritz “Alexander und Darius” ’, in: Euphorion, vol. 3, no. 1 (Bamberg, 1896b), pp. 8–13. Wiedemann, Theodor, ‘Leopold von Ranke und Varnhagen von Ense nach der Heimkehr Rankes aus Italien’, in: Deutsche Revue, vol. 26, no. 3 (1901), pp. 211–225, 352–365. Wieland, E.K., and Beck, C.D., De Mythologia Graecorum Antiquissima Dissertatio (Leipzig, 1817). Wilhelmy, Petra, Der Berliner Salon im 19. Jahrhundert (1780–1914) (Berlin, 1989). Wilson, Duncan, The Life and Times of Vuk Stefanovic Karadzic (1787–1864). Literacy, Literature, and National Independence in Serbia (Oxford, 1970). Wimmer, Mario, ‘Rankes Quellen’, in: Historicum, N.F. I–II (2015), pp. 46–63. Wines, Roger, The Secret of World History: Selected Writings on the Art and Science of History (New York, 1981). Winter, Georg, ‘Erinnerungen an Leopold von Ranke’, in: Nord und Süd, vol. 28 (1886). Winter, Georg, ‘Ein englisches Urtheil über deutsche Geschichtsschreibung’, in: Die Gegenwart, vol. 183–185 (Berlin, 1888). Wischmeyer, Johannes, ‘Objektivitätsideal zwischen Toleranz und Revisionismus: Leopold von Ranke und Ludwig von Pastor als Historiographen des Papsttums’, in: ArmborstWeihs, Kerstin (ed.), Toleranz und Identität. Geschichtsschreibung und Geschichtsbewusstsein zwischen religiösem Anspruch und historischer Erfahrung (Göttingen, 2010), pp. 253–272. Wittenberg, Erich, ‘Rankes Historiebild’, in: Historisk Tidskrift 58 (Stockholm, 1938), pp. 151–167. Wittichen, F.C., ‘Briefe von Gentz an Ranke’, in: HZ 98 (1907), pp. 329–336. Wittichen, Paul, ‘Briefe Rankes an Gentz’, in: HZ 93 (1904), pp. 76–88. Wittkau, Anette, Historismus. Zur Geschichte des Begriffs und des Problems (Göttingen, 1992). Wolandt, Ursel, Die Einheit des christlichen Abendlandes als Leitidee in der Geschichtsschreibung Leopold von Rankes. Diss. (Würzburg, 1950). Wolf, Gustav, Einführung in das Studium der neueren Geschichte (Berlin, 1910). Wolf, Gustav, Dietrich Schäfer und Hans Delbrück. Nationale Ziele der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung seit der franzoesischen Revolution (Gotha, 1918). Wolf, Hubert, Burkard, Dominik, and Muhlack, Ulrich, Rankes ‘Päpste’ auf dem Index, Dogma und Historie im Widerstreit (Paderborn, 2003). Wolfe Howe, M.A. de, The Life and Letters of George Bancroft (London, 1908). Woolfson, Jonathan, Renaissance Historiography (London, 2005). Wunderlich, Paul, Die Beurteilung der Vorreformation in der deutschen Geschichtsschreibung seit Ranke. Diss. (Erlangen, 1930). Zemlin, M-J., ‘Die historische Theoria im Geschichtsdenken Rankes’, in: Saeculum, vol. xxxvii (1986a), pp. 352–365.

358  Bibliography Zemlin, M-J., ‘ “Zeigen, wie es eigentlich gewesen”. Zur Darstellung eines berühmten Rankewortes’, in: Erdmann, K.D., and Rohlfes, J. (eds.), Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, vol. xxxvii (1986b), pp. 333–350. Zemlin, M-J., Geschichte zwischen Theorie und Theoria. Untersuchung zur Geschichtsphilosophie Rankes (Würzburg, 1988). Zittel, Bernhard, Ranke und der Humanismus. Diss. (Munich, 1947). Zobelitz, Hans von, Dreißig Lebensbilder deutscher Männer aus neuerer Zeit (Leipzig, 1892).

Index of themes

absolutism 76, 85, 101, 180–181, 184, 192, 198, 258, 279 abuse 7, 48 academic 1, 6, 8, 11, 13, 17, 34, 59, 60, 75, 77, 83, 86, 93, 97, 99, 142, 194, 255, 257, 263, 273–274, 276, 279, 285, 287, 289–290 achievements 5, 276, 286–287 Act of Attainder 200 Act of Union (1801) 111 aesthetics 6, 18, 21–22, 34, 38, 43, 81, 182, 283, 285 Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB) 191, 254, 260 ambassador 37, 44, 48, 62, 65, 86, 94, 100, 108, 116, 169, 192–193, 196, 198–199, 207, 215, 219, 232 American Historical Association 263 analysis 6, 10, 22, 24, 61, 149, 156, 252, 254, 273, 275, 278, 281, 285, 288–289, 291 antiquity 21, 31, 33, 36, 58, 79 appendix 63, 70, 85, 101, 199, 209, 218, 239, 251–254, 259, 261–262, 302–303 approach 5–6, 8, 10, 22, 45, 48, 76, 170, 182, 271, 273, 281–282, 286, 288–289, 304 archaeology 61, 155 archive 1, 10–11, 22, 24, 34, 41, 44, 54, 56–61, 64–66, 69, 70, 75, 85, 88, 95–97, 99, 115, 119, 122, 129, 131, 195–196, 198–199, 204, 206, 208–209, 218–219, 221, 226, 242, 255–256, 263, 273, 276–277, 281, 287–288, 291, 302, 305–307 aristocracy 13, 66, 68, 111, 132, 192 army 17, 81, 109–111, 141–142, 144–145, 192, 228, 230, 234, 241, 243 art 6, 10, 22, 34, 86, 90–91, 226, 234, 267, 286 authority 15, 35, 42, 69, 84, 100, 132, 156, 162–163, 183, 284

balance of power 2, 78–79, 141–142, 181–182, 192, 217, 251, 253, 284 barbarians 39, 262 Battle of Leipzig 17 Battle of the Boyne 198, 200–201, 228, 230 Biedermeier 75 biography 3, 10–11, 23–24, 31, 63, 84, 149, 170, 180, 191, 240–241, 253–254, 260, 271, 277, 279, 283, 291 bourgeoisie 69, 146, 184, 259 Brehon Laws 155–156, 208, 227 Buddhism 100 Carlsbad Decrees 56 Catholic 14, 43, 55, 86, 102, 111, 131–132, 141, 170, 176, 180–181, 191, 197, 200–201, 203–204, 226–228, 230–231, 305 Catholic Church 67, 78, 83–84, 87, 100, 180, 202, 226, 258 censorship 41, 144 Cholera 235–236 Christian 19, 39, 48, 55, 64, 83–84, 129, 153, 155, 164, 192, 201, 227, 256, 262 Church 39, 41, 46, 88, 100, 131, 146, 164, 183, 282 Church of England 120, 126, 194 Church of Ireland 111, 240, 305 civilization 39, 84, 183, 200, 260, 262, 283 civil war 9, 67, 122, 184, 194, 217 classics 17–18, 23, 29, 58, 278, 288 colonization 38, 45, 100, 180, 183, 194–195, 203, 251, 255 commonwealth 194–195 concept 20–23, 38, 60, 91, 150, 183–184, 208, 274–275, 278, 281–285, 288–290 confederation 191, 252, 258 Congress of Vienna 56, 112

360  Index of themes conservative 1, 4, 31, 42, 65, 68, 75, 77, 82, 97, 146, 148, 208, 230–232, 285 Conspiracy against Venice 59, 70 constitution 31, 39–40, 78–80, 100–101, 150, 184–185, 192, 194, 255 contemporary 7, 9, 13, 21, 31, 33, 36, 64, 70, 77, 81, 95, 109, 128, 149, 156, 182–185, 191–192, 194, 199, 217, 237, 245, 251–253, 262, 274, 276–277, 286, 288 continuity 3, 202, 279 correspondence 9–10, 19, 30, 41, 59, 62, 184, 207, 255, 291, 301, 306 Crimean War 176–177, 217 criticism 1–2, 5–6, 8, 19, 21–22, 24, 30, 34–35, 37, 40, 43, 45–46, 48, 54, 63–64, 67, 77, 79, 86, 94–95, 98, 102, 130, 156, 163, 180–181, 197–199, 208, 251, 253–254, 271–279, 281, 286–289 culture 10, 19, 38–39, 42, 45–46, 55, 60, 62–63, 75, 78–79, 83, 85–86, 89, 99, 115, 126–128, 142, 146, 169–170, 181, 183–184, 191, 195, 202–203, 228, 242, 251–252, 258, 267, 272–274, 283, 286, 289, 291 De Historiae et Politices Cognationae atque Discrimine 97 democracy 46, 81, 85, 101, 116, 143, 271 development 8, 11, 14–16, 24, 35, 38–39, 46, 60, 80–81, 83–84, 98, 101, 111, 121, 141–142, 149, 166, 170, 180–181, 183–184, 192, 195–197, 201, 203, 207, 228, 237, 251–253, 258, 261–262, 267, 271, 273–274, 278, 280–281, 288–291, 303 ‘Dialogue on Politics’ 80, 82 diary 23, 40, 95, 109, 116–117, 120, 132, 150, 185, 192, 197, 199, 207, 241, 255, 290 diplomacy 1, 8, 38, 44, 80, 82, 86, 169, 243, 255, 274–275, 287, 289 discipline 1–2, 5, 8, 263, 267, 273, 278, 283, 286 disease 113, 164, 166, 171, 174, 176–177, 244 divine 21, 31, 43, 80, 273 dynasty 13, 81, 109, 127, 192 economy 35, 45–46, 76–79, 86, 100, 111, 116, 130–131, 133, 142, 168, 181, 183–184, 197–198, 244, 251–252, 267, 282, 286

education 4, 10, 13, 15, 17, 20, 24, 32, 41–42, 45, 56, 82, 93–94, 101, 111–112, 114–115, 128, 132–133, 141–142, 145, 157, 162–164, 168, 176, 180, 231, 257, 273, 277, 284, 286–288, 305 element 34, 39, 48, 79–80, 81, 84, 90, 116, 122, 132, 199, 251, 253, 272, 284, 286 elite 1, 75, 146, 183 empirical 7, 272–273, 278, 282, 285, 288–289 enlightenment 1, 6, 19, 20, 76, 79, 98 epistemology 286 epoch 6, 9, 60, 178 European Revolutions (1848) 3, 10, 143 event 5, 9–10, 18, 21–22, 30, 38–39, 43–44, 48, 60, 64, 67, 70, 77, 84–85, 88, 121, 182, 192, 207, 217, 234, 239, 251–254, 272, 276, 282, 286–288 evidence 6–7, 38, 48, 86, 118, 142, 272, 275, 284, 286 fact 7, 33, 35, 38, 40, 43, 46, 54, 60, 62, 64–66, 82, 86, 95, 129, 132, 156, 165, 178–179, 206, 259, 273–275, 280–281, 285–290 faith 18, 48, 198, 290 federalism 17, 77, 150, 239 Fenian Rising 240 feudalism 13–14, 46 fiction 33, 48, 285 footnote 7, 63, 198, 252–254, 262, 280, 304 Franco-Prussian War 11, 171, 241–242 French Revolution 3, 13, 17, 19–20, 44, 57, 78, 98, 131, 181–182, 184, 192, 251, 255, 288 Geheime Staatsarchiv Preuβischer Kulturbesitz 305 geography 39, 79, 197, 233 German powers and the Princes League, The 251 Glorious Revolution 194–197, 201 God 18–20, 32, 35–38, 48, 55, 59–60, 80, 86, 113, 117, 124, 132, 147, 153–154, 178, 182, 198, 201–202, 214, 232, 236, 244, 260, 265, 274–275, 278–279, 284 God-given 13, 15, 19, 163, 202 government 8–9, 31, 42, 44–45, 58–59, 62, 68–69, 75–76, 78, 80, 93, 99, 111, 116, 131, 143–144, 148, 152, 155, 181, 200, 208, 217, 231, 243, 272–273, 282

Index of themes  361 grammar school 14, 29, 30, 32 Great Famine 131 Great Migration 38, 261 ‘Great Powers, The’ 4, 78, 82–83, 285 Hardenberg and the history of the Prussian State 253 hegemony 78, 284 hierarchy 6, 13, 81, 141 hieroglyph 5, 36, 38, 59 Historical Commission at the Bavarian Academy of Sciences vii, 4, 8, 54, 94, 179, 191, 242, 262–263, 275 Historical-Political Journal 10, 76, 79, 81, 83, 98, 184, 267, 280 Historical Seminar 8, 43, 89, 93–94, 157, 161, 193, 271–272, 280, 287, 303 historical writing 2, 272–273, 275–276, 278, 283, 285–286, 288–289 Historic-biographical studies 253 historicism 19, 285 Histories of the Latin and Germanic nations 4, 10, 21–22, 37, 38, 41, 44, 47, 274, 279 historiography 1–2, 4–5, 8, 11, 30–31, 44, 47, 60–61, 65, 68, 70, 87, 128, 178, 183–184, 191, 201–202, 231, 252, 262–263, 271–273, 278–282, 285, 289, 303 history 1–2, 4–6, 8–9, 11, 16, 18–19, 21–24, 29–48, 58–60, 62–64, 67–68, 75–79, 81, 83–87, 89–91, 93, 95–96, 98, 100, 108–109, 115–116, 122, 126, 128–129, 131, 141–143, 146, 155–157, 161, 163, 168, 178–185, 194–200, 203–204, 206, 208, 215–216, 222, 226–228, 234, 237, 239–242, 245, 251–255, 257–263, 267, 271–279, 281–291, 303–304, 307 History of England 4, 9, 11, 191, 194–197, 199, 204, 206–209, 218, 231, 239, 258–259, 263, 265 History of France 11, 180, 182, 184, 289 History of Germany 252 History of Prussia 4, 10, 108, 119, 142, 156 History of Servia 45, 62–63, 76, 79, 128–129 History of the Popes 4, 10, 45, 66–67, 78, 83–89, 101, 143 History of the Reformation in Germany 4, 87, 99, 101, 129–130, 143, 271 History of Wallenstein 283

‘Hitler Diaries’ 7 Holocaust 2, 7, 157 Home Rule 200, 258–259 honorary degree 122, 220, 222–223, 225–226 humanism 17, 20, 65 humanity 18, 283 idealism 3, 19–20, 23, 35, 38, 184, 278–279, 283, 287 identity 6, 20, 36, 58, 115, 200, 202–203, 274, 283 ideology 48, 62, 95, 272, 277–278, 289 illness 11, 113–114, 120, 127, 152, 161, 164, 166–168, 241 impartiality 43, 83, 86–87, 91, 96, 143, 272, 278, 281 independence 8, 17, 38, 40, 46, 64, 67, 69, 80, 101, 130, 133, 143, 150, 195 Index 78, 87–88 Indian Mutiny 176, 207 individual 2, 47, 60, 80, 98, 200, 202, 284–285, 287, 288–289 individuality 18, 35, 43, 48, 59, 163, 178–179, 282–283, 290 industrialisation 141, 244 influence 9–10, 46, 84 innovation 7, 287 institution 15, 35, 39, 41, 46, 76, 78, 83, 87, 202, 256, 302 international 8, 10, 285 interpretation 4, 9, 21, 38, 94, 143, 275, 280, 284, 287 investigation 4, 7, 272, 282 Irish College of Physicians 110 Irish Republican Army (IRA) 8 Islam 100, 122, 176, 261–262 Jacobite Diary 199, 255 knowledge 7, 10, 17, 23, 34, 61, 64, 70, 75, 93, 96, 98, 118, 121, 130, 156, 162, 164, 166, 170, 185, 204, 226–227, 274, 276, 282, 286, 288, 291 Kulturkampf 252, 254 language 2–3, 6, 9, 14, 18–20, 23, 29, 35, 40, 45, 60–62, 76–77, 85–86, 115, 121–122, 131, 133, 146, 152, 155, 163, 168, 170–171, 173, 197, 203–204, 208, 217–218, 227, 235, 239, 259, 261, 282 Latin 17, 37, 39–41, 84, 97, 110, 121, 131, 173, 202, 224, 233, 238

362  Index of themes lectures 4, 18, 23, 40–41, 54–55, 70, 89–93, 96, 99, 109–110, 128–129, 194, 231, 245, 255, 257, 262, 276, 290, 303 liberalism 35, 40, 42, 68, 75–77, 95, 98, 157, 230–231, 241, 258, 271 Liberation Wars 3, 17 literature 2, 5, 18, 21–22, 29–30, 32–33, 37, 39, 43, 60–62, 64, 66, 81, 83–84, 86, 88–89, 101, 115, 131, 141–142, 152, 168, 170, 179, 181, 194–197, 201, 205, 251–252, 255, 257, 261–262, 267, 271, 275, 277–278, 280, 285–286, 288, 308 Lutheran 15, 19–20, 30, 59, 278, 283 ‘Luther Fragment’ 23 mathematics 114, 150, 180, 215, 223, 230, 233 Meath Hospital 110, 165 Mediterranean 45, 83, 182 memoirs 43, 63, 80, 123, 156, 181, 196, 253, 255–256 memory 63, 88, 94, 157, 164, 172, 221, 242, 260, 276 methodology 1–2, 4–5, 8–9, 11, 21–22, 24, 30, 33, 44, 46, 48, 75, 78, 96, 191, 209, 255–257, 271–273, 276, 278–281, 285, 287–288 Middle Ages 30, 32–33, 76, 82–83, 102, 128, 149, 183–184, 194, 245, 257, 264 Milesian kings 204 military 78–79, 101, 192, 199, 201, 241, 275 mining 60–61 moment 84, 95, 182, 194, 253–254, 272–273, 286 monarchy 2, 4, 15, 41, 44, 77, 84, 101, 150, 158, 171, 177, 181, 184, 195, 282 Monumenta Germaniae Historica (MGH) 76, 94, 180 movement 9, 101, 183, 273, 278, 288 myth 2, 57, 61, 67, 204, 278 Napoleonic Wars 13, 16–17, 149 narrative 4, 8, 24, 34–36, 40, 43, 46, 48, 60, 63, 67, 77, 83–85, 87, 100–101, 141, 180–184, 195, 199–200, 206, 209, 252, 261, 272, 279–280, 282, 285–288, 290 nation 4, 8–9, 11, 37–40, 60, 63, 69, 79–81, 83–84, 88, 111, 142, 152, 156, 184, 195–196, 200–204, 207, 218, 242, 258, 261, 272–274, 282–283, 286–287, 289

national 3, 6, 8, 10, 17, 19–20, 36, 38, 40–41, 43–44, 68, 76, 79, 181, 191–192, 200, 202, 204, 208, 239, 242, 281, 291 nationalism 2, 5, 9, 142, 184, 203, 254, 278, 287 nobility 13, 35, 88, 175–176, 181, 214, 216, 280 novel 21–22, 34, 86, 132 objectivity 1–3, 5–6, 24, 39, 48, 62, 64, 82–84, 96, 200, 206, 252, 254, 271–273, 278–282, 286, 288–289 Ogham script 152, 208 ‘On the constituting of the French notables in 1787’ 130 On the correspondence of Frederick Wilhelm IV and Bunsen 252 ‘On the criticism of Francean-German empirical writers of annals’ 180 ‘On the criticism of Prussian memoirs’ 156 ‘On the epochs of Modern History’ 95, 98, 178, 180, 262 On the history of Austria and Prussia between the treaties of Aachen and Hubertusburg 252 ‘On the history of Don Carlos’ 67 On the history of Germany and France during the nineteenth century 267 ‘On the outbreak of the Seven Years’ War’ 119 opposition 4, 181, 203, 218, 228, 252, 271 oral history 4, 63–64, 94 orthodoxy 17, 39, 59, 129 Ottomans and the Spanish monarchy 44 pamphlets 4, 11, 44, 77–79, 149, 196, 255, 267, 276, 301, 303–304 pantheism 20, 48, 113, 273 papacy 8, 23, 39, 41, 45, 67, 69, 75, 83–84, 87–88, 122, 192, 288 Papers and trials: First attempts 253 Papers and trials: New Collections 267 paradigm 21, 200, 282, 289 parliament 40, 79–80, 109, 111, 116, 147–148, 194–195, 201, 218, 222, 224–225, 228, 230–231, 251, 306 particularity 19, 47, 194, 253–254, 281 past 1, 5, 18, 24, 36, 38, 40, 43, 48, 65, 75, 77, 90, 94, 98, 129, 149, 172, 192, 195–196, 202, 209, 237, 260, 273, 286, 288 Peace of Westphalia 245, 255 Peasants’ Revolt 100, 271

Index of themes  363 people 6, 9, 39, 55, 57, 62–64, 78, 84, 98, 113, 127, 150, 172, 198, 201, 204, 234, 242–245, 273–274 phenomenon 83, 101, 149, 200, 274, 281 philology 17–18, 22, 24, 34, 40, 86, 94, 175, 279, 286–288 philosophy 4–6, 17–19, 21–24, 33, 35, 40, 43, 46, 57, 60, 78, 81, 90, 95, 98–99, 113, 131, 169, 172, 195, 271, 273, 278–279, 281–284, 287, 289 piety 20, 23, 30, 35, 55 playwright 67, 85–86, 183 poetry 19, 21–23, 31, 48, 57, 61–63, 66–68, 76, 88–90, 113–114, 117, 121–123, 128, 133, 168–174, 192, 203, 228, 235, 238, 267, 281, 285, 305 politics 1, 9–11, 14, 17, 22–23, 29, 32, 42, 44, 47, 59, 62, 64, 66–67, 70, 75–79, 81–82, 85, 88, 94–95, 98, 101, 108, 112, 117, 121–122, 129, 131–133, 141, 147–148, 151, 168, 171, 181, 183, 185, 198, 200–201, 203, 207, 217–219, 226, 228, 230, 234, 239, 242, 251–254, 258–259, 265, 267, 273–275, 278, 283–287, 289 population 113, 132, 141, 183, 200–203, 226, 244 postmodernism 38, 272, 283 Pour le Merite 153, 169, 237 power 2, 8, 11, 14, 17, 34–35, 40–41, 64, 75–81, 83–84, 100, 108, 111, 116, 122, 141–142, 146, 149–150, 158, 165, 180–182, 184, 192, 195, 198, 201, 203, 217–218, 228, 230, 234, 241–242, 244, 251–253, 255, 261, 271, 273, 275, 278, 283, 285 prejudice 55, 259, 273 Presbyterian 227, 230 present 5, 18, 38, 43, 75, 77, 85, 98, 192, 202, 207, 274, 285, 287–288 prestige 61, 75, 78, 152, 168 primacy of foreign affairs 8, 80, 285 primary sources 6–7, 33, 48, 85, 95, 119, 196, 201, 272, 280, 287, 303 Princes and nations in Southern Europe 44–45, 85, 224 principality 13, 101, 150, 192 principle 2, 7, 17, 23, 48, 79, 84–86, 91, 101, 129, 163, 178, 230, 272–273, 281–282 progress 60, 81, 84, 178–179, 262, 271, 274, 284 protestant 2, 17, 23, 59, 66, 83, 86–87, 100–101, 111, 129, 141–142, 147, 152,

176, 191, 195, 197–198, 200–201, 203–204, 208, 226, 228, 230, 251, 305 Prussian Academy of Sciences 89, 97, 156 Ranke-Verein 22, 161, 307–308 reality 64, 90, 281, 283–284, 286 Reasons and the beginning of the Revolutionary Wars 253 rebellion 109–111, 113, 176, 194, 196, 201, 204 reformation 10, 17, 23–24, 35, 41, 44, 83, 100–102, 129, 142, 180, 184, 194, 255, 271, 277 Relazioni 43–44, 62, 65, 85, 100, 181, 252, 255, 301, 303 religion 4, 16–17, 19–23, 30–31, 35, 41, 55, 59, 81, 83–84, 86, 100–101, 113, 115–116, 122, 141, 145, 151, 170, 180, 181–185, 195, 199–201, 203, 227, 230, 255–256, 259–260, 262, 271, 273–275, 284 renaissance 14, 17, 32, 89, 289 republic 68, 101, 143, 242, 254 restoration 17, 64, 77–78, 82, 112, 208, 254, 267 review 11, 40, 42, 45, 143, 146, 184, 192, 204, 209, 259, 271, 277, 281 revolution 4, 59, 62–64, 68, 69–70, 75, 77, 82, 92, 127, 131, 133, 141–142, 145–146, 148–150, 157, 184, 192, 195, 200, 208, 219, 221, 241, 253–254, 258, 267, 278 research 1, 4–7, 10–11, 33–35, 43, 45, 54, 56–58, 60–61, 67–68, 85–86, 89, 93, 95–96, 100, 108, 115–116, 119, 155, 162–163, 169, 178, 194–195, 197, 199, 205–206, 231, 245, 252, 254, 263, 272, 276, 279–280, 282, 285–287, 290–291, 303–304, 307 romantic 3, 18, 20, 24, 33, 35, 58, 61, 109, 152, 172, 203, 208, 253, 262, 282, 285 royal advisor 5, 10, 54, 141, 217, 274 Royal College of Physicians of Ireland 165 royal historiographer 100, 141, 252 Royal Irish Academy 152, 155–156, 180, 205, 227, 229, 305 Royal Society (Irish) 165, 180, 226, 229 salon 8, 10, 42, 62, 66, 82, 133, 143, 150, 157, 163, 168, 171, 177, 217–219, 231–232, 241 ‘Salon Ranke’ 11, 39, 127, 161, 168, 193

364  Index of themes Sämmtliche Werke 4, 64, 82, 239, 251–252, 267, 276 Schmalkaldian War 101 science 2, 6, 18, 22, 34, 43, 55, 90–91, 94–95, 101, 119, 121, 129, 133, 195, 234, 242, 252, 259–261, 267, 272–273, 276, 279, 281–282, 285, 288, 291 secondary sources 6, 9, 67 Second Gulf War 9 Seven Years’ War 252, 267 sexuality 60–61 slavery 32, 46 social 3, 13, 45–46, 54, 61–64, 68, 80–81, 83, 115, 132, 152, 184, 202, 208, 241, 258, 261–262, 282–283, 286 social classes 2, 13, 35, 38, 46, 63, 76, 78, 101, 111, 113, 131–133, 142, 149, 157, 161–162, 164, 168, 181, 183–184, 195, 230, 251, 261, 271, 289 society 2, 4, 29–30, 35, 45, 48, 66, 84, 86, 101, 111, 127, 133, 289–290, 305 sonnet 129, 172–173 source criticism 1, 6, 21–22, 34, 43, 46, 48, 67, 70, 86, 197, 255, 277 sources 2–3, 5–9, 21, 24, 30, 33, 35, 37, 43–45, 58, 60–64, 67, 76, 86, 93–96, 100, 108, 119, 156, 180, 195–198, 200, 204, 209, 226, 239, 252, 255, 271–272, 278, 280, 283–284, 286, 288–289, 303–304 Sources of the Seven Years’ War, The 251 Staatsbibliothek Berlin 306 state 4, 8–9, 17, 32, 35, 38–42, 44, 46, 48, 54–56, 60, 63, 65, 67, 75, 77–83, 87, 96, 99, 100–101, 110, 122, 127, 141–143, 148–149, 157, 164, 177, 179–182, 184–185, 192, 194–195, 202, 219, 231, 234, 239, 242, 251–258, 261, 267, 272, 274–275, 279, 282–285, 287 St. Bartholomew’s Day 84, 180 structure 4, 8, 10, 14, 40–41, 46, 63, 76, 78, 81, 83, 101, 217, 234, 251, 289 superiority 2, 152, 181, 201, 216, 253, 274 techniques 5–6, 67, 81, 93, 288 technology 7, 61, 237 tendency 78, 254, 282 Thames Tunnel 116–117 theology 13, 18, 21–23, 30, 43, 59, 169–170, 278 theory 2, 17, 48, 67, 78, 98, 206, 253, 262, 271, 278, 281–283, 285, 288, 290

Third Reich 2, 9, 142, 281 Thirty Years’ War 83–84, 181, 241 Times, The 7, 121, 123, 219, 235, 264, 266 Tory 195, 200, 208 totality 40, 81, 91, 273, 282, 291 trade 45, 78, 83, 101, 141–142, 168, 180–181, 195, 197, 234, 252, 261, 267 tradition 10, 13–14, 17, 19–20, 24, 77, 79, 88, 111, 115, 120, 132, 146, 166, 170, 175, 183, 202–203, 228–229, 242, 258, 278, 287 translation 10, 17, 38–40, 63, 87, 119, 122–123, 128–131, 143–144, 169, 173, 205, 207, 258–259, 266, 304 travels 5, 10–11, 31–32, 42, 44–45, 54, 57–58, 61, 65–67, 75, 97, 109, 114–115, 125, 155, 158, 164–165, 177, 185, 194, 218–219, 230–232, 237, 245, 252, 280 Treaty of Augsburg 101 Treaty of Basel 15 truth 6–7, 19, 24, 39, 47–48, 59–60, 64, 68, 81, 91, 95, 122, 127, 129, 156, 182, 203–204, 206, 271, 273, 275–276, 281–282 unification 3, 77, 234, 251, 254 unity 8, 38, 41, 69, 77, 81, 101, 142, 150, 171, 192, 239, 242 Universal History 4, 11, 89, 128, 192, 256–257, 260–262, 265–266, 275, 279–280 university 8, 32, 41, 56, 70, 78, 81, 90, 93, 99, 141–142, 151, 161, 176, 238, 257, 263 University of Berlin 4, 14, 41, 43, 55, 66, 93, 99, 123, 168, 194, 237, 252, 291 University of Cornell 263 University of Dorpat 55 University of Dublin 208 University of Halle 14 University of John Hopkins 263 University of Leipzig 17–18, 22 University of London 121 University of Marburg 122 University of Oxford 259 University of Padua 65, 254 University of Syracuse 196, 291, 301, 303 uprising 62, 69, 79 Volksgeist 273–274 Vormärz 10, 75, 77, 98, 133

Index of themes  365 Whig 194, 200, 230 ‘Wie es eigentlich gewesen’ 38, 47, 258 World 5, 9, 14, 19, 24, 29, 35, 38, 41, 47, 60, 67, 78–80, 84, 91, 94, 124, 128, 145, 181, 183–184, 201, 256, 260, 271–272, 275–276, 278, 284, 303 World War I 243

World War II 9, 157, 290, 306–307 Yearbooks of the German Empire under the Saxon House 96, 272 Zeitgeist 6 Zollverein 168

Index of persons

Acton, Lord 94, 207–208, 257, 277 Adams, Charles 94, 280 Adams, Herbert 94, 263, 280 Adams, Prof. 223–224 Ahlemann, Mrs. 29, 164 Alderton, Mrs. 220 Alemanni, Luigi 88 Alexander the Great 261 Altenstein, Karl Freiherr vom Stein zum 41 Altmann, Wilhelm 256 Ancillon, Friedrich 75 Andersen 173 Anne (English queen) 195 Applegate 168 Argenson 181 Aristotle 273 Arnim, Achim von 61, 70, 75 Arnim, Bettina von 10, 30, 42, 45, 56, 62, 70, 75, 81, 114, 143, 169, 185 Arnold, John 272 Asendorf, Manfred 271 Augustenbourg, Duke of 234 Augustus (Roman emperor) 261 Austin, Sarah 10, 87, 128–130, 143, 194, 205 Baberowski, Hist 80 Bach 233 Bäcker-von Ranke, Gisbert 280, 291, 308 Baden, Grand Duchess of 157 Baethgen, Friedrich 281 Baier, Hermann Christoph 31 Baileu, Paul 256 Bancroft, George 94, 170, 192–193, 208, 279 Bardeleben, Mrs. 123, 143 Barnes, H.E. 273 Baur, Siegfried 3, 22, 31, 41, 46, 82–83, 121–122, 128, 143, 175, 243, 255, 262, 278–280, 307–308

Bavaria, Queen Marie of 157 Bayreuth, Countess of 156 Beard, Charles 273 Beare, Philip O’Sullivan 204 Beck, Christian Daniel 94 Beer, Caroline 29, 164 Beethoven, Ludwig van 114, 123 Benedict XIV (Pope) 88 Bennet, Charles 94, 303 Bentley, Michael 287 Bently, Michael 257 Beranger, Pierre Jean de 173 Berg, Gunter 44, 89, 245 Berger, Stefan 272 Bernheim, Ernst 281 Bernstorff, Albrecht Graf von 219 Bernstorff, Christian Günter Graf von 41, 75–76, 79 Beyschlag, Willibald 93, 128 Bigeschke, Beate vii Bigeschke, Frank vii, 61 Bismarck, Otto von 11, 79, 218, 221, 235, 239, 258 Bita, Miss von 241 Black, Jeremy 257 Bluntschli, Johann Caspar 93 Boase, C.W. 259 Bodin 6 Boiardo, Matteo Maria 88 Boldt, Dieter vii Boldt, Liesbeth vii Boleyn, Anne 209 Bonnet, Mr. 199 Bopp, Franz 153 Bourne, E.G. 280 Braasch, Gottfried 22, 308 Brady, Thomas 3, 66–67, 128 Braw, J.D. 37 Brechermacher, Thomas 274 Breisach, Ernst 287–288

Index of persons  367 Brentano, Clemens von 42, 173 Breuning, Charles 202 Brogan, Howard O. 8, 57 Buchanan, Sir Andrew 169 Büchsenschütz, Karl 16 Bunsen, Karl von 116, 119, 148, 169, 252, 266–267 Burckhardt, Jakob 92–93, 128, 262, 274, 303 Burgess, John 94 Burke, Edmund 78, 98 Burke, Sir John Bernard 226–227 Burlamacci, Mr. 254 Burnet, Bishop 197, 209 Burrow, John 287 Butcher, Dr. 152 Butler, Newton 200 Byron, Lord George Gordon 113, 117 Caesar, Julius 261 Calderon 81 Calonne, Charles de 131 Calvin 275 Cannon, John 285 Carlyle, Thomas 123, 170, 265–266 Carr, E.H. 2, 289 Caswell, Alexis 193 Cavour, Count of 192 Cesare, Adolfo 65, 254 Chamisso, Adelbert von 42 Charlemagne 36, 100, 110, 261 Charles I (English king) 194 Charles II (Emperor) 261 Charles II (English king) 194, 198, 209 Charles II (Spanish king) 46 Charles V (German emperor) 23, 255 Charles X (French king) 68 Charles the Bold 33 Chessier, Marie Andre de 173 Churchill, Winston 6 Circourt, Adolphe Comte de 143 Clancarthy, Lord 225 Clarendon, Lord 197, 199, 209 Coddington, Mr. 228 Coleridge, Samuel Francis 113 Columbus, Christoph 60 Comfort, George 94 Commines 30, 33 Condillac 181 Conrad the Great 13 Consalvi, Cardinal 254 Constable, Archibald 233 Constantine the Great (Roman emperor) 261 Conze, Eckart 274 Cook, Captain 60 Cook, L.A. 282–283, 290

Cradock, Thomas Russell William 229 Creighton, M. 259 Cromwell, Oliver 109, 196, 198–199, 201, 207, 241, 255 Cullen, Paul 87 Daddow, Oliver J. 48, 86, 272 Dahbour, Omar 285–286 Dahlmann, Friedrich Christoph 143, 279 Dahn, Felix 93 Danckelmann, Minister von 253 Darwin, Charles 153, 237, 273 David I (Scottish king) 110 Davis, Stephen 14, 191 Devrient, Ludwig 42 Dickens, A.G. 85, 271 Diderot 181 Dieffenbach, Johann Friedrich 131 Diether, Otto 273 Dilthey, Wilhelm 80, 93–94, 184 Dionysius 18 Don Carlos (Spanish prince) 67, 253–254 Dönniges, Wilhelm von 94, 96 Dotterweich, Volker 274 Dove, Alfred 93, 192, 262, 267 Drake, Johann Friedrich 170, 236, 238 Dreye, Johann Nikolaus von 237 Drombrowski, Prof. 57, 63, 280 Droysen, Johann Gustav 43, 94–95, 142, 262, 279 Drummond, W.S. 152 Duff Gordon, Lady 128 Duff Gordon, Sir Alexander 205 Duncker & Humblot 219, 239 Dünisch, Alfred 17, 177 Düringsfeld, Ida von 169 Eberhardt, Magdalene 15 Edward I (English king) 110 Ehrenberg, Christian Gottfried 169 Eichendorff, Joseph von 76, 170 Eichhorn, Friedrich 76, 99, 126–127, 151, 169 Einhard 180 Eiselen, Bernhard 197 Elizabeth (Russian czarina) 255 Elizabeth I (English queen) 110, 194 Elvert, Jürgen 43, 79 Emerton, Ephraim 280 Emmet, Robert 109 Enke, Johann Franz 169 Ennis, John 87 Enniskillen, Earl of 224 Ernst August (Hanoverian king) 185 Eskildsen 56

368  Index of persons Evans, Richard 5, 7 Ewers, Johann Philipp Gustav von 55 Family of Bellson 127, 145, 147 Family of Eichhorn 147 Family of Gordon 165 Family of Hebeler 165 Family of Heman 127 Family of Hitzig 232 Family of Itzenplitz 232 Family of Kreuser 232 Family of Manteuffel 232 Family of Mendelssohn 307 Family of Napier 127, 165 Family of Puchta 127, 145 Family of Schelling 127, 145, 147 Family of Senfft von Pilsack 232 Family of Swinburne 150 Family of Twinning 165 Family of Wichmann 232 Farrenkopf, John 284–285 Fassmann, Mr. 156 Feldner, Heiko 272 Ferdinand I (German emperor) 77, 252 Fichte, Johann Gottlieb 17, 19, 36, 94, 202 Field, Samuel 111 Fitzsimons, M.A. 277–278 Fletcher, Mrs. 129, 150 Fontane, Emilie 2 Ford, Franklin 62, 242, 286 Foster, E. 128 Francesconi, Francesco 65, 254 Franz I (French king) 180 Franz Joseph (Austrian emperor) 234 Frederick II, the Great (Prussian king) 4, 15, 108, 122, 141–143, 146, 156, 239, 251, 253–255, 260, 267, 307 Frederick VII (Danish king) 234 Frederick William I (Prussian king) 142, 156 Frederick William III (Prussian king) 14, 55, 99 Frederick William IV (Prussian King) 75, 99, 141, 144, 149, 171, 206, 252, 254, 267 Freytag, Gustav 170 Fuchs, W.P. 17–18, 21, 275, 307 Fugger, Count Friedrich 57 Fulda, Daniel 22, 64 Ganz, Eduard 89, 97 Gard, Mr. 199 Gatterer, Prof. 287 Gay, Peter 85, 275 Geibel 173 Gentz, Friedrich von 56–59, 75, 77

George, H.B. 259 George I (English king) 195 George II (English king) 195 Gervinus, Georg Gottfried 43 Gibbon, Edward 6–7 Giesebrecht, Wilhelm von 91, 94, 96, 279 Gilbert, Felix 288–289 Giovio, Paolo 30 Gluck, Christoph Willibald 123 Godolphin, Lord 199 Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von 18, 22–24, 42, 61–62, 64, 66, 81, 152, 203, 253, 278, 287 Gombert, Ottilie 163, 167, 238 Gooch 184 Grafton 48 Granville, Lord 206, 265 Gratton, Mrs 167 Graves, Alfred 229 Graves, Amelia 221 Graves, Ann 110 Graves, Ann Catherine 110, 113 Graves, Arabella 110, 113 Graves, Arnold 229 Graves, Caroline 108–109, 111, 114–115, 120, 175 Graves, Charles 111, 114–115, 147, 151–153, 155–156, 165–166, 174, 180, 204, 207–208, 216, 220, 222–223, 225, 227–230, 233, 236, 240, 245, 266, 305 Graves, Colonel 109 Graves, Emilie 180 Graves, Georgina 222 Graves, Helen 166–167, 174–175, 222, 225, 229, 236, 240, 244, 266 Graves, Helena 110–111, 114–115, 120, 123, 126–127, 129–130, 146–148, 153, 157 Graves, Henry 123 Graves, James 109–110 Graves, James Perceval 108, 111, 165 Graves, John 109 Graves, John Crosbie 110–111, 113–114 Graves, John Thomas 111–112, 117, 121, 123, 126, 145–147, 150, 153, 164, 180, 214–215, 220–221, 241 Graves, Nelly 240 Graves, Richard 109 Graves, Richard Hastings 109 Graves, Richard Henry 109 Graves, Dr. Robert James 109–110, 165–166 Graves, Robert Perceval 111, 113–115, 118–120, 123–126, 129–132, 144, 146, 148, 150–151, 164–166, 168, 170,

Index of persons  369 173–177, 207–208, 214, 216–217, 220, 222–223, 225, 228–229, 232–236, 238–241, 243, 245, 266, 305 Graves, Robert (von Ranke) 305 Graves, Selina 165, 220, 225, 232–233 Graves, Thomas 109–110, 113 Graves, William Perceval 118 Gregory XVI (Pope) 69, 115 Greville, Charles 205 Grignon, de 199 Grimm, Hermann 169 Grimm, Jacob 62, 75, 126–127, 133, 143, 151–152, 156, 169 Grimm, Wilhelm 76, 127, 133, 169 Grohmann, Mr. 127 Grosse, Jürgen 274 Grote, George 206 Grunder, Rolf 286 Guicciardini, Francesco 30, 39–40 Guilland, Antoine 8, 15, 18, 129 Guizot, Francois Guillaume 152, 156, 203 Gutzkow, Karl 81 Hallam, Henry 155–156 Hamilton, Nicolas E. 199 Hamilton, Sir William Rowan 113–114, 173 Hamlet 183 Hanslick, Eduard 93, 128 Hantsch, Hugo 287 Hardenberg, Graf von 13, 253, 255 Harding, Mr. 226 Harper, Mr. 230 Hart, Peter 8 Haugnitz, Count von 253 Head, Sir Edmund 205 Hebekus, Uwe 183 Hecht, Ingrid vii, 3, 14, 22–23, 29, 149, 166–167, 291 Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 19, 42–43, 48, 57, 94–95, 202–203, 273 Heidegger 19 Heine, Heinrich 42, 82, 173 Helmolt, Hans F. 3, 22–23, 37, 64, 178, 206, 276 Henry I (French king) 110 Henry I (German emperor) 96 Henry II (French king) 180 Henry III (French king) 180 Henry IV 79 Henry IV (French king) 180, 182–183 Henry V (German emperor) 261 Henry VII (German emperor) 261 Henry VIII (English king) 194, 209 Hensel, Wilhelm 99

Henz, Günter Johannes 2–3, 57, 94, 162–163, 179, 275–277, 280 Herder, Johann Gottfried 19, 203, 283 Hermann, Gottfried 18, 21–22, 29, 40, 94 Herodotus 32, 37 Herwegh 173 Herzfeld, Lambertus von 180 Hesekiel, Georg 170 Hesekiel, Ludovica 170 Hinneberg, Paul 256, 262 Hirsch, Siegfried 94, 96 Hitler, Adolf 7 Hobhouse, Henry 206 Hoeft, Bernhard 15, 32–33, 42, 256, 275, 306 Hofbauer, Clemens Maria 55 Hoffmann, Wilhelm 169 Holland, Princess Sophie of 157 Hollweg, Mr. 126–127 Hope, Anne 259 House of Habsburg 41, 181 House of Hanover 207 House of Hohenzollern 4, 127, 142, 146, 171, 306 House of Saxony 96, 267 House of Werthern 308 House of Wettin 13 Hovey, Aloah 193 Hughes-Warrington, Marnie 287 Hugo, Victor 173 Humboldt, Alexander von 56, 152, 169, 192, 202 Humboldt, William von 14, 35, 42 Hume, David 79 Iggers, Georg G. vii, 17, 34–35, 38–39, 59, 78, 80, 98, 178, 258, 278–279, 285 Ignatius Loyola (Pope) 83 Irving, David 7 Itzenplitz, Minister von 238 Jackson, W.W. 259 Jacoby, Johann 126–127 Jaffe, Philipp 93 Jahn 18, 31, 197 James I (English king) 204 James II (English king) 197–198, 200–201, 228, 230 Jenkins, Keith 38 Joachimsen, Paul 23, 307 Joll, James 204 Jordan, Stefan vii, 2–3, 191, 242 Juhnke, Dominic 3, 16–17, 29, 37, 45–46, 76, 162, 279–280 Justinian (Roman emperor) 261

370  Index of persons Kamptz, Heinrich von 41–42 Kant, Imanuel 18, 273 Karadjordje 62–63 Karadzhich, Vuk Stefanovich 62–63, 76 Karageorgevich, Alexander 63 Keller, Gottfried 183 Kelly, Walter K. 223 Kempis, Thomas 30 Kerr, Luise 128 Kettenacker, Lothar 290–291 Kinkel 173 Kitchin, G.W. 259 Klopstock, Friedrich Gottlieb 203, 252 Kluge, Hermann 281 Knechtl, Joseph 56, 57 Koberstein, August 281 Kopitar, Jernej 62–63 Köpke, Rudolf 94, 96, 237 Köppen, Friedrich 82, 89 Kotze, Lily von 239 Kotze, Wilhelm von 55, 214, 231–232, 258 Kraus, H.-C. 274 Krieger, Leonard 290–291 Kuhn, Thomas 282 Labouchere, Baron Henry 219 Lachmann, Karl Konrad Friedrich Wilhelm 126–127 La Martiniere, Mr. 156 Lamprecht, Karl 276 Lange, Adolph Gottlob 94 Langen, Miss von 235 Lanz, Karl 108, 121 Lappenberg, Johann Martin von 45, 197 Larcom, Sir Thomas 226 Laue, Theodore H. von 3, 15, 17, 29–30, 42, 57, 289–290 Lauzun, General 197 Lehmicke, Friedericke 14 Leibnitz, Gottfried Wilhelm 47 Leland, Thomas 199 Lemberg, Joseph 281 Leo, Heinrich 46–48, 76, 82 Leo X (Pope) 83 Leopold I (Belgian king) 185 Lepsius, Karl Richard 152, 169 Lessing 81, 252 Lewis, George 205 Liebel-Weckowicz, Helen 282 Lieber, Francis 94 Liebeschütz, Hans 23, 275 Liliencron, Rochus von 93 Lincoln, Abraham 217 Lincoln, John 94 Lind, Jenny 127

Livy 18, 176 Loftus, Lord Augustus 238 Loppe, Mrs. 259 Lord, John 127, 157 Lorenz, Ottokar 208, 281 Louis XI 33 Louis XIII (French king) 183 Louis XIV (French king) 78, 122, 181, 183, 192, 206, 242–243 Louis-Philippe (French king) 68–69, 157 Luca, Antonio de 88 Ludwig I (Bavarian king) 177 Ludwig II (Bavarian king) 242 Lundy, Commander 200 Luther, Martin 16, 22–23, 29, 35, 86–87, 100–101, 283 Macaulay, Lord 6, 86, 199–201, 204–208, 216, 265, 285 Machiavelli 30, 39–40, 46–47, 149, 280 MacMurrough (Irish king) 110 Macpherson, James 203 MacRaild, Donald 257 Madden, Francis 155 Makler, Minister 237 Maltzahn, Baron von 56, 65 Maltzahn, Christoph Freiherr von 273 Manteuffel, Edwin von 149, 153, 157, 169, 207, 219, 227, 230, 237, 244, 259–260, 267, 291 Manteuffel, Hertha von 169 Maria de’ Medici (French queen) 180, 182 Maria Theresa (Austrian Empress) 80, 252 Marvick, Arthur 286 Marx, Karl 19, 82, 93 Mary Queen of Scots 194 Maximilian II (Bavarian king) 54, 57, 126–127, 146, 158, 169, 172, 177–179, 191–192, 262 Maximilian II (German emperor) 77, 252 Mazarin, Cardinal 181 Medici, Cosimo 254 Megill, Allan 282 Melanchthon 86 Mendelssohn, Felix 132, 172, 233 Mendelssohn, Georg Benjamin 99 Mendelssohn, Joseph 99 Menotti, Ciro 69 Metternich, Prince 31, 56–59, 64, 75, 144 Metz, Karl Heinz 15, 18, 23, 29, 31 Meyer, Franz 22 Meyerbeer, Giacomo 169, 218 Mezzofanti, Guiseppe 115 Michael, Emil 275 Michelet, Jules 157–158, 285

Index of persons  371 Mignet, Francois-Auguste Marie 108, 157, 218 Milan I (King of Serbia) 64 Milford, Karl 273–274 Miller, Prof. 223, 245 Milosh (Prince of Serbia) 63 Mitchell, Mr. 239 Mohl, Julius von 218 Mohl, Mary von 218 Mommsen 279, 285 Mommsen, Theodor 6 Mommsen, Wilhelm 289 Monk 241 Montefiore, Sir Moses 265 Montesquieu 181 Moses, John 278 Movement 9, 101, 183, 273, 278, 288 Mozart 114, 276 Mueller, Max 258 Muhlack, Ulrich 43, 274–276 Mühlenfels, Elfriede von 169 Muir, Edward 254, 303–304 Müller, Adam 75 Müller, Johannes von 24, 37, 44, 252 Müller, Karl Alexander von 192 Munslow, Alun 34, 288 Müntzer, Thomas 16 Murray, John 207 Napier, E. 165 Napier, Lord Francis 169 Napoleon I 14, 16–17, 31, 77–78, 83, 112, 168, 182, 254, 284 Napoleon III 158, 241–243 Nasse, Dr 115, 120 Neander, Johann August Wilhelm 153, 169 Newman, Cardinal 170 Nichols, John 175 Niebuhr, Barthold Georg 18, 21, 24, 37, 40, 64, 70, 75, 94, 202, 253–254 Nietzsche 279, 281 Nightingale, Florence 115, 172, 243 Nitzsch, Karl Immanuel 126 North, Fanny 244–245 Nottingham, Earl of 199 Novalis 61 Novotny, Alexander 287 O’Brien, William Smith 147 O’Connell, Mr. 228 Ohlen und Adlerskron, Mrs von 244 O’Neill, Brian vii Osgood, Herbert 94 Otto I the Great (German Emperor) 16, 96, 261

Otto II (German emperor) 96, 261 Otto III (German emperor) 96 Owen, Starriett M. 124, 127, 166, 241 Pammer, Michael 2–3, 55, 64 Pape, Elisabeth von 236 Papencordt, Felix 87 Parker, Christopher 273 Passmore, Kevin 272 Paul IV (Pope) 83 Paul V (Pope) 182 Peel, Sir Robert 132, 231 Pelham, H.F. 259 Perceval, Alfred A. 118 Perceval, Ascelin Goval de 110 Perceval, George 110 Perceval, Richard 110 Perceval, Robert 110 Perthes, Friedrich 44–45, 70, 76 Pertz, Georg 76, 93, 151, 169, 222 Petrie, George 226–227 Petzoldt, Johann Gottfried 97 Pfeifer, Wilhelm 256 Philip II (Spanish king) 46, 67 Philip III (Spanish king) 46 Phillips, Sir Thomas 199, 221–222, 230, 255 Pico, Mr. 254 Pius V (Pope) 83 Pius VII (Pope) 254 Platen, Count August von 57, 81 Plitt, Agathe 233 Plummer, A. 258–259 Podewil, Mr. 255 Poliziano 173 Pöllnitz, von 156 Poole, Reginald Lane 263 Pope, Alexander 117 Poppo, Ernst 29 Powell, J.M. 278, 303 Powys, Helen 245 Prescott, W.H. 96 Price, Bartholomew 258–259 Prussia, Prince Albrecht of 157 Prussia, Prince August of 157 Prussia, Queen Elisabeth of 157 Prutz, Hans 281 Puchta, Georg Friedrich 169 Pückler, Hermann Fürst von 42 Pulci, Luigi 88–89 Raabe, Wilhelm 183 Ramonat, Oliver 275–276 Ranke, Albrecht 153–155 Ranke, Amalie 132, 147, 151, 153, 165 Ranke, Andreas 13

372  Index of persons Ranke, Clarissa von 3, 10–11, 39, 108–109, 111–124, 127–133, 144–147, 150–155, 161–177, 180, 192–193, 204–209, 214–217, 220–221, 223, 229, 232–241, 243–245, 266, 277, 280, 291, 301, 303–305, 307–308 Ranke, Ernst 14, 115, 120–121, 123, 126, 238 Ranke, Ferdinand 16, 108–109, 119, 125, 145, 164, 237, 239 Ranke, Friduhelm von 127, 157, 161–163, 169, 199, 215, 217–222, 225–226, 229–231, 239, 243–245, 256, 258, 266 Ranke, Gottlob Israel 13–15 Ranke, Heinrich 15, 30–32, 55, 59–60, 66, 70, 120, 122–125, 170, 172, 244, 258, 305 Ranke, Heinrich Israel 14 Ranke, Israel 13 Ranke, Leopold von 1–310 Ranke, Maximiliane von 55, 126, 162–163, 167, 169, 177, 214, 231–232, 238–240, 243, 258 Ranke, Otto von 122–125, 155, 161–163, 167, 215, 235–236, 239–240, 243–245, 266, 304 Ranke, Rosalie 164 Ranke, Selma 132, 172 Ranke, Theoda (Oda) 115, 120, 146 Ranke, Wilhelm 121, 123, 239, 245 Raumer, Friedrich Ludwig Georg von 41, 89, 127, 170, 185 Ravaillac, Mr. 182 Redern, Graf von 170 Redesdale, Lord 110 Reid, Dr 303 Reimer, Georg 37, 45 Reumont, Alfred von 86 Richelieu, Cardinal 80, 180–181 Richter, Karl 24, 123, 126–127, 169 Riley, Miss 241 Ritter, Heinrich 21, 60–61, 81, 97, 127 Ritter, Moritz 93 Robertson, Mr. 123, 170 Robinson, J.H. 273 Rolleston, Stephen 114 Romberg, Moritz Heinrich 166–167 Ronquillo, Ambassador 199 Roscher, Wilhelm Georg Friedrich 94 Rosemann, Philipp 19, 21, 23 Rosenhaft 133, 162 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques 79, 181 Rüchel, Mr. 99 Rückert, Friedrich 81, 122

Rudolf II (German emperor) 252 Rüsen, Jörn 285 Russell, Fanny 235 Sabrians, French ambassador 198 Savigny, Friedrich Karl von 43, 61, 76, 78, 97, 99, 121, 125, 143, 169, 202 Savonarola 254 Sax, Benjamin 274 Schaff, Philipp 242 Scharnhorst, General 77 Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von 18, 42, 126, 169 Schevill, Ferdinand 274 Schiller, Friedrich 22, 67–68 Schimper, Karl Friedrich 81 Schippan, Martin 280 Schlegel, August Wilhelm von 169 Schlegel, Friedrich von 18, 57, 75 Schleier, Hans 85, 183 Schleiermacher, Friedrich 42–43, 97, 185 Schlieffen Sandow, Graf 218 Schlözer, Kurd von 92 Schmidt, Julian 93–94, 281 Schnicke, Falko 60–62, 90, 94, 176 Schomberg 228 Schrader, Julius 170 Schubert, G. Heinrich 70, 172 Schulin, Ernst 149 Schulze, Johannes 41 Scott, Mrs. 245 Scott, Robert 233 Scott, Sir Walter 24, 33–34, 170 Selss, Albert Maximilian 238 Seward, William Henry 217 Shakespeare 5, 168–170, 172 Sixtus V (Pope) 83–84, 86 Sleidamus, Mr. hist. 30 Smith, B.G. 272 Smith, H.W. 202 Snethlage, vicar 232 Solly, Thomas 170, 173–174 Sophocles 265 Southy, Robert 113 Spalding, Roger 273 St. Patrick 228 Staegemann, Friedrich August von 82 Stanwell 110 Steffens, Heinrich 169 Stein, Reichsfreiherr vom und zum 13, 76 Stenzel, Gustav 21–22, 46, 76 Stieglitz, Charlotte 81 Stokes, Whitley 245 Stolberg-Werningerode, Countess of 172

Index of persons  373 Story, W.W. 92 Strauss, Gerhard Friedrich 127, 153, 169 Stromeyer 82, 101, 184 Strongbow 110 Strozzi, Filippo 254 Stubbs, Bishop 258 Stuchtey, Benedikt 201–202 Su, Shih-Chieh 48, 289 Süßmann, Johannes 274 Sue, Eugene 198 Sybel, Heinrich von 92, 94, 179–180, 184, 191, 258, 303 Tacitus 17, 37, 64 Tape, Elisabeth von 235 Taquemot, Mr. 241 Tasso, Bernador 88 Tasso, Torquato 65, 88, 255 Teggart, F.J. 273 Tell, Wilhelm 22 Tennyson, Mr. 170 Theiner, Augustin 88 Theremin, vicar 122, 126–127 Thierry, Augustin 158 Thiers, Adolphe 158, 218, 242–243 Thomas, Mr. 151 Thompson, James Westfall 31, 33, 75, 256 Thorvaldsen, Bertel 115 Thucydides 18, 22, 24, 65 Tiarks, Mrs. 219 Tieck, Johann Ludwig 126–127, 169, 173 Todd, Dr 208 Toews, John Edward 20–21 Toledo, Cardinal of 182 Tollebeek, Jo 128, 157 Treitschke 184, 279 Trench, archbishop 225, 233 Trendelenburg, Mr. 169 Trever-Roper, Hugh 7 Tschech, Heinrich Ludwig 122 Turgenev, Ivan 219 Turner, John Mallard 165 Twinning, Mrs. 245 Tzschirner, Heinrich Gottlob 22 Valori (French ambassador) 108 Varnhagen von Ense, Karl August 42–43, 56, 58, 66–67, 76, 95, 145 Varnhagen von Ense, Rahel 42, 45, 55, 62, 75, 168 Vega, Lope de 81 Vergennes, Count Charles 131 Verrier, Le 224

Victoria (English queen) 224 Vierhaus, Rudolf 14, 183, 286 Villemain, Abel-Francois 157 Vogelstein, Mr. 123 Voltaire 5, 142, 170, 181 Waitz, Georg 94, 96, 279, 303 Waldenburg, Mathilde von 157, 170 Walker, Mr. 228 Wallenstein 240–241 Wang, Mr. Hist 34–35 Warren, John 1, 18–20, 65, 289 Watson, A. 259 Watson, Miss 151 Watson, W.G. 151 Webb, Walter 272 Weber, Jutta 307 Weber, Max 284 Weise, Dr 238 Wellesley, Lord 113 Wentworth, Thomas 197–198 Wheaton, Mr. 96 White, Andrew Dickson 91, 94, 263 White, Hayden vii, 285 Whitener, B.D. 283–284, 290 Wichelhaus, Pastor 120 Wiedemann, Theodor 254, 256–257, 267, 301 William I (English king) 110 William I (Prussian king and German emperor) 171, 216, 218, 234, 242, 244 William III of Orange (English king) 195, 197–198, 201, 206, 226, 228–229 William IV of Orange 239 Williams, Amy 229, 231 Williams, Frank 229 Wilmans, Roger 94, 96 Wimmer, Mario 21, 33, 37, 42, 60, 94 Wines, Roger 287 Winter, Georg 256, 259–260 Wiseman, Nicholas 87 Wodehouse, Lord 220, 223, 226 Wordsworth, Dora 115 Wordsworth, William 113, 115, 117, 122–123, 151, 153, 170 Worthington 130 Wulp, van der 199 Zeccinelli, Michele Domenico 88 Zedlitz, Freiherr von 57 Zemlin, M.-J. 273 Zielinski, Antoinette von 29, 41 Zinkeisen, Johann Wilhelm 121

Index of places

Aachen 112 Africa 45, 83, 100, 180, 194, 260, 262 Aghadoe 180 Alexandra College (Dublin) 168, 233, 305 Alexisbad 44 Allstedt 16 Alsace 181, 243 Altenkirchen 31–32 America 45, 83, 92, 96, 100, 130, 157, 170, 180, 192–194, 208, 217, 219, 226, 232, 237, 251–253, 256–257, 260, 262–263, 271, 278–280, 282, 303 Amsterdam 97, 194 Anglo-Irish 3, 8, 111, 168, 204, 216, 291 Ansbach 185, 194 Ardagh 109 Ardfert 110, 180 Ariosto 88 Aschaffenburg 97 Asia 32, 83, 100, 180, 194, 260, 262 Assisi 68 Athens 261 Auerstedt 14, 16 Augsburg 101 Austria 10, 14, 55, 57–59, 64, 69–70, 75, 78, 80, 90, 112, 115, 142, 149–150, 180, 192, 234–235, 237, 241, 243, 251–253, 258, 309 Babelsberg 194 Baden 143, 158 Balkans 63–64 Ballymuddy 120 Basel 15, 158, 237, 310 Bassano 65 Bavaria 5, 8, 31, 57, 124, 126–127, 146, 158, 172, 177, 179, 191, 217, 232, 237, 242, 251 Bayreuth 97 Belarus 68

Belfast 111 Belgium 13, 61, 67, 69, 82, 112, 115, 168, 185, 191–192, 251, 309 Berchtesgaden 177–178, 185, 194 Berlin 3–5, 10, 14, 29–30, 32–33, 37, 39, 41–43, 45, 54–57, 62, 64, 66, 70, 75, 82, 85, 89, 91–100, 118–123, 127–128, 141, 143, 145–153, 156–158, 165, 168–169, 171, 177, 194, 198, 206–207, 214, 216, 219–220, 223–225, 227, 231–232, 235, 237, 242–244, 252, 255, 257, 259, 262, 266, 291, 305–306, 309 Bern 158 Bibra 256 Birmingham 141 Bologna 65, 68–69 Bologne 116, 194 Bonn 41, 97, 115, 120, 151, 167, 237, 309 Bornstedt 13, 54 Bosnia 79 Boston 96, 193 Bottendorf 61 Bowness 113, 116, 118, 120, 150, 170 Boyne 198, 228 Brandenburg 108, 141–142, 259, 306 Breberal 110 Brescia 70 Brigown 109 Britain 9, 67, 132, 168, 195, 197, 203, 208, 255, 261, 263 British 3, 111, 147, 169, 198, 201, 206, 231, 243, 291 British Empire 195 British Museum 116, 119, 196, 199, 219 Brittany 110 Brocken 44 Bruges 185 Brühl 54 Brussels 54, 97, 122, 158, 185, 194, 199, 255, 309

Index of places  375 Buckingham Palace 230 Byzantine Empire 261 Calais 185 Cambridge 185, 223, 245 Campagna 68 Canada 8 Cardiff 158 Carolingian Empire 37 Carrigfergus 110 Carsdorf 32 Carthage 261 Cary 110 Castelfranco 65 Charenton 158 Charlottenburg 157, 164, 241 Cheltenham 146, 158, 164, 199, 220–223, 229–230, 255 China 260–262 Chipstow 158 Clapham 165, 221 Clausthal 44 Clonfert 180 Cloyne 109 Cologne 24, 97, 158, 309 Como 70 Confederate States 217, 219 Connor 109, 113 Constantinople 185 Coshmore and Cishbridge 120 Crete 45 Croatia 62 Cumberland 121 Cyprus 45 Denmark 90, 115, 143, 145, 148–149, 171, 173, 194, 234, 240 Doberan 32, 167 Donndorf 16, 33, 158 Dornbach 54 Dorpat 55–56 Dortmund 158 Dresden 54, 97, 151, 194 Drogheda 198, 201 Dublin 87, 109–111, 113–114, 120, 127, 147, 164–166, 168, 172, 180, 196, 198, 208, 220–223, 225–230, 233, 238, 240, 266, 305, 309 Dublin Castle 111, 180, 199, 222, 225–226, 229 Dublin Custom House 199, 226, 229 Düsseldorf 97, 158 Edinburgh 165 Egypt 45, 261, 265

Eisleben 13, 16 England 8, 11, 13, 37–38, 40, 45, 68, 78–79, 82, 86, 88, 100–101, 110–111, 113–116, 118, 120–121, 127, 130–131, 141–142, 145–147, 149, 164, 167, 171, 177, 180, 185, 192, 194–195, 199–207, 215–217, 223, 227–228, 230–231, 233, 236, 238, 240, 243–245, 251–253, 258, 261, 263–265, 271, 277, 305, 309 English 3, 6, 8, 39, 44, 60, 63, 87, 96, 108, 110, 116, 119–122, 124–126, 128, 130, 132, 144, 148, 152, 155, 162, 168, 170–171, 173–176, 184, 192, 195–197, 199, 202–205, 207–208, 216, 218, 222, 224, 231–232, 235, 241–245, 257, 259, 266, 277, 279–280, 282, 285–286, 291, 305 Erfurt 54, 70, 97, 108, 185 Erlangen 309 Europe 5, 8–9, 11, 13, 15–16, 32, 36, 39–40, 44–45, 59, 64, 68, 70, 77–79, 84, 86, 89, 96, 100, 112, 114–115, 132, 141–142, 149, 152, 171, 181, 192, 195, 201, 203, 206, 217, 226, 237, 239, 241, 244, 251, 253, 258, 260, 272, 275, 278, 287 European 5, 8–11, 13–14, 16–17, 24, 32, 38–40, 43–45, 56, 64–65, 69, 75, 78–79, 81–83, 100, 128, 131, 141, 150, 170, 173, 175, 180–182, 184–185, 203, 207–208, 237, 239–241, 245, 251–253, 255–257, 276, 283, 285, 287, 291, 307 Ferrara 65, 69 Florence 45, 47, 56, 65–66, 68, 85, 243, 252, 254, 309 Folkstone 194 Fontainebleu 158 Forli 69 France 8, 11, 15, 37–39, 41, 45, 68, 75, 77–78, 81–84, 88, 90, 100, 110, 114–116, 130–131, 142–143, 157, 168, 177, 180–182, 185, 192, 194, 201, 203, 206–207, 240, 241–243, 245, 251–253, 255, 261, 282, 309 Frankenhausen 16 Frankfurt/Main 76, 97, 99–100, 131, 150, 309 Frankfurt/Oder 10, 18, 21, 29–34, 37, 44, 54, 90, 164 Freiburg 61, 67, 309 French 8, 16–17, 19–20, 40, 44, 47, 68–69, 77, 108, 112, 122, 143, 150, 163, 168, 170, 173, 176, 180–182, 192, 197–200, 203–207, 214, 218, 239, 241–243, 251, 257, 267

376  Index of places Frutingen 158 Fuligno 68 Gaelic 203–204, 216 Gallia 261 Geheime Staatsarchiv Preuβischer Kulturbesitz 305 Gemsbach 158 Gent 185 German 4, 6, 8, 14–15, 17–19, 22, 24, 29–30, 32, 36, 39–40, 45, 47, 59, 61, 65–66, 68–70, 75, 77–79, 81–85, 87, 89, 91, 93, 96, 100–101, 116, 118–129, 131–133, 142–143, 148–149, 163–164, 166, 168, 170–171, 173–174, 177–181, 183–184, 191, 194–195, 202–208, 214, 218, 231, 234, 240, 242, 251–253, 257–258, 261–263, 266–267, 274, 278–281, 283–285, 287, 304, 307 German Confederation 191, 234, 242, 267 German Diet (Reichstag) 38, 99, 255 German Empire (Deutsches Kaiserreich) 79, 150, 242, 244, 251–252, 258, 267 Germany vii, 2–3, 8–11, 15, 17–18, 20, 22, 31, 33, 37–39, 41, 45, 56, 62, 64, 67–69, 75, 77–78, 88, 102, 114–115, 117, 119, 127, 131–132, 141, 148, 150, 157, 169, 171, 175, 180–182, 192–193, 196–197, 233, 239, 241–244, 251–252, 254–255, 258, 261, 264, 266, 271, 273, 275, 281, 284, 303, 305–307, 309 Gitzin 235 Glasgow 141 Gloucestershire 109 Golden Valley 13 Goslar 44 Gotha 44 Göttingen 24, 97, 185, 237, 288, 309 Gravenshaag 231 Great Britain 45, 90, 128, 201 Greece 13, 40, 45, 48, 64, 82, 185, 192 Greek 8, 17, 29, 32, 39–40, 45, 121, 173, 227, 261, 267 Gunzenhausen 185 Hague, The 122, 194, 199, 309 Halle 14, 32, 41, 44, 54, 70, 82, 97, 237 Hamburg 76, 97, 141 Hampton Court 109, 120 Hanover 69, 158, 185, 309 Harzburg 44 Harz Mountains 14, 44 Hawkshead 120

Heidelberg 24, 43, 115, 309 Herefordshire 147 Hohenschwangau 192 Holland 45–46, 82, 110, 115, 180, 194–196, 199, 251, 309 Holyhead 223 Holy Roman Empire 8, 13–14, 38–39, 77, 100–101, 194, 202, 234, 239–240, 251–252 Honfleur 109 Hull 119 Hungary 39, 82, 90, 100, 173, 192, 235–236, 240, 243 Ilsenburg 44 Imola 69 India 45, 173, 176, 207, 261–262, 265 Ingolstadt 70 Innsbruck 115 Interlaken 158 Ireland 4, 8, 11, 79, 88, 109–110, 113, 116, 120, 127, 131–132, 146–148, 152, 164, 166, 169, 171–172, 177, 180, 194–195, 197–201, 203–204, 207, 223, 226–229, 231, 233, 240–241, 243, 244–245, 258, 263, 277, 304–305, 309 Irish 3, 8, 10, 87, 111, 113, 116, 119, 123, 132, 152, 155–156, 168, 170, 175–176, 196–199, 201–202, 204, 207–208, 216, 226–228, 239–240, 244, 266, 280, 291, 304–305 Irish Free State 195 Ischia 65 Italian 8, 37, 40, 42, 56, 58, 60–61, 69, 78, 86, 88, 94, 122, 163, 166, 168, 170–171, 173, 254, 267, 280 Italy 10, 38–41, 44–47, 55–57, 60, 66, 68–70, 82–84, 88, 100, 115, 177, 180, 192, 194, 234, 239–240, 243, 253–255, 261, 309 Jena 14, 16, 237 Kap Arkora 32 Karlsruhe 122, 309 Kassel 62, 97 Kerry 110 Kiel 97, 309 Kilkenny 109–110, 147 Kingstown 223, 229 Kinsale 113 Klosterneuburg 65 Koblenz 97, 309

Index of places  377 Königgrätz 235 Königsberg 256 Krakau 310 Kyffhausen 16, 44

Müllrose 32 Munich 4, 54, 70, 115, 169, 177, 179, 185, 191, 194, 232, 275, 309 Münster 101

Laeken 185 Langenroda 97, 158 Langensalza 44 Lausanne 158 Leeds 141 Le Havre 109 Leipzig 3, 13, 17–18, 21–22, 32–33, 44, 82, 94, 97, 309 Lenau 173 Leuker-Bad 158 Liege 112 Limerick 109, 180, 266, 305 Lindau 70 Lindow 32 Lithuania 68 Liverpool 141 Lodersleben 55, 194, 232, 258 London 7, 54, 64, 96, 99, 115–123, 128, 131, 147, 158, 164–166, 168–169, 171, 184–185, 194, 196, 206, 208, 219–223, 231, 235, 245, 255, 309 (London-)Derry 200 Lübeck 101 Luetzen 17 Luxembourg 82, 90 Luzern 310

Naples 65–66, 143 Naumburg 32 Newgrange 228 New York 196, 263, 291, 303 Nordhausen 44, 158 Normandy 110, 182, 203, 261 Nuremberg 185, 193, 309

Maastricht 112 Magdeburg 97, 309 Manchester 141, 185 Mantua 65 Marbach 309 Marburg 194 Maynooth 230–231 Mediterranean 45, 83, 182 Memel 14 Memleben 16, 125 Merovingians 261 Merseburg 29, 32, 70, 309 Mickleton 109 Milan 46, 70 Mitchelstown 113 Modena 69 Mongolia 261 Monmouth 230–231 Monmouthshire 147 Montenegro 79 Morea 79 Moscow 17

Ostende 158, 164 Otricoli 68 Oxford 146–147, 185, 194, 258, 263 Padua 65 Paestum 65 Paris 11, 54, 97, 99, 108–109, 120, 122, 155, 157–158, 185, 194, 208, 217–219, 221, 242–243, 255, 309 Parknasilla 220, 222, 229 Parma 69 Partenkirchen 194 Persia 45, 173 Perugia 68 Pesaro 69 Pforta 29, 309 Pisa 68 Poland 14, 39, 68–69, 82, 90, 100, 141, 173, 180, 185, 192, 240, 251–253, 289, 291, 310 Pompeii 65 Porto Miseno 65 Portugal 82, 171 Potsdam 97, 185, 309 Prague 54, 60, 280 Princeton 3 Prussia 10, 13–16, 30–32, 55–57, 65, 77–79, 100, 102, 112, 127, 141–144, 148–150, 156, 168, 171, 177–178, 192, 206–207, 216, 233–236, 241, 243, 251–253, 267, 306 Prussian 1–2, 4–5, 8, 10, 15, 17, 29, 41–42, 44–45, 54, 56, 59, 75–76, 81–82, 99, 102, 108, 116, 121–122, 126, 131–132, 143, 146–149, 156–157, 169, 171, 177, 185, 217–219, 221, 232, 236–237, 239, 241–242, 244, 252–253, 257–258, 267, 272, 303 Quedlinburg 44, 70 Querfurt 14, 16, 18, 194

378  Index of places Ravenna 69 Rehme 167 Rhine 24, 102, 124 Rhode Island 193 Rhylton 124 Richmond 110 Roßleben 32 Roman 17, 19, 24, 29, 32, 39, 66–67, 75, 184, 194, 227, 254, 267 Roman Empire 24, 33, 63, 202, 261–262 Rome 8, 45, 65–68, 78, 83, 85–88, 115, 121, 196, 252, 255, 261, 309 Rostock 32 Rotterdam 231 Royal Irish Academy 152, 155–156, 180, 205, 227, 229, 305 Royal Society (Irish) 165, 180, 226, 229 Rückersdorf 70 Rueil 219 Rügen 32 Russia 4, 9, 16–17, 39, 62, 68–69, 78, 82–83, 90, 112, 141–142, 149, 173, 192, 217, 251–253, 261, 289 Rydale 120 Saale 17 Sackville 113 Sanssouci 157 Saratoga 263 Saxony 13–17, 69, 78–80, 100, 125, 204, 235 Scandinavia 38, 40 Schönbrunn 54 Schönewerda 158 Schulpforta 15–17, 33, 94 Sclessin 112 Scotland 110, 168, 194–195, 200–203, 222, 229, 241 Serbia 8, 40, 62–64, 79, 125, 235, 237, 255 Sevastopol 177 Silesia 88, 131, 141–143, 253 Sitten 158 Slane 198 Slavic 39, 57, 62–63 Sligo 110 Socialist (Eastern) Germany 9, 22, 97 Sömmerda 237 Sorrent 65 Soviet Union 289 Spain 16, 38–41, 45–46, 67, 82–83, 88, 100, 110, 141, 180, 194, 196, 253–255, 261 Spanish 8, 37, 40–41, 44–46, 67, 110, 122, 170, 173, 181–182, 199, 224, 241 Spello 68

Spoleto 68 Spring 32 Staatsbibliothek Berlin 306 Stettin 32 St. Georges Channel 223 St. Patrick’s College Maynooth 231 St. Petersburg 243 Strasbourg 158, 181, 243 Stuttgart 309 Sweden 16, 82, 142, 173, 180, 194, 240 Switzerland 10, 38, 40, 78–79, 90, 100, 180, 237, 310 Syracuse 196, 291, 301, 303 Tara 228 Terracina 65 Thames Tunnel 116–117 Thuringia 33, 36, 214, 232, 308 Tiepolo 37 Tipperary 147 Topper 259–260 Tower of London 116 Treviso 65 Trinity College Dublin 109–100, 113, 165, 173, 180, 223–225, 238, 304–305 Tübingen 238, 309 Turkey 8, 37, 39, 45, 47, 62–63, 82, 185, 192, 255, 262 Tuscany 45, 254 Ukraine 69, 289 United States 8–9, 90, 94, 96, 130, 192, 217, 255, 257, 263, 281 Urbino 69 Venice 8, 37, 43–45, 48, 54, 57–60, 62, 65–70, 79, 85–86, 98, 100, 163, 181, 185, 194, 196, 252, 254–255, 301, 303, 309 Verona 65 Versailles 109, 185, 194, 219 Vesuvius 65 Vicenza 65 Vienna 41, 44, 54–63, 66–67, 75, 85, 99, 115, 206, 237, 242, 252, 255, 309 Vincennes 158 Voigtstedt 15 Wales 156, 230 Warsaw 68 Waterford 109, 120, 147 Waterloo 112, 171 Weißenfels 70 Weiβensee 158 Weimar 54, 62, 97, 100, 309 Wendelstein 16

Index of places  379 Westbury 111–112 Westminster 111, 116, 195, 224 Westminster Abbey 110, 266 Westmoreleand 113 Wethau 70 Wettin 13, 16 Wieda 44 Wiehe 14–16, 32, 44, 54–55, 61, 70, 97, 125, 128, 158, 164, 185, 194, 232, 237, 256, 258, 307–308 Wiesbaden 115 Wildbad 167 Wimbach 185

Windcliffe 158 Windermere 120 Windsor Castle 219 Wittenberg 32 Wolfenbüttel 309 Worms 100 Wuerttemberg 143 Yorck 16 Yorkshire 147 Yugoslavia 9 Zurich 158, 237, 310