No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Madame de Staël, in her monumental study of German culture, L'Allemagne, wrote of the Catholic church at the dawn of the nineteenth century: “Today, standing disarmed, it has the majesty of an aged lion which formerly made the universe tremble.”1 The French empire, continuing the policy of the revolution, confiscated ecclesiastical property wherever it expanded. By 1804 Napoleon distributed the church's land in Germany—which had been the most extensive in her possession of any country in Christendom—among his client rulers on the right bank of the Rhine.2 All over Europe princes were dissolving monastic communities in order to make their revenues available to the state. Perhaps the church suffered her crowning indignity in 1809, when Napoleon responded to a dispute with the pope by making him his prisoner.
1. de Staël, Madame, De L'Allemagne (Paris, 1960), V, 67–8.Google Scholar
2. Cf. Huber, E. R., Verfassungsgeschichte (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhanmer, 1961), pp. 40–44.Google Scholar
3. See especially Alexis de Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the Revolution, trans. Gilbert, S. (New York: Doubleday, 1955), pp. 6–8.Google Scholar
4. Ibid., and Goyau, George, L'Allemagne religieuse (Paris, 1905-1910), vol. I.Google Scholar
5. De L'Allemagne, V, 66.Google Scholar
6. Treitschke, Heinrich, Deittsche Gesohichte im XIX Jahrhunderte (Leipzig, 1879), I, 188.Google Scholar
7. Schnabel, Franz, Deutsche Gesochichte im XIX Jahrhunderte (Freiburg: Herber, 1947), IV, 55 and 80.Google Scholar
8. Goethe Briefe, ed. P. Stein (Berlin, 1905), Vii, 72–73.
9. Novalis Schriften, ed. J. Minor (Leipzig, 1907), II, 22–26.
10. De L'Allemagne, V, 69–72.Google Scholar
11. Schnabel, IV, 148 and 151.
12. Schlegel, Friedrich, Kritische Ausgabe, VII, ed. Behler, E. (Zurich, 1966), 495.Google Scholar
13. Ibid., p. 486.
14. Ibid., XIII, ed. Anstett, J. J. (Paderborn, Munich, and Vienna: Ferdinand Schöningh, 1960), 250.Google Scholar
15. Ibid., pp. 252–253.
16. Cf. Sehlegel's, Philosophy of Life (English trans.: London, 1851), p. 162.Google Scholar
17. Philosophy of History (English trans.: London, 1830), p. 308.Google Scholar
18. Kritsche Ausgabe, VII, 483.Google Scholar
19. Eos, No. 92, June 9, 1828.
20. Cf. H. Kapfinger's Eoskreis, Munich, 1928.
21. Cf. Reisse, Roman, Die weltanschauliche Entwicklung des jungen Goerres (Leipzig, 1928).Google Scholar
22. von Mueller, K. A., “Goerres in Strassburg,” in Goerres Festschrift (Munich, 1926).Google Scholar
23. Cf. Beguin, Albert, L'Ame romantique et le Reve (Paris; J. Corti, 1946), vol. I, chapter VIII.Google Scholar
24. Cf. Fuhrman's, H.Schellings Spaetphilosophie (Duesseldorf, 1940), p. 17.Google Scholar
25. Scheuing's, Saemmtliche Werke (Cotta Press, 1856-1861), Section II, IV, 50–254.Google Scholar
26. Ibid., pp. 220–280 passim.
27. Ibid., pp. 332–334.
28. Cf. the issues of Eos for June 1829.
29. Eos, no. 181, Nov. 12, 1828.
30. Ibid., no. 27, Feb. 16, 1831.
31. Cf. Mannheim's, K.Ideology and Utopia, trans. Wirth, L. (New York: Harcourt Brace, 1936), pp. 206–222Google Scholar. I am using the expression “utopianism” in the sense defined by Mannheim: as an “orientation transcending reality… which, when it passes into conduct… shatters the prevailing order.” (Ibid., p. 123).
32. Ibid., p. 218.
33. Ibid., pp. 208–212.
34. Eos, no. 154, Sept. 26, 1828.Google Scholar
35. Eos, no. 51, March 29, 1828.Google Scholar
36. Cf. Concordia (Vienna, 1821), I, 147.Google Scholar
37. See especially the following issues of Eos: no. 88, 06 3, 1829Google Scholar; no. 98, July 20, 1829; and no. 139, Sept. 2, 1831.
38. Cf. Baader's, Saemmtliche Werke (Leipzig, 1856), vol. VI and XV.Google Scholar
39. Goerres Ausgewaehlte Werke und Briefe, ed. W. Schellberg (Kempten, 1911), pp. 474–475.Google Scholar
40. Cf. Review of Politics, 21 (10, 1959), 635–36.Google Scholar
41. Philosophy of Life, pp. 162–63.
42. Eos, no. 92, June 9, 1828.Google Scholar
43. Novalis Schriften, II, 38–45.Google Scholar
44. Ibid., p. 37.
45. Schelling's, Saemmtliche Wedke, section I, Vol VII, 404–406, and 410–413.Google Scholar
46. Schrnidlin, Joseph, Papstgeschichte im XIX Jahrhunderte (Munich: Josef Kösel und Friedrich Pustet, 1933), I, 413.Google Scholar
47. Cf. Ringseis, J. N., Erinnerungen (Regensburg, 1886) III, 58.Google Scholar
48. Quoted in Susini's, EugeneF. von B. et le Romantisme mystique (Paris, 1942), II, 270.Google Scholar
49. Bander's, Baemmtiiche Werke, vol. XII and XIII.Google Scholar
50. Susini, I, 269.
51. Knittenmayr, Hinrich, Schelling und die romantische Schule (Munich: E. Reinhardt, 1929), pp. 32–35, 357–404, and 415–441.Google Scholar
52. Schellings Briefe, ed. G. L. Plitt (Leipzig, 1870), II, 222–227.Google Scholar
53. Cf. Doberl's, M.Entwicklungsgeschichte Bayerns (Munch: Oldenbourg, 1928), II, 462–475.Google Scholar
54. Cf. Ringseis, , Erinnerungen, I, 49–56Google Scholar; and Friedrich, J., Ignaz Doellinger (Munich, 1899), pp. 173–174.Google Scholar
55. For a thorough study of the formation of Boehme's cosmogeny, see Koyre's, AlexanderLa Phliosophic de J. Boehme (Paris, 1929).Google Scholar
56. Cf. Fuhrmans, op. cit., pp. 319–325 and the concluding chapter of Knittenmayr.
57. Quoted in Eduard Lecanuet's biography of Count de Montalembert (Paris, 1903), I, 382.
58. Goerres Ausgewaehlte Werke und Briefe, p. 460.
59. Athenasus (Regensburg, 1838), p. 144.Google Scholar
60. Ibid., p. 145.
61. Sehnabel, IV, 211.
62. Cf. Grisar, Joseph, Bayern und Preussen zur Zeit der Koelner Wirren (unpublished dissertation, Munich, 1923)Google Scholar; and Tonsor, Stephen, “The Historical Morphology of Ernst Lasaulx,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 25 (1964), 378–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar