[69] See the chapter on the Swabian wars.

[70] Rohan was a great friend to Zurich, and presented to its city library which was then forming his "Parfait Capitaine," a Hebrew Bible, and his portrait. He was by his own request buried at Geneva, and his death was greatly regretted by the reformed cities. The letters written by his family in reply to the "Condolence of Zurich" are still preserved in the library. See pamphlet on Rohan by Professor von Wyss.

[71] In Meyer's novel, Lucretia is betrothed to Jenatsch and takes the veil after the murder of Jenatsch, but this story has no foundation in fact.

[72] A few of these magnificent t.i.tles, or epithets, may be noted: "Hoch," "Wohlgeachtete," "Edle," "Fromme," "Fursichtige," "Furnehme,"

"Weise Herren," and many more such like.

XXVII.

POLITICAL MATTERS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.

Politically Switzerland presents much the same aspect in the eighteenth as in the previous century, and it needs here only a few words to indicate more clearly the temper of the times. In Swiss lands, as elsewhere, we have the inevitable division into the two cla.s.ses of governor and governed. The rank and file of the "reigning families,"

_regiments-fahig_, patricians or plutocrats, rigorously kept all power to themselves, and held sway over the ordinary burghers and common folk.

Unchecked rule and superiority and a life of ease and luxury on the one side; blind submission and toil on the other, especially in the rural districts. Even in the professedly democratic cantons the same despotism is met with; chieftains and family "dynasts" seizing the reins of government, and overruling the _landsgemeinde_, whilst they contend with each other for supremacy. Just as in the case of the oligarchies, the _laender_ make the most of their "divine right" to govern. No wonder risings took place, as that of the Leventines against the harsh _landvogte_ of Uri, and that of the Werdenberger (St. Gall) against Glarus, though these revolts were in vain. In Zurich, Schaffhausen, and Basel, there was less oppression, the guilds keeping the n.o.bility at bay, though this guild system itself was not without blemish. The chief cities or cantonal _chefs-lieux_ one and all held sovereign sway over the country districts attaching to them, but, like the old n.o.bility of France, shifted off their own shoulders nearly all taxation, whilst they monopolized trade and industry. Thus the peasantry were crushed with the weight of taxes, imposts, t.i.thes, and what not.

Religious differences had deepened since the second war of Villmergen (1712), which had brought the Protestants to the fore, and had established the principle of religious equality. The Catholics, having lost their supremacy in certain bailiwicks or subject districts, began to dream of regaining their lost position. To this end they entered into a secret agreement (_ligue a la ca.s.sette_) with Louis XIV. of France shortly before that monarch's death. It was not till 1777, however, that France really gained her point. In that year the common fear of Austria induced both Protestants and Catholics to enter into a league with Louis XVI. Thus, for the first time since the Reformation, the Confederates were a united body, or at any rate were agreed as to their joint plan of action.

Interesting though the task might be, it is here impossible to investigate the various conditions of the government in the subject lands--Aargau, Thurgau, Ticino, Vaud, part of St. Gall, portions gained by conquest, or fragments acquired by purchase. We should meet with curious remnants of feudalism, and strange mixtures of the mediaeval and the modern. But our s.p.a.ce will permit of only a glance. The subject lands were deprived of all self-government, and the _landvogte_ ruled them as an Eastern satrap might rule his satrapy. A somewhat strange arrangement for a republic to make and allow; but yet, on the whole, the government was excellent, and this state of things continued for a long period. Abuses, bribery, extortions, and the like of course crept in, but it is to be remembered that the _landvogte_ were strictly controlled by the central government.[73] Many of them, especially at Bern, kept up much state; possessed horses, carriages, and livery-servants, and kept open house. In their lordships they ruled as veritable sovereigns, but they cared for their people, as good sovereigns should. They were, indeed, more like the patriarchs of old, rewarding or admonishing their peoples as circ.u.mstances required. One specimen of the cla.s.s was greatly admired by Goethe, viz., Landvogt Landolt von Greifensee (Zurich). A few traits will serve to mark the man and the system. This governor was of the old school, and hated enlightened peasants and modern revolutionary ideas. He advocated compulsory attendance at church, and firmly believed in flogging as the most rational form of punishment. On the other hand, he was both benevolent and humane, and watched over his people with a fatherly care. He was equally anxious to improve their farms and their morals. He was wont to go about _incognito_--generally dressed as a Tyrolese--and visited the printshops to find out the gamblers and the drunkards. The latter he had put into a revolving cage till they got sober. Quarrelling couples he shut up together, and forced them to eat _with the same spoon_![74] But among many subject lands the system had greatly changed.

The greatest holder of subject territory was Bern, with its forty-four lordships or bailiwicks, Zurich coming next with twenty-nine. The largest subject district was Vaud, and, thanks to its thriving agriculture, and the wise, though harsh, administration of Bern, it flourished greatly. The Vaudois had on the whole submitted quietly to Bernese rule, though the upper cla.s.ses amongst them did not relish their exclusion from the conduct of State affairs. However, bowing to the inevitable, they gave themselves up to the enjoyment of a life of pleasure and to intellectual pursuits. About this time Lausanne, their capital, had become the resort of men like Gibbon, Fox, Raynal, Voltaire, and many men of lesser mark. They were attracted by the beauty of the scenery and by the high repute of the Vaud gentry for good breeding and affability. These n.o.ble families opened their salons to the distinguished foreigners who resided among them, and Gibbon seems to have particularly appreciated their good qualities.[75] The historian spent much of his life at Lausanne. An unlucky attempt had been made by Major Davel, in 1723, to rescue Vaud from the grasp of Bern. This enthusiastic patriot had himself concocted the plot, and attempted to carry out his plans without informing a single person of his intentions.

Mustering his men, Davel, on some pretence, led them to Lausanne, where the council were then sitting, the _landvogte_ being up at Bern, and informed the board what he proposed to do. But the members of the council were not yet prepared to seek emanc.i.p.ation, and, simulating an understanding, betrayed the luckless patriot to the Bernese authorities.

"Leurs Excellences"--such was the official t.i.tle of the Bernese rulers--made use of the rack, with the object of extorting from him the names of his accomplices, but in vain, and he was beheaded.

Amongst the leading cities of the Confederation, Zurich was conspicuous as the centre of Liberal tendencies and intellectual progress, whilst Bern was the political centre, and the leading financial focus.[76] Like a modern Rothschild, Bern then lent to various European states. Part of her treasure went towards paying the cost of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt. Among her sister cities, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Lucerne, Bern presented the most perfect example of an oligarchy, admired by Montesquieu, Napoleon, and even Rousseau. Her decided bent was for diplomacy, and she was completely absorbed in rule and administration, and she had few other tastes. Trade and industry she considered beneath her dignity; even literary pursuits to a great extent. The Bernese aristocrats were politicians from birth, so to speak, and the young men had a curious society amongst themselves, "ausserer Stand," a society formed for the purpose of cultivating the diplomatic art and practising parliamentary oratory and tactics, especially their more formal outward side. Thus trained in bearing and ceremonial they acquired their much-admired political _aplomb_. Bern was French in fashion, in manners, and in language, and the German tongue was as little appreciated amongst the Bernese patricians as at the Court of Frederick the Great. The const.i.tution presents some features quite unique in their way. There was an exclusiveness which has lasted in all its force even down to our own days; and three cla.s.ses of society sprang up, as widely separated from each other as the different castes in India. All power was vested in the 360 "reigning families"; the number of these was at length, by death and clever manipulating, reduced to eighty, and even fewer. From these families alone were the councils selected, and to the members of these only were governorships a.s.signed. If male heirs were wanting, then the seats on the council were given to the daughters as dowries. So exclusive was this governing body, that even Haller, the great poet, was not allowed to enter it. The cla.s.s next lower in rank was that of the burghers, _ewige habitanten_, with no political rights, and with not a vestige of power in the commonwealth. They were not allowed to hold officerships abroad, but trade, industry, and the schools and churches were theirs. Lastly came the Ansa.s.sige (settlers), the proletariat, including the country labourers, foreigners, refugees, and commoner folk generally. Many were their disabilities; they were not permitted to buy houses, to have their children baptised in the city, to have tombstones set up over the graves of members of their family.[77] They might not even appear in the market till their betters had done their business, viz., 11 a.m., and they were strictly forbidden to carry baskets in the archways (_les arcades de la ville_), in order that these should not damage the hooped petticoats of the patrician ladies.[78] Bern has often been compared with ancient Rome, and certainly its stern council somewhat resembles in its austerity, solemnity, and pomp the august Roman Senate. It is not surprising that many attempts should have been made to induce the Government to relax its severity. In 1744 certain citizens pet.i.tioned the council to that effect, but were banished for their pains. Five years later a famous man named Henzi, with several a.s.sociates, formed a plot against the council, but they were detected and executed.

But in truth there were risings in almost every one of the cantons. Of these only the most remarkable can be touched on here, those of Geneva.

These are real const.i.tutional struggles, and, indeed, form the preliminaries in their way to the French Revolution, on which indeed their history sheds no little light. These troubles in Geneva are not unlike those of the Gracchi period in Roman history. By the Const.i.tution of 1536 Geneva had been granted the right of a "Conseil General," but this council had never been allowed to act or meet. The patricians who occupied the _haut de la cite_ had arrogated to themselves well-nigh all power. But as early as 1707, the burghers, ever on the alert to regain their liberties, rose with the view of re-establishing the General Council of 1536. The movement was headed by the generous and n.o.ble-minded Pierre Fatio, himself a patrician. In fiery speeches, made in the open places of the town, he championed the popular rights, a.s.serting with vehemence that the rulers were not the masters and tutors of the people, but the executors of its sovereign will. The attempt to gain popular liberty miscarried, Fatio was shot in prison, and his followers were exiled. Yet Fatio's idea lived on amongst the working cla.s.ses, and later were again advocated in the pamphlets of Micheli du Crest. In the years 1734 and 1737 the insurrections burst out afresh, and resulted in the establishment of the Const.i.tution of 1738, which secured for a quarter of a century a happiness it had never before known.

However, the second half of the century witnessed new troubles between the burghers and the patricians. These latter were called, by way of nickname, "Negatifs," because they denied the people reform, whilst the burghers were styled "Representants," because they presented pet.i.tions for political liberty. The artizan cla.s.s were nicknamed "Natifs." It is impossible here to follow closely these "tea-cup squabbles," as Voltaire called them, but the philosopher's sympathies were with the _haut de la ville_, while Rousseau, on the contrary, sided with the _bas de la ville_.

Of all the Swiss lands the most equitable and righteous government was that enjoyed by Neuchatel, under Frederick the Great (1740-1786). This state had of its own free will in 1707 accepted the ducal sway of the kings of Prussia, in order to escape the grasp of Louis XIV. At one time, however, Frederick II. so far forgot himself as to infringe the "states'" right of taxation, and the semi-republican duchy at once rose in rebellion. Gaudot, the vice-governor, Frederick's devoted minister, was shot in the fray (1768). Yet, thanks to the monarch's wise moderation, and the intervention of the Swiss Confederation, the storm was calmed, and Neuchatel continued in her peaceful and happy condition.

It is clear that there was in Switzerland plenty of combustible matter, needing only the French Revolution to raise a conflagration.

FOOTNOTES:

[73] The unrighteous and cruel Landvogt Tscharner was punished with death by the Bernese Government in 1612.

[74] For further particulars about this original man the reader is referred to the charming novel bearing his name, by Keller (Keller's "Zurcher Novellen").

[75] Madame de la Charriere, the novelist, writes: "Nous vivons avec eux, nous leur plaisons, quelquefois nous les formons, et ils nous gatent."

[76] The Bernese peasantry had attained unusual wealth by its excellent management and the strict administration of its government.

[77] Prof. Vogelin, "Schweizergeschichte," p. 344.

[78] See "Die Patrizierin," a recent fascinating novel by Widmann, a Bernese writer.

XXVIII.

SWITZERLAND AND THE RENAISSANCE. INFLUENCE OF VOLTAIRE AND ROUSSEAU.

Barren and uninviting is the waste of politics in Switzerland at this period of our story, and it seemed as if the republic was quietly crumbling out of active existence. But the literary and scientific renaissance runs through it all like a fertilizing stream, and saves it from utter sterility. Feeble though it was politically, Switzerland yet produced on all sides men of mark in science, in literature, in philosophy. Time would fail to tell of them all, and we must be content to follow briefly the three great currents of the movement, which centred respectively around Geneva, Zurich, and the Helvetic Society.

The two former of these may indeed be said to form a part (and an important part) of the great general awakening of the eighteenth century, an awakening beginning with the French "period of enlightenment," and crowned by the era of German cla.s.sicism. Yet the French movement itself was based on English influence. Just as, at the Restoration, England had copied the France of Louis Quatorze, so France in return drew intellectual strength from the England of the second half of the eighteenth century--England was then vastly ahead of the Continent--and brought forth the "_siecle de la philosophie_." Of the great Frenchmen who learned in the school of English thought, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Voltaire stand foremost, and of these again Voltaire occupies indisputably the highest place. Voltaire was not only the founder, but the very heart of the philosophic school which reared its front against the statutes and traditions and pretensions of the Church. He had drunk deeply of the spirit of Newton and of Locke during his exile in England, and spread abroad their views and discoveries, a.s.sisted by his genius, his sparkling wit, his lashing satire, and his graceful style. None equally with him naturalized on the Continent English free thought and English rationalism. Voltaire and Rousseau were as two great beacons planted in the century guiding as they would the course of philosophy. Both were champions of personal freedom and religious tolerance in a benighted and down-trodden age. But the influence of the two men worked in very different ways, for in the one it was based on the head, in the other on the heart. Voltaire, the realist, by his venomous and even reckless satires on the Church and on Christianity, dealt a severe blow to religion at large. Rousseau, the idealist, plunged into the mystery of good and evil, and was wrecked by the very impracticability of his system.

Voltaire, as is well known, spent the last twenty years of his life--his "_verte vieillesse_"--almost at the gates of Geneva, and Rousseau, actually one of its citizens, pa.s.sed the greater part of his life wandering abroad, though he loved Geneva so dearly that he once fainted with emotion on leaving it. Yet while both did battle so to speak from Geneva, neither of them was reckoned as a prophet in that city. After Voltaire had spent a couple of years at "Les Delices"--this was subsequent to his break with the great Frederick--he bought Tournay and Ferney, close to Geneva, to "keep aloof from monarchs and bishops, of whom he was afraid." Ferney, with its _parc a la Versailles_, and its fine castle, he made his residence; and there his niece did the honours of the house to the countless visitors who came from all parts to do homage to the ill.u.s.trious "Aubergiste del' Europe," as he pleasantly styled himself. It was not the salons of Ferney that induced him to reside there, but care for his health and a wish to be free from all fear of bastilles.

Geneva was not inclined to bow in admiration before her famous neighbour, as has been already stated. She had by this time become a great intellectual centre. Men of science, naturalists, and philosophers there congregated, and a reaction against the everlasting study of theology, of which the fashion had been introduced by the Huguenot refugees, having come about, the study of nature had taken its place.

Whilst France was being governed by the Pompadours, Geneva was ruled by a society of savants, inclined, it is true, to absolutism and narrow Calvinism, but still savants. It is a common error to suppose that Voltaire's influence took deep root in Geneva. Voltaire set the current running for the world at large indeed, but Geneva was not specially affected. In truth, most of her learned men were disinclined to do more than follow Voltaire half way, as it were, into his philosophy, whilst some of them, as, for instance, Charles Bonnet, were particularly narrow in their views, and were even heretic hunters.[79] Voltaire's contest with the city authorities respecting the establishing of a theatre is a good ill.u.s.tration of his want of real authority and influence there. It greatly tickled his fancy to seduce the "pedantic city still holding to her old reformers, and submitting to the tyrannical laws of Calvin" from the ancient path, and to make war on her orthodoxy. And as part of his plan he determined to introduce theatrical performances into the city.

The ball was set rolling by an article in the "Encyclopedie" by D'Alembert, but the arguments there adduced in favour of the theatre proved of no avail. Rousseau made a furious reply, and averred that a theatre was injurious to the morals of a small town. In a large city, where the morals were already corrupt, it did not signify. The Consistoire was in a flutter, for it had pretended that the Genevans had a prodigious love for light amus.e.m.e.nts. However, one day Voltaire invited the city authorities to "Les Delices," and there treated them to a representation of his "Zare," and it was no little triumph to the wily old schemer that his audience were overcome with emotion. "We have moved to tears almost the whole council--Consistory and magistrates; I have never seen more tears," he delightedly reports; "never have the Calvinists been more tender! G.o.d be blessed! I have corrupted Geneva and the Republic." Nevertheless he was not to triumph. The theatre at "Les Delices" had to be closed. He opened his theatre several times elsewhere in Genevan territory, and began to draw crowds, but in every instance was compelled to close again. In truth, it was not till 1766 that Geneva had a theatre of its own, and even then it lasted but two years. The building was set on fire by some Puritans, and, being only of wood, was rapidly consumed. Crowds ran to the conflagration, but finding that it was only the theatre that was on fire, they emptied their buckets, shouting, "Let those who wanted a theatre put out the fire!"

"_Perruques_ or _tigna.s.ses_," exclaimed Voltaire, with irritation, "it is all the same with Geneva. If you think you have caught her, she escapes."

Rousseau (1712-1778) was the son of a Genevan watchmaker, and received but a very desultory education in his early days. Whilst yet but a boy he had drunk in the republican and Calvinistic spirit of his native town, hence his democratic leanings. He was a lover of nature, and fond of solitude, and was possessed of a deep religious feeling, even though his religion was based on sentiment. He witnessed the revolt of 1735-37, and, _enfant du peuple_ as he was, rebelled against the tyranny of the patricians, and gave vent to his indignation in his writings. He thus became the mouthpiece of a down-trodden people craving for liberty, of a society satiated with culture. His prize essay on "Arts and Sciences" is an answer in the negative to the question propounded by the Dijon Academy, Whether the New Learning had resulted in an improvement to morals. His next essay on "L'origine et les fondements de l'inegalite"

is a sally against the state of society. In it he advocates a return to the condition of nature, on which Voltaire sarcastically retorted, "I felt a great desire to go on all fours." "Emile" (1762), which Goethe calls the "gospel of education," declares against the hollowness of our distorted and over-refined civilization, and advocates a more rational training based on nature. And Pestalozzi, pedagogue and philanthropist, though he styled "Emile" a "book of dreams," was yet nourished on Rousseau's ideas. "Emile" is opposed to deism and materialism on the one hand, whilst on the other it objects to revelation and miracles, and declares that existing religion is one-sided and unable to save mankind from intellectual slavery. The excitement the book created was immense on both sides, and it was publicly burnt both at Paris and Geneva. Its author was compelled to flee.

[Ill.u.s.tration: ROUSSEAU.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: PORTRAIT OF PESTALOZZI.

(_From a photograph of the statue, at Yverdon, by Lanz._)]

A similar untoward fate befel the same author's famous "Contrat Social,"

perhaps the most important political work of the eighteenth century. In this Rousseau advances much further than Montesquieu. Indeed the former was a strong Radical, whilst the latter might be more fittingly described as a Whig. Rousseau advocates republicanism, or rather a democracy, as the best form of government; whilst Montesquieu points to the const.i.tutional government of England as his model, insisting on the right to equality of all before the law. The "Contrat Social," as is well known, did much to advance the revolutionary cause, and became indeed the textbook of the democracy, and formed the princ.i.p.al basis of the Const.i.tution of 1793. But Rousseau himself was no agitator. On the contrary, when the burghers of Geneva rose on his behalf, to save "Emile" and the "Contrat" from the flames, he hesitated hardly a moment, but begged them to submit to order, as he disliked disorder and bloodshed.

His novel, "La Nouvelle Helose" (1761), introduced the romantic element, and opened a new era in literature. It was, in fact, a manifesto against a bewigged and bepowdered civilization. Poetry was invited to withdraw from the salons and come once more to live with nature. But this sudden onslaught on the stiff conventionalism and narrowness of the time was too much, and there ensued an outburst of excitement and feeling such as we in our day can scarcely realize. A great stream of sentiment poured into literature, and gave rise to that tumultuous "storm and stress" (_Sturm und Drang_) period in Germany, out of which sprang Schiller's "Rauber" (Robbers). Goethe caught up the prevailing tone of sentimentality and supersensitiveness in his "Werther" (1774). This tearful, boisterous period is but the outrush of a nation's pent-up feelings on its sudden emanc.i.p.ation from the thraldom of conventionalism. And it led the way to the golden era in German literature, the era of Schiller and Goethe.

The brilliant literary court of Madame de Stael at Coppet succeeded that of Voltaire at Ferney. Though born in Geneva she was in heart a Frenchwoman, and her native country but little affected her character.

"I would rather go miles to hear a clever man talk than open the windows of my rooms at Naples to see the beauties of the Gulf," is a characteristic speech of hers. Yet amongst women-writers Madame de Stael is perhaps the most generous, the most lofty, and the grandest figure.

Her spirited opposition to Napoleon, her exile, her brilliant _coterie_ at Coppet, and her famous literary productions, are topics of the greatest interest, but as they do not specially concern Switzerland, they cannot be more than hinted at here.

[Ill.u.s.tration: HALLER.]

From the very depression, political and social, prevailing in Swiss lands arose the yearning for and proficiency in letters and scientific culture which in the period now before us produced so prolific a literature in the country. And it was not in West Switzerland alone that this revival of letters showed itself. Basel prided herself on her naturalists and mathematicians, Merian, Bernoulli, and Euler; while Zurich could boast of her botanists, Scheuchzer and John Gessner. Bern produced that most distinguished naturalist, Haller, who was also a poet; Schaffhausen claims Johannes von Muller, the brilliant historian; and Brugg (Aargau) Zimmermann, philosopher and royal physician at Hanover. Bodmer and Breitinger formed an aesthetic critical forum at Zurich. And no country of similar area had so many of its sons occupying positions of honour in foreign universities. A whole colony of Swiss savants had settled at Berlin, drawn thither by the great Frederick; others were to be found at Halle. Haller, who had lived at Gottingen ever since 1736, likewise received an invitation from Frederick, but found himself unable to accept it, being greatly averse to Voltaire and his influence. A perfect stream of Swiss intellect poured into Germany, and by its southern originality, greater power of expression, and its true German instinct, quickened German nationality, and witnesses to the fact that there is ever pa.s.sing between the two countries an intellectual current.[80] It is impossible within the limits of the present volume to do more than touch upon the most characteristic literary movements of the period.

Amongst the upper cla.s.ses in Switzerland, French culture reigned supreme, just as did French fashions, French manners, and it may almost be said, the French language. Nevertheless, the Swiss were the first to throw off the French supremacy in literature, turning rather to England as a more congenial guide and pattern. Bodmer speaks of Shakespeare and Milton "as the highest manifestations of Germanic genius." As for German literature itself, it was still in a state of helplessness--what with the Thirty Years' War, and the German n.o.bility given over to French tastes and French influence--and fashioned itself in foreign modes till the close of the Seven Years' War, in 1763, when it took the leading position it has ever since maintained.

Bern and Zurich, which had both risen to wealth and independence, were stout opponents of the French policy. Both cities were homes of the _belles lettres_, and Zurich was a veritable "poets' corner." The chief figure there was Bodmer, who wielded the literary sceptre in Switzerland and Germany for well-nigh half a century. A fellow-worker with him, and his well-nigh inseparable companion, was Breitinger, and these two more than any others helped to break the French spell. Bodmer (1698-1783), was the son of a pastor of Greifensee, and had himself been at first destined for the church, though he was at length put to the silk trade.

But neither calling could keep him from his beloved letters, and in 1725 he became professor of history and political science at the Zurich Carolinum. His aim was to raise literature from its lifeless condition.

As far back as 1721, he had joined with Breitinger and others, in establishing a weekly journal on the model of Addison's _Spectator_--"Discurse der Maler." Breitinger was professor of Hebrew, and later on, canon of the minster of Zurich, and was a man of profound learning and refined taste. The new paper treated not only of social matters, but discussed poetry and _belles lettres_ generally. Gottsched (1700-1766), who occupied the chair of rhetoric at Leipzig, was supreme as a literary critic. His tastes were French, and he held up the French cla.s.sics as models. In his "Critical Art of Poetry" (1730), he tries to teach what may be called the _mechanics_ of poetry based on reason, and pretends that it is in the power of any really clever man to produce masterpieces in poetry. In 1732, appeared Bodmer's translation of "Paradise Lost," to the chagrin of Gottsched, who, feeling that he was losing ground, furiously attacked the Miltonian following. His mockery of the blind poet roused Bodmer's anger, and he replied with his work the "Wonderful in Poetry." A fierce controversy raged for ten years. In the name of Milton the young men of talent took the side of Zurich, that is, of the German, as opposed to the French influence in literature. The result was that by the efforts of such men as Haller, Klopstock, Wieland, and Kleist, the French influence was ousted and the national German influence came to the front.

Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777), whom Goethe calls "the father of national poetry," was the first representative of the new school of poets which began to turn to nature for inspiration and ill.u.s.tration rather than to mere dead forms. His poems on the Alps (1732) paint the majestic beauty of the Bernese highlands, and contrast the humble and peaceful but natural life of the shepherd with the luxurious and artificial life of the patrician, and the dweller in cities. Haller's writings made a great impression on the polite world.[81] Klopstock it was, however, whom Bodmer welcomed as the harbinger of a new era, as the German Milton. Klopstock had been trained in the Swiss school of thought, and regarded Breitinger's "Critical Art" as his aesthetic bible, whilst Bodmer's translation of "Paradise Lost" inspired his epic, "Messiah." The first three cantos appeared in the "Bremer Beitrage" in 1748, and created such a _furore_ that he was declared to be an immortal poet. Wieland's first poems were, in 1751, published in the "Swiss Critic," and met with a reception hardly less favourable if somewhat less enthusiastic. A strong friendship springing up between Bodmer and the young Klopstock, the former offered the poet a temporary home at his Tusculum (still standing) on the slopes of Zurichberg, that he might go on with his great epic. The fine view of the lake and mountains, the "highly cultivated city beneath," was greatly prized by Goethe who sounds its praises in "Wahrheit und Dichtung." However, Bodmer was disappointed with his young guest, for Klopstock loved the society of the young men and young women of his own age, and the progress made with the "Messiah" was well-nigh _nil_. However, it is to Klopstock's sojourn there, that we owe some of his fine odes, especially that on Zurich lake. But meanwhile Bodmer's friendship had cooled, and Klopstock went to the house (in Zurich itself) of Hartmann Rahn, who later on married the poet's sister. With this same Rahn was some years afterwards a.s.sociated the philosopher Fichte, when he lived at Zurich (1788).