CHAPTER III

TWO GERMAN SCHOLARS: THEODOR MOMMSEN--RUDOLF EUCKEN

The prize of 1902 has been awarded:

Mommsen, Theodor, Professor of History at the University of Berlin, born 1817, died November 1, 1903: “the greatest living master of the age in the art of representing history, taking into especial regard his monumental work, _Römische Geschichte_.”[22]

France was the first country to be honored by the Nobel prize in literature; Germany was the second. In 1902, Theodor Mommsen, whose records of scholarship included history, law and archeology, was the chosen candidate. He was eighty-four years old and lived for only a year after the award. While there was gratification among his countrymen and friends in other lands, at his recognition and this high honor, yet there were adverse comments in several journals about the perversion of the intent of Nobel’s will. The recipient had finished his work; the award could never quicken him to further research or expression of idealism. This choice showed the intention of the Swedish Academy to consider “literature” in a broad sense, including contributions of scientific value as well as those of artistic merit.

Garding, in Schleswig, was the birthplace of Mommsen; his school days were spent at Kiel. Before he was thirty years old he had been employed by the Berlin Academy to decipher and examine Roman inscriptions in Italy and France, because of marked accuracy and zest in research. He combined the reading of law with that of history and, in 1848, was called to the department of law at Leipzig University. Always fearless in political convictions and ardent in Liberalism, he was obliged to retire from this University because of active participation in the political issues of 1848-1849. Two years later he was called to professorship of Roman law at Zürich; after service here for two years he accepted a similar position at Breslau. In all these places he was recognized as magnetic in the classroom and inspirational in his contact with University students from all parts of the civilized world. In 1858, he went to the University of Berlin as Professor of Ancient History and there extended his influence among scholars and lay readers.

Although specific in his interests and a student of deep earnestness, he had read and traveled widely; as conversationalist he excelled, informed upon topics in almost every branch of learning and activity. To him has been attributed the oft quoted sentence, “Each student must choose his special field of labour but he must not imprison himself within its confines.”[23] He was called “the modern Erasmus” because of his versatile knowledge. He wrote with facility and grace, as well as vigor, whether his theme was a monumental _History of Rome_, or a journalistic discussion of current affairs. In political creed he belonged to the National Liberal Party. He was, however, never partisan in his ultimate purposes and hopes for future union of factions. He opposed Bismarck in his tenets and sometimes won over him in courts of law and in the Prussian House of Delegates, by his keen, logical mind. At the same time, he admired the Chancellor very much and said, “What a calamity it is for us all that political animosity should deprive us of the privilege of mixing socially with such a man!” On principle, he was opposed to British attitude towards the Boers, and gave his allegiance to the revolutionists. Again, he deplored the strained relations at times between his country and England and asserted, “What a pity that two great nations of kindred race should remain at loggerheads!”[24] He detested slavery and considered the Civil War in the United States “a holy crusade.”[25]

More than one hundred volumes of original writing and translations from the Latin and Germanic languages are listed under Mommsen’s name in large German libraries. Edward A. Freeman, a critic and historian of international repute, has called Mommsen “the greatest scholar of our times, well-nigh the greatest scholar of all times.” His writings show mastery of law, languages, customs, archeology, coins, inscriptions and monuments, that are of inestimable value to students. He was editor of _Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum_ which was issued by the Berlin Academy of which he was secretary for many years. To the average reader, however, the name of Theodor Mommsen will always be associated with his _History of Rome_, written 1854-1856, which still maintains its authenticity and popularity. As a writer, Mommsen was always illumining, with a vivid style; he was often dramatic. He touched descriptive scenes with grace and color but he was convincingly realistic in his portrayal of events and characters. He unfolded a large canvas but he kept a true focus and threw a strong light upon both individuals and group-pictures, from the early days of Rome to the death of Julius Cæsar.

Although his masterwork was entitled _History of Rome_, he explained, in the Introductory Chapter, that he intended “to relate the history of Italy, not simply the record of the city of Rome.” While the Romans represented the most powerful branch of the Italian stock, yet they were only a branch--but this civic community of Rome gained sovereignty over Italy and the world of its day. Like the historian Freeman, Mommsen insisted upon “the unity of history,” the similarity of human nature from 1800 B. C. to modern times. Few writers have surpassed him in revivifying historical characters. He had strong likes and dislikes, prejudices which he could impress upon the reader, although he was generally justified in his statements and balanced in his estimates. The portrait of Cicero, which “was bitten with vitriolic energy,” as Mr. Buchan has said, in _Some Eighteenth Century Byways and Other Essays_, has been most widely quoted; it is less impartial than his characterizations of Hannibal, Sully, and Cæsar. By temperament and political bias, Mommsen was an admirer of Julius Cæsar; he has given to him a living portraiture.

The pictorial