Microfilmed by Univ. of Wis. Department of Photography 70-22,047 DKEHER, Robert Edward, 1939- ARTHUR DE GOBINEAU: AN INTELLECTUAL PORTRAIT The University of Wisconsin, Ph.D., 1970 History, modem University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan © Robert Edward Drphpr, 1Q7fi______ All Rights Reserved (This title card prepared by The University of Wisconsin) PLEASE NOTE: The negative microfilm copy of this dissertation was prepared and inspected by the school granting the degree. We are using this film without further inspection or change. If there are any questions about the film content, please write directly to the school. UNIVERSITY MICROFILMS ARTHUR DE GOBINEAU: AN INTELLECTUAL PORTRAIT A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. by Robert Edward Dreher Degree to be awarded January 19— June 19— August 19— To Professors: Mosse Gargan Skidmore This thesis having been approved in respect to form and mechanical execution is referred to you for judgment upon its substantial merit. Dean Approved as satisfying in substance the doctoral thesis requirement of the University of Wisconsin 'IL-.'/QeJL Date of Examination 7%. Ajl-J-L- 19-Z-l ARTHUR DE GOBINEAU: AN INTELLECTUAL PORTRAIT BY ROBERT EDWARD DREHER A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (History) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN 1970 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I The Legacy of Gobineau.............. 1 II The Formation of a Pessimist........ 19 III The Essai........................... 59 IV The Anatomy of Degeneracy: Gobineau and theNear E a s t .......... 170 V Depression and a Return to Art .... 215 (1869-77) VI Collapse and Death: The End of Civilized Society (1878-1 8 8 2).........................253 VII The Misuse of the Prophet.............. 299 Appendix Biographical Summary ............... 325 Bibliography Section 1........................... 335 Section I I ......................... 3^4 Section III......................... 356 ii CHAPTER I THE LEGACY OF GOBINEAU When Joseph-Arthur, Comte de Gobineau died in 1882, few would have recognized his name or what he had done in a long life of accomplishment and frustration and practi­ cally no one would have recognized any of the more than thirty volumes of history, linguistics, poetry, and novels which he had written. Yet, this man and his thought would be the center of a whole series of controversies between 1900 and the present. The story of that revival is as much a part of the problem of Gobineau as the man himself. It is a story of misuse and misinterpretation which has created a legend difficult to unravel and even more diffi­ cult to piece together, a story which must be understood if one is to see the problem of Gobineau correctly. When Gobineau died, he was a man alone, rejected by his family and unclaimed by any intellectual group or coun­ try. After numerous legal difficulties, Gobineau1s manuscripts and correspondence was willed to his old friend and confident, Mathilde de la Tour. The exact relationship of this woman to the departed Count remains far from certain but her full dedication to protecting and reviving the memory of her departed friend is beyond doubt. In 1894 she consulted an attorney in regard to establishing the publishing rights to Gobineau's works only to find that no one held much interest in republishing or commenting on any of his books.1 Gobineau was a complete unknown. Madame de la Tour, herself, decided to publish Gobineau's last work, Amadis as a final testament to the world. Before doing so, however, she consulted Gobineau's sister, Caroline, a very pious nun and Arthur's only truly close relative. Both agreed that Gobineau's text was far too religiously unorthodox to be published in the form in which it had been left. They, therefore, deleted certain passages and published it as an "unfinished" work.2 In an introduction to Amadis^Madame de la Tour created a legend of the man she had known. He was a man persecuted by the world for his pessimistic views, a sensitive artist misused by a materialistic society which had no understanding of his aristocratic virtues. Caroline accentuated this in an unpublished biography of her brother. He had been the last of a long line of aristocrats, a man of great virtue, neglected and persecuted by a hard world. In addition, he had been a consummate scholar who had demonstrated the impending collapse of western civilization through his •a expert knowledge of history and orientalism. It was implied, if rarely stated, that the failure of Gobineau to 3 gain prominence was some how accountable for by the jealousy and suspicion of intellectuals in high academic positions. Gobineau was, thus, the sensitive aristocrat in the nineteenth century: artist and scholar, spiritual and inward, aloof and desdainful, the last of an old breed per­ secuted and destroyed by the irreligion, materialism, and lack of true virtue which the revolution had ushered in. A legend had been created, a legend which would be accepted by all scholars until after World War II but one which brought no immediate popularity. At this point Ludwig Schemann entered on the scene. Gobineau in his later years had been befriended by Richard Wagner and Schemann was the "master's" personal choice to popularize the forgotten Count. Schemann's qualifications seemed acceptable. He was young, a painstaking scholar, and devoted to both Wagner and his task. Wagner, himself, in "an overwhelmingly excited tone",** had asked Schemann to introduce Gobineau's works into Germany. His transla­ tion of 1 'Essal sur 1 1Inegallte des Races Humalnes began to appear in Germany in the l890's but his real work could not begin until he persuaded Madame de la Tour to give Gobineau's papers to the university library in Strasbourg and the publishing rights to Schemann, himself. Around these papers Schemann attempted to build a shrine of Franco- German intellectual cooperation; a collection of manuscripts, sculpture, and mementos of the departed Count. The symbol of this cooperation was to be the Gobineau Society ( Gobineau Verein ) , the accomplishments of the society were prodigious and Schemann's dedication to his appointed task unquestionable. Working under considerable personal pain and privation,5 Schemann published a detailed study of the influence of Gobineau's work, two volumes of source material taken from Gobineau's unpublished works and letters, four volumes of unpublished essays, and finally a two volume biography. In addition, Schemann republished a number of Gobineau's unknown works in France, translated a large number of his works into German, and created a general interest in a person who until then had remained largely unknown. Madame de la Tour had given Schemann the sources to use but had restricted them from general scholarly use. They were only for him to analyze. The result was a veil of secrecy and suspicion thrown over the whole question of Gobinism. The study of Gobineau appeared to be a cult, whose inner meaning was hidden except to a chosen few. The result for those who were already predisposed towards rejecting the Count's influence was incalculable. We now know Schemann's presentation of Gobineau's work to have been reasonably accurate. If he held back on numerous points, it was more out of deferance for Gobineau's relatives and friends rather than for any ideological reasons, but it is also understandable why many doubted the fundamental honesty of his work. Gobinism was from its beginning a movement which raised great suspicion outside of the Gobineau Society. Schemann attempted to present an "objective scientific" picture of Gobineau, not as a propagandist, bpt as a serious fk ' historical scholar. In doing this he accepted the legend of Madame de la Tour, extended it, "demonstrated" it with abundant documentation. There seems to have been little doubt by French Gobineau students of Schemann's honesty in his presentation. Even scholars who disagreed with him were generally convinced of his dedication to the revival which he directed and his desire to keep Gobineau from becoming the object of political propaganda.^ Yet, it is obvious that there was serious dissension both within the Gobineau Society and without before 191^. Schemann was never able to attract the large French member­ ship which had been originally planned although he did manage to interest a few literary critics. He, therefore, turned increasingly to his German membership for support. While the Wagnerians maintained a certain understanding for the diversity of Gobineau's thought, many of the Pan Germans, who increasingly dominated the group, began to misuse Gobineau as a predecessor of Wilhelmian nationalism. Schemann was caught In a highly ambivalent position by his personal tendency towards this form of nationalism and his desire to sustain an objective picture of Gobineau. Until the beginning of the first World War he maintained his basic assumptions that German could not be substituted for Germanic, that Gobineau's sense of Race was above nationality and that the Gobineau Society was not related to any particular political perspective. By the end of the War, however, Schemann's work was totally destroyed; the society split, lost its membership, and rapidly dissipated; the return of Strasbourg to France left the crucial unpublished source material in "foreign" hands; and Ludwig Schemann, shaken by the experience of the war and the collapse of the Second Empire turned to the political right. His course led him from a biography of Paul de Lagardi, through support for the Kapp Putsch and Ludendorff, to the Instltut fuer Reichsgeschichte, his reputation for objectivity being destroyed in the process by his support for the half Aryan parentage of Christ in 1932.8 The question of Gobineau's intent in the process became somewhat confused.