1. Haym, Rudolf, Aus meinem Leben: Erinnerungen von Rudolf Haym (Berlin, 1902), 14.Google Scholar

2. Ibid., 258.

3. Ibid., 266–270.

4. Compare Sheehan, who seems to regard calls for coalition as a great tactical mistake on the liberals' part. But if this is right, why did Bismarck fear the example of Gladstone, the great liberal coalition-builder? See Sheehan, James J., German Liberalism in the Nineteenth Century (Chicago, 1978), 128–29.Google Scholar

5. There has been exceedingly little written about Haym since World War II, and that generally not from a historical perspective. See, for example, Kimmerle, Heinz, “Zum Hegel-Buch von Rudolph Haym,” Hegel-Studien 5 (1969): 259–64Google Scholar; Schalk, Fritz, “Zu den Erinnerungen Hayms,” Philosophical Perspectives 5 (1973): 227–35Google Scholar. Of the pre–World War II literature the most useful are Westphal, Otto, Welt- und Staatsauffassung des deutschen Liberalismus: Eine Untersuchung über die Preussischen Jahrbücher und den konstitutionellen Liberalismus in Deutschland von 1858 bis 1863, Historische Bibliothek, vol. 41 (Munich, 1919)Google Scholar, and above all Hans Rosenberg's unfinished biography, of which see more below in the text.

6. Rosenberg, , Rudolf Haym und die Anfänge des klassischen Liberalismus (Munich, 1933).Google Scholar

7. Rosenberg characterizes Haym as one of the “foremost and most informative representatives of the world-view of ‘classical’ liberalism.” Haym, , Ausgewählter Briefwechsel Rudolf Hayms, ed. Rosenberg, H. (Stuttgart, 1930), 6–7.Google Scholar

8. Meinecke, Friedrich, “Drei Generationcn deutscher Gelehrtenpolitik,” in Historische Zeitschrift 125 (1921–1922): 248–83, at 250.Google Scholar

9. Rosenberg, Rudolf Haym, 79–80, 82.

10. Ibid., 79–80; Willey, Thomas E., Back to Kant; The Revival of Kantianism in German Social and Historical Thought, 1860–1914 (Detroit, 1978), 29, 39.Google Scholar

11. Rosenberg, Rudolf Haym, 206–7.

12. In his essay “Theologischer Rationalismus und vormärzlicher Vulgärliberalismus,” in Historische Zeitschrift 141, no. 3 (1930)Google Scholar, Rosenberg is aware of the fact that the bourgeoisie was not necessarily either power-hungry or a simple unity. On p. 146 of Rudolf Haym he is also aware of this. Not however, on p. 83, from which the above citation is taken.

13. Rosenberg, Rudolf Haym, 109–11.

14. Ibid., 208.

15. Ibid., 115. Leonard Krieger writes Haym off as a compromising republican who ultimately surrendered all of his goals, in The German Idea of Freedom: History of a Political Tradition from the Reformation to 1871 (Boston, 1957), 361–63.Google Scholar

16. Wehler, , Das deutsche Kaiserreich, 1871–1918 (Göttingen, 1973), 31–32Google Scholar. It is curious that Wehler seems to simultaneously regard the Bismarckian system as Bonapartism, i.e., at least in Engels's view the indirect rule of the bourgeoisie (Wehler cites Engels, Ibid., 66), and as the defeat of the bourgeoisie. For some other judgments of liberal failure, see Sheehan, German Liberalism in the Nineteenth Century, 113, 117–19, and Krieger, The German Idea of Freedom, 458.

17. Sheehan, German Liberalism in the Nineteenth Century, 273.

18. Gall, Lothar, Bismarck: Der weisse Revolutionär (Frankfurt a. M., 1980), 260.Google Scholar

19. Nipperdey, Thomas, Deutsche Geschichte 1800–1866: Bürgerwelt und starker Staat (Munich, 1983), 795–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. Blackbourn, David and Eley, Geoff, The Peculiarities of German History: Bourgeois Society and Politics in Nineteenth-Century Germany (Oxford, 1984), 84–85, 90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. These questions are, of course, derived from some of the central themes of the historiography of German liberalism, from Bussmann's, Walter “Zur Geschichte des deutschen Liberalismus im 19. Jahrhundert,” Historische Zeitschrift 186, no. 3 (1958): 527–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar, to Hans-Ulrich Wehler's Das Deutsche Kaiserreich, and its many replies.

22. Haym often wrote in italics. Unless otherwise stated, all emphases are in the original. This passage is cited in Lees, Andrew, Revolution and Reflection: Intellectual Change in Germany during the 1850s (The Hague, Netherlands, 1974), 37CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See pp. 34–38 for a description of the “on-to-History” movement.

23. Haym, , “An Hegels hundertstem Geburtstag” included in Rosenberg's, Hans re-edition of Hegel und seine Zeit (Leipzig, 1927), 484.Google Scholar

24. Ibid., 6, 14, 464–70.

25. Haym, , Hegel und seine Zeit (Berlin, 1857), 466.Google Scholar

26. Rosenberg, postface to the re-edition of Hegel und seine Zeit, 535. See also Kimmerle, “Zum Hegel-Buch von Rudolf Haym,” 259.

27. Rosenberg, postface to Hegel und seine Zeit, 543.

28. Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte, 719. It is noteworthy that throughout Haym's thought the concept of public opinion still has an undifferentiated structure. It is a monolithic entity rather than an arena for conflicting interests and classes. For a fuller discussion of the differing contemporary views of public opinion, see Habermas, Jürgen, Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit: Untersnchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellchaft (Neuwied, 1965), 144–45, 217, 221.Google Scholar

29. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 218.

30. Haym, , “Em Wort mit der Neuen Preussischen Zeitung,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 699.Google Scholar

31. Haym, , “Thomas Babington Macaulay,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 694–95Google Scholar; Haym, , “Zu den Wahlen in Preussen,” Preussische Jahrbücher 2 (1858): 464.Google Scholar

32. Rosenberg, Rudolf Haym, 206.

33. Haym, “Zu den Wahlen in Preussen,” 466–67; “Der preussische Landtag während der Jahre 1851 bis 1857,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 202Google Scholar; Briefwechsel, 206 n. 2; “Politische Correspondenz,” Preussische Jahrbücher 9 (1862): 471–72Google Scholar. It is the state that Haym expects to end the class struggle by siding with the bourgeoisie.

34. Haym, , “Zu den Wahlen in Preussen,” Preussische Jahrbücher 2 (1858): 464.Google Scholar

35. Haym, , “Ein Wort mit dem Neuen Preussischen Zeitung,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 698Google Scholar; Briefwechsel, 129–30, 134, 203; “Der preussische Landtag während der Jahre 1851 bis 1857,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 195Google Scholar. Even in 1848 Haym had never been enthusiastic about revolutionary methods.

36. Haym, Briefwechsel, 130; “Ein Wort mit dem Neuen Preussischen Zeitung,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 698–99.Google Scholar

37. Haym, , “Der preussische Landtag während der jahre 1851 bis 1857,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 210.Google Scholar

38. Haym, Briefwechsel, 142–43; Aus meinem Leben, 279. Haym's antagonism to democrats and revolutionaries, often represented in his view by the Progressives, is present much more often and more strongly in Haym's writings during the potentially revolutionary situation of 1862–66, as will be discussed below.

39. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 288–89.

40. Haym, Briefwechsel, 155–56.

41. Ibid., 128, 199. Haym's contacts extended as far as the right-wing nationalists of the Preussische Wochenblatt, who asked him to help find a new editor for their journal in 1858. See Behnen, Michael, Das Preussische Wochenblatt (1851–1861): Nationalkonservative Publizistik gegen Ständestaat und Poliziestaat (Göttingen, 1971).Google Scholar

42. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 267–68; Briefwechsel, 152, 157–58; “Mittheilungen,” Preussische Jahrbücher 2 (1858): 236.Google Scholar

43. Haym, , “Mittheilungen,” Preussische Jahrbücher 2 (1858); 236–37.Google Scholar

44. Ibid., 238; Haym, , “Bröschuren-Literatur,” Preussische Jahrbücher 3 (1859): 367.Google Scholar

45. Haym, Briefwechsel, 205.

46. Ibid., 203.

47. That is, a system with a strong executive monarch as well as a strong parliament, not a purely parliamentary government. Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte 1800–1866, 765.

48. Rosenberg, Rudolf Haym, 153–54.

49. For example, see Haym, , “Politische Correspondenz,” Preussiche Jahrbücher 9 (1862): 597.Google Scholar

50. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 270.

51. Haym, , “Die Verordnung vom 1 Juni und die Presse,” Preussische Jahrbücher 11 (1863): 634–35, 639Google Scholar; “Ein Artikel der Grenzboten,” Preussische Jahrbücher 11 (1863): 64.Google Scholar

52. Haym, , “Die Verordnung vom 1 Juni und die Presse,” Preussische Jahrbücher 11 (1863): 632–33Google Scholar; “Ein Artikel der Grenzboten,” Preussische Jahrbücher 12 (1863): 64–68.Google Scholar

53. Haym, Briefwechsel, 207, 209–10, 213; “Politische Correspondenz,” Preussische Jahrbücher 10 (1862); 83–84Google Scholar; “Ein Artikel der Grenzboten,” Preussische Jahrbücher 12 (1863); 71.Google Scholar

54. Like the Prussian liberals in March 1848, like himself at that time, Haym would certainly have been willing to take advantage of a successful revolution, however. As with his predecessors, his first concern would have been to end it.

55. Haym, , “Politische Correspondenz,” Prenssische Jahrbücher 9 (1862); 596Google Scholar: “Ein Artikel der Grenzboten,” Preussische Jahrbücher 12 (1863); 71Google Scholar; Briefwechsel, 218, 222–23; Haym, letter to Eduard Simson, in Heyderhoff, Julius and Wentzcke, Paul, Deutscher Liberalismus im Zeitalter Bismarcks, 2 vols. (Bonn, 1925–1926), 1:162–63Google Scholar; “Die Verordnung von 1 Juni und die Presse,” Preussische Jahrbücher 11 (1863): 638.Google Scholar

56. Haym, , “Ein Artikel der Grenzboten,” Preussische Jahrbücher 12 (1863): 72 passimGoogle Scholar; “Politische Correspondenz,” Preussische Jahrbücher 9 (1862): 477Google Scholar. See also Ibid., 600.

57. This also serves to disprove Nipperdey's contention that the old, 1848 rift between democrats and liberals had been temporarily healed during the 1850s and 1860s and only broke out anew in 1864 with the Schleswig-Holstein crisis. Haym and his correspondents give every indication of having preserved all their animosity towards the democrats. See Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte 1800–1866, 730.

58. Haym, , “Politischc Correspondenz,” Preussische Jahrbücher 9 (1862): 476, 595.Google Scholar

59. 1863 was, of course, during the period of Napoleon III's apparent success in foreign policy.

60. Haym, , “Die Verordnung vom 1 Juni und die Presse,” Preussische Jahrbücher 11 (1863): 636–37.Google Scholar

61. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 291; Briefwechsel, 230, 234, 236–38.

62. Haym, Briefwechsel, 238, 241–42.

63. Ibid., 243.

64. Ibid., 243–44.

65. Ibid., 243–46; Aus meinem Leben, 290.

66. Aus meinem Leben, 289.

67. Haym, Briefwechsel, 244.

68. The Indemnity Bill gave retroactive parliamentary sanction to the government's budgets since 1862. By submitting the bill to parliament, the government recognized the illegality of its own previous actions. It upset conservatives who considered the admission unnecessary, and left-liberals because it did not explicitly guarantee that such actions would not be repeated in future.

69. Haym, Briefwechsel, 247–48, 252–53, 260–61.

70. Ibid., 260.

71. Ibid., 278.

72. Ibid., 279.

73. Equally with Catholics and democrats, the Junkers could never be Haym's friends—there is no hint that he ever considered that possibility. But even Junkers were better than socialists if worst came to worst. Haym was tepidly willing to consider an anti-socialist alliance with some Free Conservative elements (among whom after all were to be found many of his ex-liberal friends), in moments of danger. Haym, Briefwechsel, 299.

74. Rosenberg, “Introduction,” Briefwechsel, 16.

75. Ibid., 323 n., 324.

76. Ibid., 288, 313, 323–27; Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte, 731.

77. Haym, Briefwechsel, 323–24, 326.

78. Ibid., 313.

79. Ibid., 263, 267, 271–73, 298, 322, 327, 336–37.

80. It is also interesting to note that Haym, a great admirer of Lessing's Nathan the Wise, was a consistent supporter of Jewish Emancipation in Prussia and an opponent of the anti-Semitic Protestant preacher Stöcker. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 153; “Der preussische Landtag,” Preussische Jahrbücher 1 (1858): 199Google Scholar; “Thomas Babington Macaulay,” Preussische Jarhbücher 6 (1860): 361.Google Scholar

81. Haym, , “Mittheilungen,” Preussische Jahrbücher 2 (1858): 239–40Google Scholar; “Zur Tagesliteratur,” Preussische Jahrbücher 3 (1859): 496–99Google Scholar; Briefwechsel, 344.

82. Haym, Briefwechsel, 282.

83. Ibid., 283.

84. Haym, Aus meinem Leben, 303; Briefwechsel, 299–300.

85. Gall, Bismarck, 468–69.

86. Haym thus serves as a confirmation of this aspect of Nipperdey's argument in Deutsche Geschichte, 800. However, Nipperdey's contention (799) that liberalism's attitude to Bismarck was formed in the complete absence of any fears of the masses and the lower class is belied by Haym's continual concern throughout the Prussian constitutional conflict with just such questions.

87. In this light Haym is relevant to the contemporary debate over the nature of the 1867 constitution of the North German Confederation. Haym's favorable reaction to it must be counted in favor of Nipperdey's argument that the constitution was a true compromise between Bismarck and the liberals, versus Gall's contention that it was a victory for Bismarck over the liberals. Gall, Bismarck, 387, 389; Nipperdey, Deutsche Geschichte, 797.