Читать книгу Ludwig the Second, King of Bavaria - Clara Tschudi - Страница 10

Table of Contents

We know that Schiller, from Ludwig’s childhood, had been his favourite poet. At Munich, as in all other theatres, the master’s works had hitherto only been given in an abridged form. But the “romanticist on the throne,” commanded that in his own theatre they should be played as the poet himself had intended. On the 18th of October 1865 Wilhelm Tell was performed for the first time in its original shape.

After this representation the King was taken with the desire to know the people and the country which Schiller had glorified in his work. Accompanied by his aide-de-camp, Prince Paul of Thurn and Taxis, he started on the 20th of October for Switzerland. In Lucerne, which he made his headquarters, he went to the hotel Schweizer Hof. His arrival being unannounced, and no one recognising him, he was given a room on the third floor. The consternation among the personnel of the establishment may be imagined when it became known the following day that it was the King of Bavaria who had been lodged so high up. The landlord, in dismay, hastened upstairs to make his apologies, and offered Ludwig the suite of rooms on the ground floor in which royal personages were usually accommodated. Ludwig declined the offer with his kindest smile, declaring that he was satisfied with his little room on the third floor, with its pretty view over the lake and mountains, and that he would not leave it.

From Lucerne he made excursions to places in the woodland cantons rich in legendary lore: to “Rütli” “Tells-Platte,” “Stauffachers Kapel,” to the Küsnach gorge, and several other places.

The hearts of the inhabitants went out to the handsome, enthusiastic youth. The Schwyzer Zeitung published after his departure some hearty words of appreciation and farewell. This he answered in an autograph letter which ran as follows:—

“Herr Redakteur!

“It was with the greatest pleasure that I read to-day the warm farewell from “William Tell’s” land, and I answer it from my heart.

“I send my greeting likewise to my dear friends in the forest cantons, for whom already as a child I had a particular affection.

“The recollection of my visit to the glorious interior of Switzerland and of the honest, free people, whom I pray God to protect, I shall always prize.

“With the kindest feelings, I am,

“Your gracious,

“Ludwig.

“Hohenschwangau, November the second, 1865.”

On his return home Ludwig invited Richard Wagner to visit him; and on the 10th of November the two friends were again together in the “Swan Castle.” It was intended to open at the beginning of the year 1866 the new school of music and dramatic art, with Hans von Bülow as Principal. Wagner had much upon his mind which he desired to ask of his royal friend, and was so satisfied with his stay at Hohenschwangau that after his return home he telegraphed to one of his adherents:

“The year 1866 is ours!”

Meanwhile there were forces working from different quarters to destroy the friendship between him and Ludwig. The Secretary and the Keeper of the Privy Purse, who had enjoyed the late King’s confidence for years, considered it to be their duty to counteract the tendency to extravagance which was showing itself in the young Sovereign. They received support from the numerous opponents of the poet-musician. The opposition grew into a perfect tumult; for the people, who could neither understand his relations with Ludwig nor his artistic objects, believed in the alarming pictures of him which his enemies sowed broadcast in words and writings. “Well-informed persons,” wrote the Volksbote, “affirm that Wagner within less than a year has cost the privy purse no less than a million and nine hundred thousand guldens. We do not vouch for the accuracy of the amount stated; but we may mention it as certain that Wagner some weeks ago once more demanded forty thousand guldens in order to satisfy his expensive habits. Herr von Pfistermeister has advised the Sovereign not to grant this new and excessive demand. As a result of this Richard Wagner has written in his anger a letter very far from polite to Herr von Pfistermeister; and finally he has in spite of everything received the sum he desired.” Ministers, Councillors of State, burgher representatives, all took part against him. Among the general public opinions were, however, somewhat divided. The following episode occurred in a railway train. A Catholic priest expressed disapproval of his Majesty for making so much of “Lutheran musicians.” To this a peasant who was sitting in the same carriage, replied: “I would rather see the King with musicians than with priests.”

The Secretary was looked upon by Wagner as the instigator of all the opposition the latter met with, and on many occasions he expressed himself in disparaging terms of this greatly respected man. In the other camp, on the contrary, Pfistermeister was greatly admired on account of the bold stand he was making against the inconsiderate demands of the master, the Conservative papers siding strongly with him.

On the 4th of December an address of confidence was laid out in the business houses of Munich for signature, which it was intended should be presented to Herr von Pfistermeister by a deputation. It also contained a request that he would continue to stand fast by the King’s side. Ludwig received official information of these facts, and at the same time it was made known to him how unpopular Wagner had made himself. On the 5th of December he moved from Hohenschwangau back to the Royal Palace at Munich. On the same day his mother, his great-uncle Prince Karl, Archbishop Scherr, and the Premier, Baron von der Pfordten, went to the Palace. In his capacity as Minister of the Royal Household, the latter handed him a memorandum in which he threatened to retire if Wagner did not leave Bavaria. Prince Karl gave forcible expression to the belief of the court that this friendship would have disastrous consequences. The police would no longer answer for the poet-composer’s safety. Lacqueys who were questioned let fall hints that a revolution might break out under the present condition of affairs.

The King had weak nerves, and was not a man of conspicuous bravery. Wagner’s violence and exactions had many times caused him difficulties. He felt himself, moreover, greatly hurt by the manner in which his name had been mixed up in the matter. The attacks of the press and the threats of his relations and councillors would hardly, however, have been sufficient to separate him from his friend, had not another reason been added to them: he had received incontrovertible proof that the poet-composer had a liaison with Frau Cosima von Bülow. These proofs, for which he was quite unprepared, made a far more painful impression on him than the meddling of his friends and the malicious fulminations of the press.

Schwärmerei was a prominent trait in his character, and he had fixed all his affections on Richard Wagner. The predominant feeling of the latter was primarily gratitude to his royal patron; but there is no doubt, judging by the letters and poems from his hand, that he also cherished very great sympathy for the gifted youth. But Ludwig was of a jealous nature. He wished to be loved for his own sake; and he wished to possess his friend alone. The connection with Frau von Bülow, therefore, became a source of bitter and continual disappointment to him. The same day that he ascertained the fact with certainty, he sent the Premier a document in which he made known his desire that Wagner should at once leave Munich. “I will,” he said on this occasion, “show my dear people that their confidence in, and love for, me stands higher than any other consideration.” To von Lutz, later his Minister, was allotted the task of verbally informing Wagner of the decision which had been taken with regard to him. The same evening he visited the Hof Theater with the Queen-mother. Instead of the warm welcome he was in the habit of receiving when he had been absent for some time, a murmur of displeasure was heard. He thought to see in this a confirmation of the current of public feeling. The following morning he sent Wagner an autograph letter, which ran as follows:—

“My dear Friend,

“Greatly as it pains me, I must ask you to comply with the wish I expressed yesterday through my secretary. Believe me, I was obliged to act thus! My affection for you will last for ever. I ask you, also, always to keep your friendship for me. It is with a good conscience that I dare say that I am worthy of it. … Who has the right to part us? … I know that you feel as I do, that you can perfectly measure my deep sorrow. I could not act otherwise, be convinced of this! Never doubt the faithfulness of your greatest friend. … It is not for ever.

“To death,

“Your faithful,

“Ludwig.”

Even before the official organ of the Government had announced this sensational banishment, the news had been disseminated with lightning rapidity. The 8th of December was a holiday. Nevertheless, a meeting of magistrates was convened to discuss the propriety of sending a deputation to the King, to express the city’s thanks. The debate was protracted and sharp; it was finally agreed that the deputation should not be sent. Nor did a torchlight procession which had been thought of, take place.

While the Clerical and some of the Liberal papers were overjoyed at Ludwig’s action, the Progressive organ observed that “the august relatives, members of the nobility, and officials of Church and State who had informed the King of the prevailing condition of public feeling had been incorrect in their statements. Wagner’s presence had done nothing to alarm the people, and had in no way diminished their love of the King. Wagner’s person had had nothing whatever to do with the internal affairs of the country, and with the efforts of the Progressive party.”

On the 10th of December the master left Munich. Despite the cold of winter and the dark early morning hour, the railway station was filled with people anxious to see him and bid him good-bye. Ludwig had sent him a last farewell letter, brimming over with sorrow:

“My precious tenderly loved Friend,

“Words cannot express the pain gnawing at my heart. Whatever it is possible to do to refute the abominable newspaper accounts shall be done. That it should have come to this! Our ideals shall be faithfully cultivated—I need hardly tell you this. Let us write often and much to one another. I ask it of you! We know each other, and we will not give up the friendship which binds us. For the sake of your peace I had to act as I have done.

“Do not misjudge me, not for a moment; it would be the pangs of hell to me. … Success to my most beloved friend! May his works flourish. A hearty greeting with my whole soul from

“Your faithful,

“Ludwig.”

Wagner went to Switzerland and took up his abode there.

Neither the King nor his advisers thought that the banishment would be for ever. The poet-musician did, indeed, return to Munich, on visits of short duration, but he never stayed there again for any length of time. The good relations between him and Ludwig were never broken, and the gallant Monarch continued to hold his protecting hand over him. He worked zealously for the inauguration of the Wagner Theatre at Bayreuth, and the royal pension was paid without reduction out of the privy purse until the death of Wagner in 1883. Frau Cosima, however, who had been one of the causes of the friends’ separation, was unable to congratulate herself on any favour whatsoever; she might not have existed as far as the ruler of Bavaria was concerned. As a widow she sought an audience of him, to thank him for the proofs of affection he had shown her husband. Ludwig refused to receive her. “I do not know any Frau Cosima Wagner,” he said coldly.

Although he had voluntarily sent the master away, and although, as we have seen, other reasons than the voice of opinion had influenced his decision, Ludwig never forgave the citizens of Munich for the part they had taken in disturbing a friendship which had been the source to him of so much consolation and pleasure. The aversion which he showed the capital on many later occasions was first awakened by this circumstance. The severance not only left behind it a profound feeling of loneliness, but also, in his sensitive heart, a bitterness which boded ill for the future.

“His too great love for me,” wrote Wagner, on the 26th of December 1865, to Frau Wille, “made him blind to other connections, and therefore he was easily disappointed. He knows nobody, and it is only now that he is learning to know people. Still I hope for him. As I am sure of his enduring affection, so I believe in the development of his splendid qualities. All he requires is to learn to know a few more people. He will then rapidly learn to do the right thing.”

On the 1st of July 1867 he wrote in a letter to Malvida von Meysenburg:

“The only thing that kept me back in Munich was affection for my friend, for whose sake I have suffered more than for any other person. … I have saved him, and still hope that I have kept in him one of my best works for the world.”

Among Wagner’s contemporaries there were but few who were disposed to share his belief that he had saved the young King. On the contrary, public opinion affirmed that it was he who had given Ludwig a taste for the nocturnal life which entirely undermined his nervous system, and that by his exaggerated poems of homage he had laid the foundation of the megalomania which later developed in him. At the time of Ludwig’s death it was even declared that this friend was concerned in the tragedy of the Starnberger See. The latter is, of course, an unproved and improvable affirmation. With quite as much reason might it be said that Ludwig II.—morbid as he was—had need of some person who by the power of music could soothe him in his suffering condition. Certain it is that from the day when the separation from Richard Wagner took place the King’s spirit became less, and his life more joyless than it had been before.

It has also been thought that Wagner meddled in the guidance of political affairs. This, however, is incorrect. There were, indeed, many who credited him with an all-powerful influence over the King, and he himself mentions this in a letter to a friend: “I pass for a favourite who can bring everything about. The other day even a murderess’s relations addressed themselves to me!” It is also said that, at the time when war seemed to be imminent between Prussia and Austria, an endeavour was made through Wagner to induce Ludwig to remain neutral. All, however, who are in a position to know, are agreed that in the fulfilment of his duties as a ruler the young Monarch never allowed himself to be influenced by him. Wagner has on countless occasions declared that he never talked politics with the King, because the latter had forbidden him to do so. When he touched upon a topic which might in any way have led the conversation into this channel, Ludwig would gaze up at the ceiling and whistle, as a sign that he did not desire a continuation of the subject.

Finally, in summing up the relations between the two friends, it must not be forgotten that, after Wagner’s genius, it is to the affection of the Bavarian King for him that the world owes to-day the possession of the Meistersinger, Der Ring, and Parsifal. His help at a time when it was most needed, gave back to the master his strength and courage. Ludwig’s magnificent generosity enabled him to create these new and glorious works. Moreover, the royal protection did much further to attract attention to Wagner and to the music of the future. His enthusiastic admiration for the composer of Rienzi, Der Fliegende Holländer, Tannhäuser, Lohengrin, Tristan und Isolde, and the above-mentioned operas, has caused the name of Ludwig II. to be honourably connected with the history of music.

Little more than twenty years have passed since his death, in the year 1886. But the prophetic words which he uttered on the 4th of August 1865, in a letter to Richard Wagner, have become reality. “When we two are no more, our work will serve as a shining model for posterity. It will delight centuries. And hearts will glow with enthusiasm for the art which is from God, and is everlasting.”