It is
a curious fact that of that class of literature to which Munchausen
belongs, that namely of Voyages Imaginaires, the three great types
should have all been created in England. Utopia, Robinson Crusoe,
and Gulliver, illustrating respectively the philosophical, the
edifying, and the satirical type of fictitious travel, were all
written in England, and at the end of the eighteenth century a
fourth type, the fantastically mendacious, was evolved in this
country. Of this type Munchausen was the modern original, and
remains the classical example. The adaptability of such a species
of composition to local and topical uses might well be considered
prejudicial to its chances of obtaining a permanent place in
literature. Yet Munchausen has undoubtedly achieved such a place.
The Baron’s notoriety is universal, his character proverbial, and
his name as familiar as that of Mr. Lemuel Gulliver, or Robinson
Crusoe, mariner, of York. Condemned by the learned, like some other
masterpieces, as worthless, Munchausen’s travels have obtained such
a worldwide fame, that the story of their origin possesses a
general and historic interest apart from whatever of obscurity or
of curiosity it may have to recommend it.
The work first appeared in London
in the course of the year 1785. No copy of the first edition
appears to be accessible; it seems, however, to have been issued
some time in the autumn, and in the Critical Review for December
1785 there is the following notice: “Baron Munchausen’s Narrative
of his Marvellous Travels and Campaigns in Russia. Small 8vo, I.S.
(Smith). This is a satirical production calculated to throw
ridicule on the bold assertions of some parliamentary declaimers.
If rant may be best foiled at its own weapons, the author’s design
is not ill-founded; for the marvellous has never been carried to a
more whimsical and ludicrous extent.” The reviewer had probably
read the work through from one paper cover to the other. It was in
fact too short to bore the most blasé of his kind, consisting of
but forty-nine small octavo pages. The second edition, which is in
the British Museum, bears the following title; “Baron Munchausen’s
Narrative of his Marvellous Travels and Campaigns in Russia; humbly
dedicated and recommended to country gentlemen, and if they please
to be repeated as their own after a hunt, at horse races, in
watering places, and other such polite assemblies; round the bottle
and fireside. Smith. Printed at Oxford. 1786.” The fact that this
little pamphlet again consists of but forty-nine small octavo
pages, combined with the similarity of title (as far as that of the
first edition is given in the Critical Review), publisher, and
price, affords a strong presumption that it was identical with the
first edition. This edition contains only chapters II, III, IV, V
and VI (pp. 10–44) of the present reprint. These chapters are the
best in the book and their substantial if peculiar merit can hardly
be denied, but the pamphlet appears to have met with little
success, and early in 1786 Smith seems to have sold the property to
another bookseller, Kearsley. Kearsley had it enlarged, but not, we
are expressly informed, in the preface to the seventh edition, by
the hand of the original author (who happened to be in Cornwall at
the time). He also had it illustrated and brought it out in the
same year in book form at the enhanced price of two shillings,
under the title: “Gulliver Reviv’d: The Singular Travels,
Campaigns, Voyages and Sporting Adventures of Baron Munnikhouson
commonly pronounced Munchausen; as he relates them over a bottle
when surrounded by his friends. A new edition considerably enlarged
with views from the Baron’s drawings. London. 1786.” A
well-informed Critical Reviewer would have amended the title thus:
“Lucian reviv’d: or Gulliver Beat with his own Bow.”
Four editions now succeeded each
other with rapidity and without modification. A German translation
appeared in 1786 with the imprint London: it was, however, in
reality printed by Dieterich at Göttingen. It was a free rendering
of the fifth edition, the preface being a clumsy combination of
that prefixed to the original edition with that which Kearsley had
added to the third.
The fifth edition (which is, with
the exception of trifling differences on the title page, identical
with the third, fourth, and sixth) is also that which has been
followed in the present reprint down to the conclusion of chapter
twenty, where it ends with the words “the great quadrangle.” The
supplement treating of Munchausen’s extraordinary flight on the
back of an eagle over France to Gibraltar, South and North America,
the Polar Regions, and back to England is derived from the seventh
edition of 1793, which has a new subtitle:—“Gulliver reviv’d, or
the Vice of Lying properly exposed.” The preface to this enlarged
edition also informs the reader that the last four editions had met
with extraordinary success, and that the supplementary chapters,
all, that is, with the exception of chapters II, III, IV, V and VI,
which are ascribed to Baron Munchausen himself, were the production
of another pen, written, however, in the Baron’s manner. To the
same ingenious person the public was indebted for the engravings
with which the book was embellished. The seventh was the last
edition by which the classic text of Munchausen was seriously
modified. Even before this important consummation had been arrived
at, a sequel, which was within a fraction as long as the original
work (it occupies pp. 163–299 of this volume), had appeared under
the title, “A Sequel to the Adventures of Baron Munchausen. …
Humbly dedicated to Mr. Bruce the Abyssinian traveller, as the
Baron conceives that it may be some service to him, previous to his
making another journey into Abyssinia. But if this advice does not
delight Mr. Bruce, the Baron is willing to fight him on any terms
he pleases.” This work was issued separately. London, 1792,
8vo.
Such is the history of the book
during the first eight or constructive years of its existence,
beyond which it is necessary to trace it, until at least we have
touched upon the long-vexed question of its authorship.
Munchausen’s travels have in fact
been ascribed to as many different hands as those of Odysseus. But
(as in most other respects) it differs from the more ancient
fabulous narrative in that its authorship has been the subject of
but little controversy. Many people have entertained erroneous
notions as to its authorship, which they have circulated with
complete assurance; but they have not felt it incumbent upon them
to support their own views or to combat those of other people. It
has, moreover, been frequently stated with equal confidence and
inaccuracy that the authorship has never been settled. An early and
persistent version of the genesis of the travels was that they took
their origin from the rivalry in fabulous tales of three
accomplished students at Göttingen University, Bürger, Kästner, and
Lichtenberg; another ran that Gottfried August Bürger, the German
poet and author of Lenore, had at a later stage of his career met
Baron Munchausen in Pyrmont and taken down the stories from his own
lips. Percy in his anecdotes attributes the Travels to a certain
Mr. M. (Munchausen also began with an M) who was imprisoned at
Paris during the Reign of Terror. Southey in his Omniana
conjectured, from the coincidences between two of the tales and two
in a Portuguese periodical published in 1730, that the English
fictions must have been derived from the Portuguese. William West
the bookseller and numerous followers have stated that Munchausen
owed its first origin to Bruce’s Travels, and was written for the
purpose of burlesquing that unfairly treated work. Pierer boldly
stated that it was a successful anonymous satire upon the English
government of the day, while Meusel with equal temerity affirmed in
his Lexikon that the book was a translation of the “well-known
Munchausen lies” executed from a (nonexistent) German original by
Rudolph Erich Raspe. A writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1856
calls the book the joint production of Bürger and Raspe.
Of all the conjectures, of which
these are but a selection, the most accurate from a German point of
view is that the book was the work of Bürger, who was the first to
dress the Travels in a German garb, and was for a long time almost
universally credited with the sole proprietorship. Bürger himself
appears neither to have claimed nor disclaimed the distinction.
There is, however, no doubt whatever that the book first appeared
in English in 1785, and that Bürger’s German version did not see
the light until 1786. The first German edition (though in reality
printed at Göttingen) bore the imprint London, and was stated to be
derived from an English source; but this was, reasonably enough,
held to be merely a measure of precaution in case the actual Baron
Munchausen (who was a well-known personage in Göttingen) should be
stupid enough to feel aggrieved at being made the butt of a gross
caricature. In this way the discrepancy of dates mentioned above
might easily have been obscured, and Bürger might still have been
credited with a work which has proved a better protection against
oblivion than Lenore, had it not been for the officious
sensitiveness of his self-appointed biographer, Karl von Reinhard.
Reinhard, in an answer to an attack made upon his hero for bringing
out Munchausen as a potboiler in German and English simultaneously,
definitely stated in the Berlin Gesellschafters of November 1824,
that the real author of the original work was that disreputable
genius, Rudolph Erich Raspe, and that the German work was merely a
free translation made by Bürger from the fifth edition of the
English work. Bürger, he stated, was well aware of, but was too
high-minded to disclose the real authorship.
Taking Reinhard’s solemn
asseveration in conjunction with the ascertained facts of Raspe’s
career, his undoubted acquaintance with the Baron Munchausen of
real life and the first appearance of the work in 1785, when Raspe
was certainly in England, there seems to be little difficulty in
accepting his authorship as a positive fact. There is no difficulty
whatever, in crediting Raspe with a sufficient mastery of English
idiom to have written the book without assistance, for as early as
January 1780 (since which date Raspe had resided uninterruptedly in
this country) Walpole wrote to his friend Mason that “Raspe writes
English much above ill and speaks it as readily as French,” and
shortly afterwards he remarked that he wrote English “surprisingly
well.” In the next year, 1781, Raspe’s absolute command of the two
languages encouraged him to publish two moderately good
prose-translations, one of Lessing’s Nathan the Wise, and the other
of Zachariae’s mock-heroic, Tabby in Elysium. The erratic character
of the punctuation may be said, with perfect impartiality, to be
the only distinguishing feature of the style of the original
edition of Munchausen.
Curious as is this long history
of literary misappropriation, the chequered career of the rightful
author, Rudolph Erich Raspe, offers a chapter in biography which
has quite as many points of singularity.
Born in Hanover in 1737, Raspe
studied at the Universities of Göttingen and Leipsic. He is stated
also to have rendered some assistance to a young nobleman in sowing
his wild oats, a sequel to his university course which may possibly
help to explain his subsequent aberrations. The connection cannot
have lasted long, as in 1762, having already obtained reputation as
a student of natural history and antiquities, he obtained a post as
one of the clerks in the University Library at Hanover.
No later than the following year
contributions written in elegant Latin are to be found attached to
his name in the Leipsic Nova Acta Eruditorum. In 1764 he alluded
gracefully to the connection between Hanover and England in a piece
upon the birthday of Queen Charlotte, and having been promoted
secretary of the University Library at Göttingen, the young savant
commenced a translation of Leibniz’s philosophical works which was
issued in Latin and French after the original manuscripts in the
Royal Library at Hanover, with a preface by Raspe’s old college
friend Kästner (Göttingen, 1765). At once a courtier, an antiquary,
and a philosopher, Raspe next sought to display his vocation for
polite letters, by publishing an ambitious allegorical poem of the
age of chivalry, entitled Hermin and Gunilde, which was not only
exceedingly well reviewed, but received the honour of a parody
entitled Harlequin and Columbine. He also wrote translations of
several of the poems of Ossian, and a disquisition upon their
genuineness; and then with better inspiration he wrote a
considerable treatise on “Percy’s Reliques of Ancient Poetry,” with
metrical translations, being thus the first to call the attention
of Germany to these admirable poems, which were afterwards so
successfully ransacked by Bürger, Herder, and other early German
romanticists.
In 1767 Raspe was again advanced
by being appointed Professor at the Collegium Carolinum in Cassel,
and keeper of the landgrave of Hesse’s rich and curious collection
of antique gems and medals. He was shortly afterwards appointed
Librarian in the same city, and in 1771 he married. He continued
writing on natural history, mineralogy, and archæology, and in 1769
a paper in the 59th volume of the Philosophical Transactions, on
the bones and teeth of elephants and other animals found in North
America and various boreal regions of the world, procured his
election as an honorary member of the Royal Society of London. His
conclusion in this paper that large elephants or mammoths must have
previously existed in boreal regions has, of course, been
abundantly justified by later investigations. When it is added that
Raspe during this part of his life also wrote papers on lithography
and upon musical instruments, and translated Algarotti’s Treatise
on “Architecture, Painting, and Opera Music,” enough will have been
said to make manifest his very remarkable and somewhat prolix
versatility. In 1773 he made a tour in Westphalia in quest of
manuscripts, and on his return, by way of completing his education,
he turned journalist, and commenced a periodical called the Cassel
Spectator, with Mauvillon as his co-editor. In 1775 he was
travelling in Italy on a commission to collect articles of vertu
for the landgrave, and it was apparently soon after his return that
he began appropriating to his own use valuable coins abstracted
from the cabinets entrusted to his care. He had no difficulty in
finding a market for the antiques which he wished to dispose of,
and which, it has been charitably suggested, he had every intention
of replacing whenever opportunity should serve. His consequent
procedure was, it is true, scarcely that of a hardened criminal.
Having obtained the permission of the landgrave to visit Berlin, he
sent the keys of his cabinet back to the authorities at Cassel—and
disappeared. His thefts, to the amount of two thousand rixdollars,
were promptly discovered, and advertisements were issued for the
arrest of the Councillor Raspe, described without suspicion of
flattery as a long-faced man, with small eyes, crooked nose, red
hair under a stumpy periwig, and a jerky gait. The necessities that
prompted him to commit a felony are possibly indicated by the
addition that he usually appeared in a scarlet dress embroidered
with gold, but sometimes in black, blue, or grey clothes. He was
seized when he had got no farther than Klausthal, in the Hartz
mountains, but he lost no time in escaping from the clutches of the
police, and made his way to England. He never again set foot on the
continent.
He was already an excellent
English scholar, so that when he reached London it was not
unnatural that he should look to authorship for support. Without
loss of time, he published in London in 1776 a volume on some
German Volcanoes and their productions; in 1777 he translated the
then highly esteemed mineralogical travels of Ferber in Italy and
Hungary. In 1780 we have an interesting account of him from Horace
Walpole, who wrote to his friend, the Rev. William Mason: “There is
a Dutch sçavant come over who is author of several pieces so
learned that I do not even know their titles: but he has made a
discovery in my way which you may be sure I believe, for it proves
what I expected and hinted in my Anecdotes of Painting, that the
use of oil colours was known long before Van Eyck.” Raspe, he went
on to say, had discovered a MS. of Theophilus, a German monk in the
fourth century, who gave receipts for preparing the colours, and
had thereby convicted Vasari of error. “Raspe is poor, and I shall
try and get subscriptions to enable him to print his work, which is
sensible, clear, and unpretending.” Three months later it was,
“Poor Raspe is arrested by his tailor. I have sent him a little
money, and he hopes to recover his liberty, but I question whether
he will be able to struggle on here.” His “Essay on the Origin of
Oil Painting” was actually published through Walpole’s good service
in April 1781. He seems to have had plans of going to America and
of excavating antiquities in Egypt, where he might have done good
service, but the bad name that he had earned dogged him to London.
The Royal Society struck him off its rolls, and in revenge he is
said to have threatened to publish a travesty of their
transactions. He was doubtless often hard put to it for a living,
but the variety of his attainments served him in good stead. He
possessed or gained some reputation as a mining expert, and making
his way down into Cornwall, he seems for some years subsequent to
1782 to have been assay-master and storekeeper of some mines at
Dolcoath. While still at Dolcoath, it is very probable that he put
together the little pamphlet which appeared in London at the close
of 1785, with the title “Baron Munchausen’s Narrative of his
Marvellous Travels and Campaigns in Russia,” and having given his
jeu d’esprit to the world, and possibly earned a few guineas by it,
it is not likely that he gave much further thought to the matter.
In the course of 1785 or 1786, he entered upon a task of much
greater magnitude and immediate importance, namely, a descriptive
catalogue of the Collection of Pastes and Impressions from Ancient
and Modern Gems, formed by James Tassie, the eminent connoisseur.
Tassie engaged Raspe in 1785 to take charge of his cabinets, and to
commence describing their contents: he can hardly have been
ignorant of his employee’s delinquencies in the past, but he
probably estimated that mere casts of gems would not offer
sufficient temptation to a man of Raspe’s eclectic tastes to make
the experiment a dangerous one. Early in 1786, Raspe produced a
brief but well-executed conspectus of the arrangement and
classification of the collection, and this was followed in 1791 by
A Descriptive Catalogue, in which over fifteen thousand casts of
ancient and modern engraved gems, cameos, and intaglios from the
most renowned cabinets in Europe were enumerated and described in
French and English. The two quarto volumes are a monument of
patient and highly skilled industry, and they still fetch high
prices. The elaborate introduction prefixed to the work was dated
from Edinburgh, April 16, 1790.
This laborious task completed,
Raspe lost no time in applying himself with renewed energy to
mineralogical work. It was announced in the Scots Magazine for
October 1791 that he had discovered in the extreme north of
Scotland, where he had been invited to search for minerals, copper,
lead, iron, manganese, and other valuable products of a similar
character. From Sutherland he brought specimens of the finest clay,
and reported a fine vein of heavy spar and “every symptom of coal.”
But in Caithness lay the loadstone which had brought Raspe to
Scotland. This was no other than Sir John Sinclair of Ulbster, a
benevolent gentleman of an ingenious and inquiring disposition, who
was anxious to exploit the supposed mineral wealth of his barren
Scottish possessions. With him Raspe took up his abode for a
considerable time at his spray-beaten castle on the Pentland Firth,
and there is a tradition, among members of the family, of Sir
John’s unfailing appreciation of the wide intelligence and
facetious humour of Raspe’s conversation. Sinclair had some years
previously discovered a small vein of yellow mundick on the moor of
Skinnet, four miles from Thurso. The Cornish miners he consulted
told him that the mundick was itself of no value, but a good sign
of the proximity of other valuable minerals. Mundick, said they,
was a good horseman, and always rode on a good load. He now
employed Raspe to examine the ground, not designing to mine it
himself, but to let it out to other capitalists in return for a
royalty, should the investigation justify his hopes. The necessary
funds were put at Raspe’s disposal, and masses of bright, heavy
material were brought to Thurso Castle as a foretaste of what was
coming. But when the time came for the fruition of this golden
promise, Raspe disappeared, and subsequent inquiries revealed the
deplorable fact that these opulent ores had been carefully imported
by the mining expert from Cornwall, and planted in the places where
they were found. Sir Walter Scott must have had the incident
(though not Raspe) in his mind when he created the Dousterswivel of
his Antiquary. As for Raspe, he betook himself to a remote part of
the United Kingdom, and had commenced some mining operations in
country Donegal, when he was carried off by scarlet fever at
Muckross in 1794. Such in brief outline was the career of Rudolph
Erich Raspe, scholar, swindler, and undoubted creator of Baron
Munchausen.
The merit of Munchausen, as the
adult reader will readily perceive, does not reside in its literary
style, for Raspe is no exception to the rule that a man never has a
style worthy of the name in a language that he did not prattle in.
But it is equally obvious that the real and original Munchausen, as
Raspe conceived and doubtless intended at one time to develop him,
was a delightful personage whom it would be the height of absurdity
to designate a mere liar. Unfortunately the task was taken out of
his hand and a good character spoiled, like many another, by mere
sequel-mongers. Raspe was an impudent scoundrel, and fortunately
so; his impudence relieves us of any difficulty in resolving the
question—to whom (if anyone) did he owe the original conception of
the character whose fame is now so universal.
When Raspe was resident in
Göttingen he obtained, in all probability through Gerlach Adolph
von Munchausen, the great patron of arts and letters and of
Göttingen University, an introduction to Hieronynimus Karl
Friedrich von Munchausen, at whose hospitable mansion at
Bodenwerder he became an occasional visitor. Hieronynimus, who was
born at Bodenwerder on May 11, 1720, was a cadet of what was known
as the black line of the house of Rinteln Bodenwerder, and in his
youth served as a page in the service of Prince Anton Ulrich of
Brunswick. When quite a stripling he obtained a cornetcy in the
“Brunswick Regiment” in the Russian service, and on November 27,
1740, he was created a lieutenant by letters patent of the Empress
Anna, and served two arduous campaigns against the Turks during the
following years. In 1750 he was promoted to be a captain of
cuirassiers by the Empress Elizabeth, and about 1760 he retired
from the Russian service to live upon his patrimonial estate at
Bodenwerder in the congenial society of his wife and his paragon
among huntsmen, Rösemeyer, for whose particular benefit he
maintained a fine pack of hounds. He kept open house, and loved to
divert his guests with stories, not in the braggart vein of Dugald
Dalgetty, but so embellished with palpably extravagant lies as to
crack with a humour that was all their own. The manner has been
appropriated by Artemus Ward and Mark Twain, but it was invented by
Munchausen. Now the stories mainly relate to sporting adventures,
and it has been asserted by one contemporary of the baron that
Munchausen contracted the habit of drawing such a long bow as a
measure of self-defence against his invaluable but loquacious
henchman, the worthy Rösemeyer. But it is more probable, as is
hinted in the first preface, that Munchausen, being a shrewd man,
found the practice a sovereign specific against bores and all other
kinds of serious or irrelevant people, while it naturally endeared
him to the friends of whom he had no small number.
He told his stories with
imperturbable sangfroid, in a dry manner, and with perfect
naturalness and simplicity. He spoke as a man of the world, without
circumlocution; his adventures were numerous and perhaps singular,
but only such as might have been expected to happen to a man of so
much experience. A smile never traversed his face as he related the
least credible of his tales, which the less intimate of his
acquaintance began in time to think he meant to be taken seriously.
In short, so strangely entertaining were both manner and matter of
his narratives, that “Munchausen’s Stories” became a byword among a
host of appreciative acquaintance. Among these was Raspe, who years
afterwards, when he was starving in London, bethought himself of
the incomparable baron. He half remembered some of his sporting
stories, and supplemented these by gleanings from his own
commonplace book. The result is a curious medley, which testifies
clearly to learning and wit, and also to the turning over of musty
old books of facetiæ written in execrable Latin.
The story of the Baron’s horse
being cut in two by the descending portcullis of a besieged town,
and the horseman’s innocence of the fact until, upon reaching a
fountain in the midst of the city, the insatiate thirst of the
animal betrayed his deficiency in hind quarters, was probably
derived by Raspe from the Facetiæ Bebelianæ of Heinrich Bebel,
first published at Strassburgh in 1508.
There it is given as
follows:
“De Insigni Mendacio. Faber
clavicularius quem superius fabrum mendaciorum dixi, narravit se
tempore belli, credens suos se subsecuturos equitando ad cujusdam
oppidi portas penetrasse: et cum ad portas venisset cataractam
turre demissam, equum suum post ephippium discidisse, dimidiatumque
reliquisse, atque se media parte equi ad forum usque oppidi
equitasse, et caedem non modicam peregisse. Sed cum retrocedere
vellet multitudine hostium obrutus, tum demum equum cecidisse seque
captum fuisse.”