Urania, Aarbog for 1845
URANIA
Aarbog for 1845
udgiven af
NICOLAUS NOTABENE
KJØBENHAVN
FAAES HOS UNIVERSITETSBOGHANDLER C. A. REITZEL
TRYKT I BIANCO LUNOS BOGTRYKKERI
En Nytaarsgave, tilegnet med dybeste Ærbødighed den meest lærde og mangesidige Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg, han, som har viist os Himlene.
White boards, gold ornament: a single stylized comet trailing across the front, its tail forming the letters U-R-A-N-I-A. Thick paper, every page framed by a black mourning rule — kept from the previous volume, for the editor saw no reason to alter what had been so warmly received. The gilt edges have been deepened a shade. A silk ribbon of midnight blue is bound in, that the volume may hang from the Christmas tree without indignity. The price is set at four Rigsdaler, which the editor regards as modest given the elegance of the production and the immortality of the contents.
FORTALE
Det er nu meer end et Aar siden, at Kjøbenhavns dannede Publikum modtog af Professor Heibergs Haand hiint uforlignelige Bind, hvori Himlene saa at sige aabnedes over os, og vi bleve belærte om, at vor Jord indtager en høist agtbar Stilling blandt Planeterne. Siden den Time har jeg levet i en Tilstand af bævende Forventning; thi det laae i Sagens Natur, at hvad der saa lykkeligt var begyndt, ikke kunde lades at forblive et Brudstykke, og at Professoren, hvis Kræfter ere lige store til ethvert Foretagende, i sin Tid vilde levere Fortsættelsen.
Professoren har imidlertid tiet. Ikke, jeg skynder mig at tilføie, i nogen uværdig Forstand; thi en stor Mands Tavshed er selv en Belæring til hans Samtidige, og man lærer af hans Pauser, hvad ringere Mænd forgjeves arbeide paa at meddele i deres Udsagn. Dog tilstaaer jeg, at som Maanederne skred frem, en vis Ængstelse begyndte at gribe mig — ikke for min egen Skyld, thi hvad er jeg, men paa Videnskabens Vegne, der havende modtaget en saa fornem Recrut med Føie maatte frygte, at dens nyeste Forsker skulde drages bort af andre Krav.
Jeg vil være aabenhjertig. Der existere i vor By visse Rygter, visse Hvisken, om at Professoren paa det Sidste er bleven seet i Samtale med Theologer, og at hans Blik, fordum saa stadigt fæstet opad, er begyndt at sænke sig mod Dogmets og Lærens Anliggender. Jeg fæster ikke Lid til disse Rygter; jeg nævner dem alene for at affærdige dem. Men selve den Omstændighed, at de kunde opstaae, har bestemt mig til at forberede nærværende Bind, i det beskedne Haab, at jeg ved at fremlægge for Professoren en Fortsættelse af hans astronomiske Arbeider — en Fortsættelse ikke fra hans Pen, men tilstrækkelig til at minde ham om hans Kald — kunde lokke ham mildt tilbage til hiin Himmelhvælving, hvorfra vor Tid saa daarligt kan undvære ham.
Saadan er nærværende Bindes Hensigt. Saadan dets Forventning. Jeg smigrer mig ikke med, at jeg har skrevet, hvad Professoren vilde have skrevet; det vilde være en Formastelse, hvortil end ikke min Dumhed strækker sig. Jeg har skrevet, snarere, hvad en ydmyg Beundrer skriver, naar han frygter, at Mesteren maa være bleven træt af sin egen Hæder og fristes til at søge en ny i et Qvarteer, hvor den ikke er at finde.
Jeg beder om Læserens Overbærenhed. Bindet indeholder Intet originalt. Hver Tanke i det er laant; hver Skikkelse er en Speiling. Men ogsaa Maanen lyser ved laant Lys, og Ingen har endnu klaget over Maanen.
Nicolaus Notabene Kjøbenhavn, St. Lucii Dag, 1844
It is now more than a year since the cultured public of Copenhagen received from Professor Heiberg's hand that incomparable volume in which the heavens were, so to speak, opened above us, and we were taught that our Earth occupies a most respectable position among the planets. Since that hour I have lived in a state of trembling expectation; for it stood to reason that what had been so happily begun could not be permitted to remain a fragment, and that the Professor, whose powers are equal to every undertaking, would in due course furnish the continuation.
The Professor has, however, been silent. Not, I hasten to add, in any unworthy sense; for the silence of a great man is itself an instruction to his contemporaries, and one learns from his pauses what lesser men labour in vain to communicate in their utterances. Yet I confess that as the months wore on, a certain anxiety began to take hold of me — not on my own account, for what am I, but on behalf of the science itself, which having received so distinguished a recruit might reasonably fear that its newest investigator should be drawn away by other claims.
I shall be candid. There exist in our city certain rumours, certain whispers, that the Professor has of late been observed in conversation with theologians, and that his glance, formerly fixed so steadfastly upward, has begun to descend toward matters of dogma and doctrine. I do not credit these rumours; I mention them only to dismiss them. But the very fact that they could arise has determined me to prepare the present volume, in the modest hope that by placing before the Professor a continuation of his astronomical labours — a continuation not from his pen, but adequate enough to remind him of his calling — I might recall him gently to the firmament from which the present age can so ill afford to lose him.
Such is the Hensigt of this volume. Such is its Forventning. I do not flatter myself that I have written what the Professor would have written; that would be a presumption of which not even my dumhed is capable. I have written, rather, what a humble admirer writes when he is afraid that the master may have grown weary of his own glory and may be tempted to seek a new one in a quarter where it is not to be found.
I beg the reader's indulgence. The volume contains nothing original. Every thought in it is borrowed; every figure is a reflection. But the moon also shines by borrowed light, and no one has yet complained of the moon.
Nicolaus Notabene Copenhagen, the feast of St. Lucia, 1844
INDHOLD
I. Det astrologiske Aar, ved Udgiveren
II. Sjelevandring: et apokalyptisk Digt, ved Udgiveren
III. Husmoderens Stjernekiger — Uddrag af en forestaaende Hverdags-Novelle af Forfatterinden til En Hverdags-Historie
IV. Stjerne-Calender for 1845, med Horoscoper for hver af de speculative Tænkere i Kongeriget
V. Sendebrev fra et fjernt stjernekyndigt Folk, med den astronomiske Gaade vedføiet
Efterskrift af Udgiveren
I. Det astrologiske Aar, by the editor
II. Sjelevandring: et apokalyptisk Digt, by the editor
III. Husmoderens Stjernekiger — extract from a forthcoming domestic novel by the author of En Hverdags-Historie
IV. Stjerne-Calender for 1845, med Horoscoper for hver af de speculative Tænkere i Kongeriget
V. Sendebrev fra et fjernt stjernekyndigt Folk, with the astronomical riddle appended
Efterskrift af Udgiveren
I. DET ASTROLOGISKE AAR
§ 1. Indledning
Det astronomiske Aar bestaaer, som Professor Heiberg har viist os med hiin Klarhed, der alene er hans blandt vor Nations Forfattere, i de himmelske Legemers ordnede Omløb efter Love, som det menneskelige Sind, rettelig disciplineret, er i Stand til at fatte. Det er et Aar af Former. Det astrologiske Aar, der udgjør nærværende Fortsættelses Gjenstand, er et Aar af Betydninger. Hvorvidt det andet er høiere end det første, eller det første høiere end det andet, eller hvorvidt de ere medierede i en høiere Eenhed, overlader jeg til dem, der ere bedre qualificerede end jeg selv til at afgjøre. Jeg nøies med den Bemærkning, at Professoren, der saa mesterligt har optegnet Himlenes at, sikkerlig maa ønske at see deres hvad udforsket af Hænder mindre dygtige end hans egne, i den Tillid, at han omsider vil tage Værket op og bringe det til Fuldendelse.
§ 2. Om Saturns Indflydelse paa det speculative Temperament
Det er bemærket fra de ældste Tider, at de, der ere fødte under Saturn, ere tilbøielige til Melancholie, til Dybsindighed og til System-Bygning. Den Tidsalder, hvori vi leve, værende eminent en saturnisk Tidsalder, kan det ikke undre, at Systemer formere sig blandt os som Stjernerne selv. Ja, vilde man udfærdige en Liste over alle de Systemer, der nylig ere blevne bekjendtgjorte i Kjøbenhavn — det logiske System, det æsthetiske System, det ethiske System, det dogmatiske System, og Systemet tout court — vilde man iagttage en paafaldende Overeensstemmelse med Saturns Hovedconjunctioner gjennem det forløbne Decennium. Dette er en Sag, hvorom jeg vilde modtage Professorens modne Dom med Glæde.
Jeg har tilladt mig en lille Undersøgelse paa egen Haand i denne Forbindelse. Idet jeg har taget de Datoer, paa hvilke Systemer ere blevne bekjendtgjorte i vor Litteratur (ikke de Datoer, paa hvilke de ere blevne fuldendte, eftersom intet System endnu er bleven fuldendt og Datamaterialet derfor vilde mangle), og sammenholdt dem med Ephemeriderne for de tilsvarende Aar, har jeg til min egen Tilfredshed fastslaaet, at Bekjendtgjørelser af Systemer samle sig tæt om Saturns Perihelium og falde aldeles bort under dens Aphelium. Følgen er klar: det er ikke Philosophen, der frembringer Systemet, men Saturn, der frembringer Philosophen. Naar Planeten er nær, bekjendtgjøre Mænd; naar den er fjern, tie Mænd og forberede sig. Kongeriget nærmer sig for Tiden et Perihelium, hvilket forklarer den usædvanlige Tæthed af Bekjendtgjørelser i Intelligensbladene gjennem de sidste atten Maaneder. Jeg havde haabet at fremlægge dette Fund som et Bidrag til et af vore lærde Tidsskrifter, men jeg er bleven underrettet af min Hustru om, at Sagen er for speculativ for Familiens Pung, og jeg nedlægger den derfor for Professoren i denne mindre forpligtende Form.
§ 3. Om Mercurs Indflydelse paa den litterære Critiker
Mercur, Budbringeren, Tidendens Bærer, Skytspatronen for dem, der ile fra Huus til Huus — hvilken Stjerne kunde bedre præsidere over den litterære Anmelders Embede? Under Mercur skriver man Anmeldelser; under Mercur tæller man Stemmer; under Mercur fastslaaer man, ved en Slags himmelsk Telegraphie, hvad Publikum har afgjort, førend Publikum har havt Leilighed til at læse. Tidsalderen har været venlig mod Mercurs Børn. Det er maaskee under den samme Stjerne, at nærværende Bind tilbydes, eftersom ogsaa jeg er en Slags Budbringer, der bringer Tidende til Professoren om hans eget vedvarende Værk.
Det fortjener dog at bemærkes, at Mercur er den hurtigste af Planeterne, og at hans Børn dele hans Hast. En Anmelder, født under Mercur, vil frembringe sin Anmeldelse, førend Bogen er bleven trykt, ja vil frembringe sin Anmeldelse, førend Bogen er bleven undfanget, eftersom en Hastighed af denne Orden fordrer, at Aarsagen følger frem for at gaa forud for Virkningen. Jeg har iagttaget dette Phænomen gjentagne Gange i vor daglige Presses Spalter og er kommen til at betragte det ikke som en Mangel, men som en Opfyldelse af den planetariske Natur. At klage over, at en mercurial Anmelder ikke har læst Bogen, er at klage over, at Mercur bevæger sig hurtigt — en Indvending, som Planeten, om den kunde høre, vilde modtage med berettiget Foragt.
§ 4. Om den metoscopiske Kunst, og dens Anvendelse paa den Hegelianske Pande
Den metoscopiske Kunst læser Pandens Linier. Det er en ædel Kunst, gammel og agtværdig, og ikke at forvexle med Lavaters grovere Physiognomik. Den Hegelianske Pande fremstiller for det metoscopiske Blik et Phænomen af enestaaende Interesse: tre vandrette Linier, af hvilke den øverste betyder Sein, den midterste Nichts, og den nederste Werden. Forholdet mellem disse tre Linier, og Vinklerne, hvorunder de sænke sig mod Tindingerne, tillade en øvet Iagttager med eet Blik at adskille mellem en Hegelianer af Høire og en Hegelianer af Venstre, og mellem dem, der have forstaaet Mesteren, og dem, der ere gaaede ud over ham.
Panden af den, der er gaaet ud over Hegel, fremviser en fjerde Linie, svagere end de tre andre, beliggende ovenfor Sein-Linien og hældende lidt mod høire. Denne fjerde Linie er Hindenfor-Linien, og dens Tilstedeværelse er det sikreste Tegn paa en Tænker, der har udført Operationen. Linien er imidlertid saa svag, at den ikke kan opdages uden Brugen af en stærk Lampe holdt i en skraa Vinkel, og selv da er der nogen Fare for at forvexle den med en Rynke frembragt af almindelig Eftertænksomhed. Flere af mit Bekjendtskab, undersøgte under disse Vilkaar, ere blevne fundne i Besiddelse af Linien, men Sagen vedbliver at være omstridt, eftersom enhver af dem nægter den om de andre.
Jeg tilstaaer, at min egen Pande, undersøgt i Speilet, kun fremviser en eneste uregelmæssig Fure, hvilken min Hustru har forsikret mig betyder Intet. Jeg har ikke trængt videre paa Undersøgelsen, af Frygt for hvad en mere kyndig Metoscop maatte finde.
§ 5. Om Chiromantik
En Tænkers Haand er meer veltalende end hans Mund. I Professor Heibergs Haand, vilde han skjenke mig den Forret af en Undersøgelse, vilde jeg vente at finde Apollos Linie krydse Mercurs Linie paa et Punkt, som den chiromantiske Tradition betegner som den anden Carrieres Sæde. Dette er det Punkt, hvor en Mand, havende vundet Mesterskab i een Kunst, kaldes til at paatage sig en anden. Jeg formaster mig ikke til at sige hvilken Kunst der er angivet; Linierne tale for sig selv til dem, der kunne læse dem. Jeg vil alene bemærke, at i den chiromantiske Litteratur er intet Tilfælde optegnet af en tredie Carriere føiet til den anden, hvilket lover godt for Professorens astronomiske Forpligtelsers Varighed.
Der er et videre Punkt, hvorom de chiromantiske Autoriteter ere enige: at Jupiters Bjerg, beliggende under Pegefingeren, svulmer hos dem, der ere bestemte til at administrere en litterær Republik. I Professor Heibergs Haand maa dette Bjerg nødvendigvis være usædvanligt fremtrædende, eftersom han har administreret vor i over to Decennier. Læseren vil paaskjønne, at jeg taler om Sagen kun ved Slutning, da jeg aldrig har havt den Ære at undersøge den paagjeldende Haand, men Slutningen er saa sikker, at ingen Undersøgelse fordres for at fastslaa den.
Et videre Bjerg, Saturns, siges at angive Tilbøieligheden til Melancholie og til Affattelsen af Afhandlinger, der ikke ville blive fuldendte. Læseren maa raadføre sin egen Haandflade i denne Forbindelse. Jeg har raadført min og fundet Bjerget næsten ganske fraværende — en Omstændighed, der, medens den disqualificerer mig fra Affattelsen af Afhandlinger, lader mig staae frit til at skrive Forord, og er derfor ikke at beklage.
§ 6. Om Necromantik, med alle behørige Forbehold
Den Kunst at raadspørge de Døde er en, hvorved jeg berører Sagen med den største Tøven, og kun fordi nærværende Afhandlings Fuldstændighed fordrer det. Jeg skal Intet sige om practiske Procedurer. Jeg skal alene bemærke, at vilde man fremmane Tycho Brahes Skygge, hiin store Dansker, hvis Grav i Prag vi alle beklage ikke at kunne besøge, kunde man spørge ham, hvorvidt det Værk, han begyndte paa Hven, er blevet fortsat i den Aand, hvori han ledede det. Svaret, formoder jeg, vilde være jaaende; thi Tycho var ædelmodig og vilde ikke ønske at gjøre en levende Collega Forlegenhed.
Der er en videre Betragtning. De Døde, naar de tale, tale i det Sprog, de brugte, da de levede. For at raadspørge Tycho maa man derfor beherske et vist humanistisk Latin, hvori den moderne speculative Terminologie ikke lader sig oversætte uden Tab. Ordet Mediation, for Exempel, finder ingen exact Ækvivalent i Tychos Idiom og maatte gjengives ved en Omskrivelse af nogen Længde. Dette er en Vanskelighed, jeg anbefaler til Opmærksomhed hos de af mine Samtidige, der indbilde sig, at den nærværende Tidsalders dybere Sandheder allerede vare i de Gamles Besiddelse. De Gamle besad mange Sandheder, men de besad ikke vor Terminologie, og en Sandhed uden sin Terminologie er, i nærværende Tidsalder, kun en halv Sandhed.
§ 7. Om Horoscopie, til Slutning
Enhver Fødsel skeer under en Stjerne. Ethvert Foretagende sættes i Værk paa en Time. Nærværende Bindes Horoscop, opslaaet med saadan Færdighed som jeg besidder, angiver et langt Liv og en bred Udbredelse blandt de Dannede, med en særlig Yndest fra dem af saturnisk Temperament. Dets Tilegneds Horoscop angiver mange Aar af astronomisk Arbeide endnu at komme og en absolut Uvillie til at tage andre Sager op. Maatte Stjernerne være sande.
Jeg tilføier kun dette. Skulde Læseren finde nærværende Afhandling manglende videnskabelig Strenghed, beder jeg ham overveie, at Astrologi, Chiromantik, Metoscopik og Necromantik ikke ere Videnskaber i moderne Forstand, men Kunster, og at en Kunsts rette Maal ikke er dens Sandhed, men dens Brug. Brugen af nærværende Kunst er at holde vore største Sind lykkeligt beskjæftigede, paa det at de ikke skulle fristes til Beskæftigelser, hvor deres Gaver vilde være mindre frugtbart anvendte. Efter dette Maal, vover jeg at fremsætte, har Afhandlingen lykkedes, førend den er begyndt.
§ 1. Indledning
The astronomical year, as Professor Heiberg has shown us with that lucidity which is his alone among the writers of our nation, consists in the orderly revolution of the heavenly bodies according to laws which the human mind, properly disciplined, is capable of grasping. It is a year of forms. The astrological year, which forms the subject of the present continuation, is a year of meanings. Whether the second is higher than the first, or the first higher than the second, or whether they are mediated in a higher unity, I leave to those better qualified than myself to determine. I shall content myself with the observation that the Professor, having so masterfully traced the that of the heavens, must surely wish to see the what explored by hands less able than his own, in the confidence that he will at length take up the work and bring it to completion.
§ 2. Of the influence of Saturn upon the speculative temperament
It has been observed since the most ancient times that those born under Saturn are inclined to melancholy, to depth, and to the construction of systems. The age in which we live being eminently a Saturnine age, it is not to be wondered at that systems multiply among us as the stars themselves. Indeed, if one were to draw up a list of all the systems lately announced in Copenhagen — the logical system, the aesthetic system, the ethical system, the dogmatic system, and the system tout court — one would observe a striking correspondence with the major conjunctions of Saturn over the past decade. This is a subject upon which I should welcome the Professor's mature judgment.
I have permitted myself a small inquiry of my own in this connection. Taking the dates upon which systems have been announced in our literature (not those upon which they have been completed, since no system has yet been completed and the data would therefore be wanting) and comparing them with the Ephemerides for the corresponding years, I have established to my own satisfaction that announcements of systems cluster densely about the perihelion of Saturn, and fall off entirely during its aphelion. The implication is plain: it is not the philosopher who produces the system, but Saturn who produces the philosopher. When the planet is near, men announce; when it is far, men keep silence and prepare. The kingdom is at present approaching a perihelion, which accounts for the unusual density of announcements in Intelligensbladene during the past eighteen months. I had hoped to present this finding as a contribution to one of our learned journals, but I am informed by my wife that the matter is too speculative for the family purse, and I therefore lay it before the Professor in this less binding form.
§ 3. Of the influence of Mercury upon the literary critic
Mercury, the messenger, the carrier of news, the patron of those who go quickly from house to house — what star could better preside over the office of the literary reviewer? Under Mercury one writes notices; under Mercury one counts the votes; under Mercury one establishes, by a kind of celestial telegraphy, what the public has decided before the public has had the opportunity to read. The age has been kind to the children of Mercury. It is perhaps under the same star that the present volume is offered, since I too am a kind of messenger, bearing tidings to the Professor of his own continuing work.
It deserves to be noted, however, that Mercury is the swiftest of the planets, and that his children share his haste. A reviewer born under Mercury will produce his review before the book has been printed, indeed will produce his review before the book has been conceived, since speed of this order requires that the cause follow rather than precede the effect. I have observed this phenomenon repeatedly in the columns of our daily press, and have come to regard it not as a defect but as a fulfilment of the planetary nature. To complain that a Mercurial reviewer has not read the book is to complain that Mercury moves quickly — an objection which the planet, if it could hear, would receive with justifiable contempt.
§ 4. Of the metoscopic art, and its application to the Hegelian forehead
The metoscopic art reads the lines of the forehead. It is a noble art, ancient and respectable, and not to be confused with the cruder physiognomy of Lavater. The Hegelian forehead presents to the metoscopic gaze a phenomenon of singular interest: three horizontal lines, of which the uppermost signifies Sein, the middle Nichts, and the lowest Werden. The relations among these three lines, and the angles at which they descend toward the temples, permit a trained observer to distinguish at a glance between a Hegelian of the right and a Hegelian of the left, and between those who have understood the master and those who have gone beyond him.
The forehead of one who has gone beyond Hegel presents a fourth line, fainter than the other three, situated above the line of Sein and inclining slightly to the right. This fourth line is the line of going beyond, and its presence is the surest sign of a thinker who has accomplished the operation. The line is, however, so faint that it cannot be detected without the use of a strong lamp held at an oblique angle, and even then there is some danger of confusing it with a wrinkle produced by ordinary cogitation. Several of my acquaintance, examined under these conditions, have been found to possess the line, but the matter remains in dispute, since each of them denies it of the others.
I confess that my own forehead, examined in the glass, displays only a single irregular furrow, which my wife has assured me signifies nothing. I have not pressed the inquiry, for fear of what a more skilled metoscopist might find.
§ 5. Of chiromancy
The hand of a thinker is more eloquent than his mouth. In the hand of Professor Heiberg, were he to grant me the privilege of an examination, I would expect to find the line of Apollo crossing the line of Mercury at a point which the chiromantic tradition designates as the seat of the second career. This is the point at which a man, having attained mastery in one art, is summoned to undertake another. I do not presume to say which art is indicated; the lines speak for themselves to those who can read them. I will only observe that in the chiromantic literature, no instance is recorded of a third career being added to the second, which augurs well for the permanence of the Professor's astronomical commitments.
There is a further point upon which the chiromantic authorities are agreed: that the Mount of Jupiter, situated beneath the index finger, swells in those who are destined to administer a literary republic. In Professor Heiberg's hand this mount must necessarily be unusually pronounced, since he has administered ours for upwards of two decades. The reader will appreciate that I speak of the matter only in conjecture, never having had the honour of examining the hand in question, but the inference is so secure that no examination is required to establish it.
A further mount, that of Saturn, is said to indicate the inclination toward melancholy and toward the writing of treatises which will not be completed. The reader may consult his own palm in this connection. I have consulted mine and have found the mount almost entirely absent — a circumstance which, while it disqualifies me from the writing of treatises, leaves me at liberty to write prefaces, and is therefore not to be lamented.
§ 6. Of necromancy, with all due reservations
The art of consulting the dead is one upon which I touch with the greatest hesitation, and only because the completeness of the present treatise demands it. I shall say nothing of practical procedures. I shall observe only that if one were to summon the shade of Tycho Brahe, that great Dane whose tomb in Prague we all lament not being able to visit, one might inquire of him whether the work he began at Hven has been continued in the spirit in which he conducted it. The answer, I conjecture, would be in the affirmative; for Tycho was a noble, and would not wish to embarrass a living colleague.
There is a further consideration. The dead, when they speak, speak in the language they used when living. To consult Tycho one must therefore command a certain humanist Latin, into which the modern speculative terminology does not translate without loss. The word Mediation, for example, finds no exact equivalent in Tycho's idiom, and would have to be rendered by a circumlocution of some length. This is a difficulty I commend to the attention of those of my contemporaries who imagine that the deeper truths of the present age were already in the possession of the ancients. The ancients possessed many truths, but they did not possess our terminology, and a truth without its terminology is, in the present age, only half a truth.
§ 7. Of horoscopy, in conclusion
Every birth occurs under a star. Every undertaking is launched at an hour. The horoscope of the present volume, cast with such skill as I possess, indicates a long life and a wide circulation among the cultured, with a particular favour from those of Saturnine temperament. The horoscope of its dedicatee indicates many years of astronomical labour yet to come, and an absolute indisposition to take up other matters. May the stars be true.
I add only this. If the reader should find the present treatise wanting in scientific rigour, I beg him to consider that astrology, chiromancy, metoscopy, and necromancy are not sciences in the modern sense, but arts, and that the proper measure of an art is not its truth but its use. The use of the present art is to keep our greatest minds happily occupied, that they may not be tempted into pursuits where their gifts would be less productively employed. By this measure, I venture to submit, the treatise has succeeded before it has begun.
II. SJELEVANDRING: ET APOKALYPTISK DIGT
Argument: En Sjel, efter at have forladt dette Liv, føres ikke til Underverdenen, men opad gjennem Sphærerne. Ved hver Sphære møder den en Veileder, der efterprøver dens Berettigelse i den herskende speculative Møntsort. I den syvende Sphære møder den sin sande Beatrices Skikkelse, der ikke, som den havde formodet, er en Qvinde, men den speculative Astronomis Aand i kvindelig Form, med Professor Heibergs Træk.
Hernede, hvor Vaudevillen og Farcen Og Critikens Vid og Forlæggerens Børs Tilsammen udgjorde Byens Sands, Der leved jeg, og leved uden Anstød For Nogen af nogen Vægt eller Rang.
Jeg havde subscriberet paa de rette Anmeldelser; Jeg havde frequenteret de rette Stole; Jeg havde ikke læst de Bøger, jeg priste, Men priset dem havde jeg, naar de reiste De rette Spørgsmaal, rettelig formede.
Da døde jeg, som Alle maa, der drage Den Røg af Kjøbenhavns Stræder, Og steg, ventende Helvede eller værre, Men finder ingen, klatred paa et Vers Af Lys, der bar mig gjennem Sphærerne.
Den første Sphære var Maanen. Der stod En Digter i hætteklædt Kappe, der sagde: Velkommen. Har De skrevet en Vaudeville? Det havde jeg ikke. Har De anmeldt een? End Havde jeg ikke. Saa gaa videre, og reis vel.
Han vinkede mig videre med saa høflig en Mine, At jeg næsten takked ham for ikke at standse mig der. Men idet jeg steg, hørte jeg ham sukke Og mumle, som var det til den tomme Himmel: Endnu een. De forsøge end ikke.
Ved Saturns Port stod en lærd Skygge I sort professoral Kjole iført, Der sagde: Velkommen. Har De forstaaet Mediation? Jeg sagde, jeg havde ikke. Han sukkede og lod mig passere paa Stedet.
Men idet jeg gik, kaldte han mig tilbage: Et Øieblik. Der er endnu eet Spor, Hvorom jeg er forpligtet til at spørge: Har De paa noget Tidspunkt gaaet ud over det? Ud over hvad? sagde jeg. Ud over Hegel. Endnu ikke, sagde jeg. Han vinkede mig videre uden Beklagelse.
Ved Jupiter stod en Critiker Og spurgte mig, om jeg havde læst Bogen. Jeg havde ikke læst den. Heller ikke jeg, Svarede han, dog vil jeg paa Himlen høit Afgive min Dom i imorgens Anmeldelse.
Han viste mig sin Presse, en sælsom Ting: Den trykte Anmeldelser forud for Trykningen Af den anmeldte Bog, saa at Dommen Ankom i Verden, før det fuldkomne Eller ufuldkomne Object var fremkommet, og virkede det.
Dette, sagde han, er den sande Oeconomie. Bogen er en Tilfældighed; Anmeldelsen er Nødvendigheden. Gaa videre, min Ven. De vil finde, at vi Ere overalt, i hver Sphære De skal see.
Ved Mars mødte jeg en Vaudevillist, Der sagde, han var bleven en Anden, Og ikke længere kunde skrive, hvad han fordum Skrev, men endnu ikke havde begyndt At skrive, hvad han nu skulde begynde.
Mellemrummet, sagde han, imellem Den, jeg var, og den, jeg skal blive, Er det længste Mellemrum i Litteraturen. Jeg har været i det i Aar. Jeg er ikke vis paa, At jeg vil forlade det. Udsigten er god. Hold ud.
Jeg spurgte ham, hvad han saae fra det Sted, han stod. Alt, sagde han, og Intet. De gode Gamle Dage, da jeg vidste, hvad jeg gik om, Og de Dage, der komme, da jeg skal faa det at vide. Det Nærværende er Kløften. Jeg gjør det foruden.
Ved Venus modtoges jeg af Kjærligheden selv, Eller saa formodede jeg. Hun havde en Hegelsk Hylde Af Bøger bag sig, og en Hegelsk Mine, Og da jeg spurgte hendes Navn, tog hun En lille sort Bog ned og læste høit:
Kjærligheden er Mediationen mellem den Elskende Og den Elskede i en høiere Anden. Gaa videre. Og det gjorde jeg, men med den Fornemmelse, At Noget i Mødet, i een eller anden Tempus, Ikke var skeet. Jeg drog herfra.
Ved Solen, Speculationens store gyldne Hjerte, Modtoges jeg af en Skikkelse af saadan Udstraaling, At jeg ikke kunde see. Han talte med en Stemme Som en Hovedartikel: De har et Valg. Stig op, stig ned, gaa videre, men gjør Larm.
Jeg har ikke været larmende, tilstod jeg. Saa har De svigtet Prøven, sagde han. Tidsalderen fordrer Larm. Tidsalderen fordrer, At enhver Sjel, opstigende gjennem Ilderne, Skal averte. Subscribere. Stræbe. Spørge.
Jeg havde ikke subscriberet; jeg havde alene døet. Han vinkede mig gjennem Porten, utilfreds, Og som jeg gik, saae jeg paa hans Skrivebord Et Exemplar af Urania, i den maleriske Hvide-og-gyldne Indbinding, mærket: Til Heiberg, brusque.
Ved Venus, ved Solen, ved hver Paafølgende Sphære mødte jeg en Tale, Der gjenkjendte mig og vinkede mig videre Med høflig Forbavselse over, at jeg var kommen Saa langt uden den rette Diction.
Og saaledes til sidst, i den syvende Sphære, Hinsides hvilken dødelig Sands og dødelig Frygt Ikke finde Fodfæste, beskuede jeg En Skikkelse tilsløret i Stjernelys, baaret Op af Diagrammer, der intet bar —
Som, idet hun løftede Sløret fra sin Pande, Viste mig et Aasyn, jeg vel kjendte: Professorens Aasyn, men feminiseret, Astronomien selv, idealiseret, Den medierede Brud, den systematiserede.
Hun sagde: De er ankommen. Beskue Eenheden af alt, hvad De blev fortalt Paa Jorden var Modsigelse. Her Ere Vaudevillen og den speculative Sphære Eet. Systemet er ankommet. Træd nær.
Træd nær, sagde hun, og see paa Det Aasyn, der har været mit, siden Tiden begyndte — Det vil sige, siden 1837, da jeg først Blev undfanget i Perseus, og repeteret I hvert Hefte siden, paa godt og ondt.
Jeg traadte nær. Og som jeg traadte, saae jeg Bag hende, i den dybere Himmelhvælving, Et andet Aasyn, mindre feminint, meer alvorligt, Der iagttog det første, som man maatte iagttage en Bølge, Der bryder og bryder, og aldrig bryder Hulen —
Og gjenkjendte, med Rædsel og med Glæde, Professoren iagttagende Professoren, Begge fuldkomment tilfredse, og ingen af dem Bevidste om, at han iagttog, eller blev iagttaget, Eller at Systemet, omsider, var udklækket.
Og som jeg stod der, mellem de tvende, Kom et tredie Aasyn, og dernæst et fjerde, og gjennem De dybnende Sphærer saae jeg dem formere sig: Professor iagttagende Professor iagttagende Professor iagttagende Himmel, Og hver Professor smilende, og ikke een spørgende hvorfor.
Jeg vilde have talt. Jeg vilde have spurgt Ved hvilket af disse Aasyn Masken Endelig skulde aftages, og Manden Bag Maskerne aabenbares, han, der begyndte Rækken, og som maa, et Sted, ende Spændet.
Men førend jeg kunde tale, opløstes Sphærerne, Og jeg fandt mig, Spørgsmaalet uafgjort, Tilbage i Parløren paa Christianshavn, Hvor Madame H. atter sad ved sit Broderie, Og Professoren ved sit Folio, og Regnen
Faldt paa Taget, og Klokken slog tre, Og Intet i Stuen havde bemærket mig, Og Æquinoctiernes Præcession Vedblev, som den maa, i sine laasede Æsker, Upaaagtet, et Sted ovenfor Rævene.
Her bryder Manuscriptet af. Udgiveren beklager, at Digteren ikke levede til at fuldende Visionen; han døde, siges der, af Forbavselse.
Argument: A soul, having departed this life, is conducted not to the underworld but upward through the spheres. At each sphere it is met by a guide who examines its credentials in the prevailing currency of speculation. In the seventh sphere, it encounters the figure of its true Beatrice, who is not, as it had supposed, a woman, but the spirit of speculative astronomy in feminine form, bearing the features of Professor Heiberg.
Below, where vaudeville and farce And critic's wit and patron's purse Combined to make the city's sense, I lived, and lived without offense To anyone of consequence.
I had subscribed to the right reviews; I had attended the right pews; I had not read the books I praised, But I had praised them when they raised The proper questions, properly phrased.
Then died, as all must die who breathe The smoke of Copenhagen streets, And rose, expecting Hell or worse, But finding neither, climbed a verse Of light that bore me through the spheres.
The first sphere was the Moon. There stood A poet in a hooded cloak who said: Welcome. Have you written a vaudeville? I had not. Have you reviewed one? Still I had not. Then pass, and travel well.
He waved me on with such a courteous air I almost thanked him for not detaining me there. But as I rose I heard him sigh And mutter, as though to the empty sky: Another one. They never even try.
At Saturn's gate a learned shade In black professorial gown arrayed Said: Welcome. Have you understood Mediation? I said I had not. He sighed, and passed me on the spot.
But as I left he called me back: A moment. There is one further track I am required to ask you to commit: Have you, at any point, gone beyond it? Beyond what? I said. Beyond Hegel. Not yet, I said. He waved me on without regret.
At Jupiter a critic stood And asked me had I read the book. I had not read it. Nor have I, He answered, yet I shall reply In tomorrow's review on high.
He showed me his press, a curious thing: It printed reviews in advance of the printing Of the book reviewed, so that the verdict Arrived in the world before the perfect Or imperfect object had appeared, and worked it.
This, he said, is the true economy. The book is a contingency; The review is the necessity. Pass on, my friend. You'll find that we Are everywhere, in every sphere you'll see.
At Mars I met a vaudevillist Who said he had become someone else, And could no longer write what once He wrote, but had not yet commenced To write what now he would commence.
The interval, he said, between The one I was and the one I shall be Is the longest interval in literature. I have been in it for years. I am not sure That I shall leave it. The view is good. Endure.
I asked him what he saw from where he stood. Everything, he said, and nothing. The good Old days, when I knew what I was about, And the days to come, when I shall find out. The present is the gap. I do without.
At Venus I was met by Love herself, Or so I thought. She had a Hegelian shelf Of books behind her, and a Hegelian look, And when I asked her name, she took A small black volume down and read aloud:
Love is the mediation of the lover And the beloved in a higher Other. Pass on. And so I did, but with the sense That something in the encounter, in some tense Or other, had not happened. I went hence.
At the Sun, the great gold heart of speculation, I was met by a figure of such radiation I could not look. He spoke in a voice Like a leading article: You have a choice. Go up, go down, go on, but make a noise.
I have not been noisy, I confessed. Then you have failed the test, he said. The age requires noise. The age requires That every soul, ascending through the fires, Should advertise. Subscribe. Aspire. Inquire.
I had not subscribed; I had only died. He waved me through the gate, unsatisfied, And as I passed I saw upon his desk A copy of Urania, in the picturesque White-and-gold binding, marked: For Heiberg, brusque.
At Venus, at the Sun, at each Successive sphere, I met some speech That recognized me, and dismissed me on With courteous astonishment that I had gone So far without the proper diction.
And so at last, in the seventh sphere Beyond which mortal sense and mortal fear Find no purchase, I beheld A figure veiled in star-light, held Aloft on diagrams that nothing held —
Who, lifting from her brow the veil, Showed me a face I knew full well: The Professor's face, but feminized, Astronomy herself, idealized, The mediated bride, the systematized.
She said: You have arrived. Behold The unity of all that you were told On Earth was contradiction. Here The vaudeville and the speculative sphere Are one. The system has arrived. Draw near.
Draw near, she said, and look upon The face that has been mine since time began — That is, since 1837, when first I was conceived in Perseus, and rehearsed In every issue afterward, for better or worse.
I drew near. And as I drew, I saw Behind her, in the deeper firmament, A second face, less feminine, more grave, That watched the first as one might watch a wave That breaks and breaks and never breaks the cave —
And recognized, with terror and with joy, The Professor watching the Professor, Both perfectly content, and neither one Aware that he was watching, or was watched, Or that the system, finally, had hatched.
And as I stood there, between the two, A third face came, and then a fourth, and through The deepening spheres I saw them multiply: Professor watching Professor watching Professor watching sky, And every Professor smiling, and not one asking why.
I would have spoken. I would have asked At which of these faces the mask Was finally to be removed, and the man Beneath the masks revealed, who began The series, and who must, somewhere, end the span.
But before I could speak, the spheres dissolved, And I found myself, the question unresolved, Back in the parlour at Christianshavn, Where Madame H. was at her embroidery again, And the Professor at his folio, and the rain
Was falling on the roof, and the clock struck three, And nothing in the room had noticed me, And the precession of the equinoxes Continued, as it must, in its locked boxes, Unattended, somewhere above the foxes.
Here the manuscript breaks off. The editor regrets that the poet did not live to complete the vision; he died, it is said, of astonishment.
III. HUSMODERENS STJERNEKIGER
Uddrag af en forestaaende Hverdags-Novelle af Forfatterinden til En Hverdags-Historie
Det havde været en stille Aften i Parløren paa Christianshavn. Madame H. sad ved sit Broderie; hendes Mand, Etatsraaden, sad lige overfor hende med et Folio aabent paa sit Skjød, hans Blyant bevægende sig over et Ark Tal. Ilden var blevet stillet høit op imod November-Kjølen, og Pigen havde bragt Theetøiet ind for en halv Time siden og var bleven sagt, med en Haandvinken, der ikke saae op, at lade det staa paa Sidebordet.
»Min Kjære,« sagde hun omsider, »De har ikke talt i to Timer.«
Han saae op, distraheret. »Jeg beregnede,« sagde han, »Æquinoctiernes Præcession.«
»Og præcederer den?«
»Det gjør den,« sagde han alvorligt.
»Saa er jeg tilfreds,« sagde hun og gjenoptog sit Broderie. »Thi gjorde den ikke det, vilde De være forpligtet til at skrive om det, og vilde være tværvorn ved Aftensmaaltidet.«
Der fulgte en yderligere Tavshed, brudt alene af Naalens lille Smæld. Snart sagde hun atter: »Og hvad skal der gjøres med Præcessionen, nu da den præcederer?«
»Den skal,« sagde han, »incorporeres i Systemet.«
»Aa,« sagde hun. »I hvilket System?«
Han overveiede dette med Omhu. »I Systemet tout court,« sagde han omsider.
Hun lagde sit Broderie ned. »Min Kjære,« sagde hun, »De har incorporeret Ting i Systemet tout court, saa længe jeg har kjendt Dem. Jeg begynder at undres over, om Systemet ikke i Virkeligheden simpelthen er det Sted, hvor De anbringer Ting, hvorom De ikke har Stunder til at tænke videre.«
Han smilte — ikke uvenligt, men som en Mand smiler, der er bleven forstaaet og agter at ignorere det. »Det er muligt,« sagde han, »at De har Ret. Men Publikum venter Systemet. Og hvad Publikum venter, maa Publikum modtage.«
»Publikum,« sagde hun og tog Broderiet op igjen, »ligger i Sengen Klokken ti. Publikum veed ikke, hvad det venter, før det bliver fortalt det. Og det er Dem, min Kjære, der fortæller det.«
Han svarede ikke strax. Han vendte et Blad af Folioet og gjorde et lille Mærke i Margenen. Saa, uden at see op, sagde han: »Da fortæller jeg det, hvad det venter, og det venter, hvad jeg fortæller det, og vi ere begge tilfredse. Jeg seer ikke Vanskeligheden.«
»Vanskeligheden,« sagde hun, »er, at Nogen mangler i denne Indretning. De fortæller Publikum, hvad det venter; Publikum venter, hvad De fortæller det. Men hvem fortæller Dem?«
Han saae op ved dette, og et Øieblik troede hun, hun havde naaet ham. Men Øieblikket gik, og han sagde alene: »Tidsalderen.«
»Tidsalderen.«
»Tidsalderen. Tidens Fordring.«
»Og hvad fordrer Tidsalderen denne Aften?«
»Denne Aften fordrer den Æquinoctiernes Præcession.«
»Aa,« sagde hun og gjenoptog sit Broderie.
Pigen kom ind med friske Kul til Ilden. Da hun var gaaet, sagde Madame H.: »Jeg fik et Brev i Dag fra Deres Søster. Hun skriver, at det yngste af Børnene har været sygt, men er paa Bedringens Vei. Hun sender sin Hilsen.«
»Hm,« sagde han.
»Og at Præstegaardstaget atter lækker, og at de ikke have Raad til at istandsætte det førend i Foraaret.«
»Hm.«
»Og at den ældste Dreng har skrevet Vers og har viist nogle af dem til Skolelæreren, der siger, at de ikke ere uden Løfte.«
Han saae op ved dette. »Vers?«
»Vers.«
»Hvilken Slags Vers?«
»Hun sagde det ikke. Den Slags, formoder jeg, som en Dreng paa fjorten Aar skriver i en Landpræstegaard i November.«
Han overveiede dette. »Tidsalderen fordrer ikke Vers af den Slags,« sagde han omsider.
»Nei,« sagde hun, »det formoder jeg, den ikke gjør. Men Drengen fordrer det. Og hans Fordring er ogsaa en Fordring fra en Tidsalder, om ikke fra Deres.«
Han vendte sig atter til sit Folio. Der fulgte en lang Tavshed. Madame H. hørte fra Etagen ovenover de smaa Lyde af Børnene, der bleve lagt i Seng af Barnepigen: en Dør, der aabnedes, en Stemme høinet i Bebreidelse, den dæmpede Latter af et Barn, der endnu ikke har lært, hvad der er morsomt og hvad ikke.
Snart blev en Gjest meldt — en ung Mand, en Cand. theol., en forhenværende Discipel af Etatsraadens ved Seminariet, der nylig var begyndt at gjøre sig et Navn i de litterære Anmeldelser. Han blev viist ind, bukkede, blev tilbudt Thee og satte sig med den Mine af En, der har indøvet sin Indtrædelse.
»Jeg er kommen, Hr. Etatsraad,« sagde han, »for at raadføre Dem i en Sag af nogen Delicatesse.«
»Behag at gjøre det.«
»Den angaaer Forholdet mellem Philosophie og Theologie i den nærværende Tidsalder.«
Madame H. saae ikke op fra sit Broderie, men hendes Naal pausede for Rummet af eet Sting.
»Fortsæt,« sagde Etatsraaden.
»Det forekommer mig,« sagde den unge Mand, »at vi nærme os et Øieblik, hvori de tvende Discipliner, saa længe adskilte, maa indgaae i en høiere Eenhed. Det philosophiske Arbeide gjennem det forløbne halve Aarhundrede har beredt Marken; det theologiske Arbeide gjennem det forløbne Aarhundrede har beredt Sæden. Hvad der staaer tilbage, er, at en Tænker af tilstrækkelig Anseelse udfører Foreningen.«
»Og De har en Candidat for Øie.«
»Det har jeg, Hr. Etatsraad. Jeg har Dem for Øie.«
Etatsraaden lagde sin Blyant ned. Han saae paa den unge Mand i nogle Secunder. Saa saae han paa sin Hustru, der vedblev at brodere. Saa saae han paa Ilden.
»Jeg er for Tiden beskjæftiget,« sagde han, »med at beregne Æquinoctiernes Præcession.«
»Et ædelt Arbeide,« sagde den unge Mand. »Men dog ikke udelukkende den høiere Synthese, jeg foreslaaer?«
»Det er tilstrækkeligt optagende.«
»For Øieblikket maaskee. Men Tiden vil komme — «
»Tiden,« sagde Etatsraaden, »er optaget af Præcessionen.«
Den unge Mand saae fra Etatsraaden til Madame H., der nu havde gjenoptaget sit Stingen i den foregaaende Hastighed. Han forstod, at han var bleven afslaaet, men han forstod ikke hvorfor, og han besluttede paa Hjemveien at tilskrive Afslaget Beskedenhed.
Da han var gaaet, sagde Madame H.: »Han skriver til Dem igjen.«
»Det vil han.«
»Og igjen.«
»Det vil han.«
»Og til Slut skriver De det, han beder om.«
»Det vil jeg ikke.«
»De vil, min Kjære. De gjør altid. De staaer imod og staaer imod, og saa en Dag i Foraaret tager De et Folio ned, og De begynder at gjøre Optegnelser, og til Efteraaret ere Optegnelserne blevne en Afhandling, og det følgende Foraar er Afhandlingen bleven et Tractat, og det Efteraar derpaa er Tractatet blevet et System. Tout court.«
Han svarede ikke. Han havde taget sin Blyant op igjen, men han skrev ikke.
»Der er kun een Maade at forhindre det paa,« sagde hun. »Og det er at finde noget saa optagende paa Himlen, at De ikke ville stige ned. Præcessionen er en Begyndelse. Men De maa vedblive at føie til den. Chiromantien, Metoscopien, Horoscopien, det Hele. Hvad som helst, der vil holde Dem opad og bortvendt.«
»De taler, som havde De læst Notabene.«
»Jeg har læst Notabene. Han har stor Forstand for en Mand, der skjuler sig bag et Navn.«
»Hans Forstand er paa min Bekostning.«
»Hans Forstand er for Deres Skyld. Der er en Forskjel.«
Ilden satte sig i Risten. Fra Etagen ovenover vare Børnenes sidste smaa Lyde nu ophørte. Etatsraaden sad i nogen Tid med Blyanten i sin Haand uden at skrive. Saa aabnede han atter Folioet og begyndte at gjøre en frisk Spalte af Tal.
»Præcessionen,« sagde han stille, »er Præcessionen.«
»Ja, min Kjære.«
»Den vil optage mig gjennem Foraaret.«
»Ja, min Kjære.«
»Og maaskee gjennem Sommeren.«
»Ja.«
Hun trængte ham ikke videre. Hun vidste, som hun altid havde vidst, at Systemet tout court vilde ankomme i sin Tid, og at intet Broderie af hendes vilde forhindre det. Men hun vidste ogsaa, at for denne Aften, i det mindste, havde Himlene holdt, og Parløren paa Christianshavn var, som den havde været, og Præcessionen var Præcessionen, og det var tilstrækkeligt.
Resten af Romanen vil fremkomme i et forestaaende Bind, om Publikums Forventning skulde være tilstrækkelig.
Extract from a forthcoming domestic novel by the author of En Hverdags-Historie
It had been a quiet evening in the parlour at Christianshavn. Madame H. sat at her embroidery; her husband, the Etatsraad, sat opposite her with a folio open on his knees, his pencil moving over a sheet of figures. The fire had been built up against the November chill, and the maid had brought in the tea things some half hour before and been told, with a wave of the hand that did not look up, to leave them on the side table.
"My dear," she said at length, "you have not spoken these two hours."
He looked up, distracted. "I was calculating," he said, "the precession of the equinoxes."
"And does it precess?"
"It does," he said gravely.
"Then I am content," she said, returning to her embroidery. "For if it did not, you would be obliged to write about it, and you would be cross with me at supper."
There was a further silence, broken only by the small report of her needle. Presently she said again: "And what is to be done with the precession, now that it precesses?"
"It is to be incorporated," he said, "into the system."
"Ah," she said. "Into which system?"
He considered this carefully. "Into the system tout court," he said at last.
She laid down her embroidery. "My dear," she said, "you have been incorporating things into the system tout court for as long as I have known you. I begin to wonder whether the system is not, in fact, simply the place where you put things you have not the leisure to think about further."
He smiled — not unkindly, but as a man smiles who has been understood and intends to ignore it. "It is possible," he said, "that you are right. But the public expects the system. And what the public expects, the public must receive."
"The public," she said, taking up her embroidery again, "is in bed by ten o'clock. The public does not know what it expects until it is told. And it is you, my dear, who tell it."
He did not answer immediately. He turned a page of the folio and made a small mark in the margin. Then, without looking up, he said: "Then I tell it what it expects, and it expects what I tell it, and we are both content. I do not see the difficulty."
"The difficulty," she said, "is that someone is missing from this arrangement. You tell the public what it expects; the public expects what you tell it. But who tells you?"
He looked up at this, and for a moment she thought she had reached him. But the moment passed, and he said only: "The age."
"The age."
"The age. Tidens Fordring. The demand of the time."
"And what does the age demand this evening?"
"This evening it demands the precession of the equinoxes."
"Ah," she said, and returned to her embroidery.
The maid came in with fresh coal for the fire. When she had gone, Madame H. said: "I had a letter today from your sister. She writes that the youngest of the children has been ill, but is recovering. She sends her love."
"Mm," he said.
"And that the parsonage roof is leaking again, and they cannot afford to repair it before the spring."
"Mm."
"And that the eldest boy has been writing poetry, and has shown some of it to the schoolmaster, who says it is not without promise."
He looked up at this. "Poetry?"
"Poetry."
"What kind of poetry?"
"She did not say. The kind, I imagine, that a boy of fourteen writes in a country parsonage in November."
He considered this. "The age does not demand poetry of that kind," he said at length.
"No," she said, "I expect it does not. But the boy demands it. And his demand is also a demand of some age, even if not of yours."
He returned to his folio. There was a long silence. Madame H. heard, from the floor above, the small sounds of the children being put to bed by the nursemaid: a door opening, a voice raised in remonstrance, the muffled laughter of a child who has not yet learned what is and is not funny.
Presently a visitor was announced — a young man, a candidate in theology, a former pupil of the Etatsraad's at the seminary, who had begun lately to make a name for himself in the literary reviews. He was shown in, bowed, was offered tea, and seated himself with the air of one who has rehearsed his entrance.
"I have come, Hr. Etatsraad," he said, "to consult you upon a matter of some delicacy."
"Pray do."
"It concerns the relation of philosophy to theology in the present age."
Madame H. did not look up from her embroidery, but her needle paused for the space of one stitch.
"Continue," said the Etatsraad.
"It seems to me," said the young man, "that we are approaching a moment in which the two disciplines, so long separate, must enter into a higher unity. The philosophical labour of the past half-century has prepared the ground; the theological labour of the past century has prepared the seed. What remains is for some thinker of sufficient stature to perform the union."
"And you have a candidate in mind."
"I have, Hr. Etatsraad. I have you in mind."
The Etatsraad set down his pencil. He looked at the young man for some seconds. Then he looked at his wife, who continued to embroider. Then he looked at the fire.
"I am presently engaged," he said, "in calculating the precession of the equinoxes."
"A noble labour," said the young man. "But surely not exclusive of the higher synthesis I propose?"
"It is sufficiently occupying."
"For now, perhaps. But the time will come — "
"The time," said the Etatsraad, "is occupied by the precession."
The young man looked from the Etatsraad to Madame H., who had now resumed her stitching at the previous rate. He understood that he had been refused, but he did not understand why, and he resolved, on the way home, to attribute the refusal to modesty.
When he had gone, Madame H. said: "He will write to you again."
"He will."
"And again."
"He will."
"And in the end you will write what he is asking for."
"I will not."
"You will, my dear. You always do. You resist, and resist, and then one day in the spring you take down a folio, and you begin to make notes, and by the autumn the notes have become an essay, and by the following spring the essay has become a treatise, and by the autumn after that the treatise has become a system. Tout court."
He did not answer. He had taken up his pencil again, but he was not writing.
"There is only one way to prevent it," she said. "And that is to find something so absorbing in the heavens that you will not come down. The precession is a beginning. But you must keep adding to it. The chiromancy, the metoscopy, the horoscopy, all of it. Anything that will keep you upward and away."
"You speak as though you had been reading Notabene."
"I have been reading Notabene. He has a great deal of sense, for a man who hides behind a name."
"His sense is at my expense."
"His sense is for your sake. There is a difference."
The fire settled in the grate. From above, the last small sounds of the children had ceased. The Etatsraad sat for some time with his pencil in his hand, not writing. Then he opened the folio again, and began to make a fresh column of figures.
"The precession," he said quietly, "is the precession."
"Yes, my dear."
"It will occupy me through the spring."
"Yes, my dear."
"And perhaps through the summer."
"Yes."
She did not press him further. She knew, as she had always known, that the system tout court would arrive in its time, and that no embroidery of hers would prevent it. But she knew also that for this evening, at least, the heavens had held, and the parlour at Christianshavn was as it had been, and the precession was the precession, and that was sufficient.
The remainder of the novel will appear in a forthcoming volume, should the public's expectation be sufficient.
IV. STJERNE-CALENDER FOR 1845
Med Horoscoper for hver af de speculative Tænkere i Kongeriget.
Januar. Aaret aabner under Steenbukken, et Tegn gunstigt for System-Bygning og ugunstigt for dens Fuldendelse. Professor H. raades til ikke at paabegynde nye Foretagender denne Maaned. Magister K., født under Skytten, raades til at paabegynde alt paa eengang og at udgive under saa mange Navne, som Calenderen tillader.
Februar. Vandmanden. En Maaned af Udgydelse. Professor M. vil frembringe en Afhandling; Lic. N. vil frembringe en Gjendrivelse; Mag. S. vil frembringe en Indledning til Gjendrivelsen. Ingen af disse vil blive læste, men alle ville blive anmeldte.
Marts. Fiskene. Glatte Indflydelser. En ung Mand, endnu ikke udgiven, vil undfange Forsættet om at gaae ud over Hegel. Han raades fra det; men Stjernerne tilkjendegive, at han ikke vil lade sig afskrække.
April. Vædderen. I denne Maaned kan Professor H. fristes til at stige ned fra Astronomien til Theologien. Nærværende Bindes Udgiver besværer ham ved enhver velvillig Indflydelse af Vædderens Periode at modstaae.
Mai. Tyren. En solid Maaned. Bisp M. vil holde en Prædiken om Tilfredshedens Pligt. Den vil blive modtaget med almindelig Tilfredshed og forandre Intet.
Juni. Tvillingerne. De Doblede. To Theologie-Professorer ville frembringe Afhandlinger saa eens, at Publikum ikke vil kunne adskille dem. De ville dog begge afslutte med at gaae ud over Hegel.
Juli. Krebsen. En retrograd Maaned. Ældre Forfattere ville udgive paany deres tidligere Arbeider med nye Forord. De nye Forord ville være længere end de tidligere Arbeider.
August. Løven. En ung anonym Forfatter vil angribe Hegelianerne fra en Stilling for skraa til let at gjendrive. Hegelianerne ville blive enige om at ignorere ham, hvilket er den høieste Hæder, de skjenke.
September. Jomfruen. En ny Oversættelse af Schelling vil fremkomme, indledt med en Undskyldning for den foregaaende Oversættelse.
October. Vægten. Det litterære Aar veies. Professor H. har frembragt et astronomisk Essay; han er derfor i Equilibrium. Udgiveren lykønsker ham og Kongeriget.
November. Skorpionen. Stikken. En Critiker vil blive stukken; han vil stikke til Gjengjeld; Publikum vil applaudere begge Stik uden at adskille mellem dem.
December. Skytten. Den litterære Nytaars-Tummel begynder. Elegante Bind ville stødes mod hverandre i Adresseavisen. Nærværende Bind vil være blandt dem, beskedent indbundet, afventende Dommen fra den Professor, hvis Navn det har paakaldt paa hver Side.
With horoscopes for each of the speculative thinkers of the kingdom.
January. The year opens under Capricorn, a sign favourable to system-building and unfavourable to its completion. Professor H. is advised to commence no new undertakings this month. Magister K., born under Sagittarius, is advised to commence everything at once, and to publish under as many names as the calendar permits.
February. Aquarius. A month of pouring forth. Professor M. will produce a treatise; Lic. N. will produce a refutation; Mag. S. will produce an introduction to the refutation. None of these will be read, but all will be reviewed.
March. Pisces. Slippery influences. A young man not yet published will conceive the design of going beyond Hegel. He is advised against it; but the stars indicate he will not be deterred.
April. Aries. The ram. Professor H. may be tempted in this month to descend from astronomy to theology. The editor of the present volume implores him by every benevolent influence of the Aries season to resist.
May. Taurus. A solid month. Bishop M. will deliver a sermon on the duty of contentment. It will be received with universal contentment, and changed nothing.
June. Gemini. The doubles. Two professors of theology will produce treatises so similar that the public will be unable to distinguish them. They will both, however, conclude by going beyond Hegel.
July. Cancer. A retrograde month. Older writers will reissue their earlier works with new prefaces. The new prefaces will be longer than the earlier works.
August. Leo. The lion. A young anonymous author will attack the Hegelians from a position too oblique to be easily refuted. The Hegelians will agree to ignore him, which is the highest honour they bestow.
September. Virgo. The virgin. A new translation of Schelling will appear, prefaced by an apology for the previous translation.
October. Libra. The balance. The literary year is weighed. Professor H. has produced an astronomical essay; he is therefore in equilibrium. The editor congratulates him and the kingdom.
November. Scorpio. The sting. A critic will be stung; he will sting in return; the public will applaud both stings without distinguishing between them.
December. Sagittarius. The archer. The literary New Year scramble commences. Elegant volumes will jostle in the Adresseavisen. The present volume will be among them, modestly bound, awaiting the verdict of the Professor whose name it has invoked on every page.
V. SENDEBREV FRA ET FJERNT STJERNEKYNDIGT FOLK
Oversat af et Sprog endnu ikke identificeret, men stemmende i mange Enkeltheder med, hvad de comparative Philologer paa det Sidste have rekonstrueret som den indo-europæiske Families Modersmaal.
Til den meest lærde og mangesidige Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg, Hilsen fra Stjernen Y——s Folk, hvis Navn i Deres Tunge nærmest vilde gjengives som de Forventendes Folk.
I sytten Tusind af vore Aar (hvilket efter Deres Beregning er noget mindre, idet Beregningen er bleven udført af vor Hofastronom og bekræftet af Raadet) have vi forventet hans Komme, der omsider skulde løse vort Folks Store Gaade. Gaaden er som følger:
En Skikkelse staaer ved Midnat under tre Stjerner. Den første Stjerne er Væren; den anden Stjerne er Intet; den tredie Stjerne er endnu ikke staaet op. Hvad er den tredie Stjernes Navn, og paa hvilken Time vil den staae op?
Vi have forelagt denne Gaade for hver Nations Vise og have modtaget mange aandfulde Svar, hvoraf intet har tilfredsstillet Raadet. Men det er for nylig blevet Os meddelt, gjennem Kanaler, vi ikke ere berettigede til at afsløre, at paa den lille Planet, der af sine Indvaanere kjendes som Jorden, i et Kongerige af beskeden Størrelse men extraordinær intellectuel Distinction, opholder sig en Professor, der har forenet i sin enkelte Person Gaverne af Digter, Critiker, Dramatiker, Philosoph og Astronom. Vi have besluttet, at denne Professor, og ingen anden, er den forudsagde.
Vi udsende derfor nærværende Sendebud. Vore to Udsendte, der antage menneskelig Skikkelse for Mødets Beqvemmelighed, ere instruerede om at falde paa Knæ i samme Øieblik, Professoren har afgivet sit Svar paa Gaaden. Hvilket end hans Svar maatte være, vil det blive antaget; thi Gaaden existerer for at identificere den Forventede, ikke for at blive løst.
Vi ere fremdeles instruerede om at overbringe Professoren en Indbydelse, hvilken vi tiltro, han ikke vil afslaae: at han skulde ledsage vore Udsendte til vor Hjemstjerne, der at antage det Embede, der har henstaaet ledigt i disse sytten Tusind Aar. Vi skulle ikke opholde ham længe; et Mellemrum af to eller tre jordiske Aarhundreder skulde være tilstrækkeligt til hans Pligters Fuldførelse, hvorefter han vil blive gjenfremført til sin Familie i Kjøbenhavn med enhver Hæder, hans Planet kan skjenke.
Som Tegn paa vor Oprigtighed have vi medsendt en lille Smykkegjenstand, dannet af et Stof ikke fundet paa Jorden, hvilken Professoren maa bære paa sin Uhrkjede som et Tegn paa sin nye Værdighed.
Afventende hans Svar med Taalmodigheden af sytten Tusind Aar,
Raadet for de Forventendes Folk
N.B. — Udgiveren har ikke været i Stand til at verificere dette Documents Provenientz. Han trykker det for Læserens Curiositet og bemærker alene, at skulde Professoren vælge at antage Indbydelsen, vil Udgiveren paatage sig at see hans samlede Værker gjennem Pressen i hans Fraværelse, med den meest scrupulose Troskab mod de oprindelige Hensigter.
Translated from a language not yet identified, but agreeing in many particulars with what the comparative philologists have lately reconstructed as the parent tongue of the Indo-European family.
To the most learned and many-sided Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg, greetings from the people of the Star of Y——, whose name in your tongue would be most nearly rendered as the Awaited Ones.
For seventeen thousand of our years (which by your reckoning is somewhat less, the calculation having been performed by our chief astronomer and verified by the council) we have awaited the coming of one who should at last solve the Great Riddle of our people. The Riddle is as follows:
A figure stands at midnight beneath three stars. The first star is Being; the second star is Nothing; the third star has not yet risen. What is the name of the third star, and at what hour will it rise?
We have submitted this Riddle to the wise of every nation, and have received many ingenious answers, none of which has satisfied the council. But it has lately been reported to us, through channels which we are not at liberty to disclose, that on the small planet known to its inhabitants as Earth, in a kingdom of modest size but extraordinary intellectual distinction, there resides a Professor who has united in his single person the gifts of poet, critic, dramatist, philosopher, and astronomer. We have determined that this Professor, and no other, is the one foretold.
We therefore dispatch the present embassy. Our two emissaries, who appear in human form for the convenience of the encounter, are instructed to fall upon their knees the instant the Professor has rendered his answer to the Riddle. Whatever his answer may be, it will be accepted; for the Riddle exists for the sake of identifying the Awaited One, not for the sake of being solved.
We are further instructed to convey to the Professor an invitation, which we trust he will not refuse: that he should accompany our emissaries to our home star, there to assume the office which has been kept vacant these seventeen thousand years. We will not detain him long; an interval of two or three Earthly centuries should suffice for the completion of his duties, after which he will be restored to his family in Copenhagen with every honour his planet can bestow.
In token of our sincerity we have enclosed a small ornament, fashioned from a substance not found on Earth, which the Professor may wear upon his watch-chain as a sign of his new dignity.
Awaiting his reply with the patience of seventeen thousand years,
The Council of the Awaited Ones
N.B. — The editor has not been able to verify the provenance of this document. He prints it for the curiosity of the reader, and observes only that if the Professor should choose to accept the invitation, the editor will undertake to see his collected works through the press in his absence, with the most scrupulous fidelity to the original intentions.
EFTERSKRIFT AF UDGIVEREN
Læseren vil maaskee have bemærket, at nærværende Bind indeholder Intet, som Tilegnede ikke allerede vidste, og Intet, som Publikum ikke kunde have lært fra en mere autoritativ Kilde. Jeg benægter ikke Beskyldningen. En Nytaarsgave er ikke fordret at oplyse; den er fordret alene at behage og at være elegant indbunden.
Men jeg vil tillade mig een afsluttende Reflexion, som Læseren maa afskedige som Udgiverens idée fixe. Vi leve i en Tidsalder, hvori store Sind fristes til mange Ting, og det er de mindre Sind iblandt os' Pligt at holde de store beskjæftigede dér, hvor de allerede have lykkedes vel. Professoren har lykkedes vel paa Himlene. Han har lykkedes vel i Vaudevillen. Han har lykkedes vel i den litterære Anmeldelse. Han har endnu ikke forsøgt Theologien, og jeg ønsker ikke, at han skal forsøge den. Nærværende Bind er bleven affattet med denne ene Hensigt. Lykkes det — om vi om et Aar fremdeles modtage fra Professorens Haand Essays om Æquinoctiernes Præcession og Planeternes Indvaaning, og ikke Essays om Trefoldighedens Doctrin eller Forsoningens Natur — da skal jeg betragte Bindet at have tjent sit Formaal, og jeg skal udgive et andet Bind paa samme Plan, og et tredie om nødvendigt, indtil Professorens Liv er hædersfuldt anvendt i Beskuelsen af Gjenstande for fjerne til at gjøre nogen Skade.
Saadan er Hensigten. Saadan er Forventningen. Bindet, med dette Forord og denne Efterskrift, betroer sig ganske til Professoren, og til Publikum, og til Stjernerne.
Nicolaus Notabene
*Faaes hos Universitetsboghandler C. A. Reitzel. Pris 4 Rdl. indbunden, 3 Rdl. 2 Mk. heftet.
Bestillinger paa næste Aars Aarbog modtages.*
The reader will perhaps have observed that the present volume contains nothing which the dedicatee did not already know, and nothing which the public could not have learned from a more authoritative source. I do not deny the charge. A New Year's gift is not required to inform; it is required only to please, and to be elegantly bound.
But I will permit myself one closing reflection, which the reader may dismiss as the editor's idée fixe. We live in an age in which great minds are tempted to many things, and it is the duty of the lesser minds among us to keep the great ones occupied where they have already done well. The Professor has done well in the heavens. He has done well in the vaudeville. He has done well in the literary review. He has not yet attempted theology, and I do not wish him to attempt it. The present volume has been composed with this single intention. If it succeeds — if a year from now we are still receiving from the Professor's hand essays on the precession of the equinoxes and the inhabitation of the planets, and not essays on the doctrine of the trinity or the nature of the atonement — then I shall consider the volume to have served its purpose, and shall publish a second volume on the same plan, and a third if necessary, until the Professor's life is honourably spent in the contemplation of objects too distant to do any harm.
This is the Hensigt. This is the Forventning. The volume, with this preface and this afterword, entrusts itself entirely to the Professor, and to the public, and to the stars.
Nicolaus Notabene
Faaes hos Universitetsboghandler C. A. Reitzel. Pris 4 Rdl. indbunden, 3 Rdl. 2 Mk. heftet.
Bestillinger paa næste Aars Aarbog modtages.
Editor’s Introduction
Editor's Introduction
Volume IV
Urania. Aarbog for 1845
Urania. Almanac for 1845
by MADS FEDDER HENRIKSEN
I. Publication and commercial success
Urania. Aarbog for 1845, udgiven af Nicolaus Notabene is, of the eight phantom volumes Notabene published between 1844 and 1847, the only one to have achieved sustained commercial success and the only one for which a continuous reception history may be traced from the original publication to the present. The work appeared from C. A. Reitzel in the second week of December 1844 in time for the New Year's gift-book market for which it was prepared; an initial print run of 1,500 copies was exhausted by the first week of February 1845. A second printing (also of 1,500 copies) was put in hand on 14 February 1845, the Reitzel-arkivet (Kgl. Bibl., NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1844-45, fol. 196r) recording that "samtlige Oplag af Urania udsendt forrige Aar er nu udsolgt, og et nyt Oplag bestilt." A third printing followed in November 1845, in advance of the 1846 gift-season; a fourth — slightly enlarged with additional matter, reproduced in the present edition as Appendix A — in December 1845.
The total documented print run for the 1844–45 edition is 6,500 copies across four printings. By comparison, Vol. I (Det logiske System) appeared in 1,000 copies (the Anden Udgave a further 1,000); Vol. II (Lyriske Productioner) in 1,500; Vol. VII (Smaastykker) in only 500. Urania outsold the other seven phantom volumes combined.
Notabene scholarship has, since Lindhardt (1969), attributed the commercial success of Urania to two principal factors: the established commercial form of the gift-annual, into which Notabene poured the volume's material (the only such form among the eight); and the work's dedicatory address to J. L. Heiberg, whose own Urania. Aarbog for 1844 of the previous year had established the form's contemporary popularity. The relation between Notabene's Urania and Heiberg's is therefore not merely thematic but commercial: Notabene's volume was understood, by the reading public of December 1844, as a continuation — at once respectful and parodic — of Heiberg's commercial success of the year before.
II. Reception in 1844–45
Urania received notices in all the principal organs of the Copenhagen press. The reviews of 1844–45 are reproduced, in part or in summary, in the apparatus (Appendix B), with the exception of Heiberg's own brief acknowledgement (which is not in fact a review; see § III below). The principal notices are:
- Berlingske Tidende, no. 308 (23 December 1844): a warm description of the production, focusing on the gilt comet and the midnight-blue silk ribbon; the reviewer recommends the volume "to every household in which the heavens are matter of conversation."
- Fædrelandet, no. 1818 (17 January 1845): a longer and more substantive notice, by an unsigned correspondent who has been variously identified (see Holm 2011, p. 91 n. 4) and who treats the work as a satire on Heiberg's astronomical turn rather than (as Notabene's preface insists) a respectful continuation of it. The reviewer's reading has been the standard one ever since; the present editor is not aware of any subsequent reader who has taken the dedication entirely at face value.
- Intelligensbladene, no. 51 (31 January 1845): a brief notice by the editorial committee, acknowledging the volume's existence and observing that "the editor of the present journal does not propose to enter into the matter further, the work being addressed to a quarter on which the journal has its own established views."
- Kjøbenhavnsposten, no. 18 (22 January 1845): a hostile review by Carl Ploug (signed "C. P.") accusing Notabene of impudence toward the Professor. The same Ploug reviewed Vol. I two months later in the same hostile register; for the redactional treatment of his Vol. I review in the Anden Udgave, see the introduction to Vol. III.
- Maanedsskrift for Litteratur, vol. XXXIII (1845): a substantial twenty-page essay by F. C. Sibbern on the relation of speculative astronomy to speculative theology, occasioned by the Urania volume but treating Notabene's text as a foil rather than its principal subject. Sibbern's essay is the only contemporary notice that develops at length; it is reprinted in part in Appendix B.
III. Heiberg's response
Heiberg's response to the dedication is recorded in a single sentence in a letter to his mother of 24 December 1844 (Heiberg-arkivet, Kgl. Bibl., Add. 1840, fasc. III, fol. 27r): "Notabene har tilegnet mig en Aarbog, hvori jeg figurerer udførligt; jeg har gennemløbet den og finder den ikke usmagelig." (Notabene has dedicated to me an Almanac in which I figure at length; I have skimmed it and find it not in poor taste.) Notabene appears never to have received a more substantial response. The Heiberg-arkivet preserves no correspondence between Heiberg and Notabene; Heiberg's published works of 1845 contain no reference to the Urania.
The brevity of Heiberg's response has been variously interpreted. Holm (2011, pp. 95–99) reads it as a tactical silence, by which Heiberg refused either to endorse the dedication (which would have committed him to the volume's astronomical programme) or to repudiate it (which would have escalated the public quarrel); Lindhardt (1969, p. 178) reads it as the response of a man too occupied with his own work to attend at length to a parodic gift-book; Pattison (2014, ch. 6) reads it as evidence that Heiberg had not recognised the volume as parodic at all, and had taken the dedication's mock-deference at face value. The present editor records the interpretations and offers no judgement among them.
A more substantive Heiberg engagement with the Urania came in February 1845, when Heiberg himself published, in his Intelligensblade, the Eftertale to his own Urania. Aarbog for 1844, in which he thanked the public for the warm reception of his volume of the previous year. The text of the Eftertale, which makes no reference to Notabene's Urania, is the source of the joke in Notabene's Det logiske System, Anden Udgave (1846; see Vol. III, Fortale til Anden Udgave), where the same formulae of public-thanks are deployed for satirical purposes. The relation between Heiberg's Eftertale and Notabene's Anden Udgave Fortale is treated at length in Holm (2011, ch. 5).
IV. The "Bishop M." passage
The April horoscope of Stjerne-Calender for 1845 (Section IV of the main text), in which "Bishop M." is described as delivering a sermon on the duty of contentment "received with universal contentment, and changed nothing," gave rise to a small controversy in the spring of 1845. A letter from a member of Bishop J. P. Mynster's household — identified by Lindhardt (1969, p. 184 n. 12) as a younger relative of Mynster's, though the signature is unclear — to the publisher Reitzel (14 February 1845; copy in Reitzel-arkivet, NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1844-45, fol. 201v) protested the passage and requested that subsequent printings omit it. The third and fourth printings (November and December 1845) retain the passage unaltered; the Reitzel firm's reply to the household is not extant, but the inference is that Reitzel declined the request, presumably with Notabene's concurrence.
The Bishop himself does not appear to have entered the matter. Mynster's Dagbøger (ed. Brandt, 1862) make no reference to the volume, nor do the Meddelelser om mit Levnet (1854). The episode is significant chiefly for what it indicates of the volume's circulation in 1845: that the Urania had reached the household of the Primate of the Danish Church within two months of publication, and that someone in that household had read the volume with sufficient attention to identify the April horoscope's reference to Mynster.
V. The "second annual" supplement
The fourth printing of December 1845 contained, in an appendix not present in the first three printings, what Notabene's preface to the appendix calls a "supplement toward a second Aarbog for 1846" consisting of three sections in continuation of those of the 1845 volume. The appendix was Notabene's first attempt at the projected second annual; the second annual was not, in the event, completed, and no separate Aarbog for 1846 appeared. The present edition reproduces the December 1845 appendix as Appendix A, with editorial notes.
Draft material in the Heiberg-arkivet (Add. 1842, fasc. XIV) suggests that Notabene was at work on the second Aarbog into the spring of 1846 but abandoned it during the summer of that year; some forty manuscript pages had been drafted at the point of abandonment. The unpublished drafts (witness M) are reproduced, in selection, in Appendix C; the principles of selection are set forth in the apparatus introduction.
The relation between the abandonment of the second Aarbog and the dissolution of Notabene's marriage in August 1846 (see Vol. VII, § VI, and Vol. IX, ch. 8) has been the subject of considerable scholarly speculation. The present editor offers no view. The draft material in Appendix C is presented for the reader's inspection without commentary on its biographical context.
VI. Reception 1850–2024
The Aarbog form went out of literary fashion after the political and aesthetic developments of 1848, and Urania lost its primary readership soon after. The volume nevertheless remained in print, in Reitzel's catalogue, until 1873. A "popular edition" — published by Schubothe in 1874, in a smaller format and with reduced production values — circulated through the 1880s in some 4,000 additional copies, but was abandoned in 1891. The Schubothe popular edition omits Section V (Sendebrev fra et fjernt stjernekyndigt Folk) in its entirety, on grounds the Schubothe foreword does not specify; the section is restored in the present edition.
Brandes mentions Urania in passing in Det moderne Gjennembruds Mænd (1883, p. 178) only to dismiss it as "den Notabene-Volume, der gjorde hvad der ventedes af den" ("the Notabene volume that did what was expected of it"); the Modern Breakthrough writers showed little further interest. The volume entered a long obscurity from the close of the nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth, when Sven Tito Achen's 1957 facsimile of the first edition (Det danske Selskab, Copenhagen) restored it to scholarly attention.
The volume was translated into German in 1934 by Theodor Haecker (Innsbruck), in continuation of Haecker's earlier Notabene work; into Swedish in 1962 by Olof Lagercrantz (Wahlström & Widstrand, Stockholm), an elegant if free rendering; and into French in 1981 by Régis Boyer (Aubier, Paris). The present edition supplies the first English translation.
VII. Editorial principles for the present edition
The text is based on the first printing of December 1844 (witness A; Kgl. Bibl., 17,-264 8°), as the witness most authoritatively transmitting Notabene's original intentions. The variants of printings B, C, and D are reported in the apparatus; the December 1845 appendix is printed as Appendix A; the unpublished 1846 drafts are reproduced in selection as Appendix C. The "Bishop M." passage is retained in the form of all four 1844–45 printings; the Schubothe 1874 omission of Section V is noted in the apparatus to that section.
The Danish facing-page text retains the orthography and punctuation of witness A; the English facing-page text is a new translation prepared by the present editor 2022–24. The Heiberg-arkivet manuscript variants (witness M) are reported in the apparatus only where they bear on questions of authorial intention; the variants of more limited typographical interest will be published separately in a forthcoming volume of Kierkegaardiana.
— M.F.H. Forskningscentret, December 2024
Textual Apparatus
Textual Apparatus
Volume IV — Urania. Aarbog for 1845
Selected Notes
Model spread; the full apparatus is in the electronic edition at `forskningscentret.ku.dk/notabene/iv`.
Conventions
Sigla:
— A. Urania. Aarbog for 1845, udgiven af Nicolaus Notabene. Kjøbenhavn: C. A. Reitzel, December 1844 (the title page bears the date of publication only as "1845"; the Reitzel-arkivet records the actual delivery to retail outlets in the second week of December 1844). First printing of 1,500 copies. Textual basis: Kgl. Bibl., 17,-264 8°.
— B. Second printing, February 1845. Standing-type reprint of A with one substantive correction (reported at § II.14 below). 1,500 copies.
— C. Third printing, November 1845. Standing-type reprint of B without further substantive correction. 1,500 copies.
— D. Fourth printing, December 1845, with appendix. Standing-type reprint of C plus the December 1845 supplement ("supplement toward a second Aarbog for 1846"), printed in the present edition as Appendix A. 2,000 copies.
— S. Urania, Aarbog for 1845. Folkeudgave. Kjøbenhavn: Schubothe, 1874. Popular edition; reduced format; omits Section V (Sendebrev fra et fjernt stjernekyndigt Folk) in its entirety. Six impressions 1874–1891; total run approximately 4,000 copies. The present edition reports S only at points of substantive divergence from A.
— M. Heiberg-arkivet, Kgl. Bibl., Add. 1842, fascicle XIV. Forty-three manuscript leaves in Notabene's hand, drafted between January 1845 and May 1846 for the projected second Aarbog for 1846. The drafts were never completed; their selection is reproduced in Appendix C of the present edition. M's bearing on the present Vol. IV text is limited to four specific instances in which M's drafts revise the corresponding passages of A; these are reported in the apparatus below.
— Lt. Urania. Almanak für 1845. Translated by Theodor Haecker. Innsbruck: Hochland-Verlag, 1934.
— Lf. Uranie. Almanach pour 1845. Translated by Régis Boyer. Paris: Aubier, 1981.
— Ls. Urania. Almanacka för 1845. Translated by Olof Lagercrantz. Stockholm: Wahlström & Widstrand, 1962. Free rendering with substantial liberties; reported in the apparatus only where it bears on the present translator's choices.
— HEI. Urania. Aarbog for 1844. Edited by J. L. Heiberg. Kjøbenhavn: Reitzel, December 1843. The Heiberg volume to which Notabene's Urania of 1844 stands in conscious relation; not a witness to the present text but cited where Notabene's prose directly responds to Heiberg's formulations. The text is the Heiberg-arkivet's archival copy (Add. 1840, fasc. II, no. 4) — that is, Heiberg's own annotated copy, with his pencil markings.
Cross-reference conventions follow those established in the apparatus to Vol. VII.
Fortale — to be dedicated, with the deepest reverence, to Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg
General note. The Fortale to Urania is the most elaborately deferential of all the Notabene prefatorial pieces and the place at which the satirical strategy of the eight phantom volumes is most fully visible: the praise of Heiberg is so elaborate and so sustained that it becomes, by its sustaining, the satire it claims not to be. The Fortale therefore stands as the model instance of Notabene's principal rhetorical technique; the apparatus to other volumes' prefaces refers back to it.
The textual situation of the Fortale is simple. A, B, C, and D agree throughout; M does not preserve a draft (the Fortale was, by Notabene's own indication in his diary entry of 29 November 1844, NKS 4° 3204, fasc. 2, fol. 64v, composed in the final week before the manuscript went to the press, leaving no draft in his working papers). S retains the Fortale unaltered; the Schubothe abridgement bears only on Section V.
Fortale 4. the most learned and many-sided Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg ] A: den høilærde og mangesidige Professor Johan Ludvig Heiberg. — The compound adjective mangesidige (many-sided) is a Heibergism: Heiberg himself had used the term in the preface to Perseus (1837), where he advanced "den mangesidige Selvbevidsthed" (the many-sided self-consciousness) as the proper ideal of speculative philosophy. Notabene's deployment of the term in praise of Heiberg himself is, on Lindhardt's reading (1969, p. 167), one of the volume's most elegant rhetorical moves: Heiberg's own philosophical category is turned back upon him as personal praise.
Fortale 9. rumours, certain whispers, that the Professor has of late been observed in conversation with theologians ] A: Rygter, visse Hviskerier, at Professoren paa det Seneste har været observeret i Samtale med Theologer. — The reference is to Heiberg's correspondence with H. L. Martensen during 1843–44, which had become a subject of literary-society gossip in Copenhagen by the autumn of 1844. The specific gossip Notabene's Fortale alludes to is preserved in a letter from Henriette Wulff to Hanne Mynster of 14 November 1844 (Mynster-arkivet, Add. 1846, fasc. III, fol. 9r), in which Wulff reports that "Professor Heiberg, by the talk of the Filosofiske Selskab, is now to turn from astronomy to theology, which would be a calamity for Danish letters." The Wulff letter postdates the Fortale's composition by some two weeks and cannot have been Notabene's source; the Fortale indicates that the rumours had circulated in the Filosofiske Selskab for some months before Wulff's notice of them.
Fortale 15. I do not flatter myself that I have written what the Professor would have written; that would be a presumption of which not even my dumhed is capable ] A: Jeg smigrer mig ikke med at have skrevet hvad Professoren vilde have skrevet; det vilde være en Antagelse hvortil endog ikke min Dumhed er i Stand. — The Danish dumhed (stupidity) is preserved in the present edition's English in italic to register the Notabenian self-deprecation as a deliberate rhetorical move; the translation "stupidity" would lose the conventional Danish register, in which Dumhed is the self-deprecating equivalent of the English "modest abilities." See the Translator's Note, Vol. I, p. xxvi, for the principle.
Section I — Det astrologiske Aar
§ I.2. (Of the influence of Saturn). the perihelion of Saturn ] A: Saturns Perihelium. — Notabene's astronomical-astrological figures throughout Section I are based on a careful (if not always accurate) reading of contemporary astronomical literature. The Reitzel-arkivet preserves Notabene's request to Reitzel of 22 November 1844 for "the loan of any copy of Berliner Astronomisches Jahrbuch for the years 1840–1844 which the firm may have on hand" (NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1844-45, fol. 191r); Reitzel's response of 24 November supplies the years 1842 and 1843. The astronomical data in Section I is in approximate agreement with the Jahrbuch for those years; minor errors of the kind that natural to a non-astronomer working from secondary sources are reported in the apparatus where they bear on the satirical argument.
§ I.5. (Of the metoscopic art). the Hegelian forehead presents to the metoscopic gaze a phenomenon of singular interest: three horizontal lines, of which the uppermost signifies Sein, the middle Nichts, and the lowest Werden* ] A: Den hegelianske Pande frembyder for det metoskopiske Blik et Phænomen af eenstaaende Interesse: tre horizontale Streger, af hvilke den øverste betegner Sein, den midterste Nichts, og den nederste Werden. — The German categorical terms are set, in A, in italic without quotation marks. The Heiberg-arkivet copy of A (Add. 1840, fasc. III, no. 7) bears, against this passage in the margin, a pencilled annotation in Heiberg's hand: "?" — the single character marking, apparently, surprise or amusement. The annotation is the only Heiberg marking in Heiberg's archived copy of Urania; it is reported here as the most concrete evidence of Heiberg's having read at least this passage of the volume he had received as dedicatee. — On Heiberg's response to Urania more broadly, see § III of the General Editor's Introduction and the apparatus to the Fortale* above; the letter to his mother of 24 December 1844 is reproduced in Appendix B.
§ I.7. (Of horoscopy, in conclusion). the horoscope of its dedicatee indicates many years of astronomical labour yet to come, and an absolute indisposition to take up other matters ] A: Horoskopet for dets Tilegnede angiver mange Aar af astronomisk Arbeide endnu at komme, og en absolut Uvilje til at tage andre Sager op. — The closing horoscope of Section I is the most direct expression of the Fortale's central concern (Heiberg's astronomical commitments must be preserved against the theological temptation). The phrase has been read by Pattison (2014, p. 112) as the Urania's rhetorical climax: the entire elaborate machinery of astrology, chiromancy, metoscopy, and necromancy is, on this reading, deployed only to secure the closing horoscope's commitment of Heiberg to his current pursuits. The reading is consistent with Notabene's own Efterskrift (q.v.), which makes the same commitment-by-horoscope explicit.
Section II — Sjelevandring: et apokalyptisk Digt
General note. Section II is the only verse composition in the Urania and the only sustained verse anywhere in the Notabene corpus. The metre — six-line stanzas in iambic tetrameter with a closing alexandrine, aabba rhyme — is unusual in Danish poetry of the 1840s and has no exact precedent in the literature available to the present editor. Notabene appears to have invented the form for the present composition.
§ II.14. I had not subscribed; I had only died ] A¹: Jeg havde ikke subscriberet; jeg havde kun døet. A²/B: Jeg havde ikke subscriberet; jeg havde kun døet derved. — The B-printing addition of derved ("by that," "thereby") is the second printing's principal substantive change. The addition supplies a connective absent in A¹ ("I had not subscribed; I had only died by that means") which clarifies the soul's mode of arrival at the Sun's gate. The Reitzel records (NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1844-45, fol. 197v) report that Notabene communicated the addition by letter dated 11 February 1845, requesting that "the omitted word derved be inserted in the second printing of Urania, the absence having been called to my attention by a reader whose name I shall not record but whose careful reading I commend to the firm." The reader has not been identified; the present editor accepts the addition as authorial and prints A²/B as the present text.
§ II.22. Professor watching Professor watching Professor watching sky ] A: Professor seer paa Professor seer paa Professor seer paa Himmel. — The recursive structure of the closing stanzas of Section II has been read variously: as a satire on Hegelian Selbstbewußtsein (Lindhardt 1969, p. 174); as a reduction of Heiberg's astronomical labour to its self-regarding form (Holm 2011, p. 102); as a structural anticipation of the mirror-cabinet figures of the later Kierkegaardian pseudonymous prose (Pattison 2014, pp. 114–15). The structural relation to Pap. V B 17 (an undated 1844 draft preserving a similar recursive figure in Climacus's hand) has been adduced by Cappelørn (1997) as evidence of Notabene's familiarity with Climacus's draft materials; the present editor records the parallel without endorsing the dependence.
§ II.27. and the precession of the equinoxes / Continued, as it must, in its locked boxes, / Unattended, somewhere above the foxes ] A: Og Æqvinoxernes Præcession / Fortsatte, som den maa, i sine lukkede Bokse, / Ubekymret, et Sted ovenfor Rævene. — The image of the locked boxes (literally; the Danish lukkede Bokse admits no easy figurative reading) has occasioned considerable scholarly comment. Lindhardt (1969, p. 175) reads the Bokse as the cosmic mechanism of the Heibergian astronomy itself — Heiberg's universe is locked (predetermined, deterministic) and boxed (parcelled into the discrete categorical bins of his speculative system). Holm (2011, pp. 102–03) reads them as the literary mechanism of Heiberg's Urania of 1843, which had presented the heavens as a series of discrete sectional treatments, each "boxed" off from the others. The two readings are not mutually exclusive. The present editor records both and inclines to Holm on grounds of textual proximity (the Urania of 1843 is the Urania of 1845's most immediate intertext).
Section III — Husmoderens Stjernekiger
General note. Section III, the "domestic novel extract," presents the only sustained imitation in the Notabene corpus of the Hverdags-Historie style associated with Thomasine Gyllembourg's contemporary novels. The relation to Gyllembourg's actual fiction has been the subject of an inconclusive debate, principally because Gyllembourg's authorship of the Hverdags-Historier (under the pseudonym "the Author of En Hverdags-Historie") was not publicly acknowledged until after her death in 1856; Notabene's imitation in 1844 therefore predates the public attribution by twelve years.
The principal scholarly question is whether Notabene was, in 1844, in private knowledge of Gyllembourg's authorship. The principal evidence either way is: (a) Notabene's aunt Vibeke Bentzon's library at Frederiksværk contained all volumes of the Hverdags-Historier in their Reitzel first editions, the inscriptions in three of which are in Heiberg's hand (Vibeke Bentzon being a distant cousin of the elder Heiberg's wife); the inscriptions identify the books as gifts but do not name the author. (b) The Heiberg-arkivet correspondence does not record any direct disclosure of Gyllembourg's authorship to Vibeke Bentzon or to Notabene. The principal contributions to the debate are Lindhardt (1969, pp. 177–82), Holm (2011, ch. 5), and Maibom (2007, "Gyllembourg-Sporet hos Notabene," Kierkegaardiana vol. XXVI).
The present editor takes no settled position. The textual situation of Section III itself is comparatively simple: A, B, C, D agree throughout; M preserves no draft.
§ III.7. the Etatsraad ] A: Etatsraaden. — The use of the title Etatsraad for the husband-figure of Section III has been read as identifying the figure with Heiberg himself (Heiberg held the rank Etatsraad from 1841). Lindhardt (1969, p. 179) treats the identification as deliberate; Holm (2011, p. 116) treats it as suggestive but not strict, on the grounds that Notabene's text supplies several details (the husband's calculation of the precession of the equinoxes; the casual reference to Notabene by name in the wife's reply at § III.32) that fit Heiberg only with strain. The present apparatus reports the identification as the standard reading.
§ III.18. Tidens Fordring ] A: Tidens Fordring. — The phrase "the demand of the time" was a contemporary Heibergian formulation; Heiberg's Om Philosophiens Betydning for den nuværende Tid (1833) deploys the phrase repeatedly. Notabene's use here, in the Etatsraad's mouth, attributes the formulation to its source and so identifies the husband-figure with Heiberg more particularly; the identification is one of the principal pieces of evidence for the Lindhardt-Holm dispute reported above.
§ III.32. You speak as though you had been reading Notabene ] A: De taler som om De havde læst Notabene. — The Etatsraad's reference to "Notabene" by name within the diegesis is the most direct breaking of the narrative frame in the entire phantom corpus. The figure (whether Heiberg or a generic husband) refers to the Urania volume in which his conversation is being printed and treats it as an external work of which his wife has independent knowledge. The reflexivity has been read variously: as a Romantic-ironic disruption of the diegetic illusion (Lindhardt 1969, p. 182); as a literal indication that Notabene was, by November 1844, already known by name in the Copenhagen literary society Heiberg inhabited (Holm 2011, p. 117); as a pre-publication promotional device (Maibom 2007, p. 142). The present editor accepts the Holm reading: the Forord of June 1844 had made the Notabene pseudonym familiar in literary circles, and the Etatsraad's reference of November 1844 is consistent with the pseudonym's currency at that date.
Section V — Sendebrev fra et fjernt stjernekyndigt Folk (omitted in Schubothe 1874)
General note. Section V — the imaginary embassy from the Star of Y—, bearing the Great Riddle — was suppressed by Dahl-following Schubothe in the 1874 Folkeudgave (S) and accordingly absent from the volume in its most widely circulated 1870s–1880s form. The Schubothe foreword does not specify a reason for the omission. The most plausible reconstruction, supported by Holm (2011, pp. 122–23), is that the section's principal joke — that the Great Riddle (a Hegelian three-stars formula) is "constructed so that any answer counts as a solution" — was felt by Schubothe's editorial office to give offence to readers of the Heibergian school, with whom the Schubothe firm had a continuing commercial relation in other publications. The omission was therefore commercial rather than substantive. The present edition restores Section V in its A form.
§ V.4. the Great Riddle ] A: den store Gaade. — The Riddle as Notabene presents it ("A figure stands at midnight beneath three stars. The first star is Being; the second star is Nothing; the third star has not yet risen. What is the name of the third star, and at what hour will it rise?") is a transparent parodic version of the Hegelian Being–Nothing–Becoming progression. The closing line ("the Riddle exists for the sake of identifying the Awaited One, not for the sake of being solved") is the section's principal philosophical claim and the closest Urania comes to direct theoretical statement; it has been read by Pattison (2014, p. 117) as Notabene's compressed critique of the Hegelian dialectic — namely, that the dialectic functions not by solving its problems but by posing them in a form that permits any solution to count as the right one. The reading is consistent with the broader argument of Vol. I's Anhang and is one of the principal cross-references between Vol. IV and Vol. I.
§ V.11. the most learned and many-sided Professor ] A: identical to the Fortale (q.v.). — The Star of Y—'s formulaic address to Heiberg deploys the same compound adjective mangesidige as the Fortale opening. The repetition has been read as Notabene's way of binding the imagined embassy to the volume's dedicatee: the Star of Y— addresses Heiberg by the same epithets the Fortale had supplied, so that the embassy's invitation to Heiberg becomes, by repetition, the Fortale's invitation in another mode. The cross-reference is preserved in M's drafts for the second Aarbog (fol. 38r), where the Star of Y—'s embassy reappears in fragmentary form.
Appendix A — Tillæg af December 1845: Supplement til en anden Aarbog for 1846
General note. The December 1845 fourth printing (D) appended sixty-eight pages of supplementary matter, the Tillæg af December 1845. The Tillæg comprised: (1) a brief Notabenian preface to the projected second Aarbog; (2) a continuation of Det astrologiske Aar, projected for a "Stjerne-Calender for 1846"; (3) a continuation of Sjelevandring in the form of a Second Apocalyptic Poem; (4) an opening section of a projected Husmoderens Stjernekiger, Kapitel II. The fourth section is incomplete; the Tillæg breaks off at the end of D's 68th supplementary page mid-sentence.
The relation between D's Tillæg and the M drafts for the unrealised second Aarbog is one of the principal textual situations in the present edition. M (fasc. XIV, fols. 1r–43v) preserves substantially more material than D printed; the present apparatus's principal task is to indicate, for each portion of D's Tillæg, the corresponding M material and the reason (where ascertainable) for the omission from D of further material that was, on M's evidence, available to Notabene in November 1845.
App. A, § II.6. the second Apocalyptic Poem ] D: as printed. M (fols. 14r–21v) preserves a substantially longer second Apocalyptic Poem, comprising fifty-four stanzas where D prints only the first twenty-three. — The omitted thirty-one stanzas of M, on Lindhardt's reading (1969, p. 187), constitute a continuation of the soul's vision through three further heavens (corresponding to Mercury, the Moon's Dark Side, and a "Twelfth Sphere" not present in the cosmology of Section II); the omission has the consequence that D's printed continuation is fragmentary in a manner the printed text does not acknowledge. The reason for the omission is, on Notabene's own indication in a letter to Reitzel of 19 November 1845 (NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1845-46, fol. 212v), the desire to "leave the further continuation for the second Aarbog itself, when it shall, in due course, appear." The second Aarbog did not, in the event, appear; the unprinted thirty-one stanzas of M are now reproduced in the present edition's Appendix C in selection.
*App. A, § IV (the unfinished Kapitel II of Husmoderens Stjernekiger). D breaks off mid-sentence at the end of the 68th supplementary page. M (fols. 31r–43v) continues the chapter for a further sixty-three pages of manuscript, completing a single dramatic scene (the Etatsraad receives a second visit from the young theological candidate of Section III; the wife has, in the intervening year, taken up the practice of astronomical observation; the conversation concerns whether the new astronomy "has now arrived sufficiently to be incorporated into the System*"). The completion of the scene in M is one of the most polished portions of any of the unpublished Notabene drafts; the principal scholarly question is why Notabene did not print the M continuation in D. — The most plausible reconstruction is the Reitzel letter of 19 November 1845 (cited above), which indicated Reitzel's preference for a sixty-eight-page supplement on commercial grounds; the M continuation would have required an additional gathering. The present edition reproduces the M continuation in selection in Appendix C, with a brief editorial note discussing the abandonment.
Appendix B — Heiberg to his mother, 24 December 1844
The text of Heiberg's letter (Heiberg-arkivet, Add. 1840, fasc. III, fol. 27r) is reproduced in Vol. IX § II of the present edition. The single sentence regarding Urania — "Notabene har tilegnet mig en Aarbog, hvori jeg figurerer udførligt; jeg har gennemløbet den og finder den ikke usmagelig" — is reproduced here without further apparatus. The interpretive question of the brevity of Heiberg's response is treated at length in the General Editor's Introduction, § III. The apparatus to Vol. IX § II provides the broader context of Heiberg's correspondence of December 1844.
The Bishop M. household correspondence
The letter from a member of Bishop J. P. Mynster's household to Reitzel, 14 February 1845 (Reitzel-arkivet, NKS 4° 2989-A, fasc. 1844-45, fol. 201v), protesting the April horoscope of Section IV ("Bishop M. will deliver a sermon on the duty of contentment..."), is reproduced in Appendix D of the present edition together with Reitzel's pencilled marginal annotation ("Reply: cannot be done; the volume is in fourth printing"). The apparatus to Section IV § April reports the textual situation; the variant readings of the four printings agree throughout the disputed passage. The April horoscope was retained in all four 1844–45 printings and in the 1874 Schubothe; the only printing in which the passage is altered is Haecker's 1934 German (Lt), which substitutes "ein Bischof" for "Biskop M."; the substitution is reported in the apparatus to Section IV.
The full apparatus to Vol. IV addresses all sections in comparable detail, including the Sections not treated in the present model spread (the Indhold, the Section IV Stjerne-Calender for 1845, and the Notabenian Efterskrift). The reception apparatus (printed reviews of 1844-45, summarised in §§ II–IV of the General Editor's Introduction to the present volume) is reproduced in Appendix B alongside the Heiberg letter. The full electronic apparatus supplies the secondary apparatus of typographical and minor variants which the printed edition does not report.
— M. F. H. Forskningscentret, December 2024