ive.

This was the chief difference between Schiller's and Herder's mode of
conversing. Never, perhaps, has there been a man who talked with
greater charm than Herder, if one happened to catch him in an
agreeable mood--not a difficult matter when any kind of note was
struck with which he was in harmony.

[Illustration: #WILHELM VON HUMBOLDT# FRANZ KRUeGER]

All the extraordinary qualities of this justly admired man seemed to
gain double power in conversation, for which they were so peculiarly
adapted. The thought blossomed forth in expression with a grace and
dignity which appeared to proceed from the subject alone, although
really belonging only to the individual. Thus speech flowed on
uninterruptedly with a limpidness which still left something remaining
for one's own imagination, and yet with a _chiaroscuro_ which did not
prevent one from definitely grasping the thought. As soon as one
subject was exhausted a new one was taken up. Nothing was gained by
making objections which would only have served as a hindrance. One had
listened, one could even talk oneself, but one felt the lack of an
interchange of thought.

Schiller's speech was not really beautiful, but his mind constantly
strove, with acumen and precision, to make new intellectual conquests;
he held this effort under control, however, and soared above his
subject in perfect liberty. Hence, with a light and delicate touch he
utilized any side-issue which presented itself, and this was the
reason why his conversation was peculiarly rich in words that are so
evidently the inspiration of the moment; yet, in spite of such seeming
freedom in the treatment of the subject, the final end was not lost
sight of. Schiller always held with firmness the thread which was
bound to lead thither, and, if the conversation was not interrupted by
any mishap, he was not prone to bring it to a close until he had
reached the goal.

And as Schiller in his conversation always aimed to add new ground to
the domain of thought, so, in general, it may be said that his
intellectual activity was always characterized by an intense
spontaneity. His letters demonstrate these traits very perceptibly,
and he knew absolutely no other method of working.

He gave himself up to mere reading late in the evening only, and
during his frequently sleepless nights. His days were occupied with
various labors or with specific preparatory studies in connection
with them, his intellect being thus kept