Lord Ribbeck of Ribbeck
Lord Ribbeck of Ribbeck in Havelland,
And in his garden a pear tree would stand.
When autumn steeped all in its golden light
The pears were shining far and wide.
Whenever the bells of the tower struck noon
He crammed both pockets with pears anon.
He called: would you like a pear, my lad?’
When in his clogs a boy passed by
And when it was a girl, he called: My lass,
I ´ve got a pear, come nigh.
It went on thus for many a year
Until Lord Ribbeck´s end came near.
He felt he ´d pass, it was autumn, again,
And far and wide the pears were laughing;
It was then that Ribbeck said, I´m dying,
Put a pear into this grave of mine.
And three days later Lord Ribbeck was moved,
Out of the house with the half-hipped roof.
With solemn faces cottagers and peasants
Sang Jesus Christ, my sure defence.
And the children moaned with their hearts full of
cares:
He is dead, now. Who is going to give us our pears?
So the children moaned. This was not fair -
O, they were far from getting his measure.
The new one, though, he pinches his penny
and strictly shuts off the park and the pear-tree.
However, all but trusting his son
With a sense of foreboding, the older man
knew well what he was doing when
he asked for a pear in his grave back then.
When three years had passed, from this house so quiet
the shoot of a pear tree saw the light.
Again the years have come and gone,
a pear tree has hung over the grave for long,
And in the golden autumn light
again it´s shining far and wide.
And in the tree it whispers: ... a pear, my lad?
when through the churchyard a boy comes by
and when it is a girl, it whispers: Lass,
I´ve got a pear, come nigh.
And thus Lord Ribbeck of Ribbeck ´s hand
is still a blessing in Havelland.
Theodor Fontane (1889)
Theordor
Fontane modelled his ballad Lord Ribbeck of Ribbeck (Herr von Ribbeck) on Hans
Georg von Ribbeck (1689-1759), a squire in Havelland, a region west of Berlin,
which was a part of Prussia at that time. Today it lies in the German state of
Brandenburg.[1]
It is a sign of Ribbeck´s benevolence that he gives
away pears from his tree to children in the neighbourhood. I imagine him to be
similar to Lord Grantham in the film series Downton Abbey, a well-meaning
patriarch, who runs the family property responsibly and treats his employees
and tenants fairly, but who does not fundamentally question the social
hierarchy of the four estates of the realm, from which his privileged position
originates.
When he dies he is racked by doubts whether his son is
going to be a caring patriarch like him. As a pre-emptive measure he asks for a
pear to be buried with him. In fact, with his son taking charge of the estate
it becomes clear, how precarious the situation of the poorer population is when
their well-being depends on the good-will of the landlord.
Old Lord Ribbeck´s plan implemented at the very last
moment suggests a more sustainable model of participation in wealth. A pear
tree grows out of the pear in his grave, and the children are again offered the
fruits. This time they can pick them themselves. However, he has taken this
measure so late that the children have to wait for some years until the new
tree carries pears. This gap in the supply points to the power relations behind
the apparently idyllic first impression. Charity is not obligatory for the
nobility. It is an act of generosity a lord of the manor can afford to make,
and even though it is a kind gesture, it is still an element of arbitrary rule.
If the squire is charitable, he is esteemed for it in society. Charity can even
be considered a smart policy, because it is perpetuated by gratefulness and
subjugation of its beneficiaries. But
if he decides not to be generous, his position nevertheless remains
unquestioned.
Old Lord Ribbeck´s benevolence is not just a personal
trait. It arises from the spirit of his times, the 18th century.
Then, emotions were discovered as a source for the moral consciousness of human
beings.[2] In
a counter-movement to the rationalism of the 17th century, loving
care and charity became central literary themes and took root as social values.
In this context old Lord Ribbeck embodies an ideal, which has certainly had its
representatives in life. With his selfishness and his avarice his son is his
counter-image, a personality type, whose behavior demonstrates what the
situation can be like as well due to the power relations in an estates-based
society.
The comparison between the two generations of Ribbecks
can be interpreted as implied criticism of the social and political conditions
during the era in which the ballad was composed.[3]
The sequence of temporary liberalization, as during the Revolution of 1848, and
subsequent restoration was painfully familiar to the author Theodor Fontane. He
had to endure the authoritarian, estates-based Prussian state. While being in
its service, he was not only financially dependent on it, but he was humiliated
by its austerity, its arbitrariness and the pressure to adhere to its
ideological precepts. Despite writing for the nationalist conservative paper
‘Kreuzzeitung’, which represented the interests of the nobility and the court,
he was critical of the social and political system and open to modernization in
all areas of life.[4]
He perused the newspapers daily over decades and very likely observed with
interest the emergence of the labour movement and the beginnings of a welfare
state in Germany after 1871. His own precarious situation can serve as evidence
that social legislation makes sense. In fact, it is invaluable, because it
makes state support for those who have become destitute through illness or through
accidents at work legally binding.
So criticism of contemporary Prussia is certainly
implied in Fontane´s ballad as is a dream of wellbeing for all. Nevertheless,
aristocrat as he may be, old Lord Ribbeck has remained a model for human
kindness and compassion.
[1]
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Georg_von_Ribbeck. The manor house on the official
website (www.von ribbeck.de) of the estate, was built in the 19th century.
[2] Deutsche Literatur in Schlaglichtern, Bernd Balzer und Volker Mertens, Eds., Mannheim: Meyers Lexikonverlag, 1990, S. 201 ff.
The English authors Anthony A. Earl of Shaftesbury (1621-1683) and Francis Hutcheson
(1694-1746) outlined the theory of moral sense. ‘Hutcheson argues frequently and forcefully that we
are capable of irreducibly benevolent affections and passions, against the view
he associates with Hobbes and Mandeville that all passions are, in the final
analysis, forms of self-interest. Self-interest, he maintains, cannot explain
why we approve what we do, and in particular, why we identify with those of
benevolent character.’ Francis
Hutcheson on the Emotions (1694-1746),
Supplement to 17th and
18th Century Theories of Emotions, Amy M. Schmitter, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, 2010,
plato.stanford.edu/entries/emotions-17th18th/LD7Hutcheson.html.
[3] My source for
this is Fontane. Ein Jahrhundert in
Bewegung. Hamburg: Rowohlt Verlag, 2. Auflage, Februar
2019, by Iwan-Michelangelo D´Aprile. The author concludes that analogies in
Fontane´s ballads work as a vehicle for criticism. Allusions to the reign of Frederick the Great (Friedrich der Große,
1740-1786), for example, were a popular device used by contemporary authors to convey
criticism of the authoritarian state (144, 156-158). Besides, Fontane used the
stuff of legend and history as a frame of reference as well as his own
observations during his stays in Great Britain, which at that time was more
liberal and progressive than Prussia.
[4] This is
particularly evident in his own fields of expertise: the press, literature and
the theatre.
