- 176 -

he visited Italy, where he became acquainted with the famous classicist Winckelmann and the artist Angelica Kauffmann. The following year he returned to Zürich and studied history as a favourite pupil of Bodmer and later of Breitinger, eventually succeeding to Bodmer's professorial chair in 1774. He was also very active in the publishing firm of Orell, Gessner and Füssli, which brought to light several other unknown writers besides Bräker and also some forgotten German poetry and folksong. He founded the periodicals "Der Erinnerer" [The Monitor] together with Lavater, in 1765, and in 1783 the "Schweizer-Musaeum", and edited and contributed to many others.

Later in life he held various official posts in local government, including, from 1795, the office of Obmann [overseer] of lands and property in the canton which had formerly belonged to monasteries. During the Revolution he was, like Lavater, a moderate, trying first to intervene on behalf of the victims of governmental repression such as the citizens of Stäfa, and later to mitigate oppression by the French occupation. He became Minister for the Interior in the post-revolutionary national government from 1801 to 1803. In 1807 he helped to found the National Institute for Political Science, later amalgamated with the University of Zürich. He did not give up all his official posts until he was 85 years old.

Füssli was twice married and had a large family, several of whom became Bräker's friends and patrons, notably two of his sons-in-law, Ratsherr [councillor] Abraham Steger of Lichtensteig and Pastor Hans Heinrich Wirz of Kilchberg near Zns of Sürich. Later, Füssli having remarried in 1786, Bräker met relatives of his second wife at Arbon on Lake Constance.

Bräker's allusion to the editorial work done by Füssli brings up the vexed question of just how far Bräker's published work differs from what he actually wrote. Unfortunately the manuscript of the autobiography has been lost, and comparison of original and published work can be made only on the basis of the diaries. Schiel thinks that Füssli virtually rewrote the autobiography, giving as example of Bräker's uncorrected style the meditation on the death of his mother in 1783. I think he is not comparing like with like, as the diary is everywhere more carelessly written than the autobiography, also he does not take into account the difference between lyrical and narrative writing, a distinction that (in my opinion) Bräker was quite capable of making. I am not disputing, however, that Füssli revised Bräker's work (it would be really odd if he had not done some editorial work on it). Voellmy gives references that show Bräker himself admitting that his spelling and punctuation were illiterate (v 1 p 16), that he never revised his work (v 2 p 10) and was grateful for correction (v 2 pp 12, 13, 16).

Comparison of the early Kleine Lebensgeschichte with the published autobiography does indeed show considerable change, not only in the way Bräker's thoughts and feelings are expressed, but in the thoughts and feelings themselves. I have already drawn attention to this relating to the passages on Bräker's father's death in chapter 64 of the autobiography. I think, however, that this reflects actual change in Bräker's mentality as a result of his development as a scholar, not the imposition of ideas from Füssli. It is very tempting to attribute to Füssli some of the more trite and hackneyed sentiments of patriotism and patronage that appear in some of the later diaries, but it is quite possible that Bräker did become more conservative in politics and morals as he grew older. (Compare, for example, his account of life in the Prussian army with his description of a local militia ceremony in 1793.) My own view is that generally speaking Bräker's later writing changes somewhat for the worse when he is conscious of writing for publication, but that this reflects Füssli's influence beforehand rather than his revision later. It may also reflect Bräker's increasingly desperate need of money in the 1790s.

Füssli's preface to the book edition, dated 6th April 1789, states that preparing Bräker's work for publication was "little trouble and such as to double the sweet enjoyment of a few dozen hours". This suggests heavy revision, but simply correcting the spelling and punctuation would have taken quite some time. Füssli did add some notes, about half of them are explanations of

Contents