In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

J. G. Fichte/F. W. J. Schelling Correspondence (1800–1802) 1. Schelling in Bamberg to Fichte in Berlin, May 14, 1800 Bamberg, 14th May 1800 My dear friend, I am using my first quiet moment here in Bamberg to write to you.1 No doubt you have received my article against the A.L.Z., and I hope that on the whole it has met with your approval.2 The following information is obviously more important for you: Reinhold’s3 review of Bardili’s Logik (perhaps it is already published) is supposed to be a new strike against us.4 This wind-tossed reed is now apparently an adherent of Bardili’s [system], just as he was formerly an adherent of yours. That remains to be seen. In the meantime I hope you have had the opportunity to do some work on your essay against Bardili, which as you predicted is now more urgent than ever. On the other hand, I ask you to leave me to deal with the Reinhold review; an analysis of it will constitute a nice supplement to the second edition of my text against the Literatur Zeitung, which will soon be necessary. And all the more so, because in the text I have designated Reinhold as someone who should no longer have the honor of reviewing for the L.Z. If his review is put together in the way the victory cry of the editors leads me to believe it is, then it is high time to snap this reed in two. He was a feeble support for our cause anyway. Please write to me about this when you get the chance. Also, please feel free to draw my attention to anything for the announced second edition, or to contribute something if you wish. I do not know how far along you are with your plan for a critical journal raised to the second power, but if you are still thinking about carrying it out, now would be the time. 21 22 J. G. Fichte/F. W. J. Schelling Please excuse the haste of this letter on account of the enormous distractions that I have been caught up in ever since arriving here. Gabler has orders to send you soon a vellum copy of my Transcendental Philosophy, a copy of the Einleitung zur Naturphilosophie, and the second issue of my Zeitschrift.5 I would be especially grateful if you could give me your opinion of the first two works.6 In deep friendship and with heartfelt respect, Yours sincerely, Schelling. 2. Fichte in Berlin to Schelling in Bamberg, June 9, 1800 Berlin, 9th June 1800 Heartfelt thanks for your thoughtful gesture, my dear friend.7 I have read your text8 with pleasure, yet also with the regret that a thinker who surely has better things to do at the moment than occupy himself with the eyesores of literature is still sometimes obliged to do so. I have no doubt that you will win your case against Schütz and that would be most welcome.9 Make sure you publish the proceedings. That is the only way to have any effect on those philistines whose nature and type I have had ample opportunity to become acquainted with here. I cannot tell you how long it will be before I can get to work on the review of Bardili’s Logik.10 I still have not read the review in the A.L.Z., but only found an absurd letter here in Berlin from Reinhold that I have left unanswered.11 I am going to make a complete break with that pitiful creature (I mean Reinhold) and suggest you do the same. Do what you see fit, you are guaranteed of my entire support and interest in advance. We should not be too hasty about carrying out our plan. I have in mind and am counting on a rich man whom I have met by chance and who urgently requests me to give him private lessons.12 I am grateful for and deeply cherish your continuing friendship, Yours, Fichte. Resident at Königsgraben 17. To Professor Schelling from Jena, presently in Bamberg. 3. Fichte in Berlin to Schelling in Bamberg, August 2, 1800. Berlin, 2nd August 1800. If you look at the enclosed printed text, my dear friend, you will find that I have been recently working on our critical plan.13 Upon my arrival in [18.217.144.32] Project MUSE (2024-04-24 05:06...

Share