At first glance it is just a simple wooden house in Liepāja amidst the magnificent buildings of the architect Paul Max Bertschy (1840-1911) that shape the urban landscape of Latvia's third largest city. And yet the inconspicuous-looking building on Bāriņu iela in the city center is a place of great importance – it once housed the bookstore of François Théodore de Lagarde and Johann Daniel Friedrich that published the first edition of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Judgment in 1790.
Commemorating this historical fact are a memorial plaque and a small monument to the German philosopher whose biography in many aspects is related to what today is known as Latvia. Kant´s special connection with the region was also highlighted at a recent series of events at the Latvian National Library to honour the 300th anniversary of the German philosopher's birth in 1724.
The Critique of Judgment is the last of Kant's three major “critical works” and was preceded by the groundbreaking Critique of Pure Reason (1781) and the Critique of Practical Reason (1788). These writings have changed the way people think all over the world – and have lost nothing of their relevance to this day. The landmark seminal works brought about a revolution in philosophical thought and are still leading the way in all areas of modern philosophy.
Often considered to be Kant's masterpiece and one of the greatest philosophical books of all time, the Critique of Pure Reason was first published in Riga by Johann Friedrich Hartknoch (1740-1789), who also brought out and distributed the second edition Critique of Practical Reason. Hartknoch had built up the largest publishing and bookselling business in the region, and also published the works of other great philosophers such as Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803). The first inside pages of all the books attest to this affiliation.
Publishing in Libau
Following the death of Hartknoch, his same-named son successfully continued the publishing business. But Johann Friedrich Hartknoch junior was unable to win Kant's favor – and the Critique of Judgment was thus published by Lagarde and Friedrich. Why and for what reason Kant selected the publishing house that had established its branch on 15 June 1785 in the city that then was known as Libau it is not clear. The Latvian historian and philosopher Rihards Rubīns (1930-2014) assumed that it might have been for cost reasons.
Another explanation, according to the late researcher, might have been that Liepāja – located halfway between Königsberg and Riga – was back then still part of the Duchy of Courland, where there was not such strict book censorship as in the Russian Empire to which Riga belonged as the capital of the Governorate of Livonia.
The links to both Courland and Livonia were in any case close: Königsberg was a trading city well connected to other Baltic ports and young men from the region flocked to study at the University of Königsberg.
Literary scholar and book historian Aija Taimiņa has also no direct explanation as to why Kant changed his publisher. "Maybe it was simpler, maybe he hoped that it would be cheaper, maybe he hoped that there would be a fee, maybe they hoped for something else, maybe they persuaded them. Who knows?" she told LSM, adding that in general Kant and Hartknoch had had a relationship that was mutually beneficial.
The publisher paid royalties and sent gifts such as salmon and caviar to Kant in Königsberg and distributed his books, which in turn contributed to the fortune of Hartknoch’s bookselling business.
No matter what at the end were reasons for Kant to switch to Lagarde, the publisher seemed to meet the expectations. Lagarde made "every effort of giving the work also external beauty," Kant's follower and student Johann Gottfried Kiesewetter (1766-1819), who revised and made corrections to the manuscript, wrote to the great philosopher. The quality of the paper surpassed that of Hartknoch's paper, Kiesewetter informed Kant in the correspondence, adding that "new typesetting letters are also needed to print the work."
Kant himself also seemed to be quite impressed by the work of Lagarde. "The specimen sheets show that the printing was very well done," he wrote in a letter to the publisher dated 9 March 1790. Lagarde at once returned the praise to the famous author. "Your work does not only benefit me, but also brings honour to my publishing house," he replied to Kant in his answer. Not least because the first inside page of the books attested to its affiliation and stated: Berlin und Libau, bey Lagarde und Friedrich, 1790. It was to remain the most important publication in the company’s 30-year history.
Given the strong demand for the work, Lagarde soon afterwards announced the prospect of publishing a second edition. Because of many typographical and printing errors in the hastily compiled first edition and also due to other commitments of Kant, the revised version could be published only in 1793. By this time, however, Lagarde and Friedrich, who had settled down in Libau for good, had already parted ways – and on the first inside page of the book only Berlin was stated as place of publication.
Legend it has that Kant, who is known for almost never leaving his home city of Königsberg, might have personally come to Liepāja to hand over the manuscript of the “Critique of Judgment“. However, there is no documentary evidence that would support the claim, according to Rubīns, who was the driving force behind the Kant memorial in Liepāja and did extensive research on the topic.
Although he did find not anything that indicates that the anecdote might be true, the tourism information office of Latvia´s third biggest city still boasts on its website that “Kant is considered to have visited Liepāja at some point. “
Another Kant in Courland
Well documented in written sources, however, is that another Kant spent a big part of his life in what is now Lativa. Kant's eleven-years-younger brother Johann Heinrich (1735-1800) is proven to have worked first as co-rector and then as director of the gymnasium in Mitau (Jelgava) from 1775.
After studying theology in Königsberg, he moved to the Duchy of Courland and Semigallia in 1758 and worked as a private tutor at an estate in Scheden (Šķēde). Later, Johann Heinrich Kant became a Lutheran pastor in Alt-Rahden (Vecsaule) parish, where he also died in 1800 at the age of 64 – four years before his famous older brother who passed away in 1804 in Königsberg after a lengthy illness.
Kant did not have much in common with his younger brother and was not very close to any of his other siblings, either. “No close relationship could develop between the two brothers,” explained the German archivist and historian Manfred von Boetticher in a lecture about the two Kants based on his research of historical material and the exchange of letters between them, adding that: ”The philosopher's behaviour towards his brother sheds a significant light on the philosopher's idea of duty and family, to which he felt bound in his own way. “
Both Kant brothers had been quite distant from each other since their youth and their ways split forever in 1758, when Johann Heinrich left Königsberg for Courland. Only occasionally did the younger brother write a letter to the older one, and for years did not receive any reply.
”Although it cannot be ruled out that the correspondence between the two has not been completely preserved, it was in any case extremely one-sided, ” von Boetticher said, adding that Johann Heinrich regularly complained about Immanuel’s silence.
The letters give evidence of the most important periods of Johann Heinrich’s private and professional life. One of them was also included in a collection of letters written by various German writers between 1783 and 1883 that was published and commented upon by the influential German philosopher Walter Benjamin (1892-1940 – he also had some interesting links to Latvia) in the anthology Deutsche Menschen. Eine Folge von Briefen (German Men and Women: A Sequence of Letters; 1936).
”I have a happy and loving marriage with my good and worthy wife and I am pleased that my four well-formed, good-natured, obedient children fill me with the almost infallible expectation that they will one day become fine, upstanding human beings“, the letter dated 21 August 1789 stated, in which Johann Heinrich also asked his brother to write him also a letter, with news of their sister, and he even offers to pay for the postage costs. But the hope for an answer was in vain.
Mitau was calling
Kant did not even consider it necessary to personally inform his younger brother that he rejected the offer of a professorship in philosophy at the newly established Academia Petrina in Mitau in 1775. Established by Duke Peter von Biron, it was the first higher education facility in Latvia. Johann Heinrich served there first as its co-rector and then as rector until 1781, before accepting the pastoral position in Vecsaule. The historical building today houses the Ģederts Eliass Jelgava History and Art Museum.
”I am told you are not coming. That is not right – you would have found here a brother, who loves you, and a sister-in-law who would like to meet you, and who deserves to be loved by you“, Johann Heinrich stated regretfully in letter to the great philosopher on 21 January 1776. And some years later he wrote: “Mitau reached out its arms to you three years ago. Was it love of fatherland, or what was it, that you did not want to come? ”
However, even though Immanuel Kant avoided having close contact with his brother, he appointed his relatives as heirs and left his sister-in-law and her children a generous inheritance. ”The reasoning for this is very telling. Kant did it not because of brotherly bonding or love but considered it rather a duty of gratitude because both have been raised by their common parents,“ von Boetticher explains, adding that Kant’s rather cold relationship to his relatives seemed probably correct in the eyes of the philosopher.
“It was a fundamental conception of Immanuel that explains his attitude towards Johann Heinrich and that made him on purpose not to react to his brother’s emotional assurances, “ von Boetticher told LSM, indicating that Kant was living a strictly ordered life and wanted to live up to his ideas. "And in his idea there is no room for emotions – neither for women nor for his brother. Only for the people by whom he is inevitably directly surrounded.”
This attitude would only change later in Kant’s older years after he had retired and could not any longer work academically. “It is striking that the philosopher now adopted a far more personal tone towards his more distant relatives than he had ever done towards his brother and sister-in-law, who were waiting so much for kind words from him, “ von Boetticher said in reference to some letters of Kant to the sons-in-law of his brother that were sent after Johann Heinrich’s death. “Had he become less strict towards himself? Had he become more lenient? So it seems.“
Reason in Riga
While von Boetticher was taken aback by this mindset shown by Kant senior, he found warm words for the younger brother. Johann Heinrich could be considered a “committed local German pastor“ who devotedly brought up his own children and promoted the spiritual life of the Latvians, the German historian and archivist told LSM: “His congregation was Latvian and he also wrote to his brother that he certainly brought his Christian message to the people with the
Latvian language and a lot of patience.”
Former Latvian President Egils Levits found the work and activities of Johann Heinrich, as well as his relation to Immanuel, to be a “very noteworthy and interesting, but relatively unknown facet“ that should be explored more.
“It is also part of our country’s history,“ he told LSM on the sidelines of von Boetticher’s lecture that he attended as listener. Levits was Latvia`s head of state from 2019 to 2023 and is a knowledgeable expert of the long and deep historical relations between Latvia and Germany, where he spent a large part of his early life and gained his education.
Asked whether Latvia should in general promote Kant´s connection to the country and the historical legacy that he left behind here more actively, Levits said: “Definitely. This is part of the history of the Enlightenment, of the history of Latvia – in this case of its predecessors Courland and Livonia. And it is part of the intellectual history, but also of the political history of the country, particularly the spread of the ideas of the Enlightenment and of Kant's modern ideas of reason.”
Levits went on to say that the Baltic region was very receptive for the ideas of the great philosopher. “Courland and Livonia were one of the first areas to absorb Kant in some way in practice, and not just in the field of education“, the former Latvian president told LSM. Being himself a renowned jurist and law expert, Levits in particular referred to Kant’s influence on the development of the legal system: “He is also the originator of the modern concept of rule of law. The rule of law and the importance of law here refer to the works of Kant.“
Kant´s various links with Latvia are being highlighted at the international forum “Reason in Riga“ held at the Latvian National Library and University of Latvia from 24 to 28 September. Besides the special attention that will be paid to his connections to Latvia in different session of the four-day event, the organisers will offer the opportunity to view the library's collection on Kant and visit the places where his books were published in Rīga.
