Franz Overbeck and Friedrich Nietzsche were most certainly the closest of friends; despite whatever Nietzsche’s sister publicly proposed. The publication of Overbeck’s correspondence with Nietzsche after Overbeck’s death, via Bernoulli, put to rest the many and falsified aspersions of the Nietzsche Archive via Frau Forster-Nietzsche. The matter for this essay is whether their friendship extended into the cultivation of shared intellectualism. First, we will look at how these two scholars considered one another. Then, we will briefly look at how Nietzsche interacted with Overbeck’s ideas and vice versa. Finally, we will attempt to determine if Nietzsche could have adopted Overbeck’s thinking about the nature of Christianity in part or in whole.

 

First, it is fair to say that beyond the practical aspects of relationship, Nietzsche considered Overbeck a comrade in arms in his struggle against modern German scholarship. In a letter to Rodhe (1873), Nietzsche says of Overbeck, “Besides, he is a radical, and I can no longer get along with people who are not radicals.” In later correspondence, he writes that Overbeck is, “… my friend and brother-in-mind … the most independent theologian now alive according to my knowledge and in any case the greatest scholar of church history… .”

 

 

This is no small statement from Nietzsche at that particular time in his career. Overbeck’s public reception confirms what Nietzsche says. After the release of On the Christian Character of Our Present-Day Theology, Overbeck admits in a letter that he had, “embroiled himself in an irresolvable conflict with the dominant theological current in the German Empire and in consequence was condemned to exile.”

Nietzsche and Overbeck identified with each other intellectually. They were both taking on the stalwarts of German academia: philology and theology. Both were avidly opposed to what they saw as the false dichotomy of liberalism, personified in David Strauss, and conservatism epitomized by the old Prussian church.

 

However, they were not averse to disagreement between them. Overbeck did believe in the spirituality of the ancient church and that there was a true faith. Overbeck was extremely concerned with the study of history while Nietzsche was clearly focused on the future, though admitting the need for some historical analysis.

 

There is no direct overlap in their thinking and/or their approach to history, culture, or philosophy. There is, however, an ongoing critical interaction that respects one another and values each other’s input. James Overbeck (no relation to Franz) cites this example as representative of their critical relationship concerning Beyond Good and Evil: “Nietzsche suggested that Overbeck read the new book cover to cover, and not become embittered or hostile because of it. He warned him that the book might be unbearable, but that he should find at least a hundred particulars that were bearable.” But James Overbeck reports that Nietzsche also showed enthusiasm in that Overbeck and he knew each other intimately and that he could rely on Overbeck’s historical grounding to fund Nietzsche’s project.

Just this brief foray into their relationship shows a strong friendship that fueled critical scholarship between the two. Nietzsche’s identification with Overbeck as a fellow-radical and their continual submission of texts to one another gives us ample reason to believe that Nietzsche may have garnered some particularized views of essential Christianity from Franz Overbeck. Now turning to Nietzsche’s view, we must ask if there is legitimate coincidental thinking or merely the appearance of similitude between the two scholars?

Refer to:

• Lionel Gossman, Basel in the Age of Burckhardt (University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 200).
• Carl Albrecht Bernoulli, Overbeck und Nietzsche: Eine Freundschaft, (Leipzig: 1916).
• Letter from Nietzsche to Overbeck dated August 28, 1883.