Yuletide tags are out: Frederician version

[cahn]

Come join us in this crazy Frederick the Great fandom and learn more about all these crazy associated people, like the star-crossed and heartbreaking romance between Maria Theresia's daughter Maria Christina and her daughter-in-law Isabella, wow.

OK, so, there are FOURTEEN characters nominated:
Anna Karolina Orzelska (Frederician RPF)
Elisabeth Christine von Preußen | Elisabeth Christine Queen of Prussia (Frederician RPF)
Francesco Algarotti (Frederician RPF)
François-Marie Arouet | Voltaire (Frederician RPF)
Friedrich II von Preußen | Frederick the Great (Frederician RPF)
Hans Hermann Von Katte (Frederician RPF)
Joseph II Holy Roman Emperor (Frederician RPF)
Maria Theresia | Maria Theresa of Austria (Frederician RPF)
Michael Gabriel Fredersdorf (Frederician RPF)
Peter Karl Christoph von Keith (Frederician RPF)
Sophia Dorothea of Hanover (Frederician RPF)
Stanisław August Poniatowski (Frederician RPF)
Wilhelmine von Preußen | Wilhelmine of Prussia (1709-1758) (Frederician RPF)
Yekatarina II Alekseyevna | Catherine the Great of Russia (Frederician RPF)

This means some fourth person kindly nominated Algarotti and -- I think? -- Stanislaw August Poniatowski! YAY! Thank you fourth person! Come be our friend! :D Yuletide is so great!

I am definitely requesting Maria Theresia, Wilhelmine, and Fritz (Put them in a room together. Shake. How big is the explosion?), and thinking about Elisabeth Christine, but maybe not this year.

I am also declaring this post another Frederician post, as the last one was getting out of hand. I think I'll still use that one as the overall index to these, though, to keep all the links in one place.

(seriously, every time I think the wild stories are done there is ANOTHER one)

Comments

Peter Keith

[mildred_of_midgard]

Okay, so one thing I want to ramble about that's tangentially related to my canon-divergent AUs is the fact that Peter Keith keeps showing up in them, which is why I nominated him for Yuletide. And a while back, I was digging around the internet looking for whatever I could find on him (not much, and much of it contradictory). Biggest find was that he seems to have been acquainted with Lord Chesterfield, who helped him in his flight from Wesel to the Netherlands to England to Portugal after Fritz's failed escape attempt. (One always says "the escape attempt" because Fritz failed, but one of the three did actually make it.)

Well, rough chronology is that he escapes in 1730, goes to Portugal, serves in the army for 10 years, comes back in late 1740/maybe early 1741, as soon as Fritz becomes king and pardons him. Fritz gives him some money and honors (the interesting one being membership in the Academy of Sciences), lets him get married (I wonder if Fritz was displeased with people getting married this early, or if he and Peter* just weren't close enough any more for him to care), and generally they have little to do with each other thereafter. Which makes sense. The last time they'd seen each other was 1728, when they were both ~16, I don't know if they had a chance to correspond after 1730, and drifting apart is to be expected.

* I have to call him Peter, because there were at least 5 Keiths in Fritz's life. That's too many!

So I keep reading that Peter was complaining until he died about not getting repaid enough for the sacrifices he made for Fritz. Now, he died in 1756, and the only documentary evidence I've found is a letter from 1741 saying that the cost of living in Berlin was so high that the money Fritz had given him wasn't enough. Is there any reason to believe Fritz was the kind of person who would have persuaded to give him more money? No, not likely, especially since I'm convinced that somewhere in the back of Fritz's head, maybe consciously, maybe not, a voice was yelling, "Katte DIED with JOY in his heart, and you lived and you're complaining about MONEY?!!" (It's not fair, but Fritz was traumatized, and since when is he fair on most subjects, much less this one?)

Anyway, either someone is extrapolating from 1741 to 1756 and not saying so, or there's documentary evidence for 1756 that they're not giving. Anyway.

The super interesting thing when I started digging was a letter from one of Fritz's friends to Fritz explaining that Keith, who is in Berlin while Fritz and the army are in Silesia, would like a commission. Because while he appreciates the great honor Fritz has done him and only wants to serve him obediently, all the other young men are joining the army for the First Silesian War, and Peter doesn't feel right staying home. (This is a very common phenomenon among young men in wartime.)

Given that Peter was a lieutenant in the Prussian army in 1730, and served in the Portuguese army for the last ten years, and given that there's a war on when he gets home to Prussia, the fact that he wasn't immediately assigned to a regiment and, in fact, is having to *explain* why he'd like to be in the army...

It feels very much to me, reading between the lines, that Fritz was trying to keep Peter safe. And given how extremely sensitive Fritz was about people not supporting his wars and how willing he was to use force to recruit (okay, these are early days, this isn't the Seven Years' War yet, but look at how upset he gets with Wilhelmine for not appearing to support his wars whole-heartedly)...that feels pretty exceptional. I know he pulled Fredersdorf out of the army and gave him a civilian role as valet, then as chamberlain, but that's the only exception that's coming to mind off the top of my head, whereas the number of times he went the other way ("help me fight my wars or else") is high.

The most natural way for me to read this is Fritz trying to keep Peter safe because he feels bad. Especially given the speed (<1 month) with which he started bestowing promotions and titles on Katte's dad as soon as he became king.

In sum, Fritz trying to keep Peter safe gives me sad shippy feelings. :/ Not OTP shippy feelings, but some regret that they drifted apart and never really did anything about it. (Because remember: 19-yo Peter *was* willing to risk his life for Fritz's plan and go into possibly permanent exile with him, and even Wilhelmine, who Did Not Like him, wrote that 17-yo Peter really was devoted to Fritz and not just because he was Crown Prince.) This is really unusual for me as a shipper; normally I want nothing to do with ships that start when people are that young. But Peter and Katte are kind of exceptions...because of reasons that I haven't quite figured out yet.

Anyway, poor Peter has one (1) fic on AO3, in German, a modern AU where he's apparently trying to help Fritz put together a surprise birthday party for Katte. I'm trying my darnedest to give him a fixit fic, even if just friendly ex in exile with the Fritz/Katte OTP. <3 But really my brain is going straight to polyamory for maximum happily ever after, so sue me. :P

Re: Peter Keith

[cahn]

Yeah, I'm having feelign about this too :P

This is really unusual for me as a shipper; normally I want nothing to do with ships that start when people are that young. But Peter and Katte are kind of exceptions...because of reasons that I haven't quite figured out yet.

Hmm. I feel like mostly people in RL, especially in this day and age, drift off from our early ships/relationships and never talk to those people again. (At least, I never talk to my early boyfriends, and my first one and I probably wouldn't even be friends now if we met for the first time in another context, although he's perfectly nice.) And in a lot of early YA-type ships there is a lot of... emo... going on. But here we have some evidence that Fritz remembered these relationships and had feelings about them through his life <3 And the relationships themselves are less about 21st-C-style emo and more about, well, trying to survive emotionally. (See also my own obsession with Fritz-Wilhelmine.)

/amateur psychology

Re: Peter Keith

[mildred_of_midgard]

Later references to Peter Keith.

In 1750, an English traveler reports that Fritz actually gave him a gift of more money (I was aware of the amount but not the timing--I thought it had been an up-front thing in 1740), with this little anecdote:

There was a military review that took place partly on the grounds of his mother-in-law's house. Though little or no damage was done (depending on who you believe), Fritz gave Keith a casket with 10,000 crowns inside and told him to give it to his mother-in-law. The casket also had a letter saying nice things about Peter.

Hilariously, our source on this is a guy who:

1) Doesn't think Fritz can possibly be a free-thinker "in the worst sense of the word," because he's so virtuous.

2) In 1753, writes that Fritz is so extremely non-Machiavellian that the Anti-Machiavel was written by him--or his favorite Voltaire, the author's not sure, but either way, it means Fritz is like the most virtuous monarch ever. In 1753!

3) Doesn't think war is going to break out between Prussia and Russia, because Russia's not going to fuck with Fritz, and also Fritz would probably lose from the sheer disadvantage of numbers, even if he won a battle or two. Man, dude is going to be in for a surprise in about 3 years, and again in 10 years.

Anyway, I don't hold people responsible for predicting very unexpected political and military developments, and everyone is going to be biased by their own perspective on religion, but where was he in 1740?? Haha.

However, I was interested to find that he moved to Lisbon in 1729, which means he was there when Peter Keith arrived in 1730/1731, and in fact he states that he was very well acquainted with Keith and had a high opinion of him.

Unlike one Thomas Carlyle, who did not know Keith (being born too late), but did not let a little thing like that stop him from disliking him. Observe: "At the name Keith, a slight shadow (very slight, for how could Keith help himself?) crosses the mind: 'Is this, by ill luck, the Feldmarschall Keith?' No, reader; this is Lieutenant-Colonel Keith; he of Wesel, with 'Effigy nailed to the Gallows' long since; whom none of us cares for."

Thank you, you cranky Scot, I definitely enjoy being told whom I do and do not care for.

The anecdote in which Carlyle passes judgment (well, not for the first time) against Keith is the one where there's a huge bitter academic fight at the Academy of Sciences in 1752. It will eventually suck in König, Maupertuis, Euler, Voltaire, and Fritz, and culminate in or at least contribute to the final big Fritz/Voltaire explosion.

Anyway, Peter Keith had been appointed a curator at the academy by Fritz a few years earlier, so he gets to collect votes, write letters, etc. Carlyle disagrees with the decision, so he announces that none of us like Keith anyway. He also trashes Euler in the same section with "great in Algebra, apparently not very great in common sense and the rules of good temper."

Now, I tried super hard to understand what Carlyle was upset about in this passage, but I was forced to admit defeat at the hands of paragraphs like this:

"THURSDAY EVENING, 13th APRIL, 1752, The Academy met; Curator Monsieur de Keith, presiding; about a score of acting Members present. To whom Curator de Keith, as the first thing, reads a magnanimous brief Letter from our Perpetual President: 'That, for two reasons, he cannot attend on this important occasion: First, because he is too ill, which would itself be conclusive; but secondly, and A FORTIORI, because he is in some sense a party to the cause, and ought not if he could.' Whereupon, Secretary Formey having done his Documentary flourishings, Curator Euler—(great in Algebra, apparently not very great in common sense and the rules of good temper)— reads considerable 'Report;' [Is No. 1 of— Maupertuisiana.—] reciting, not in a dishonest, but in a dim wearisome way, the various steps of the Affair, as readers already know them; and concludes with this extraordinary practical result: 'Things being so (LES CHOSES ETANT TELLES): the Fragment being of itself suspect [what could Leibnitz know of Maxima and Minima? They were not developed till one Euler did it, quite in late years!], [— Maupertuisians,— No. i. 22.] of itself suspect; and Monsieur Konig having failed to' &c. &c.,—" c.,—' it is assuredly manifest that his cause is one of the worst (DES PLUS MAUVAISES), and that this Fragment has been forged.' Singular to think!' And the Academy, all things duly considered, will not hesitate to declare it false (SUPPOSE), and thereby deprive it publicly of all authority which may have been ascribed to it' (HEAR, HEAR! from all parts)."

So I went and googled the affair. A much clearer source explained that König had attacked some principle of physics that Maupertuis considered one of his most important contributions, and furthermore said that Maupertuis didn't come up with it at all, but Leibniz did. A debate then ensued over whether the fragment König produced and claimed was written by Leibniz was real or a forgery.

Things escalated when Voltaire took König's side and attacked Maupertuis in a satire, and Fritz said, in effect, "Stop satirizing everyone at my court; only I'm allowed to do that!" and Voltaire said, "Fuck that, I'm a professional satirist! Satirize ALL the peoples!" and Fritz said, "Fuck you and the monkey you rode in on, and also give me back my book of satires I wrote about other people or I cut you." And the rest was history.

1752-1753, ladies and gentlemen. As we know, Algarotti skipped town in 1753 to avoid getting caught up in all this drama. Wise man. Also, total tangent, but it's hilarious to read in Wilhelmine's memoirs, ca. 1745, "My brother and I used to satirize everyone we knew as teenagers, but I outgrew that," and then several years later, Voltaire: "Women are better than men. Case in point: Wilhelmine, me, Fritz." [Fritz: "Pretty sure she's a man anyway." Wilhelmine: "You're not helping your case, bro."]

Anyway, my modern source concludes, "In the final analysis, neither of the protagonists prevailed, since most historians of science give the most credit for developing the principle of minimum action to Euler."

Whereas Carlyle seems to be mocking the point of view that gives Euler the credit, taking König's side, and upset with Keith and the academy for taking Maupertuis' side. Which makes me even less inclined to take at face value any of Carlyle's conclusions about whether we do or do not care for Peter on the basis of his participation in this debate.

That academic kerfluffle is the last bit of data I have on Peter Keith until his death on December 27, 1756. I haven't found a place or cause of death. It is after the Seven Years' War started, but the Prussian army was in winter quarters at the time, so there shouldn't have been a major encounter. Still, if he was in the army, there's lots of ways to die in the army, most notably illness (possibly responsible for more deaths than battle, I'm not sure). Anyway, if I find out more, will pass it on. Not that anyone else is as obsessed as I am, but I'm researching in hopes of future fic inspiration here.

Finally, Robert Keith, Peter's younger brother who betrayed the escape plan to FW, apparently got transferred to a regiment and then disappeared from history. The last trace of him that I or any biographer I've read (some state explicitly that he disappears) can find is November 1, 1730, when he wrote a letter thanking FW for not killing him his mercy. 5 days later, Katte is executed, and protests are felt as far away as England. I really have to wonder how the guy who went to FW and said, "Btw, it might interest you to know that your son is trying to escape please don't kill me," fared in that regiment, with sympathies running so high for Fritz and the shock over Katte. If I were him, I'd keep my head low too.

ETA: I can't believe this only just occurred to me, but I wonder if he actually changed his name. Would that have been an option in the military?

Like, when Fritz came to power he famously did not punish anyone involved, but that's a long ten years before he's king to be in a violent environment and be known not just as a snitch, but as a snitch in a situation where the consequences were terrible. I'd change my name if I could.

Re: Peter Keith

[cahn]

Hee, this is all very interesting. I should also brush up on my history of mathematics :P (I do feel like the rule is generally "If in doubt, ascribe it to Euler because he probably came up with it.")

Oh man, yeah, I wouldn't want to be Robert Keith after that.

it's hilarious to read in Wilhelmine's memoirs, ca. 1745, "My brother and I used to satirize everyone we knew as teenagers, but I outgrew that," and then several years later, Voltaire: "Women are better than men. Case in point: Wilhelmine, me, Fritz." [Fritz: "Pretty sure she's a man anyway." Wilhelmine: "You're not helping your case, bro."]

HEE.