The word is Lehnstuhl in one and Arm Stuhl in the other--can those both refer to the same piece of furniture? Google tells me they're both armchairs.)
Google is right. Lehnstuhl is the more modern word, the one we're still using, that's all.
One final note: it looks to me like Münchow says near the beginning of the 1797 letter in Minerva that his memory is going? Am I reading that right?
Almost. He says much of his memory has already gone, but some of the vivid childhood impressions are still there.
Other bits: Münchw fils diisses Hille. He'll have you know Münchow père wasn't just Kammerdirektor but President. Whereas Director Hille's "greatest virtue was having a stunningly beautiful unmarried daughter".
Fritz' meals were supposed to be supplied by a local tavern, not exceeding the cost 8 Groschen daily (this actually sounds like something I've read in Preuss or Förster's apprendices - also, a Groschen is a penny, so FW is very cheap again), but Münchow's monther offered to cook the meals instead, taking solely the 8 Groschen (implied. despite the foot costing more). "Among ourselves", Münchow jr. says, "the whole stay cost my parents 1500 Reichsthaler".)
Fritz' imprisonment (as in, not allowed to leave the room) lasted only sx weeks, then he was allowed to stay in a room in town in Küstrin, though still supervised, according to Münchow.
FW found out that Münchow's parents fed Fritz from their own meals and forbade it, so Counsillor Blockmann did it next, and then once he lived in town Fritz was allowed to have his own cook.
Münchow mentions the poetry writing and reading as well. Even kids weren't safe from hearing Fritz' poetry!
Aha. This letter has the story of Fritz making the pages take a spoonful of his morning beverage as well, as the Nicolai letter does, but the Minerva letter names explicitly the "Dresden poisoning", which means yes, it's the one Glasow was accused of.
Münchow closes by saying he could add many more anecdotes if only his old age would permit him to remember, but so much is gone. And he adds a PS saying "You haven't written to me what the volume sent to me costs", which makes it sound like this letter is addressed to a bookseller. Which Nicolai Jr. also was, in addition to being a writer. But if Nicolai were the recipient of this second letter as well, he'd have said so, and in his remarks printed later, he clearly treats it as another letter, albeit with nearly identical content.
Nicolai's comments: apparantly he also wrote some "frank" comments when Zimmernann's "Fragments" were published as well (Zimmermann disses Nicolai among many others for not understanding the greatness of Fritz properly), and in his "frank" comments mentioned all the original material he's unearthed.
Mostly Nicolai is sarcastic about Minerva rehashing stuff and selling it as a discovery when it's been already printed all over the place, but smugly adds he's sure Minerva's readers will be glad to reading it again.
Next, I went back to Gallus in order to check whether or not the story which Carlysle has and which the Minerva letter has about little Münchow going back to dresses to smuggle in stuff for Fritz is also there. It seems to be unique to the Minerva letter, but guess what's in the Gallus letter:
Münchow Jr. - who as you'll recall also served as Fritz' page later - has a go at Dr. Zimmermann, and not just at any claim of Zimmermann's but THE claim: Of the unfortunate cut Herr Zimmermann describes in his "Fragments", nothing is known to me; but I can refute that what Herr Zimmermann presents as the result of said cut from the year 1739 onwards, by word of mouth.
Mes amies, I'm a bit confounded by the phrasing - he writes he can refute it - "mündliclh" - which you could translate as "orally" or "verbally" or "by word of mouth". Now, after this cliffhanger, Münchow Jr. in the Gallus letter starts a new paragraph and says "The King loved one of my brothers, the one who was directing State Minister in Silesia, as a friend. He always had to spend the Carnival in Berlin. (Remember, the Berlin Carnival started already in December and went on till end of February.) Münchow then goes on about his brother having been presented with one of Fritz' privatly printed books (see also Mitchell) as a token of affection, and thus the tale continues in safer terrain. Now, the first time I read this I hadn't been aware what "cut" Zimmermann had been talking about. But now that I am, I can't help but interpret this passage as:
"So, about that operation Zimmermann says Fritz had: obviously, I wasn't present, but Fritz definitely did have sex later than that, from 1739 onwards, which I happen to know because my older brother was one of the people he had it with!"
At a later point, Münchow Jr. gets back to this subject again: "Herr Ritter von Zimmermann has made me angry when I read the lie of the unfortunate cut and its results. It is not a subject one can write about; but I am confident I can refute this untruth by oath, I and many who were around the King from 1739 to 1746. Aren't any waiting woman who served the Queen during that time still alive? They, too, should know about the opposite of Zimmermann's supposition. If you have a servant who has to sleep in your antechambre, if there are stairs leading from your room to your wife's room; when your servant hears how you get up from your bed in the middle of the night, take those stairs and return about an hour later, will your servant believe you've done that for the evening prayers? That is the case which I can swear to.
Another anecdote shall die with me, only two more knew about it, the former regimental medic from the 2nd Guard Pröbisch who is dead, and a valet; whether the valet is still alive, I don't know. As I have never heard gossip about it, I assume the valet kept the secret or has died. This story is of another nature and may die with me. But it, too, proves, that Herr Zimmermann can't have checked the sources he used very thoroughly.
Then Münchow says he's always hoped a truly great writer would write Fritz' bio, and he thinks Voltaire wanted to do that at first before his ugly character made him write an attack instead, and plaintively asks whether the trashy tell all is really by Voltaire? He's always suspected someone else. He also hoped that Voltaire disqualified himself via character, D'Argens would write the definite Life of Fritz, but no such luck. And then he addresses the Katte execution.
Okay then. Never mind Katte for once: Münchow Jr. wasn't a kid anymore when he served as page, and presumably he's indeed able to recall Fritz getting out of bed and upstairs, and not for evening prayers, but somehow I doubt that he went to EC "from 1739 onwards". Of course, with Fritz being a famous insomniac, he could have had any number of reasonf or leaving his bedroom in the middle of the night. Or he did have indeed sex with someone (not EC). Or is Münchow getting creative in order to defend dead Fritz from the charge of a crippled penis?
Stop the Presses! Münchow vs Zimmermann: It's on!
Google is right. Lehnstuhl is the more modern word, the one we're still using, that's all.
One final note: it looks to me like Münchow says near the beginning of the 1797 letter in Minerva that his memory is going? Am I reading that right?
Almost. He says much of his memory has already gone, but some of the vivid childhood impressions are still there.
Other bits: Münchw fils diisses Hille. He'll have you know Münchow père wasn't just Kammerdirektor but President. Whereas Director Hille's "greatest virtue was having a stunningly beautiful unmarried daughter".
Fritz' meals were supposed to be supplied by a local tavern, not exceeding the cost 8 Groschen daily (this actually sounds like something I've read in Preuss or Förster's apprendices - also, a Groschen is a penny, so FW is very cheap again), but Münchow's monther offered to cook the meals instead, taking solely the 8 Groschen (implied. despite the foot costing more). "Among ourselves", Münchow jr. says, "the whole stay cost my parents 1500 Reichsthaler".)
Fritz' imprisonment (as in, not allowed to leave the room) lasted only sx weeks, then he was allowed to stay in a room in town in Küstrin, though still supervised, according to Münchow.
FW found out that Münchow's parents fed Fritz from their own meals and forbade it, so Counsillor Blockmann did it next, and then once he lived in town Fritz was allowed to have his own cook.
Münchow mentions the poetry writing and reading as well. Even kids weren't safe from hearing Fritz' poetry!
Aha. This letter has the story of Fritz making the pages take a spoonful of his morning beverage as well, as the Nicolai letter does, but the Minerva letter names explicitly the "Dresden poisoning", which means yes, it's the one Glasow was accused of.
Münchow closes by saying he could add many more anecdotes if only his old age would permit him to remember, but so much is gone. And he adds a PS saying "You haven't written to me what the volume sent to me costs", which makes it sound like this letter is addressed to a bookseller. Which Nicolai Jr. also was, in addition to being a writer. But if Nicolai were the recipient of this second letter as well, he'd have said so, and in his remarks printed later, he clearly treats it as another letter, albeit with nearly identical content.
Nicolai's comments: apparantly he also wrote some "frank" comments when Zimmernann's "Fragments" were published as well (Zimmermann disses Nicolai among many others for not understanding the greatness of Fritz properly), and in his "frank" comments mentioned all the original material he's unearthed.
Mostly Nicolai is sarcastic about Minerva rehashing stuff and selling it as a discovery when it's been already printed all over the place, but smugly adds he's sure Minerva's readers will be glad to reading it again.
Next, I went back to Gallus in order to check whether or not the story which Carlysle has and which the Minerva letter has about little Münchow going back to dresses to smuggle in stuff for Fritz is also there. It seems to be unique to the Minerva letter, but guess what's in the Gallus letter:
Münchow Jr. - who as you'll recall also served as Fritz' page later - has a go at Dr. Zimmermann, and not just at any claim of Zimmermann's but THE claim: Of the unfortunate cut Herr Zimmermann describes in his "Fragments", nothing is known to me; but I can refute that what Herr Zimmermann presents as the result of said cut from the year 1739 onwards, by word of mouth.
Mes amies, I'm a bit confounded by the phrasing - he writes he can refute it - "mündliclh" - which you could translate as "orally" or "verbally" or "by word of mouth". Now, after this cliffhanger, Münchow Jr. in the Gallus letter starts a new paragraph and says "The King loved one of my brothers, the one who was directing State Minister in Silesia, as a friend. He always had to spend the Carnival in Berlin. (Remember, the Berlin Carnival started already in December and went on till end of February.) Münchow then goes on about his brother having been presented with one of Fritz' privatly printed books (see also Mitchell) as a token of affection, and thus the tale continues in safer terrain. Now, the first time I read this I hadn't been aware what "cut" Zimmermann had been talking about. But now that I am, I can't help but interpret this passage as:
"So, about that operation Zimmermann says Fritz had: obviously, I wasn't present, but Fritz definitely did have sex later than that, from 1739 onwards, which I happen to know because my older brother was one of the people he had it with!"
At a later point, Münchow Jr. gets back to this subject again: "Herr Ritter von Zimmermann has made me angry when I read the lie of the unfortunate cut and its results. It is not a subject one can write about; but I am confident I can refute this untruth by oath, I and many who were around the King from 1739 to 1746. Aren't any waiting woman who served the Queen during that time still alive? They, too, should know about the opposite of Zimmermann's supposition. If you have a servant who has to sleep in your antechambre, if there are stairs leading from your room to your wife's room; when your servant hears how you get up from your bed in the middle of the night, take those stairs and return about an hour later, will your servant believe you've done that for the evening prayers? That is the case which I can swear to.
Another anecdote shall die with me, only two more knew about it, the former regimental medic from the 2nd Guard Pröbisch who is dead, and a valet; whether the valet is still alive, I don't know. As I have never heard gossip about it, I assume the valet kept the secret or has died. This story is of another nature and may die with me. But it, too, proves, that Herr Zimmermann can't have checked the sources he used very thoroughly.
Then Münchow says he's always hoped a truly great writer would write Fritz' bio, and he thinks Voltaire wanted to do that at first before his ugly character made him write an attack instead, and plaintively asks whether the trashy tell all is really by Voltaire? He's always suspected someone else. He also hoped that Voltaire disqualified himself via character, D'Argens would write the definite Life of Fritz, but no such luck. And then he addresses the Katte execution.
Okay then. Never mind Katte for once: Münchow Jr. wasn't a kid anymore when he served as page, and presumably he's indeed able to recall Fritz getting out of bed and upstairs, and not for evening prayers, but somehow I doubt that he went to EC "from 1739 onwards". Of course, with Fritz being a famous insomniac, he could have had any number of reasonf or leaving his bedroom in the middle of the night. Or he did have indeed sex with someone (not EC). Or is Münchow getting creative in order to defend dead Fritz from the charge of a crippled penis?