Also, at a guess, what he's pleased about and expects poor EC to appreciate is less the sex and more supposed proof that Fritz can sire children, continuation of the dynasty etc.
Oh, that was the only possible interpretation to me. I don't think FW cares about EC's sexual pleasure, but he is nagging and nagging Fritz about siring an heir, and so, as we've seen, are the envoys, like Manteuffel.
I was just surprised FW went as far as approving siring an extramarital child! Given how we'd just been talking about unlicensed sex was bad in the gospel according to FW, regardless of offspring siring! I guess when it comes to Prussia's well-being, he has a strong pragmatic streak.
It's also kind of amazing how quickly he went from NO WOMEN AROUND MY SON and worrying about Doris to "Well, at least he can sire a child!" Like, he really seems to have realized he was worrying about one problem when he should have been worrying about a completely different problem. Maybe it was Doris turning out to be a virgin, combined with Fritz's resistance to the marriage, and FW suddenly worried that Fritz wasn't going to have sex with a woman ever. And then deluded himself that he was! (ETA: Or at least deluded himself that he'd already gotten a woman pregnant. As discussed, Fritz may have had a little sex with EC before giving up.)
Derschau: doesn't one of the Katte protocols mention Katte blaming Derschau & Hacke for talking against Fritz to his father?
Maybe? Derschau and Hacke are the two mentioned by Fritz in his "Why I left" letter. So it seems likely that Katte would try to blame them, assuming you're not remembering the apologia itself (which was found among Katte's things).
Yeah, I was wondering to what extent Brandenburgian French had diverged from what Voltaire would respect as good French. And of course, the "good" French of Fritz and Voltaire's role models is already a hundred years out of date and highly literary and poetic in the first place, so there's a lot of prescriptivism going on. I suspect that's what's going on with the "trompette" and "tête": actual speakers are rhyming them in casual speech, self-conscious "correct" speakers know they're not supposed to.
So it's hard to tell from here how much criticism of Fritz's "bad" French is stylistic, him not being a great writer, like he evidently wasn't good at spelling ever in any language, and how much is him being perfectly fluent and good at writing in a non-prestige dialect. I can't say for sure, but my guess based on his governess, etc., is that it's *not* like his "bad" German, which is descriptively, not prescriptively, ungrammatical, as in, non-native speaker with limited fluency in a second language.
ETA: Madame de Roucoulle was from Normandy, per Wikipedia. I don't know to what extent that means she would have been speaking Norman or Norman-influenced French in the 1600s, but Norman itself is quite different from Parisian French, having been influenced by those Norse-men (North-men, hence Normandy) settling Normandy in the previous millennium.
By Andrew Bisset, the 1850 editor of Mitchell's papers. Bisset himself seems to be fluent in French, and quotes the occasional French letter without translating; whether he speaks German, I doubt, since the German works he quotes, he quotes in English translations. So, this is what Bisset, Esquire, has to say:
Unquestionably Frederic's fame rests on his merits as a man of action, as a warrior, and as a statesman, rather than as a philosopher and a writer. Yet in the last character we think justice has hardly been done to him. Admitting to the full the badness of his verses, they seem to exhibit the character of the man in another light besides that of a bad poet. The calmness and presence of mind were wonderful, which could allow him to write so many even bad verses, at a time when his affairs were becoming so desperate, that he contemplated death as the only refuge from dishonour, and carried poison constantly about with him in case the worst should happen and he did not meet death in the field. Even Voltaire admits this, and admits also, that among the many bad verses there were some good. However, as he said himself, he often wrote for his own amusement and relaxation, and not for the public. (...)
All this may be true enough ; but then it does not apply to such works as his “Histoire de Mon Temps,” which was avowedly written if not for “the public” of his own time, for that of after times, and of some of the shortcomings of which we happen to be in a condition to judge. If human nature were not full of such inconsistencies, we might say it was strange or curious to see a writer in his “avant-propos,” dilating on the worthlessness of history by reason of the general want of correct information in the writers of it, (a fact, about which there can be no dispute), and then writing the account he has done of the state of England under the administration of Walpole,” which contains about as many mis-statements or mistakes as it does lines, certainly more than it does sentences.
Such a mode of dealing with and of estimating the value of evidence, or rather of confidently stating a series of conclusions grounded on no evidence at all, or evidence of the most imperfect kind,” proves that this great general and able administrator altogether wanted that earnest and undeviating love of truth which leads a man to a patient, laborious, and discriminating, as well as honest and candid investigation of the evidence upon which he is to ground his conclusions, and which is essential to the character of a great philosopher, and we may add of a truly great man.
Nevertheless, after all deductions have been made on this score, and also keeping in view that Frederic wrote in a foreign language over which he was far from having a perfect mastery," that mastery which can alone insure vitality to writing, and which no writer can hope to possess who writes in any but his mother tongue, his own * land's language," it must still be admitted that Frederic, as a writer, possessed no ordinary qualifications. His letters, particularly those to Voltaire, are often written with much wit and point, sometimes interspersed with observations worthy of the great King and warrior ; and in others of his works, particularly his History of the Seven Years' War, he writes with a clearness and brevity not unworthy of Cæsar himself There is much too of the strength which hides itself under urbanity, at least under conventional polish or politeness. When he has occasion to mention some one of whom he entertains an unfavour able opinion, for example the Duke of Cumberland or the Earl of Bute, he condenses into a few words, which have the appearance of flowing from his pen only casually and as if en passant to a subject more worthy of attention, a sarcasm which carries within it pages, nay, volumes of reprobation.
Heh, based on this I am a fan of Bissett :) I don't think I can argue about any of this!
Admitting to the full the badness of his verses
LOL!
this great general and able administrator altogether wanted that earnest and undeviating love of truth which leads a man to a patient, laborious, and discriminating, as well as honest and candid investigation of the evidence
...yeah, I'm not going to argue with this point at all :P
he condenses into a few words, which have the appearance of flowing from his pen only casually and as if en passant to a subject more worthy of attention, a sarcasm which carries within it pages, nay, volumes of reprobation.
hee! Well, I'm also not going to argue that Fritz can cut with words, omg.
He's for the most part a delightfully snarky editor, which is a good balance to the contemporary hero worship of Preuss and Koser (not that they don't deserve all the credit for their original Research and good citations!). Otoh, he has his share of early Victorian British bias. Take this bit, in his summing up of the Fritz-MT backstory, i.e. Silesia 1 and 2:
The British Cabinet attempted to persuade Maria Theresa to purchase the friendship of Frederic by the sacrifice of a small portion of her territories, but the Queen of Hungary peremptorily rejected all proposals of accommodation. However, after a good deal of fighting, in which her forces had the worst of it, she at last reluctantly acquiesced in the King of Prussia's demands.
Yeah. How could MT be so unreasonable! She could have been totally Fritz' friend if only she'd given him everything he wanted! Foolish woman! The war was totally her fault. All the wars, in fact.
The irony is, in the very next sentence, Bisset even says: There cannot now, we believe, be much question that the claim of Frederic to Silesia was supported on no better ground than that of an armed highwayman to the purse of an unarmed traveller.
Quite right. But MT is still presented as foolishly arrogant and bringing all her troubles upon her for not surrendering Silesia to begin with, and then for trying to get it back. Especially with the British so kindly advising her to give in to Cousin Fritz' demands. No mention of the fact that if she had done so, you can bet the other German princes and European powers would have been even more encouraged to grab what they could get of the HRE and Austria, only in that case she wouldn't have been able to motivate anyone to fight for wihat was left. It was her stubbornness and willingness to fight that convinced the Hungarians to fight for her as well, and enabled her to hold on to everything except for Silesia.
Now, Mitchell and his pen pals in Britain regularly taking about the "haughty" House of Austria/ Queen-Empress/Queen of Hungary is understandable. They were on opposite sides in a war, and they were still sulking about the fact that just because they teamed up with her arch nemesis, she teamed up with their arch nemesis (how could she?). But Bisset is living decades later and prides himself on the fact that he's able to give Fritz his due without being starry-eyed about him. But giving MT her due? Nope. That foolish arrogant woman should have listened to the Brits. Sheesh. Fritz himself is better at giving her credit.
the other German princes and European powers would have been even more encouraged to grab what they could get of the HRE and Austria, only in that case she wouldn't have been able to motivate anyone to fight for wihat was left.
Right? Wow. Also, I guess principles aren't a thing either.
But giving MT her due? Nope. That foolish arrogant woman should have listened to the Brits.
Omg. I have nothing to say but omg.
Sheesh. Fritz himself is better at giving her credit.
Fritz: Props to the unarmed traveler for putting up a fight and making the armed highwayman work for it!
And then there was that time when Andrew Mitchell was put on the spot by Fritz handing him a copy of his literary works and wanted feedback:
Freyberg, 30th March 1760
ABOUT a week ago, when I came to dine with the King of Prussia, I found a book laid upon the table, which, he told me, he intended for a present to me; the title of it is, “CEuvres du Philosophe de Sans Souci.” “He said it was of his writing, and had been the occupation of his leisure hours; that it contained some imitations of Horace, Lucretius, and Ovid ; that he never intended it for the public, though a few copies of it had been thrown off in his own press at Potsdam, some of which he had given to particular friends, &c.; that lately the book had been surreptitiously published in France, and since in Holland, with a view to hurt him, but that he had not yet been able to discover who had been guilty of this breach of trust; that, in reprint ing, several things were omitted, altered, or mangled, which laid him under the necessity of having it again printed more correctly and carefully; and he was pleased to add, that, so soon as the new edition was ready, he would give me a copy,” which I shall not fail to send to your Lordship.
In the mean time he desired me to read over that he gave me, and dropt a hint that he should be glad it was known in England “that this book had been published, not only without his consent, but against his will.” This declaration I considered as a sort of apology for the book, and had nothing more at heart than to look into it immediately; but my curiosity had like to cost me dear, for the Philosophe the next day asked my opinion, and, observing that I was shy and reserved upon the point, pressed and encouraged me to speak freely, which I, not caring to dissemble, complyed with more easily, as there are really more things to be admired than blamed in the book. I praised with decency and without exaggeration, and blamed with freedom where I thought I was well founded; and this has afforded matter of conversation for 5 or 6 days at table, when only his Majesty was present. The particulars are too minute to be transmitted, therefore I reserve them till I have the happiness to see you in England. It is but justice, however, to acquaint you that the King heard with candour and with temper my trifling remarks, and, at the same time, to declare, that of all the authors I ever conversed with, the ‘Philosophe de Sans Souci’ bears criticism the best."
Detective Mildred, I think you have discovered the true reason why Fredersdorf in several decades with Fritz did not learn enough French to correspond in. ;)
Doesn't it explain so much? He was clearly intelligent enough to master a new language if he'd put his mind to it. And it would have been such an obvious career move. But he had so many cautionary examples before his eyes.
Also, I've always thought one of the best and most underrated lines from Voltaire's memoirs is this one, from immediately after the 1753 breakup:
Leaving my palace of Alcina, I went to pass a month with the Dutchess of Saxe-Gotha, the best of Princesses, full of gentleness, discretion, and equanimity, and who, God be thanked, did not make verses.
I remember laughing out loud when I first read it, and it still has the power to make me dissolve into helpless sniggering.
It's a golden sentence. I've just read a very short novella (in German) about the Voltaire-Emilie-Fritz triangle which somehow manages to make this great story bland, so can't rec it, but the author does quote that sentence as well.
Fritz: Props to the unarmed traveler for putting up a fight and making the armed highwayman work for it!
Courtesy of a Kind person pointing me the way to Fritz and MT related documents, I can tell you your fictional Fritz quote has a solid canonical basis. Fritz‘ idea of a pep talk on 27th April 1745:
„Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman, has not given up hope when her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna, when they had conquered her richest provinces – and you don’t want to show as much courage as this woman, and in a moment, too, when we haven’t lost a single battle and made a single loss!“
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean? Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this Woman" of courage later that same year, it's the most dire betrayal...
Oh, yay, I'm glad it's paying off already! Also, you are fast, but we already knew that. ;)
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean?
Masterful use of the generic noun, Fritz. :P
I'm most interested in "her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna." Had any non-Prussians arrived at the walls of Vienna? Because I know Fritz briefly managed to get a small Prussian force uncomfortably close to Vienna without ever being a serious threat, but describing it as "at the walls" would be some serious self-aggrandizement. But if the Bavarians and French managed it, then okay.
Who's he pep talking, btw?
Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman
The Queen of Hungary, a WOMAN.
Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this Woman" of courage later that same year, it's the most dire betrayal...
Fritz: "I'm allowed to make himself look good by giving the Austrian devil her due, but no one's allowed to have genuine sympathy and liking for anyone but meeeee."
I look forward to whatever other Fritz & MT goodies this latest resource may provide!
I couldn't resist taking a gander. So far, it appears to provide lots of neat material – ambassador reports and so forth – though when he’s quoting memoirs, the editor doesn’t provide a single „maybe not so reliable“ comment. To his credit, he does this with both Catt and Wilhelmine, as opposed to questionmarking Wilhelmine and giving Catt a pass. Also, for a guy publishing in 1976, he’s amazingly starry eyed about Fritz (while also considering MT awesome, in a Fritz talking to Catt way).
This is how he summarizes Silesia 1:
MT’s Dad dies.
Fritz: really really wants Prussia & Austria to team up against the French (editor believes this claim of his in a letter to FS completely), and when not hearing any offers in that regard, kidnaps Silesia to enforce his offer of „protection“ to FS and MT.
MT: No, you gangster. Go to hell, and take your protection racket with you. Editor: „Friedrich war erschüttert über so viel Hass.“ („Friedrich was stunned by so much hatred.“)
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, editor.
More seriously, this editor is probably right that Fritz did not expect a) MT to fight back and b) MT to have any say in this at all, and was basing what little effort he made to come to terms with the Austrians before invading on his impression of Franzl as someone who would compromise. And go for the protection racket, since the Duke of Bavaria making a French-supported go at the Imperial Throne was indeed in the cards already, despite everyone having signed the Pragmatic Sanction.
The 1745 pep talk which opens the second volume, which is why it caught my eye while quickly browsing, is directed at Podewils, though having gone back to the beginning, I haven't ascertained whether it's the same Podewils who was the Prussian Ambassador giving Fritz the "MT, hot or not?" report. If it is, I can't help but wonder whether Podewils had some fears about ending up as a hostage in Vienna and this being Fritz' reply.
MT: As if I'd go after an ambassador. What do you think I am, a Prussian monarch?
So far, it appears to provide lots of neat material – ambassador reports and so forth
Oh, good! That's the impression on which I based my decision to buy it.
To his credit, he does this with both Catt and Wilhelmine, as opposed to questionmarking Wilhelmine and giving Catt a pass.
Oookaay. That's...progress in the wrong direction. But at least he's equal opportunity gullible!
Being starry-eyed in 1976 is indeed odd.
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, editor.
??
With you on that!
More seriously, this editor is probably right that Fritz did not expect a) MT to fight back
If Blanning's Fritz quotes (to come in next write-up) can be trusted (like, at all), this was definitely the case.
on his impression of Franzl as someone who would compromise
And I think I remember you saying Franzl did want to compromise?
MT: As if I'd go after an ambassador. What do you think I am, a Prussian monarch?
Ahahaha. MT gets the best lines! "You gangster." :P
Oookaay. That's...progress in the wrong direction. But at least he's equal opportunity gullible!
True. I can now tell you he also quotes Fritz' various war memoirs without a question mark. Except for Mollwitz; there, he adds Schwerin's account. To be fair, we also get gems like the Venetian ambassador Errizzo reporting that MT in the September of 1745 (i.e. when she's about to meet Wilhelmine and see Franzl crowned said the following about Fritz: "(Friedrich) she called a prince who, despite the ease with which he breaks his word - and that he does so can't be called a minor flaw - can't be denied to possess a great acumen, a comprehensive talent and a relentless occupation with his duties as a ruler. As a general, he adds to these qualities an always alert vigilance, which she judges to be absolutely essential for the profession."
So, by 1745, they seem to see each other thusly:
Fritz: She's courageous and determined, despite being a woman. MT: He's lying liar who lies, but also a smart, capable workoholic and an A plus general.
(Zimmermann: But Fritz NEVER BROKE HIS WORD! NEVER EVER!!!! I can't emphasize this enough in my "Fragments!" And he was always gallant to women! You should have married him, not that gloating guy from Lorraine!!!)
And I think I remember you saying Franzl did want to compromise?
He did suggest it, though in the second Silesian war, not in the first, and not in public; in public, he and MT presented a united front.
„Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman, has not given up hope when her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna, when they had conquered her richest provinces – and you don’t want to show as much courage as this woman, and in a moment, too, when we haven’t lost a single battle and made a single loss!“
*chokes* FRITZ! I also choked at the "Enemies" bit, oh Fritz.
re: enemies before the walls of Vienna - Mildred asked this elsewhere, and having now progressed through the documents to 1745, I can say he does mean that small troop of hussars of which he wrote "my hussars are only four miles from Vienna!"
(He also wanted the Duke of Bavaria and later rival Emperor to march direclty towards Vienna, but Karl Albrecht basically said, um, you first, mate, you first. Another reason why MT not appeasing Fritz paid off for her despite her losing Silesia is that the conclusion Europe drew from the Austrian War of Succession that if you're not Fritz, you do not mess with MT.)
I can say he does mean that small troop of hussars of which he wrote "my hussars are only four miles from Vienna!"
*cough* I thought he might be up to a little self-aggrandizement. Thank you for confirming.
Fritz, it's nice that you managed to get a small body of troops that close, I'm sure it's great for propaganda, but they were never actually a threat according to any of my reading. You're not exactly "the Turks before Vienna."
The British Cabinet attempted to persuade Maria Theresa to purchase the friendship of Frederic by the sacrifice of a small portion of her territories, but the Queen of Hungary peremptorily rejected all proposals of accommodation.
LOL. Appeasement: it's the way to go, clearly! I suppose Bissett couldn't exactly say he thought the British Cabinet was wrong? Or, judging from the rest of your comment, even entertain the notion of it?
There cannot now, we believe, be much question that the claim of Frederic to Silesia was supported on no better ground than that of an armed highwayman to the purse of an unarmed traveller.
HAHAHAHA (...owing to having my fingers positioned on the keyboard incorrectly, the first time I wrote it it came out as JAJAJAJA, which I suppose is also appropriate!)
No mention of the fact that if she had done so, you can bet the other German princes and European powers would have been even more encouraged to grab what they could get of the HRE and Austria, only in that case she wouldn't have been able to motivate anyone to fight for wihat was left. It was her stubbornness and willingness to fight that convinced the Hungarians to fight for her as well, and enabled her to hold on to everything except for Silesia.
Thanks for this -- it is the sort of thing that seems obvious when you say it but I don't think I quite understood. :)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
Re: Random things
Oh, that was the only possible interpretation to me. I don't think FW cares about EC's sexual pleasure, but he is nagging and nagging Fritz about siring an heir, and so, as we've seen, are the envoys, like Manteuffel.
I was just surprised FW went as far as approving siring an extramarital child! Given how we'd just been talking about unlicensed sex was bad in the gospel according to FW, regardless of offspring siring! I guess when it comes to Prussia's well-being, he has a strong pragmatic streak.
It's also kind of amazing how quickly he went from NO WOMEN AROUND MY SON and worrying about Doris to "Well, at least he can sire a child!" Like, he really seems to have realized he was worrying about one problem when he should have been worrying about a completely different problem. Maybe it was Doris turning out to be a virgin, combined with Fritz's resistance to the marriage, and FW suddenly worried that Fritz wasn't going to have sex with a woman ever. And then deluded himself that he was! (ETA: Or at least deluded himself that he'd already gotten a woman pregnant. As discussed, Fritz may have had a little sex with EC before giving up.)
Derschau: doesn't one of the Katte protocols mention Katte blaming Derschau & Hacke for talking against Fritz to his father?
Maybe? Derschau and Hacke are the two mentioned by Fritz in his "Why I left" letter. So it seems likely that Katte would try to blame them, assuming you're not remembering the apologia itself (which was found among Katte's things).
Yeah, I was wondering to what extent Brandenburgian French had diverged from what Voltaire would respect as good French. And of course, the "good" French of Fritz and Voltaire's role models is already a hundred years out of date and highly literary and poetic in the first place, so there's a lot of prescriptivism going on. I suspect that's what's going on with the "trompette" and "tête": actual speakers are rhyming them in casual speech, self-conscious "correct" speakers know they're not supposed to.
So it's hard to tell from here how much criticism of Fritz's "bad" French is stylistic, him not being a great writer, like he evidently wasn't good at spelling ever in any language, and how much is him being perfectly fluent and good at writing in a non-prestige dialect. I can't say for sure, but my guess based on his governess, etc., is that it's *not* like his "bad" German, which is descriptively, not prescriptively, ungrammatical, as in, non-native speaker with limited fluency in a second language.
ETA: Madame de Roucoulle was from Normandy, per Wikipedia. I don't know to what extent that means she would have been speaking Norman or Norman-influenced French in the 1600s, but Norman itself is quite different from Parisian French, having been influenced by those Norse-men (North-men, hence Normandy) settling Normandy in the previous millennium.
Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Unquestionably Frederic's fame rests on his merits as a man of action, as a warrior, and as a statesman, rather than as a philosopher and a writer. Yet in the last character we think justice has hardly been done to him. Admitting to the full the badness of his verses, they seem to exhibit the character of the man in another light besides that of a bad poet. The calmness and presence of mind were wonderful, which could allow him to write so many even bad verses, at a time when
his affairs were becoming so desperate, that he contemplated death as the only refuge from dishonour, and carried poison constantly about with him in case the worst should happen and he did not meet death in the field. Even Voltaire admits this, and admits also, that among the many bad verses there were some good. However, as he said himself, he often wrote for his own amusement and relaxation, and not for the public. (...)
All this may be true enough ; but then it does not apply to such works as his “Histoire de Mon Temps,” which was avowedly written if not for “the public” of his own time, for that of after times, and of some of the shortcomings of which we happen to be in a condition to judge. If human nature were not full of such inconsistencies, we might say it was strange or curious to see a writer in his “avant-propos,” dilating on the worthlessness of history by reason of the general want of correct information in the writers of it, (a fact, about which there can be no dispute), and then writing the account he has done of the state of England under the administration of Walpole,” which contains about as many mis-statements or mistakes as it does lines, certainly more than it does sentences.
Such a mode of dealing with and of estimating the value of evidence, or rather of confidently stating a series of conclusions
grounded on no evidence at all, or evidence of the most imperfect kind,” proves that this great general and able administrator altogether wanted that earnest and undeviating love of truth which leads a man to a patient, laborious, and discriminating, as well as honest and candid investigation of the evidence upon which he is to ground his conclusions, and which is essential to the character of a great philosopher, and we may add of a truly great man.
Nevertheless, after all deductions have been made on this score, and also keeping in view that Frederic wrote in a foreign language over which he was far from having a perfect mastery," that mastery which can alone insure vitality to writing, and which no writer can hope to possess who writes in any but his mother tongue, his own * land's language," it must still be admitted that Frederic, as a writer, possessed no ordinary qualifications. His letters, particularly those to Voltaire, are often written with much wit and point, sometimes interspersed with observations worthy of the great King and warrior ; and in others of his works, particularly his History of the Seven Years' War, he writes with a clearness and brevity not unworthy of Cæsar himself There is much too of the strength which hides itself under urbanity, at least under conventional polish or politeness. When he has occasion to mention some one of whom he entertains an unfavour able opinion, for example the Duke of Cumberland or the Earl of Bute, he condenses into a few words, which have the appearance of flowing from his pen only casually and as if en passant to a subject more worthy of attention, a sarcasm which carries within it pages, nay, volumes of reprobation.
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Admitting to the full the badness of his verses
LOL!
this great general and able administrator altogether wanted that earnest and undeviating love of truth which leads a man to a patient, laborious, and discriminating, as well as honest and candid investigation of the evidence
...yeah, I'm not going to argue with this point at all :P
he condenses into a few words, which have the appearance of flowing from his pen only casually and as if en passant to a subject more worthy of attention, a sarcasm which carries within it pages, nay, volumes of reprobation.
hee! Well, I'm also not going to argue that Fritz can cut with words, omg.
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
He's for the most part a delightfully snarky editor, which is a good balance to the contemporary hero worship of Preuss and Koser (not that they don't deserve all the credit for their original Research and good citations!). Otoh, he has his share of early Victorian British bias. Take this bit, in his summing up of the Fritz-MT backstory, i.e. Silesia 1 and 2:
The British Cabinet attempted to persuade Maria Theresa to purchase the friendship of Frederic by the sacrifice of a small portion of her territories, but the Queen of Hungary peremptorily rejected all proposals of accommodation. However, after a good deal of fighting, in which her forces had the worst of it, she at last reluctantly acquiesced in the King of Prussia's demands.
Yeah. How could MT be so unreasonable! She could have been totally Fritz' friend if only she'd given him everything he wanted! Foolish woman! The war was totally her fault. All the wars, in fact.
The irony is, in the very next sentence, Bisset even says: There cannot now, we believe, be much question that the claim of Frederic to Silesia was supported on no better ground than that of an armed highwayman to the purse of an unarmed traveller.
Quite right. But MT is still presented as foolishly arrogant and bringing all her troubles upon her for not surrendering Silesia to begin with, and then for trying to get it back. Especially with the British so kindly advising her to give in to Cousin Fritz' demands. No mention of the fact that if she had done so, you can bet the other German princes and European powers would have been even more encouraged to grab what they could get of the HRE and Austria, only in that case she wouldn't have been able to motivate anyone to fight for wihat was left. It was her stubbornness and willingness to fight that convinced the Hungarians to fight for her as well, and enabled her to hold on to everything except for Silesia.
Now, Mitchell and his pen pals in Britain regularly taking about the "haughty" House of Austria/ Queen-Empress/Queen of Hungary is understandable. They were on opposite sides in a war, and they were still sulking about the fact that just because they teamed up with her arch nemesis, she teamed up with their arch nemesis (how could she?). But Bisset is living decades later and prides himself on the fact that he's able to give Fritz his due without being starry-eyed about him. But giving MT her due? Nope. That foolish arrogant woman should have listened to the Brits. Sheesh. Fritz himself is better at giving her credit.
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Right? Wow. Also, I guess principles aren't a thing either.
But giving MT her due? Nope. That foolish arrogant woman should have listened to the Brits.
Omg. I have nothing to say but omg.
Sheesh. Fritz himself is better at giving her credit.
Fritz: Props to the unarmed traveler for putting up a fight and making the armed highwayman work for it!
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Freyberg, 30th March 1760
ABOUT a week ago, when I came to dine with the King of Prussia, I found a book laid upon the table, which, he told me, he intended for a present to me; the title of it is, “CEuvres du Philosophe de Sans Souci.” “He said it was of his writing, and had been the occupation of his leisure hours; that it contained some imitations of Horace, Lucretius, and Ovid ; that he
never intended it for the public, though a few copies of it had been thrown off in his own press at Potsdam, some of which he had given to particular friends, &c.; that lately the book had been surreptitiously published in France, and since in Holland, with a view to hurt him, but that he had not yet been able to discover who had been guilty of this breach of trust; that, in reprint ing, several things were omitted, altered, or mangled, which laid him under the necessity of having it again
printed more correctly and carefully; and he was pleased to add, that, so soon as the new edition was ready, he would give me a copy,” which I shall not fail to send to your Lordship.
In the mean time he desired me to read over that he gave me, and dropt a hint that he should be glad it was known in England “that this book had been published, not only without his consent, but against his will.” This declaration I considered as a sort of apology for the book, and had nothing more at heart than to look into it immediately; but my curiosity had like to cost me dear, for the Philosophe the next day asked my opinion, and, observing that I was shy and reserved upon the point, pressed and encouraged me to speak freely, which I, not caring to dissemble, complyed with more easily, as there are really more things to be admired than blamed in the book. I praised with decency and without exaggeration, and blamed with freedom where I thought I was well founded; and this has afforded matter of conversation for 5 or 6 days at table, when only his Majesty was present. The particulars are too minute to be transmitted, therefore I reserve them till I have the happiness to see you in England. It is but justice, however, to acquaint you that the King heard with candour and with temper my trifling remarks, and, at the same time, to declare, that of all the authors I ever conversed with, the ‘Philosophe de Sans Souci’ bears criticism the best."
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Catt, Hille, Voltaire, Algarotti, everyone: We've all been there, Mitchell.
Fredersdorf: Je ne parle pas français!
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Fredersdorf was truly a wise man.
:D
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Fredersdorf, you were awesome <3
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Leaving my palace of Alcina, I went to pass a month with the Dutchess of Saxe-Gotha, the best of Princesses, full of gentleness, discretion, and equanimity, and who, God be thanked, did not make verses.
I remember laughing out loud when I first read it, and it still has the power to make me dissolve into helpless sniggering.
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
for the Philosophe the next day asked my opinion
OMG, Fritz. This is why your writer friends kept running away! (Well, one of the reasons.)
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Courtesy of a Kind person pointing me the way to Fritz and MT related documents, I can tell you your fictional Fritz quote has a solid canonical basis. Fritz‘ idea of a pep talk on 27th April 1745:
„Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman, has not given up hope when her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna, when they had conquered her richest provinces – and you don’t want to show as much courage as this woman, and in a moment, too, when we haven’t lost a single battle and made a single loss!“
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean? Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this Woman" of courage later that same year, it's the most dire betrayal...
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean?
Masterful use of the generic noun, Fritz. :P
I'm most interested in "her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna." Had any non-Prussians arrived at the walls of Vienna? Because I know Fritz briefly managed to get a small Prussian force uncomfortably close to Vienna without ever being a serious threat, but describing it as "at the walls" would be some serious self-aggrandizement. But if the Bavarians and French managed it, then okay.
Who's he pep talking, btw?
Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman
The Queen of Hungary, a WOMAN.
Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this Woman" of courage later that same year, it's the most dire betrayal...
Fritz: "I'm allowed to make himself look good by giving the Austrian devil her due, but no one's allowed to have genuine sympathy and liking for anyone but meeeee."
I look forward to whatever other Fritz & MT goodies this latest resource may provide!
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
This is how he summarizes Silesia 1:
MT’s Dad dies.
Fritz: really really wants Prussia & Austria to team up against the French (editor believes this claim of his in a letter to FS completely), and when not hearing any offers in that regard, kidnaps Silesia to enforce his offer of „protection“ to FS and MT.
MT: No, you gangster. Go to hell, and take your protection racket with you.
Editor: „Friedrich war erschüttert über so viel Hass.“ („Friedrich was stunned by so much hatred.“)
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, editor.
More seriously, this editor is probably right that Fritz did not expect a) MT to fight back and b) MT to have any say in this at all, and was basing what little effort he made to come to terms with the Austrians before invading on his impression of Franzl as someone who would compromise. And go for the protection racket, since the Duke of Bavaria making a French-supported go at the Imperial Throne was indeed in the cards already, despite everyone having signed the Pragmatic Sanction.
The 1745 pep talk which opens the second volume, which is why it caught my eye while quickly browsing, is directed at Podewils, though having gone back to the beginning, I haven't ascertained whether it's the same Podewils who was the Prussian Ambassador giving Fritz the "MT, hot or not?" report. If it is, I can't help but wonder whether Podewils had some fears about ending up as a hostage in Vienna and this being Fritz' reply.
MT: As if I'd go after an ambassador. What do you think I am, a Prussian monarch?
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Oh, good! That's the impression on which I based my decision to buy it.
To his credit, he does this with both Catt and Wilhelmine, as opposed to questionmarking Wilhelmine and giving Catt a pass.
Oookaay. That's...progress in the wrong direction. But at least he's equal opportunity gullible!
Being starry-eyed in 1976 is indeed odd.
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, editor.
??
With you on that!
More seriously, this editor is probably right that Fritz did not expect a) MT to fight back
If Blanning's Fritz quotes (to come in next write-up) can be trusted (like, at all), this was definitely the case.
on his impression of Franzl as someone who would compromise
And I think I remember you saying Franzl did want to compromise?
MT: As if I'd go after an ambassador. What do you think I am, a Prussian monarch?
Ahahaha. MT gets the best lines! "You gangster." :P
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
True. I can now tell you he also quotes Fritz' various war memoirs without a question mark. Except for Mollwitz; there, he adds Schwerin's account. To be fair, we also get gems like the Venetian ambassador Errizzo reporting that MT in the September of 1745 (i.e. when she's about to meet Wilhelmine and see Franzl crowned said the following about Fritz: "(Friedrich) she called a prince who, despite the ease with which he breaks his word - and that he does so can't be called a minor flaw - can't be denied to possess a great acumen, a comprehensive talent and a relentless occupation with his duties as a ruler. As a general, he adds to these qualities an always alert vigilance, which she judges to be absolutely essential for the profession."
So, by 1745, they seem to see each other thusly:
Fritz: She's courageous and determined, despite being a woman.
MT: He's lying liar who lies, but also a smart, capable workoholic and an A plus general.
(Zimmermann: But Fritz NEVER BROKE HIS WORD! NEVER EVER!!!! I can't emphasize this enough in my "Fragments!" And he was always gallant to women! You should have married him, not that gloating guy from Lorraine!!!)
And I think I remember you saying Franzl did want to compromise?
He did suggest it, though in the second Silesian war, not in the first, and not in public; in public, he and MT presented a united front.
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
power couples of the ancient world
Re: power couples of the ancient world
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
*chokes* FRITZ! I also choked at the "Enemies" bit, oh Fritz.
(Also, Wilhelmine! >:( )
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
(He also wanted the Duke of Bavaria and later rival Emperor to march direclty towards Vienna, but Karl Albrecht basically said, um, you first, mate, you first. Another reason why MT not appeasing Fritz paid off for her despite her losing Silesia is that the conclusion Europe drew from the Austrian War of Succession that if you're not Fritz, you do not mess with MT.)
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
*cough* I thought he might be up to a little self-aggrandizement. Thank you for confirming.
Fritz, it's nice that you managed to get a small body of troops that close, I'm sure it's great for propaganda, but they were never actually a threat according to any of my reading. You're not exactly "the Turks before Vienna."
Re: Fritz as a writer: an early Victorian take
LOL. Appeasement: it's the way to go, clearly! I suppose Bissett couldn't exactly say he thought the British Cabinet was wrong? Or, judging from the rest of your comment, even entertain the notion of it?
There cannot now, we believe, be much question that the claim of Frederic to Silesia was supported on no better ground than that of an armed highwayman to the purse of an unarmed traveller.
HAHAHAHA (...owing to having my fingers positioned on the keyboard incorrectly, the first time I wrote it it came out as JAJAJAJA, which I suppose is also appropriate!)
No mention of the fact that if she had done so, you can bet the other German princes and European powers would have been even more encouraged to grab what they could get of the HRE and Austria, only in that case she wouldn't have been able to motivate anyone to fight for wihat was left. It was her stubbornness and willingness to fight that convinced the Hungarians to fight for her as well, and enabled her to hold on to everything except for Silesia.
Thanks for this -- it is the sort of thing that seems obvious when you say it but I don't think I quite understood. :)