Hoffbauer objecting to de Catt: in the sense that the entire account by Fritz in the memoirs is unreliable since there‘s no basis in the diary and Koser proved Catt‘s general untrustworthiness.
Unsolicited report: as I understood it he‘s talking about two different things. The one by von Münchow has the execution spot named, Katte is brave, see above. The first message by von Lepel isn‘t really a report in that nothing at all is described. Hoffbauer doesn‘t count it among the five descriptive documents. He quotes it entirely, though, and it really is just a „it‘s done, where should I sent the medal, and whom should I send the bill to?“‘ letter of a few lines, with Lepel the next day writing a few more lines about Fritz‘ current state, and then the actual report after receiving FW‘s ungracious „I want details!“ letter. Which was sent per Eilstaffette, i.e. urgent mesenger, says Hoffbauer, as marked in the archives - all communication between Lepel and FW around the execution were. I guess FW didn‘t want any more messages being delayed overnight?
BUT. If Hans Heinrich is getting the "Point de pardon, mon prince, je meurs avec mille plaisirs pour vous," version, and FW is getting the "Monseigneur vous n‘avez rien à me demander!" that tells me that maybe somebody is pitching the message to the audience
Possible, but note the different sources. FW gets his version from Lepel. Hans Heinrich gets his from Besser, possibly Müller, and v. Schack. These are all different people. Doesn‘t mean Besser didn‘t want to comfort Hans Heinrich, or that Lepel didn‘t want FW to be assured everything went according to plan as spelled out by FW, of course. Still, I don‘t see why Besser wouldn‘t given Hans Heinrich FW‘s version if that was the only one, ditto Müller, whereas Lepel has a better motive for altering the words to suit FW.
Münchow Jr.‘ age: Hoffbauer devoted some text on this, but seriously, I only have so much time. I skipped.
Koser revision: these two things are what Hoffbauer names - i.e. Koser eliminating the „we can no longer trust him“ and the „probably correct“ - as proof Koser changed his mind on Jr.
Berg: as said in other comment, you‘ll have to wait a bit longer, I‘m on the road next week pretty much every day!
Re: Katte at Küstrin: The Theodor Hoffbauer Version
Unsolicited report: as I understood it he‘s talking about two different things.
Ahh, thank you for clarifying.
Possible, but note the different sources. FW gets his version from Lepel. Hans Heinrich gets his from Besser, possibly Müller, and v. Schack. These are all different people. Doesn‘t mean Besser didn‘t want to comfort Hans Heinrich, or that Lepel didn‘t want FW to be assured everything went according to plan as spelled out by FW, of course. Still, I don‘t see why Besser wouldn‘t given Hans Heinrich FW‘s version if that was the only one, ditto Müller, whereas Lepel has a better motive for altering the words to suit FW.
Exactly what I concluded below: that the version given to Hans Heinrich was the most likely to be correct, and the FW version was way toned down. Perhaps as signaled by the "ungefähr."
Koser revision: these two things are what Hoffbauer names - i.e. Koser eliminating the „we can no longer trust him“ and the „probably correct“ - as proof Koser changed his mind on Jr.
I'm not convinced, but I don't have access to Hoffbauer's full text, so I will refrain from arguing too much with him.
No worries about time! Anything you can read or scan is most welcome at any time that you can provide it. I'm sorry I wasn't able to get my hands on these volumes myself. I tried very hard! (Also, getting a break before Berg gives me a chance to work on Poniatowski for cahn, so I'm actually kind of relieved.)
Also, I just want to say that I very much enjoyed the liveliness of your write-up. En garde! :D
![[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: Katte at Küstrin: The Theodor Hoffbauer Version
Unsolicited report: as I understood it he‘s talking about two different things. The one by von Münchow has the execution spot named, Katte is brave, see above. The first message by von Lepel isn‘t really a report in that nothing at all is described. Hoffbauer doesn‘t count it among the five descriptive documents. He quotes it entirely, though, and it really is just a „it‘s done, where should I sent the medal, and whom should I send the bill to?“‘ letter of a few lines, with Lepel the next day writing a few more lines about Fritz‘ current state, and then the actual report after receiving FW‘s ungracious „I want details!“ letter. Which was sent per Eilstaffette, i.e. urgent mesenger, says Hoffbauer, as marked in the archives - all communication between Lepel and FW around the execution were. I guess FW didn‘t want any more messages being delayed overnight?
BUT. If Hans Heinrich is getting the "Point de pardon, mon prince, je meurs avec mille plaisirs pour vous," version, and FW is getting the "Monseigneur vous n‘avez rien à me demander!" that tells me that maybe somebody is pitching the message to the audience
Possible, but note the different sources. FW gets his version from Lepel. Hans Heinrich gets his from Besser, possibly Müller, and v. Schack. These are all different people. Doesn‘t mean Besser didn‘t want to comfort Hans Heinrich, or that Lepel didn‘t want FW to be assured everything went according to plan as spelled out by FW, of course. Still, I don‘t see why Besser wouldn‘t given Hans Heinrich FW‘s version if that was the only one, ditto Müller, whereas Lepel has a better motive for altering the words to suit FW.
Münchow Jr.‘ age: Hoffbauer devoted some text on this, but seriously, I only have so much time. I skipped.
Koser revision: these two things are what Hoffbauer names - i.e. Koser eliminating the „we can no longer trust him“ and the „probably correct“ - as proof Koser changed his mind on Jr.
Berg: as said in other comment, you‘ll have to wait a bit longer, I‘m on the road next week pretty much every day!
Re: Katte at Küstrin: The Theodor Hoffbauer Version
Ahh, thank you for clarifying.
Possible, but note the different sources. FW gets his version from Lepel. Hans Heinrich gets his from Besser, possibly Müller, and v. Schack. These are all different people. Doesn‘t mean Besser didn‘t want to comfort Hans Heinrich, or that Lepel didn‘t want FW to be assured everything went according to plan as spelled out by FW, of course. Still, I don‘t see why Besser wouldn‘t given Hans Heinrich FW‘s version if that was the only one, ditto Müller, whereas Lepel has a better motive for altering the words to suit FW.
Exactly what I concluded below: that the version given to Hans Heinrich was the most likely to be correct, and the FW version was way toned down. Perhaps as signaled by the "ungefähr."
Koser revision: these two things are what Hoffbauer names - i.e. Koser eliminating the „we can no longer trust him“ and the „probably correct“ - as proof Koser changed his mind on Jr.
I'm not convinced, but I don't have access to Hoffbauer's full text, so I will refrain from arguing too much with him.
No worries about time! Anything you can read or scan is most welcome at any time that you can provide it. I'm sorry I wasn't able to get my hands on these volumes myself. I tried very hard! (Also, getting a break before Berg gives me a chance to work on Poniatowski for
Also, I just want to say that I very much enjoyed the liveliness of your write-up. En garde! :D