Frederick the Great discussion post 15

[cahn]

...I have nothing clever to say here, just really pleased this is still going :)
rheinsberg

Comments

Re: Lehndorff

[selenak]

it's het, but otherwise, it's Heinrich/all of Lehndorff's least favorite people. Lol.

Having listened to it right now, true enough!

Ludolf August von Katte/Katherina du Rosey marriage: the plot thickens! I think I had the overall two kids from a previous wiki entry (which however als had her dying in the 1770s as opposed to surviving to have tea with Lehndorff in the 1780s), but I'm not completely sure. The 1749 date for Lehndorff's proposal is based on the Leipzig state archive dating the box containing the Lehndorff correspondance on that matter to this year, but that's the archive dating, and not having seen the contents of the box, I don't know whether they're basing it on dated letters or just assumptions. They just give it in their online catalogue, which is how I came across it. (Lehndorff himself gives us only the date of 1751 as for when they were supposed to marry - in the diary entry when he meets her again as Frau von Katte - , and a one year or more gap for an engagement among nobles is normal.) And no, I can't see a proposal to an eleven years old being done at that time, either. These weren't the Middle Ages anymore, and the extended Lehndorff-du Rosey-tribe were East Prussian nobility, not royalty. (I'm making that royalty qualification because Fritz insisted on the plans for a marriage between Wilhelmine's daughter and young Carl Eugen von Würtemberg being made definite when his niece was eight, and of course SD had her plans for Wilhelmine as future Queen of England first documented in a letter written by her when Wilhelmine was all of six months.) Now Klosterhuis has his Katte family data from Martin von Katte as I recall. I scanned those family trees from Martin for you, do they have something? (Either in the way of kids or birthdays?)

Anyway, there's another possibility for a mistaken birth date though that's stretching things, and it's this: as I recall dates of baptism are registered far more frequently than birth dates, especially for female babies who wouldn't have been of much dynastic importance to a family. (Not just true for German speaking principalities; I seem to remember this is why we don't have Shakespeare's actual birthday on record, just the knowledge it probably was in April because his baptism is registered in this month, and why Shakespeare's registered death day is used as a double for his birthday.) If for some reason baby du Rosey remained unbaptized until she was toddler du Rosey, that might account for perhaps two years. Still, it would be an awfully young age, and you wouldn't need "family intrigues" as an explanation for why the du Rosey clan said no. Nor would it account for the fact that Lehndorff's diary description reads as if she was married to Ludolf von Katte instead of him, not with a four or five years gap between the two (non) events. And he's writing in the later 1750s, so not with decades distance which could have caused some confusion.

Easiest possibility: some clerk made a mistake about her birth date when registering her death. I just remembered: Ellen Ternan, the actress with whom Dickens was in love, in her later years took a whole decade from her age and had in fact that wrong date written on her tombstone, and it took more modern biographers some research and checking of her mother's papers to realise what she'd done. (And let's not forget, East Prussia was a war zone during the 7 Years War, which included the usual burnings of churches which would have the registry.) In the 18th and even the 19th century, confusion about birth dates must have been awfully easy. Maybe she did want to do as Ellen did and cut off some years in her later years; or maybe whoever gave the information to the person registering her death (who'd then also have to register when she was born) honestly believed her to be younger than she'd been, or was guessing.

Re: Lehndorff

[mildred_of_midgard]

I think I had the overall two kids from a previous wiki entry (which however als had her dying in the 1770s as opposed to surviving to have tea with Lehndorff in the 1780s), but I'm not completely sure.

No, I remember it too, both the 2 kids and the impossibly early death date. Like some other entries, it's been recently updated (it seems one of the Wiki contributors recently discovered Kloosterhuis, among other things).

I scanned those family trees from Martin for you, do they have something? (Either in the way of kids or birthdays?)

No, unfortunately, that branch of the family tree stops with Heinrich Christoph (Hans Heinrich's brother), None of his kids or their spouses or kids.

Easiest possibility: some clerk made a mistake about her birth date when registering her death.

Or Wikipedia being wrong! I still have no source on her birthday (it's not Kloosterhuis).

I just remembered: Ellen Ternan, the actress with whom Dickens was in love, in her later years took a whole decade from her age and had in fact that wrong date written on her tombstone

Laura Ingalls Wilder's husband Almanzo evidently raised his age by 2 years, which can only be confirmed by very early census records. His tombstone, his wife, and every other source give the older age. So definitely not impossible! If du Rosey was really born in 1733 and later subtracted 5 years from her age, she'd have been 16 in 1749, which is a reasonable age for a proposal from a 26-yo, given the time, especially if, as you speculated, her parents thought she was too young.

Or there could have been a clerkly error or guess, similarly off by about 5 years.

And no, I can't see a proposal to an eleven years old being done at that time, either. These weren't the Middle Ages anymore, and the extended Lehndorff-du Rosey-tribe were East Prussian nobility, not royalty.

Indeed, and a dynastic marriage to an eleven-year-old arranged by parents is different from Lehndorff proposing out of love and being deeply disappointed. Even if we take his 1751 year and assume the archive is wrong, thirteen years old seems a bit much, even for the times! His two actual marriages, assuming the dates in Wikipedia are correct, are to a 17-yo and an 18-yo.

The extra kids are interesting, though, especially the dates. Did she relent eventually? None of the sources I'm seeing are indicating that Ludolf had those kids, though--we still only have Wikipedia's word for that.

but that's the archive dating, and not having seen the contents of the box

So, I'm thinking, learning to master hand-written Rokoko French would be an excellent next project for you! You can start with German: we do have all those Fredersdorf letters to look up, after all. ;)