Frederick the Great, discussion post 16
Jul. 14th, 2020 09:12 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnWe have slowed down a lot, but are still (sporadically) going! And somehow filled up the last post while I wasn't looking!
...I was asked to start a new thread so that STDs could be discussed. Really! :D
...I was asked to start a new thread so that STDs could be discussed. Really! :D
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 02:57 am (UTC)I'm now rethinking my speculations on FW and masturbation. Because the 1727 instructions to five-year-old AW's governor say the governors have to sleep next to him in case he needs anything, and in the very next paragraph, "although we don't need to worry about 'silent sins' yet, in a few years, don't tolerate it and do everything you can to prevent it, and in the meantime, no dirty talk in his presence."
And the 1738 governor instructions for Heinrich and Ferdinand go, "Sleep next to them every night in case they need anything," and in the next paragraph, "don't tolerate any silent sins, and no dirty talk during the day."
So why is 18-yo Fritz suddenly getting "sleep next to him every night" instructions for his governors in 1730? I'm now thinking they originally had orders to do this, a few years before, and then Fritz talked them into giving him some privacy (which would explain why he liked Keyserlingk so much in years to come), and FW was merely reiterating the instructions after Fritz and Peter got caught doing whatever it was they were doing.
Because the 1727 AW instructions and the 1738 Heinrich and Ferdinand instructions are almost verbatim the same, but Fritz's are rather different, and they emphasize "whether you're here [i.e. Potsdam], in Berlin, or on trips, sleep next to him every single night, and be responsible for his person." Which could read as, "And when I said every night when you were hired, I meant every. Single. Night. Not just the ones where his boyfriend isn't coming over."
Now, it could be that in 1727 FW thought that if you taught your son not to commit silent sins and set a good example with no dirty talk, that was sufficient, and then in 1730, finding out otherwise was another brick in the foundation of "wretched son is false to the core," or it could be that he intended Fritz supervised every night for no masturbating or midnight reading or anything, and Fritz talked his governors into giving him some space, until FW caught on.
I mean, for all we know, Fritz and Peter got caught reading French literature late at night. :P Judging by that Catt anecdote, which I don't remember if it's in the diary, Fritz was also having to sneak out of his room to read at night, until he almost got caught and had to stop. And we know Peter was a big reader.
My headcanon has always been that Fritz shared books if he could with Peter, and if not, told him what he was reading in that giant secret library of his that he'd gotten into debt for. Heck, I put that in "Lover": I missed late nights talking about literature with you, even whispering because your father would beat us if he found out, and He and royal page Keith had bonded over smuggled books, feeding their starved minds as best they could together.
So, who knows.
(I still think they got caught fooling around, though. :P Would love to have the complete text of that order from the archives.)
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 05:07 am (UTC)"if he cannot get along with my son in kindness, then I will probably find means to make Wilhelm obey"? He "wanted the child's own will to be broken from the start"? UGH. (I know, you're like "yeah, it's just FW." I keep forgetting that FW is... FW.)
Also, do you know what uses syntax and vocabulary simple enough for me to read? Wilhelm's letters! Woohoo, I can read at a 6-year-old level :D (I'm not sure most of the 6-year-olds I know would be able to write a letter that well, actually.)
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 09:55 am (UTC)More seriously, it has to be said that the "children need to learn to obey unquestioningly" part wasn't just FW, that was the general conviction of the era until Rousseau. Which is why the Mozart family biographer has a point when he says that Leopold Mozart might come across as the ultimate overbearing, micomanaging Dad to us, but in terms of his contemporaries, he was downright revolutionary as long as his children were still children. Also if you compare him with the teachers of other musical prodigies. (Looking at you, Herr Schmeling.) Hitting/spanking children was normal; Leopold never did, and in his "Versuch einer gründlichen Violinschule" had firm opinions on how musical instruments should be taught, with the pupil understanding, not blindly obeying, being key. Also with all the travelling and teaching them he spent much more time with Wolfgang and Nannerl (until puberty struck, poor girl) than fathers were used to do at the era.
(Leopold as a parent to adult children is another matter, but there his favourite tactic was emotional blackmail of the "I remember when you kissed me on the nose as a little boy and promised you'd always take care of me in my old age, and now you'r hanging out with the Webers and giving them money which we gave you for your journey instead of moving on to Paris to conquer the musical scene there? SERIOUSLY? I am heartbroken!" type rather than FW style "you wretch, kiss my feet if you want to live!")
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 08:46 pm (UTC)Normal kid: *doesn't want to study Latin*
Normal kid: *gets beaten*
Fritz: *eager to study Latin*
Fritz: *gets beaten*
Most parents: *would die to have bb!Fritz*
Btw,
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-29 03:49 am (UTC)Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 12:24 am (UTC)No, "broken" was FW speaking. Eigenhändig (in his own hand) to boot!
6. Weil er auch einen Kopf hat, wie die Kinder alle haben, so muss dieser beizeiten gebrochen werden.
He also used "broken" to describe the desired state of Fritz's heart in the minutes immediately following Katte's execution. (Broken and therefore hopefully susceptible to being guided back onto the proper religious path by the preacher who was to be standing by at the execution.)
And yes, *that*, even at the time, was weird. Pace Preuss, FW wasn't a typical "deutscher Hausvater", either in his goals or in his methods. Here's how I think 18th century fathers stacked up:
- Expecting blind obedience beyond what we would consider healthy now: normal.
- Corporal punishment: varied.
- Micromanaging your kid's life and trying to break his will so that he never does anything he wants even when you're not around: weird.
- Threatening to kill your kid: WTF???
- Actually killing your kid: Peter the Great.
the bit about FW breaking his son in "Survived" was the product of several earlier drafts where mildred said I wasn't getting that part quite right. :)
With this part, I think it was less about not getting it right and more about me trying to help with the arc of the story. Since Fredersdorf has heard about the execution and met Fritz during the imprisonment, he can't exactly think everything is sunshine and roses between FW and Fritz. But the point of writing the first Christmas was for him to experience the dysfunction at close hand and realize just how bad it really is. And there are little things like SD ranting in front of the servants and FW keeping track of candle usage, but it occurred to me that a good major realization for Fredersdorf to have would be to go from believing that things were bad between FW and Fritz, but that a bunch of the conflicts were one-offs, the product of FW's temper--Fredersdorf giving him the benefit of the doubt and believing he does things he regrets--to Fredersdorf realizing that FW is actually trying to break Fritz: that hurting his oldest son isn't a bug, but a feature. And that's where Fredersdorf starts having second thoughts about whether this is what he signed up for.
The one where I felt maybe we needed to acknowledge FW's parenting wasn't as abnormal then as it is now was when you had the kids not speaking unless spoken to at the table, and Fredersdorf taking that as a sign something was wrong. Whereas to me, especially when your parents are monarchs, that feels way more normal.
Actually, you've read Farmer's Boy, right? I think Almanzo's father makes a good contrast with FW here.
The children have to do an adult's work on the farm at the age of 8 or whatever.
They get whipped for infractions.
They're not allowed to speak at the table unless spoken to.
Remember the last scene? Almanzo's father actually asks him what he thinks about being apprenticed and what kind of career he wants for himself, and Almanzo's shocked that he gets to have an opinion about his own future.
We find out in later books and/or Laura's letters that Almanzo's dad had the right to keep him on the farm and collect all his earnings until he was twenty-one, but Mr. Wilder actually gave his sons their independence at age 18 and let them take jobs, move out, keep their own money, etc.
And, Almanzo and his father have a good rapport.
Now, how this played out in real life, who knows. Laura clearly glamorized Pa and made Ma look worse in at least some respects than she was. But the point is that corporal punishment, "children should be seen and not heard," and children's futures being decided by their parents might have been normal then, but the kind of fear and hatred you get between Fritz and FW, or, say, Bullet and John Tillerman, isn't inevitable. Because Mr. Wilder on the one hand is capable of saying, "Everyone gets up at 5 am to go out to the fields, and you work diligently until I say it's time to eat," to his children, but also, "If Almanzo's heart's not in it, there's no point in forcing him into a career as a farmer. Let him go apprentice in the city," to his wife. Which is not an FW thing to do!
Or, from (totally fictional) Outlander, Jamie speaking: "My father whipped me as often as he thought I needed it, and a lot oftener than I thought I did. But I didna cower when he spoke to me. And I dinna think young Rabbie will lie in bed with his wife one day and laugh about it.
“He’s right; the lad’s his own son, he can do as he likes. And I’m not God; only the laird, and that’s a good bit lower down. Still…”
So that's why I think when the Hohenzollern kids are actively cringing around their parents in "Survived", it's a good clear signal of abusiveness even by the standards of the time.
And Fritz not saying *anything* during that one historical meal where he had to cut the meat is a bit different, in that it's a larger gathering of 21 people, where many different conversations would have been happening as everyone talked to the people sitting next to them (like Fritz and Suhm during the infamous forced intoxication episode). In contrast to a family-only meal, where I assume the adults talk and the kids wait to be addressed.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 06:07 am (UTC)I agree with your examples but would add some (marked in bold):
- Expecting blind obedience beyond what we would consider healthy now: normal.
- Corporal punishment: varied.
- Micromanaging your kid's life and trying to break his will so that he never does anything he wants even when you're not around: weird.
- leaving your kid for fourteen years elsewhere without visits: a bit cold, but the weather is nicer in Hannover anyway?
- openly rooting for your fave to inherit instead of your oldest kid: when combined with:
- Threatening to kill your kid: WTF???
(...but okay if you do it via spreading rumors your oldest kid is impotent)
- having sex with your kid (according to gossip): you're clearly either August(us) the Strong or Philippe d'Orleans the Younger
- participating in orgiastic parties at the same time your daughter does and being on board with your daughter having an active sex life with other people in general: you're DEFINITELY August(us) the Strong or Philippe d'Orleans the Younger
- Actually killing your kid: Peter the Great.
"Do not speak unless spoken to": imo in general more a 19th century thing. If guests are present, you're certainly supposed to show you can carry a conversation if you're a prince or princess. Other Seckendorff in his diary notes with disapproval young Aw fainting in the tobacco parliament, and with approval later that on another occasion kid Ferdinand (future menace) cheeked Grumbkow about passing him some dish by enganging in a joke with him about Grumbkow being a field marshal now, so he an be gracious like a King.
Of course, the problem with judging as to whether or not children were expected to talk during family only meals is that most of the reports we have are from family and other people meals, by necessity. The one example that popped immediately in my mind about a royal family meal with no other people present is from one of Liselotte's letters (to aunt Sophie of Hannover, as it happens) about a moment of levity chez Orleans, where the people present are she, Philippe the older and Philippe the Younger, and then one of them farts and the others join in for a laugh. But not only is this two generals pre Fritz and FW, I also think Philippe the Younger was at least a teenager by then.
Oh, just remembered: if I recall Horowitz correctly, one of the complaints about Fritz of Wales from his family was that after he joined them after fourteen years alone in Hannover, he hardly spoke to any of them unless spoken to. Given the circumstances, this is hardly surprising, but it does show he was expected to talk during family meals, not wait for his parents to adress him.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 03:15 pm (UTC)"The adults and nearly-adults are talking about the future queen's alleged fistulas at dinner" does strike me as a very very dysfunctional family at best. :P
And the Tobacco Parliament was explicitly supposed to be etiquette-free, right? I doubt anyone for a moment forgot that FW was their monarch in terms of *what* they said, but as they drank and smoked and played practical jokes, I imagine he got spontaneously interrupted in the middle of a sentence during a lively discussion and was pleased rather than otherwise by the casualness.
But maybe even the little kids did always get to pipe up at will this century. I will keep that in mind, thank you. (When doing the servant research, I did initially project late 18th and early 19th century mores back in time, only to find out that the 18th century was a transitional period, with the early part of the century looking different than the latter, and the transition happening at different rates in different regions, so that travelers to other countries were shocked by the local customs. So that's when I started pulling my hair out at "I don't know what expectations of servants were like in 1732 Prussia, much less the weirdo court where FW wants to be a German burgher and SD wants to be a French queen! It was probably different on different days, depending on whether he was in residence or not.")
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-29 04:38 am (UTC)My parents (born in 1945 and 1947 respectively) still had their fingers hit by rulers by their teachers in school, so definitely still a thing in Germany in the 1960s, too.
(Whereas my generation was safe from this in school, though parents spanking their children was still considered an okay punishment. I mean, I wasn't, but a lot of people my age were.)
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 12:24 am (UTC)Whereas my generation was safe from this in school, though parents spanking their children was still considered an okay punishment. I mean, I wasn't, but a lot of people my age were.
Same, no corporal punishment in schools, but parents could do it. Mine did, in the 80s and 90s, but quite mildly. It was more of a shame punishment than a pain one. I remember one occasion when I was 5 and got spanked, and I actually protested, "But that didn't even hurt!" when my mother was done and told me to go stand and face the wall.
And she rolled her eyes, said, "All right, come back here," and then administered a couple more swats that actually stung for a few seconds. As I walked off to my time-out, I felt satisfied that at least she had done it right.
Which tells you how little it hurt! And also that it was intended to, just a little.
I'm not saying I would endorse this, but FW it was not.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 04:20 am (UTC)Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 10:09 am (UTC)Here's a thought: what if Sophie Charlotte had lived a few decades longer instead of dying young and in her 30s? It would have caught FW in a bind, because he was so much into respecting your parents, and he couldn't have objected if his mother at her court would have (openly, not in secret) provided Fritz with cultural opportunities.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-28 09:39 pm (UTC)Sigh.
FW really thinks he is God and created his offspring in his image.
Which would explain why Peter just gets transferred and not punished or threatened with hellfire.
Yeah, I keep going back and forth on what would get you transferred but not cashiered by FW. Not!Robert got pressured into helping with the escape attempt, then voluntarily fessed up and plea bargained, and he got the same deal Peter had six months earlier: dismissed as page, given a promotion to lieutenant, sent to a regiment in Wesel. (FW: "It worked so well the first time!" :P Though to be fair, what he actually wrote to not!Robert's new commander was, "He should be more honest than his brother the rogue.")
So Peter fessing up, probably not, not if Fritz continued to trust him and involve him in plans. But given that Fritz voluntarily and consistently in late 1730 said that escaping was his idea, he talked everyone else into it, and he didn't want his friends punished--well, whatever it was in January 1730 wasn't bad enough that FW felt the need to punish both parties like he did in November 1730. So I very much doubt, say, anal penetration was what Fritz and Peter got caught at. But whether it was book reading, kissing and fondling, or something else, it's very likely that Fritz took the blame, FW assumed the worst of his son, or both, and Peter didn't get the lion's share of FW's wrath.
I imagine whatever Peter said, he was careful to appease FW and also not to blame Fritz. Sth like, "I'm so sorry, I know I shouldn't have, I was weak, it won't happen again-"
FW: No, it won't, because you'll be in Wesel, far, far away from my wretched son.
Let's also remember that FW wasn't always as harsh as November 1730. On at least one previous occasion, he found out that Fritz had run up debts and he was like, "I'll pay them, I just wish he'd be honest and not sneak around." The final time, it was maximum sentences for everyone who had helped or even associated with Fritz in any way.
So just because Fritz failed to get Katte or Peter's sentences lightened by taking the blame on himself in late 1730, doesn't mean he wouldn't have been successful in early 1730.
And there's also: becoming a lieutenant is a promotion, true, but even leaving aside the distance from Fritz, it was apparently a very low-prestige regiment at the time.
All of which is to say, could have been some light fooling around (whether or not they passed it off as masturbation), could have been book reading, could have been something else. Koser thinks it was an escape plan.
I'e always questioned that on the grounds that surely FW would have reacted more harshly, but...he actually wasn't *that* harsh on August 6-August 9, after Fritz's attempt was discovered but before Peter's was. It was only when the escape plan turned out to have been coordinated across a large geographical area, to have been successful as far as at least one member was concerned, and to have involved England that FW started seeing conspiracies. And January 1730 is when that mass desertion conspiracy among the Potsdam Giants was uncovered. (I looked yet again for Kloosterhuis' 700-page "Lange Kerls" book, and I still can't find it cheaper than $136. Sigh. NO, self.)
So maybe Kloosterhuis is right, and FW has escape on his mind and is just separating Fritz from anyone he suspects might try to help, while tightening the guard on him.
FOOLING AROUND HEADCANON :P
he couldn't have objected if his mother at her court would have (openly, not in secret) provided Fritz with cultural opportunities.
Hmm. Could he have kept Fritz mostly away from her? How far does filial obedience to a legally powerless mother extend?
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-29 06:40 am (UTC)I think this is also why he had an easier time with the girls other than Wilhelmine (once it was clear she and Fritz were indivisible and she sided with SD in the big marriage battle). In as much as he paid any attention to them at all, that is, but he did write affectione letters to Charlotte and Friederike once they were married. (Of course, they from him pov did everything right - married without arguing whom they were supposed to, produced grandchildren.) Daughters were a different species and he never expected them to be like himself. It also explains why he initially took to AW, thereby creating a positive loop instead of a negative one, despite the fact that AW in the end wasn't much like FW. AW as toddler had just enough similarities for FW to believe that this was finally the kid he'd wanted to have all along, to wit, he enjoyed playing with soldiers and canons, he liked sports - to overlook that actually, their tempers couldn't be more differently. (Tiny Terror FW beats up cousin George, swallows golden shoelaces in protest and makes his teachers cry, kid AW's policy when interacting with adults seems to be to charm them, and far from being jealeous of other children, he's delighted about sharing rooms with Heinrich.
(I'm still not over adult AW in 1744, writing his "my life so far" retrospective for his newborn son, regarding four years old Heinrich moving in with him as the big event of 1730.)
Now granted, Tiny Terror FW was an only child (and as the one and only heir a very precious one in every sense) whereas AW was the spare to the heir and one of many siblings when he was born, but still, they were both given the "apple of the eye" treatment by the most powerful adults around them, and FW was raised with his cousins in a sibling-like situation for a while. (Resulting in him beating them up, where AW took to Heinrich and then Ferdinand with joy.)
All of which goes to show: FW had expectations of his kids but he also saw what he wanted to see. Unfortunately, it was clear early on that little Fritz' interests were not his interests, while the mere fact little AW liked some of the same things he'd done was enough to further the (for AW fortunate) misunderstanding that they were alike and he'd finally gotten his replica.
If Sophie Charlotte had lived: Hmm. Could he have kept Fritz mostly away from her? How far does filial obedience to a legally powerless mother extend?
Good question. The 19th century Prussian historians think he didn't like his mother ("not a good Christian"), as he despised all she loved and through his life rejected what she had valued, but Barbara Beuys does reproduce enough letters and actions from young FW to demonstrate that's not exactly true. His grandmother may have noticably gone from "OMG how cute tiny FW is!" (in the ballet when he was six) to "his father adores him" (when FW was twelve) in her letters, but young FW when visiting Brussels for the first time took the trouble to hunt down some paintings for his mother and to describe others to her which he'd seen because he knew she loved them. These were baroque opulent paintings with pagan subjects, not religious stuff. Bear in mind that even at F1's court, where the militarisation hadn't happened yet and where the genders weren't that strictly separated, young FW still had no reason to interact with his mother on more than official court occasions once he was a teenager, and yet he still sought out her company. (Mind you, of course Sophie Charlotte hadn't done any more hands-on raising than the other princesses of the era - that had been Madame de Roucoulles.)
There's also my old speculation that FW accepting SD kicking him out of bed instead of committing outright marital rape, and taking the punch from Frau von Pannewitz instead of either forcing her or punishing her for her rjection might have had to do with the fact his mother had been a strong-willed lady who got to set the rules in her own marriage. (F1 famously was only allowed to come to Charlottenburg - once he'd given her the place - if she explicitly invited him to, and he abided by that. )
And FW really was sentimental about the whole family concept, perhaps precisely because h'd been an only child. He wanted an adoring wife and many children surrounding him. So I don't think he'd been emotionally capable of, say, practically banishing his mother if Sophie Charlotte had lived, or forbidding his children to visit her. Assuming she wouldn't have moved back to Hannover (or gone to England) after F1's death, but would have stayed in Prussia, and would have maintained her own little court at Charlottenburg, I really have no idea how he'd have responded to her encouraging the grandkids culturally. Because as opposed to his wife, him trying to forbid her to do this would presumably just have resulted in a raised eyebrow and her doing it anyway. She definitely would not have felt threatened or intimdated, because he had no social power over her.
Another question is: what would SD have done? Because she wasn't a good mother-in-law even when it was no question of her oldest daughter-in-law being her rival, even when Fritz had made it clear from the get go she was the true first lady of Prussia. This was not a woman easily putting up with competition for the Queen spot. And Sophie Charlotte wouldn't just have been any Queen Mother. She had been one of the most praised queens of Europe in her time, despite of her kingdom being thought of as little more than a joke. Both when she was on the marriage market and after, her beauty was heralded. She was praised for making Berlin "Athens on the Spree" long before Fritz' time. The great Leipniz raved about her intellect. Young Sophie Charlotte had been to Versailles, even, while SD despite her English marriage fixation had never seen more than Hannover and Brandenburg. In short, it would be like competing with royal glamour personified, while simultanously your husband starts his austerity program.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 01:00 am (UTC)Exactly. Much like the SD-Wilhelmine dynamic, vs. SD and Fritz.
AW as toddler had just enough similarities for FW to believe that this was finally the kid he'd wanted to have all along, to wit, he enjoyed playing with soldiers and canons, he liked sports - to overlook that actually, their tempers couldn't be more differently.
FW *definitely* latched onto superficials here. I mean, the kid that you're worried about being soft and effeminate is sticking to his guns in the face of increasing pain, humiliation, and fear of death. If that isn't a will of iron, I don't know what is.
And FW really was sentimental about the whole family concept, perhaps precisely because h'd been an only child. He wanted an adoring wife and many children surrounding him. So I don't think he'd been emotionally capable of, say, practically banishing his mother if Sophie Charlotte had lived, or forbidding his children to visit her.
Oh, very true, and good point.
I really have no idea how he'd have responded to her encouraging the grandkids culturally. Because as opposed to his wife, him trying to forbid her to do this would presumably just have resulted in a raised eyebrow and her doing it anyway. She definitely would not have felt threatened or intimdated, because he had no social power over her.
That is really interesting. But suppose it weren't FW, but someone less into respecting their parents. What would the actual consequences have been if he'd decided to physically keep his kids away from her and say that they were only allowed to carry out their military duties, attend church, and study the administration and smattering of history that he authorized? Because there's de jure power, and then there's de facto power. Who's on her side if he locks the kids away from her?
I guess it's the same as my question of "If Fritz had divorced EC, who would have *made* him get married again?"
Even today, at least in the US, parents have the right to keep their kids away from the grandparents, short of a court order (how that works depends on the state). I don't know about Germany.
But I agree with you that FW's personality would have led him to have a great deal of trouble defying Mom's wishes, in much the same way as he gave Dad the lavish funeral before beginning the reign of austerity. And I don't know how that would have played out in this AU.
Maybe it would have worked out better for poor Fritz and Wilhelmine. :(
what would SD have done? Because she wasn't a good mother-in-law even when it was no question of her oldest daughter-in-law being her rival, even when Fritz had made it clear from the get go she was the true first lady of Prussia. This was not a woman easily putting up with competition for the Queen spot. And Sophie Charlotte wouldn't just have been any Queen Mother.
In short, it would be like competing with royal glamour personified, while simultanously your husband starts his austerity program.
Oh, man. But Sophie Charlotte's presumably behind the English marriage, right? Is it possible they just become allies in the face of FW's crazy, and SC makes it so SD can have more glamor at her own court?
she wasn't a good mother-in-law even when it was no question of her oldest daughter-in-law being her rival, even when Fritz had made it clear from the get go she was the true first lady of Prussia.
How much of that was because she despised her daughters-in-law, though? How would she have reacted to Mina as Fritz's wife? (Not a rhetorical question.)
(I'm still not over adult AW in 1744, writing his "my life so far" retrospective for his newborn son, regarding four years old Heinrich moving in with him as the big event of 1730.)
I got to that yesterday, and I'm glad you prepared me, because that was really something else! And she does actually say that he doesn't mention either Ferdinand's birth or Fritz's escape and imprisonment. It's not just that she didn't quote them for us, which I think had been a point of doubt before.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 04:46 am (UTC)But Sophie Charlotte's presumably behind the English marriage, right? Is it possible they just become allies in the face of FW's crazy, and SC makes it so SD can have more glamor at her own court?
Could be. As to whether SC would have been on Team Hannover, initially yes, of course, but I'm not sure she'd have insisted the way SD did once it turned into such a controversial subject, not least because she wouldn't have felt the need for Wilhelmine to live the life she didn't get the way SD did. She also in rl wasn't partisan in the marriage negotiations she did live long enough to experience, i.e. for foster daughter Caroline. Remember, for a hot minute Caroline was considered as a bride for MT's future dad before he settled on a Brunswick princess instead. Sophie Charlotte would have been on board with that and wouldn't have minded the need to convert; she herself had, also for a hot minute, been considered for marriage into the French Royal family, after all, which also would have necessitated conversion, and her mother Sophie, aka The Protestant Heir To The English Throne, was utterly nonchalant and practical about this.
So I'm not sure that SC would have been all "my grandson must marry a Hannover princess by all means!" once FW started to be against it (which he wasn't from the get go). Who knows, maybe this would have happened:
FW: Mom, please tell me you're not encouraging my wife this Hannover/Britain Or Nothing! campaign.
SC: I don't. It would have been nice, but if you're that much against it, darling, well, I'm sure my brother George can find other suitors.
FW: Thank you, you're a good mother.
SC:...which is why I've thought of an alternate match. After all, it doesn't look like that Brunswick girl whom the Emperor took instead of Caroline will provide him with sons any time soon. So, I've been thinking: how about an Archduchess for our Fritz? Especially considering how strongly you feel about your loyalty to the Emperor. And I'm sure he'd have no choice but to back your claims to Berg and Jülich then.
FW: ....BUT WHAT ABOUT THE POPERY?!? NO SON OF MINE...
SC: Oh, hush. It would only be for show, and I'm sure he'll return to the true faith as soon as the Emperor has kicked the bucket and introduce Protestantism in Vienna. Isn't that a godly cause worthy to cheer for? Along with making the House of Brandenburg the ruling dynasty of the HRE?
How much of that was because she despised her daughters-in-law, though? How would she have reacted to Mina as Fritz's wife? (Not a rhetorical question.)
Hm. On the one hand: Mina has all the refinement and beauty SD requires. On the other: she's really minor nobility - the daughter not even of a ruling prince but a younger prince from a Hesse sideline. Good enough for third son Heinrich, but for beloved first son and future King Fritz? Then again: this means SD still is the superior woman, as she's the daughter and sister of English Kings and can trace her bloodline back for a thousand years.
Lastly: let's not forget that in addition to SD taking against Wilhelmine because of the Bayreuth marriage, there's also an undertone of "who gets to be the most important woman to Fritz?" While she calmed down towards EC once it became clear EC never would even be in the running, and certainly would not be treated as more important than SD by anyone, from Fritz to the lowest Berlin citizen.
Now, Fritz presumably would not have been in love with Mina any more than he was with EC, but he might have gotten along with her better (and certainly would have been pleased she could do all the courtly stuff and was regarded as an ornament to the court). Still, even under the best of circumstances I can't see him letting her get close to him emotionally.
In conclusion: while I don't think SD would have been as enthusiastic about Mina as wife to her first son the way she was about her as wife to her third, for as long as it's made clear she's still the most important woman in Prussia both in terms of social standing and to Fritz, she'd have been okay with her, limiting herself to a few asides about Mina's lower nobility status early on and later a few pointed questions as to why there's no grandkid yet in terms of criticism.
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 06:07 pm (UTC)Oh, yes, very good point.
FW: ....BUT WHAT ABOUT THE POPERY?!? NO SON OF MINE...
SC: Oh, hush. It would only be for show
LOL, I'm sold, this is how it would have happened!
I'm sure he'll return to the true faith as soon as the Emperor has kicked the bucket and introduce Protestantism in Vienna.
This is totally what I would say to FW as a persuasive technique! But actual Fritz...so on the one hand, he's got a pragmatic side, where he's willing to attend church during wartime, or have the court wear mourning for Isabella and stuff--the trappings, for public support. But his actual decisions fly in the face of whatever emperor has nominal authority over him.
So...Emperor Fritz remains nominally Catholic but gets excommunicated, thus continuing a long and respectable tradition of Pope/Emperor conflict?
Does a Fritz already in possession of Silesia (tu felix Frederice nube) continue the tradition of leading his army over the Alps and biting off more than (or in his case, possibly exactly as much as, as with Silesia) he can chew?
Does he get into a multi-front war with various Italian states to the south and Austria-Hungary to the north(-east), as MT rallies the Catholics to side with the Pope against her husband? Does MT pull off the Diplomatic Revolution with the French as fellow defenders of the faith?
I can see AW deciding his allegiance is to Big Bro emperor, and Heinrich winning some victories in Central Europe. Maybe more without Big Bro around?
Also, it would be totally hilarious if AW inherits in May 1740 and Fritz in October 1740, and Fritz decides not to recognize the Prussian Jülich-Berg claims. :P
but he might have gotten along with her better (and certainly would have been pleased she could do all the courtly stuff and was regarded as an ornament to the court)
Agreed. I suspect they would have had roughly the same number of interactions, as he relentlessly distanced her from power, but they might have been politer interactions.
while I don't think SD would have been as enthusiastic about Mina as wife to her first son the way she was about her as wife to her third, for as long as it's made clear she's still the most important woman in Prussia both in terms of social standing and to Fritz, she'd have been okay with her
Makes sense. And if niece Amelia, of impeccable bloodline, had shown up in Prussia married to Fritz, as per SD's *one wish*?
And speaking of grandparental AUs...
On the one hand, I've always been convinced, and I know you agree, that a Fritz raised by someone like Eugene of Savoy--kind and homosexual and in love with the arts, and also in love with having an army and a treasury to pass on to his beloved and well-treated son Fritz--still invades Silesia at the same time for the same reasons. (And possibly is more open to tactics other than decisive battles with monstrous casualties on both sides, because *that* strikes me as a "fight" reflex that got reinforced bigtime by trauma. And also possibly doesn't insult and betray other European powers quite so much. TBD.)
On the other hand, if Fritz had been raised by F1 (and SC if she lives long enough), and inherited a bankrupt kingdom without one of the finest armies in Europe...I'm not convinced that Fritz does an FW and invents frugality and militarism on his own. Workaholism maybe.
If he does, of course, he doesn't have the money and the army by November of 1740. But I'm not sure he does at all. He might have turned out more like August the Strong, minus the drinking, fox-tossing, mistresses, etc., of course.
What do you think?
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-31 04:46 am (UTC)This is totally what I would say to FW as a persuasive technique! But actual Fritz...so on the one hand, he's got a pragmatic side, where he's willing to attend church during wartime, or have the court wear mourning for Isabella and stuff--the trappings, for public support. But his actual decisions fly in the face of whatever emperor has nominal authority over him.
So...Emperor Fritz remains nominally Catholic but gets excommunicated, thus continuing a long and respectable tradition of Pope/Emperor conflict?
Does a Fritz already in possession of Silesia (tu felix Frederice nube) continue the tradition of leading his army over the Alps and biting off more than (or in his case, possibly exactly as much as, as with Silesia) he can chew?
Does he get into a multi-front war with various Italian states to the south and Austria-Hungary to the north(-east), as MT rallies the Catholics to side with the Pope against her husband? Does MT pull off the Diplomatic Revolution with the French as fellow defenders of the faith?
I can see AW deciding his allegiance is to Big Bro emperor, and Heinrich winning some victories in Central Europe. Maybe more without Big Bro around?
Also, it would be totally hilarious if AW inherits in May 1740 and Fritz in October 1740, and Fritz decides not to recognize the Prussian Jülich-Berg claims. :P
*seriously rethinks whether maybe I should ask for MT for Yuletide in addition to or instead of Heinrich*
Re: AW readthrough
Date: 2020-08-30 04:13 am (UTC)(Source: one of my kids is super charming and good-natured, and you can practically see that positive feedback loop taking place when that child is around adults, while my other kid is a perfectly nice kid but hasn't got nearly the amount of innate charm. Adults seem to like that child as well, but it's definitely more of an effort, and FW wasn't the sort of person who would have even understood making an effort. (As opposed to Lehndorff :P :) ) )