So, imagine my surprise when both the Lady Mary and the Lord Hervey biography mentioned that not content with the two of them flinging themselves at Algarotti, Algarotti was also taking up with... Well, here are the quotes:
It was not long, then , before (Algarotti) reached London — in March 1739. At first he visited Andrew Mitchell, a young man who had left Scotland to make his fortune in England , a member of the Royal Society , who had recently been called to the Bar. Algarotti stayed only a short time with him in his chambers in the Middle Temple, then moved to Hervey's apartment in St. James's Palace
And then, later, when he's contemplating a third English sojourn:
From Hamburg he also advised Andrew Mitchell of his expected return to England . Instead of trying to relate every thing he has heard and seen on his recent travels, he prefers to wait until they can sup together in London, he writes, 'where you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi] ... If the wind continues as it is, I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days. Farewell, my dear friend ; love me and believe until death , F.A.'
Well! Now neither "Andrew" nor "Mitchell" are rare names. But the thing is, Andrew Mitchell the later envoy according to the brief biographical sketch of his younger years in Bisset's edition of his papers did have the following career: studies law in Scotland, marries young, wife Barbara dies young, Andrew makes the Grand Tour to Italy, returns but to London to take the bar there (necessary since otherwise he'd been just qualified for Scotland, I remember this from Boswell who had to do it twice, too). We next hear from him in Bisset's summary when he's being considered to run as MP for Aberdeen years later. That leaves just enough time for getting it on with Algarotti in the late 30s and early 40s.
Maybe there were two Andrew Mitchells from Scotland studying law in London during that time. But if not: one wonders whether Algarotti as a subject was ever mentioned with Fritz, and if so, whether Bisset edited this out, because I don't recall the man ever being mentioned in what I've read...
Oh, darn! I thought I had shared this already, but no, it was in that backlog of comments I wanted to make that accumulated while I was spending all my computer time on fic.
So--yes! It's our Andrew Mitchell, per the Algarotti dissertation writer:
Before taking up residence at St. James Palace with Hervey, Algarotti had stayed for a short time with Andrew Mitchell. Mitchell, together with Celsius and Folkes, had been responsible for nominating Algarotti for membership to the Royal Society in 1736.
Like Hervey, Mitchell was well-connected: he was the secretary to John Hay, Fourth Marquis of Tweeddale, who was at this time the Extraordinary Lord of Session of the Scottish Court of Session.
Mitchell (1708-1771) would go on to win a seat in the House of Commons in 1747. In 1753 he would be knighted and sent as ambassador to the court of Frederick the Great. [Mildred's note: he may have been knighted in 1753, I'm not sure, but he didn't arrive in Prussia until 1756.]
In the Algarotti section of our chronology, I had even put the following entry:
1739, March/April-May: Algarotti in London. Stays with Andrew Mitchell, Lord Hervey, Lord Baltimore.
(Lord Baltimore is the one in whose company he would meet Fritz at Rheinsberg. in September of 1739.)
What I didn't know is that "you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi]" and "I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days." Man, Algarotti gets around!
one wonders whether Algarotti as a subject was ever mentioned with Fritz, and if so, whether Bisset edited this out, because I don't recall the man ever being mentioned in what I've read...
One does wonder, because in that draft I composed back on June 8, I wrote:
Algarotti stayed with Andrew Mitchell in London in 1739! I had missed this on my first read-through of the dissertation. I'm sure that gave Fritz and Mitchell one more thing to talk about.
And yes, I do wonder if Bisset edited out some embracing and tasty dishes. :P I mean, if Fritz and d'Argens are happy to gossip about Émilie's sex life, Fritz and Mitchell chatting about their mutual friendly ex would definitely be a thing. Especially since Fritz was still eager to bring up Algarotti with Lucchesini long after Algarotti's death; when Mitchell is around, Fritz is still trying to think up ways to get his "we didn't break up, we're just temporarily separated, I swear" boyfriend to come back to Prussia once the war is over.
I trust her up to a point. She gets little details like dates and name spellings wrong, and as selenak caught, doesn't seem to know MT is the Queen of Hungary and Bohemia in 1742.
But she works mostly off Algarotti's letters in the archives in Italy, and she does have citations. Plus I did some googling, and I found this one book from 2019 which is heavily footnoted, called Andrew Mitchell and Anglo-Prussian Diplomatic Relations During the Seven Years War, which looks useful if someone wants to write Mitchell for RMSE next year! Anyway, this book agrees Algarotti stayed with Mitchell and wrote letters to him, and it cites those letters in very scholarly-looking footnotes.
Oh, looks like it's a reprint/e-book edition of a 1986 publication. Still. I would say Mitchell and Algarotti knowing each other is reasonably well corroborated.
I duly googled and from what I an see, it's even more complicated: it's a 2019 e-book basedon a 1986 publication which in turn is based on a 1971 doctoral thesis. Its author proudly asserts that he didn't change a thing for the public print edition in the foreword, with together with young Andrew's youthful days and the footnotes to the entire book as well as the bibliography is online. Now, our author uses a lot of primary sources - thus I learn the majority of Mitchell's papers, which Bisset used for his book, are still at the British Library - but evidently there can't be any research post dating 1971. Thus I doubt there will be any explicit gayness. However, this early chapter does say Mitchell met and befriended Algarotti in Italy. Also the following horror story about Mitchell's marriage:
Dad Mitchell (widower): gets involved with lady, arranges for an engagement between her ten years old daughter Barbara and his fourteen years old son Andrew; marries Barbara's mother (also called Barbara), everyone moves in together
Andrew Mitchell: at eighteen (meaning when Barbara is fourteen) gets widowed himself as his fourteen years old bride dies in childbirth.
Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
Anyway, I will somehow acquire this book, because it does look highly relevant to my interests, but I am cautioning myself about the research date. I also note in the bibliography the publication datae for Chester Easum's Heinrich biography, which is 1942. This US biography of Heinrich was the only big one (aside from essays and co portraits) before Ziebura and thus gets referenced here and there; for example, Krockow says Easum disapproves of the Obelisk and calls it a monument to Heinrich's emotionally twisted and warped nature (twisted and warped by hate of his brother), but also that Easum says approving things about Heinrich's treatment of prisoners etc. Now, if Easum as an American writer published this in 1942, he can't have had access to the Prussian State Archive for obvious reasons. Which means he must have relied on material published and accessible in the US up to that point. So no Marwitz, no letters from Heinrich to Ferdinand, and Lehndorff only if he got his hands on copies of the diaries in the US.
Otoh, the Mitchell doctoral thesis writer includes not just the first Lehndorff volume but also 2 and 3 in his bibliography, which have indeed lots more Mitchell entries than the first one.
The Mitchell doctoral thesis writer, explaining to his readers in the foreword who Lehndorff is - "The Queen's Chamberlain, the Prussian Lord Hervey, though without that lord's malice or style".
I don't know whether to laugh, agree or protest. I mean, yes, they had the same office - technically. And they both left posterity detailed records of the courtly goings on. But Queen Caroline had actual political influence on George II, and Hervey having influence with her was a major factor in Robert Walpole staying PM as long as he did. Hervey also had actual interactions with George II. Conversely, yes, Lehndorff didn't have malice, but style? *looks at icon*
which in turn is based on a 1971 doctoral thesis. Its author proudly asserts that he didn't change a thing for the public print edition
Oof. Well, I guess that makes it better than nothing, but yeah, caveat lector.
evidently there can't be any research post dating 1971. Thus I doubt there will be any explicit gayness
Agreed, though Margaret Goldsmith did surprise me in 1929!
Andrew Mitchell: at eighteen (meaning when Barbara is fourteen) gets widowed himself as his fourteen years old bride dies in childbirth.
Yiiiiiikes. THAT POOR GIRL.
Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
Ouch. Yeah, even if you were bi, that could be enough to traumatize you out of het sex forever. And if you weren't bi to begin with, then yeah. Ouch. :(
And again: POOR BARBARA. :(
Me: *watches MT lose it at Fritz over "What do you know of death?"*
I will somehow acquire this book, because it does look highly relevant to my interests
Yay! Looks like Stabi has it; is that still accessible to you during plague times? If not and you don't have good options, email me.
Andrew Mitchell: at eighteen (meaning when Barbara is fourteen) gets widowed himself as his fourteen years old bride dies in childbirth.
Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
I agree with mildred: YIKES
who Lehndorff is - "The Queen's Chamberlain, the Prussian Lord Hervey, though without that lord's malice or style".
I don't know whether to laugh, agree or protest. I mean, yes, they had the same office - technically. And they both left posterity detailed records of the courtly goings on. But Queen Caroline had actual political influence on George II, and Hervey having influence with her was a major factor in Robert Walpole staying PM as long as he did. Hervey also had actual interactions with George II. Conversely, yes, Lehndorff didn't have malice, but style? *looks at icon*
Heh, yes! Well, I guess we can agree that Lehndorff didn't have Lord Hervey's style, anyway! (And he would NEVER EVER leave his children to SOME OTHER RANDOM WOMAN. JUST SAYING.)
Indeed Lehndorff would not, though to be precise, Mrs. Strangeways-Horner wasn't some random woman. She was in fact the mother of Stephen Fox' child bride, and also the lover of Henry Fox. So basically Hervey did something quite similar to AW, who wanted his kids given to Mina, because choosing Mrs. Strangeways-Horner is as good as saying "I want my daughter to be raised with the Foxes".
(Doesn't make it less punching down to share the misery via one's last will.)
Here's a picture of Hervey:
Now of course we don't have Lehndorff's wives diaries, so we don't know what kind of husband he was from their pov, and one should not idealize him. But he postponed his long hoped for journey abroad - after Fritz had given him permission - when his first wife was ill and went with her to a spa instead and stayed with her till she died; this at a point when his continued career frustration had anything but lessened (the later 1760s) and would soon reach a boiling point. So, I consider it safe to say: Lehndorff wasn't the type to punch down at his wife in misery.
*nods* It's always good for you to remind me that I shouldn't idealize people, especially when I'm only getting their POV and not the POV of the people they were above in hierarchy.
But he still wasn't the type to punch down at his wife, like you said <3
Ha. I didn't think of counterchecking the dissertation, only Bisset's edition of the papers, where Algarotti is Sir Non-Appearing.
What I didn't know is that "you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi]" and "I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days." Man, Algarotti gets around!
No kidding. BTW, the Hervey biographer also quotes the Fritz letter with les p_s and like yours truly concludes these are putains, but he thinks Fritz may have been using a euphemism:
...advantage of your wit since the p [utains ) cannot profit by your body. ' ( The allusion to p [ rostitutes ] was probably a euphemism ; a month later Voltaire described in vivid detail the sexual activity between the French ambassador's young male secretary and Algarotti, who is depicted as a Venetian Socrates with large eyes and aquiline nose.)*
* But when I see the tender Algarotti Crush with passionate embrace The handsome Lugeac , his young friend , I imagine I see Socrates fastened Onto the rump of Alcibiades.
Note this down as further proof of Voltaire and Fritz being as bad as each other. I'm sure Lugeac was no more amused than Darget. (1) Voltaire, btw, had befriended Hervey during his time in England, and earlier in the Hervey bio, we get a direct quote from one of Voltaire's English-written letters to Hervey followed by a Halsband editorial comment that's very... well, I'll let you judge:
(Voltaire writes:) 'Adieu charming lord remember a frenchman who is devoted to your lordship for ever with the utmost respect,and loves you passionately .' (The extravagance of his language comes from his relative unfamiliarity with English .)
Whatever happened to "in the 18th century everyone was emo, Halsband? you really want us to believe Brits were excepted?
And yes, I do wonder if Bisset edited out some embracing and tasty dishes. :P I mean, if Fritz and d'Argens are happy to gossip about Émilie's sex life, Fritz and Mitchell chatting about their mutual friendly ex would definitely be a thing.
Right? And now we can claim Mitchell as another at the very least bisexual of the era. Bisset, of course, claimed that he never remarried because he didn't get over his dead wife (and dead baby who died with her), and at the time I had no reason to doubt it. Given the new info that he was Algarotti's tasty dish afterwards I suspect he didn't remarry because there was no family pressure on him to do so and he just plain did not want to, enjoying the single life style. It also explains why Lehndorff never mentions a mistress of Mitchell's, whereas he does that for other envoys he socialized with.
Mind you, Mitchell would have had to decide whether mentioning Algarotti could be more harmful or helpful for his envoy job; after all, for all he knew, Fritz could have been bitter about Algarotti leaving. So Fritz would have had to bring him up first.
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
(1) Except if this poem is from a private letter rather than from a publication? Halsband and Grundy don't say.
Ha. I didn't think of counterchecking the dissertation
I worked my way through the dissertation a second time for putting together the chronology, and I spotted a few things I hadn't the first time around. Boyfriend detective!
( The allusion to p [ rostitutes ] was probably a euphemism ; a month later Voltaire described in vivid detail the sexual activity between the French ambassador's young male secretary and Algarotti, who is depicted as a Venetian Socrates with large eyes and aquiline nose.)*
Oh, I assume Fritz is eliding male-male sex here. My only question is whether that includes Fritz/Algarotti action or not.
Btw, MacDonogh claims that Algarotti was disappearing "into the homosexual brothels of Berlin." I'm not sure what the evidence for that is, but it's entirely possible.
(1) Except if this poem is from a private letter rather than from a publication? Halsband and Grundy don't say.
Private letter to Fritz, although if he also published it elsewhere, I don't know. I'm entertained that both MacDonogh (who doesn't believe Fritz was gay, that was just Voltaire slander) and Blanning (GAY!) both feel the need to quote and translate this poem at length.
Given the new info that he was Algarotti's tasty dish afterwards I suspect he didn't remarry because there was no family pressure on him to do so and he just plain did not want to, enjoying the single life style. It also explains why Lehndorff never mentions a mistress of Mitchell's, whereas he does that for other envoys he socialized with.
Yep, this makes lots of sense. I'm now guessing there's been some editing out by Bisset. Didn't Bisset's James Keith never start a family because manly man totally absorbed with the military?
Remember: if Bisset didn't approve of it, it never happened!
Love that dare not speak its name indeed. (And that goes for het, too!)
So Fritz would have had to bring him up first.
And Fritz totally would. <3
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
Oh, absolutely! Algarotti seems to have had the highest sex drive of them all. That's one reason I think that if Fritz was doing it with anyone, it would have been with Algarotti: good looking, charismatic, strong sex drive, sexually experienced, obvious mutual attraction, sexually charged banter with Fritz. So if Fritz is blase about Algarotti having an STD the next time they see each other, either Fritz considers getting an STD from Algarotti (or giving him one?) no big deal, or Fritz is indifferent to having sex with him. And gonorrhea is one thing, but given just how bad syphilis is...
Anyway, while we're here, all this talk of secret boyfriends and envoys leads me to: Algarotti/Suhm, y/n?
Algarotti visited St. Petersburg when Suhm was there, and when he visited Crown Prince Fritz at Rheinsberg immediately after, Fritz wrote to Suhm that "We talked a lot about you."
And we know it doesn't take people long to fall for Algarotti, he's like FS but with sex, in terms of how fast he makes a positive impression. :P
Since neither Algarotti nor Suhm chose each other over Fritz (both came running as soon as Fritz became king), and it was only a few weeks that Algarotti was in St. Petersburg (like 4-6 weeks), I think Fritz would totally be fine with this, and in fact, would consider it evidence of Algarotti's fine taste in men.
Suhm: So, young man, if you're looking for a job--I know FW is not a great supporter of the arts and sciences [because Suhm is too diplomatic to say THE WORST]--but his son! *sparkly hearts* You should totally go to Rheinsberg. Tell Fritz I would go if I could. Fritz and Algarotti: *talk about Suhm* Fritz: Finally, someone I can appreciate my erastes with!
Private letter: okay, Voltaire, for now, you're somewhat of the hook.
Yep, this makes lots of sense. I'm now guessing there's been some editing out by Bisset. Didn't Bisset's James Keith never start a family because manly man totally absorbed with the military?
Indeed. Though in fairness not Bisset, it occurs to me that the Mitchell documents he presents and quotes from are all reports and letters to people at the foreign office in London. These weren't likely to contain "and then the King and I talked about what hot stuff our mutual ex Algarotti is" type of remarks.
Algarotti/Suhm: entirely possible. However, if I have to play devil's advocate: Lord Hervey and Lady Mary, as the examples of people older than himself whom Algarotti flirts with and in Hervey's case has sex with, are both in a position to do something for him. Even young Andrew Mitchell has already some good connections (to the Royal Society). Though he didn't have them when meeting Algarotti as a young man in Italy, hence it would be a safe assumption that young Andrew had a sex appeal all of his own.
Otoh: Suhm: is of a previous generation, none too healthy, small of stature, and can't do anything for Algarotti. clearly they hit it off conversationally at least, if they talked about Fritz, but would Suhm at this point been sexually attractive for Algarotti?
This isn't to say it didn't happen, and at any rate, there's far more canon than a lot of Juggernaut ships have to assume it could have! I'm just messing around.
Though in fairness not Bisset, it occurs to me that the Mitchell documents he presents and quotes from are all reports and letters to people at the foreign office in London. These weren't likely to contain "and then the King and I talked about what hot stuff our mutual ex Algarotti is" type of remarks.
Very true, and that had occurred to me.
"and then the King and I talked about what hot stuff our mutual ex Algarotti is"
But also, this totally happened, whether he wrote home about it or not. Also, Fritz made him read the orgasm poem.
Suhm: is of a previous generation, none too healthy, small of stature
This, especially the health, did occur to me. Heinrich's admirers would like to protest the short stature, though. ;) Okay, for *some* of them it was all about your next point, what he could do for them, but not for all of them. ;)
But points about age and health very well taken. Fritz had years to build up love and trust for Suhm beyond immediate attraction.
and can't do anything for Algarotti
Ah, but devil's advocate: Algarotti is a newcomer to court, he's looking for a job, Suhm has been there for three years, and Suhm has been sending Fritz copies of the Life of Prince Eugene for almost that same length of time. Clearly Suhm has *some* connections at that court. (His predecessor had been having an affair with the future regent Anna Leopoldovna.) The fact that that didn't translate to a job offer for Algarotti...well, neither did Hervey's connections!
clearly they hit it off conversationally at least, if they talked about Fritz
We don't technically know they did, but we know that Algarotti 1) showed up at Rheinsberg almost immediately after St. Petersburg (admittedly, he could have heard about Fritz from other people, including Voltaire), 2) talked with Fritz about Suhm. To me, this suggests Algarotti had met Suhm in St. Petersburg, which leads me to believe Fritz at least came up.
would Suhm at this point been sexually attractive for Algarotti?
Agreed, likely it was just conversation. Now, would Algarotti have been attractive to Suhm? Let's just say that Suhm, who was probably in no condition to act on his attraction, liked looking. :)
In contrast, Peter Keith was about 18 months older than Algarotti, of medium stature, and evidently so attractive that Lehndorff felt the need to comment on his handsome face (despite the squint!) when he was 45, 16 years older than Lehndorff. If Algarotti was willing to look past the squint, 25-yo Peter in 1736 might have been a tasty dish himself. Who knows?
In 1739, Suhm is 48 and 21 years older than Algarotti, which might be too much. Especially if he wasn't that attractive to begin with (which we simply don't know), and/or how exactly that bad health manifested.
Also, Fritz did say of Suhm at Russia, "This barbarous court needs those men who know how to drink well and fuck vigorously. I don't think you'd recognize yourself in this description. Your delicate body is the custodian of a fine soul, spiritual and penetrating."
Translation: probably not that great in bed?
We'll just say Suhm talked about literature and philosophy and his protege at Rheinsberg with stars in his eyes. ;) And Algarotti was impressed enough to go find this protege and make eyes at him himself.
This isn't to say it didn't happen, and at any rate, there's far more canon than a lot of Juggernaut ships have to assume it could have! I'm just messing around.
And I'm not wedded to it, I was just throwing it out there because it occurred to me: envoy, in the same place at the same time.
Oh LOLOLOL! I wondered if Mitchell would have criticism on that poem, since I did remember that line from his papers, and you're right! He would have corrected for historical accuracy!
The one other thing that makes me think that Suhm and Algarotti *might* have met is that when Suhm dies, Fritz writes a letter to Algarotti just to tell him about it. Now, maybe this was just because Fritz and Algarotti were in frequent correspondence at that time and Fritz needed someone to talk to, as it were, but maybe Algarotti had met him the year before in St. Petersburg, and that was why Fritz was so inclined to talk about him to Algarotti.
And then he talked about Suhm to Georgi the handsome hussar. Oh, I think it's way more plausible that they've met and at the very least liked each other - Suhm and Algarotti, that is - than that Heinrich and Algarotti had a one night stand, and I've adopted this speculation of yours, as you know. :)
Bisset, of course, claimed that he never remarried because he didn't get over his dead wife (and dead baby who died with her), and at the time I had no reason to doubt it.
IDK, what you've told us about his dead wife and baby were sort of horrifying enough that I can see that putting one off het sex for life, especially if one happens to be bisexual and, well, have Algarotti as an option... though I suppose that's not quite the same as "didn't get over his dead wife," which, uh, clearly it sounds like he did :P
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
I agree, it sounds like there may have been two things going on: one is never having het sex again because traumatized, and the other is having an alternative to het sex, e.g. hot stuff Algarotti.
And again I say: Mitchell (under Algarotti's tutelage?) must then have developed into hot stuff himself, if Algarotti, sought after by Lord Hervey and Lady Mary as he was, still found time for some extra assignations with him. :)
BTW, it did occur to me that this might be another reason why Mitchell remained in Berlin post war despite getting somewhat disenchanted with Fritz: G3, after all, was the first and as it turned out the last Hannover monarch who was faithful to his wife. Everything got somewhat more moral until the Regency happened. Meanwhile, Berlin still had Fritz the Gay as monarch and thus I bet the possibilities for same sex affairs remained better.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-06 05:42 pm (UTC)It was not long, then , before (Algarotti) reached London — in March 1739.
At first he visited Andrew Mitchell, a young man who had left Scotland to make his fortune in England , a member of the Royal Society , who had recently been called to the Bar. Algarotti stayed only a short time with him in his chambers in the Middle Temple, then moved to Hervey's apartment in St. James's Palace
And then, later, when he's contemplating a third English sojourn:
From Hamburg he also advised Andrew Mitchell of his expected return to England . Instead of trying to relate every thing he has heard and seen on his recent travels, he prefers to wait until they can sup together in London, he writes, 'where you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi] ... If the wind continues as it is, I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days. Farewell, my dear friend ; love me and believe until
death , F.A.'
Well! Now neither "Andrew" nor "Mitchell" are rare names. But the thing is, Andrew Mitchell the later envoy according to the brief biographical sketch of his younger years in Bisset's edition of his papers did have the following career: studies law in Scotland, marries young, wife Barbara dies young, Andrew makes the Grand Tour to Italy, returns but to London to take the bar there (necessary since otherwise he'd been just qualified for Scotland, I remember this from Boswell who had to do it twice, too). We next hear from him in Bisset's summary when he's being considered to run as MP for Aberdeen years later. That leaves just enough time for getting it on with Algarotti in the late 30s and early 40s.
Maybe there were two Andrew Mitchells from Scotland studying law in London during that time. But if not: one wonders whether Algarotti as a subject was ever mentioned with Fritz, and if so, whether Bisset edited this out, because I don't recall the man ever being mentioned in what I've read...
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-06 09:55 pm (UTC)So--yes! It's our Andrew Mitchell, per the Algarotti dissertation writer:
Before taking up residence at St. James Palace with Hervey, Algarotti had stayed for a short time with Andrew Mitchell. Mitchell, together with Celsius and Folkes, had been responsible for nominating Algarotti for membership to the Royal Society in 1736.
Like Hervey, Mitchell was well-connected: he was the secretary to John Hay, Fourth Marquis of Tweeddale, who was at this time the Extraordinary Lord of Session of the Scottish Court of Session.
Mitchell (1708-1771) would go on to win a seat in the House of Commons in 1747. In 1753 he would be knighted and sent as ambassador to the court of Frederick the Great. [Mildred's note: he may have been knighted in 1753, I'm not sure, but he didn't arrive in Prussia until 1756.]
In the Algarotti section of our chronology, I had even put the following entry:
1739, March/April-May: Algarotti in London. Stays with Andrew Mitchell, Lord Hervey, Lord Baltimore.
(Lord Baltimore is the one in whose company he would meet Fritz at Rheinsberg. in September of 1739.)
What I didn't know is that "you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi]" and "I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days." Man, Algarotti gets around!
one wonders whether Algarotti as a subject was ever mentioned with Fritz, and if so, whether Bisset edited this out, because I don't recall the man ever being mentioned in what I've read...
One does wonder, because in that draft I composed back on June 8, I wrote:
Algarotti stayed with Andrew Mitchell in London in 1739! I had missed this on my first read-through of the dissertation. I'm sure that gave Fritz and Mitchell one more thing to talk about.
And yes, I do wonder if Bisset edited out some embracing and tasty dishes. :P I mean, if Fritz and d'Argens are happy to gossip about Émilie's sex life, Fritz and Mitchell chatting about their mutual friendly ex would definitely be a thing. Especially since Fritz was still eager to bring up Algarotti with Lucchesini long after Algarotti's death; when Mitchell is around, Fritz is still trying to think up ways to get his "we didn't break up, we're just temporarily separated, I swear" boyfriend to come back to Prussia once the war is over.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-07 04:50 am (UTC)omg!
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-07 06:21 pm (UTC)But she works mostly off Algarotti's letters in the archives in Italy, and she does have citations. Plus I did some googling, and I found this one book from 2019 which is heavily footnoted, called Andrew Mitchell and Anglo-Prussian Diplomatic Relations During the Seven Years War, which looks useful if someone wants to write Mitchell for RMSE next year! Anyway, this book agrees Algarotti stayed with Mitchell and wrote letters to him, and it cites those letters in very scholarly-looking footnotes.
Oh, looks like it's a reprint/e-book edition of a 1986 publication. Still. I would say Mitchell and Algarotti knowing each other is reasonably well corroborated.
somebody should read this bookit might be relevant to their interestsRe: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-08 09:25 am (UTC)Dad Mitchell (widower): gets involved with lady, arranges for an engagement between her ten years old daughter Barbara and his fourteen years old son Andrew; marries Barbara's mother (also called Barbara), everyone moves in together
Andrew Mitchell: at eighteen (meaning when Barbara is fourteen) gets widowed himself as his fourteen years old bride dies in childbirth.
Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
Anyway, I will somehow acquire this book, because it does look highly relevant to my interests, but I am cautioning myself about the research date. I also note in the bibliography the publication datae for Chester Easum's Heinrich biography, which is 1942. This US biography of Heinrich was the only big one (aside from essays and co portraits) before Ziebura and thus gets referenced here and there; for example, Krockow says Easum disapproves of the Obelisk and calls it a monument to Heinrich's emotionally twisted and warped nature (twisted and warped by hate of his brother), but also that Easum says approving things about Heinrich's treatment of prisoners etc. Now, if Easum as an American writer published this in 1942, he can't have had access to the Prussian State Archive for obvious reasons. Which means he must have relied on material published and accessible in the US up to that point. So no Marwitz, no letters from Heinrich to Ferdinand, and Lehndorff only if he got his hands on copies of the diaries in the US.
Otoh, the Mitchell doctoral thesis writer includes not just the first Lehndorff volume but also 2 and 3 in his bibliography, which have indeed lots more Mitchell entries than the first one.
The Mitchell doctoral thesis writer, explaining to his readers in the foreword who Lehndorff is - "The Queen's Chamberlain, the Prussian Lord Hervey, though without that lord's malice or style".
I don't know whether to laugh, agree or protest. I mean, yes, they had the same office - technically. And they both left posterity detailed records of the courtly goings on. But Queen Caroline had actual political influence on George II, and Hervey having influence with her was a major factor in Robert Walpole staying PM as long as he did. Hervey also had actual interactions with George II. Conversely, yes, Lehndorff didn't have malice, but style? *looks at icon*
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-08 10:07 pm (UTC)Oof. Well, I guess that makes it better than nothing, but yeah, caveat lector.
evidently there can't be any research post dating 1971. Thus I doubt there will be any explicit gayness
Agreed, though Margaret Goldsmith did surprise me in 1929!
Andrew Mitchell: at eighteen (meaning when Barbara is fourteen) gets widowed himself as his fourteen years old bride dies in childbirth.
Yiiiiiikes. THAT POOR GIRL.
Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
Ouch. Yeah, even if you were bi, that could be enough to traumatize you out of het sex forever. And if you weren't bi to begin with, then yeah. Ouch. :(
And again: POOR BARBARA. :(
Me: *watches MT lose it at Fritz over "What do you know of death?"*
I will somehow acquire this book, because it does look highly relevant to my interests
Yay! Looks like Stabi has it; is that still accessible to you during plague times? If not and you don't have good options, email me.
I don't know whether to laugh, agree or protest.
LOL! I'm with you on that.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-12 05:24 am (UTC)Andrew Mitchell: Has no known heterosexual activity after that experience as far as anyone knows.
I agree with mildred: YIKES
who Lehndorff is - "The Queen's Chamberlain, the Prussian Lord Hervey, though without that lord's malice or style".
I don't know whether to laugh, agree or protest. I mean, yes, they had the same office - technically. And they both left posterity detailed records of the courtly goings on. But Queen Caroline had actual political influence on George II, and Hervey having influence with her was a major factor in Robert Walpole staying PM as long as he did. Hervey also had actual interactions with George II. Conversely, yes, Lehndorff didn't have malice, but style? *looks at icon*
Heh, yes! Well, I guess we can agree that Lehndorff didn't have Lord Hervey's style, anyway! (And he would NEVER EVER leave his children to SOME OTHER RANDOM WOMAN. JUST SAYING.)
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-12 08:21 am (UTC)(Doesn't make it less punching down to share the misery via one's last will.)
Here's a picture of Hervey:
Now of course we don't have Lehndorff's wives diaries, so we don't know what kind of husband he was from their pov, and one should not idealize him. But he postponed his long hoped for journey abroad - after Fritz had given him permission - when his first wife was ill and went with her to a spa instead and stayed with her till she died; this at a point when his continued career frustration had anything but lessened (the later 1760s) and would soon reach a boiling point. So, I consider it safe to say: Lehndorff wasn't the type to punch down at his wife in misery.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-13 09:17 pm (UTC)But he still wasn't the type to punch down at his wife, like you said <3
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-07 08:15 am (UTC)What I didn't know is that "you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi]" and "I hope to embrace you in 4 or 5 days." Man, Algarotti gets around!
No kidding. BTW, the Hervey biographer also quotes the Fritz letter with les p_s and like yours truly concludes these are putains, but he thinks Fritz may have been using a euphemism:
...advantage of your wit since the p [utains ) cannot profit by your
body. ' ( The allusion to p [ rostitutes ] was probably a euphemism ; a month later Voltaire described in vivid detail the sexual activity between the French ambassador's young male secretary and Algarotti, who is depicted as a Venetian Socrates with large eyes
and aquiline nose.)*
* But when
I see the tender Algarotti
Crush with passionate embrace
The handsome Lugeac , his young friend ,
I imagine I see Socrates fastened
Onto the rump of Alcibiades.
Note this down as further proof of Voltaire and Fritz being as bad as each other. I'm sure Lugeac was no more amused than Darget. (1) Voltaire, btw, had befriended Hervey during his time in England, and earlier in the Hervey bio, we get a direct quote from one of Voltaire's English-written letters to Hervey followed by a Halsband editorial comment that's very... well, I'll let you judge:
(Voltaire writes:) 'Adieu charming lord remember a frenchman who is devoted to your lordship for ever with the utmost respect,and loves you passionately .' (The extravagance
of his language comes from his relative unfamiliarity with English .)
Whatever happened to "in the 18th century everyone was emo, Halsband? you really want us to believe Brits were excepted?
And yes, I do wonder if Bisset edited out some embracing and tasty dishes. :P I mean, if Fritz and d'Argens are happy to gossip about Émilie's sex life, Fritz and Mitchell chatting about their mutual friendly ex would definitely be a thing.
Right? And now we can claim Mitchell as another at the very least bisexual of the era. Bisset, of course, claimed that he never remarried because he didn't get over his dead wife (and dead baby who died with her), and at the time I had no reason to doubt it. Given the new info that he was Algarotti's tasty dish afterwards I suspect he didn't remarry because there was no family pressure on him to do so and he just plain did not want to, enjoying the single life style. It also explains why Lehndorff never mentions a mistress of Mitchell's, whereas he does that for other envoys he socialized with.
Mind you, Mitchell would have had to decide whether mentioning Algarotti could be more harmful or helpful for his envoy job; after all, for all he knew, Fritz could have been bitter about Algarotti leaving. So Fritz would have had to bring him up first.
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
(1) Except if this poem is from a private letter rather than from a publication? Halsband and Grundy don't say.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-07 03:03 pm (UTC)I worked my way through the dissertation a second time for putting together the chronology, and I spotted a few things I hadn't the first time around. Boyfriend detective!
( The allusion to p [ rostitutes ] was probably a euphemism ; a month later Voltaire described in vivid detail the sexual activity between the French ambassador's young male secretary and Algarotti, who is depicted as a Venetian Socrates with large eyes and aquiline nose.)*
Oh, I assume Fritz is eliding male-male sex here. My only question is whether that includes Fritz/Algarotti action or not.
Btw, MacDonogh claims that Algarotti was disappearing "into the homosexual brothels of Berlin." I'm not sure what the evidence for that is, but it's entirely possible.
(1) Except if this poem is from a private letter rather than from a publication? Halsband and Grundy don't say.
Private letter to Fritz, although if he also published it elsewhere, I don't know. I'm entertained that both MacDonogh (who doesn't believe Fritz was gay, that was just Voltaire slander) and Blanning (GAY!) both feel the need to quote and translate this poem at length.
Given the new info that he was Algarotti's tasty dish afterwards I suspect he didn't remarry because there was no family pressure on him to do so and he just plain did not want to, enjoying the single life style. It also explains why Lehndorff never mentions a mistress of Mitchell's, whereas he does that for other envoys he socialized with.
Yep, this makes lots of sense. I'm now guessing there's been some editing out by Bisset. Didn't Bisset's James Keith never start a family because manly man totally absorbed with the military?
Remember: if Bisset didn't approve of it, it never happened!
Love that dare not speak its name indeed. (And that goes for het, too!)
So Fritz would have had to bring him up first.
And Fritz totally would. <3
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
Oh, absolutely! Algarotti seems to have had the highest sex drive of them all. That's one reason I think that if Fritz was doing it with anyone, it would have been with Algarotti: good looking, charismatic, strong sex drive, sexually experienced, obvious mutual attraction, sexually charged banter with Fritz. So if Fritz is blase about Algarotti having an STD the next time they see each other, either Fritz considers getting an STD from Algarotti (or giving him one?) no big deal, or Fritz is indifferent to having sex with him. And gonorrhea is one thing, but given just how bad syphilis is...
Anyway, while we're here, all this talk of secret boyfriends and envoys leads me to: Algarotti/Suhm, y/n?
Algarotti visited St. Petersburg when Suhm was there, and when he visited Crown Prince Fritz at Rheinsberg immediately after, Fritz wrote to Suhm that "We talked a lot about you."
And we know it doesn't take people long to fall for Algarotti, he's like FS but with sex, in terms of how fast he makes a positive impression. :P
Since neither Algarotti nor Suhm chose each other over Fritz (both came running as soon as Fritz became king), and it was only a few weeks that Algarotti was in St. Petersburg (like 4-6 weeks), I think Fritz would totally be fine with this, and in fact, would consider it evidence of Algarotti's fine taste in men.
Suhm: So, young man, if you're looking for a job--I know FW is not a great supporter of the arts and sciences [because Suhm is too diplomatic to say THE WORST]--but his son! *sparkly hearts* You should totally go to Rheinsberg. Tell Fritz I would go if I could.
Fritz and Algarotti: *talk about Suhm*
Fritz: Finally, someone I can appreciate my erastes with!
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-08 09:48 am (UTC)Yep, this makes lots of sense. I'm now guessing there's been some editing out by Bisset. Didn't Bisset's James Keith never start a family because manly man totally absorbed with the military?
Indeed. Though in fairness not Bisset, it occurs to me that the Mitchell documents he presents and quotes from are all reports and letters to people at the foreign office in London. These weren't likely to contain "and then the King and I talked about what hot stuff our mutual ex Algarotti is" type of remarks.
Algarotti/Suhm: entirely possible. However, if I have to play devil's advocate: Lord Hervey and Lady Mary, as the examples of people older than himself whom Algarotti flirts with and in Hervey's case has sex with, are both in a position to do something for him. Even young Andrew Mitchell has already some good connections (to the Royal Society). Though he didn't have them when meeting Algarotti as a young man in Italy, hence it would be a safe assumption that young Andrew had a sex appeal all of his own.
Otoh: Suhm: is of a previous generation, none too healthy, small of stature, and can't do anything for Algarotti. clearly they hit it off conversationally at least, if they talked about Fritz, but would Suhm at this point been sexually attractive for Algarotti?
This isn't to say it didn't happen, and at any rate, there's far more canon than a lot of Juggernaut ships have to assume it could have! I'm just messing around.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-08 10:39 pm (UTC)Very true, and that had occurred to me.
"and then the King and I talked about what hot stuff our mutual ex Algarotti is"
But also, this totally happened, whether he wrote home about it or not. Also, Fritz made him read the orgasm poem.
Suhm: is of a previous generation, none too healthy, small of stature
This, especially the health, did occur to me. Heinrich's admirers would like to protest the short stature, though. ;) Okay, for *some* of them it was all about your next point, what he could do for them, but not for all of them. ;)
But points about age and health very well taken. Fritz had years to build up love and trust for Suhm beyond immediate attraction.
and can't do anything for Algarotti
Ah, but devil's advocate: Algarotti is a newcomer to court, he's looking for a job, Suhm has been there for three years, and Suhm has been sending Fritz copies of the Life of Prince Eugene for almost that same length of time. Clearly Suhm has *some* connections at that court. (His predecessor had been having an affair with the future regent Anna Leopoldovna.) The fact that that didn't translate to a job offer for Algarotti...well, neither did Hervey's connections!
clearly they hit it off conversationally at least, if they talked about Fritz
We don't technically know they did, but we know that Algarotti 1) showed up at Rheinsberg almost immediately after St. Petersburg (admittedly, he could have heard about Fritz from other people, including Voltaire), 2) talked with Fritz about Suhm. To me, this suggests Algarotti had met Suhm in St. Petersburg, which leads me to believe Fritz at least came up.
would Suhm at this point been sexually attractive for Algarotti?
Agreed, likely it was just conversation. Now, would Algarotti have been attractive to Suhm? Let's just say that Suhm, who was probably in no condition to act on his attraction, liked looking. :)
In contrast, Peter Keith was about 18 months older than Algarotti, of medium stature, and evidently so attractive that Lehndorff felt the need to comment on his handsome face (despite the squint!) when he was 45, 16 years older than Lehndorff. If Algarotti was willing to look past the squint, 25-yo Peter in 1736 might have been a tasty dish himself. Who knows?
In 1739, Suhm is 48 and 21 years older than Algarotti, which might be too much. Especially if he wasn't that attractive to begin with (which we simply don't know), and/or how exactly that bad health manifested.
Also, Fritz did say of Suhm at Russia, "This barbarous court needs those men who know how to drink well and fuck vigorously. I don't think you'd recognize yourself in this description. Your delicate body is the custodian of a fine soul, spiritual and penetrating."
Translation: probably not that great in bed?
We'll just say Suhm talked about literature and philosophy and his protege at Rheinsberg with stars in his eyes. ;) And Algarotti was impressed enough to go find this protege and make eyes at him himself.
This isn't to say it didn't happen, and at any rate, there's far more canon than a lot of Juggernaut ships have to assume it could have! I'm just messing around.
And I'm not wedded to it, I was just throwing it out there because it occurred to me: envoy, in the same place at the same time.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-09 10:09 am (UTC)But also, this totally happened, whether he wrote home about it or not. Also, Fritz made him read the orgasm poem.
Oh God yes. Perhaps the reason why he took criticism from Mitchell on his poetry well was because Mitchell was in a position to know whereof he spoke?
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-09 06:08 pm (UTC)Too good.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-10 03:04 pm (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-11 03:38 pm (UTC)And then he talked about Suhm to Georgi the handsome hussar.Oh, I think it's way more plausible that they've met and at the very least liked each other - Suhm and Algarotti, that is - than that Heinrich and Algarotti had a one night stand, and I've adopted this speculation of yours, as you know. :)Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-12 04:39 am (UTC)IDK, what you've told us about his dead wife and baby were sort of horrifying enough that I can see that putting one off het sex for life, especially if one happens to be bisexual and, well, have Algarotti as an option... though I suppose that's not quite the same as "didn't get over his dead wife," which, uh, clearly it sounds like he did :P
...and I feel even more entitled of having included your Algarotti/Heinrich speculation in My Brother Narcissus. Clearly, Algarotti absolutely would have if he could have.
Clearly!
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-12 12:30 pm (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-12 02:09 pm (UTC)BTW, it did occur to me that this might be another reason why Mitchell remained in Berlin post war despite getting somewhat disenchanted with Fritz: G3, after all, was the first and as it turned out the last Hannover monarch who was faithful to his wife. Everything got somewhat more moral until the Regency happened. Meanwhile, Berlin still had Fritz the Gay as monarch and thus I bet the possibilities for same sex affairs remained better.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-13 09:23 pm (UTC)Huh, that does make sense. Freedom of conscience and the penis, and all that :D
Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-13 09:24 pm (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: Secret Algarotti Boyfriend?!
Date: 2020-09-07 04:49 am (UTC)This is amazing! WOW.
you will certainly be the tastiest dish for me (le meilleur plat pour moi]
WHOA
I am so curious as to how Mitchell and Fritz would have talked about Algarotti, wooooow.