Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 19
Oct. 5th, 2020 10:05 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnYuletide nominations:
18th Century CE Federician RPF
Maria Theresia | Maria Theresa of Austria
Voltaire
Friedrich II von Preußen | Frederick the Great
Ernst Ahasverus von Lehndorff
Friedrich Heinrich Ludwig von Preußen | Henry of Prussia (1726-1802)
Wilhelmine von Preußen | Wilhelmine of Prussia (1709-1758)
Anna Amalie von Preußen | Anna Amalia of Prussia (1723-1787)
Catherine II of Russia
Hans Hermann von Katte
Peter Karl Christoph von Keith
Michael Gabriel Fredersdorf
August Wilhelm von Preußen | Augustus William of Prussia (1722-1758)
Circle of Voltaire RPF
Emilie du Chatelet
Jeanne Antoinette Poisson (Madame de Pompadour)
John Hervey (1696-1743)
Marie Louise Mignot Denis
Lady Mary Wortley-Montagu
Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis
Armand de Vignerot du Plessis de Richelieu (1696-1788)
Francesco Algarotti
18th Century CE Federician RPF
Maria Theresia | Maria Theresa of Austria
Voltaire
Friedrich II von Preußen | Frederick the Great
Ernst Ahasverus von Lehndorff
Friedrich Heinrich Ludwig von Preußen | Henry of Prussia (1726-1802)
Wilhelmine von Preußen | Wilhelmine of Prussia (1709-1758)
Anna Amalie von Preußen | Anna Amalia of Prussia (1723-1787)
Catherine II of Russia
Hans Hermann von Katte
Peter Karl Christoph von Keith
Michael Gabriel Fredersdorf
August Wilhelm von Preußen | Augustus William of Prussia (1722-1758)
Circle of Voltaire RPF
Emilie du Chatelet
Jeanne Antoinette Poisson (Madame de Pompadour)
John Hervey (1696-1743)
Marie Louise Mignot Denis
Lady Mary Wortley-Montagu
Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis
Armand de Vignerot du Plessis de Richelieu (1696-1788)
Francesco Algarotti
Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-10 07:20 am (UTC)As expected by the excerpts which are online, this is informative. Most of it is about the war from a British pov and all the various twists and turns coming from the various government changes (Newcastle-Pitt-Bute) as well as the G2 to G3 change. I will say that it looks like Hervey was dead-on in just how much G2 was emotionally committed to his Elector of Hannover identity, which made him extremely uncomfortable being in a war against the Emperor, even aside from the fact he didn't trust Prussian Nephew as far as he could throw him and suspected Son of FW to have designs on Hannover. (Sadly, Doran doesn't say whether he ever got a copy of Heinrich's and AW's RPG.) When G2 was staying in Hannover in 1755, Fritz hinted he could visit, and G2 was all NO NO NO DO NOT WANT to his ministers, who had to tone it down and massage it into a diplomatic reply. Generally speaking, "British envoy in Berlin" from the later FW years onwards until Mitchell was considered a lousy job. To illustrate just how strained Anglo-Prussian relations had been pre 1756:
At the time of Mitchell's appointment Britain had been without diplomatic represantation in Berlin, apart from the short and ill-fated mission of Sir Charles Hanbury Williams in 1750-51, since Henry Legge's even shorter stay there in 1758. The recall of Jean-Henri D'Andrie, who was Prussian minister in London from 1738 to 1747, left Prussian representation there in the hands of a secretary of legation. Hanbury Williams, who was at his post less than eight months, succeded in that short space of time in m aking himself persona non grata with the king and with court. (And then he went to Vienna and became the sole envoy managing to piss off both Fritz and MT in equal measure. Whereupon he was transfered to St. Petersburg where he enabled the Catherine/Poniatowiski affair and negotiated the Anglo-Russian treaty which became ready for signing just when the Diplomatic Revolution happened.)
Hanbury Williams (...) gave it as his considered opinion that "It was better to be a monkey in the island of Borneo than to be a minister at Berlin". (...) In 1747 Lord Chesterfield, speaking from his experience as secretary of state, and ith the friction between Hannover and Prussia in mind, believed that 'whoever went to Berlin must be a very unhappy man between the two courts". Sir Luke Schaub (...) took the view that a minister who was capable of holding the post of British envoy in Berlin deserved to habe statues erected to him both in the United Provinces and in Britain.
Enter our hero from Scotland. Though alas, given how Anglo-Prussian relations went downhill again from the last years of the war (and Bute ending the subsidies to Fritz) onwards, he lived to see his good work undone. In the end, he got not a statue but a bust in a now destroyed Berlin church and, Doran thinks, was an unhappy man (professionally, though Doran allows he was fine with his friends in Berlin). This being a doctoral thesis from 1971, there is not the slightest bit of speculation about Mitchell's orientation, let alone the "you shall be the tastiest dish when we have supper" quote from Algarotti's ltter. Before I proceed to the potentially useful for fanfic Mitchell life dates this book gives us, some more details I hadn't gotten from the Bisset-edited Mitchell papers:
- Mitchell, due to being on the front lines with Fritz, was one of the few who got to know Eichel and get alone with him well - until later 1758, which was when Mitchell went from distructing Heinrich to hanging out with Heinrich more and more, and Eichel (who apparantly was the "loyal only to the monarch and no one else" type - when FW ruled, this was FW, when Fritz ruled, it was Fritz) became distrustful of Mitchell and considered him contaminated by Heinrich's Fritz-critical opinions
- someone in Vienna had a sharp sense of humor: while G2 was busy lamenting he'd been forced in an alliance against the Emperor, he got a letter reminding him that as Elector of Hannover, he was obliged to send troops to the war effort now that Fritz was officially under Reichsbann; G2's immediate reaction is not on record
- when G3 (born in Britain, no interest in Hannover) came to the throne, both Brits and Prussians first were very relieved and thought this meant Hannover stopped being of much, or any importance, but then the second Miracle happened, Lord Bute thought it was a great time to save money and cut the subsidies, and Fritz then wrote a letter to cousin G3 which G3 called the most impertinent and insulting letter he ever read, felt personally enraged and from this point onwards loathed Fritz as well. (G3, you have the American rebels still ahead of you, calm down.)
- Doran points out Fritz lucked out that his much cherished scheme to get the Turks into an alliance so they'd attack either the Russians or Austrians or preferably both came to nothing, because if Russia had been in a war with Turkey when Peter III. came to the throne, even (P)RussianPete surely could not have switched allegiances
- Fritz never bothered to tell the English about his intermittent use of Wilhelmine, Voltaire, Heinrich to sound out the French for a separate peace; meanwhile, the Brits didn't tell him about their intermittent attempt to get MT into an anti-Bourbon team up by offering her Naples (which they didn't have, and which, reminder, was ruled by an offspring of the Spanish Bourbons who in turn were a branch of the French Bourbons) (Mt: No thanks; I'm going to marry my daughter to the King of Naples instead)
- during the campaign free winter months at Dresden, Leipzig and Magdeburg, Mitchell busied himself learning German and befriended both Gottsched (remember him?) and Gellert (whom he persuaded Fritz to give an audience and a pension to); that he, a foreigner, showed more interest in the German language and literature than Fritz was not lost on either Gottsched or Gellert.
Mitchell dates:
Born in Edingburgh 15 April 1708, one of three children of the Rev. William Mitchell, who was VERY interested in money and was by the time he died in 1727 not just one of the most influential leaders of the Scottish church but also one of its wealthiest divines.
1722: Arranging for his fourteen years old son to marry his ten years old cousin Barbara MItchell and marrying her mother one year later was all about Barbara being the heiress of the Aberdeenshire estate of Thainston. In short, Mitchell Snr. was like the villain of a Robert Louis Stevenson tale.
1723: Andrew enters Edinburgh University, where David Hume is one of his classmates; also Boswell's dad Alexander Boswell, future Lord Auchinleck
1725: Andrew articled to an advocate
1726: poor Barbara the 14 years old dies of the birth of a daughter; the daughter dies while still an infant, when exactly, we don't know, but before Andrew leaves Scotland.
1727: Mitchell Snr. dies. Andrew inherits all, which means he's a well-off man for his remaining life.
1729: Andrew leaves Scotland, first for a few months of London, then on his Grand Tour, which will take years (btw, this is the same year Hervey returns from his second European Tour and becomes Vice Chamberlain); for the remainder of the year, he travels through the Netherlands and Germany
1730: Andrew resumes his studies, enroles at the law faculty i nLeyden where he spends two semesters (this means he's in the Netherlands when Peter Keith hightails it out of Prussia); (studying in the Netherlands for two terms was also what Boswell did before embarking on his Grand Tour, when I read this bit, I thought, that sounds familiar)
July 1731: Andrew goes from the Netherlands to Paris where he remains until the beginning of 1732, at which point he sets out on a leisurely tour through France and Italy (where he meets Algarotti)
September 1734: Andrew back in Paris, where he stays for the remaining year and most of 1735
End of 1735: Andrew Mitchell returns to Britain.
(This meant he really had spend considerable time abroad, and was "proficient" in French and Italian.)
1736 - Mitchell resumes his law studies; he's admitted as a meber of the Faculty of Advocates in Scotland; he's also elected a Fellow of the Royal Society
1738 - Mitchell called to the English Bar; Algarotti stays at his house in Pall Mall during his first trip to England
1740 - Mitchell gains a seat at the council of the Royal Society
1741 - Mitchell becomes private secretary to the fourth Marquess of Tweeddale (again, what a name!) and is made undersecretary for Scotland when Tweeddale is appointed Secretary of State for Scotland in 1742
January 1746 - Tweeddale is forced into resigning, which means Mitchell also loses his job; he considers running in the general election in the next year as MP
April 1747: the MP for Aberdeenshire, Sir Arthur Forbes of Craigievar offers to stand down in Mitchell's favor so he can run for his seat; Mitchell accepts gratefully but pisses off the Duke of Argyll who runs a candidate against him, though said candidate stands down a week before the election; Mitchell wins the seat
1752: Mitchell at his first diplomatic post, as one of the two commissaries appointed to negotiate in Brussels the dispute over the Treaty of Barrier (which was from 1715 (it was about maritime trading privileges, inevitably)
1754: due to government changes, MItchell does not seek reelection for Aberdeenshire, but he does run and gets elected for the Elgin burghs, and will hold that seat for the rest of his life
March 174: Robert, Earl of Holdernesse and pal of Mitchell's, gets transfered from the southern depatment of the Secretaryship of State to the Northern department
Summer of 1755: Holdernesse tries unsuccessfully to get Mitchell appointed as envoy to Vienna
end of January 1756: Mitchell appointed by Newcastle at the suggestion of Holderness as envoy to Berlin.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-11 02:35 am (UTC)in 1755, Fritz hinted he could visit, and G2 was all NO NO NO DO NOT WANT to his ministers, who had to tone it down and massage it into a diplomatic reply
ROTFL
This is how Blanning describes this episode, while recounting Anglo-Prussian relations leading up to the Seven Years' War:
Fortunately, relations with Uncle George (II) had thawed slightly from their normal state of deep freeze. Back in 1751 Frederick had gone out of his way to upset him by sending the Jacobite Earl Marischal George Keith to Versailles as Prussian ambassador. When his foreign minister, Podewils, asked how George might react, Frederick replied coarsely, “I don’t give a fuck!” 86 In late 1754, however, the two kings had cooperated to contain the damage to the Protestant party in the Holy Roman Empire threatened by the conversion of the Crown Prince of Hessen-Kassel to Catholicism. The ice was dissolved further when Frederick traveled across Germany to his territories in the west in May 1755, passing close to George, who was in residence at Herrenhausen. Although the two kings did not meet, amicable messages were exchanged.
Amicable messages thanks to the underappreciated ministers, I see.
Blanning continues:
Frederick also used a visit by the Duchess of Brunswick to the Hanoverian court, on a matrimonial mission of her own, to convey informally the assurance that he would never attack his uncle’s territories.
Fritz: Just in case you had any concerns on that front, or anything.
G2: Thanks, I guess. Your word is as good as gold!
The recall of Jean-Henri D'Andrie, who was Prussian minister in London from 1738 to 1747, left Prussian representation there in the hands of a secretary of legation.
Note: this is when the Brits suggest Peter Keith, and Fritz is all NO NO NO DO NOT WANT about the idea. :P
Mitchell, due to being on the front lines with Fritz, was one of the few who got to know Eichel and get alone with him well - until later 1758, which was when Mitchell went from distructing Heinrich to hanging out with Heinrich more and more, and Eichel (who apparantly was the "loyal only to the monarch and no one else" type - when FW ruled, this was FW, when Fritz ruled, it was Fritz) became distrustful of Mitchell and considered him contaminated by Heinrich's Fritz-critical opinions
Oohh, this is very neat! It's not the least bit surprising of Eichel, but it is new information. Also, Mitchell getting to know him, that *is* a coup!
G2's immediate reaction is not on record
Lol. I still remember Lavisse saying it was a pity that FW's alliance with France never got him into this position vis-a-vis the Emperor.
Mitchell dates:
Woot! This is going in the chronology! This is soooo great, thank you so much.
1730: Andrew resumes his studies, enroles at the law faculty i nLeyden where he spends two semesters (this means he's in the Netherlands when Peter Keith hightails it out of Prussia); (studying in the Netherlands for two terms was also what Boswell did before embarking on his Grand Tour, when I read this bit, I thought, that sounds familiar)
Neat!
In 1747 Lord Chesterfield, speaking from his experience as secretary of state, and ith the friction between Hannover and Prussia in mind, believed that 'whoever went to Berlin must be a very unhappy man between the two courts".
So I know that the Prussian report says that Chesterfield wasn't home when Keith showed up, but he returned to Britain in 1732 and married Aunt Melusine's daughter (possible lover of Katte) Petronella in 1733, and Peter was evidently in London around 1734-1736, so...I wonder if Peter thanked him for his staff's role in saving his life, and if they got to know each other, and if Chesterfield, who was busy expressing opinions on the state of Anglo-Prussian diplomacy in 1747, was interested in getting Keith sent to Britain that year. It's tenuous, but it's possible.
In sum, I've been waiting for this write-up, and, as always,
Chesterfield on FW
Date: 2020-10-11 03:00 am (UTC)The King of [sic!] Prussia in the oath he prepared for the Prince to swallow, among many other things, has made him swear that he will never believe in the doctrine of Predestination! A very unnecessary declaration in my mind for any body who has misfortune of being acquainted with him to make, since he himself is a living proof of free-will, for Providence can never be supposed to have pre-ordained such a creature!
You go, Chesterfield!
Re: Chesterfield on FW
Date: 2020-10-11 06:14 am (UTC)(Doctor Johnson had a famous clash with Chesterfield years later and said apropos the "Letters to his son" that Chesterfield's idea of being a gentleman clearly involved having the morals of a whore and the manners of a dancing master.)
Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination
Date: 2020-10-11 03:47 pm (UTC)It also touches on something that's been irritating me since I first read it: FW's opposition to predestination, and the fact that he made it such an important part of Frederick's submission. Because as far as I know, FW was a calvinist, and Calvin's doctrine was clearly pro predestination, so I don't quite get it. Did he just not care about the doctrine in this case and his opposition is all personal and a result of his conflict with Fritz, as in: Fritz discovering it as a clever argument against him, saying that everything he is/does/likes is predestined by God, so why would his father fault him for it? Certainly comes across that way. (It's an argument to irritate his father for sure, but it's also interesting in the context of Fritz trying to make sense of himself I think.)
And of course Fritz, submission or not, argues for predestination again, early on in his correspondence with Voltaire, while Voltaire obviously takes the free will side. It's very much a philosophical instead of a theological argument with him, though, because since Fritz doesn't believe in an immortal soul, the whole post-death part of salvation/damnation is clearly irrelevant to him.
Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination
Date: 2020-10-11 03:54 pm (UTC)Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination
Date: 2020-10-11 03:55 pm (UTC)Ergo: Fritz could have found no surer way to strike at Dad under the guise of submission (since he was reading religious books and talking with the preacher, as demanded) than to declare himself a believer in predestination. Aside from that, it also was a way to justify himself. (I.e. assert his individuality - if God had meant him to be the way he was, etc.). But seriously, Predestination was a life long terror to FW, and anyone who knew him personally knew that.
Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination
From:Re: Chesterfield on FW
Date: 2020-10-12 04:45 am (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Choosing an Envoy
Date: 2020-10-11 05:59 am (UTC)G2: I just don't like younger relations called Fritz, okay? They're never up to any good.
Note: this is when the Brits suggest Peter Keith, and Fritz is all NO NO NO DO NOT WANT about the idea. :P
To fully appreciate how utterly insulting to Peter Keith (and also somewhat insulting to the Brits in terms of how serious he took relations with them until 1756) this is, get this: the Legationssekretär in GB was one Abraham Michell (yes, Michell, just to make life easier for us), whom Fritz had never met, who had, in fact, never visited Prussia in his life, and about whom it's unclear whether he even had taken the customary oath of loyalty to Prussia when becoming the previous envoy's secretary. The previous envoy had also been a Swiss (but at least one who' dbeen to Berlin and was known to people there), and Michell had joined Prussian service through this backdoor. When Podewils suggested raising him from Legationssekretär to minister, rank wise, now that he was full time envoy, Fritz said no, he'd demand a bigger salary then, and Fritz was all about saving money. And Michell - who, again, no one in Berlin knew and who never had visited any part of Prussia in his life - remained on the job.
...I do hope Peter never learned the Brits had asked for him, or at least not who the alternate candidate was. Also, again, date wise: This decision was made in 1747; within two years, after Hans Hermann's half brothers killed each other, Fritz intervenes in Katte family affair and gets cousin Ludolf a rich heiress.
Chesterfield: it is, indeed, possible, but like I said, I REALLY HOPE HE DIDN'T TELL PETER:
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Choosing an Envoy
Date: 2020-10-13 12:16 am (UTC)It may not be deliberate whitewashing! Maybe he only read the diplomatic versions. After all, those ministers are getting paid for *something*, and that includes successful spin doctoring.
get this: the Legationssekretär in GB was one Abraham Michell (yes, Michell, just to make life easier for us), whom Fritz had never met, who had, in fact, never visited Prussia in his life, and about whom it's unclear whether he even had taken the customary oath of loyalty to Prussia when becoming the previous envoy's secretary.
Oh, gosh. So I was with Fritz that Peter might not be the person you'd want for hardcore negotiations, but if the alternative is this guy, and no formal envoy? In a way, though, that almost makes it better: clearly this has less to do with Peter and more to do with 1) Fritz being cheap, 2) Fritz not giving a damn about British relations.
...It's a balance-of-powers miracle that Fritz ended up with any allies at all in 1756. :P
This decision was made in 1747; within two years, after Hans Hermann's half brothers killed each other, Fritz intervenes in Katte family affair and gets cousin Ludolf a rich heiress.
Yep, I was thinking of this. No wonder my fictional Peter is so insecure in 1750. :/
Chesterfield: it is, indeed, possible, but like I said, I REALLY HOPE HE DIDN'T TELL PETER:
Let's hope it went like this.
British: Sound out Fritz.
British: Get a thumbs down.
British: Decide there's no point in telling Peter.
Let's also hope Peter was happier as Academy curator anyway.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Choosing an Envoy
Date: 2020-10-13 05:12 am (UTC)British: Decide there's no point in telling Peter.
It did strike me that when after August III's death Heinrich was considered a candidate for next King of Poland, Fritz told the Polish delegation not just no but forbade them to mention it to Heinrich, who indeed dit not find out until visiting Catherine seven years later. So maybe he told the Brits not to tell Peter, either, which would have saved Peter from feeling rejected all over again.
Lehndorff: This is why all right-thinking people are indignant on your behalf, Sir. But I'm honored to know you anyway.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Choosing an Envoy
From:Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Emotionally Compromised
Date: 2020-10-11 11:30 am (UTC)Here are the two Heinrich passages for you:
Previously Mitchell had been wary of Henry because of his pro-French sympathies but during the months when he accompanied him on campaign he came to see a different side to the King's brother. In Henry Mitchell found the ideal military commander, one who struck a proper balance between valour and humanitas. He praised the 'goodness' with which the prince treated prisoners, his care for the common soldier and his consideration for his officers, and he admired his 'coolness and presence of mind under fire'. Henry, in fact, had all of Frederick's qualities as a commander except his daring, and conspiciously lacked his impatience, his urge to settle everything in one great battle and his unconcern for his men. during this campaign Mitchell alid the basis of that friendship with Henry which lasted for the rest of his life.
Suspicious Eichel, a year later, when Mitchell instead of staying at headquarters with Fritz goes with Heinrich to Glogau in November 1760:
As worrying as Mitchell's absence from headquarters was his growing intimacy with Henry. Eichel, for one, was particularly unhappy about this. Since the end of August, when Frederick had amalgamated Henry's army with his own force, the prince had been sulking. Returning to Breslau, 'se sentant incommodi d'un accès de fievre', as Eichel wrote carefully to Finckenstein, he brooded over the loss of his command. The subsequent estrangement between the two brothers was a further source of that discontent and flagging morale which both Eichel and Mitchell noted among the army command. Many of the general officers shared Henry's view that the concentration of all the troops into one army seriously reduced the capability of the state to defend itself, whereas Frederick was prepared to accept this risk for the possibility of inflicting a massive defeat on one of his enemies should such an opportunity arise. First at Breslau, then ata Glogau, Mitchell was very much thrown into the company of Henry and in the eyes of Eichel, and perhaps Frederick himself, risked being contaminated by the dissatisfaction with the handling of the war which Henry's circle professed. AS so much depended on Britain retaining belief in Frederick's ability to survive, Eichel's concern was understandable. Mitchell was, in fact, trying to persuade Henry to return to headquarters and heal the breach with the King. But he failed in this attempt 'to heal, to soften and to apologize for the King of Prussia's conduct towards him'.
(This would be when Mitchell wrote he was trying to persuade Prussian ministers to help him reconciling the brothers, but that they chickened out. Maybe he meant Eichel?)
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Emotionally Compromised
Date: 2020-10-12 04:48 am (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return - Emotionally Compromised
Date: 2020-10-13 06:31 pm (UTC)Eichel's prominent enough and in favor enough that he'd be my go-to guy for this, if I knew him and got along with him! Too bad Eichel had one-man loyalties.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-12 04:44 am (UTC)Hee!
and Fritz then wrote a letter to cousin G3 which G3 called the most impertinent and insulting letter he ever read, felt personally enraged and from this point onwards loathed Fritz as well. (G3, you have the American rebels still ahead of you, calm down.)
ahahahaha! I find this hilarious.
Doran points out Fritz lucked out that his much cherished scheme to get the Turks into an alliance so they'd attack either the Russians or Austrians or preferably both came to nothing, because if Russia had been in a war with Turkey when Peter III. came to the throne, even (P)RussianPete surely could not have switched allegiances
Huh! That's interesting. Fritz saved by his own failure :P
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-12 07:06 am (UTC)And speaking of Fritzian insults to his Hannover relations, no sooner had he gotten the pardon for George Keith, Lord Marischall that would allow the later to visit Britain again (remember, he did this after the death of James Keith at Hochkirch), that he appointed George Keith - i.e. a man who'd done his best to ensure the Stuarts, not the Hannovers, would sit on the British throne - as Prussian Ambassador to GB.
G3: I think I'll like John Adams better when he's the first American ambassador at my court.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-13 01:03 am (UTC)I remembered the quote, but not the source. Johnson, cool!
What about Catherine, inquiring minds want to know? Johnson was apparently quite excited when she decided to propagate one of his works in Russia:
Gentlemen, I must tell you a very great thing. The Empress of Russia has ordered the Rambler to be translated into the Russian language; so I shall be read on the banks of the Wolga. Horace boasts that his fame would extend as far as the banks of the Rhône; now the Wolga is farther from me than the Rhône was from Horace.
ETA:
he appointed George Keith - i.e. a man who'd done his best to ensure the Stuarts, not the Hannovers, would sit on the British throne - as Prussian Ambassador to GB.
I've quoted this before, but now seems a good time to remind everyone that when Keith was dying,
He summoned the British envoy, Elliot, on 23 May 1778: "I called you, because I find pleasure in emitting the last sighs of a Jacobite to a minister of King George."
As I said when I first quoted this, I can see why he and Fritz were friends for so long. :D
Peter Keith: ARGGRHHMBLLWTF!!!!!
That's Fritz for you, Peter.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-13 04:37 am (UTC)(As for MT: impeccable moral reputation on the one hand, but Catholic on the other; also an enemy of England in the latest war, and Bisset's editorial comments as well as Holdernesses letters to Mitchell in the Mitchell papers show me the British thought this was totally ungrateful of her, since they credit themselves with having saved her in the Silesian Wars (Hungary: What?!!?; Austrian Trenck: As if!), and she just should have listened to Britain and not stabbed them in the back by teaming up with France. And then she refused Naples - which they didn't have - as a peace offering. Really. Not a good monarch, clearly.)
Dying George Keith: LOL. Scotland forever!
I can see why he and Fritz were friends for so long.
Same here.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-13 12:31 pm (UTC)He summoned the British envoy, Elliot, on 23 May 1778: "I called you, because I find pleasure in emitting the last sighs of a Jacobite to a minister of King George."
As I said when I first quoted this, I can see why he and Fritz were friends for so long. :D
Oh, nice, all new to me, and very much appreciated, because the Fritz - G. Keith friendship is rather interesting. May I ask where the quote is from?
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
From:Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-13 11:12 pm (UTC)Meant to point out that Katte studied law in the Netherlands (Utrecht), though apparently he's not in their matriculation records (shades of Peter Keith at Trinity), and I can't tell exactly how long, but if it was in 1722 and 1722-1723 is also the time of his Grand Tour, then apparently not for long, maybe only one semester.
Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-14 09:55 am (UTC)Re: Andrew Mitchell: The Return
Date: 2020-10-15 03:08 am (UTC)Mitchell, of course, was his own man and in control of all the cash
Which his father went to a great deal of trouble to acquire, apparently.
Stabi request
Date: 2020-10-17 09:09 pm (UTC)It's short, so it might not have anything new to us, and of course the author might have terrible opinions and methodology, but, on the other hand it's recent, and it's written by a medical doctor. Given the title and table of contents, it might have something of interest about his illness(es) and death and possible connections with mercury. And judging by the table of contents, the author checked out his home town Gartz for signs of him. Don't know if he found anything, of course, but hey.
This volume could go either way (awesome, terrible, bland recap of what we already know), but it's been on my radar since shortly before the shutdown, when you were too busy to take requests, so I just wanted to get it on your radar. I'm not about to fork over money for it sight unseen, not with the shipping costs from Germany.
No rush!
Or, actually, it occurs to me we now have other Germans with access to German libraries too. :) If anyone has access to it and the time to flip through it and see if it's any good, that would be awesome!
Re: Stabi request
Date: 2020-10-18 08:31 am (UTC)Re: Stabi request
Date: 2020-10-18 04:05 pm (UTC)