then he went straight off to war in December. [...] Now, I think Fritz came back to Berlin briefly during winter quarters? But I could be misremembering.
This is all according to Roedenbeck's and Droysen's itineraries, and I know they aren't always entirely correct, but they both say that he was in Berlin for two weeks in December 1740 - before going off to war, even attending a ball and such things - and, more importantly, that he was in Berlin and Charlottenburg for most of the two months between November 12th, 1741, and January 18th, 1742. And then Peter is mentioned in Fritz' letter a bit more than a month later.
I will now revise that, since I feel pretty good about Preuss citing a specific 1740 source.
In the light of even Kloosterhuis contradicting himself (why), I'll be completely exact here and say that Preuss himself is ambiguous in his phrasing and gives the BN Dec 20th source among the Jordan letters, whereas Droysen (in the Political Correspondence) is unambiguous about Lt.Col. = 1740 and gives the same BN source for that without mentioning the letters. It is still possible that Droysen copied half of Preuss without reading the source himself and fell for the ambiguous phrasing, which is why I'd love to see it for myself. :P (The Berliner StaBi has a note saying that the years 1740 and 1741 are "in the process of being digitized" but who knows when that's actually going to happen.)
Interesting! Maybe they did meet in person, then. Either right before Fritz went off to war, or a year later, or both. I had taken the lack of direct correspondence to mean that Fritz was basically ignoring him and Peter's requests were going to Jordan (especially since Jordan's the one explaining to Fritz why Peter wants to go off to war), but maybe not. Maybe they had in-person contact in Berlin, but once Fritz left, Keith had to go through Jordan in writing rather than write to Fritz directly.
In the light of even Kloosterhuis contradicting himself (why)
Ha, well, typos happen. I'm far from immune myself. Though I seem to recall that Kloosterhuis contradicts himself on Peter Keith more than once. I think he attributes Peter's departure from Wesel to being warned that Fritz was arrested (so like Peter's son and Wilhelmine), but he also reports documentation from Peter's regiment recording the contents of his room on August 7, which is way too early for him to have been warned (as Koser points out).
Here's a fannish speculation, though. Remember when there was the kerfluffle over whether Katte got warned, and somebody delayed the delivery of the letter from FW ordering his arrest? What if Keith *was* warned and allowed to escape, but somebody backdated the inventory of his room and maintained that he deserted on the 6th? I seem to recall that FW learned of Peter's desertion on August 12, when approaching Wesel. I would like to know what the source for that is (Seckendorff?), and whether there's time for Peter to have been warned between when Fritz was arrested and when FW found out that Peter deserted, and whether that's consistent with backdating of the documents.
Oh, I like the backdating theory. Especially since I don't recall - though maybe I forgot? - FW firing or severly punishing someone at Wesel over Peter's escape, so if that is the case, it would have worked as intended. Re: sources, though, it's worth pointing out that none of the envoys - Seckendorff, Stratemann, or Dickens - was anywhere near FW at the time, so would have to rely on reports, and Seckendorff's usual source, Grumbkow, wasn't with FW, either, since he was in Berlin being smug and "I know something you don't" to Wilhelmine according to her memoirs.
There's also the problem that we have all these letters from Hans Heinrich to his brother, starting from before the arrest, but we don't have anything comparable from the Keith family presumably because of the difference in importance and rank. Do we even know whether Peter's parents were still alive in 1730, does Formey mention that in his obituary? If so, did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
Maybe they did meet in person, then. Either right before Fritz went off to war, or a year later, or both.
Perhaps there was one reception/audience, and Peter, whose mental image of Fritz was stuck in January 1730, was having a Wilhelmine-at-her-wedding like moment because Fritz, ever alert to people assuming, as the late FW had done, he'd be ruled by his favourites, was extra formal (and mentally preoccupied with Silesia) and also expected telepathy as he was prone to do. (I.e. for his opposite to realise yes, he was glad for the reunion, despite playing it cool.)
(Now if I were a mean writer, which I can be, I'd let Peter encounter Algarotti in London just before FW dies, and they both talk about Fritz and looking forward to the future, and then I'd let him encounter Algarotti again in the winter of 1740, seeing that yes, King Fritz can be as enthusiastic and affectionate as Crown Prince Fritz... but not to him.)
Especially since I don't recall - though maybe I forgot? - FW firing or severly punishing someone at Wesel over Peter's escape
I don't either, though perhaps I missed it. But if the backdating idea is correct, it would mean Peter's son had the correct version of his escape. Question: if the Wesel people managed to keep this a secret from FW, how does Wilhelmine know the correct story? (Perhaps already in 1739--as noted, I would love to get my hands on the 1739 draft of her memoirs, it would be really telling.)
Re: sources, though, it's worth pointing out that none of the envoys - Seckendorff, Stratemann, or Dickens - was anywhere near FW at the time
I...thought...Seckendorff was on the trip with him? They stopped on his estate on their way to Ansbach, and he's the one Fritz came clean to a couple days before reaching Wesel, and you read us his envoy report, in which Fritz says he doesn't care what happens to him, but he would be most upset if anything happened to his friends.
Okay, Lavisse agrees:
The first night was passed at Meuselwitz, Count Seckendorff's estate, where the king remained the two following days. The 18th he continued his route, taking the Count with him.
The night of the escape: Seckendorff, who always slept with one eye open, appeared in the street. The prince had started out again, and the dawning day lighted up his red mantle.
[FW] reached Bonn on the 10th. Before putting up there he ordered the officers of the prince to watch him well, and bring him back to the boat, dead or alive. Frederick heard these commands and other hard words spoken by his father without a frown. But, in his heart, he began to be troubled, feeling himself already a prisoner. In his way, he was shrewd. He guessed that all was discovered, and that Seckendorff was posted. He determined then to draw this enemy over to his cause...“I had,” said Frederick to Seckendorff, “the firm intention of running away..." [Fritz confesses]
Seckendorff had to listen with an air of respectful compassion, at the same time hiding his pleasure at the sight of so proud a youth reduced to asking a favor of him, knowing how reluctantly he gave this forced confidence. The next day, at Mörs, he spoke to the king in generous terms of the prince's repentance. The king replied that he would prefer pardon to justice, if his son would make his avowals in an open-hearted manner, a thing he very much doubted; but, at Geldern, he learned that Lieutenant Keith had left Wesel.
This is why I wonder if Seckendorff's envoy reports are the source for when FW learned about Keith, and if so, Seckendorff was on site when it happened.
Do we even know whether Peter's parents were still alive in 1730, does Formey mention that in his obituary? If so, did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
I don't remember if Formey mentions it, but we know his mother was still alive, because she's writing to Fritz in 1740, asking what happened to Peter. (Kloosterhuis says she "reminded" Fritz of Peter's existence, but that's simply not true, because we have Fritz writing to his contact in Hannover about Peter at least a month before the letter from the mother.) According to Kloosterhuis, his father had died in 1729.
did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
Perhaps. I do recall some kind of a letter from FW to not!Robert's new regimental commander that hopefully this Keith would be better than his wretched brother.
ever alert to people assuming, as the late FW had done, he'd be ruled by his favourites
Yeah, I do think this was a factor; I always thought Hanway had it right that one thing motivating Fritz was a decision to establish the fact that he was in charge, and your job was to obey, and that that had nothing to do with whether Peter was in favor or not.
also expected telepathy as he was prone to do. (I.e. for his opposite to realise yes, he was glad for the reunion, despite playing it cool.)
That does make sense! The Wilhelmine at her wedding comparison is quite likely.
Now if I were a mean writer
Me: What do you mean, "if"? :P
which I can be
Right, yes. :P
I'd let Peter encounter Algarotti in London just before FW dies
Though Peter is in Lisbon when FW dies and only stops off briefly in London on the way back (at which point Algarotti has already borrowed the money for his ship fare from Lady Hervey and raced off to Berlin, leaving his luggage behind :P), you can always fudge that for fiction. The time when they might historically have met is March-May 1736, just after Algarotti arrived the first time and just before Peter left for Lisbon.
seeing that yes, King Fritz can be as enthusiastic and affectionate as Crown Prince Fritz... but not to him.
OMG. No wonder Peter wrote in his memoirs (according to Formey) that Providence seemed determined to make up for his sufferings. </3 (Perhaps with Algarotti ending up neglected and frustrated too, shortly thereafter--not as schadenfreude but as proof that it's not Peter, it's Fritz.)
You know, I know he married Ariane at a normal age for men of the period to marry (31), and that he sensibly waited until he was back in Prussia (though maybe he eventually would have married in Lisbon?), but I've also always felt that maybe he got married at a time when he needed something that didn't hurt, and my fic reflects that. (Remember, he's currently in Berlin being judged by *everyone*, probably not just for cowardice but for apparently being out of favor with Fritz.)
re: Seckendorff, I had completely forgot, you're right, and it makes geographic sense - his estate is in the area! (Same estate Fritz will later kidnap him from.)
How Wilhelmine might have known: if she knew already in 1739, it can't have been from Pöllnitz, since he won't show up at her court until the 1740s. Otoh her husband, lest we forgot, is in charge of a Prussian regiment which means he spends quite a lot of the early 1730s in Brandenburg, and he might have picked up some gossip, though I doubt any Wesel military would have risked telling the King's son-in-law. (Unless they witnessed FW doing that drink enforcing, verbal abusing thing to him and thus knew BayreuthFriedrich wasn't a fan, maybe?) Also, both Sonsine and her nieces the Marwitz girls had as we know relations in the service.
erhaps with Algarotti ending up neglected and frustrated too, shortly thereafter--not as schadenfreude but as proof that it's not Peter, it's Fritz.
Oh, it would only be human if Peter felt that way. And maybe he and Algarotti formed a "We left London for this?" club. A bit more seriously, I could see Peter, with his intellectual interests, using the opportunity to talk to world famous celebrity Algarotti, and if they share common ground by knowing England, it's something of a conversation opener.
but I've also always felt that maybe he got married at a time when he needed something that didn't hurt
That makes sense. And someone for whom he comes first. Mind you, re: Peter being judged - at this point, he may have been, but if Lehndorff is anything to go by, before the decade is over he's got friends and at least one admirer, and at least a part of the public sympathizes with him. He also must have left good impressions in Britain if the Brits suggested him as envoy. (I'm still not over the fact that Fritz prefered the last envoy's Swiss secretary who hadn't even sworn loyalty to Prussia.)
And maybe he and Algarotti formed a "We left London for this?" club.
Lol, well, they might well have bonded over this! I'm trying to remember the chronology...Algarotti got sent to Turin pretty soon after the war started (January?), and then shortly after he returned, Fritz summoned him to Silesia (and left him waiting there), and then I think Algarotti went either straight to Dresden or maybe passed through Berlin on his way to Dresden. So either after the return from Turin or after the return from Silesia when A's quitting his job is when mutual frustrations with Fritz will be highest.
And someone for whom he comes first.
Exactly. <3 </3
if they share common ground by knowing England, it's something of a conversation opener.
Exactly. I figure this is how he and Hanway got to know each other in Lisbon. Hanway being an Englishman apprenticed to a merchant there, and Peter having spent the last couple (? few?) years in England, and Ireland before that.
before the decade is over he's got friends and at least one admirer, and at least a part of the public sympathizes with him.
Oh, yeah, definitely. Hanway says the same, iirc. But I wonder how much of that was helped along by Peter proving his willingness to go off to war (whether or not he ever made it to the front). Not Lehndorff, maybe, but the general public.
He also must have left good impressions in Britain if the Brits suggested him as envoy.
Yeah, one of the things I called attention to in my fic is that in 1741-1742, he hasn't been in Berlin since 1729, so people don't know him any more (either because they never met him or because so much time has passed). I think at that point, his emotional support circle in his immediate vicinity was at its lowest.
I'm still not over the fact that Fritz prefered the last envoy's Swiss secretary who hadn't even sworn loyalty to Prussia.
Haha, well, was the guy empowered to negotiate or just a point of contact? Because it may be apples and oranges to compare "make Peter official envoy" to "Eh, who needs envoys?"
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-02 06:08 pm (UTC)This is all according to Roedenbeck's and Droysen's itineraries, and I know they aren't always entirely correct, but they both say that he was in Berlin for two weeks in December 1740 - before going off to war, even attending a ball and such things - and, more importantly, that he was in Berlin and Charlottenburg for most of the two months between November 12th, 1741, and January 18th, 1742. And then Peter is mentioned in Fritz' letter a bit more than a month later.
I will now revise that, since I feel pretty good about Preuss citing a specific 1740 source.
In the light of even Kloosterhuis contradicting himself (why), I'll be completely exact here and say that Preuss himself is ambiguous in his phrasing and gives the BN Dec 20th source among the Jordan letters, whereas Droysen (in the Political Correspondence) is unambiguous about Lt.Col. = 1740 and gives the same BN source for that without mentioning the letters. It is still possible that Droysen copied half of Preuss without reading the source himself and fell for the ambiguous phrasing, which is why I'd love to see it for myself. :P (The Berliner StaBi has a note saying that the years 1740 and 1741 are "in the process of being digitized" but who knows when that's actually going to happen.)
Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-02 10:26 pm (UTC)In the light of even Kloosterhuis contradicting himself (why)
Ha, well, typos happen. I'm far from immune myself. Though I seem to recall that Kloosterhuis contradicts himself on Peter Keith more than once. I think he attributes Peter's departure from Wesel to being warned that Fritz was arrested (so like Peter's son and Wilhelmine), but he also reports documentation from Peter's regiment recording the contents of his room on August 7, which is way too early for him to have been warned (as Koser points out).
Here's a fannish speculation, though. Remember when there was the kerfluffle over whether Katte got warned, and somebody delayed the delivery of the letter from FW ordering his arrest? What if Keith *was* warned and allowed to escape, but somebody backdated the inventory of his room and maintained that he deserted on the 6th? I seem to recall that FW learned of Peter's desertion on August 12, when approaching Wesel. I would like to know what the source for that is (Seckendorff?), and whether there's time for Peter to have been warned between when Fritz was arrested and when FW found out that Peter deserted, and whether that's consistent with backdating of the documents.
What do you guys think?
Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-03 05:56 am (UTC)There's also the problem that we have all these letters from Hans Heinrich to his brother, starting from before the arrest, but we don't have anything comparable from the Keith family presumably because of the difference in importance and rank. Do we even know whether Peter's parents were still alive in 1730, does Formey mention that in his obituary? If so, did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
Maybe they did meet in person, then. Either right before Fritz went off to war, or a year later, or both.
Perhaps there was one reception/audience, and Peter, whose mental image of Fritz was stuck in January 1730, was having a Wilhelmine-at-her-wedding like moment because Fritz, ever alert to people assuming, as the late FW had done, he'd be ruled by his favourites, was extra formal (and mentally preoccupied with Silesia) and also expected telepathy as he was prone to do. (I.e. for his opposite to realise yes, he was glad for the reunion, despite playing it cool.)
(Now if I were a mean writer, which I can be, I'd let Peter encounter Algarotti in London just before FW dies, and they both talk about Fritz and looking forward to the future, and then I'd let him encounter Algarotti again in the winter of 1740, seeing that yes, King Fritz can be as enthusiastic and affectionate as Crown Prince Fritz... but not to him.)
Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-03 01:15 pm (UTC)I don't either, though perhaps I missed it. But if the backdating idea is correct, it would mean Peter's son had the correct version of his escape. Question: if the Wesel people managed to keep this a secret from FW, how does Wilhelmine know the correct story? (Perhaps already in 1739--as noted, I would love to get my hands on the 1739 draft of her memoirs, it would be really telling.)
Re: sources, though, it's worth pointing out that none of the envoys - Seckendorff, Stratemann, or Dickens - was anywhere near FW at the time
I...thought...Seckendorff was on the trip with him? They stopped on his estate on their way to Ansbach, and he's the one Fritz came clean to a couple days before reaching Wesel, and you read us his envoy report, in which Fritz says he doesn't care what happens to him, but he would be most upset if anything happened to his friends.
Okay, Lavisse agrees:
The first night was passed at Meuselwitz, Count Seckendorff's estate, where the king remained the two following days. The 18th he continued his route, taking the Count with him.
The night of the escape: Seckendorff, who always slept with one eye open, appeared in the street. The prince had started out again, and the dawning day lighted up his red mantle.
[FW] reached Bonn on the 10th. Before putting up there he ordered the officers of the prince to watch him well, and bring him back to the boat, dead or alive. Frederick heard these commands and other hard words spoken by his father without a frown. But, in his heart, he began to be troubled, feeling himself already a prisoner. In his way, he was shrewd. He guessed that all was discovered, and that Seckendorff was posted. He determined then to draw this enemy over to his cause...“I had,” said Frederick to Seckendorff, “the firm intention of running away..." [Fritz confesses]
Seckendorff had to listen with an air of respectful compassion, at the same time hiding his pleasure at the sight of so proud a youth reduced to asking a favor of him, knowing how reluctantly he gave this forced confidence. The next day, at Mörs, he spoke to the king in generous terms of the prince's repentance. The king replied that he would prefer pardon to justice, if his son would make his avowals in an open-hearted manner, a thing he very much doubted; but, at Geldern, he learned that Lieutenant Keith had left Wesel.
This is why I wonder if Seckendorff's envoy reports are the source for when FW learned about Keith, and if so, Seckendorff was on site when it happened.
Do we even know whether Peter's parents were still alive in 1730, does Formey mention that in his obituary? If so, did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
I don't remember if Formey mentions it, but we know his mother was still alive, because she's writing to Fritz in 1740, asking what happened to Peter. (Kloosterhuis says she "reminded" Fritz of Peter's existence, but that's simply not true, because we have Fritz writing to his contact in Hannover about Peter at least a month before the letter from the mother.) According to Kloosterhuis, his father had died in 1729.
did not!Robert's actions make up for Peter's in FW's eyes when it comes to the family?
Perhaps. I do recall some kind of a letter from FW to not!Robert's new regimental commander that hopefully this Keith would be better than his wretched brother.
ever alert to people assuming, as the late FW had done, he'd be ruled by his favourites
Yeah, I do think this was a factor; I always thought Hanway had it right that one thing motivating Fritz was a decision to establish the fact that he was in charge, and your job was to obey, and that that had nothing to do with whether Peter was in favor or not.
also expected telepathy as he was prone to do. (I.e. for his opposite to realise yes, he was glad for the reunion, despite playing it cool.)
That does make sense! The Wilhelmine at her wedding comparison is quite likely.
Now if I were a mean writer
Me: What do you mean, "if"? :P
which I can be
Right, yes. :P
I'd let Peter encounter Algarotti in London just before FW dies
Though Peter is in Lisbon when FW dies and only stops off briefly in London on the way back (at which point Algarotti has already borrowed the money for his ship fare from Lady Hervey and raced off to Berlin, leaving his luggage behind :P), you can always fudge that for fiction. The time when they might historically have met is March-May 1736, just after Algarotti arrived the first time and just before Peter left for Lisbon.
seeing that yes, King Fritz can be as enthusiastic and affectionate as Crown Prince Fritz... but not to him.
OMG. No wonder Peter wrote in his memoirs (according to Formey) that Providence seemed determined to make up for his sufferings. </3 (Perhaps with Algarotti ending up neglected and frustrated too, shortly thereafter--not as schadenfreude but as proof that it's not Peter, it's Fritz.)
You know, I know he married Ariane at a normal age for men of the period to marry (31), and that he sensibly waited until he was back in Prussia (though maybe he eventually would have married in Lisbon?), but I've also always felt that maybe he got married at a time when he needed something that didn't hurt, and my fic reflects that. (Remember, he's currently in Berlin being judged by *everyone*, probably not just for cowardice but for apparently being out of favor with Fritz.)
Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-03 04:16 pm (UTC)How Wilhelmine might have known: if she knew already in 1739, it can't have been from Pöllnitz, since he won't show up at her court until the 1740s. Otoh her husband, lest we forgot, is in charge of a Prussian regiment which means he spends quite a lot of the early 1730s in Brandenburg, and he might have picked up some gossip, though I doubt any Wesel military would have risked telling the King's son-in-law. (Unless they witnessed FW doing that drink enforcing, verbal abusing thing to him and thus knew BayreuthFriedrich wasn't a fan, maybe?) Also, both Sonsine and her nieces the Marwitz girls had as we know relations in the service.
erhaps with Algarotti ending up neglected and frustrated too, shortly thereafter--not as schadenfreude but as proof that it's not Peter, it's Fritz.
Oh, it would only be human if Peter felt that way. And maybe he and Algarotti formed a "We left London for this?" club. A bit more seriously, I could see Peter, with his intellectual interests, using the opportunity to talk to world famous celebrity Algarotti, and if they share common ground by knowing England, it's something of a conversation opener.
but I've also always felt that maybe he got married at a time when he needed something that didn't hurt
That makes sense. And someone for whom he comes first. Mind you, re: Peter being judged - at this point, he may have been, but if Lehndorff is anything to go by, before the decade is over he's got friends
and at least one admirer, and at least a part of the public sympathizes with him. He also must have left good impressions in Britain if the Brits suggested him as envoy. (I'm still not over the fact that Fritz prefered the last envoy's Swiss secretary who hadn't even sworn loyalty to Prussia.)Re: Keith(s)
Date: 2021-02-03 08:54 pm (UTC)Lol, well, they might well have bonded over this! I'm trying to remember the chronology...Algarotti got sent to Turin pretty soon after the war started (January?), and then shortly after he returned, Fritz summoned him to Silesia (and left him waiting there), and then I think Algarotti went either straight to Dresden or maybe passed through Berlin on his way to Dresden. So either after the return from Turin or after the return from Silesia when A's quitting his job is when mutual frustrations with Fritz will be highest.
And someone for whom he comes first.
Exactly. <3 </3
if they share common ground by knowing England, it's something of a conversation opener.
Exactly. I figure this is how he and Hanway got to know each other in Lisbon. Hanway being an Englishman apprenticed to a merchant there, and Peter having spent the last couple (? few?) years in England, and Ireland before that.
before the decade is over he's got friends and at least one admirer, and at least a part of the public sympathizes with him.
Oh, yeah, definitely. Hanway says the same, iirc. But I wonder how much of that was helped along by Peter proving his willingness to go off to war (whether or not he ever made it to the front). Not Lehndorff, maybe, but the general public.
He also must have left good impressions in Britain if the Brits suggested him as envoy.
Yeah, one of the things I called attention to in my fic is that in 1741-1742, he hasn't been in Berlin since 1729, so people don't know him any more (either because they never met him or because so much time has passed). I think at that point, his emotional support circle in his immediate vicinity was at its lowest.
I'm still not over the fact that Fritz prefered the last envoy's Swiss secretary who hadn't even sworn loyalty to Prussia.
Haha, well, was the guy empowered to negotiate or just a point of contact? Because it may be apples and oranges to compare "make Peter official envoy" to "Eh, who needs envoys?"