I don't believe in a massive cover-up for the simple reason that Mylius must know that FW is on his way to Wesel and will be there in furious person, and it's just too risky. What if random soldier X mentions Lieutenant Keith left on a different date?
Exactly my thinking.
Am also reminded how the "Sachsens Glanz und Preußens Gloria" scriptwriters and/or their nineteenth century Polish novel source simplified their lives by making Katte and both Keith brothers into the same character.
Yep, I was thinking of that too. It's a pretty complex story. (I still want to know where the name Robert for the brother originated. felis? ;) )
Keith Jr: Peter (and/or his mother, given he was a boy when Peter died, so possibly like with the Hertefelds a retelling of a retelling.
Agreed, I've always assumed that even if Peter told the story when the kids were young, their actual memories of it (in 1820!) were based on variants they heard later. It's a PITY a certain Academy secretary felt the need to gloss over the account in the memoirs!
Current speculation: Fritz did write a note, and since Peter managed to escaped, he naturally assumed this note saved Peter's life, was glad about it, and mentioned this in his own retellings to Wilhelmine etc.
This has been my theory for a long time (it might even be in the Rheinsberg textual criticism posts), and this...
By the time Peter returned to Berlin, the story was firmly established, and he was both touched that Fritz wrote to begin with (since that proved at least in the past, Fritz had cared), and wise enough not to contradict the King, especially if he was also feeling defensive due to the implicit Katte comparison everyone must have been making. So he included the note into his own version.
...is a perfect explanation for the rest! SOLD. :)
ETA: Fritz did write a note, and since Peter managed to escaped, he naturally assumed this note saved Peter's life, was glad about it, and mentioned this in his own retellings to Wilhelmine etc.
It occurs to me that Fritz might have spent 10 years believing his note saved Peter, telling everyone that, only found out otherwise in 1740 when he went through the archives, and didn't want to change his story.
Speaking of people being only human, I've always assumed that even if Peter was just following Fritz's orders when he deserted, and even if Fritz *didn't* want him executed in addition to, or even instead of, Katte, Fritz would only be human if he had some resentment after hearing about Peter living for ten years in freedom (even with FW after him) while he was put through the Küstrin regimen and Katte was killed. Of course, I think the bigger problem is Fritz drank the Prussian kool-aid in the 1730s, but I think we have to assume everyone resents everyone at least a little in this story. :(
Re: Sauvez-Vous!
Exactly my thinking.
Am also reminded how the "Sachsens Glanz und Preußens Gloria" scriptwriters and/or their nineteenth century Polish novel source simplified their lives by making Katte and both Keith brothers into the same character.
Yep, I was thinking of that too. It's a pretty complex story. (I still want to know where the name Robert for the brother originated.
Keith Jr: Peter (and/or his mother, given he was a boy when Peter died, so possibly like with the Hertefelds a retelling of a retelling.
Agreed, I've always assumed that even if Peter told the story when the kids were young, their actual memories of it (in 1820!) were based on variants they heard later. It's a PITY a certain Academy secretary felt the need to gloss over the account in the memoirs!
Current speculation: Fritz did write a note, and since Peter managed to escaped, he naturally assumed this note saved Peter's life, was glad about it, and mentioned this in his own retellings to Wilhelmine etc.
This has been my theory for a long time (it might even be in the Rheinsberg textual criticism posts), and this...
By the time Peter returned to Berlin, the story was firmly established, and he was both touched that Fritz wrote to begin with (since that proved at least in the past, Fritz had cared), and wise enough not to contradict the King, especially if he was also feeling defensive due to the implicit Katte comparison everyone must have been making. So he included the note into his own version.
...is a perfect explanation for the rest! SOLD. :)
ETA: Fritz did write a note, and since Peter managed to escaped, he naturally assumed this note saved Peter's life, was glad about it, and mentioned this in his own retellings to Wilhelmine etc.
It occurs to me that Fritz might have spent 10 years believing his note saved Peter, telling everyone that, only found out otherwise in 1740 when he went through the archives, and didn't want to change his story.
Speaking of people being only human, I've always assumed that even if Peter was just following Fritz's orders when he deserted, and even if Fritz *didn't* want him executed in addition to, or even instead of, Katte, Fritz would only be human if he had some resentment after hearing about Peter living for ten years in freedom (even with FW after him) while he was put through the Küstrin regimen and Katte was killed. Of course, I think the bigger problem is Fritz drank the Prussian kool-aid in the 1730s, but I think we have to assume everyone resents everyone at least a little in this story. :(