re: Suhm - I was checking out this essay (written 1900) about the Antisobres, which prints a letter the Berlin members apparently sent to August in November 1728. Said letter gives a whole list of members and their nicknames beyond the big five, and among them is: "Suhm, surnommé le Diaphane". I had no idea that he was a member - given the political aspect of this Saxon/Prussian society and his position as Saxon envoy, it kind of makes sense, but, aw, poor Suhm - and that the nickname was in use there (which makes me wonder if he chose it himself).
And a second tidbit, summer 1729: Since Suhm gave offense in Berlin through his intimacy with the English envoy, King August sent Manteuffel himself [who got sick on the way, as Selena reported].* *On August 15th, 1729, Friedrich Wilhelm asked Manteuffel how he could send the Prussian-Russian contract to the patron without unauthorized persons becoming aware of it, "étant convaincu que le Sieur de Suhm ne pourroit guère s'empecher d'en faire un fidele rapport au du Bourgé."
Thing is, I have no idea who or what "du Bourgé" is supposed to be? Not the English envoy as far as I know. But it still at least suggests that FW didn't trust Suhm and that's why Polenz was deployed in September.
Re: Le Diable: The Political Biography - B
Date: 2021-03-14 10:57 am (UTC)And a second tidbit, summer 1729: Since Suhm gave offense in Berlin through his intimacy with the English envoy, King August sent Manteuffel himself [who got sick on the way, as Selena reported].*
*On August 15th, 1729, Friedrich Wilhelm asked Manteuffel how he could send the Prussian-Russian contract to the patron without unauthorized persons becoming aware of it, "étant convaincu que le Sieur de Suhm ne pourroit guère s'empecher d'en faire un fidele rapport au du Bourgé."
Thing is, I have no idea who or what "du Bourgé" is supposed to be? Not the English envoy as far as I know. But it still at least suggests that FW didn't trust Suhm and that's why Polenz was deployed in September.