Fritz supposedly asked Knobelsdorff if he'd seen the new Berlin Gate on his way in, built by "your stupid castellan Bouman" (stupid being what Knobelsdorff had called Bouman) and Knobelsdorff's response was "That must be the reason I didn't notice it." As you say, it's not like Manger was there for it, but either way, he seems to be the source for the Knobelsdorff vs. Bouman part.
Yes, that explains it. Thank you very much for the link! BTW, I was wondering about something else in the novel, and now that you've linked me to Manger's Knobelsdorff write up, I can see that this at least hails from our two authors' (most likely Back's) imagination, to wit: Fritz suggesting the satyrs on the Sanssouci facade and Knobelsdorff hating the idea (executed by Boumann because he refuses to have anything to do with it). Like I said, this isn't in Manger, so I'm tempted to suspect it's Back who hates on the satyrs. (What's wrong with the satyrs? I like them!)
ETA: Having read further in Manger, i.e. his write up of Bouman, I see that Knobelsdorf indeed hated the satyrs and that the line in the novel where he says they make the facade look like the seraglio of an Oriental potentate, not a Christian king, with lots of cut off heads put up for decoration is authentic. Man, those Fritz and Knobelsdorf arguments must have made everyone else in sight run for cover!/ETA
Miiiiiiiildred! The Knobelsdorff bio as given by Manger claims that not only did he meet Fritz at Küstrin because young Knobelsdorff, still doing military service, was a part of the Küstrin garnison, but that Knobelsdorff himself was the soldier who blew out, then reignited the candle. This story didn't make it in the novel (nor did a Küstrin first meeting; the novel starts when Fritz has just moved into Rheinsberg, and he and Knobelsdorff are already an item), and I suspect why: it's really not true. Manger himself says "I have heard from several people", not that he had it from the man himself. And when Lehnedorff visits Küstrin in the 1750s and hears the story of the soldier with the cancle, it's just an anonymous soldier. At this point, Knobelsdorff was already famous and of Europe wide renown, and Lehndorff most definitely knew who he was, so if it had been him, he'd probably have noticed!
I'll check out the post-Glasow write ups next, but the "Knobelsdorff was the candle reigniting soldier at Küstrin" bit was too good not to be shared immediately.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Book review I: Der Meister von Sanssouci - Fredersdorf and historical footnotes
Date: 2021-03-17 06:13 am (UTC)Yes, that explains it. Thank you very much for the link! BTW, I was wondering about something else in the novel, and now that you've linked me to Manger's Knobelsdorff write up, I can see that this at least hails from our two authors' (most likely Back's) imagination, to wit: Fritz suggesting the satyrs on the Sanssouci facade and Knobelsdorff hating the idea (executed by Boumann because he refuses to have anything to do with it). Like I said, this isn't in Manger, so I'm tempted to suspect it's Back who hates on the satyrs. (What's wrong with the satyrs? I like them!)
ETA: Having read further in Manger, i.e. his write up of Bouman, I see that Knobelsdorf indeed hated the satyrs and that the line in the novel where he says they make the facade look like the seraglio of an Oriental potentate, not a Christian king, with lots of cut off heads put up for decoration is authentic. Man, those Fritz and Knobelsdorf arguments must have made everyone else in sight run for cover!/ETA
Miiiiiiiildred! The Knobelsdorff bio as given by Manger claims that not only did he meet Fritz at Küstrin because young Knobelsdorff, still doing military service, was a part of the Küstrin garnison, but that Knobelsdorff himself was the soldier who blew out, then reignited the candle. This story didn't make it in the novel (nor did a Küstrin first meeting; the novel starts when Fritz has just moved into Rheinsberg, and he and Knobelsdorff are already an item), and I suspect why: it's really not true. Manger himself says "I have heard from several people", not that he had it from the man himself. And when Lehnedorff visits Küstrin in the 1750s and hears the story of the soldier with the cancle, it's just an anonymous soldier. At this point, Knobelsdorff was already famous and of Europe wide renown, and Lehndorff most definitely knew who he was, so if it had been him, he'd probably have noticed!
I'll check out the post-Glasow write ups next, but the "Knobelsdorff was the candle reigniting soldier at Küstrin" bit was too good not to be shared immediately.