Suhm clearly lucked out there, not being around as a potential FW target, yes.
Stratemann: I don't know what you're talking about. My reports around that time keep stating that the King will pardon Katte and recall the Crown Prince any minute now. Also look, by Christmas, he's being a model Dad, shopping for his kids. He's just such a lovely man, a model parent to his model family, and that's exactly what I'm reporting to Braunschweig.
Every other envoy: Head. Desk.
Still, Suhm doesn't seem to have done Saxony any good with FW. Perhaps he and Fritz were close already in 1727 (hopefully as father figure rather than erastes at this date!), and with FW's health, they hoped that his rising son connections would help any minute now?
Could be. After all, that's when Rottembourg is actually conspiring for a hot minute, so clearly in 1727, FW comes across as vulnerable either to illness or to being declared insane.
Good point about August possibly going over Flemming's head in insisting Suhm stays in Berlin (or rather returns there). Not least as a point of pride. (No one is kicking MY envoy out of the country.)
Yeah, they might have decided it would look like weakness for them to back down in 1727, and then they got stuck in a sunk costs situation that only got rectified during the big reshuffling.
After all, that's when Rottembourg is actually conspiring for a hot minute, so clearly in 1727, FW comes across as vulnerable either to illness or to being declared insane.
Ah, yes, good catch on the chronology. 1727 is when Rottembourg is recalled for the last time, so the Suhm-hanging episode happened right during the conspiracy, yes!
But even if Fritz and Suhm are already close (and we know they are in 1728), Lynar got recalled from Russia, as I described in another comment today, and only sent back when his lover was actually in power, so they could totally have done that with Suhm.
Thanks to my algorithms and their use of Google's infinitely more sophisticated algorithms, we have the following exchange between August and FW.
August to FW, March 28, 1727:
It was with the utmost astonishment that I learned from my Private War Adviser Suhm, my Envoy Extraordinary to Your Majesty's Court, in what manner Your Majesty had him say on the 22nd of the instant, by his Private Adviser Van Katsch, that he would be unhappy, and that one would use reprisals on him, if one executed the sentence of death pronounced against a criminal named Zuhm detained in Dresden; although this Declaration having been made by a present Private Adviser to Your Majesty, therefore in the most solemn manner, to said Suhm, there is no doubt that it has happened without the knowledge of Your Majesty.
In truth, I cannot understand how Your Majesty, whose profound and fair views are known to all the earth, could have taken a step so contrary to the Law and Use of Nations; & that she did not pay attention that the retaliation route cannot take place in relation to a legally convicted criminal, especially in the person of a Public Minister of a Power who is in friendship & at peace with Your Majesty. If Your Majesty had found it expedient to attack my Minister residing near him, I could with more reason have taken reprisals against his two Ministers who are at my Court, namely de Schwerin & Viebahn; that is why I made them declare, that I would not fail to act as appropriate. I therefore find myself obliged to pray to Your Majesty forever, to declare to myself amicably, and as a good neighbor, the nature of this affair, and what are his intentions in this regard. I expect on this a prompt & amicable reply from Your Majesty, & I am, &c.
FW to August, April 8, 1727:
I received the amicable Letter from Your Majesty of March 28, concerning what happened to your Private & War Consellier, who until now has resided at my Court as Envoy Extraordinary, & my Minister Katsch. I am very sorry that during the time that Your Majesty is occupied with the reestablishment of health, with which I take so much care, he was embarrassed by this affair, which could have been completed in a quarter of an hour to the satisfaction of the Sr. Suhm; if before his departure from here he had wanted to explain himself more fully. As soon as I was informed of the sensitivity of said Sr. Suhm & of his departure, I was instructed by my Minister Katsch of the state and consequences of this affair, & he assured me on my conscience (the the only witness he has of the truth on this occasion) that he absolutely did not use the expressions reported in Your Majesty's Letter, over and above that of reprisals which would be used against him; that he had not even thought of it; that in truth he had sorrows & sorrows only to receive the said Suhm in the event that some violence was used in the Lands of Your Majesty against the Officer, which could only be considered here as innocent, which the said Suhm will have interpreted in the way he tries to explain it, and to persuade your Majesty without any foundation. I beg Your Majesty to do me justice to believe, that I know too well what is due to the Character of a Minister of a Crowned Head, & especially to Your Majesty, for whom I have esteem & a particular road consideration, & with which the said Suhm was covered, & which I would not suffer that anything was done in my States against the Right of this Character. I flatter myself that your Majesty will be satisfied with this declaration, and that it will not dwell any longer on the disadvantageous judgment which has been formed; which will help to tighten even more the knots of friendship and good intelligence which is between Your Majesty and me; all the more so as I am resolved not to let any opportunity pass to testify to Your Majesty all that may be agreeable to him; & that I will always be with sincerity, &c.
Mauvillon writes: "The King of Poland not having found this Letter to be a sufficient satisfaction, wrote again the following one, with the intention of obtaining a less ambiguous one." April 19, 1727:
I have seen with appreciable pleasure, through the obliging Response which Your Majesty gave me, the assurances which it gives me of the part which he is taking in the full recovery of my health, and I am very obliged to him. I have not learned with less satisfaction that what happened between my Envoy Extraordinary of Suhm & his Minister Katsch happened, as I had suspected, without your knowledge. I have never doubted, also that Your Majesty knew perfectly what the Powers, who have reasons to live in good understanding together, owe to a Public Minister and to the Rights of Nations so inviolably guarded throughout Europe; & I have done justice on this to Your Majesty in a letter of 28. March last. But as it appears that the aforesaid Katsch took the name of Your Majesty in the inappropriate compliment he paid to the aforesaid Suhm (suppose I was not persuaded to the contrary) would it not have easily given rise to a great misunderstanding between us? although he denied this step in the presence of Your Majesty, changing something in the expressions. I therefore leave it to your Majesty to judge, if this Katsch is not all the more punishable, to have used this as an order that he did not have, and to have significantly offended me in the person of my Minister. I rest on the fraternal friendship of Your Majesty, that he herself feels for this unbearable conduct of your Minister, and that he will not fail to oblige him to make me a proportionate reparation, as well as to Sr. Suhm in particular, so that I may be able to send someone from my part to Your Majesty, to cultivate all the better the good intelligence that I wish to maintain on my side.
In the complete confidence in which I am that your Majesty will carry out this, I have given orders to deliver to Sr. de Schwerin his Letters of Appreciation which had been retained until now, & to declare to Sr. Viebahn that I do not will not deny him further hearing. I am &c.
I have definitely read somewhere that in the interests of keeping the peace, Katsch took the fall for FW here--Ah, yes, Carlyle says that. What, if anything, actually happened to Katsch, I don't know. (Perhaps felis will find out. ;))
But yeah, August definitely wanted Suhm to go back, and possibly as a face-saving measure kept him there longer than he really should have (but with what delightful results for yours truly).
What, if anything, actually happened to Katsch, I don't know.
Not much, as far as I can tell. He'd had a whole lot of offices and was the closest to a minister of justice Prussia had at the time, in charge of the criminal college in Berlin for example, law reforms, and other related things. (Apparently FW also told him to have on eye on the conduct of his fellow ministers.) This 1977 bio entry says that he did indeed step down as minister in 1727 and was, by his own wish, succeeded by Cocceji. I can't say if that was related to the whole Saxony kerfuffle, though, because he was also quite old at that point, sixty-two, and subsequently died in 1729. But maybe it was a factor in the decision. Also, to quote said bio entry: A glance at contemporary literature shows that he performed his office in the spirit of the king, whose views he knew to live like no other. Mild in private life, relentless in service, loyal to his king, without being called a favorite, K. was one of the most hated Prussian officials of his time alongside Creutz. After his death, the king lamented the loss of the “faithful man who served me out of love”.
And Wilhelmine apparently mentions him in her memoirs: "the bodily image of the unjust judge in the Gospel, a man who is accomplished in the art of twisting and turning everything, and the very willing creature of Grumbkow".
(Btw, I also saw that his widow was Countess Camas' predecessor as EC's Chief Court Mistress (until 1742).)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Le Diable: The Political Biography - B
Date: 2021-03-14 03:57 pm (UTC)Stratemann: I don't know what you're talking about. My reports around that time keep stating that the King will pardon Katte and recall the Crown Prince any minute now. Also look, by Christmas, he's being a model Dad, shopping for his kids. He's just such a lovely man, a model parent to his model family, and that's exactly what I'm reporting to Braunschweig.
Every other envoy: Head. Desk.
Still, Suhm doesn't seem to have done Saxony any good with FW. Perhaps he and Fritz were close already in 1727 (hopefully as father figure rather than erastes at this date!), and with FW's health, they hoped that his rising son connections would help any minute now?
Could be. After all, that's when Rottembourg is actually conspiring for a hot minute, so clearly in 1727, FW comes across as vulnerable either to illness or to being declared insane.
Good point about August possibly going over Flemming's head in insisting Suhm stays in Berlin (or rather returns there). Not least as a point of pride. (No one is kicking MY envoy out of the country.)
Re: Le Diable: The Political Biography - B
Date: 2021-03-14 04:09 pm (UTC)After all, that's when Rottembourg is actually conspiring for a hot minute, so clearly in 1727, FW comes across as vulnerable either to illness or to being declared insane.
Ah, yes, good catch on the chronology. 1727 is when Rottembourg is recalled for the last time, so the Suhm-hanging episode happened right during the conspiracy, yes!
But even if Fritz and Suhm are already close (and we know they are in 1728), Lynar got recalled from Russia, as I described in another comment today, and only sent back when his lover was actually in power, so they could totally have done that with Suhm.
Every other envoy: Head. Desk.
Stratemann: Hey! My tactics got us 3 marriages!
Every other envoy: A Pyrrhic victory at best.
rising son
I am entertained by my typo here.
August vs FW: Nobody kicks MY envoy out of the country
Date: 2021-03-14 09:05 pm (UTC)Thanks to my algorithms and their use of Google's infinitely more sophisticated algorithms, we have the following exchange between August and FW.
August to FW, March 28, 1727:
It was with the utmost astonishment that I learned from my Private War Adviser Suhm, my Envoy Extraordinary to Your Majesty's Court, in what manner Your Majesty had him say on the 22nd of the instant, by his Private Adviser Van Katsch, that he would be unhappy, and that one would use reprisals on him, if one executed the sentence of death pronounced against a criminal named Zuhm detained in Dresden; although this Declaration having been made by a present Private Adviser to Your Majesty, therefore in the most solemn manner, to said Suhm, there is no doubt that it has happened without the knowledge of Your Majesty.
In truth, I cannot understand how Your Majesty, whose profound and fair views are known to all the earth, could have taken a step so contrary to the Law and Use of Nations; & that she did not pay attention that the retaliation route cannot take place in relation to a legally convicted criminal, especially in the person of a Public Minister of a Power who is in friendship & at peace with Your Majesty. If Your Majesty had found it expedient to attack my Minister residing near him, I could with more reason have taken reprisals against his two Ministers who are at my Court, namely de Schwerin & Viebahn; that is why I made them declare, that I would not fail to act as appropriate. I therefore find myself obliged to pray to Your Majesty forever, to declare to myself amicably, and as a good neighbor, the nature of this affair, and what are his intentions in this regard. I expect on this a prompt & amicable reply from Your Majesty, & I am, &c.
FW to August, April 8, 1727:
I received the amicable Letter from Your Majesty of March 28, concerning what happened to your Private & War Consellier, who until now has resided at my Court as Envoy Extraordinary, & my Minister Katsch. I am very sorry that during the time that Your Majesty is occupied with the reestablishment of health, with which I take so much care, he was embarrassed by this affair, which could have been completed in a quarter of an hour to the satisfaction of the Sr. Suhm; if before his departure from here he had wanted to explain himself more fully. As soon as I was informed of the sensitivity of said Sr. Suhm & of his departure, I was instructed by my Minister Katsch of the state and consequences of this affair, & he assured me on my conscience (the the only witness he has of the truth on this occasion) that he absolutely did not use the expressions reported in Your Majesty's Letter, over and above that of reprisals which would be used against him; that he had not even thought of it; that in truth he had sorrows & sorrows only to receive the said Suhm in the event that some violence was used in the Lands of Your Majesty against the Officer, which could only be considered here as innocent, which the said Suhm will have interpreted in the way he tries to explain it, and to persuade your Majesty without any foundation. I beg Your Majesty to do me justice to believe, that I know too well what is due to the Character of a Minister of a Crowned Head, & especially to Your Majesty, for whom I have esteem & a particular road consideration, & with which the said Suhm was covered, & which I would not suffer that anything was done in my States against the Right of this Character. I flatter myself that your Majesty will be satisfied with this declaration, and that it will not dwell any longer on the disadvantageous judgment which has been formed; which will help to tighten even more the knots of friendship and good intelligence which is between Your Majesty and me; all the more so as I am resolved not to let any opportunity pass to testify to Your Majesty all that may be agreeable to him; & that I will always be with sincerity, &c.
Mauvillon writes: "The King of Poland not having found this Letter to be a sufficient satisfaction, wrote again the following one, with the intention of obtaining a less ambiguous one." April 19, 1727:
I have seen with appreciable pleasure, through the obliging Response which Your Majesty gave me, the assurances which it gives me of the part which he is taking in the full recovery of my health, and I am very obliged to him. I have not learned with less satisfaction that what happened between my Envoy Extraordinary of Suhm & his Minister Katsch happened, as I had suspected, without your knowledge. I have never doubted, also that Your Majesty knew perfectly what the Powers, who have reasons to live in good understanding together, owe to a Public Minister and to the Rights of Nations so inviolably guarded throughout Europe; & I have done justice on this to Your Majesty in a letter of 28. March last. But as it appears that the aforesaid Katsch took the name of Your Majesty in the inappropriate compliment he paid to the aforesaid Suhm (suppose I was not persuaded to the contrary) would it not have easily given rise to a great misunderstanding between us? although he denied this step in the presence of Your Majesty, changing something in the expressions. I therefore leave it to your Majesty to judge, if this Katsch is not all the more punishable, to have used this as an order that he did not have, and to have significantly offended me in the person of my Minister. I rest on the fraternal friendship of Your Majesty, that he herself feels for this unbearable conduct of your Minister, and that he will not fail to oblige him to make me a proportionate reparation, as well as to Sr. Suhm in particular, so that I may be able to send someone from my part to Your Majesty, to cultivate all the better the good intelligence that I wish to maintain on my side.
In the complete confidence in which I am that your Majesty will carry out this, I have given orders to deliver to Sr. de Schwerin his Letters of Appreciation which had been retained until now, & to declare to Sr. Viebahn that I do not will not deny him further hearing. I am &c.
I have definitely read somewhere that in the interests of keeping the peace, Katsch took the fall for FW here--Ah, yes, Carlyle says that. What, if anything, actually happened to Katsch, I don't know. (Perhaps
But yeah, August definitely wanted Suhm to go back, and possibly as a face-saving measure kept him there longer than he really should have (but with what delightful results for yours truly).
Re: August vs FW: Nobody kicks MY envoy out of the country
Date: 2021-03-15 12:49 pm (UTC)Not much, as far as I can tell. He'd had a whole lot of offices and was the closest to a minister of justice Prussia had at the time, in charge of the criminal college in Berlin for example, law reforms, and other related things. (Apparently FW also told him to have on eye on the conduct of his fellow ministers.) This 1977 bio entry says that he did indeed step down as minister in 1727 and was, by his own wish, succeeded by Cocceji. I can't say if that was related to the whole Saxony kerfuffle, though, because he was also quite old at that point, sixty-two, and subsequently died in 1729. But maybe it was a factor in the decision.
Also, to quote said bio entry: A glance at contemporary literature shows that he performed his office in the spirit of the king, whose views he knew to live like no other. Mild in private life, relentless in service, loyal to his king, without being called a favorite, K. was one of the most hated Prussian officials of his time alongside Creutz. After his death, the king lamented the loss of the “faithful man who served me out of love”.
And Wilhelmine apparently mentions him in her memoirs: "the bodily image of the unjust judge in the Gospel, a man who is accomplished in the art of twisting and turning everything, and the very willing creature of Grumbkow".
(Btw, I also saw that his widow was Countess Camas' predecessor as EC's Chief Court Mistress (until 1742).)
Re: August vs FW: Nobody kicks MY envoy out of the country
Date: 2021-03-15 10:13 pm (UTC)