did argue with Fritz about there being one floor at Sanssouci
Speaking of which, I skimmed some of the earlier parts of Manger's book - which contain a lot of building details of course - and noticed that he is not just critical of Fritz between the lines, but very openly, and rather opinionated in general. Case in point, he agrees with Knobelsdorff that at least a basement for Sanssouci would have been much better, not least for Fritz' health. He also tells a long anecdote about the sad fate of a worker and his family to conclude that Fritz' forbidding people to leave the country was a bad and detrimental decision, and thinks that Fritz blamed his own mistakes on others and sometimes listened to slander. Also, about himself again: he never got entrusted with architectural design work of his own, but adds that the King at least thought him adept enough to steal, which was "really a lot"! :P
One more detail regarding Fritz/Knobelsdorff: if the last meeting was indeed in 1750* instead of 1753, their conversation can't have been about the Berlin Gate, because that was built in 1752/53.
*Which might not be the case, see below.
Finally, on a very different note, a fun Potsdam Town Palace detail from Manger: Fritz had a bronze dragonhead for heating his writing cabinet. Since it didn't have a fireplace of its own, Fritz ordered Manger to install a furnace in a room underneath, based on a drawing of a Russian device he'd obtained, with a pipe that led the warm air into the cabinet and ended in said dragonhead. Photo! :D (in context)
Knobelsdorff was an enthusiastic collector of art, a fact unknown until the recent discovery of old inventory lists.[3] He bequeathed to his friend, Lieutenant Colonel von Keith, an extensive collection of paintings and engravings virtually unmatched in 18th century Berlin.
[3] = Martin Engel: Die Knobelsdorffsche Kunstsammlung. In: Tilo Eggeling, Ute-G. Weickardt (Hrsg): Zum Maler und zum großen Architekten geboren. Georg Wenzeslaus von Knobelsdorff, 1699–1753 The same guy wrote a 2001 dissertation (Das Forum Fridericianum in Berlin und die monumentalen Residenzplätze des 18. Jahrhunderts) which has lots of details about all the things Fritz (had) built in Berlin and how. It's long, so I just skimmed a bit, but he questions some of Manger's claims Fritz/Knobelsdorff claims and includes a nice timeline at the end, which shows that Knobelsdorff visited Fritz at least thrice in 1750 (including December) and once in August 1751 (all based on the Berlin newspaper recording the comings and goings). Fritz in his eulogy also says that Knobelsdorff was sick for a long time and went to Spa before his death in September 1753, so a last visit seem unlikely for 1750 and 1753 both?
Regarding Knobelsdorff's friendship with Peter, there's a mention of it in the main text, including that Peter was Knobelsdorff's successor in being responsible for the Tiergarten.
(Engel gives Denina's La Prusse Litteraire as a source on Peter, which has a couple pages (331ff) that seem to be a paraphrase of Formey's eulogy.)
Another Engel article I found (here) quotes Knobelsdorff's will, an addendum he made six days before his death no less: "alle meine Tableau, Kupferstiche, und Bibliothecke [...] legiere ich hiermit meinem guten Freund dem Obristlieutenant von Keith [...]".
So not just the paintings but also the library! I sure hope Engel didn't mistake one Lt.Col. for the other here, but given the possible Tiergarten/Charlottenburg/Academy connection, this would make a lot of sense. The question is just if the connection came first, maybe through the Academy - where Knobelsdorff was an honorary member, although he doesn't seem to have visited all that often, only a handful of times between 1747 and 1749 - and then Peter got the Charlottenburg/Tiergarten responsibility once Knobelsdorff died, or if he got it during Knobelsdorff's lifetime and that is how they became friends.
In addition to that, also in the dissertation: A 1755 letter from Peter to Fritz!
Oct. 17, 1755: Prompted by Lieutenant Colonel Peter Christoph Carl von Keith, the construction manager C. F. Richter made drawings and construction plans for the complete renovation of the Königsbrücke and Neustadtische Brücke [in Berlin]. The accompanying letter shows that Friedrich II spoke with Keith about the bridges in Berlin and asked how much it would cost to build such bridges out of stone:
„Sire, Votre Majesté ayant parlé il y a quelque temps des ponts de Berlin, et combien il en couteroit d’en faire de pierre, je me suis fait donner des desseins pour deux, l’un aupres de l’Opera, l’autre a la Porte Roiale, je prends la liberté de les envoier a Votre Majesté, avec l’estimation combien chaqu’un couteroit ou en pierre ordinaire ou revêtir de pierre de Taille, j’ai L’honneur d’etre avec le plûs profond respect Sire De Votre Majesté Le plus humble et plus obeisant serviteur Keith.“
(Source: Geh.St.A.: 1.HA,Rep.96,412,C1: Bl.38-46)
(Google Translation:
Sire, Your Majesty having spoken some time ago of the bridges of Berlin, and how much it would cost to make them out of stone, I had designs for two given to me, one at the Opera, the other at the Porte Roiale. I take the liberty of sending them to Your Majesty, with an estimate of how much each would cost either in ordinary stone or freestone. I have the honor to be with the deepest respect Sire Your Majesty's Most humble and obedient servant Keith.)
Alas, while the Keith/Knobelsdorff thing seems okay, see my comment to Selena below for some doubts I developed regarding the letter.
But! Selena's Gundling write-up pointed me towards the Berliner Adresskalender, which mentions Peter for the first time in 1744, as honorary Academy member, "ObristLieutnant und Stallmeister" (this stays the same until his death), living "in der Brüderstrasse in der Frau v. Kniphausen Hause". From 1748 on, he's listed under Curatores, living "in der Frau von Knyphausen Hause hinten am Wasser hinter der Brüderstrasse". (From 1755 on it's "his" house, without the Knyphausen mention, but the same description. And in 1756 someone actually crossed out his name! :() Now, I don't know if with his ascension to curator, they just updated his address from "Brüderstrasse" to a more exact "at the waterside behind Brüderstrasse", especially because the Knyphausen thing stays the same, but the latter is how one could roughly describe the position of the Jägerhof I guess.
Oh, if you are browsing through the Berliner Adresskalender - could you possibly check a) where Lehndorff lived in 1756, and b) whether he still lived there in 1759? Because yes, I'm still curious as to whether his wife was exposed to the phosphor inscription on the wallpaper. :) Mind you: given all the constant evacuations of the court to Magdeburg, there might not be a Kalender for the 7 Years War time, but maybe you could check?
Hm, for some reason, the pre-1757 issues only give military and administration/organization personnel, not the court officials. But I can tell you that 1757-1759, Lehndorff lived "an der Jägerbrücke in des Güther-Verwalter Schließers Hause" and from 1760 on he lived "hinterm Zeughause am Kupfergraben in des Kriegesrath Hn. Westphals Hause".
ETA: Oh, hey, additional 1759 info, "changes during printing": Lehndorf lived "in der Commendantenstrasse an der Ecke der Friedrichsbrücke in des Zelt-Schneider Pielers Hause" - he moved twice in 1759/60?
That is interesting, because Lehndorff says Jägerhof was given to Peter as a lifelong dwelling. Since it was the royal hunting lodge, I assumed it was given by Fritz directly to Peter. Now it's the Baroness's house? Well, there was the time Fritz apparently gave Peter money to give to the Baroness (hence in my fic), with the implication that it was also a gift for Peter, so...maybe Fritz just liked the Baroness? (Her late husband had been his go-between with French count Rottembourg during the "trying to overthrow FW" days, was in the pay of France according to Lavisse, and lost his job as minister in 1730 due to coming out on the wrong side of the marriage intrigues.)
So maybe it was after the Baroness died (1751 per Wikipedia, which makes it interesting that it's still "her" house until 1755) that Fritz said her son-in-law Peter could keep the house for his lifetime? And then Ariane, until Fritz needed it as a bank?
from "Brüderstrasse" to a more exact "at the waterside behind Brüderstrasse", especially because the Knyphausen thing stays the same, but the latter is how one could roughly describe the position of the Jägerhof I guess.
Yeah, that is odd. The Brüderstrasse is one block east of the water, Jägerhof one-two blocks west. So maybe you're right and they started trying to get it more precise.
nd noticed that he is not just critical of Fritz between the lines, but very openly, and rather opinionated in general
Good for Manger! It also makes him a rare outlier among the immediate rush of memoirs and anecdotes in the years after Fritz' death. I mean, Büsching reports on Old Fritz beating his servants when displeased, but in a German ancien regime context, that doesn't count as open critique. (I don't know when it became regarded as bad behavior to kick and hit your servants, let alone when it became illegal, but Prussia being Prussia, I'm sceptically eyeing WWI as the final date at least for Prussia actual (the other German states may have been better). Anyway, otherwise the general tone in 1786 - ca. 1795 publications is generally adoring or at least very pro. I think it's telling that in Nicolai's version of the Glasow tale, he has Fritz seeing through the truly evil culprit, Völker, and being strict but fair in his judgments. Reporting that Fritz could be prone to scapegoating for his own mistakes, flattery, and slander is something that Mitchell reports in his later dispatches to a very select audience in the British government, or Lehndorff in his diary, but other than Manger I can't think of another Prussian saying so in print at this specific time.
(Mind you, there were plenty of German writers ready to critisize Fritz in print some years earlier in his own life time, in the aftermath of De La Literature Allemande, on the general note of "polish your rusty armor and stop talking about things you have evidently no idea about", but that a death brings with it a period of uncritical praise isn't that surprising.) (And then, of course, as Napoleon happened, the glorification of the Fritz era became the balm to soothe the bruised national pride.)
Bronze dragon head: that's awesome and charming at the same time. And another loss to WWII, I guess, since they had to rebuild the Potsdam Palace (at least the outside) pretty much from scratch.
Now, the Kobelsdorff - Peter Keith friendship: what a fantastic discovery on your part! (And no, despite the plethora of Keiths in Fritz' life, I don't think there's a confusion here. The rank and the responsibilities all fit with the one and only Peter and no one else.) It is really marvelous how we've been able to flesh out Peter's post 1730 life and thus his personality over the last two years, when in biographies old and new he's pretty much just (foot)noted as "the other one". We knew he loved books and reading, now we know he must have loved the visual arts as well, since I doubt Knobelsdorff would have left his collection to an ignoramus who just uses it to impress people. Also, Lehndorff who is younger and generally tactful and amiable being impressed with Peter and liking him is one thing, but if someone older, notoriously prickly and not prone to mince words as Knobelsdorff also trusts and likes him (enough so to single him out in his last will), I think a case can be made of Peter being another who is good at being diplomatic (without, I hasten to add, being sycophantic or spineless).
a nice timeline at the end, which shows that Knobelsdorff visited Fritz at least thrice in 1750 (including December) and once in August 1751 (all based on the Berlin newspaper recording the comings and goings).
Those newspapers are really historians' friends (or should be). The German "Fritz and music" author whose book I read last year (not the American one Mildred just put in the library) also was able to disprove the "Fritz never attended any concerts after losing his ability to play the flute" legend through them, and Sabrow was able to trace Gundling and verify or disprove legends through them.
As to Fritz/Knobelsdorff and Manger being demonstrably wrong about the date of their last encounter and possibly being wrong about some other things: not that surprising, given the "Knobelsdorf was a member of the Küstrin garnison" claim (he's careful to say re: Knobelsdorff being the soldier with the candle, that "some people have told me", i.e. he doesn't claim this as a certaintly, but Knobelsdorff serving in Küstrin is reported as a fact, and that seems to be completely wrong, too, since I've seen elsewhere he did serve under the Old Dessauer before quitting the service. (The Küstrin Garnison was part of Schwerin's overall command, wasn't it?) Manger also has Fredersdorf faking a serious illness in order to get Fritz' permission to marry and being married poste haste accordingly, only to immediately recover, which, it's worth repeating, is refuted by Lehndorff mentioning the future Mrs. Fredersdorf as Fredersdorf's fiancee nearly a year before the actual marriage (and knowing the King's promised wedding gift), and doesn't fit with the one and only letter from Fritz to Fredersdorf where she's mentioned (as the nurse), either (which only shows that Fredesdorf is ill at the time, but he was ill pretty much all of the time in the 1750s, and it's not treated as something new in the letter, nor will it be something Fredersdorf magically recovers from post marriage). Conclusion: there are a couple of unreliable stories there. Now I don't think Manger invented them, they probably reflect the gossip of the time, he's heard them himself, but I doubt it's a coincidence they are about people he probably only saw from afar, if it all, from 1753 onwards when he joined the Baukontor. Whereas with Fritz he can write about personal experience, and presty, a more authentic ring.
I suspect so, given that it wasn't mobile like some other interiors that were stored elsewhere. Probably melted when the Palace burned down.
someone older, notoriously prickly and not prone to mince words as Knobelsdorff also trusts and likes him (enough so to single him out in his last will), I think a case can be made of Peter being another who is good at being diplomatic
You know what I had to think of? Lehndorff's mention of Peter's "English manners". If, as Fritz says in his eulogy, Knobelsdorff regarded courtesy/social trappings ("complaisance" in the French original) as an inconvenience, he might have liked it if Peter had a more direct style perhaps.
BUT. re: confusion of Keiths. While I think the Knobelsdorff/Keith friendship is probably sound, Engel might have misattributed the letter to Peter! Because I just googled the ending phrase - "De Votre Majesté Le plus humble et plus obéissant serviteur Keith" - and found a different letter from JAMES Keith that ended exactly like that. James Keith, whom Fritz made governor of Berlin in 1749, and who therefore might have had a reason to talk about bridges with Fritz as well. It's possible that the papers in the state archive records identify Peter by more than just "Keith", but if the letter is all there is? Hm. Huge grain of salt here.
Well, in that case, I agree that James as the letter writer sounds more likely, but the main issue to me is the Knobelsdorff/Keith connection.
English manners: could be! It's a shame for this reason, too, that Peter died a few months after Mitchell arrived; I bet they'd have gotten along, too.
j’ai l’honneur d’etre avec le respect le plûs profond Sire De Votre Majesté Le plus humble et plus obeissant serviteur Keith.
Which is pretty long to be almost identical, even given 18th century formulas. I'm betting on James, then, especially if he was governor of Berlin. Alas!
You know what I had to think of? Lehndorff's mention of Peter's "English manners". If, as Fritz says in his eulogy, Knobelsdorff regarded courtesy/social trappings ("complaisance" in the French original) as an inconvenience, he might have liked it if Peter had a more direct style perhaps.
I like this hypothesis! Particularly if Keith, as Lehndorff indicates, was nice and friendly and not confrontational in the content of what he said, he just phrased things in an English (more direct) way. I could see Knobelsdorff getting along with someone like that. (Especially if Peter didn't tell him how to do his job. :P)
You know what I had to think of? Lehndorff's mention of Peter's "English manners". If, as Fritz says in his eulogy, Knobelsdorff regarded courtesy/social trappings ("complaisance" in the French original) as an inconvenience, he might have liked it if Peter had a more direct style perhaps.
Oh, I like this! I can attest that for some people direct styles are helpful *ducks* and this seems very plausible.
It also makes him a rare outlier among the immediate rush of memoirs and anecdotes in the years after Fritz' death.
True, I hadn't picked up on that little detail in the sea of Fritz criticism out there. ;)
And no, despite the plethora of Keiths in Fritz' life, I don't think there's a confusion here. The rank and the responsibilities all fit with the one and only Peter and no one else.
As I noted elsewhere, there is a Lt. Col. Keith in Fritz's circle at this time, and he married Suhm's daughter, and we know nothing about his interests or lack thereof in the visual arts. The Academy and Tiergarten connections are the only bit of evidence that make me lean toward Peter. But I want it to be Peter, so I hope so!
It is really marvelous how we've been able to flesh out Peter's post 1730 life and thus his personality over the last two years, when in biographies old and new he's pretty much just (foot)noted as "the other one".
I agree! And we still have yet to get those letters from the archive. :) (I hope they're actually from Peter; I am increasingly not placing 100% confidence in archival descriptions.)
His father's hunting lodges and hunting grounds became deserted [because Fritz didn't like hunting], and the care of the game began to cease. Against this a commission was set up, consisting of the Landjägermeister v. Schwerin [Hans Bogislav by the way, brother of the field marshall], lieutenant colonel v. Keith and the sur-intendant v. Knobelsdorff to make suggestions for converting the Tiergarten into a tasteful pleasure forest, according to which Knobelsdorff should design the facilities. For this purpose, the entire forest terrain was surveyed in 1742, the extent of which was determined to be 820 acres.
and later:
... Raumer says about the creation of this establishment: Lieutenant Colonel v. Keith, who after Knobelsdorff's death was in charge of the management of the Charlottenburg Palace Gardens, of the avenues and plantations in the Tiergarten during the years 1754 and 1755, had some old furniture from that palace sold in order to use the proceeds to build a mulberry plantation on the empty space at the confluence of the Landwehrgraben and the Spree, whereby the Tiergartenpflanzkasse should receive an income. The plantation created by the Planteur Sello only existed for a few years, ...
Neither Meyer nor Raumer mention the name Peter and usually I'd suspect possible confusion of Keiths, but together with the Lehndorff info, the second part at least make perfect sense. The first one, though! That must have been very early, 1741/42, and that would be brand-new information if that was Peter already. But it could explain how he and Knobelsdorff became friends.
In the preface, Raumer says he collected information from books and handwritten sources and he does quote a couple of cabinet orders from Fritz to Schwerin verbatim for example, so he must indeed have had access to something. But 1840 is where this train stops so far.
(Raumer also mentions the Jägerhof by the way (at the Schinkenplatz, which is correct, if colloquial), and that it was turned into a bank in 1765, but to heighten the confusion, there's no mention of Keith at all, on the contrary, he says that the Oberjägermeister was still living there. *throws up hands* Given the info from the address calendar, which seems to place Peter's house on the other side of the water, too, I'm maybe possibly doubting Lehndorff a bit here? Or maybe there were several buildings? *throws up hands again*)
More tomorrow, but yes, I'm more leaning toward it being Peter now. Which is interesting in 1741/2!
Given the info from the address calendar, which seems to place Peter's house on the other side of the water, too, I'm maybe possibly doubting Lehndorff a bit here?
Yeah, it's odd. But as I remember, Lehndorff's specific about Ariane getting a pension from Fritz in 1765 because he turned her house into a bank, and I researched the Jägerhof at the time enough to know *exactly* what building was turned into a bank, and...see if Daheim in the library tells you anything useful. It's been a while since we read it. The details in Google Drive should tell you what page to look on--I annotate the docs that are long and contain only a single piece relevant to us.
For Lehndorff and Jägershof, see my reply to Mildred below. Otherwise, awesome research is awesome! I really think it's very unlikely that we're dealing with Other Keith(s) here,as opposed to Peter meeting and befriending Knobelsdorff this way, which also, btw, explains why he got the Tiergarten job after Knobelsdorff's death in the first place - if this was all him, he'd be a natural successor.
Btw, I could see one explanation how Peter so relatively soon after his return from exile got on a team wo figure out what to do with the Tiergarten - as far as I know, the converting of a former royal hunting ground into a public park and then the landscaping of same had happened in England already, and one prominent example just in time for Peter to observe. To quote wiki on Hyde Park: The first coherent landscaping in Hyde Park began in 1726. It was undertaken by Charles Bridgeman for King George I, but following the king's death the following year, it continued with approval of his daughter-in-law, Queen Caroline. Work was undertaken under the supervision of Charles Withers, the Surveyor-General of Woods and Forests. The principal effect of the work was to sub-divide Hyde Park and create Kensington Gardens. The Serpentine was formed by damming the River Westbourne, which runs through the park from Kilburn towards the Thames. It is divided from the Long Water by a bridge designed by George Rennie in 1826.
The work was completed in 1733. The 2nd Viscount Weymouth was made Ranger of Hyde Park in 1739 and shortly after began digging the Serpentine lakes at Longleat.
So, until we find something out about Suhm's post-mortem son-in-law that sounds like he hung out with Knobelsdorff, Peter & Knobelsdorff bffness shall be canon. :)
It also makes him a rare outlier among the immediate rush of memoirs and anecdotes in the years after Fritz' death.
True, I hadn't picked up on that little detail in the sea of Fritz criticism out there. ;)
Ha. If you want to know the extent to which Manger is an outlier in the flood of publications after the the death des Einzigen Königs, look no further than the dedication of his building history of Potsdam. For the first volume of Manger's book opens with a dedication to FW2, and the words, after FW2's titles: "The first day of your royal majesty's glorious government was to me a day of supreme delight! For in place of the previous fears, I received the assurance of your highnesses mercy and favor."
The first day was, of course, the day Fritz died (early in the morning). Tell us how you really feel, Manger.
It is really marvelous how we've been able to flesh out Peter's post 1730 life and thus his personality over the last two years, when in biographies old and new he's pretty much just (foot)noted as "the other one".
On my long Rheinsberg to-do list is a proper biographical essay of Peter. I'm dumping everything we find into the existing Keiths post, but it's unreadable and is there just so I can double-check info when I need it. At some point, I would like to create something readable collecting everything we've found.
/Your friend, an American scholar who is currently studying Peter Keith. :D
Oh, felis, I think that exchange took place outside salon. When Selena was in the Katte crypt in Wust last year, she had to explain why she was taking 45 pictures of all angles and making sure to get one of everything with any kind of text on it, no matter how much she had to kneel down and lean over and use a smaller camera to access it. And since she couldn't say, "For my friend, who ships Fritz/Katte," to the local historian/tour guide, she said, "For my friend, an American scholar who is currently studying the Katte family."
This NEVER CEASES to be utterly hilarious to me. I'm an American! I'm a scholar! I'm studying the Katte family! And yet that sentence is utterly misleading while being 100% factually true. :D
I mean, not that I, as an independent scholar by night, don't fantasize about publishing a Peter Keith biographical essay, a "Catt is a lying liar who lies, LIKE KOSER SAID," essay, and following it up with our "Fritz was a lying liar who lied to Katte to get him to help with the escape plan" findings, but...I fantasize about writing as many scholarly articles as I do fanfics, and I end up completing and publishing 0.01% of them.
So the "American scholar who is currently studying" line is going to be a running joke for a while. ;)
We knew he loved books and reading, now we know he must have loved the visual arts as well, since I doubt Knobelsdorff would have left his collection to an ignoramus who just uses it to impress people.
Agreed! And don't forget, he loved experimental science too. Did some in Ireland, and I'm sure that played a role in his honorary Academy membership.
We knew he loved books and reading, now we know he must have loved the visual arts as well, since I doubt Knobelsdorff would have left his collection to an ignoramus who just uses it to impress people.
I just turned up something in the inventory of his rooms in Wesel in 1730:
eine süßklingende Flöte („Flothe douce“) eine Querflöte („Flothe Traversière“)
So two flutes! Being an 18th century nobleman, Peter having an instrument doesn't surprise me, and being a boyfriend of Fritz, it being a flute doesn't surprise me. Since we have no mention of him and music later, either his interest didn't make it into our admittedly very limited sources on him (e.g. the visual arts have *just* turned up), or, as I speculatively put in my fic, he tried out music but was never talented (or merely passionate, as Fritz was about poetry) enough to become notably good at it. (Look, I want *one* of these characters to not be passionate and/or talented when it comes to music so I can relate, okay? :P Yes, Ulrike, but I haven't written fic about her.)
But man, I need to go study German so I can read Kloosterhuis beginning to end someday. I know there are all sorts of things in there waiting for me.
Well, FW isn't passionate about music (when not Händel as played by a tall oboist). *g*
Also, what about your guy Suhm? Now you've read the letters and I haven't, so: does he ever bring up musicians he recs to Fritz, or scores, or anything like that? Because I don't recall him being mentioned as a musical patron anywhere, including Exner's dissertation.
And of course, Heinrich was passionate about music but as a player never more than okay.
Lehndorff occasionally mentions a good musician he notices, and not just the celebrities - for example, he actually names Mara as a teen in AW's employ just before the war - but plays no instrument himself, and he never talks about music with the fondness he has for reading and books, so I think while grown of age in a court dominated by a very musical royal family, he absorbed enough to like the occasional concert, but he really is more into literture and non-musical theatre, and he's never been motivated to play himself.
Oh, and I don't think EC was musical (though trying her best in the 1730s with taking lessons in anything Fritz liked). She painted a bit throughout her life, but she never was any musician's patron that I recall, and Lehndorff never mentions her playing.
ETA: re: Peter and the flutes - did you consider they might not have been for himself but for Fritz? After all, Fritz might not have been able to take a flute or several with him when travelling with Dad and strictly supervised. In that case, though, Peter leaving them behind would argue he left in a hurry.
thinks that Fritz blamed his own mistakes on others
Blame mistakes on other people??? (or his flute?) Our Fritz WOULD NEVER! :P
Thank you for the dragon picture! It reminds me of Wilhelmine saying "We all smoked like dragons." :)
Dissertation now in the library!
Having seen your other comments, I agree that there are a plethora of other Keiths around, including a Lt. Col. Sir Robert Keith, son of this guy but without a wiki page of his own, who was ADC to Fritz and who was a lt. col. when he married Suhm's daughter in 1750. So if we don't have a lot of direct evidence that it's Peter, I'm going to reluctantly put a question mark next to the identification. But it might be Peter!
The strongest connection so far seems to be the Tiergarten and the Academy.
and then Peter got the Charlottenburg/Tiergarten responsibility once Knobelsdorff died, or if he got it during Knobelsdorff's lifetime and that is how they became friends.
Interestingly, the earliest mention of Peter in connection with the Tiergarten that I'm aware of is February, 1754. Now, granted, that's an argument from silence, and Lehndorff certainly doesn't consider it his duty to posterity to give us a blow-by-blow of Peter's life, but combined with the fact that Knobelsdorff died in September 1753 and Peter's supposed to have been his successor according to Engel, I'm inclined to think Lehndorff sounds like he's reporting a recent development: "Diner bei der Königin mit Keith, dem der König die Aussicht über den Tiergarten anvertraut hat." (Next sentence: "Es ist ein sehr liebenswürdiger Mann." <3)
For now, I'm going with Peter getting it after Knobelsdorff died, which means, alas, that my fic is slightly more AU than it was yesterday (I went with 1751 instead of late 1753/early 1754). ;)
Engel gives Denina's La Prusse Litteraire as a source on Peter, which has a couple pages (331ff) that seem to be a paraphrase of Formey's eulogy.
Meant to say, thank you for this! At the end it has a couple things on his son that were in Formey's future. One I'd seen but didn't have a source for: namely that the son of Peter who was an envoy to Turin in 1776-1777 (the one I've seen three different first names for) lived a life entirely retired from society after withdrawing from politics. Now I have a 1790 source for that! So it's looking quite likely. I also learned that he hadn't married as of 1790. Since he's in his mid-forties, it's just possible that he did eventually marry, but looking less likely.
Still no idea about the other son, not even a death date. The last I hear of him, Ariane was taking him to join his brother at university circa 1760.
Oh, Denina also says Envoy Son was, albeit withdrawn from society, nevertheless attached to the Prussian minister of foreign affairs. That seems to be this Hertzberg, who's shown up a couple times in salon.
Oh, lol, he has some correspondence with Fritz in Trier, in 1779-1781, and just from my quick glance at the French, they are, you guessed it, arguing about the virtues of German vs. French. Fritz is being very...Fritzian. :'D
ETA: Oh, yeah, his wiki page says, "In 1780 he boldly took up the defence of German literature, which had been disparaged by Frederick the Great in his famous writing De la literature allemande."
Polish your rusty armor and stop talking about things you have no idea about, Fritz. :P (Except don't, I love your flaws as much as your virtues, that's why you're endlessly fascinating to me...from a safe distance. But if you come into my house and start telling me how to administer databases, you will see Knobelsdorff has nothing on me when it comes to dispensing with social niceties. :P (CorporateAU!Heinrich is gritting his teeth right now.))
So anyway, Hertzberg + Envoy Son of Peter = BFFs. Probably a connection that helped get Envoy Son that envoy position.
(Hertzberg shows up in Ziebura during FW2's reign, doesn't he? Or am I thinking of someone else?)
Hertzberg does indeed; he and Heinrich hated each other's guts, and Hertzberg was one of the key factors why FW2 froze Heinrich out politically pretty much from the get go. He even tried to make trouble on a personal, non political level when it came to Fritz' legacy. Now, FW, as early as 1733, had put it in writing in a donation act dated September 1st 1733 that if AW or his descendants became King, Wusterhausen (until then a crown possession) would go to Heinrich, and if Heinrich died without children, to Ferdinand and his children. Fritz did nothing to gainsay that, but Hertzberg told FW2 that this was vague enough and Wusterhausen should remain with the crown. FW2 showed that letter to Heinrich, who commented the intention of the author was easily discernable, i.e. enstrange him and his nephew, and since he, Heinrich had no children, he'd never sue his beloved nephew and would of course step back, despite the fact that FW's intentions re: Wusterhausen had been legally clear. That basically did it in terms of Wusterhausen. But not so much in terms of politics. (Looking up Ziebura again for this, btw, shows me that Lehndorff, who'd always liked FW2 a lot, had come to Berlin and like Heinrich had hoped to a return to office (well not Queen's Chamberlain office! an interesting office!), but was also sent home disappointed, and I guess (Ziebura doesn't say so) this might have been because he was known as Heinrich's friend and Hertzberg, Bischofswerder and possibly FW2 himself were paranoid about Heinrich making a power grabbing move.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-18 10:34 pm (UTC)Speaking of which, I skimmed some of the earlier parts of Manger's book - which contain a lot of building details of course - and noticed that he is not just critical of Fritz between the lines, but very openly, and rather opinionated in general. Case in point, he agrees with Knobelsdorff that at least a basement for Sanssouci would have been much better, not least for Fritz' health. He also tells a long anecdote about the sad fate of a worker and his family to conclude that Fritz' forbidding people to leave the country was a bad and detrimental decision, and thinks that Fritz blamed his own mistakes on others and sometimes listened to slander. Also, about himself again: he never got entrusted with architectural design work of his own, but adds that the King at least thought him adept enough to steal, which was "really a lot"! :P
One more detail regarding Fritz/Knobelsdorff: if the last meeting was indeed in 1750* instead of 1753, their conversation can't have been about the Berlin Gate, because that was built in 1752/53.
*Which might not be the case, see below.
Finally, on a very different note, a fun Potsdam Town Palace detail from Manger: Fritz had a bronze dragonhead for heating his writing cabinet. Since it didn't have a fireplace of its own, Fritz ordered Manger to install a furnace in a room underneath, based on a drawing of a Russian device he'd obtained, with a pipe that led the warm air into the cabinet and ended in said dragonhead. Photo! :D (in context)
--
Speaking of Knobelsdorff's Wiki, though:
Knobelsdorff was an enthusiastic collector of art, a fact unknown until the recent discovery of old inventory lists.[3] He bequeathed to his friend, Lieutenant Colonel von Keith, an extensive collection of paintings and engravings virtually unmatched in 18th century Berlin.
[3] = Martin Engel: Die Knobelsdorffsche Kunstsammlung. In: Tilo Eggeling, Ute-G. Weickardt (Hrsg): Zum Maler und zum großen Architekten geboren. Georg Wenzeslaus von Knobelsdorff, 1699–1753
The same guy wrote a 2001 dissertation (Das Forum Fridericianum in Berlin und die monumentalen Residenzplätze des 18. Jahrhunderts) which has lots of details about all the things Fritz (had) built in Berlin and how. It's long, so I just skimmed a bit, but he questions some of Manger's claims Fritz/Knobelsdorff claims and includes a nice timeline at the end, which shows that Knobelsdorff visited Fritz at least thrice in 1750 (including December) and once in August 1751 (all based on the Berlin newspaper recording the comings and goings). Fritz in his eulogy also says that Knobelsdorff was sick for a long time and went to Spa before his death in September 1753, so a last visit seem unlikely for 1750 and 1753 both?
Regarding Knobelsdorff's friendship with Peter, there's a mention of it in the main text, including that Peter was Knobelsdorff's successor in being responsible for the Tiergarten.
(Engel gives Denina's La Prusse Litteraire as a source on Peter, which has a couple pages (331ff) that seem to be a paraphrase of Formey's eulogy.)
Another Engel article I found (here) quotes Knobelsdorff's will, an addendum he made six days before his death no less: "alle meine Tableau, Kupferstiche, und Bibliothecke [...] legiere ich hiermit meinem guten Freund dem Obristlieutenant von Keith [...]".
So not just the paintings but also the library! I sure hope Engel didn't mistake one Lt.Col. for the other here, but given the possible Tiergarten/Charlottenburg/Academy connection, this would make a lot of sense. The question is just if the connection came first, maybe through the Academy - where Knobelsdorff was an honorary member, although he doesn't seem to have visited all that often, only a handful of times between 1747 and 1749 - and then Peter got the Charlottenburg/Tiergarten responsibility once Knobelsdorff died, or if he got it during Knobelsdorff's lifetime and that is how they became friends.
In addition to that, also in the dissertation: A 1755 letter from Peter to Fritz!
Oct. 17, 1755: Prompted by Lieutenant Colonel Peter Christoph Carl von Keith, the construction manager C. F. Richter made drawings and construction plans for the complete renovation of the Königsbrücke and Neustadtische Brücke [in Berlin]. The accompanying letter shows that Friedrich II spoke with Keith about the bridges in Berlin and asked how much it would cost to build such bridges out of stone:
„Sire,
Votre Majesté ayant parlé il y a quelque temps des ponts de Berlin, et combien il en couteroit d’en faire de pierre, je me suis fait donner des desseins pour deux, l’un aupres de l’Opera, l’autre a la Porte Roiale, je prends la liberté de les envoier a Votre Majesté, avec l’estimation combien chaqu’un couteroit ou en pierre ordinaire ou revêtir de pierre de Taille, j’ai L’honneur d’etre avec le plûs profond respect
Sire
De Votre Majesté
Le plus humble et plus obeisant serviteur
Keith.“
(Source: Geh.St.A.: 1.HA,Rep.96,412,C1: Bl.38-46)
(Google Translation:
Sire,
Your Majesty having spoken some time ago of the bridges of Berlin, and how much it would cost to make them out of stone, I had designs for two given to me, one at the Opera, the other at the Porte Roiale. I take the liberty of sending them to Your Majesty, with an estimate of how much each would cost either in ordinary stone or freestone. I have the honor to be with the deepest respect
Sire
Your Majesty's
Most humble and obedient servant
Keith.)
!
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-18 11:55 pm (UTC)Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 11:16 am (UTC)But! Selena's Gundling write-up pointed me towards the Berliner Adresskalender, which mentions Peter for the first time in 1744, as honorary Academy member, "ObristLieutnant und Stallmeister" (this stays the same until his death), living "in der Brüderstrasse in der Frau v. Kniphausen Hause". From 1748 on, he's listed under Curatores, living "in der Frau von Knyphausen Hause hinten am Wasser hinter der Brüderstrasse". (From 1755 on it's "his" house, without the Knyphausen mention, but the same description. And in 1756 someone actually crossed out his name! :() Now, I don't know if with his ascension to curator, they just updated his address from "Brüderstrasse" to a more exact "at the waterside behind Brüderstrasse", especially because the Knyphausen thing stays the same, but the latter is how one could roughly describe the position of the Jägerhof I guess.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 04:11 pm (UTC)Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 04:48 pm (UTC)ETA: Oh, hey, additional 1759 info, "changes during printing": Lehndorf lived "in der Commendantenstrasse an der Ecke der Friedrichsbrücke in des Zelt-Schneider Pielers Hause" - he moved twice in 1759/60?
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 05:05 pm (UTC)So maybe it was after the Baroness died (1751 per Wikipedia, which makes it interesting that it's still "her" house until 1755) that Fritz said her son-in-law Peter could keep the house for his lifetime? And then Ariane, until Fritz needed it as a bank?
from "Brüderstrasse" to a more exact "at the waterside behind Brüderstrasse", especially because the Knyphausen thing stays the same, but the latter is how one could roughly describe the position of the Jägerhof I guess.
Yeah, that is odd. The Brüderstrasse is one block east of the water, Jägerhof one-two blocks west. So maybe you're right and they started trying to get it more precise.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 07:42 am (UTC)Good for Manger! It also makes him a rare outlier among the immediate rush of memoirs and anecdotes in the years after Fritz' death. I mean, Büsching reports on Old Fritz beating his servants when displeased, but in a German ancien regime context, that doesn't count as open critique. (I don't know when it became regarded as bad behavior to kick and hit your servants, let alone when it became illegal, but Prussia being Prussia, I'm sceptically eyeing WWI as the final date at least for Prussia actual (the other German states may have been better). Anyway, otherwise the general tone in 1786 - ca. 1795 publications is generally adoring or at least very pro. I think it's telling that in Nicolai's version of the Glasow tale, he has Fritz seeing through the truly evil culprit, Völker, and being strict but fair in his judgments. Reporting that Fritz could be prone to scapegoating for his own mistakes, flattery, and slander is something that Mitchell reports in his later dispatches to a very select audience in the British government, or Lehndorff in his diary, but other than Manger I can't think of another Prussian saying so in print at this specific time.
(Mind you, there were plenty of German writers ready to critisize Fritz in print some years earlier in his own life time, in the aftermath of De La Literature Allemande, on the general note of "polish your rusty armor and stop talking about things you have evidently no idea about", but that a death brings with it a period of uncritical praise isn't that surprising.) (And then, of course, as Napoleon happened, the glorification of the Fritz era became the balm to soothe the bruised national pride.)
Bronze dragon head: that's awesome and charming at the same time. And another loss to WWII, I guess, since they had to rebuild the Potsdam Palace (at least the outside) pretty much from scratch.
Now, the Kobelsdorff - Peter Keith friendship: what a fantastic discovery on your part! (And no, despite the plethora of Keiths in Fritz' life, I don't think there's a confusion here. The rank and the responsibilities all fit with the one and only Peter and no one else.) It is really marvelous how we've been able to flesh out Peter's post 1730 life and thus his personality over the last two years, when in biographies old and new he's pretty much just (foot)noted as "the other one". We knew he loved books and reading, now we know he must have loved the visual arts as well, since I doubt Knobelsdorff would have left his collection to an ignoramus who just uses it to impress people. Also, Lehndorff who is younger and generally tactful and amiable being impressed with Peter and liking him is one thing, but if someone older, notoriously prickly and not prone to mince words as Knobelsdorff also trusts and likes him (enough so to single him out in his last will), I think a case can be made of Peter being another who is good at being diplomatic (without, I hasten to add, being sycophantic or spineless).
a nice timeline at the end, which shows that Knobelsdorff visited Fritz at least thrice in 1750 (including December) and once in August 1751 (all based on the Berlin newspaper recording the comings and goings).
Those newspapers are really historians' friends (or should be). The German "Fritz and music" author whose book I read last year (not the American one Mildred just put in the library) also was able to disprove the "Fritz never attended any concerts after losing his ability to play the flute" legend through them, and Sabrow was able to trace Gundling and verify or disprove legends through them.
As to Fritz/Knobelsdorff and Manger being demonstrably wrong about the date of their last encounter and possibly being wrong about some other things: not that surprising, given the "Knobelsdorf was a member of the Küstrin garnison" claim (he's careful to say re: Knobelsdorff being the soldier with the candle, that "some people have told me", i.e. he doesn't claim this as a certaintly, but Knobelsdorff serving in Küstrin is reported as a fact, and that seems to be completely wrong, too, since I've seen elsewhere he did serve under the Old Dessauer before quitting the service. (The Küstrin Garnison was part of Schwerin's overall command, wasn't it?) Manger also has Fredersdorf faking a serious illness in order to get Fritz' permission to marry and being married poste haste accordingly, only to immediately recover, which, it's worth repeating, is refuted by Lehndorff mentioning the future Mrs. Fredersdorf as Fredersdorf's fiancee nearly a year before the actual marriage (and knowing the King's promised wedding gift), and doesn't fit with the one and only letter from Fritz to Fredersdorf where she's mentioned (as the nurse), either (which only shows that Fredesdorf is ill at the time, but he was ill pretty much all of the time in the 1750s, and it's not treated as something new in the letter, nor will it be something Fredersdorf magically recovers from post marriage). Conclusion: there are a couple of unreliable stories there. Now I don't think Manger invented them, they probably reflect the gossip of the time, he's heard them himself, but I doubt it's a coincidence they are about people he probably only saw from afar, if it all, from 1753 onwards when he joined the Baukontor. Whereas with Fritz he can write about personal experience, and presty, a more authentic ring.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith! -- or not?
Date: 2021-03-19 10:59 am (UTC)I suspect so, given that it wasn't mobile like some other interiors that were stored elsewhere. Probably melted when the Palace burned down.
someone older, notoriously prickly and not prone to mince words as Knobelsdorff also trusts and likes him (enough so to single him out in his last will), I think a case can be made of Peter being another who is good at being diplomatic
You know what I had to think of? Lehndorff's mention of Peter's "English manners". If, as Fritz says in his eulogy, Knobelsdorff regarded courtesy/social trappings ("complaisance" in the French original) as an inconvenience, he might have liked it if Peter had a more direct style perhaps.
BUT. re: confusion of Keiths. While I think the Knobelsdorff/Keith friendship is probably sound, Engel might have misattributed the letter to Peter! Because I just googled the ending phrase - "De Votre Majesté Le plus humble et plus obéissant serviteur Keith" - and found a different letter from JAMES Keith that ended exactly like that. James Keith, whom Fritz made governor of Berlin in 1749, and who therefore might have had a reason to talk about bridges with Fritz as well. It's possible that the papers in the state archive records identify Peter by more than just "Keith", but if the letter is all there is? Hm. Huge grain of salt here.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith! -- or not?
Date: 2021-03-19 04:09 pm (UTC)English manners: could be! It's a shame for this reason, too, that Peter died a few months after Mitchell arrived; I bet they'd have gotten along, too.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith! -- or not?
Date: 2021-03-19 04:35 pm (UTC)j’ai l’honneur d’etre avec le respect le plûs profond
Sire
De Votre Majesté
Le plus humble et plus obeissant serviteur
Keith.
Which is pretty long to be almost identical, even given 18th century formulas. I'm betting on James, then, especially if he was governor of Berlin. Alas!
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith! -- or not?
Date: 2021-03-19 04:39 pm (UTC)I like this hypothesis! Particularly if Keith, as Lehndorff indicates, was nice and friendly and not confrontational in the content of what he said, he just phrased things in an English (more direct) way. I could see Knobelsdorff getting along with someone like that. (Especially if Peter didn't tell him how to do his job. :P)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith! -- or not?
Date: 2021-03-21 05:17 am (UTC)Oh, I like this! I can attest that for some people direct styles are helpful *ducks* and this seems very plausible.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 07:24 pm (UTC)True, I hadn't picked up on that little detail in the sea of Fritz criticism out there. ;)
And no, despite the plethora of Keiths in Fritz' life, I don't think there's a confusion here. The rank and the responsibilities all fit with the one and only Peter and no one else.
As I noted elsewhere, there is a Lt. Col. Keith in Fritz's circle at this time, and he married Suhm's daughter, and we know nothing about his interests or lack thereof in the visual arts. The Academy and Tiergarten connections are the only bit of evidence that make me lean toward Peter. But I want it to be Peter, so I hope so!
It is really marvelous how we've been able to flesh out Peter's post 1730 life and thus his personality over the last two years, when in biographies old and new he's pretty much just (foot)noted as "the other one".
I agree! And we still have yet to get those letters from the archive. :) (I hope they're actually from Peter; I am increasingly not placing 100% confidence in archival descriptions.)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 12:54 am (UTC)A Tiergarten history by Meyer, from 1892, says:
His father's hunting lodges and hunting grounds became deserted [because Fritz didn't like hunting], and the care of the game began to cease. Against this a commission was set up, consisting of the Landjägermeister v. Schwerin [Hans Bogislav by the way, brother of the field marshall], lieutenant colonel v. Keith and the sur-intendant v. Knobelsdorff to make suggestions for converting the Tiergarten into a tasteful pleasure forest, according to which Knobelsdorff should design the facilities. For this purpose, the entire forest terrain was surveyed in 1742, the extent of which was determined to be 820 acres.
and later:
... Raumer says about the creation of this establishment: Lieutenant Colonel v. Keith, who after Knobelsdorff's death was in charge of the management of the Charlottenburg Palace Gardens, of the avenues and plantations in the Tiergarten during the years 1754 and 1755, had some old furniture from that palace sold in order to use the proceeds to build a mulberry plantation on the empty space at the confluence of the Landwehrgraben and the Spree, whereby the Tiergartenpflanzkasse should receive an income. The plantation created by the Planteur Sello only existed for a few years, ...
Raumer = this even earlier Tiergarten history from 1840, which does indeed mention both the early commission and the second story about Keith in charge and the mulberry plantation.
Neither Meyer nor Raumer mention the name Peter and usually I'd suspect possible confusion of Keiths, but together with the Lehndorff info, the second part at least make perfect sense.
The first one, though! That must have been very early, 1741/42, and that would be brand-new information if that was Peter already. But it could explain how he and Knobelsdorff became friends.
In the preface, Raumer says he collected information from books and handwritten sources and he does quote a couple of cabinet orders from Fritz to Schwerin verbatim for example, so he must indeed have had access to something. But 1840 is where this train stops so far.
(Raumer also mentions the Jägerhof by the way (at the Schinkenplatz, which is correct, if colloquial), and that it was turned into a bank in 1765, but to heighten the confusion, there's no mention of Keith at all, on the contrary, he says that the Oberjägermeister was still living there. *throws up hands* Given the info from the address calendar, which seems to place Peter's house on the other side of the water, too, I'm maybe possibly doubting Lehndorff a bit here? Or maybe there were several buildings? *throws up hands again*)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 01:33 am (UTC)Given the info from the address calendar, which seems to place Peter's house on the other side of the water, too, I'm maybe possibly doubting Lehndorff a bit here?
Yeah, it's odd. But as I remember, Lehndorff's specific about Ariane getting a pension from Fritz in 1765 because he turned her house into a bank, and I researched the Jägerhof at the time enough to know *exactly* what building was turned into a bank, and...see if Daheim in the library tells you anything useful. It's been a while since we read it. The details in Google Drive should tell you what page to look on--I annotate the docs that are long and contain only a single piece relevant to us.
Jägershof and Lehndorff
From:Re: Jägershof and Lehndorff
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Brüderstrasse: Royal Reader request!
From:Re: Jägershof and Lehndorff
From:Lehndorff
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 08:01 am (UTC)Btw, I could see one explanation how Peter so relatively soon after his return from exile got on a team wo figure out what to do with the Tiergarten - as far as I know, the converting of a former royal hunting ground into a public park and then the landscaping of same had happened in England already, and one prominent example just in time for Peter to observe. To quote wiki on Hyde Park: The first coherent landscaping in Hyde Park began in 1726. It was undertaken by Charles Bridgeman for King George I, but following the king's death the following year, it continued with approval of his daughter-in-law, Queen Caroline. Work was undertaken under the supervision of Charles Withers, the Surveyor-General of Woods and Forests. The principal effect of the work was to sub-divide Hyde Park and create Kensington Gardens. The Serpentine was formed by damming the River Westbourne, which runs through the park from Kilburn towards the Thames. It is divided from the Long Water by a bridge designed by George Rennie in 1826.
The work was completed in 1733. The 2nd Viscount Weymouth was made Ranger of Hyde Park in 1739 and shortly after began digging the Serpentine lakes at Longleat.
So, until we find something out about Suhm's post-mortem son-in-law that sounds like he hung out with Knobelsdorff, Peter & Knobelsdorff bffness shall be canon. :)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Peter Keith and maps
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 07:04 am (UTC)True, I hadn't picked up on that little detail in the sea of Fritz criticism out there. ;)
Ha. If you want to know the extent to which Manger is an outlier in the flood of publications after the the death des Einzigen Königs, look no further than the dedication of his building history of Potsdam. For the first volume of Manger's book opens with a dedication to FW2, and the words, after FW2's titles: "The first day of your royal majesty's glorious government was to me a day of supreme delight! For in place of the previous fears, I received the assurance of your highnesses mercy and favor."
The first day was, of course, the day Fritz died (early in the morning). Tell us how you really feel, Manger.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Peter Keith
Date: 2021-03-20 04:08 pm (UTC)On my long Rheinsberg to-do list is a proper biographical essay of Peter. I'm dumping everything we find into the existing Keiths post, but it's unreadable and is there just so I can double-check info when I need it. At some point, I would like to create something readable collecting everything we've found.
/Your friend, an American scholar who is currently studying Peter Keith. :D
Oh,
This NEVER CEASES to be utterly hilarious to me. I'm an American! I'm a scholar! I'm studying the Katte family! And yet that sentence is utterly misleading while being 100% factually true. :D
I mean, not that I, as an independent scholar by night, don't fantasize about publishing a Peter Keith biographical essay, a "Catt is a lying liar who lies, LIKE KOSER SAID," essay, and following it up with our "Fritz was a lying liar who lied to Katte to get him to help with the escape plan" findings, but...I fantasize about writing as many scholarly articles as I do fanfics, and I end up completing and publishing 0.01% of them.
So the "American scholar who is currently studying" line is going to be a running joke for a while. ;)
We knew he loved books and reading, now we know he must have loved the visual arts as well, since I doubt Knobelsdorff would have left his collection to an ignoramus who just uses it to impress people.
Agreed! And don't forget, he loved experimental science too. Did some in Ireland, and I'm sure that played a role in his honorary Academy membership.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-21 05:49 pm (UTC)I just turned up something in the inventory of his rooms in Wesel in 1730:
eine süßklingende Flöte („Flothe douce“)
eine Querflöte („Flothe Traversière“)
So two flutes! Being an 18th century nobleman, Peter having an instrument doesn't surprise me, and being a boyfriend of Fritz, it being a flute doesn't surprise me. Since we have no mention of him and music later, either his interest didn't make it into our admittedly very limited sources on him (e.g. the visual arts have *just* turned up), or, as I speculatively put in my fic, he tried out music but was never talented (or merely passionate, as Fritz was about poetry) enough to become notably good at it. (Look, I want *one* of these characters to not be passionate and/or talented when it comes to music so I can relate, okay? :P Yes, Ulrike, but I haven't written fic about her.)
But man, I need to go study German so I can read Kloosterhuis beginning to end someday. I know there are all sorts of things in there waiting for me.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-21 06:51 pm (UTC)Also, what about your guy Suhm? Now you've read the letters and I haven't, so: does he ever bring up musicians he recs to Fritz, or scores, or anything like that? Because I don't recall him being mentioned as a musical patron anywhere, including Exner's dissertation.
And of course, Heinrich was passionate about music but as a player never more than okay.
Lehndorff occasionally mentions a good musician he notices, and not just the celebrities - for example, he actually names Mara as a teen in AW's employ just before the war - but plays no instrument himself, and he never talks about music with the fondness he has for reading and books, so I think while grown of age in a court dominated by a very musical royal family, he absorbed enough to like the occasional concert, but he really is more into literture and non-musical theatre, and he's never been motivated to play himself.
Oh, and I don't think EC was musical (though trying her best in the 1730s with taking lessons in anything Fritz liked). She painted a bit throughout her life, but she never was any musician's patron that I recall, and Lehndorff never mentions her playing.
ETA: re: Peter and the flutes - did you consider they might not have been for himself but for Fritz? After all, Fritz might not have been able to take a flute or several with him when travelling with Dad and strictly supervised. In that case, though, Peter leaving them behind would argue he left in a hurry.
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
From:Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 04:45 pm (UTC)Blame mistakes on other people??? (or his flute?) Our Fritz WOULD NEVER! :P
Thank you for the dragon picture! It reminds me of Wilhelmine saying "We all smoked like dragons." :)
Dissertation now in the library!
Having seen your other comments, I agree that there are a plethora of other Keiths around, including a Lt. Col. Sir Robert Keith, son of this guy but without a wiki page of his own, who was ADC to Fritz and who was a lt. col. when he married Suhm's daughter in 1750. So if we don't have a lot of direct evidence that it's Peter, I'm going to reluctantly put a question mark next to the identification. But it might be Peter!
The strongest connection so far seems to be the Tiergarten and the Academy.
and then Peter got the Charlottenburg/Tiergarten responsibility once Knobelsdorff died, or if he got it during Knobelsdorff's lifetime and that is how they became friends.
Interestingly, the earliest mention of Peter in connection with the Tiergarten that I'm aware of is February, 1754. Now, granted, that's an argument from silence, and Lehndorff certainly doesn't consider it his duty to posterity to give us a blow-by-blow of Peter's life, but combined with the fact that Knobelsdorff died in September 1753 and Peter's supposed to have been his successor according to Engel, I'm inclined to think Lehndorff sounds like he's reporting a recent development: "Diner bei der Königin mit Keith, dem der König die Aussicht über den Tiergarten anvertraut hat." (Next sentence: "Es ist ein sehr liebenswürdiger Mann." <3)
For now, I'm going with Peter getting it after Knobelsdorff died, which means, alas, that my fic is slightly more AU than it was yesterday (I went with 1751 instead of late 1753/early 1754). ;)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-19 09:30 pm (UTC)Meant to say, thank you for this! At the end it has a couple things on his son that were in Formey's future. One I'd seen but didn't have a source for: namely that the son of Peter who was an envoy to Turin in 1776-1777 (the one I've seen three different first names for) lived a life entirely retired from society after withdrawing from politics. Now I have a 1790 source for that! So it's looking quite likely. I also learned that he hadn't married as of 1790. Since he's in his mid-forties, it's just possible that he did eventually marry, but looking less likely.
Still no idea about the other son, not even a death date. The last I hear of him, Ariane was taking him to join his brother at university circa 1760.
Oh, Denina also says Envoy Son was, albeit withdrawn from society, nevertheless attached to the Prussian minister of foreign affairs. That seems to be this Hertzberg, who's shown up a couple times in salon.
Oh, lol, he has some correspondence with Fritz in Trier, in 1779-1781, and just from my quick glance at the French, they are, you guessed it, arguing about the virtues of German vs. French. Fritz is being very...Fritzian. :'D
ETA: Oh, yeah, his wiki page says, "In 1780 he boldly took up the defence of German literature, which had been disparaged by Frederick the Great in his famous writing De la literature allemande."
Polish your rusty armor and stop talking about things you have no idea about, Fritz. :P (Except don't, I love your flaws as much as your virtues, that's why you're endlessly fascinating to me...from a safe distance. But if you come into my house and start telling me how to administer databases, you will see Knobelsdorff has nothing on me when it comes to dispensing with social niceties. :P (CorporateAU!Heinrich is gritting his teeth right now.))
So anyway, Hertzberg + Envoy Son of Peter = BFFs. Probably a connection that helped get Envoy Son that envoy position.
(Hertzberg shows up in Ziebura during FW2's reign, doesn't he? Or am I thinking of someone else?)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 01:26 am (UTC)MinistRY I think? It say "ministère" not "ministre" in French.
Fritz is being very...Fritzian.
:D (<3)
Re: Manger, Knobelsdorff - and Peter Keith!
Date: 2021-03-20 01:35 am (UTC)(Like the time I accidentally solved the mystery of Lehndorff's cousin by confusing "Vetter" and "Base". :D)
Off to bed!
Hertzberg
Date: 2021-03-20 06:47 am (UTC)