So I never replied to this on the other thread but this is AWESOME and I think this is a GREAT CRACK IDEA :D and someone should write it for me.
(But I also think Voltaire would work as a guy whom Fritz would talk to, if not SD... the problem is that I find it completely unbelievable that he could find out a murder happened and keep his mouth SHUT about it, even if part of him thought justice was better served that way.)
Also, in canon there's one guy who actually doesn't participate on purpose, right? It would be fun if that were Fritz... so he's at least technically free of patricide/regicide (which idk, would FS have more problems with that than with the other guys doing it? At first I thought he might, since Fritz actually becomes king from it... but I could see it both ways, maybe it's worse if it's the subjects). And then of course Fritz goes on to, well, as you say below :)
Also, in canon there's one guy who actually doesn't participate on purpose, right?
CLEARLY I need to reread this. It was one of my favorites, and now it's salon-relevant. :D I'll see if I can find it as a library ebook.
Anyway, you may be right, but all I remember is someone not participating and their spouse participating instead. Which could be all wrong! My Agatha Christie-reading days were long, long ago.
Agreed on Voltaire! That was the whole premise behind his role in "Grind". :P
Yeah, "on purpose" might be a somewhat ambiguous way to put it... My vague memory was that it was agreed by the murderers (possibly not by the person themself? I forget) that the spouse participate precisely so that the one who didn't participate didn't have to be guilty of the actual murder. Which I think would hit two different buttons I have, a) that everyone was willing to protect Fritz that way <3 and b) that Fritz then goes on to be a magnificent bastard ;)
Heh, we have a few Christies but for some reason this is not one of them... I may get it from the library, I really like this one too :)
I remember it being the spouse insted of the actual person-with-a-motive, too. And yes, Voltaire just would not keep his mouth shut. Also it's questionable whether he'd go anywhere near FW's Prussia in the first place, since he doesn't know Fritz yet, so has no incentive.
However: if I recall correctly, 1733 is when Émilie/Voltaire become an item. You could therefore, in theory, in 1732 have Émilie as a visitor, and her motive for going anywhere near FW's Prussia might be she wants to have a look at Leipniz' manuscripts/letters at the Academy, and since she's not a mouthy poet who in 1732 I think is still in England in exile, and is a travelling French noblewoman instead, she could show up without having to fear getting into trouble. Her reason for keeping the secret might be emotion felt when laarning how FW treated scholars...
But Émilie or FW, we do neet a fall guy. Poirat's alternative explanation for the police was to pin it on an anonymous murderer who managed to get away, but that clearly would not work in a case of regicide (which has the hang, drawn and quartered penality, let me remind you, a simple beheading won't do), and neither FS nor Émilie would pin it on someone they know to be innocent.
A convenient guy to pin it on would be someone who commits suicide over a different issue entirely which the detective learns of in time to declare this person has been the killer and must have killed themselves either in repentance or to escape the horrible penalty. Hm.
Though I also like all the broken bones from Gaiman. Or maybe the murder is accomplished by everyone adding some arsenic to FW's beer and tobbaco?
I vote for stab wounds or broken bones. The reason the Christie is so satisfying is that everyone gets to take a blow at the bastard. Arsenic, for all its logistical advantages, just doesn't have the same visceral oomph. Or maybe that's just my inner murderer speaking. :P
There's truth in that. Mind you, I'm reminded again that Fritz and Wilhelmine by the mid 30s must have trusted that their correspondence wouldn't get opened because in 1735, Fritz is ready for some snark which would incriminate him in any murder enquiry. Context: By summer of 1735, it was obvious that everyone's late 34/early 35 expectation that FW's severe illness would kill him had been wrong and he was up and about again. He also refused Fritz permission to join the (still ongoing) war of Polish Succession campaign. Biographers think it was because he thought Fritz would get too influenced by the Austrians, and he was very unhappy with team Austria by now. (No Jülich and Berg, no marriage invite.) In any event, Fritz writes this to Wilhelmine:
Ruppin, August 11th 1735: The King betrays me; for after promising me everything I could ever wish for, he keeps none of it, for he knows I can't force him to keep his word. He's better than ever. (...) I shall now travel to Wusterhausen again and will find myself once more in the most embarrassing, insufferable and saddest position. Pray then for a soul in purgatory in the hope it will soon be freed.
September 8th: The King won't permit me to join the campaign. I've asked him four times and reminded him of his promise. But he told me he had his secret reasons for not keeping it. I'm entirely ready to believe that; for I'm convinced he doesn't know them himself. As a consolation prize, he wants to let me take a journey to East Prussia; that's a little bit better than Sibiria, but not by much. I resemble Saturn; for my forehead doesn't unwrinkle anymore, and joy has died in me. (... by Volz.) Postscript. I am delighted by the Duke of Brunswick's behavior. As a polite man, he died to please his son. (On September 3rd.) In my opinion, he's one who didn't abuse worldly greatness.
Didn't one of Fritz' US biographers accuse him and Wlhelmine of sounding like Agatha Christie characters in these letters? Anyway, this is a faaaar cry from Schöning's statement that Fritz was a model illustration of how to keep the fourth commandment. And speaking of Crown Prince Fritz vs Old Fritz, one year later we get a letter which sounds as if Heinrich wrote it in the late 1740s, but no, it's Fritz a decade earlier:
May 29th (during the big spring revue): There is nothing more dull than the life we lead here. Always drilling, always up and about, on the revue or giving out paroles - bah! How I'll bless my fortune when I'm finally in Rheinsberg, where I can be my own lord and master and content, far away from a court where only ungratitude, pride and rudeness rule!
Given that parades and drilling formed such a large part of his entire remaining life, by his own choice, the tragical paradox that is Fritz strikes again. Perhaps the best thing FW ever did for him was not dying until 1740, because otherwise he wouldn't have had even those few Rheinsberg years (and the preceding Ruppin years, which weren't that bad, compared with the late 1720s, and at any rate were Dad free more often than not) in which he could (for Fritz) relax and enjoy life.
Which doesn't mean we can't kill FW earlier in fiction! Thinking further about a fall guy: not Grumbkow or Seckendorff (SD would probably vote for either), since they are both too wily, and also it would incriminate Vienna. How about Derschau? Now, being one of Fritz' least favourite persons in 1730 doesn't warrant a gruesome death. But "Der König und sein Narr" introduced me to a rl event (I've checked) which we could make Derschau partially responsible for, and which is horrid enough to make any reader loathe him. The facts, which also illustrate something about FW and which is why Stade has included it in his novel, are these:
1724: FW protests with August the Strong because of the abuse some Protestants have endured in (Catholic) Poland. 1725, December: there's a big Autodafé in Lissabon during which 18 people are condemned, some due to polygamy, some for heretical opinions, some for atheism and some for intercourse with the devil. FW is horrifed, protests with the Emperor that surely he as an ally of Spain's should have leverage to protest such barbaric laws, and in the Tobacco College makes no bones of his opinion that only Catholics are capable of such superstitious cruelty. (Not sure whether Portugal was ruled by Spain at this point, but that's not the issue here.) (Also, ally? Hadn't they fought for the succession just a decade earlier?) (Again, not the point.)
In between, in November 26th, 1725, this happened in Prussia, according to the news: After recently a Jew named Hirsch had been punished much deservedly with the iron brush because of dishonorable slander and denunciations against some royal servants in Prussia, he has exclaimed some great curses and severe blasphemies against God. Thus he has been executed after a sentence today before the town at the usual execution place in the following way: his tongue has been cut out of his throat earlier, his mouth was hit three times with it, and then got nailed on his left shoulder while he was hanged at the gallows. He was accompagnied by two rabbis to the place of execution and has died in his Jewish superstition.
(In the novel, the Hirsch case comes up two times; once, when FW goes on about Catholic barbarity and Gundling says well, you don't have to go to Lissabon to see such executions, we have them in right outside the gates of Berlin, and he imagines FW to be shamed by this; and the second time when FW talks to Rottembourg and says re: Voltaire's exile in England that he has different means of ensuring silence in Brandenburg, and asks Gundling how the Jew was called who comes to his mind right now. Which is when Gundling realises he's been kidding himself about his occasonal landing hits producing some kind of good in FW.)
Now, "royal servants" could mean literally servants or could mean nobles in the royal service, like Derschau. We could make Derschau the one who brought poor Hirsch to the attention of the judges and campaigned for this gruesome sentence. Then, no reader would presumably balk at him ending up as the fall guy for the conspiracy.
My inner nitpicker strikes: marriage invite is 1736. MT & FS married in February 1736, FW finds out after the fact (he wasn't even informed that it was taking place), May 1736 is "There stands one who will avenge me," (which I believe was triggered by the recent marriage snub), which is why I remember the date.
Didn't one of Fritz' US biographers accuse him and Wlhelmine of sounding like Agatha Christie characters in these letters?
Oh, yeah! MacDonogh! Thanks for reminding me.
During the period of the king’s illness, the tone of Frederick’s correspondence with Wilhelmina took on a sinister, anticipatory air as they waited for the not so old man to die. The letters read like a couple of Hollywood villains planning to murder a rich relative. Frederick wrote from the Rhine on 5 August, for example, ‘our fat friend is leaving on the 8th. He was ill and complaining of chest pains, but he’s fighting hard against going the way of all flesh …’ A month later he wrote from Heidelberg:
in the end I am completely convinced that I shall enjoy no pleasure in his lifetime. I believe, too, that there are a hundred reasons why you will quickly forget him; for what touches you, my love, comes from the fact you haven’t seen him for ages. Have another look at him, I think you would let him rest in peace without too much grief.
I would like to see MacDonogh be less eager in that situation.
And speaking of Crown Prince Fritz vs Old Fritz, one year later we get a letter which sounds as if Heinrich wrote it in the late 1740s, but no, it's Fritz a decade earlier:
I had the same thought! He constantly complains about his regimental duties to Suhm (remember, he has to give up sleep in order to find time to study), and when I was going through his correspondence for anti-FW remarks, I was struck by one that said something along the lines of "We waste time doing nothing [at the spring review], time that we'll never get back." And I was like, "And yet he'll force Heinrich to do the same."
Given that parades and drilling formed such a large part of his entire remaining life, by his own choice, the tragical paradox that is Fritz strikes again.
Yeah, Fritz is clearly one of those people who embraced his chains, and he sort of knew that, as judged by the galley slave letter to Wilhelmine. By and large, his attitude was, "If I didn't get to, you don't get to!" and "If I can force myself to, you can force yourself to!"
cahn, this is one (big) reason Duke Valens reminds me so much of Fritz: not only did his father force him to go hunting when he was younger and he hated it, as soon as his father died, Valens took up hunting as a regular pastime and became renowned internationally for being the *best* hunter. And there are clearly deep psychological issues there, which he's more or less aware of.
Perhaps the best thing FW ever did for him was not dying until 1740, because otherwise he wouldn't have had even those few Rheinsberg years (and the preceding Ruppin years, which weren't that bad, compared with the late 1720s, and at any rate were Dad free more often than not) in which he could (for Fritz) relax and enjoy life.
Yeah. Richter's of the school of thought that "Rheinsberg made Fritz great," isn't he?
How about Derschau?
I'm good with Derschau! Especially with the background you're creating here.
(Not sure whether Portugal was ruled by Spain at this point, but that's not the issue here.)
Nope, and that's a plot point during the War of the Spanish Succession. Portugal started out on France's side, but quickly switched to the Grand Alliance, and the reason that's a big deal is that there's a river (the Tagus) that runs from Lisbon to Spain, and the Portuguese allowed the English and Dutch to use the mouth of the Tagus both as a home base for their ships on their way to the Mediterranean, and as a place to drop off soldiers, who would then march into Spain.
(Also, ally? Hadn't they fought for the succession just a decade earlier?) (Again, not the point.)
In salon, it's always the point! I was just reading up on the Treaty of Vienna, because A Gentleman's Guide to Vice and Virtue is set circa 1725/6.
The War of the Spanish Succession ends in 1714, with the Peace of Utrecht. Philip V, grandson of Louis XIV, is on the Spanish throne. MT's dad, the alternate candidate, is disgruntled. [ETA: Obviously you know this part, Selena, this is for Cahn. :)]
In 1718-1720, Spain goes to war again to try to recover territory lost during the war. It does not end well for them. This is called the War of the Quadruple Alliance (Austria, France, Great Britain, the Dutch). Yep, France and England briefly on the same side, for once!
In 1725, Austria/HRE breaks out of the alliance and concludes a peace with Spain, in the Treaty of Vienna. Part of this involves Spain recognizing the Pragmatic Sanction, part of it (according to Wikipedia), involves Charles VI giving up his claim to the Spanish throne. However, I feel like Stollberg-Rilinger said he was claiming it until he died. ?? Not sure about that.
Anyway, simultaneously in 1725, you get the Treaty of Hanover, where Prussia joins Great Britain/Hanover and France, thus putting Prussia on the opposite side as their nominal overlord the HRE. Later, FW will conclude a secret treaty with the Habsburgs, in the Treaty of Berlin, thus showing that Fritz comes by his foreign policy honestly.
As for enemies-to-allies, Horowski is fond of pointing out that it was normal in 18th century wars to end up on your enemy's side a few years later.
(In the novel, the Hirsch case comes up two times; once, when FW goes on about Catholic barbarity and Gundling says well, you don't have to go to Lissabon to see such executions, we have them in right outside the gates of Berlin, and he imagines FW to be shamed by this; and the second time when FW talks to Rottembourg and says re: Voltaire's exile in England that he has different means of ensuring silence in Brandenburg, and asks Gundling how the Jew was called who comes to his mind right now. Which is when Gundling realises he's been kidding himself about his occasonal landing hits producing some kind of good in FW.)
Oof. The more you describe this novel, the more harrowing it sounds!
Then, no reader would presumably balk at him ending up as the fall guy for the conspiracy.
What do you think?
Works for me! I have checked out the book from the library, btw, and am halfway through. :)
not only did his father force him to go hunting when he was younger and he hated it, as soon as his father died, Valens took up hunting as a regular pastime and became renowned internationally for being the *best* hunter.
This is actually kind of making me wonder if KJ Parker knew something about Fritz :P Although I suppose it's a reasonable psychological thing to have happened, and if he had really been patterned on Fritz one might expect the series to have taken a somehwat different course...
Oof. The more you describe this novel, the more harrowing it sounds!
Seconded!
[ETA: Obviously you know this part, Selena, this is for Cahn. :)]
This is actually kind of making me wonder if KJ Parker knew something about Fritz :P Although I suppose it's a reasonable psychological thing to have happened, and if he had really been patterned on Fritz one might expect the series to have taken a somehwat different course...
I was going back and forth the entire time I was rereading the trilogy a few months ago! Because there are a lot of things like that that are *suspiciously* Fritz-like. And yet it's just as clearly not Fritz with the serial numbers filed off, and as you say, there are a lot of things you could arrive at just by psychology plus that father-son dynamic, which is unfortunately not *rare*.
I will say I kept thinking, "Parker, you missed your chance to make him gay!" and then finally we get a couple homophobic remarks from characters to the effect that there are rumors about Valens but he was Definitely Not Gay. Which did not at all clear up whether or not he was based on Fritz, lol.
Jury is still out for me!
It is alllll for me! :D Salon is so great!
It's all for you! (How are you enjoying the address book research, lol?) But not all of it is for Selena, is what I'm saying. This is why your presence is critical: if I had to worry about whether I was telling Selena something she already knows, I would be paralyzed with doubt and indecision all the time and never say anything. ;)
Btw, I have finished the Agatha Christie in question. The spouse who's most likely to be incriminated by their close relation to the victim is spared from having to participate by their spouse, so I vote that Fritz, who's the obvious answer to "cui bono?" during any murder investigation, is spared having to kill the father he loves/hates by his spouse Fredersdorf.
Also, it's even better than I remembered. Well worth a reread!
I will say I kept thinking, "Parker, you missed your chance to make him gay!" and then finally we get a couple homophobic remarks from characters to the effect that there are rumors about Valens but he was Definitely Not Gay. Which did not at all clear up whether or not he was based on Fritz, lol.
HAHAHAHAHA ...okay, Parker totally missed his chance for there to be rumors about broken penis. I'm JUST SAYING.
It's all for you! (How are you enjoying the address book research, lol?)
Lol, gotta say that mostly went over my head, EXCEPT that as a result I have managed to make my ONE contribution to fandom research through being LDS, which I'm really very pleased about :D
Just to make sure - Derschau the interrogator (and now fall guy) was Karl Friedrich von Derschau, right? Or was he another one? This one didn't marry and procreate until 1733, so if he's the fall guy in 1732, there won't be a grieving widow left behind.
Alas, he was Christian Reinhold von Derschau, whose wiki entry mentions his interrogation of Fritz. Married in 1718, 6 kids, only one with a birth date, and that birthdate is 1723. So a grieving widow and 6 kids, assuming his wife is still alive.
Drat. Well, in that case, how about this: one night after everyone kills FW, someone else kills Derschau, who was at first the guy investigating. Naturally everyone assumes the two murders are connected, and Derschau was killed by the original killer, which further distracts from the solution. In fact, though, the two murders were entirely seperate for different reasons, and Derschau was killed by Hirsch's son/daughter/lover/, by hanging Derschau. This is important because we need a method that can also have been a suicide without modern autopsies. Hirsch's son/daughter/lover then sensibly left Prussia as quickly as they could. Once FS has figured the two murders were separate and what happened, and has decided to not out the conspiracy, his alternate solution is that Derschau killed FW and then in remorse committed suicide. Would that work?
That could work. Of course, let's not forget the wife could very well be a relieved widow rather than a grieving widow, depending on her personality, the quality of her marriage, and the state of her financial situation.
But a decoy killing is always a nice twist, no objections here!
But he told me he had his secret reasons for not keeping it. I'm entirely ready to believe that; for I'm convinced he doesn't know them himself.
I laughed out loud at this. Poor Fritz, but that is A+ snark.
I am delighted by the Duke of Brunswick's behavior. As a polite man, he died to please his son.
Hee!
Omg, Hirsch :(((((((((((((((((
Well, I guess I wouldn't balk if he ended up as the fall guy. Though could we arrange it so he'd already died by the time FS figures it out? (As the trolley problem shows us, it's one thing to pin the blame on a guy that's already dead, another to actually be responsible for the death.)
So what I'm hearing is that Fritz's spouse, aka Fredersdorf, who doesn't have a personal vendetta but has plenty of reason to want to kill FW on behalf of others, spares Fritz from participating. :D
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 05:39 am (UTC)for me.(But I also think Voltaire would work as a guy whom Fritz would talk to, if not SD... the problem is that I find it completely unbelievable that he could find out a murder happened and keep his mouth SHUT about it, even if part of him thought justice was better served that way.)
Also, in canon there's one guy who actually doesn't participate on purpose, right? It would be fun if that were Fritz... so he's at least technically free of patricide/regicide (which idk, would FS have more problems with that than with the other guys doing it? At first I thought he might, since Fritz actually becomes king from it... but I could see it both ways, maybe it's worse if it's the subjects). And then of course Fritz goes on to, well, as you say below :)
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 01:28 pm (UTC)CLEARLY I need to reread this. It was one of my favorites, and now it's salon-relevant. :D I'll see if I can find it as a library ebook.
Anyway, you may be right, but all I remember is someone not participating and their spouse participating instead. Which could be all wrong! My Agatha Christie-reading days were long, long ago.
Agreed on Voltaire! That was the whole premise behind his role in "Grind". :P
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 04:07 pm (UTC)Heh, we have a few Christies but for some reason this is not one of them... I may get it from the library, I really like this one too :)
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 04:25 pm (UTC)However: if I recall correctly, 1733 is when Émilie/Voltaire become an item. You could therefore, in theory, in 1732 have Émilie as a visitor, and her motive for going anywhere near FW's Prussia might be she wants to have a look at Leipniz' manuscripts/letters at the Academy, and since she's not a mouthy poet who in 1732 I think is still in England in exile, and is a travelling French noblewoman instead, she could show up without having to fear getting into trouble. Her reason for keeping the secret might be emotion felt when laarning how FW treated scholars...
But Émilie or FW, we do neet a fall guy. Poirat's alternative explanation for the police was to pin it on an anonymous murderer who managed to get away, but that clearly would not work in a case of regicide (which has the hang, drawn and quartered penality, let me remind you, a simple beheading won't do), and neither FS nor Émilie would pin it on someone they know to be innocent.
A convenient guy to pin it on would be someone who commits suicide over a different issue entirely which the detective learns of in time to declare this person has been the killer and must have killed themselves either in repentance or to escape the horrible penalty. Hm.
Though I also like all the broken bones from Gaiman. Or maybe the murder is accomplished by everyone adding some arsenic to FW's beer and tobbaco?
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 07:56 pm (UTC)Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-25 08:17 am (UTC)Ruppin, August 11th 1735: The King betrays me; for after promising me everything I could ever wish for, he keeps none of it, for he knows I can't force him to keep his word. He's better than ever. (...) I shall now travel to Wusterhausen again and will find myself once more in the most embarrassing, insufferable and saddest position. Pray then for a soul in purgatory in the hope it will soon be freed.
September 8th: The King won't permit me to join the campaign. I've asked him four times and reminded him of his promise. But he told me he had his secret reasons for not keeping it. I'm entirely ready to believe that; for I'm convinced he doesn't know them himself. As a consolation prize, he wants to let me take a journey to East Prussia; that's a little bit better than Sibiria, but not by much. I resemble Saturn; for my forehead doesn't unwrinkle anymore, and joy has died in me. (... by Volz.)
Postscript. I am delighted by the Duke of Brunswick's behavior. As a polite man, he died to please his son. (On September 3rd.) In my opinion, he's one who didn't abuse worldly greatness.
Didn't one of Fritz' US biographers accuse him and Wlhelmine of sounding like Agatha Christie characters in these letters? Anyway, this is a faaaar cry from Schöning's statement that Fritz was a model illustration of how to keep the fourth commandment. And speaking of Crown Prince Fritz vs Old Fritz, one year later we get a letter which sounds as if Heinrich wrote it in the late 1740s, but no, it's Fritz a decade earlier:
May 29th (during the big spring revue): There is nothing more dull than the life we lead here. Always drilling, always up and about, on the revue or giving out paroles - bah! How I'll bless my fortune when I'm finally in Rheinsberg, where I can be my own lord and master and content, far away from a court where only ungratitude, pride and rudeness rule!
Given that parades and drilling formed such a large part of his entire remaining life, by his own choice, the tragical paradox that is Fritz strikes again. Perhaps the best thing FW ever did for him was not dying until 1740, because otherwise he wouldn't have had even those few Rheinsberg years (and the preceding Ruppin years, which weren't that bad, compared with the late 1720s, and at any rate were Dad free more often than not) in which he could (for Fritz) relax and enjoy life.
Which doesn't mean we can't kill FW earlier in fiction! Thinking further about a fall guy: not Grumbkow or Seckendorff (SD would probably vote for either), since they are both too wily, and also it would incriminate Vienna. How about Derschau? Now, being one of Fritz' least favourite persons in 1730 doesn't warrant a gruesome death. But "Der König und sein Narr" introduced me to a rl event (I've checked) which we could make Derschau partially responsible for, and which is horrid enough to make any reader loathe him. The facts, which also illustrate something about FW and which is why Stade has included it in his novel, are these:
1724: FW protests with August the Strong because of the abuse some Protestants have endured in (Catholic) Poland.
1725, December: there's a big Autodafé in Lissabon during which 18 people are condemned, some due to polygamy, some for heretical opinions, some for atheism and some for intercourse with the devil. FW is horrifed, protests with the Emperor that surely he as an ally of Spain's should have leverage to protest such barbaric laws, and in the Tobacco College makes no bones of his opinion that only Catholics are capable of such superstitious cruelty. (Not sure whether Portugal was ruled by Spain at this point, but that's not the issue here.) (Also, ally? Hadn't they fought for the succession just a decade earlier?) (Again, not the point.)
In between, in November 26th, 1725, this happened in Prussia, according to the news: After recently a Jew named Hirsch had been punished much deservedly with the iron brush because of dishonorable slander and denunciations against some royal servants in Prussia, he has exclaimed some great curses and severe blasphemies against God. Thus he has been executed after a sentence today before the town at the usual execution place in the following way: his tongue has been cut out of his throat earlier, his mouth was hit three times with it, and then got nailed on his left shoulder while he was hanged at the gallows. He was accompagnied by two rabbis to the place of execution and has died in his Jewish superstition.
(In the novel, the Hirsch case comes up two times; once, when FW goes on about Catholic barbarity and Gundling says well, you don't have to go to Lissabon to see such executions, we have them in right outside the gates of Berlin, and he imagines FW to be shamed by this; and the second time when FW talks to Rottembourg and says re: Voltaire's exile in England that he has different means of ensuring silence in Brandenburg, and asks Gundling how the Jew was called who comes to his mind right now. Which is when Gundling realises he's been kidding himself about his occasonal landing hits producing some kind of good in FW.)
Now, "royal servants" could mean literally servants or could mean nobles in the royal service, like Derschau. We could make Derschau the one who brought poor Hirsch to the attention of the judges and campaigned for this gruesome sentence. Then, no reader would presumably balk at him ending up as the fall guy for the conspiracy.
What do you think?
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-25 01:27 pm (UTC)My inner nitpicker strikes: marriage invite is 1736. MT & FS married in February 1736, FW finds out after the fact (he wasn't even informed that it was taking place), May 1736 is "There stands one who will avenge me," (which I believe was triggered by the recent marriage snub), which is why I remember the date.
Didn't one of Fritz' US biographers accuse him and Wlhelmine of sounding like Agatha Christie characters in these letters?
Oh, yeah! MacDonogh! Thanks for reminding me.
During the period of the king’s illness, the tone of Frederick’s correspondence with Wilhelmina took on a sinister, anticipatory air as they waited for the not so old man to die. The letters read like a couple of Hollywood villains planning to murder a rich relative. Frederick wrote from the Rhine on 5 August, for example, ‘our fat friend is leaving on the 8th. He was ill and complaining of chest pains, but he’s fighting hard against going the way of all flesh …’ A month later he wrote from Heidelberg:
in the end I am completely convinced that I shall enjoy no pleasure in his lifetime. I believe, too, that there are a hundred reasons why you will quickly forget him; for what touches you, my love, comes from the fact you haven’t seen him for ages. Have another look at him, I think you would let him rest in peace without too much grief.
I would like to see MacDonogh be less eager in that situation.
And speaking of Crown Prince Fritz vs Old Fritz, one year later we get a letter which sounds as if Heinrich wrote it in the late 1740s, but no, it's Fritz a decade earlier:
I had the same thought! He constantly complains about his regimental duties to Suhm (remember, he has to give up sleep in order to find time to study), and when I was going through his correspondence for anti-FW remarks, I was struck by one that said something along the lines of "We waste time doing nothing [at the spring review], time that we'll never get back." And I was like, "And yet he'll force Heinrich to do the same."
Given that parades and drilling formed such a large part of his entire remaining life, by his own choice, the tragical paradox that is Fritz strikes again.
Yeah, Fritz is clearly one of those people who embraced his chains, and he sort of knew that, as judged by the galley slave letter to Wilhelmine. By and large, his attitude was, "If I didn't get to, you don't get to!" and "If I can force myself to, you can force yourself to!"
Perhaps the best thing FW ever did for him was not dying until 1740, because otherwise he wouldn't have had even those few Rheinsberg years (and the preceding Ruppin years, which weren't that bad, compared with the late 1720s, and at any rate were Dad free more often than not) in which he could (for Fritz) relax and enjoy life.
Yeah. Richter's of the school of thought that "Rheinsberg made Fritz great," isn't he?
How about Derschau?
I'm good with Derschau! Especially with the background you're creating here.
(Not sure whether Portugal was ruled by Spain at this point, but that's not the issue here.)
Nope, and that's a plot point during the War of the Spanish Succession. Portugal started out on France's side, but quickly switched to the Grand Alliance, and the reason that's a big deal is that there's a river (the Tagus) that runs from Lisbon to Spain, and the Portuguese allowed the English and Dutch to use the mouth of the Tagus both as a home base for their ships on their way to the Mediterranean, and as a place to drop off soldiers, who would then march into Spain.
(Also, ally? Hadn't they fought for the succession just a decade earlier?) (Again, not the point.)
In salon, it's always the point! I was just reading up on the Treaty of Vienna, because A Gentleman's Guide to Vice and Virtue is set circa 1725/6.
The War of the Spanish Succession ends in 1714, with the Peace of Utrecht. Philip V, grandson of Louis XIV, is on the Spanish throne. MT's dad, the alternate candidate, is disgruntled. [ETA: Obviously you know this part, Selena, this is for Cahn. :)]
In 1718-1720, Spain goes to war again to try to recover territory lost during the war. It does not end well for them. This is called the War of the Quadruple Alliance (Austria, France, Great Britain, the Dutch). Yep, France and England briefly on the same side, for once!
In 1725, Austria/HRE breaks out of the alliance and concludes a peace with Spain, in the Treaty of Vienna. Part of this involves Spain recognizing the Pragmatic Sanction, part of it (according to Wikipedia), involves Charles VI giving up his claim to the Spanish throne. However, I feel like Stollberg-Rilinger said he was claiming it until he died. ?? Not sure about that.
Anyway, simultaneously in 1725, you get the Treaty of Hanover, where Prussia joins Great Britain/Hanover and France, thus putting Prussia on the opposite side as their nominal overlord the HRE. Later, FW will conclude a secret treaty with the Habsburgs, in the Treaty of Berlin, thus showing that Fritz comes by his foreign policy honestly.
As for enemies-to-allies, Horowski is fond of pointing out that it was normal in 18th century wars to end up on your enemy's side a few years later.
(In the novel, the Hirsch case comes up two times; once, when FW goes on about Catholic barbarity and Gundling says well, you don't have to go to Lissabon to see such executions, we have them in right outside the gates of Berlin, and he imagines FW to be shamed by this; and the second time when FW talks to Rottembourg and says re: Voltaire's exile in England that he has different means of ensuring silence in Brandenburg, and asks Gundling how the Jew was called who comes to his mind right now. Which is when Gundling realises he's been kidding himself about his occasonal landing hits producing some kind of good in FW.)
Oof. The more you describe this novel, the more harrowing it sounds!
Then, no reader would presumably balk at him ending up as the fall guy for the conspiracy.
What do you think?
Works for me! I have checked out the book from the library, btw, and am halfway through. :)
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-26 05:00 am (UTC)This is actually kind of making me wonder if KJ Parker knew something about Fritz :P Although I suppose it's a reasonable psychological thing to have happened, and if he had really been patterned on Fritz one might expect the series to have taken a somehwat different course...
Oof. The more you describe this novel, the more harrowing it sounds!
Seconded!
[ETA: Obviously you know this part, Selena, this is for Cahn. :)]
It is alllll for me! :D Salon is so great!
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-26 05:45 pm (UTC)I was going back and forth the entire time I was rereading the trilogy a few months ago! Because there are a lot of things like that that are *suspiciously* Fritz-like. And yet it's just as clearly not Fritz with the serial numbers filed off, and as you say, there are a lot of things you could arrive at just by psychology plus that father-son dynamic, which is unfortunately not *rare*.
I will say I kept thinking, "Parker, you missed your chance to make him gay!" and then finally we get a couple homophobic remarks from characters to the effect that there are rumors about Valens but he was Definitely Not Gay. Which did not at all clear up whether or not he was based on Fritz, lol.
Jury is still out for me!
It is alllll for me! :D Salon is so great!
It's all for you! (How are you enjoying the address book research, lol?) But not all of it is for Selena, is what I'm saying. This is why your presence is critical: if I had to worry about whether I was telling Selena something she already knows, I would be paralyzed with doubt and indecision all the time and never say anything. ;)
Btw, I have finished the Agatha Christie in question. The spouse who's most likely to be incriminated by their close relation to the victim is spared from having to participate by their spouse, so I vote that Fritz, who's the obvious answer to "cui bono?" during any murder investigation, is spared having to kill the father he loves/hates by his spouse Fredersdorf.
Also, it's even better than I remembered. Well worth a reread!
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-04-07 05:21 am (UTC)HAHAHAHAHA ...okay, Parker totally missed his chance for there to be rumors about broken penis. I'm JUST SAYING.
It's all for you! (How are you enjoying the address book research, lol?)
Lol, gotta say that mostly went over my head, EXCEPT that as a result I have managed to make my ONE contribution to fandom research through being LDS, which I'm really very pleased about :D
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-27 06:43 am (UTC)Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-27 12:51 pm (UTC)Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-27 04:56 pm (UTC)Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-27 05:01 pm (UTC)But a decoy killing is always a nice twist, no objections here!
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-26 04:56 am (UTC)I laughed out loud at this. Poor Fritz, but that is A+ snark.
I am delighted by the Duke of Brunswick's behavior. As a polite man, he died to please his son.
Hee!
Omg, Hirsch :(((((((((((((((((
Well, I guess I wouldn't balk if he ended up as the fall guy. Though could we arrange it so he'd already died by the time FS figures it out? (As the trolley problem shows us, it's one thing to pin the blame on a guy that's already dead, another to actually be responsible for the death.)
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-24 07:53 pm (UTC)So what I'm hearing is that Fritz's spouse, aka Fredersdorf, who doesn't have a personal vendetta but has plenty of reason to want to kill FW on behalf of others, spares Fritz from participating. :D
Re: FW Whodunit
Date: 2021-03-25 06:12 am (UTC)