cahn | Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 27

cahn

Still going! :D

Page 1 of 2 << [1] [2] >>

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only | Expand All

From:

selenak

Brought to you by my recalling that idle joke about Katte and Rodrigo de Posa changing places, and the likely result this would have on the plot of Don Carlos and Fritz' life, respectively: I wonder about the rest of the cast. With the premise that only one literary character is allowed to exchange places with one rl character each (i.e. no Fritz and Katte switching at the same time):

FW for Philip of Spain (Schiller/Verdi version): FW is horrified to find himself as the most Catholic of monarchs, fires the Spanish Inquisition, orders everyone at court to become Protestant (either Lutheran or Calvinist would be fine), gets locked up as insane by Domino and Alba, dies, the end. Otoh, if the switch comes with FW forgetting his past and believing himself to Philip, the father/son problem still exists, but the Duke of Alba is very surprised that Philip now wants to start a tobacco-smoking hard drinking club with him, Lerma and some other courtiers. FW!Philip does not have sex with Eboli, and doesn't suspect Elisabeth of getting it on with Carlos, but he is absolutely convinced she's conspiring with Carlos and Posa against him and hones in on the political aspect there at once.

Philip!FW, otoh, let's see: a) with his memory: is horrified at what's been going on since his life time, has no problem with FW's personal austerity but does have a problem with the Potsdam Giants, glares witheringly at the Tobacco College the first time someone addresses him as "Colonel" and dissolves it, gets along with SD on a mutual leaving each other alone level much to her surprise and relief, and stuns everyone by being okay with the English marriages. (Why? Because clearly God means for him to finally get his hands on England, that wretched realm. Philip is a Habsburg. If the Armada failed, marriage will do it.) He's also fine with music and literature for Fritz, though very suspicious about various ambassadors courting the Crown Prince. The plot as we know it does not happen, but maybe another kind of father/son clash will, especially if Philip decides to relieve his loneliness via summoning Katte.

b) Without his memory, believing himself to be FW: Philip is absolutely convinced SD and his oldest kids are conspiring against him and is deeply hurt by this, but to Grumbkow's surprise, instead of honing in on the G2/English marriage angle, Philip!FW suspects SD of having an affair with one of the Schwedt cousins and of Fritz & Wilhelmine not being his kids. He definitely summons Katte. And puts the moves on Präulein von Pannewitz. The strangest thing, though: not a single "prank" on Gundling (or anyone else) is being played. Philip!FW is arrested as an impersonator by Old Dessauer.

From:

cahn

ahahahaha this is excellent!! this whole comment was gold.

FW is horrified to find himself as the most Catholic of monarchs, fires the Spanish Inquisition, orders everyone at court to become Protestant (either Lutheran or Calvinist would be fine), gets locked up as insane by Domino and Alba, dies, the end.

LOL FOREVER, not least because, well, true. Way to shorten the play/opera :D

but the Duke of Alba is very surprised that Philip now wants to start a tobacco-smoking hard drinking club with him, Lerma and some other courtiers.

HAHAHAHA I think this is my favorite part of the entire comment (which was a super high bar, I'll have you know)

but he is absolutely convinced she's conspiring with Carlos and Posa against him and hones in on the political aspect there at once.

...ooooof. Yeah. And I suppose he would not be nearly as fascinated with Posa as Philip, soooo I might not be so interested in this whole triangle (because it's all about what I want to watch :) )

has no problem with FW's personal austerity but does have a problem with the Potsdam Giants

HAHAHAHA

gets along with SD on a mutual leaving each other alone level much to her surprise and relief

...well, at least someone is happy, yay?

and stuns everyone by being okay with the English marriages. (Why? Because clearly God means for him to finally get his hands on England, that wretched realm. Philip is a Habsburg. If the Armada failed, marriage will do it.)

...this is my second favorite part of the entire comment. LOL!

but maybe another kind of father/son clash will, especially if Philip decides to relieve his loneliness via summoning Katte.

Heh.
Katte: is an upright courtier but not particularly revolutionary or Enlightened
Philip: He's nice enough, but somehow... I wanted more...

and of Fritz & Wilhelmine not being his kids.

Hee. Of course he would.

The strangest thing, though: not a single "prank" on Gundling (or anyone else) is being played.

THANK YOU.

Yeah, Philip is cruel in a lot of ways, but not that one. (Well, Schiller/Verdi Philip wouldn't, perhaps for the obvious reason of being written much later. Have no idea about historical!Philip, but haven't you been telling me that FW is... not exactly common in this way even for his time period?)

Re: Don Carlos/Frederician RPF Switcheroo the second

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-04-18 07:47 am (UTC) - Expand

Re: Don Carlos/Frederician RPF Switcheroo the second

From:

cahn - Date: 2021-04-18 08:11 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

prinzsorgenfrei

Hi! Uuuh Uni has been killing me for the past few months, so I haven't really been able to write much of anything I wanted to write or read much of anything I wanted to read (I started reading Lehndorff and I'm loving it), but I have drawn today! I should be working on my third research paper of this year, but a history degree is a fancy piece of paper and what is a drawing if not also a fancy piece of paper!

So I drew Katte. Because whenever I feel anxious about the future and my general existence I remind myself that at least that's not me. And I went outside of my comfort zone and drew a horse! Here it is:

images

I found this photo on tumblr months ago and thought "That looks pretty cool, I want to do that" and made a sketch and didn't finish it for ages. I really need to figure out a way to photograph coloured pencil drawings that makes them look true to life... Anyway! I drew something from the list too! Or I tried to. I found a small frame in my grandma's basement and drew a small Lehndorff for the small frame. He can hang next to Henri if I ever get that picture sorted out.

images

I hope you like the newest additions to the collection and will now disappear into the void again to pretend like I'm still managing Uni despite the pandemic! I hope you are and remain in good health and I will post again when I get everything sorted out :'D

From:

mildred_of_midgard

From:

felis

Finished this a couple of days ago and the ending didn't get any easier from knowing it was coming. :(
On the contrary, spending all the years of their correspondence with them beforehand just made it worse. (Fritz, shut up already, you've made your point!) Sigh.

That said, I feel like it wasn't as unpredictable as I thought! The letters aren't always easy to judge on their own - and AW's 1756 ones to Mina that Volz included show that he talked about things very differently to her than he did to Fritz, long before the big implosion - but there were a couple of conflicts even during the earlier years; not just the Heinrich one in 1749, but also two with AW himself in 1750 and 1755, both about matters concerning Fritz's handling of AW's regiments, i.e. Fritz going over his head and AW taking it very personally (mentions of honour and feeling useless included). Even Fritz' accusation of only listening to flattery/the wrong people shows up way earlier and when AW wants him to name names, Fritz only answers with "I see you want to involve me in a drawn-out argument, not happening, I'm done".
My impression in general was that AW was rather insecure with Fritz (there's quite a lot of impersonal OTT praise for Fritz as king), that they talked at cross-purposes (and cross-expectations) at times, focusing on things very differently, and that Fritz' impatience did not help. And while Fritz' recurring "stop over-interpreting everything I say!" is his "who, me?" perspective, I do think - admittedly just from reading the correspondence, and as chosen by Volz - that he might have had a tiny point there. So you can kind of see some roots for 1757 if you know it's coming (but Fritz's explosion is still a shock).

One early and harmless illustration of disconnect that immediately stuck out to me was in September 1747: Fritz writes to AW from Sanssouci, in response to a letter in which AW said he'd be sad if he ended up like Moses and only got to see the beautiful vineyard and his brother from afar: I won't invite you to come here, nor will I send you fruit that you haven't picked yourself. You are old enough to do both and I told you often enough that nothing could delight me more than to see you. But I won't invite you. You will come when you want and go when you like. Brothers shouldn't be on flattery terms with each other ["nicht auf dem Komplimentierfuße stehen"]. I embrace you a thousand times.

It's on this fine line between sweet/playful and impatient/admonishing and where the relationship goes from there is quite open at that point, but turns into tragedy ten years later.

Staying on the positive side, I didn't know that AW got a Biche letter as well! In May 1749, right before the whole Heinrich kerfuffle, and a year after Wilhelmine's. Biche asks him to be godfather to her pups (their father is called Mylord by the way) and AW accepts in a letter to Fritz. Aw.

Amusing: November 1746, there are rumours that G2 might be dying. Says Fritz: If that's true, there will be a battle between him and our father at Pluto's. AW's answer: I'm sure one can talk to each other in the hereafter and I'm sure our father will treat him drastically and won't skimp on the most exquisite insults.

(Not many FW mentions otherwise, but, notably, AW implicitely invokes him in 1749, when trying to help Heinrich. I totally get his intention, but I feel like "you've been such a good and gracious king so far, don't become like dad now" might not have been the best course to take, and "you know how it felt" might seem like a sensible argument, but, well. Not with Fritz.)

Finally, while Fritz needling AW re: procreation and delivering heirs was another instance of "shut uuuup, Fritz", I was rather amused by a "the Stoics are tyrants, Epicurism all the way" letter from 1748. Unfortunately, Volz doesn't include the AW letter that prompted it (and Preuss has neither of them), but the context was Fritz taking the waters and everything that went with it, so I guess AW must have said something about Fritz' abstinence or something. Fritz then feels compelled to write a whole letter on natural drives and not suppressing them - he himself totally doesn't! - and I'm still wondering to what extent he's talking about sex here, when he lists hunger, sleep, and pleasure ("when our life and nature have accumulated surplus energy") as the three drives.

From:

selenak

there were a couple of conflicts even during the earlier years; not just the Heinrich one in 1749, but also two with AW himself in 1750 and 1755, both about matters concerning Fritz's handling of AW's regiments, i.e. Fritz going over his head and AW taking it very personally (mentions of honour and feeling useless included).

Ziebura does include those in her AW biography, and provides earlier context; the sense of being useless (and the idea of being regarded as useless by Fritz, specifically) starts between Silesian Wars, she says, when otoh AW is made Prince of Prussia (and hence officially designated as heir), but so far out of the loop for anything military and political that he has no idea Fritz will start the second Silesian War a week before it happens, as opposed to his correspondent Ferdinand of Braunschweig (EC's military gifted brother), who does. And then kid brother Heinrich, still a teenager, gets his Marschbefehl before AW does. Why Fritz didn't order both of them to join the army at the same time is Fritz' mystery. BTW, on the positive side, Ziebura says Fritz continued his campaign to get AW reading and to encourage him to self educate well into his kingship through their correspondence, and that AW responds positively as can be seen not just via letters but in his library including not just all the books Fritz reccommended but a lot more. Ziebura also analyses the memoranda AW wrote after the second Silesian War with "What I'd do were I in charge of Prussia" ideas. All of which seems to me coming down to: like Fritz, AW was the son of a workoholic who'd preached to all his kids that idleness was one of the worst sins ever and a man wasn't a man if he wasn't a) working, and b) also a respected soldier. And while FW was paranoia itself, he did put Crown Prince Fritz to work in terms other than military drill ones (the whole Küstrin "reeducation" procedure did include a crash course in economics, after all, and the duty to participate in Küstrin civilian administration. This was the basis of comparison AW had for how a sovereign treats a crown prince at his age. Whereas from Fritz, he gets mainly "go forth and multiply" instructions, gets absolutely no intel on the war(s) going on (and since Fritz was an active campaigner, Fritz could have died; the prospect of suddenly becoming King with zero knowledge of what's going on must have been terrifying); and then, when it's peacetime again and he does get regimental (drilling) duties, Fritz is micromanaging there, too. It would be hard not to wonder "does Fritz think I'm stupid and incapable?" under those circumstances.

(Whereas Fritz probably thought he was doing young AW a favor when not shoving responsibilities on him and letting him enjoy his youth a bit longer, plus his paranoia was even greater than FW's.)

Biche letter: I had come across it, I think in one of the Volz anthologies but I'm not sure, and agree, it's adorable, too. Also, tsk, Biche, cheating on Folichon with Mylord.

Amusing: November 1746, there are rumours that G2 might be dying. Says Fritz: If that's true, there will be a battle between him and our father at Pluto's. AW's answer: I'm sure one can talk to each other in the hereafter and I'm sure our father will treat him drastically and won't skimp on the most exquisite insults.

LOL. Good to know FW's sons feel the same popcorn glee about the FW/G2 feud as we do. (Mind you, we later borns can conclude G2 and FW were exactly as bad as each other and thus part of the fun is rooting for neither, whereas I expect Fritz and AW would not have been rooting for Uncle George.)

It's on this fine line between sweet/playful and impatient/admonishing and where the relationship goes from there is quite open at that point, but turns into tragedy ten years later.

I think part of the inherent tragedy is also that Fritz, as sovereign, has taken over the father role for his siblings in addition to the older brother role. Because mutual fraternal ribbing is possible and enjoyable in their society, but you can't tease Dad The King back (unless you're Charlotte), not in their family, at least.

Even Fritz' accusation of only listening to flattery/the wrong people shows up way earlier and when AW wants him to name names, Fritz only answers with "I see you want to involve me in a drawn-out argument, not happening, I'm done".

Now this is fascinating, and I can't make up my mind on various possibilities, such as:

1.) Fritz is simply evoking a trope. Which "you're listening to flattery/the wrong people" really really is for their day. It's the standard criticism of princes, both in and out of power. Of course, Fritz - who levels this charge at quite a number of princes, from Louis XV to the Hannover relations - prided himself on being immune to this, which is very much NOT what fond but critical observers like later Mitchell think (see his remarks on Fritz & the two Roman named guys, Lentulus & Quintus Icilius, for example). (And of course all the way back to the Crown Prince days, FW used this very trope against Fritz when accusing him of only listening to flatterers while disliking all his father's friends, etc. Always trust Fritz to reproduce his father's insults towards someone else.) Meaning: the reason why Fritz doesn't counter with specific names is that he can't think of any, he just used the trope.

2.) Fritz means Heinrich and wants to avoid another Heinrich argument. Argument for this: not just hindsight but contemporary sources like Tyrconnel, the French envoy after Valory, name Heinrich as the biggest influence on AW in the early 1750s. Argument against this: Fritz had no problem writing "Heinrich is your idol" and accusing AW of believing him over Fritz in the big 1749 argument. So why being coy this time around if Heinrich was whom he meant?

3.) Fritz means their dear departed father and is unable to say so because he KNOWS it would make him sound jealous. Because it was FW who declared, and not just once, that of all his children, AW was the one in whose future success and greatness he was confident.

4.) Fritz actually literally means what he says, people from AW's circle of friends. The problem here is the same as when Henri de Catt later reports him fuming against unnamed evil flatterers turning AW against him - why not call a spade a spade and say who? Also, if we go by those friends who were actually around AW till (nearly, since he self isolated in his last weeks) the end, other than family members and servants, these would be basically Isaac de Forcade (later appointed by Fritz as Hofmarschall to future FW2 after Borcke was fired, so hardly a suspect for anti-Fritzian sentiments to him) and Lehndorff (definitely someone prone to talk very complimentary to and about AW, but never encouraging him to feud with the King).

What do you think?

I was rather amused by a "the Stoics are tyrants, Epicurism all the way" letter from 1748. Unfortunately, Volz doesn't include the AW letter that prompted it (and Preuss has neither of them), but the context was Fritz taking the waters and everything that went with it, so I guess AW must have said something about Fritz' abstinence or something. Fritz then feels compelled to write a whole letter on natural drives and not suppressing them - he himself totally doesn't! - and I'm still wondering to what extent he's talking about sex here, when he lists hunger, sleep, and pleasure ("when our life and nature have accumulated surplus energy") as the three drives.

Ha. I'm having trouble not to read "pleasure" as sex in this context, either. BTW, two years later, AW discusses Epicure with Maupertuis in letters and unsuprisingly is pro Epicure, too. Maupertuis specifically points out that there are pleasures other than sex and argues that the enjoyment when listening to beautiful music, or reading books, or having interesting conversations may not be as strong as the one you have during sex with a lover, but on the plus side it doesn't weaken the body or distract the soul from duty, so these pleasures are preferable, Monseigneur. As to whether AW in 1750 instinctively defining pleasure as sexual pleasure until this is pointed out to him by Maupertuis supports or argues against Fritz using the term in the same sense - I could see it either way.

Re: Fritz/AW Correspondence

From:

selenak

The Rare Male Slash Exchange nominations are open. I'm just saying.

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-27 04:22 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

I don't think our German readers have turned up this volume yet? At any rate, archive.org has Briefwechsel der kurfürstin Sophie von Hannover mit dem preussischen königshause available for borrowing: you can borrow either for a 14-day period, or for one hour at a time and renew indefinitely, pending availability. I've been using their one-hour borrowing feature for a bio of Philip V and enjoying it.

Stabi also has a hard copy if that's more convenient than archive.org--although I think

selenak said a 1944 book was considered too old to read outside of reading rooms, so this 1927 book might not be available. (I must say, that struck my American self as odd; I would fully expect to be able to check out anything from at least 1900, but maybe a public library wouldn't let me after all, and I'm just used to university libraries.)

Anyway, Stabi also has Der Königsmarck-Briefwechsel: Korrespondenz d. Prinzessin Sophie Dorothea von Hannover mit d. Grafen Philipp Christoph Königsmarck 1690 bis 1694, published in 1952 and not available on archive.org. In case anyone is interested.

(Am currently reading a bio of G1 by Blanning that I turned up during my hunt for Joseph II reading material, that's how I ran across these.)

Edited Date: 2021-05-13 09:47 pm (UTC)

From:

mildred_of_midgard

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-14 04:45 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-31 02:26 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

My gradual return to salon begins with a (long) summary of the War of the Spanish Succession. I have more detailed posts on specific subtopics planned.

The War of the Spanish Succession: Why do we care?

The generation prior to ours was deeply involved: F1, FW, MT's dad Charles VI, Hans Heinrich von Katte, Grumbkow, Prince Eugene, George I, Louis XIV, etc. Lots of royals died and new ones inherited, leading to tons of exciting political developments. It had as much to do with "Everyone in Europe is unhappy with everyone else" as it did with the actual Spanish Succession. It changed the map of Europe. New wars were started afterward by the people unhappy with the way this one ended.

It intersects in interesting ways with the Great Northern War, which was going on simultaneously, and about which I hope to learn more next.

Finally: all of Europe spent 40 years anticipating this war, making treaties to try to prevent it, and fighting other wars with an eye toward how this one was going to develop.

But mostly we care because this is how I spent the last several weeks when not reading Orieux. :P

The Lengthy Lead-up

So when was the war fought? 1701-1714. When did the war "begin", in the sense that people started fighting and negotiating over the Spanish succession? 1660 and 1665.

In 1660, Louis XIV married a Spanish princess, signed a treaty swearing not to use the marriage to claim any territory, argued that he'd found a loophole, and immediately started using his army to occupy Spanish-owned territory.

In 1665, the king of Spain died, leaving as his heir Charles II, a sickly 4-year old child whose claim to be the most inbred royal of history can surely be contested only by certain Egyptian pharaohs. Behold his family tree:

Everyone expected his imminent death without heirs. For 35 years. He didn't die until 1700, just a few days short of his 39th birthday. In the meantime, much war and many treaties happened in Europe.

The Contenders

The whole outbreak, progress, and conclusion of this war can be understood if you understand one thing: balance of power.

The two main contenders to the throne of Spain after Charles II's impending heirless death are France and Austria. No one in Europe except France wants France to suddenly control Spain, its numerous European territories outside Spain, and its numerous colonies. Ditto, no one except Austria wants Austria to control it.

So for many years, European powers keep making treaties to divide up Spanish possessions. They do not consult the Spaniards, who are understandably disgruntled at having their territory given away without reference to them, and who very much want to remain an intact world empire.

There is a major war between France and most of the rest of Europe between 1688 and 1697. Everyone is exhausted at the end. No one wants war.

So briefly in 1697, a number of European powers manage to agree on a compromise candidate, a 6-year-old Austrian kid, but then he dies at the beginning of 1698, leaving everyone back where they started. Everybody knows there's another big war coming, and most of them are hoping against hope to avoid it.

The Will

In 1700, shortly before dying, Charles II signs a will leaving the entire kingdom intact to the younger grandson of Louis XIV, the one not in line for the French throne. His main contender is the younger son of the Holy Roman Emperor, the one not in line for the throne.

The younger grandson of Louis becomes Philip V of Spain when Charles dies. Philip goes immediately to Spain and is generally welcomed there, although not without some friction.

Austria Reacts

The younger son of the Holy Roman Emperor is future Charles VI, future MT's dad. Three days after the HRE gets the news that his French rival is now Philip V of Spain, he sends his number one general, Eugene of Savoy, whom we've met a few times (and whom Fritz met), to Italy, to try to conquer Spanish possessions in Italy.

The European map looks like this at this stage:

Note that Belgium and the area around it is the Spanish Netherlands, which in our period are the Austrian Netherlands. That's because of this war! Note that Spain owns Milan, Naples, Sicily, Sardinia, and some other Mediterranean islands. That will change! Note that Spain owns Gibraltar. That will change too!

Prussia Reacts

Remember back in 1697, when we had a major war end? A lot of important things happened in the treaty that I'm hoping to cover in more detail in another write-up. Of interest to our salon is one thing that didn't happen: future F1 did not get recognition as King of Prussia. He's still only the Elector of Brandenburg, still just can't wait to be king.

But! Now it's 1700, and Leopold needs money and an army to fight for the Spanish throne. He and F1 cut a deal. He recognizes Prussia as a kingdom; F1 agrees to support Leopold in the coming war. This is why Prussians such as FW, Grumbkow, the Old Dessauer, and Hans Heinrich will make an appearance in this war! (Eugene, as you may recall, thinks letting a margrave become king may not be the Best Idea Ever, but he's overridden.) F1 is crowned in January 1701. This means his kingdom is a whole 11 years old when Fritz is born.

So now it's 1701, and in the space of two months we have a new dynasty in Spain and a brand-new new kingdom in Germany/Poland. But it's going to get even more exciting.

The English and Dutch React

The English and Dutch, both headed by William III, are deeply unhappy, but since they don't want another war so soon after the last one ended, they grudgingly acknowledge Philip V as king of Spain.

But then! Louis XIV, who's been the dominant power in Europe for several decades, shows he's getting old and overconfident. He invades Dutch territory. He starts acting like the power behind the throne of Spain. He makes other unpopular moves.

Now the Dutch and English, again in personal union through William III, are super ready to go to war with Louis and Philip. They sign an alliance with Austria to support future Charles VI's claims. (Remember, he's still the youngest son at this point, no one knows he's future Charles VI. This will be a plot point later.)

What everyone wants

So now the war's started. Everyone wants something different.

Austria: Wants future Charles VI to inherit the Spanish dominions intact.

France & Spain: Want Philip V to hang onto the Spanish dominions intact.

England and the Netherlands: Split up the Spanish dominions. Plus various things that will benefit their individual countries. More details in another post.

Prussia: Predictably, wants France to acknowledge Prussia as a monarchy.

German princes: Want subsidies for fighting.

The War

The war goes on and on for 13 years in the following theaters of war: northern Italy, Low Countries, southwestern Germany, Spain, western Mediterranean, North America. A lot of military history happens. Here's what you need to know:

The three most prominent commanders are: Duke of Marlborough (British), Prince Eugene of Savoy (Austrian), Duke of Berwick (French).

Marlborough, considered one of the greatest British generals and sometimes included in a "greatest of all time" list (likely to make the top 100, not the top 10), does his fighting mostly along the Rhine. He is quite successful there.

Eugene, considered one of the great generals of the late 17th and early 18th century, though not one of the greatest of all times, does his fighting in northern Italy, southern Germany, and occasionally up in the Low Countries. He is quite successful there.

Berwick, illegitimate son of James II by Marlborough's sister, currently in French service because Dad has been kicked off the English throne, is sent by Louis into Spain. He is pretty successful there.

It's worth adding that Philip V does a lot of his campaigning in person too. What's critical is the fact that he enjoys popular support in Spain, whereas his rival Charles really, really doesn't.

The upshot of these respective successes is that the allies gain a lot of Spanish territory but the French candidate, Philip V, stays on the throne of Spain.

Of all the battles, there are two that are really noteworthy. Both are Marlborough+Eugene victories over the French: Blenheim and Malplaquet. Separate posts to come on these.

Outcome of the War

After much back and forth, years of negotiations, and several separate treaties lumped together as the Peace of Utrecht, the following is agreed on in 1712-1714. (There are other terms, which we'll get into in more specific posts.)

1. Philip V remains king of Spain and its overseas colonies.

2. Philip V swears that he and his descendants renounce their claims to the throne of France in perpetuity.

3. Britain gets some overseas colonies from France.

4. Britain gets Minorca and Gibraltar from Spain.

4. Austria gets the Spanish Netherlands, Naples, Sardinia, Milan, and fortresses in Tuscany, from Spain.

5. Savoy gets Sicily from Spain.

6. The Dutch get their fortresses back from France.

7. France recognizes Prussia as a kingdom.

Notice all the "from Spain." Spain was really unhappy with these results! They went to war, largely unsuccessfully, for many years trying to get their territory back. Recall that the British have Gibraltar to this day.

Despite the 7 or so treaties between various countries, Spain and Austria remained at war. They didn't make peace until 1720. They were *that* stubborn.

Here's the map of Europe in 1714. Notice there's more stuff colored "Habsburg Monarchy" and less stuff colored "Spain". In tiny font, down by Gibraltar and Minorca, it says "(To Britain)".

Lots more interesting and relevant things happened in this war, which I hope to make individual posts about this week, while I look for a readable and affordable treatment of Charles XII and/or the Great Northern War.

Currently planned follow-up posts:
- Philip V and his wives
- Hanovers and Stuarts
- Royal turnover
- Blenheim
- Malplaquet
- The war in more detail
- The lead-up to the war
- Chronology
- Coda: Philippsburg

We'll see if I do them all, but some should be short and many are already drafted. I'd like to get them down while they're fresh in my memory. I worked hard for this knowledge!

From:

selenak

Not many, because I don't know nearly as much about this war as you do, I just know a few anecdotes about some of the participants which

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-05-26 10:55 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

felis

The SPSG has been doing virtual guided tours through some of the Hohenzollern palaces via Instagram Live lately (see here for links to all of them and more) and I've had a great time watching them this past week. They are all in German of course, but it might still be interesting to have a look at - or a speed-walk through - some of the rooms. Funny enough, the one that felt most familiar to me visually was Schönhausen, because a lot of it covered the very same things that Selena included in her pictures. (I mean, it would have been Sanssouci, but they haven't done that yet. Up next, though, on June 3rd.)

The newest one from a couple days ago was a walk through Fritz's apartment at the New Palais, which was lovely. I don't think it was open for visitors when I was there and I loved seeing the walk from the marble gallery through the various official rooms to his private ones, ever smaller and less formal, until you end up in his little reading cabinet (see at minute 27), which is super cosy and small (and certainly warm, what with it being south-facing and having a fireplace of its own). You can also see a modell of the book case he had on the wall - like a lot of the furniture, it is lost, but they have several of these maquettes throughout the castle, based on old photographs, to give you an idea of how it would have looked.
I'd read about the cabinet and the unusual lay-out of his rooms - an intimate dining room behind the bedroom for example, and the hidden doors leading to the waiting room for the secretaries and the library (off limits for everyone else) - before and it was great to see all of it here and get a better idea of the space. (Not that he spent all that much time there, only a few weeks every summer. But still.)

Other things I loved seeing: the route he and his guests would have taken to enter the New Chambers from Sanssouci. As a visitor, you don't get to go that way these days, there's an entrance from the street to the north, so I'd never seen that part. And I'd forgotten that the New Chambers were built long after the Palais, but it's kind of obvious once you get a look at the grand interior.

Then there are the Schönhausen tour and two Charlottenburg ones (baroque F1/SC wing and Luise's apartment, wife of FWIII). One thing I found fascinating there were the different layers of time in one building: As Selena's post already showed, Schönhausen was actively used even during DDR times, as a guest house for guests of state, and so you have a lot of changes that were made and different eras that exist next to each other. (The guide seemed more interested and well versed in the 20th century history, but, since we've talked about this before, he did include the tidbit that EC was very tall indeed - one meter and eighty centimeters according to him, so definitely taller than Fritz.)
Charlottenburg on the other hand was almost completely destroyed in WWII and had to be reconstructed. (The furniture/paintings/etc were in storage and survived, though, so while most of the building/floors/etc are all new, you have more original furniture than in the New Palais, where the building survived but a lot of the mobile parts didn't.) They made a lot of interesting decisions there - to not repaint some of the ceilings for example, or to have a modern interpretation of a ceiling where there was no good reference for the original.
No tour through the Fritzian parts of Charlottenburg (yet?), but the contrast of Sophie Charlotte's baroque wing vs. the more neoclassical design of Luise's quarters was fascinating and I learned a lot of things I didn't know. Like the fact that Luise's apartment was actually built for/by FWII, who he died before he could use it, so his daughter-in law moved in and loved the place - including the room designed by Wilhelmine von Lichtenau (a.k.a. Enke, i.e. FWII's mistress), whom her husband, FWIII, had arrested. I also didn't know that Luise only slept in her brand-new bedroom - designed by Schinkel in 1810 (minute 21 of the video) - four times before going on a journey to visit her relatives in Mecklenburg, where she died (of a heart tumour), only 34 years old. Also, when FWII had these rooms built, he got a couple of tapestries from Uncle Heinrich to use (still/again there now), who had gotten them from Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette as a gift but had no space to hang them.

Finally, Babelsberg, which was built way later than the others, for W1 in the 1830s, gothic style, and one interesting tidbit I learned: it has a Voltaire terrace, named that way because Pückler had the trees from the Marquisat (i.e. Marquis D'Argens place where Voltaire lived for a while) taken and replanted in Babelsberg. Which apparently caused some protests from the local populace, causing Pückler to refer to Potsdam as "Potsdorf" in annoyance. :P

From:

selenak

Ohhhhh, very neat. When I was in Potsdam last summer, they told us Fritz' private rooms were off limits in the Neues Palais, so I haven't seen them before, either. And Charlottenburg I've only seen from the outside, full stop. I'm looking forward to viewing it all, thank you so much for the links!

ETA: have watched the first one (Neues Palais) now, and it is wonderful! Including the secret doors in the tapestry. :)

Edited Date: 2021-05-23 04:42 pm (UTC)

Re: Virtual Guided Tours

From:

felis - Date: 2021-05-24 11:15 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Virtual Guided Tours

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-05-25 06:45 am (UTC) - Expand

Re: Virtual Guided Tours

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-23 04:39 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Virtual Guided Tours

From:

felis - Date: 2021-05-24 11:23 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

Emil Ludwig: wrote, like his arch rival, Stefan Zweig, very succesful "Biographies Romancees". Unlike Zweig, started WWI with "yay", but quickly sobered up, thankfully. Pre WWI, had been a mostly conservative German Jew who was nominally Christian; after the murder of Walter Rathenau by right wing extremists in the early 20s, returned to Judaism in Protest and memory and also moved more and more to the liberal side politically during the Weimar Republic. Was among those with books burned in 1933, left in time, went into exile. One of my great uncles and my grandfather were readers, and my Dad also liked his books, though he liked Zweig's even more.

So I checked out some Ludwig stuff I hadn't looked for eons, and what do I find? A) a "Crown Prince Fritz" historical play, b) a short Fritz portrait in his anthology of short historical bios, b) a short Voltaire portrait in the same anthology. The Voltaire portrait is better than the Fritz portrait, btw, because while the research is inevitably dated (Ludwig had no idea about Voltaire/Madame Denis, so he assumes Èmilie was the one to seek alternate sex first, for example), he gets Voltaire's Voltaire-ness in a good "flaws and virtues" balance and isn't influenced by thoughts about national destiny.

Meanwhile: Short Fritz portrait: Küstrin made Frederick great. Look, FW had a point calling him effeminate. If Fritz had made it to England, he'd have been one more useless Rokoko prince writing bad poetry. A "Van Dyke Prince" wouldn't have worked for Prussia. He became manly this way. Tragic, though. Incredibly lonely. With a demon. The Silesian Wars were pure ambition, but the Seven Years War were true greatness. That was Fritz as his most Fritzian and why he's the Great. Old Fritz is super tragic, what if everyone he still cares about dying on him. But also he works for the people in his final years. And there wouldn't have been a Prussian destiny without Fritz or a modern Germany without Prussia. Thank you, Fritz.

Crown Prince Fritz play: reasonably well researched, lots of actual quotes from the usual suspects worked in. Some deliberate changes which actually are plausible dramatic choices - instead of Frau von Kamecke, Madame de Rouccoulles the old governess of both FW and Fritz is the one to have the "don't kill your son, think of Peter and Philip!" conversation with FW, and Ludwig makes the most of this FW & his FRENCH mother figure constellation. Others are just bewildering: Wilhelmine says in her introduction scene that she wants nothing more than a husband (any husband) and lots of kids (really, please, lots oand lots of those) and this gets repeated two more times in the play, including in the very last scene which is Fritz' return at her wedding. Which, huh? We do see her play a duet with Fritz, both otherwise she seems to have zero cultural interests. And here I thought Gutzkow's romantic ingenue Wilhelmine from "Eine preußische Heirat" was weird. "I want to have lots of children!" Wilhelmine is even weirder.

FW is tough-but-fair FW. Instead of letters, he hears Wartensleben's petition for the grandkid in person, but his first reply is actually from a letter written to Hans Heinrich ("your (grand)son is a villain, so is my son; it's not our fault"), and it ends with Grandpa Wartensleben accepting that the King is merciful in beheading Katte instead of punishing him with glowing pliers etc.

ETA: Also, his historical taunt to Fritz that if his father, F1, had treated him this way, he, FW, would have put a bullet into his head, becomes in this play "I'd have left the country already, but you don't have the courage", and Fritz immediately afterwards declares his intention to leave to Wilhelmine. /ETA

Katte and Fritz do get actual scenes! Several! Katte is NOT in love with Wilhelmine, and he and Fritz are depicted as loving friends. (It's still a no homo play, though; Katte's introduction scene has him making out with an unnamed "countess", he's depicted with tavern girls later, and still later, he reminisces about hitting the taverns with Fritz and "the girls".) There's even one where Münchow lets them talk in the night before the execution. Where Katte both says he sees the King in Fritz and that Fritz has A DESTINY which he, Katte, fully believes in and urges him not to have any anger towards his father as per the punctae, because a King's gotta do what a King's gotta do, and FW acted by the law.

Ludwig prefigures Mildred in one aspect, though: in the last scene, when Fritz shows up at Wilhelmine's wedding and is cold to her and everyone (but reconciles with FW by asking for his sword back, signalling his conversion is complete and he's ready for HIS DESTINY), he's wearing a grey coat as per the memoirs. When FW asks what's up with that, Fritz says this is the coat worn by Lieutenant Katte that last day in November. FW: "Major!" Fritz: "Your Majesty." Earlier, FW has asked Reverend Müller whether he thinks Fritz is a good Christian now, and Müller goes, nah, but he's totally sincere in his submission. FW: ? Müller: He's doing it for his future glory. That's what drives him now. So FW takes what he can get, hands over his sword and says, okay, Fritz, you're ready now. The world is totally against us but you can get them! For Prussia!

End of play. I would say the ending is a big giveway this play was published in 1914, aka the year WWI started, but the beginning is an even bigger giveway. Why? Because we see the scheming duo of Grumbkow and.... Jemikoff. Who, you might ask? Why, the Russian ambassador Grumbkow was scheming with all the time and who does his best to estrange father and son and wishes FW and Fritz would do each other in, because that would be best for the ~~HRE~~ Russia. (Grumbkow, btw, says, nah, FW might yell none stop, but he still loves the kid, he'd never.) This Jemikoff then continues to scheme his way along with Grumbkow through the play. Seckendorff who?

Likeliest historical reason: think about it. 1914. Germany is about to go to war with....? And was allied with...? Meaning: there's no way a play with an evil representative of Team Habsburg would have been printed or staged, not when Willy is going nominally to war to support Franz Joseph. Otoh, there's plenty of Russia bashing rethoric making the rounds in the papers, even more than France and Britain bashing. (WWI defending Thomas Mann: Of course we have to fight with the worst, most barbaric police state of the world! Seriously, the press of all German factions milked the oppressiveness of Czarist Russia as much as they could, not least because it provided such a neat counter argument to the Allied claim of presenting the forces of progressive Western values.) So inserting an evil Russian ambassador in Seckendorff's place must have appeared as a given. Ludwig doesn't let him reveal which Czar(ina) he's working for. I mean, 1730 is a turnover year, in which Anna Ivanova becomes Czarina. Is she the one who has it in for young Fritz, or is it the short lived Peter II?

Anyway, it's one of those odd literary footnotes, this play, typical for the era, but unsurprisingly forgotten. And I'm really happy that while modern Fritz biographers have their own qualities which annoy me, at least they don't talk about DESTINY and Prussia's historical mission anymore.

Edited Date: 2021-05-25 07:05 am (UTC)

From:

mildred_of_midgard

As usual, thank you for the write-up, and as usual, far less than I actually want to say:

a King's gotta do what a King's gotta do, and FW acted by the law.

I really, really hope "The tyrant demands blood" is a genuine quote. It seems like it probably is, but we can't be sure. Anyway. I want Katte to have known exactly who the problem here was, even if he couldn't say so publicly.

~~I bet Doris Ritter did~~

Eugene as written by Two Marxists

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-05-26 08:29 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

selenak (and

felis), I need more books to practice my German on. Criteria:

- Non-fiction.
- Salon-relevant.
- A topic I'm eager to learn more about.
- Continuous text with gripping narrative (not letters or diaries).
- Style either simple like Ziebura or entertaining like Horowski and Orieux.
- No unholy fonts!
- Oh, and 18th century German is just a bit too much for both me and my friend Google Translate right now.

It turns out that I need a certain amount of being fascinated with the content of what I'm reading, in order to compensate for the struggle with the language. If I'm not eager to keep picking up the book because in the short-term I will learn a lot of things I very much want to know, then it takes a whole lot more willpower to force myself to read for hours every day solely for the long-term payoff.

Lehndorff's lack of narrative and the fact that I don't know who most of the people are are making it difficult to stay engrossed with figuring out every sentence. It was fun when I was reading a few pages a day while googling and cross-referencing all the proper names and telling you about my findings, and I will probably resume doing that for salon research purposes, but it's not great German practice.

Stollberg-Rilinger is interesting but just a liiitle too dry. (Would be fine in English, but isn't quite compensating for the linguistic struggle in German. In English, I could skim the less interesting parts, but in German, I work hard for a paragraph only to find that it wasn't that interesting.)

Rereading favorite fiction books that have been translated into German doesn't work because I'm not eager to find out what happens next; I already know what happens next! And reading new fiction doesn't work because my brain has all but rejected new fiction for the last 10+ years.

I just need to get to the point where reading German isn't such a struggle, and then the amount of compensation I will need will lessen, and I'll be able to read a broader range of material.

Any suggestions?

Edited Date: 2021-05-27 01:56 pm (UTC)

From:

selenak

Well, this is hard! I checked what else our buddy Horowski has to offer. Seems he has a new book coming out in November which could be just the ticket, as it's about the families Richelieu, Bentinck and Liechtenstein between the 17th and the 19th century. But it's months till November, and the only other book that's available sounds way more academic and more like it's his published dissertation. It's also hideously expensive (69 Euros!).

Now, there are Sophie of Hannover's Memoirs in German, which have the advantage of being a) short, b) not hideously expensive (ca. 15 Euros on Kindle), and c) this includes the introduction essay for the new translation and the footnotes. I found them very entertaining, informative (with the caveat that they end shortly after Sophie's turned 50, so don't expect anything about the Hohenzollern in them) and often witty, see my write-up. But there are also a lot of people mentioned you might not know yet (though there are footnotes telling you who they are). Btw, there's an English translation out there as well, I think, at least there's one at the Stabi, which I'm not interested in since I have the German translation at home.

(ETA: another advantage of the Sophie memoirs in German is that the translation is recent - the Memoirs were written in French, after all - , which means you don't have to put up with Baroque German. Which you would have in any edition of Liselotte's letters which isn't a translation into English, so I can't rec it to you./ETA.)b

If you want to branch out and try fiction after all, I could also reccommend the book which I've gifted to

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-29 11:10 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

I can't believe I almost decided not to read past the War of the Spanish Succession in the Philip V bio! (Mostly because the only e-book I can find is archive.org, and I find the interface insanely difficult to work with.) I had completely forgotten that Rottemborg was envoy to Spain during Philip's reign, and I would get a whole lot of context for things relevant to my fix-it fic, if nothing else.

selenak, remember when you told us that Morgenstern said Rottembourg said he missed FW's Prussian when he was in Madrid? And we decided it was one of Morgenstern's sarcasms? I now actually believe it! Not that he loved Prussia so much--I've just confirmed he asked for his leave on all three of his missions, in one case within a few months of arrival--but I didn't realize that both Rottembourg's missions to Spain corresponded with the absolute nadir of Philip's mental health, and the effect was torture on ambassadors:

First mission (October 1727-April 1728)
Rottembourg appears to have escaped before matters peaked in June, but I also don't know exactly when certain symptoms began. What I've got is this:

May 1727 - end of 1727: Philip V severely depressed, unwilling to speak to his ministers. Will listen to reports, but "no sign of hearing other than a gesture now and then or a fleeting smile."

Early 1728: Back in business, but severe attacks. Doesn't see ministers for weeks at a time, and then will only see them at night, and will keep them up until dawn. Audiences with ambassadors are held at midnight.

June is when he starts wanting to abdicate for the second time. (Remember, he abdicated once, gave the throne to his son, and his son died of smallpox after about 7 months.) His wife, Isabella, tries to prevent him. She has all writing implements removed, and keeps a close guard on him. So Philip tries escaping by sneaking out at 5 am, while she's asleep, and flees the palace in his nightshirt. She has the guards stop him, changes the locks, and gives the guards orders not to let him escape, but he tries this several times.

Finally, on June 28, he sneaks some paper while Isabella's in another room for a minute, writes out his abdication, and has his most trusted servant smuggle it into the council. The council session is discussing it when Isabella's messenger arrives, confiscates the piece of paper, and destroys it.

During this summer, and I don't know how early it started and whether some of them would have been affecting Rottembourg by April, but we've got these symptoms:

* Giving audiences to ambassadors either in his nightshirt or almost naked.
* Paranoia, delusions, and hallucinations.
* Biting himself.
* Screaming and/or singing.
* Urinating and defecating in bed.
* Believing he's a frog (July). (Rottembourg's replacement as ambassador arrived in June. Man, I don't envy him.)
* Believing that he's dead.
* Bulimia.

Rottembourg gets the hell out just in time, it seems. But he's back in 1730, which is when things are really crazy, and for a much longer time.

Second mission: (December 1730-April 1734)
During most of this time, the court isn't in Madrid, it's in Andalusia, and it's peripatetic. This is Isabella's idea for how to make Philip's mental health improve: change of scenery.

This means tons of expenses for the ambassadors. Ambassadors were notoriously in arrears for their salaries, and most were rich and the rest supported by their families. Random expenses like "The King decided to move his court" have to be covered out of pocket. So Rottembourg, who was himself very rich, had to sell property to cover these years.

And then there's the part where summer 1730 is when Philip's mental health crashes again. He's severely depressed, bulimic, and consuming vast amounts of poison antidotes (I don't know the details) because of his paranoia. He's convinced that his stools contain blood; when he inspects them and they aren't, he accuses the doctors of concealing the blood. His toenails get so long it's difficult to walk. He won't let anyone do his hair, so it turns into a complete mess. He smells terrible. His only entertainment is fishing...in his garden...at night...from a bowl that his attendants have placed fish in.

But he won't give up power, either. He walks around muttering, "I'm the boss here" (Je suis le maître), and making things difficult to prove it. If you give him a stack of papers to be signed in a certain order, he'll rearrange the papers when you're not looking.

And, of course, he's conducting all business at night. Upon arriving, Rottembourg describes the situation as "incomprehensible", and complains about being kept in meetings until 6 am. Meanwhile, Isabella is trying to conduct a normal life during the day and take care of her husband and help him with state business at night.

June 1731: Rottembourg reports that he shows up for an audience at night, but the queen has collapsed from exhaustion and is fast asleep, and Philip hasn't slept in 48 hours. So Rottembourg waits until 7 am, at which point he's told they can't see him until 5:30 pm.

By July, Philip is getting one hour of sleep a night, his legs are swollen, and everyone's convinced he's going to die.

A year later, after a brief manic episode, he's back to depressed, with no hygiene, and refusing to talk to anyone because he's dead. Also, he's extremely concerned that because he had abdicated, then became king again after his son died, his rule is invalid. By not talking, he can avoid ruling!

In October 1732, he decides he's going to talk, but only to his valet. He then starts explaining how he's going to unite the crowns of France and Spain to his valet...but no one else.

In November, he breaks his streak of not talking to ministers and ambassadors by insisting that he needs to talk to Rottembourg. "The startled count was presented with the spectacle of a king with clothing completely disordered, with a long and filthy beard, and wearing no trousers or shoes, his legs and feet naked."

This is the kind of thing that could make you miss FW forcing you to get drunk!

In conclusion, Rottembourg may well have been quoted as saying, "However bad Berlin was, it was better than Madrid!" (At least there was the SD court in Berlin when FW was away.)

Rottembourg's Health or "Health"
Rottembourg's health, btw, is bad; in 1733 he starts requesting his recall, in 1734 it's granted, and in 1735 he dies. Did the stay in Spain make it worse? Who knows, but it can't have helped.

Speaking of his health, I've now refreshed my memory that during his first two missions to Berlin, he requested recall on the grounds of his health and the Berlin climate, and the third time, he requested permission for a short leave to take care of some personal affairs, which turned into a permanent absence. But as we've seen, most Frexits proceeded officially by complaining about the climate of Berlin, not complaints about the King!

Katte Visits Rottembourg??
Also, also, I have found a crux that I had noticed ages ago, but wasn't confident was a crux, because I wasn't sure which sources to trust. I now have confidence in saying that the claim in Kloosterhuis that Martin von Katte says that Hans Heinrich says that Hans Hermann went to Madrid in late 1728/early 1729 (exact date not given), and that he met Rottembourg there, is weird!

What Kloosterhuis says: "He went in October 1728 initially to Paris on a mission for his father, then on his own initiative to Madrid, in order to visit Count Rottembourg, who'd meanwhile been stationed there, and finally to London, where he crushed on Petronella."

But I am now quite confident that Rottembourg was sent to Spain in late 1727 to negotiate the end of the Anglo-Spanish War, and that when the Convention of El Pardo was signed on March 6, Rottembourg's work was done. He announced his departure on March 28, took his leave at court on April 3, and set off for France on April 7. The multi-volume collection of instructions to ambassadors from the French archives that is of such high quality that I found an expert on British diplomacy of the 1720s envying says that in October 1730, when he got his new mission to Spain, it had been 2.5 years since his return from Spain.

And though I don't have a date for his arrival in Paris, it only took him 3 weeks to get back in 1734, while traveling extremely sick. Even if you double that time because in 1728, he's in Madrid and 1734, he's in Andalusia, which is closer to the coast (we know that he traveled by Barcelona on his way to Seville in 1730) By, say, November or December 1728, it should be really obvious to Katte in Paris that Madrid is not where Rottembourg is. Based on the time for mail, and the fact that they may not have kept in super close touch, I'm willing to believe that when he set out from Berlin, Katte thought Rottembourg was in Madrid, but I'm very surprised that after visiting Paris he didn't. Even if Rottembourg wasn't in Paris, and I suspect he was, even if he was taking the waters somewhere, surely you'd ask around before setting off to Madrid!

Incidentally, depending on how long Katte stayed in Paris and how long it took him to travel to Spain, he might have arrived to find the court wasn't in Madrid; they arrived in Seville on February 3, 1729.

Anyway, this is kind of hilarious, because one plot twist in my fix-it fic was that Katte would set off from Edinburgh, kind of out of the loop, in late 1730, looking for Rottembourg in Madrid, and find that he wasn't there, but had been recalled to France. (This is because I was getting conflicting info on Rottembourg's dates in Spain; I now feel pretty clear on the ones I have and have updated the chronology in our library.)

So, what happened in late 1728? Our sources are mistaken? Katte left without adequate research and arrived in Madrid to an unpleasant surprise? Katte and Rottembourg did or didn't actually meet up, in Paris, in Madrid, or in Seville?

I should add that in addition to the Philip V bio, which I'm almost finished with and will have some Philip V updates on when I am, I have read two articles on diplomacy in Spain at the time that Rottembourg was present, found a dissertation and hunted for all the occurrences of his name, and skimmed the instructions given to him for his two missions to Spain, as well as my usual detective work across a few Google books hits, so I now have a much better idea of what Rottembourg was up to when and why in Spain. He actually got in (a little) trouble in 1727!

Name Spelling
The collection of instructions to French ambassadors says that despite the varied spellings of the name Rottembourg (because it's of German origin; he was from Berlin and is cousin to Prussian count Rothenburg), the envoy himself always spelled it 'Rottembourg.'

Marital Status: Unknown
Incidentally, our source, or one of our sources, on Rottembourg dying unmarried (remember, some of my sources give a marriage date and a wife's name and genealogy; others say never married): Saint-Simon, who was a contemporary, at Versailles with him, and ambassador to Spain in 1721. So you'd think he would know. In contrast to the source I've found for him being married, which is a 1733 genealogical history. On the other hand, the memoirs were published in 1886, which means who knows what's been done to them by the editor!

From:

selenak

Yowsers. In this case, Morgenstern really wasn't kidding. I guess in our fictional 18th century envoys get together, we just have come across a new category to compete in: worst posting ever? Also, the otherwise thorough Kloosterhuis clearly didn't trouble to check and compare dates on Philip V. with the story of Katte's visit. I'm not surprised Martin von Katte didn't, he wasn't a professional historian and repeating a family story. It would be good to have Hans Heinrich's original letter and/or wording about this visit - maybe he just said that on what was supposed to be just a journey to France and back, Hans Herrmann met Rottembourg, the French envoy to Spain, and then proceeded to Britain. Which made Martin v. K. and after him Kloosterhuis draw the easy conclusion that the meeting in question had taken place in Spain, not France. But it also makes geographical sense if Katte went to Paris, met Rottembourg there, and then went on to London, without the major detour of a trip to Spain!

Re: Philip V and French Count Rottembourg

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-28 02:42 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Philip V and French Count Rottembourg

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-05-29 07:56 am (UTC) - Expand

Re: Philip V and French Count Rottembourg

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-29 11:04 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

Mostly for

cahn and [Bad username or unknown identity: iberiandoctor"], if either wants to use some historical factoids in potential Schiller/Verdi Don Carlos fanfiction, brought to you by the fact I just read a recent (2018) Charles V. biography.

Important reminder, not just for this but for any period, of just how much territory Charles inherited from all four grandparents

From Maximilian I., HRE: Austrian heartlands (these included Austria, a great deal of Switzerland and today's Southern Tyrolia)

From Mary of Burgundy: Burgundy (which consisted of the actual province Burgundy, today Franche-Comte, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands)

From Ferdinand of Aragon: Aragon, Sicily, Naples and Sardinia (all ruled by the House of Aragon since the high middle ages)

From Isabella of Castile: Castile and the new overseas territories. (Read: Latin America except for Brazil, which was Portuegese)

Hence: the Empire in which the sun does not set. Hence also a great many people people in it sideyeing a great many others, and that's before we get to the fact that just when Charles was starting his rule, a monk named Martin Luther got busy in Wittenberg. (Key factor.)

Now Charles, as mentioned before was raised in Flanders, unlike his younger brother Ferdinand, who was raised with Granddad Ferdinand. This, and the fact that his aunt Margaret was a brilliant governor of the Netherlands, and after her his sister Mary was very good as well, meant that while Charles lived, there might have been the occasional rumble as Protestantism started to spread in Flanders, but by and large, the Netherlands still felt the emotional connection to him; he was seen as one one of theirs. In fact, when Charles declared his abdication in Gent, the city where he was born, William of Orange (not that one, an earlier one of the same name, the Ur-William of Orange, even) was present and Charles, who was suffering from extreme gout, was leaning on him when entering the room. However, son Philip was seen as utterly Spanish, a complete foreigner, plus by the time Philip ruled, the religious strife was really kicking into high gear and Philip's reply of slamming down hard with the counter reformation and the hardcore laws in general settled it.

=> 80 years of the Dutch fighting for independence from Spain, a fight started by the same William of Orange whom Charles had leaned on during the abdication.

Back to the early days. Now Charles had been raised by Aunt Margaret in the tradition of a Duke of Burgundy, but the "Burgundy" part of Burgundy had been lost for the first time in the ongoing wars between Grandpa Max and France, then regained, then lost again and so forth in the endless wars between Charles and Francis I. If anyone of the European princes was Charles' arch nemesis, it was Frances. Their first personal conflict started when Grandpa Maximilian died and thus the election of a new Emperor was due. Now remember, unlike the various territories Charles inherited, the job office of Emperor was NOT inheritable per se. It had to be voted for by the various Princes Electors.

Rest of Europe: Do we really want the kid who inherited all that land to become HRE as well?

France: We certainly don't. Francis for HRE!

England: We're thinking Henry VIII. for HRE, mostly because Henry thinks he rocks that much. Also the Pope has just appointed him Defender of the Faith. No more faithful Catholic than Henry, ever! All the titles for Henry!

Duke of Saxony: You're kidding, right? Are any of you aware that more and more Germans are listening to ex-Brother Martin whom I happen to be shielding in my territories? That whoever gets to be Emperor should, like, maybe have a clue about German affairs? This doesn't mean a guy raised in the Netherlands and currently hanging out in Spain. I'm nominating myself.

Margaret of Austria: Gentlemen, calm down. Have some Fugger money. And some propaganda. Surely the Empire shouldn't be ruled by a Frenchman or Mr. Clueless Redbeard from accross the channel, but by another Habsburg. My nephew is the completely German offspring of a German dynasty, I swear.

Francis: Excuse you. Your nephew has one German grandparent and won't speak more German than Fritz will in the future, even using the "German is how I speak to my horses" simile Fritz will steal. Also, can it be that you still hold a grudge from when my Greatuncle ditched you?

Margaret of Austria: what I'm holding are more bags of money than you can count, and the future of the Habsburg dynasty.

Pope: It's just, the last time a HRE ruled over parts of Italy along with the German territories, my predecessors and those Emperors kept having showdowns.

Margaret: Won't happen this time. I raised my nephew as a devoted Christian, your Holiness.

=> Charles for Emperor.

Diet of Worms: Happens.
Martin Luther: Shows up.
New Emperor Charles: Not impressed. Seriously, he wasn't. This particular event is key to Luther's reputation - "here I stand, I can do no other" etc. - but Charles was just, like, meh. I expected more. Possibly one reason why he let Luther go instead of arresting him on the spot, something he would agonize over decades later. Another reason was that Charles was still young enough that having given his word about free passage for Luther meant something to him.

Charles: Okay. I'm absolutely for church reform. But no heresy! The famous Council of Trent will be largely on my initiative. My stated life goal was Christian unity in my Empire. I only thought I'd have to duke it out with the Turks, in the true spirit of my Spanish grandparents. Instead, this Luther thing got totally out of control in the German principalities, Francis and I were at each other's throats for decades and the bastard even teamed up with the goddam Turks, and three Popes in a row hated my guts.

Pope Clement: Can you blame me? Your troops sacked Rome!
Charles: Not on my orders. I wasn't even in Italy at the time. The actual commander was even murdered before that happened.
Pope Clement: You still benefited. And scared the hell out of me. Which is why...
Henry VIII: Hey, Pope Clement, you're currently besieged by Charles' marauding troops in Rome, so I'm thinking this is the perfect time to ask you to declare my marriage to Charles' aunt Catherine of Aragon null and void!
Charles:...
Clement: ...
Henry VIII: FINE. Don't blame for the consequences.

Pope Paul III: As for me, I was willing to work with you. One of my illegitimate sons married your illegitimate daughter, even. But then you had to go and look the other way when one of your people killed another of my illegitimate sons. Naturally, I hated you from this point onwards. Hey, Francis, I just recalled France is the first daughter of the Church, not Spain, and certainly NOT Germany, which gets more heretical by the second. Want to team up?
Francis: With pleasure.
Charles: WTF? He's tight with the goddam Muslims!

Overseas Territories: Are we not going to mention the terrible bloody story of the Conquistadores?

selenak: Not in depth, but I have to share this with the class:
2018 Biographer of Charles: Look, colonialism = terrible, I entirely agree. But I would like to point out that Charles allowed a public dispute between Bartolomé Las Casas (Freedom for the Indios! J'Accuse!) and Selpudeva (forced conversion and slaves = legitimate life goals for conquest), listened to Las Casas at least somewhat and reformed his laws which now forbade enslaving the Indios. Both these men were among the top theologians of their time. That is to say, Spain under Charles had these debates about the ethics of coloniasm on the highest level, while it would be centuries more until such debates happened in the Protestant countries like England and Netherlands who weren't one jot better in their overseas colonialism and profited merrily from it while self righteously fostering the "Black Legend" about Charles and son Philip as the suppressors of every bit of Gedankenfreiheit. There was no English equivalent to Las Casas until the freaking tail end of the 18th century, was there!
Overseas colonies: Considering Philip when starting to be short of cash went back on Charles' reformed laws, allow us not to weep for their reputation.

Charles: Speaking of reputations. Between my contemporaries Francis and Henry, I actually win at husbandry. I was famously devoted to my wife Isabel of Portugal, made her regent of Spain in my absences and never remarried after her death, despite Philip being my sole legitimate son. I may not have seen him for years at a time, due to the sheer size of the Empire and my constant travelling from one emergency to the next, but I wrote him "I don't have another son but you" and touchingly added "and I don't want another son, either" when he was a teenager. However, I will admit that my love life before and after my marriage was somewhat more unorthodox.

Germaine de Fox: I'm the second, MUCH younger wife of Ferdinand of Aragon, Charles' granddad. Ferdinand married me to get of out Habsburgs ruling Spain, remember? Sadly, our one son lived for less than a day. Ferdinand died when I was still in my later 20s. Which is when Charles came to Spain to inherit. He was 17. What can I say? We hit it off. For a time, until he was about 19, I was constantly at his side. And then I got pregnant, giving birth to an illigitimate daughter. He didn't acknowledge her, but in my last will I said he was the dad. Anyway, naturally her birth happened in secret and Charles then thankfully arranged for me to marry again, one of his vassals, the Margrave of Brandenburg. Small world, eh?

Johanna van der Gheynst: I was a Flemish ladies' maid; Charles and I had a fling, which resulted in my daughter Margaret, named after his aunt of course. He acknowledged her as his bastard, had her raised by his aunt and later by his sister. She's the one who married the Pope's bastard. She also governed the Netherlands for a time in the proud tradition female Regents. (Charles' biographer would like to point out that the Habsburgs were really into female regents in the 15th and 16th century.) As for me, Charles arranged a marriage and paid me a rent for the rest of my days. My grandson, Alessandro Farnese, is one of Philip II's most trusted generals. He will go in the same school together with Don Carlos, fictional Posa and Juan d'Austria.

Barbara Blomberg: I was Charles' last fling from when he had to attend the Diet at Ratisbon in his last decade. There is still a sign at the inn in Ratisbon pointing out where Charles and I had passionate, if short lived sex, mainly because my kid Juan de Austria became a hero. Charles had him brought to Spain and raised there under the cover name of Jeronimo. He met him a few times in his final years when he was retired into a monestary, but did not tell the boy he was his father. However, he asked his son Philip in his last will to take care of Juan and openly acknoweldge him as his brother, which Philip did. He also had Juan raised along with his own son Don Carles and with Alessandro Farnese at that school. Meanwhile, I, like my precessors, had been married off and settled down in the Netherlands. But when my husband died, I took a distinctly different approach.

Duke of Alba, writing a letter to Philip: Sire, we have a problem. I suggested to your half brother's mother that she should retire into a nunnery, because that's what ladies do. I even picked a nice Nunnery for her. But you know what she said? She likes sex too much for that and would prefer it if you paid her a rent so she can enjoy her retirement years with wine, men and song.

Philip: You're my most feared general and the Dutch are afraid of you - and you can't convince a single woman to retire into a nunnery?

Barbara Blomberg: I'm not Dutch. I'm a fun loving southern German, my son Juan d'Austria has just achieved the greatest Spanish victory in two generations at the battle of Lepanto against the Turks and has been hailed as a hero even by Protestants while all your other generals are loathed.

Alba: I'm off fighting with some more Protestants. If you really want to convince her, you should send her son to talk to her.

Juan d'Austria: Mom!
Barbara: Son!
Juan: Mom, we've never seen each other since I was a baby, and it's nice to finally meet my other brothers and sisters, but seriously, Philip isn't down with this free love for women approach when it comes to members of the royal family. And while I am a national hero, I'm also still a bastard. If I pick a really nice nunnery, will you go? Otherwise, I might not get the job I'm currently eyeing, which is replacing Alba in the Netherlands and trying a less heavy handed approach there.
Barbara: Okay, for you. *enters a nunnery*

Juan d'Austria: dies young.
Nation: *mourns*
Barbara Blomberg: Dear sort of step son Philip II, I'm heartbroken, and also our deal is off. I'm not staying in a nunnery now my boy is dead. The only thing which can console me is a) a nice real estate for me and my other kids, and b) a return to wine, men and song! You don't want to say no to the grieving mother of the dead national hero, do you?
Philip: ...you know what, fine. Contrary to my Schillerian reputation, I'm giving you a generous unconditional retirement rent, allow you to settle whereever you want and continue to live your life however you want.

Barbara: Thank you. I'm dying at age 70 with no regrets and a life fully lived. Some YouTube users are slutshaming me in their comments to my scene with Charles like you wouldn't believe. Ignore them.

*rewind to earlier, when Juan de Austria is still alive*

Juan: Schiller mentions me along with Alessandro Farnese as being present in some public scenes, but we don't get any lines. Which is possibly because it would have interfered with the plot of his play, because in reality, this happened:

Don Carlos: Juan, old schoolmate, I want to conspire against Dad and either want to engineer a coup or take off to the Netherlands, depending on whom you believe. In any event, I'm telling you all about it. Want to join?

Juan: I'm telling you yes, because I'm not suicidal and you are famous for your uncertain temper in real life. And then I immediately go and tell half brother Philip. Because guess what? I've sworn my oath to him, he was the one to welcome me into the family, and unlike fictional Rodrigo de Posa, I just like Philip better than you. Sorry. Adios, Carlos.

Schiller: And that's why he didn't get any lines in my play. Look, Philip is a tragic antagonist, and Domingo is scum, Alba is the Old Dessauer as a Spaniard and the Grand Inquisitor is all I loathe, but even the black Legend of Spain doesn't offer me negatives on Juan de Austria.

Black Legend: Sure we do! We claim Barbara Blomberg wasn't his real mother and that he was Charles' incest baby with either his sister Mary of Hungary or his daughter Margaret instead!

Schiller: Sorry. Even hardcore Protestant writers don't buy that one anymore in the 18th century. Not least because neither Charles' sister nor his daughter were either with him at the appropriate time or out of the public eye enough for a secret pregnancy, unlike Queen Germaine decades earlier, and incest accusations were the most popular 16th century thing ever against political opponents.

Black Legend: Well, if Charles did it with his stepgrandmother, that was incest too. Typical Habsburg.

Schiller: They weren't related by blood and only met when he was an impressionable late teen. He grew up with his sister. I'm sure you see the difference. Anyway: Charles and his love life don't fit in my drama where Carlos in love with this stepmother needs to be the only big taboo breaker. Also Charles is dead when my plot takes place.

Verdi: Not in one variation of my opera, he's not. Maybe that's why old Charles saves young Carlos - he sympathizes!

From:

cahn

Man, this is awesome :D

England: We're thinking Henry VIII. for HRE, mostly because Henry thinks he rocks that much. Also the Pope has just appointed him Defender of the Faith. No more faithful Catholic than Henry, ever! All the titles for Henry!

HAHAHAHAHA omg, especially when paired with

Henry VIII: FINE. Don't blame for the consequences.

LOL FOREVER

New Emperor Charles: Not impressed. Seriously, he wasn't. This particular event is key to Luther's reputation - "here I stand, I can do no other" etc. - but Charles was just, like, meh. I expected more. Possibly one reason why he let Luther go instead of arresting him on the spot, something he would agonize over decades later. Another reason was that Charles was still young enough that having given his word about free passage for Luther meant something to him.

This is a hilariously engaging way of telling the story, but also this is fascinating (my knowledge of the story from Lutherans is, predictably, heavy on Luther and not at all on Charles). Also makes me feel for Charles. I have a huge trope-love for people who keep their word even when it kind of sucks for them.

and touchingly added "and I don't want another son, either" when he was a teenager.

Aww, that's touching! Seems like most people in that era would have wanted another son <3

Seems like generally speaking he treated his illegitimate kids pretty well too. (What happened to his daughter by Germaine de Fox?) Also I got a kick out of his unorthodox love life :D (Also I really like Barbara Blomberg!)

Philip: You're my most feared general and the Dutch are afraid of you - and you can't convince a single woman to retire into a nunnery?

HAHAHAHAHHA okay I burst out laughing here
would totally be up for Duke of Alva fic where he gets outmanuevered by Barbara

Also, aww Philip and Barbara :D <3

Juan: I'm telling you yes, because I'm not suicidal and you are famous for your uncertain temper in real life. And then I immediately go and tell half brother Philip. Because guess what? I've sworn my oath to him, he was the one to welcome me into the family, and unlike fictional Rodrigo de Posa, I just like Philip better than you. Sorry. Adios, Carlos.

...ALSO would read this. HA.

(Also I have seen one staging of Verdi which looked not so different from this in the auto-da-fe scene, although mostly I think due to really poor direction plus a lackluster Carlos coupled with Rene Pape as a compelling Philip that did come across as much cooler than Carlos; that would be interesting as an intentional directorial construction, though)

Schiller: They weren't related by blood and only met when he was an impressionable late teen. He grew up with his sister. I'm sure you see the difference.

*blinks*

:D

Edited Date: 2021-05-29 05:10 pm (UTC)

Re: Historical background notes for Verdi opera and Schiller play

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-05-30 09:07 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

Some algorithm decided I needed to see this in one of my feeds. It was right.

Map of 1789 HRE, put together by a Reddit poster. Warning, that link is safe in that it will take you to a page with a preview, but clicking on the preview to load the full image may crash your browser. YMMV. Detailed map is detailed!

I make no guarantees about accuracy or precision, but it was clearly a labor of love!

From:

selenak

Good lord, yes, very detailed. And shows why Napoleon redrawing the map and changing these dozens of tiny principalities into fewer and larger ones was something that was for the greater part kept after he got defeated.

From:

gambitten

Yo! I've finished all my exams and only have to tie up a few loose ends over the next week, then I'm free! I have some older sources to point to as well as some newer books in the coming weeks.

Quick question: I've seen you all talking about a "restricted" section of the Rheinsberg Library before - what's it for? I think I might have some really difficult to find books/papers to contribute to it, but I'm not sure if that's its purpose or how to access it?

From:

mildred_of_midgard

Yay, awesome, congrats! I'm looking forward to you coming back. Also, you should be super proud of yourself. :DDD

Check your DMs. ;)

Re: Almost finished!

From:

cahn - Date: 2021-05-31 04:53 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

I've now finished reading the Philip V bio, Philip V of Spain: The King Who Reigned Twice, by Henry Kamen (1997), and here are my findings.

French Throne
Remember when I said I wasn't sure if Philip would have claimed the French throne, just because there were people in France and Spain who thought he should? And then I read further and reported that he had pamphlets printed and distributed in France asserting his claims? It gets even better: any time young Louis XV was sick, Philip hopped out of his depression sickbed and started preparing to rush to France to claim the throne and assert himself against that upstart Philippe d'Orleans.

Yeeeeah. There would have been a war if Louis had died. Good job, Madame de Ventadour!

His obsession with ruling France was so well-known that people speculated that the reason he abdicated the crown of Spain was that he wanted to be free to claim the French throne. Kamen argues that there's no evidence for this and that it needs to be kept in mind that this is unknowable.

Languages
He did learn some Spanish, and apparently could handle paperwork in Spanish. But he always spoke French with his family, his ministers, his generals, and his confessor.

Mental Health
The author (Henry Kamen) does a good job of destigmatizing mental illness. He repeatedly refers to Philip's "neurobiological disorder" and refutes claims that Philip was "lazy" or "weak"; if he spent all day in bed and couldn't rule his kingdom, those were symptoms of his illness. The 1997 publication date no doubt helps tremendously.

Where I'm more hesitant is over the diagnosis. Kamen asserts that Philip was bipolar, because he veered between bedridden (depressed) and energetic (manic). I'm less certain that the episodes of activity fit the clinical criteria for mania. I think I would need to see a lot more primary sources to look for evidence.

Two things make me suspicious. One, that these "manic" episodes seem to only hit when there's a war to be fought or a kingdom to be claimed. I.e., the triggers seem purely external. Two, that his "symptoms" don't seem to impair his ability to do what needs to be done; this seems to be when he actually gets stuff done. It's quite possible that his passion for war and for claiming France gave him a burst of adrenaline that afforded him temporary relief from the depression, but that what he had was straight-up major depression, whose intensity fluctuated.

The one thing that makes me think of mania were the occasional episodes where he talked a lot, and very fast. That sounds like an actual symptom. Risk-taking may be one of the standard symptoms of mania, but I don't accept Philip's risking his life in battle as a symptom by itself; there's too much cultural context for that. He had a love of warfare, and we might just be seeing that and calling it mania because it contrasts with the depression.

So I'm ready to say he had depression, but I'm agnostic on bipolar.

Abdication
So, Philip definitely had a lot of guilt, anxiety, and self-esteem issues that are part and parcel of his depression, and which fed into his pathological piety. He flagellated himself, despite not being encouraged to do so by his confessor.

In one scribbled note to the confessor, the king wrote, 'Father, as this evening is my day for discipline [i.e. flagellation], please let me know what I should do, if I can say a Miserere in its place, and if you can relieve me of the obligation'; The confessor wrote back: 'Sire, Your Majesty has no obligation to do the discipline, or to say the Miserere, or to do anything in its place. I relieve you of the need to do anything.'

But Philip continues to obsess over saving his soul. He becomes convinced he can only do this by retiring to a place of complete tranquility. As early as 1720, he and Isabella sign their first vow to someday abdicate. 1720 is key because it's right after the 1718-1720 war of the Quadruple Alliance, where Spain tried to regain territory lost in the War of the Spanish Succession, and France, England, Austria, and the Netherlands ganged up on them and made them give it back. France invaded Spain, which was deeply traumatic for Philip, who was still kinda-sorta French at heart. (Remember when I said the Duke of Berwick really didn't want to invade Spain and fight against the king he'd fought *on behalf of* for over 10 years? Berwick's son was actually in Philip's service! It was tough for everyone.)

So that was depressing, and Philip got worse and started thinking about abdication. He and Isabella repeated this vow in writing in 1721, 1722, and 1723. Finally, in 1724, when their oldest son reached his majority, Philip abdicated. The reasons he gave are:

Having for the last four years considered, and reflected deeply and profoundly on, the miseries of this life, through the illnesses, wars and upheavals that God has seen fit to send me in the twenty-three years of my reign... [and now that my son is old enough to rule, I'm abdicating.]

Any other reasons, like wanting to rule France, are speculation. So then Philip and Isabella stepped down and went to live in their palace retreat.

...Where they held court and told their son what to do from afar and just generally couldn't give up power.

Then the new king died, seven months later, from smallpox. His brother was only 11 and not ready to rule. There was debate over what to do. Philip V ended up reclaiming the crown, but there were those who thought he could only legally become regent.

Philip himself often felt this. He was tormented over whether he had the right to be king, after having abdicated. As we've seen, he dealt with this by trying to abdicate; then, when Isabella foiled that, by refusing to talk, or refusing to talk to anyone but her (or one time his valet). Can't talk, can't rule!

Btw, just as I'm sometimes left thinking, "Did Voltaire really design a war chariot or can I not read German as well as I think I can?" or "Is German 'Kickboxer' a false friend and it actually means something else??" I've spent the last couple days worried that I misread or misremembered, and it didn't actually say that he thought he was a frog and I've misled everyone...
Nope, I'm staring at the page again, and it does say: "At one time in July he believed that he was a frog."

So that happened.

In the end, Philip reigned just short of 46 years, minus the 7 months of unofficially ruling from his retreat.

Relationship with Isabella
So it appears that reports of Isabella's dominance may have been exaggerated. Young Philip V was shy and insecure, and Louis XIV, through his ministers, and then increasingly Marie Louise, made the decisions. But the older he got, the more he seems to have had his own opinions. He apparently felt especially strongly on matters of foreign policy.

Like Marie Louise, Isabella was his main emotional support. And he definitely had much worse depression during his second marriage than his first. Quite possibly because war had a therapeutic effect on him, and Marie Louise died just at the end of the War of the Spanish Succession. Isabella got him during a mixture of peacetime and wartime, so she got to see the worst episodes. It's also likely that since he wasn't getting actual therapy, his mental health continued deteriorating as he got older. Since, you know, war isn't *actually* therapeutic and the guy clearly needed real therapy.

When he was bedridden, he and Isabella were inseparable. She seems to have worn herself out trying to live a normal life and also meet all of his needs, including the nocturnal schedule. It was impossible for ambassadors to meet with one of them alone; it was always both of them, and in fact, she stayed so close to him, that you basically couldn't catch either of them alone.

During audiences, he would listen and refuse to talk, and she would do all the talking. And when he was really badly off, she wouldn't let anyone see him. This led contemporaries to believe she was making all the decisions. A conclusion that was made all the easier by the fact that when you don't like the decision, it's easier to blame the bad advisor than the king, and especially when the decision-maker is a woman, which goes against the laws of nature! As we've discussed, Contemporaries concluded that he was sexually dependent, and that she dominated him because of her sexual hold on him. Nonsense, says Kamen, he was mentally ill, and their relationship just didn't fit into the contemporary worldview.

When it came to politics, Kamen argues that Philip was making the decisions, communicating them to her in private, and she was just enforcing them. His take on Isabella is that she basically molded herself to be whatever her husband needed. She nursed him, was his therapist, was his first minister, and implemented all his ideas without having any of her own.

The problem here is that some of his evidence is Isabella asserting that she was just carrying out Philip's ideas and that she had no wishes apart from his. And Kamen just refutes all the ambassadors' claims and uncritically accepts hers.

Whereas I would submit that maybe an unpopular woman whose power derived from her husband might actually feel the need to say that. Maybe she was doing a Caroline of Ansbach with George II, convincing her husband that her ideas originated with him!

If you step away from what they say and look at what they *do*, this is what I see:

- Isabella's first act on arriving is to dismiss the Princess d'Ursins for being insolent, and then say to Philip, upon meeting him, "Hope you don't mind I got rid of your late wife's advisor who's either been or been perceived the dominant power in Spain for the last decade and a half."

- When Philip abdicates the first time, Isabella goes along with it. After he returns to the throne, she does everything in her power to stop him, from keeping him under lock and guard, to having her messenger burst in on the council meeting and tear up the paper Philip wrote.

- Philip has opinions of his own when he's not laid up with depression, and he devotes himself to ruling, and I don't see a strong reversal of policy when he's incapacitated and Isabella's doing the talking.

What I see here is the royal couple working as a team and presenting a united front. On the one hand, I don't see evidence that Isabella has no ideas that diverge from his. It seems like she's the kind of person who's willing to take the initiative when she feels strongly. Which means that she's probably got strong feelings about other things as well, we just don't see her fighting Philip unless she can't get him to agree with her using milder means.

On the other hand, given his level of activity when he's not incapacitated, and given the continuity in some of his opinions between his first marriage and second, it does seem like he was doing at least some of the ruling. So Isabella's dominance may well have been overestimated, because she was an obvious scapegoat.

Finally, I regret to report, when his mental health plummeted, Philip was known to fight with Isabella and hit her hard enough on at least one occasion that she had to explain the scratches and bruises to Rottembourg (pretty sure "the French ambassador" is him), thus moving him off the "candidate for decent marriage" list and into the "no no no" list for me. Plus there's the whole requiring my non-stop attendance on him all night while he refuses to bathe or dress and is soiling the bed. I'm not sure running Spain is worth it.

Music therapy
By popular demand, Kamen's account of the Farinelli episode!

In 1737, Farinelli's in London, where he's had a contract since 1734. Isabella invites him to Spain. On his way, he performs for Louis XV. When he arrives in Spain, Philip is depressed and not attending the royal concert. But...

As the clear tones of his voice rose into the air, they penetrated to the bedroom where the afflicted Philip lay. The divine voice immediately resuscitated the king, who snapped out of his depression and began to attend once more to his work routine. Astonished by the therapeutic effects of Farinelli's music, the king and queen demanded that he sing for them every day.

He finds the workload, especially the nocturnal part, demanding, but he uses his position to introduce Italian opera to Spain, where it's a big hit, and in general create closer cultural ties between Italy and Spain. He writes, 'my achievement is that I am considered not as mere Farinelli, but as ambassador Farinelli.'

It was said by many that Philip only wanted to hear the same handful of arias, but that's slander, says Kamen. If you look at Farinelli's own papers, he had to sing hundreds of different pieces.

Through Farinelli, the king had discovered at last, after many years of suffering, a satisfactory therapy for his disorder.

That said, "satisfactory therapy" isn't the same thing as "immediate cure"; he continues to struggle with depression for the rest of his life. He dies in 1746.

Death
It was very quick: he woke up at noon, felt suddenly sick at 1:30, and was dead three minutes later. He was 62.

Interestingly, while Kamen says his sudden death was the result of long-term deterioration of mind and body, and Spanish Wikipedia says he died of a stroke, the actual symptoms Kamen gives (Wiki gives none) suggest something very different to me:

At 1:30, he said to Elizabeth [Isabella] that he thought he was going to vomit. She immediately called for a doctor, but was told that the king's physician was out at lunch. Philip's throat started swelling, as did his tongue, and he fell back on the bed. Within seconds he was dead. It had been three minutes from the moment that he mentioned vomiting.

That sounds like anaphylaxis to me: the swelling, the nausea, and the speed of the attack. Whatever he was allergic to, he might have died of it no matter how healthy he'd been.

From:

selenak

It gets even better: any time young Louis XV was sick, Philip hopped out of his depression sickbed and started preparing to rush to France to claim the throne and assert himself against that upstart Philippe d'Orleans.

Philippe d'Orleans: And people kept casting me as the evil uncle hoping for the kid's demise!

BTW: how did he react when Philippe d'Orleans died? (Since this meant Philip the King's rival for the succession should young Louis die as well would have been Philippe's son, who was thus one more step removed from a throned ancestor.) And I take that when young Louis started to reproduce (and with a woman he'd ditched the adorable moppet daughter of Philip of Spain for, no less), this triggered yet more depression?

But he always spoke French with his family, his ministers, his generals, and his confessor.

After I had watched the movie A Royal Exchange, I googled reviews, and wouldn't you know it, one of them complained that Philip V. and his court don't wear properly Spanish fashion but French one, and don't speak French with a Spanish accent, and isn't that typical for Hollywoodization. I mean....

(Even if you don't know anything about the history going in, the movie does make it clear that Philip V. is the grandson of Louis XIV - he monologues to Louis' portrait, for God's sake! -, and there's even an exposition scene in which Philippe d'Orleans explains why marrying young Louis XV to the moppet and his daughter to Philip's oldest son will prevent any further Spanish/French wars, for God's sake.)

Risk-taking may be one of the standard symptoms of mania, but I don't accept Philip's risking his life in battle as a symptom by itself; there's too much cultural context for that.

*nods* Not in that day and age, when fighting wars was seen as a gold standard for manliness and taught as such to boys all over Europe.

Philip V ended up reclaiming the crown, but there were those who thought he could only legally become regent.

I'm trying to think about precedent. Certainly the wars of the roses offered two living crowned Kings at the same time - Henry VI and Edward IV., from the time of Edward's coronation to years later Henry VI's death in the Tower - , but neither of them ever abdicated. Their removal from power (Henry through his illlness and then through war, Edward through Warwick turning on him and changing teams to Lancaster) hadn't been voluntary, and so there wasn't, I think, a discussion as to whether they could legitimately return to power. (Not least because if you were Team Lancaster or Team York, the other guy was a pretender anyway.)

It gets more complicated when you go further back and branch out. Now, in the HRE, the current Emperor having his son elected as German King was a usual practice only rarely omitted, since it was the first step of having him elected Emperor later. Henry II. was the first King of England to try and important that practice for the Angevin Empire by making his oldest son crowned King of England while still alive (said son is therefore commonly known as Henry the young King and in novels ends up being called Hal in order not to be confused with Dad), which promptly turned into a disaster since he refused to give him any power to go with the title, the first Eleanor of Aquitaine & her sons vs Henry rebellion happened and it was family strife from this point till the end of Henry's life. When Henry the young King died, he sure as hell did not crown next oldest son Richard the Lionheart. But during the first rebellion, the "hey, young Henry IS a crowned King, the Lord's annointed, so basically old Henry has abdicated without admitting as much, therefore he isn't legitimately king anymore, right?" argument was actually used.

I can't think of another European monarch who did voluntarily (i.e. not forced by war and his winning enemies*) abdicate and then resumed power. Branching out some more, there was an Emperor of the Middle Ming Dynasty who was captured in battle by the Mongols, only for the eunuchs back home in Peking and his mother to promptly crown his younger brother the next Emperor and ignore all which the captured Emperor said (or was forced to say). The Mongol leader in question finally decided he was best served in letting the captured Emperor go, and indeed this made things majorly awkward in China, with two crowned sons of heaven and neither willing to budge. The first Emperor eventually resumed his role after his younger brother had died, but he also assumed a different ruling name for his second reign.

Anyway: Monarch who abdicates and then wants the top job back = major theoretical headache, to be sure.

Relationship with Isabella: I can see your point re: getting him off the list of desirable royal spouses.

Farinelli: thank you! And here are two more musical links for

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-06-01 01:41 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

One of the things I learned from Duffy was that Valori wrote memoirs. They seem to be legit, as in written by him. But who knows! I also don't know if they're Mitchell-style or Catt-style.

Unfortunately, I can't find the memoirs in English, so if anyone wants to read them, I'll have to put them through the no-longer-free translation algorithms. The estimated cost would be $20-$25, for about 1,000 pages in 2 volumes.

The one thing I've learned (assuming they're trustworthy) was that after the battle of Soor, at the end of September, dognapped Biche wasn't returned until the peace was made in December, and "her restoration was almost an article of the treaty."

selenak, you weren't kidding when you wrote:

Frau von Nadasty: But you told me I could keep her! She's adorable! I want to keep her!

Nadasty: How was I to know the Robber King is dog mad? Look, we've just lost a battle. The way this guy sounds, I wouldn't put it beneath him to go after us just to get the bloody dog back

!

Also, if this is correct, my fic was wrong in assuming she was returned at the same time as the POWs! (No mention of any other dogs, but that was intentional creative license anyway--Richter thinks the other animals mentioned in the letter are horses.)

So if anyone ever wants to write another take on the post-Soor events, we have Heinrich and AW present, Fritz and Heinrich drowning in overlarge shirts, and Biche not returned for 2-3 months!!

From:

selenak

Biche-less Fritz must have been hell to live with. I mean, more so than usual. Add to this that he probably hears around this time that while he's been duking it out with Nadasty, Wilhelmine had her lunch with en route to Frankfurt MT, and the increasing bile of the sibling letters is even more explained. (Though if Biche was restorned in December, Fritz no longer has that excuse for February and March which is when he fires off the Marwitz letters at Heinrich.)

Valori: The Stabi has them online, but only in French, too. From what I can see, they are actual memoirs (i.e. not collected reports and letters a la Mitchell), though with a lengthy introduction and only published in 1820. Which could or couldn't mean they were editorialized a la Hervey.

Re: Valori memoirs

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-31 06:07 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Valori memoirs

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-05-31 06:29 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

mildred_of_midgard

So as I've mentioned, I did finally read Christopher Duffy's military biography of Fritz in the last couple months. It was published in 1985, with all that entails.

I found it very readable, a good overview of Fritz's campaigns and way more accessible than Showalter's battle-focused approach, and not remotely rigorous in terms of scholarship.

I had a very exciting couple of days early in April, right after I had vowed not to participate in salon until I had read Orieux, and then I encountered these two passages in Duffy:

Less well known is Frederick William’s Political Testament, which was opened upon his death, and contained this passage:

Throughout my life I have been careful not to draw down the envy of the House of Austria on my head. This has forced me to pursue two passions which are really alien to me, namely unbounded avarice, and an exaggerated regard for tall soldiers. Only under the disguise of these spectacular eccentricities was I allowed to gather a large treasury and assemble a powerful army. Now this money and these troops lie at the disposal of my successor, who requires no such mask. (Bleckwenn, 1978, 65)

and

Frederick was lacking in basic ‘integrity’, when we use this word in the strict sense of the force which binds together public and private conduct. Maria Theresa owned this integrity when Frederick patently did not. Old Fritz once advised his nephew concerning la politique particulière:

when I was crown prince I showed little inclination towards military things. I was fond of my comforts, good food and wine, and I was often frantic with love. When I became king I put on the guise of soldier, philosopher and poet. I slept on straw, I camped among my soldiers eating ration bread, and I affected to despise women.

Me: WHAT? They can't both be faking! Why am I on hiatus from salon?! We need to talk about this!!

Then, after I calmed down :P, I took a look at the sources. The second one turned out to be the easier to dispense with. I got suspicious as soon as I saw the publication date, 1786, the author: Toulongeon, and the title of the work, A military mission in Prussia, in 1786
Account of a trip to Germany and observations on the Potsdam and Magdeburg maneuvers.

So some French guy who visits Prussia in 1786 suddenly has insights into what Fritz wrote in the first person to his nephew, and you don't have a source like Preuss?

Dug into this Toulongeon and his memoir, and I found first that he was quoting from "Les matinées royales, ou l'art de régner." When I googled that, I found a ton of sources saying, "Misattributed to Friedrich II" or "often misattributed to Friedrich II or Voltaire."

Or Voltaire, lol.

More digging turns up articles telling me that this was a pamphlet published anonymously in 1766 and circulating in manuscript form before that, which claimed to be written by Fritz for FW2.

But its authorship was debated even by contemporaries: there were rumors circulating that, because it was an obvious satire, it must have been written by a vengeful Voltaire! (Author of 20th century article: "Voltaire was certainly not above denying his anonymously/pseudonymously published satires, but this one, no. Don't buy it.")

Then, in the mid-19th century, some French guy published a copy that he said derived from a copy that was handed over to a young count in 1782 by Fritz himself, in person, as a token of honor! 19th century French guy apparently thought this had never appeared in print before. Oops.

And then there was one that was supposed to have been found at Sanssouci after Fritz's death and secretly copied.

Now, Prussian historians went crazy, of course. Major debate ensued. Ranke went looking through the archives, and found a couple copies, but none in Fritz's handwriting. To quote the article I'm following here (by George V Jourdan, 1945):

Other persons, if we are to judge by their own accounts, appear to have been more fortunate. Each of them has solemnly declared either that he possessed the very original manuscript in Frederick's writing or that he saw it, or some friend of his saw it, in the possession of somebody else.

The French and British also debated its authorship. No less a personage than Lord Acton believed it was written by Fritz, defended its authenticity, and published an edition!

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a really rigorous article, and most of the arguments for and against I've seen have been less than overwhelming. Jourdan opens his article by talking about Fritz's personality, and includes this gem:

Given a better start in life, Frederick might still have become a great king, but would undoubtedly have been a happier man, inspiring trust and confidence, enriching his people with a true prosperity, and for himself, finding comfort and strength in the assurance of the providential care of God and peace in the redemptive love of Christ.

And then he goes on to argue about how his version of Fritz would *never* have written the stuff in the pamphlet. Right. No bias there.

Another scholar, in 1902, had already written quite correctly that everyone is arguing about what Fritz would or would not have written based on their preconceptions of Fritz. He then goes on to say that objections based on style or historical inaccuracy don't hold water, because:

We must not forget that while Frederick was a very great king, he was also a very conceited and amateurish man of letters. To make a hit in literature would certainly have seemed to him quite as good an object of ambition as to win a battle, and if the whole book reads very like the production of a clever literary hack, this is very much what it would be like if Frederick himself had written it.

So this whole investigation into the authenticity of this piece has been a trip, but the end result is that--in addition to my belief that Duffy's scholarship isn't very good--based on my preconception of Fritz as TOTALLY GAY, I conclude he either didn't write this or, at the very least, didn't mean it. :P

Now the whole part where he's putting on a public display of wearing a ragged uniform and eating sparingly, while at home wearing fancy clothes and eating well, sure. But the part that had me going !! was the unexpected first-person support for Zimmermann's claim that Fritz was faking the Greek love the whole time.

That leaves us with FW faking loving tall soldiers. Like Fritz faking not being het, he gave a really convincing impression!

Unfortunately, the citation is Bleckwenn, 1978, Brandenburg-Preussens Heer, which I can't find *anywhere*. Stabi has a record saying "not available for interlibrary loan."

However, there is another book by the same author in the same year, Unter dem Preussen-Adler, which Google Books snippet view tells me also mentions the 1722 testament, and which is available at Stabi, here.

selenak, I know it'll be a month before you get your next 6 books, and you might have higher priorities, but it would be great if you could get a hold of it sometime. Since authors like to repeat themselves, it might be useful. At the very least, it should tell us which edition of the 1722 Political Testament Bleckwenn is using, because it's sure not any of the ones you or I have found.

But what's interesting is that I'm reminded that the reason we actually tracked down the 1722 testament and you read it in full and summarized it for us, is because MacDonough said the 1722 testament included FW advising his successor to regain Silesia, and you found absolutely nothing about that.

Now that we have two such supposed passages from the 1722 testament, I have to wonder if, like Thiebault's memoirs, there are multiple versions out there. More specifically, because one is "FW totally told Fritz to invade Silesia!" and the other is "FW was faking his love of tall soldiers so Fritz could use his army, because of those cursed Austrians holding Prussia back from his destiny!" if this might be nineteenth-century nationalist Prussian revisionist history that wants to make their two big heroes look good.

In less exciting but still hilarious news, a report of ?? authenticity from Duffy, which derives from the questionable Thiebault, on one of Carel's brothers:

...one of Frederick’s former pages, the scapegrace Johann Ernst Pirch. While on parade in Prussia he had let a red juice dribble from his mouth, to convince the authorities that he was dying from consumption, and he then betook himself to France as a major in the hired regiment of Hesse-Darmstadt. ‘He introduced a truly Prussian discipline to this regiment, which made a great sensation at that time, and drew the particular attention of the court of Versailles’ (Thiébault, 1813, III, 326). Pirch wrote an influential Essai de Tactique in collaboration with a French officer, but he died in 1783 at the age of thirty-eight of a polype au coeur. This time he gave a definitive performance.

At least in the 1804 edition of the memoirs, it doesn't appear to have been a one-time thing on parade. It went on for a year, and he would post someone at the window (of where he was residing, I assume? I can only read a small amount of French at a time), and whenever he got the alert that someone was approaching, he would cut the neck of one of the pigeons in his collection, that he'd acquired for just this purpose, and put that blood in his mouth.

I have no idea if this is true, but I share it with you because it's too good not to!

Finally, Fritz admitted in a letter to Schwerin in 1756, when writing about Lobositz, that he was near-sighted:

The fog was thick and all that could be seen was a sort of enemy rearguard that begged to be attacked to fall on its rear. As I have poor eyesight, I consulted better eyes than mine to see what was going on, which saw just like me. I sent them to reconnoiter, and all the reports I received were as I judged.

So Schwerin in 1756 at least was in the know.

(This one's in the Political Correspondence, so I'm treating it as real.)

From:

selenak

Okay, I'll have you know I just reread FW's political testament for your sake, in case I missed anything, and the Rokoko German is still a headache. :) But unless he wrote a completely different one after the 11722 Testament, which is the one we have in the library, or, as you speculate, there was some 19th century nationalistic forgery involved, "I only faked liking tall soldiers and being a miser because of the evil Austrians!" is nowhere to be found in this document and would, in fact, stick out like a sore thumb, beause a great deal of said Political Testament consists of money-saving and money earning tips. Including, I regret to say, old school antesimitism, i.e. religous, not the 19th century onwards new school antisemitism justifying itself with "race": FW tells Fritz not to hand out any more protection letters to Jews because they are all evil betrayers of Jesus, but if he needs money, he can squeeze the ones Prussia already has dry, because they all deserve it, because Jesus.

The 1722 testament is also most insistent that the army waas not to be sized down, and if Fritz' ministers tell him to do that in order to save money, here's how you maintain an army on that level and save money otherwise instead. (Motly taxes and supporting your local manufacturers so only their stuff is bought and sold.) Under no account, however, is Fritz to do what other German princes do and lend his troops for money elsewhere. This is also of the devil. (As are wars of aggression.) (Though Jülich and Berg are their sacred inheritance and if he wants to do anything about THAT, well....)

In that context is also one sentence which does accuse the House of Austria and the Emperor of jealousy, as in, FW advises Fritz NOT to lend his lovely army to the Emperor, either, not to lend him any money, because the Habsburgs are totes jealous that the Hohenzollerns have that nice army an such a lot of cash, unlike themselves. But "And tht's why I pretended to like tall men" does not show up as a follow up sentence. OTOH, Fritz is also strictly forbidden to ally with France against the HRE; he's to remember how that turned out with the Wittelsbachs (i.e. Höchstädt/Blenheim) and not do it. Oh, and Max Emmanuel together with Louis XIV should also be Fritz' example of how starting wars of aggression is only having EVIL results for you, and God will punish you for it.

One way to save money to maintain the lovely army is to be a really hard working King, too. As for ministers, FW recs Grumbkow (spelled Grumkau in this document, telling us how it was pronounced) beause he's ultra competent, but while Fritz should be polite to him and keep him in the cabinet, he should never show him what he thinks. (FW: apparantly suffering from the delusion Grumbkow didn't know what he, FW, thought at any given point.) If Grumbkow is dead by the time Fritz gets on the throne, his son-in-law Podewils is also useful and hireable. And no whores or "Sardanapalian excesses of the flesh" in general. (FW! THe classical education Mom insisted on was not in vain if you remember Sardanapal, who is not in the bible.)

As for the supposed Fritz-to-FW2 text: if it first shows up in print in 1766, and existed in manuscript from before that, making the rounds, it might even have been produced in the last years of the 7 Years War, when the propaganda war by anonymous pamphlet was as fervent as that on the battlefield. Given that Boswell in 1764, i.e. two years earlier, gets told the story of Fritz and the STD plus ensuing impotence after fucking around too much as a young man, Fritz' sex life, or lack of same, was certainly a topic for the gossips and thus also for the pamphleteers.

As for the likelihood of Fritz actually writing something like this to his unfavorite nephew - 1766 and the years before and after in terms of documented uncle/nephew interaction are more famous for Fritz a) firing FW2's governor Borck for making a war critical and peace praising remark in 1763/64, b) Fritz chewing out young FW2 for wearing French fashion (!), and c) Fritz chewing out young FW2 for having sex with everone but his wife who has sex with everyone but him. Somehow, "I really like women, too, and just pretended" is not the kind of thing fitting the pattern there.

Edited Date: 2021-06-01 05:45 am (UTC)

From:

mildred_of_midgard

First of all: great job, everyone, on the teamwork involved in uncovering Peter's son's baptismal record and Ariane's death record! *applauds*

cahn, your contribution to original research was amaaazing!

I didn't even have a birth year for younger son Friedrich, and now I have a birth date! And as

felis said, after he goes to university with his brother and appears briefly in the Adresskalendar circa 1764, he disappears off the map. And now we know where Ariane was buried!

Fritz as godfather to his namesake, that's cool. He can't have been present in person, since he was off on campaign in August 1745 (Biche is about to be dognapped 6 weeks later), but someone must have been there as proxy.

As for the spelling Oriane that

felis commented on, I've found at least 5 spellings of her name: Ariane, Oriane/Oriana, Origana, Marianne, and Adriane. The reason salon settled on Ariane (short for Ariane-Louise) is that's the one in the Formey eulogy, where Formey's quoting directly from Peter's memoirs, so that's the closest we've got to how Ariane spelled it.

As for the spelling "Pierre Christophle Charles," of which

cahn said the second name was likely a typo, Formey gives Peter's name as "Pierre Christophle Charles", 'l' and all! Furthermore, later on in the page, one of his ancestors is listed as a "Jean Christophle", and there are other "Christophle"s in the book. This...must have been a thing? I mean, linguistically, 'r's can turn into 'l's and vice versa, and the Romance languages were especially prone to it when the word already had an 'r' (this phenomenon is called dissimilation), so "Christophle" must have been a French variant alongside "Christophe."

*a few minutes later*

Am finding some google hits, yep. Including this image of a 16th century manuscript. So it's a thing! The small corners that this fandom has led me to never cease to surprise me.

Small problem, though: I created an account on FamilySearch (naturally), but I can't find either of the records

cahn found. Either I'm searching wrong (I'm getting plenty of other results, just not these two), or the free account doesn't get you the full access. I suspect the latter, since when I click on the direct link

cahn provided, I get "You may be able to view this image by visiting one of our partners' sites or the legal record custodian (fees may apply)."

On that note, can I ask,

cahn, when you have time, for you to run some searches on the name Suhm, 17th or 18th century, in Dresden, Berlin, or Warsaw? Aside from our envoy Ulrich Friedrich von Suhm (b. 1691 Dresden, died 1740 Warsaw, buried ??), I'm particularly interested in wife Charlotte, who died 1730 but I don't have a date or a deathplace, or son Frederik Christian, born in January 1730 but I don't have a birthplace. The family is Danish in origin, so there may be a lot of Zuhm false positives.

Also, any Keiths in Poborowo aka Poberow, Poland in the 17th, 18th, or 19th centuries are of interest--that's where our Peter was born.

<3

From:

mildred_of_midgard

While researching my Peter Keith biographical essay (lol, if I keep researching like this, it'll never get written), I ran across this 1895 source: Louis von Scharfenort, Die Pagen am Brandenburg-preußischen Hofe 1415 – 1895. Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte des Hofes aufgrund archivalischer Quellen, which Kloosterhuis considered worthy of citation. It's in the library now. It's short (150 pages), and even shorter if you limit yourself to our period (50 pages).

I didn't find anything new directly on Peter, but I can tell it's Relevant To Our Interests.

It covers our usual suspects: Pirch, Sydow, Münchow, Marwitz, etc. On page 74, I see a Marwitz in the main text receiving 66 Thaler as Abreisegeld (severance pay? or just money for a trip?) which would fit with our Marwitz being let go during that period, along with a "C.W. v. Marwitz" on page 151 listed for the years 1744-1756. I remember we had questioned Lehndorff's dating of Marwitz as a page in 1746 on the grounds that surely he would be rather too old, but maybe not? If so, might we finally have a first name (Carl Wilhelm)? (Double check me; capital letters in unholy fonts are my Achilles heel.)

The book draws on the box bills and contains details on payments, expenses, and gifts--I mention this because Selena had mentioned wondering what a page's salary would be. My impression is that this volume has more than you'd ever want to know.

Right before the Keith brothers section, I saw FW endangering his pages' lives during the boar/swine hunt, so that might well have been a thing Peter went through.

I feel like these pages are full of goodies and will repay reading! Preferably by someone who doesn't take a full hour to read 3 of the pages! (But seriously, the fact that I *can* actually more or less read the pages, I'm just super slow, is light years beyond where I was a year ago, never mind two. :D :D I might use this volume, along with the Dantal memoirs as Fritz's reader, to practice my unholy font.)

Edited Date: 2021-06-01 12:16 am (UTC)

From:

selenak

prinzsorgenfrei

Hello!

Uni is still going and I still don't have much to show in terms of art from the list, BUT I could no longer stand Fredersdorf's sad eyes that were undoubtedly blaming me for a painful existence, so I covered his face in oil paint in an attempt to make him less of an acrylic monstrosity.

images

Clearly, oil paint is the superior medium (for me). He still doesn't look much like himself, but at least he's less ugly :'D I might go back in to fix his coat too... I'm currently working on the lineart of another piece featuring Fredersdorf (this time with Frederick, acting all husband like) and maybe then I'll finally capture his face properly :D Until then, have this small update

From:

selenak

Awwww. Thank you, we do appreciate it. (And so does Fredersdorf!)

Re: Jana coming out of her well to drop art and leave

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-06-01 11:02 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Jana coming out of her well to drop art and leave

From:

cahn - Date: 2021-06-02 04:24 am (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

My latest bunch of books from the Stabi have arrived: three Joseph II related books, the Sophie of Hannover correspondence, the SD the older/Her lover Königsmarck correspondence, and the "Secret Memoirs" of Jean Des Champs. The later, alas, edited and published by the Huguenot Society of GB and Ireland, were published in the original French. However, there is a really long introduction which feels like an English summary of the memoirs themselves, complete with translated into English quotes from same. Said introduction being more of a lengthy summary than a foreword is really noticable, since the introduction writer (and presumably translator), Uta Janssens-Knorsch, takes all of Des Champs' presentations of his life on faith, which can be hilarious when it comes to Manteuffel (called a "son of Apollo" and only present as a patron of the art, which means that Fritz kicking him out of the country for no reason at all is just incomprehensibly; Des Champs explanation why he himself correspondended with Seckendorff Jr the diary writer BUT NOT LIKE THAT and only an evil scheme made it look that way to Fritz, thus ruining his, Des Champs' reputation is also something to behold), but is a problem when it comes to Fredersdorf, because lo and behold, near their end Des Champs' Memoirs finally present us with a contemporary account of someone charging Fredersdorf with embezzlement (to wit, Des Champs, claiming Fredersdorf kept his, Des Champs, salary, and that of others, and Fritz just refuses making Fredersdorf's heirs pay said salary because he'd then have to pay everyone else's stuff that Fredersdorf embezzled as well). The introduction quotes both a letter from Des Champs to Fritz and statements from Abraham Michell (aka the the Swiss guy who worked as Prussia's sort of envoy in London instead of Peter Keith, if you recall) to Des Champs (via his brother) to that effect, but both the letter and the Michell statements are sourced from the Memoirs themselves, not from other archives. (I.e. Des Champs claims "I wrote" and "Michell told me", we don't have, it seems the original documents.) Still, we have to acknowledge now the claim does exist by a contemporary source.

But back to the beginning, as summarized in the English introduction. Jean Des Champs hails from a Huguenot family who had emigrated to Mecklenburg after Louis XIV revoked the edict of Nantes. He had an older brother, Jacques, and a younger brother, Antoine. The Memoirs, Uta J-K says, are very much in the spirit of Rousseau in that they mostly concern themselves with Des Champs' early life, his childhood and youth, about which two thirds of them are, with only the final third covering Berlin, The Hague, London. Antoine and Jean both study in Geneva, which is about the best you can do as a Calvinisit Reverend and Scholar in training, but when Des Champs père dies, Jean switches to the less expensive university of Marburg, which turns out to be a blessing in disguise, because there he encounters and can study at the feet of the great Christian Wolff. (Who, being banished by FW from Prussia, has just ended up there.) Jean thus meets his philosophical idol and starts translating his works into French.

Meanwhile, his mother and brothers have moved from Mecklenburg to Berlin, where Jean also ends up and encounters Le Diable, aka the Son of Apollo, best patron ever, lovely silver fox of a gentleman who is totally disinterested in politics now and a PRIVATE CITIZEN residing in Berlin. Since he happens to know Crown Prince Fritz and Crown Prince Fritz is curious about Wolffian philosophy, Manteuffel makes introductions. The preface writer seems to be under the impression that Des Champs' translations were how Fritz read Wolff, exclusively so; I haven't yet checked whether that's a claim Des Champs also makes in his memoirs. However, Suhm definitely is Sir Not Appearing In This Introduction.

Since Des Champs is now 29 and badly in need of a steady job, he accepts the post of steady employment, so he accepts when Fritz offers him the position of chaplain at Rheinsberg, which he starts in February 1737. Job interview, according to the introduction:

The day after his arrival Des Champs was invited to dine at the royal table and the Prince asked him many questions, especially about Wolff; what was he like, how did he look, was he sympathetic, was he a pedant, and so on. The introduction says Des Champs after agreeing to take the job had some trouble from the President of the council, Cocceji, his sworn enemy (of these, there are a lot named in the introduction), but eventually he gets the FW stamp of approval, too, and his hiring is official. (This Cocceji is the father of Barbarina's future husband.) Des Champs lives not in the castle itself but in a small house in the village of Rheinsberg. His duties are preaching in the Royal Chapel, playing chess or having conversations with EC. He also makes friends with Jordan, who, however, will reveal himself as deeply treacherous in the future, and as scum just as many another member of Fritz' circle and household.

After an idyllic start, fate strikes most cruelly. When Des Champs left Berlin for Rheinsberg, Seckendorff the Nephew, Imperial Envoy at Berlin (and chum of Manteuffel, though the introduction does not mention this at all) asked him for some regular news correspondence. Des Champs correctly interprets this as a request to spy on Fritz and is HORRIFIED. Naturally, he only writes philosophical letters to Seckendorff Jr., and keeps the letter with actual news for his mother and brothers. However, Seckendorff the Younger, being an arch villain, avenges himself on Des Champs by secretly opening Des Champs' family letters, copying one of them in Des Champs' handwriting and addressing it to himself. This forgery then gets presented to Fritz, thus making it look like Des Champs, who is the most honest of souls, has spied on him! It's just horrible. (And our introduction writer, who appears to have no clue about the Manteuffel-Seckendorff connection or Manteuffel paying considerable money to people in Fritz' circle to spy on him, takes this on faith, like I said.)

After Jordan, who hasn't revealed yet his own treachery, intercedes on Des Champs' behalf, Fritz does not fire him, but he doesn't talk to him anymore, and doesn't trust him, either. At least the Societe des Aleteophiles gets founded by Manteuffel and florishes, and Des Champs writers more Wolffian books. Fritz becomes King, MT's Dad dies, and for NO REASON AT ALL, Manteuffel gets kicked out of Berlin. Here's an English translated quote from the Memoirs in the introduction:

Von Manteuffel's departure was a hard blow to the literary world and to the Muses of Berlin. Everybody who frequented his house, which was always open to men of letters, was shoked at the announcement of his departure from Berlin. For me in particular it was a double misfortune as I lost an illustrious friend as well as a protector.

However, things are still looking mostly hopeful. Fritz charges Des Champs with writing the official account of FW's last hours and death, which Fritz will later incorporate in the Histoire de la Maison de Brandenburg. He actually does get payment for his services so far, gets told he's to remain as EC's chaplain, and will be tutor to Heinrich and Ferdinand in philosophy. An extra salary as tutor is not mentioned by the new King, just assumed by Des Champs. He actually likes his new duties. Writes the introduction:

Des Champs' Memoires speak with great warmth of both princes, especially of Prince Henry, who is often mentioned, althought Des Champs taught him for only two years, until 1742, when Henry left Berlin to accompany Frederick to the Silesian war. One of the incidents Des Champs relates in great detail is a visit, together with the princes, to the cabinet of a certain Balducci, a famous Italian magician, who had constructed all sorts of automata, with which he astounded the public. These mechanical puppets could perform extraordinary tricks - like pouring wine into a glass, producing tea, coffee or chocolate, and answering questions by means of one or more beats with a hammer.

Alas, then another villain enters the scene: Voltaire. Uta J-K tells us Des Champs, like many a Huguenot, didn't like Voltaire both for "his blatant anti-clericalism and his prima donna behavior". Guilty as charged on both counts, of course, but unlike Bonisch's dissertation, the introduction does not put the Voltaire situation in context with the Manteuffel-Wolff situation. Instead, it makes it sound like Des Champs next goes on to write his anti-Voltaire stuff just because. A fateful error, for, says the introduction:

The whole Prussian Academy, led by one of Frederick's greatest sycophants, the Marquis D'Argens, instantly was up in arms to defend Voltaire and prepare a counter-attack. (This is not how Nicolai had described the Marquis, but okay.) This circle of evil, including the King, then writes the play Le Singe de la Mode, first presented at Keyslerlingk's wedding party and three days later at a public theatre in Berlin. In said play, if you'll recall, a wannabe literates asks for advice of how to fill his bookshelves and the bookseller tells him to buy 100 copies of Des Champs' latest ouevre, which hasn't sold at all.

Everybody considered it a terrible outrage upon me, writes Des Champles, and it didn't stop there. Next, a really bad review of the book is published in the Nouvelle Bibliotheque Germanique. At the time, he thinks it was written by the evil Marquis D'Argens, but woe! It turns out it actually was written by his friend, Samuel Formey, who has been peer-pressured into it by D'Argens. I'm quoting from the introduction again:

Could faction and jealously make the author of the "Belle Wolffienne" stoop to such treachery? It seemed hard to believe. But it was true. Equally hard to believe was Formey's volte-face, a few months later, during a church service in which they found themselves by chance side by side at the communion table. Here, in the face of the Lord, Formey, tears in his eyes, turned to Des Champs, admitted his guilt, and asked forgiveness. Des Champs did forgive him, and they remained the best of friends till their dying day.

Next the introduction deals with the latest of Des Champs' love affairs, of which he had several, presenting himself as a sought after by ladies man However, Mademoiselle de P will not marry him. And several church posts in Berlin are filled, but not by him. He still gets on with the royal family except for Fritz - for example, AW asks him to explainl Wolff to him, and Des Champs is happy to oblige; also, Des Champs takes part in the trip to Oranienburg Pöllnitz described in his memoirs and from which Fontane quoted. But when Jordan dies in 1744, it turns out he secretely was Des Champs' enemy all along and has spread evil rumors about him. And Fritz, returning to Berlin after the second Silesian War, remains deaf to Des Champs' last attempt to either give him his royal tutor salary due or a well paying church job. Des Champs has had it and leaves Berlin forever in June 1746.

After some time questing for a job in various principalities and in the Netherlands, he ends up in Britain. Since his Wolff translation made his fortune back in the day, he tries to achieve patronage by translating one Lord Lyttleton's writings into French. This does not work (Lyttleton has a look and says it seems Des Champs can speak neither English nor French). However, he finally gets a job, as deacon for the French Community of the Savoy in London, and his wandering days are over. He marries, and starts to have children. He even gets reccommended as a tutor in French for some young nobles, among them Robert Keith, grand nephew of George and James Keith. This renewed Prussian connection means Des Champs starts to besiege Prussian envoys Michel and Knyphhausen with letters demanding the money Fritz still owes him. His reputation keeps getting ruined with the Prussians by evil schemes, though, since Imperial envoy Colloredo visists him, thus making it look as if Des Champs would be willing to further intelligence on Fritz to the Austrians, which despite being so maltreated he would never!

Edited Date: 2021-06-04 03:20 pm (UTC)

From:

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-06-05 05:58 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

At last, he writes to Fritz himself, at the end of the 7 Years War, and the letter gets quoted in the English introduction.

Sire, the brilliant calm in which your Majesty basks, after having so gloriously conjured away the worst thunderstorms that ever raged, encourages me to profit from these fortunate circumstances and to lay my humble request at the feet of your august throne.
It is almost 18 years ago that I transported myself to this country, after having passed about ten years in your Majesty's service at Rheinsberg and Berlin. At my departure from Berlin, in 1746, I pressed Mr. Fredersdorf to pay me the arrears of my salary, due to me for several years. (...)(By Uta J-K). But he continually refused to do so. As soon as I heard about his death, I passed my demand to his heirs, and up to know everything seemed to be turning to my advantage, except that neither the Chancellor nor president Dorville can act on my behalf, unless the heirs of Fredersdorf either swear to the fact he never received such a sum, or that you allow the account-books to be consulted, which are deposited in your Majesty's cassette. That is, Sire, the satte of this unhappy affair, the success of which rests entirely in your Majesty's hands.

This is the first time Fredersdorf gets mentioned in the introduction; he wasn't in the original description of how Des Champs was made a tutor but didn't hear anything definite from Fritz about a salary raise/additional salary. The introduction sources the letter, as mentioned, solely to the memoirs themselves, not Trier or another Frederician archive. This letter, says the introduction, remained unanswered, clausing Des Champs to comment:

This Solomon of the North who rather prferred to commit an injustice towards a person who had faithfully served him at his own expense, than justly commit the heirs of his Valet de Chambre, who had robbed him, and wh had enriched them by his thefts.

The Introduction then states that according to the Memoirs, in 1765 Des Champs hears from his brother Jacques (who had remained in Berlin). Jacques said that he had heard from Michell (who had been recalled from London to Berlin in 1764), and that Michell said Eichel said that Fritz had allotted Des Champs' payment at the time, and that there were many people like Des Champs who never got their salaries, either, because "that damned soul Fredesdorf" kept it to himself, all in all more than 50 000 Reichstaler, and that if the King was to pay Des Champs, he'd have to pay everyone else, which is why he couldn't do it. However, Michell swears to Des Champs via Jaques that he'll find a way Des Champs will get his money nonetheless because Des Champs is the most honest worthy man he, Michell knows. Because fate still has it in for Des Champs, though, Michell doesn't return to London but gets appointed Governor of Neufchatel instead, never to be heard of be Des Champs again. And that, says the introduction, is the last we hear of Des Champs Prussian affairs. He dies in 1767 and got buried in the burial ground of St. Faith, across St. Paul's cathedral.

Like I said: I've only read the introduction, and will check out the original French when I find the time. But it does provide us with a few questions.

1.) Having read the two Manteuffel books, especially the 1920s biography, I find it staggeringly hard to believe the over complicated explanation as to how a letter from Des Champs to Seckendorff the Nephew ended up with Fritz, when, you know, there's a simple variation - that Des Champs did in fact make some additional cash by reports on Fritz for Team HRE (and Manteuffel), and was caught at it. Or is my inner cynic getting away with me?

2.) Even if Des Champs was innocent, though, Fritz clearly didn't consider him so. Why did he keep him around until Des Champs quit in 1746? Then again, someone had to teach Heinrich and Ferdinand philosophy and be EC's chaplain, and Fritz was cheap. He might even have counted on Des Champs' awkward caught-at-it position making him likely to accept a minimum salary where a new teacher/chaplain would not.

3.) D'Argens and Jordan as arch villains, Formey as a (repentant) Judas: okay then. Formey was notably the lone hardcore Wolffian who remained in Fritz service and friendly with both sides (Manteuffel as well, remember). He also did remain in correspondence with Des Champs; the introduction footnotes quotes from Des Champs' letters to him not to the Memoirs but to Formey's Nachlass in the Deutsches Staatsarchiv of the GDR in Berlin. (The book is from 1990.) I'd be willing to buy he got muscled into writing a bad review of Des Champs' book, but I'd also buy him writing it on his own, because good lord, the introduction alone makes it sound as if Des Champs had an ego himself.

4.) The big one: Fredersdorf. (Btw, there's a footnote hilariously claiming he used to be one of FW's Potsdam Giants who was given to Fritz as his lackey and secretary in Küstrin by Dad and who also played the flute.) I see several possibilities here:

a) He did actually embezzle the money. Just because we like Fredersdorf better than Des Champs doesn't mean it can't have happened. If this didn't come out before the end of the 7 Years War, it would certainly explain why Lehndorff in 1757/1758 hasn't heard anything about it.

b) He didn't embezzle the money, but it was a convenient explanation by a besieged Michell to spare himself further petitions from Des Champs. (BTW, asking Fritz for money right after the 7 Years War ended is certainly... a choice.)

c) "Jacques told me that Michell told him that Eichel told Michell" is a lot of Chinese whispers. It's also a statement by someone who swears he's totally innocent of having spied for Seckendorff Jr., so who knows, Des Champs could have made it up, thus providing his memoirs with an explanation for why Fritz wouldn't pay him his tutor salary that doesn't reflect too badly on the monarch who is, at the time of writing, an object of great fannish admiration in Britain, where Des Champs lives. "It was the evil favourite" is a tried and true line, after all, and no one in Britain cares about Fredersdorf's reputation.

d) Fritz kept Des Champs in service because he was cheap, see above, but saw no reason why he should pay someone who was a proven spy good money, so told Fredersdorf not to pay him more than the mere minimum. Fredersdorf did so, leaving Des Champs to conclude that Fredersdorf kept the rest of the money to himself.

What do you think?

From:

mildred_of_midgard

The Introduction then states that according to the Memoirs, in 1765 Des Champs hears from his brother Jacques. Jacques said that he had heard from Michell, and that Michell said Eichel said that Fritz had allotted Des Champs' payment at the time

So, I read this, and my reaction was the same as I later saw yours was: this is a lot of Chinese whispers. Like "Seckendorff the Younger, being an arch villain, avenges himself on Des Champs by secretly opening Des Champs' family letters, copying one of them in Des Champs' handwriting and addressing it to himself," it fails Occam's Razor.

Now, Occam's Razor is not an absolute! It just means I need more evidence than the word of the guy who stands to benefit in both cases.

The introduction sources the letter, as mentioned, solely to the memoirs themselves, not Trier or another Frederician archive.

I tried searching Trier, btw, but only found a footnote and a Tageskalender entry. That said, if he's written as "Des Champs" or "De Champs", that's harder to search for, and I only did a cursory scan of the results for "Champs".

I'd be willing to buy he got muscled into writing a bad review of Des Champs' book, but I'd also buy him writing it on his own, because good lord, the introduction alone makes it sound as if Des Champs had an ego himself.

Same!

He did actually embezzle the money. Just because we like Fredersdorf better than Des Champs doesn't mean it can't have happened. If this didn't come out before the end of the 7 Years War, it would certainly explain why Lehndorff in 1757/1758 hasn't heard anything about it.

Oh, I agree. It could have happened. I just need to see more evidence than I've seen so far!

Apropos of which, something I've been sitting on for a couple months now is Fahlenkamp's email address. I got it from Buwert, the local historian in Frankfurt an der Oder I've been corresponding with, who said I could drop his name as a mutual acquaintance. I wanted to wait until I had a copy of Fahlenkamp's book to quote directly from, which I now have.

*a couple minutes later*

Curses! The email I sent just bounced. But, promisingly, the error message indicates that it's because of the sender's address, which means it blindly rejected me on the basis of my gmail.com address. This is better than what I initially feared, which was a message that Fahlenkamp's no longer using this email address.

I've now emailed Buwert to see if he'll reach out to Fahlenkamp, since he has a .de email and has had luck corresponding with him before. (Briefly, in 2016.) Since Buwert asked me last month if I'd heard back from Fahlenkamp and was curious, he might be game for asking directly.

When I told him about the embezzlement claim (he's no longer researching Fredersdorf, so his information stopped around 2013, and Fahlenkamp's book came out in 2016), it was kind of funny:

1. He promptly ordered every book I mentioned or he turned up on his own (he has some 8,000 books crowded layers deep on his shelves).
2. He said he was very skeptical too. (I immediately thought that

cahn would approve!)
3. He pointed out what we'd already found, that Pfeiffer, the alleged co-embezzlement suspect, was found innocent anyway.

Oh, and he said he couldn't find it in Reise (1944), which was our chief suspect. It's useful extending the fringes of our salon to include people with 8,000-book collections, who've published on Fredersdorf before.

I will let you all know if I hear back re Fahlenkamp!

Fritz kept Des Champs in service because he was cheap, see above, but saw no reason why he should pay someone who was a proven spy good money, so told Fredersdorf not to pay him more than the mere minimum.

I mean, as speculations go, it's plausible enough.

(BTW, asking Fritz for money right after the 7 Years War ended is certainly... a choice.)

It is. That's why I think Voltaire got so little for the Corneille edition: 1762/1763 is not the best time to drum up money from Fritz!

What do you think?

Innocent until proven guilty, and Des Champs hasn't proven anything in my view.

I'm delighted as always to collect more wild-sounding memoirs, though! I can totally see where the "man of feeling" in the title comes in. :D

Re: Des Champs II: That Damned Soul Fredersdorf

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-06-05 12:08 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Des Champs II: That Damned Soul Fredersdorf

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-06-05 02:56 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Des Champs II: That Damned Soul Fredersdorf

From:

selenak - Date: 2021-06-05 04:51 pm (UTC) - Expand

Re: Des Champs II: That Damned Soul Fredersdorf

From:

mildred_of_midgard - Date: 2021-06-05 05:54 pm (UTC) - Expand

From:

selenak

Okay, this isn't a proper write up, just a reply to Mildred's general question about a readable German language book on the subject! There is. I've now read both a book in English - Rebecca Gates-Coon: The Charmed Circle. Joseph II and the "Five Princesses", 1765 - 17909" - and one in German, Monika Czernin: Der Kaiser reist inkognito. The later is brand new, so to speak, uses Joseph's various travels both as co-regent to MT and as sole Emperor for a character portrait of him and of a portrait of his Empire through them, and is entertainingly written. Not too complicated language from what this native speaker can tell. The author is a self confessed Stefan Zweig fan and actually tries to bring back the Biographie Romancee style in this book, i.e. it's written like a novel, with statements about Joseph resenting this or loving that without the cautionary "maybe", but most of the dialogue lines hail from letters. Also, she and Gates-Coon agree that the best Joseph biography out there is a two volume magnum opus by Derek Beales (first volume: In the Shadow of Maria Theresia, second volume: Alone against the World). Czernin has also read your guy Blanning, btw. And there are footnotes to each chapter pointing out which sources she used for which scenes if she does provide unscripted dialogue. On the MT front, she's read Stollberg-Rillinger (with whom she often but not always agrees) and also is the editor of an edition of letters from MT to her favourite lady in waiting which I've also read. So if you're still looking for something to read in German that's new to you and not as dry but relevant to salon, go for it. Here's one detail for you which despite having read about the Joseph visit to Marie Antoinette at Versailles before I somehow missed, possibly because of the distracting hilarity of the marital sex counselling. One of the things MA asked her brother during their first encounter, as part of asking about family members etc., was whether her dog was still cared for. When the fifteen years old Archduchess Maria Antonia had crossed the French border, as you may or may not recall, she had to not only leave literally everything she wore behind (and ceremoniously was dressed in French clothing), but her pet dog as well, much to her grief. That she asked about the dog (apparantly still alive!) seven years later with longing is something I felt I had to tell Mildred.

(About the sex counselling: now I had seen sources swearing Joseph had to talk Louis into an operation, and sources quoting the letter from Joseph to Leopold about the problem being Louis', err, penetration - or lack of same - and ejaculation - or lack of same technique to prove it was this and not an operation. This book quotes not only the letter but the follow up letter one and a half months later where Joseph tells Leopold that yay, the talk helped, pregnancy achieved, they figured it out! It really was just laziness and lack of imagination and knowledge, not a physical impediment, told you.)

(As sharp tongued Joseph is in that letter to Leopold, in general he did talk well about Marie Antoinette, who was his favourite sister, much as she worried him. *insert the famous "the revolution will be cruel" quote here* He defended her to the ladies who had heard worrying tales from France once he was back in Vienna. They were somewhat critical of her but basically fond - they had all known her as a girl, don't forget - and as opposed to Joseph, they were still alive when she died, which horrified them on a very personal level, not just on an aristocratic one.)

The "Five Princesses" author, incidentally, says Beales was the first to use the letters by and to said Princesses and take note of the importance of Joseph's relationship with them, with previous biographers only taking note of one, Eleonore Liechtenstein (daughter-in-law to the Antinuous owner), who was the only one of the five with whom Joseph was for a short time in unrequited love. She handled it brilliantly (given the gazillion problems a love affair would have had - a) it would have pissed off her husband, who had already made trouble with her previous affair with a sexy Scotsman, and made threats, b) it would have cost her MT's regard (and MT still was the key power in the co-regency era), and c) who could know whether Joseph wouldn't get tired of her quickly? Otoh, saying no to the second most powerful person in your world is also tricky. So she did go for "friendship yes, love no", and made sure she wasn't alone with him ever in this initial phase. From this, the circle of five - plus two of his male friends - developed. His infatuation passed, but the friendship didn't, and he started to develop friendly relationships to all four of the other women. Pre-Beales, biographers treated the other women were just as chaperones during the aborted not-love affair, and he unearthed and put together the material demonstrating they were, in fact, a group of friends, which remarkably unchanging members until Joseph's death. (Instead one or the other of the ladies leaving or new ones being added. This just didn't happen. Basically, the group consolidated in the early 1770s and remained thus till Joseph's death.) The two non-Joseph male members of the club, Lacy and Orsini-Rosenberg, weren't always present, but the women were, who all had relationships with each other as well as with the Emperor. Whom they at times were extremely critical about, not least because they were against a great many of his reforms, but also because Joseph shared a lot of Fritzian traits designed to drive you bonkers at close range - the mansplaining, the sarcasm, the meddling and micromanaging, the inability to admit he could be at fault for a subsequent disaster. (BTW, this is also why I doubt he and Fritz outside of crack fic would have worked as a couple.) But they also had unfaked (as voiced to each other) praise for his positive sides - he wrote travel letters for each when on the road, for example, and as with Wilhelmine's travel letters different ones, not copied over ones, thus making it clear he valued each individual relationship as well as the group one, and when one of the ladies (not Eleonore) had lost two children in short order he was a true comfort (remember, he had lost his only daughter and been heartbroken over it, so she knew he knew whereof he spoke). Gates-Coon never loses sight of the inevitable power differential - i.e. if Joseph had simply been Mrs. Habsburg's know-it-all son in the neigborhood, maybe they would have cut off relations at some point. But all of them had husbands (who were not wanted at the group gatherings, btw) and children and families to network, though Joseph tried really hard not to be the kind of ruler encouraging nepotism and enriching faves, with the result that he sometimes by trying to be impartial was harsher than necessary which ticked people including the ladies off. What they gained through their connection to him weren't additional lands or jobs for the husbands (with one exception), but of course people after a while took notice that the Emperor kept seeking out their company (in peace times, they met at one of the ladies' at least once or twice a week), and access to the monarch is always a highly envied privilege in a monarchy, so this in turn enhanced their already high social status. And while he denied to brother Leopold that he talked politics with them (Leopold wrote Joseph not once but two very disapproving "why do you keep hanging out with these women!!!" letters set years apart), their own letters prove he did, in fact, occasionally talk politics with them. The book is also good source material on Austrian nobility in the relevant period, and the author repeatedly takes to charge one British source that got quoted and copied through centuries who said the Viennese ladies in MT's time read only lives of saints and not the latest French literature or Madame de Sevigné and thus were uneducated due to Catholic bigotry. Whereas the letters of the five princesses prove that not only had they read Madame de Sevigné (still a near century after her life time THE role model for female letter writers) but they were familiar with a great many secular literary classics. She's also good at pointing out the fierce inner Catholic debates - pro and contra Jansenism, for example - which tend to be overlooked by Protestant contemporary sources.

Anyway: also an interesting book, but darker and more depressing than the travel-oriented one.

From:

mildred_of_midgard

just a reply to Mildred's general question about a readable German language book on the subject! There is. I've now read both a book in English - Rebecca Gates-Coon: The Charmed Circle. Joseph II and the "Five Princesses", 1765 - 17909" - and one in German, Monika Czernin: Der Kaiser reist inkognito. The later is brand new, so to speak, uses Joseph's various travels both as co-regent to MT and as sole Emperor for a character portrait of him and of a portrait of his Empire through them, and is entertainingly written.

Oh, this sounds perfect! Especially since I was disappointed that Blanning starts in 1780 and thus skips all the travels. I mean, that's a perfectly valid authorial choice, especially given that the book was written for a series called "Profiles in Power," i.e. how monarchs used their power once they got it. But it was disappointing to find that this gap in my knowledge base would not be filled by that book.

So if you're still looking for something to read in German that's new to you and not as dry but relevant to salon, go for it.

Definitely still looking!

Not too complicated language from what this native speaker can tell.

Can handle complicated if the content is interesting enough, but this is encouraging too, thank you!

Aaaaaand, the book is in Kindle for $14, so neither horrendously expensive (yes, Fahlenkamp was almost $50), nor horrendously long to wait for (you all know exactly how long the Fahlenkamp wait times were).

Perfect, this is going on my to-read list, thank you! A Royal Reader makes many valuable contributions. :DD <3

I look forward to your write-ups!

That she asked about the dog (apparantly still alive!) seven years later with longing is something I felt I had to tell Mildred.

Aww, yes, thank you. </3 (This is why I kind of think Fritz didn't have a personal pet dog in 1730, since we never hear about one. But with his correspondence to Wilhelmine during this period being destroyed, I can't be sure.)