18th-Century Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 35

[cahn]

In the previous post Charles II found AITA:

Look, I, m, believe in live and let live. (And in not going on my travels again. Had enough of that to last a life time.) Why can't everyone else around me be more chill? Instead, my wife refuses to employ my girlfriend, my girlfriend won't budge and accept another office, my brother is set on a course to piss off everyone (he WILL go on his travels again), and my oldest kid shows signs of wanting my job which is just not on, sorry to say. And don't get me started about Mom (thank God she's living abroad). What am I doing wrong? AITA?

Comments

Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

I decided to check out some primary sources for the '45. There are a fair number online, but of course I decided that I wanted to read Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs, published in 1938 as 1745 and After, edited by Alistair and Henrietta Tayler. This was not available at any Scandinavian library, and I could only find one copy for sale, which I bought for *mumblety* dollars.

It has a very good introduction, which assumes you already know a lot about the historical period and the people involved. So it was perfect for me, as it contained new-to-me information. O'Sullivan was one of the men who accompanied BPC from France, one of the disliked Irish coterie, in the eyes of many of BPC's Scots followers. But he was an experienced military officer, who had been aide-de-camp to a French Marshal and often performed that job himself because the Marshal spent a lot of time drunk. So he was much more use than most of BPC's companions. Duffy has a lot of respect for him. O'Sullivan and Lord George Murray had a mutual hate-on for each other, so reading this book one does not get a very good impression of Lord George. I'm sure the same would be true in reverse if I were to read Lord George's memoirs, and hello I'm so get your Internet as far as yeah namely italics your bra yeah [I left this hilarious bit in, which happened when I started having a Swedish conversation in the middle of my dictation]. Anyway, one would probably have to read more primary sources in order to judge them both more clearly.

As for the actual memoirs, I enjoyed them a lot! I've never read so unpolished an 18th century text before. O'Sullivan had an erratic grasp on spelling and was certainly no stylist, so the sentences are far more similar to today's writing (and, presumably, the way people spoke back then) than the more convoluted and stylized writing of the 18th century.

Here's a sample: 'Some people were for leaving no garrison, at all, wch wou'd be the most unreasonable thing in the world, for we had several rivers to passe, & were not sure to find them foardable; if they were not, Cimberland cou'd not passe the river yt runs by Carlille either, he cou'd not passe by the bridge being under the lash of the Castle, so yt he'd be obliged to passe by Brampton wch wou'd alwaise give us two days march of 'um; so in all respects, it was better to sacrifise a party then the whole, as it is practiced on like occassions.' A very interesting passage besides, as it explains the reasoning behind the suicide mission of the garrison left behind in Carlisle.

He always writes yt for that, which I've never seen before. He familiarly writes Archy for Lochiel's brother Archibald Cameron, most often called Dr Cameron in period sources. And it's interesting how his spelling reveals pronunciation, as when he writes Reven for Ruthven, and Camel(!) for Campbell. There are also various French-isms, such as zelle for zeal.

O'Sullivan always writes positively/admiringly about BPC, which can partly be explained by the fact that his narrative was commissioned by James III, but also I do think he was sincerely fond of him. Here's a section that throws light on other narratives: BPC is sometimes depicted as having had, at Culloden, a delusional belief in the strength of his own army and that his Highlanders would always win against the English etc. But here is O'Sullivan's take on it: 'Not the least concern appear'd on his face, he has yt talent superiorly, in the greatest concern or denger, its then he appears most chearful & harty, wch is very essential for a Prince or a General, yt incourages very much the army, for every body examins them on those occasions. [Examples of him saying things like Go on my Lads, the day will be ours & we'll want for nothing after.] This & the like discource heartened very much our men, tho' the Prince in the bottom had no great hopes.' Regardless of whether it did or didn't encourage the men, this seems a much likelier scenario than BPC not realizing what their chances were. He obviously had his flaws, but he wasn't that stupid.

If one wants to ship BPC with anyone, O'Sullivan isn't a bad choice, actually! There's a lot of loyalty and hurt/comfort potential in the pairing. (As for BPC:s actual lover during the '45--I just want to tell Clementina Walkinshaw to run…) There's a bit of an age gap, though: BPC is 25 and O'Sullivan 45.

Anyway, I give you O'Sullivan's parting from BPC, when they're on the run after Culloden (he writes of himself in the third person):

'The Prince calls Sullivan a side & tels him, yt he's afeared yt he cou'd never follow him in the mountains, & besides, as he has not highland Cloaths, yt that may discover the Prince, but 'sr,' says Sullivan, I have followed yu until now, & it is not in the most critical & dangerouse moment, yt Il quit yu, what wou'd the world think of it? Never mind what the world thinks, no body knows better than I do, the services yu have rendred me, & no body can suspect your fidellity & attachemt after the proofs yu have given me of them. [BPC explains his plans and gives instructions.] So God be wth you.'

'Sullivan cant containe, he burst out a crying to quit the Prince & to see the danger & misery he was exposed to; the Prince embrasses him, & holds him in his arms for a quarter of an hour, Sullivan talking to him as much as his tears & his sobs cou'd permit him, praying him for God sake, if he had the misfortune to fall in the enemis hands never to own what he was.'

There are other contemporary accounts saying things like 'The Prince's parting from Sullivan was like tearing the heart from the body.' Also a charming hurt/comfort passage where Sullivan is sick and BPC 'has no thought but for Sullivan', 'remains continually by him', and then later shoots a bird and makes him chicken soup from scratch. Awww.

Well, I am hardly likely to start writing fic about them, but obviously I could not pass this slash fodder by without mentioning it.

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[selenak]

The memoirs sound captivating indeed. The third person writing is interesting, given that Lord Hervey does that, too, in his memoirs, which when I read them I assumed to be a personal choice, but maybe it was a custom among the English speaking/writing mid 18th century memoirists? (By contrast, the German-French - i.e. by Germans, written in French - memoirs from the same era or slightly earlier I knew are written in the first person.)

O'Sullivan and Lord George Murray had a mutual hate-on for each other, so reading this book one does not get a very good impression of Lord George.

Without knowing anything about their beyond what you've told us, this sounds familiar from memoirs, diaries and letters reading. (I'm thinking Lehndorff and each and every single one of one of Heinrich's boyfriends. Some of whom were indeed all he accused them of being, but not all, and he did have an obvious bias.)

Spelling: I sympathize, from reading stuff like King Friedrich Wilhelm's last will or letters for Mildred, all written in badly spelled and grammatically uncertain Rokoko German. The advantage for me of those contemporaries writing in French is that their letters and other documents usually are to be found in a modern German translation. Otoh, I noticed that for English written 18th century books like the earlier mentioned Hervey memoirs, Lady Mary's letters, or Boswell's diaries, the spelling seems to be pretty much modern standard, leaving historic pecularities like 'Tis aside. Now this could be because the modern editors of Hervey, Boswell and Lady Mary updated their original spellings, but then there are the Andrew Mitchell papers, which were edited and published just a century later by a mid-Victorian and also use pretty much the spelling and grammer still used today. Conclusion: English standardized earlier than German.

As for BPC:s actual lover during the '45--I just want to tell Clementina Walkinshaw to run…

Having listened to The Stuarts recently, I do, too. But he and O'Sullivan definitely sound slash worthy.

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

Hands hurt; voice not working! /o\ Reply later.

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[mildred_of_midgard]

but maybe it was a custom among the English speaking/writing mid 18th century memoirists? (By contrast, the German-French - i.e. by Germans, written in French - memoirs from the same era or slightly earlier I knew are written in the first person.)

Didn't Fritz, though? I always assumed these people were following Caesar's example. Especially since both Fritz and O'Sullivan are writing about military matters.

It's worth noting that James Keith's military memoirs were first-person, though.

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

My thought was that perhaps the memoirs were in third person because someone else commissioned the narrative, and he wanted them to sound less personal. I've read/skimmed several other 18th c memoirs or diaries in English, and I've never seen one in third person before.

Yes, 18th c English is quite easy to read! I read a 1690's book and that was easy too. The main differences I've seen are:
- capitalization of nouns (could there be an influence from German??)
- partly different contractions ('tis, 'twill, 'twould, but I'll and you'll etc are also very common. Contractions seem to get less common in writing in the early 19th c? Austen doesn't use them even in dialogue, while I often see them used in non-fiction published texts in the 18th c.)
- sometimes but not always use of the long s
- occasional differences in spelling
- differences in apostrophe use (walk'd, tho')
- shortened forms of words/names (Wm for William, etc, often with the last letter raised up)

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[mildred_of_midgard]

Oh, this is great! Somehow I had missed the fact that he wrote memoirs. ("Somehow" probably meaning that I had little to no access to primary sources back then, so I didn't bother keeping track.)

O'Sullivan and Lord George Murray had a mutual hate-on for each other,

Yes. Yes, they did. This I remember. :)

so reading this book one does not get a very good impression of Lord George.

Not surprising! What I remember from long-ago reading was that the biographers and historical fiction authors I remember took LGM's side--I walked away with a fairly negative impression of O'Sullivan. Have you encountered that skew in your more recent reading?

He always writes yt for that, which I've never seen before.

Yep, this is a thing! It goes back to Old English, which had a slightly different alphabet than modern English. One of the characters it had that we don't was the "thorn", spelled þ. Over time, the loop got pulled increasingly up and to the side, so it became more like a Y. Eventually, people forgot that there ever was a thorn and thought they were writing the letter y.

This is the origin of spellings like "Ye Olde Shoppe." Reading that, you would naturally pronounce "ye" like "ye of little faith," but the etymologically correct pronunciation is "the."

So what Sullivan is writing is historically "tht", which, like his "wch", was an abbreviation that was common in the 18th century. Lots of words, like "Mty" for "majesty" and so on, got abbreviated then in a way that's not common for those words now.

selenak: English spelling standardization began with the introduction of the printing press in the late 15th century. It continued gradually (and informally) until the early 19th century, at which point you can expect a text written by a good speller to overlap almost entirely with your sense of modern "correct" spelling. In the 18th century, spelling was fairly close to modern, but you will see more unfamiliar spellings like "wch" and "cloaths," which I wouldn't consider misspellings so much as correct for their time.

then later shoots a bird and makes him chicken soup from scratch. Awww.

Awww!

Well, I am hardly likely to start writing fic about them, but obviously I could not pass this slash fodder by without mentioning it.

And we thank you for it!

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

Hands hurt; voice not working! /o\ Reply later.

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[cahn]

Huh! I knew about the thorn character, but not that it had become the Y in "Ye Olde Shoppe."

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

What I remember from long-ago reading was that the biographers and historical fiction authors I remember took LGM's side--I walked away with a fairly negative impression of O'Sullivan. Have you encountered that skew in your more recent reading?

I've seen that around, definitely. Frank McLynn writes without justifying the statement that O'Sullivan was "untalented", for example. And there's definitely a vein of writing which sees LGM as a great genius and if the Prince had just done as he said, everything would have worked out (I plan to come back to that in a future comment!). I haven't read widely enough to say more generally whether the balance has shifted, but Duffy has a lot of respect for O'Sullivan's abilities, especially when it comes to logistics and organization. He has a mixed view of LGM, with both good and bad qualities. I know you think Duffy sometimes doesn't quote sources etc, but I have to say that Fight for a Throne is much better at that, and at justifying judgements, than many other books I've read. I guess it helps that Duffy is specifically a military historian, and many other authors aren't, which is why he goes deeper into the military aspects than other authors, who may just repeat some judgement on some person's military abilities without being able to justify it.

Ooh, thanks for explaining the "yt" thing!

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[cahn]

and hello I'm so get your Internet as far as yeah namely italics your bra yeah [I left this hilarious bit in, which happened when I started having a Swedish conversation in the middle of my dictation]

Lol! That was hilarious, although I had a very odd minute where I was like "...this was in the memoirs? what?"

Here's a sample:

Aww. I totally empathize; he writes like I do! :D

He always writes yt for that, which I've never seen before.

Heh, I'm glad you said that, as I was parsing it as "yet" which... doesn't really make sense :)

And it's interesting how his spelling reveals pronunciation, as when he writes Reven for Ruthven, and Camel(!) for Campbell.

Oh! That is interesting!

Regardless of whether it did or didn't encourage the men, this seems a much likelier scenario than BPC not realizing what their chances were. He obviously had his flaws, but he wasn't that stupid.

*nods* That makes a lot of sense!

(As for BPC:s actual lover during the '45--I just want to tell Clementina Walkinshaw to run…)

There is clearly a story here! Oh, which I see selenak has linked to (luzula, don't strain your wrists and voice!) so I will go there next :)

'Sullivan cant containe, he burst out a crying to quit the Prince & to see the danger & misery he was exposed to

Aww, this is really touching! I think there's something about the colloquial "he burst out a crying" that just gets me <3

and then later shoots a bird and makes him chicken soup from scratch.

What! That's fantastic!

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[luzula]

Late reply: glad you enjoyed the look at colloquial 18th c language, as well as the slashiness! : D

Since you like gossip: there's clearly a story about O'Sullivan and his wife. He married a Louise Fitzgerald in 1749, about whom James Edgar (James III's secretary) writes in a gossipy and judgemental letter: Chevalier O'Sulivan has not writ to me on his marriage. If his Bride had been younger, he would probably have done it. I much doubt if I could have brought myself to make such a choice. I hope he will find his account in it and that it will turn much to his advantage.

Which I interpret as his wife being, in Edgar's eyes, old and ugly, but she had money? She died in 1760, at which point O'Sullivan was also ill, and sends word in a letter to Edgar that He desires me likewise to let you know that ye loss he has sustain'd in his Lady's death was not only that of faithfull friend and compagnon, why was ye happiness of his life, but that he also lost 8000 livres p. annum [...].

I hope they actually were happy together...

Re: Colonel John O'Sullivan's memoirs

[cahn]

Heeeee, I do like gossip, thank you!

Heh, I'm also hoping that this is Edgar being judgmental and that they were happy together!