cahn | 18th-Century Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 37

More diaries of our favorite 18th-century Prussian diary-keeper have been unearthed and have been synopsized!

January 18th: Blessed be thou to me! Under your light, my Prince Heinrich was born!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

mildred_of_midgard

He does state Peter would likely have been a perfectly decent Duke of Holstein and was a kid brought to a country he didn't like, whose language he didn't speak and never spoke well, whose customs he hated, in care of an aunt who didn't like him, either, and never was there the inheritor of a country with so much of an understandable dislike for the country in question from the outset.

Yeah, and I was even more impressed by him pointing out that the way Sophie was punished by her governess for not being diligent at her studies was that the governess would read an interesting book silently, whereas if Sophie had done a good job, the governess would read out loud as a reward...whereas young Peter was deprived of dinner, tied to a table, or made to kneel down on dried peas with bare knees until his feet swelled up. Says Anisimov, This might be one of the reasons that Peter III and Catherine were very different people.

Not the only reason, but I agree with "one of." Much like Lehndorff saying that FW's upbringing had an influence on the negative side of Fritz's character.

Julia Mengden originally did go with Anna Leopoldovna, but then Elizabeth separated the two. She thought Anna Leopoldovna did know where the fabled jewles and riches of Anna Ivanova's lover Biron were hidden and in her letter instructed her official to tell Anna Leopoldovna that if she didn't share this knowledge, Julia would be tortured, but Anna L. really did not know.

Yep, this has come up! I believe Julia actually volunteered to go with Anna rather than be separated from her, which is why torturing her made such a good threat.

UGH ELIZABETH.

what it immediately made me think of, but which our author does NOT mention, is that this is utterly unlike the education Catherine's husband received (young Peter definitely was beaten and scolded), AND unlike what she claims in her memoirs he was allowed to do.

Oh, that is interesting! I like the way you make very convincing connections.

In conclusion, thank you, Mildred, these were two instructive books.

I'm glad! Like you, I found him readable, opinionated, and informative, if not without flaw, and I was hoping the Empress Elizabeth book was good too (and I'm glad to hear it had more depth; Five Empresses was fun and all, but I would have liked more serious history to be included too.)

Since the author is remarkably not nationalistic...I am somewhat afraid to check whether he's still alive, and how he's doing these days....

Surprisingly well, at least according to his university page! 74 years old, tenured professor at the HSE University campus in St. Petersburg, tons of publications, named Best Teacher in 2014 and 2015, Winner of the HSE University Best Russian Research Paper Competition in 2021...

Of course, what's not listed on the page (or even what's listed in Russian that may give clues), I cannot say. But at least not in prison, mysteriously dead, mysteriously disappeared, or in exile.

Thank you for the write-ups of these two books!

From:

selenak

Good for our author, and may he not end up in Siberia or do a 180 on nationalism.

The Elizabeth biography does have more detail on all the politics, and a few battles - Kunersdorf and Zorndorf especially. Incidentally, the bibliography "for further reading" given at the end doesn't say, because it's for an English reading audience, but I bet A. used German sources as well and at least can read German, because he actually works in a Schiller quote at one point without listing it as such, to wit: "The Moor has done his duty, the Moor can go." ("Der Mohr hat seine Schuldigkeit getan, der Moor kann gehen." It's from Schiller's second play, "Die Verschwörung des Fiesco zu Genua", and the "Moor" in question is Muley Hassan.)

Something of which there's way more in the biography, for example, is about the Shuvalovs - not just Elizabeth's lover Ivan S. but mainly Peter Shuvalov his cousin, the ruthless brain of the family operation, who actually had some good ideas for economic reforms like a customs reform which put Russia ahead of France (only got rid of old fashioned feudal customs with the French Revolution) and Germany (by which he means the HRE and successive German states - only in the mid 19th century could you travel without having to go through customs and paying at every little fiefdom.

Oh, and something else there's more about is a gruesome case from the last years of Elizabeth's reign which didn't go to trial until Catherine's reign. It reminded me of Delphine Lalaurie, the serial killer from New Orleans who abused and murdered her slaves to a degree that even the pre Civil War South objected. Similarly, in serf-oppressing Russia the following was too much:

In 1756 after the deaht of her husband, Captain of Cavalry Gleb Saltykov, twenty -five-year-old Darya Nikolevna Saltykova inherited all his estates and a house in Moscow. Having greedily gained authority, this 'monster of the human species' as she was termed later in the decree of Catherine II tortured not just dozens of people. Witnesses testified that Saltychikkha personally killed or ordered to be killed no less than 100 persons. The Justice Collegium, after investigating and evaluating all the testimony, concluded that Saltykova was the morderess 'if not of all hundred persons reported by denouncers, then undoubtedly of the 50 persons about whom checking has provided information that positively inclones to her incrimination." The Justice Collegium statedfurther: "Among the number of those murdered were two or three men, the rest were all women. Several of these women were beaten to death by stable hands or other serfs of Saltykova who punished them with excessive cruelty upon the orders of the mistress, but for the most part she killed them herself, punishing with loegs, boards, rolling pins, etc. The women were subjeted to punishments primarily for inept washing of floors and linen."
Perhaps most noteworthy in Saltykova's crimes was not her fantatical, obviously pathological cruelty, but the fact that the murders were committed by a sadistic noblewoman not on some remote godforsaken estate but openly in Moscow on Kurznetskaia Street, and that many including police officials knew about them.

Makes you call for revolution, doesn't it. Oh and I thought you might like this passage:

Frederick II's, policy, which was built on calculation of the inertia of some states and the confusion of others, and which included elements of adventurism, choice, and the lightning-quick changes of allies depending on the demands of the moment, by its very nature was unacceptable to Bestushev-Rinumin and incited his sharp opposition. IN his view, there was no stateman in Europe with such an 'inconstant, aggressive, turbulent and outrageous character and manner' as the King of Prussia.

Pre- later 20th century German historians: Der Einzige!

19th century Prussian historians in particular: The various stupid favourites of the weak woman prevented the Czarina Elizabeth from remaining Fritz' ally. Can't think of another reason than Austrian bribery.

Anisimov: Fritz was undoubtedly the most brilliant monarch of his age, but good lord, that character.

Oh, that is interesting! I like the way you make very convincing connections.

Like I said: these are all sound principles in general, and would that more royals in particular had been raised to follow them, but they are also pretty specific instructions written by a woman who lived for eighteen years with a man raised directly in contrast to them and who may or may have not been cruel to powerless creatures as a result. On a lighter note, it amuses me she made sure to include the princes should be responsible for watering their own plants.

From:

mildred_of_midgard

Good for our author, and may he not end up in Siberia or do a 180 on nationalism.

I actually deleted sentences to that effect, like "what's listed in Russian that may give clues" used to be "I can't say if he's compromised his ideals or gotten more conservative in his old age and is now writing paeans to Putin." Let's hope!

I bet A. used German sources as well and at least can read German, because he actually works in a Schiller quote at one point without listing it as such, to wit

Oh, neat! His webpage only lists English and French, but hey, my LinkedIn doesn't list German either. ;)

Anisimov: Fritz was undoubtedly the most brilliant monarch of his age, but good lord, that character.

LOL, yep! Anisimov's take in a nutshell.

(Me: That's my Fritz. <3 :'D)

On a lighter note, it amuses me she made sure to include the princes should be responsible for watering their own plants.

Yes, that's a nice detail. Good job, Catherine.

Fritz: Princes ~~the worst of Hohenzollerns~~ should be responsible for not accidentally hitting dogs with homemade arrows.

Seydlitz: Kings should be responsible for not intentionally hitting their horses between the eyes with sticks, FRITZ.

From:

selenak

LOL, yep! Anisimov's take in a nutshell.

It amused me that when listing all the paradoxes, he included "wrote a book called 'The Anti-Machiavel' with a self explanatory title, then spent the rest of his life acting against its beautiful principles". Thus joining the overwhelming majority of historians who did not actually read The Anti-Machiavel.

If I ever get around to writing The Rokoko Babysitting story, I'm so including not just the dog incident but also Fritz starting to write the Anti-Machiavell and little Heinrich mouthing off at him, thus causing some instant rewrites.

From:

felis

Seydlitz: Kings should be responsible for not intentionally hitting their horses between the eyes with sticks, FRITZ.

Wait, what's this? That doesn't seem very in character.

From:

mildred_of_midgard

It's something I've run into numerous times ("Fritz didn't use spurs, but he did hit his horses, and Seydlitz didn't approve"), and I kept hoping it was apocryphal, but at some point I ran into it somewhere that made me conclude it was probably legit...but of course I no longer remember where or what the source was, so it could be apocryphal! (But Fritz hitting his horses, especially in battle, doesn't strike me as terribly out of character, either. Refusing to use spurs as a matter of course is not the same thing as not having temper outbursts.)

From:

cahn

Perhaps most noteworthy in Saltykova's crimes was not her fantatical, obviously pathological cruelty, but the fact that the murders were committed by a sadistic noblewoman not on some remote godforsaken estate but openly in Moscow on Kurznetskaia Street, and that many including police officials knew about them.

...wow. That's just... yeah.

Pre- later 20th century German historians: Der Einzige!

19th century Prussian historians in particular: The various stupid favourites of the weak woman prevented the Czarina Elizabeth from remaining Fritz' ally. Can't think of another reason than Austrian bribery.

Anisimov: Fritz was undoubtedly the most brilliant monarch of his age, but good lord, that character.

Heeeee!