cahn

Last post, along with the usual 18th-century suspects, included the Ottonians; changing ideas of conception and women's sexual pleasure; Isabella of Parma (the one who fell in love, and vice versa, with her husband's sister); Henry IV and Bertha (and Henry's second wife divorcing him for "unspeakable sexual acts"). (Okay, Isabella of Parma was 18th century.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

mildred_of_midgard

So I just made a connection of two things we learned at disparate points in salon.

Once, long ago near the beginning of salon, I found some Saxon noblewoman had adopted Fredersdorf in the 1740s and made him heir to her estate in Saxony. He accepted but delegated the management of it to someone else, because he was much too busy.

Then, last year, Selena did a write-up on the founding of the Kiekemal colony, the one where Fredersdorf allegedly got dismissed for embezzlement (and I'm writing a paper arguing that, no, he didn't, but actually Pfeiffer was found guilty and everyone who said he was found innocent was wrong). In the course of this episode, one of the entrepreneurs of the endeavor is Colonel Trachenberg, who acquires a brewery, and then things get weird and complicated. Details in Rheinsberg. Our conclusion was, "The whole Trachenberg - Fredersdorf - Marschall transfers do look pre arranged and shady, but if Fredersdorf sold the lands to Frau von Marschall for the same sum he originally provided, then it looks to me that the one personal profit he made out of this was via the brewery and making the colonists buy his beer. That he told Frau von Marschall she wouldn't have to give them rent- and tax-free years was dastardly towards the colonists, but not profitable to him personally, as he no longer owned the lands in question by the time the colonists started to work on them."

Well, today, on my continuing quest to find archival material, I found the Brandenburgisches Landeshauptarchiv, which contains a whole bunch of material related to Kiekemal, and which I think must have been Emmi Wegfraß's source.

One of the descriptions of archive records goes like this: "Schenkung eines Wohn- und Brauhauses zu Köpenick sowie des Vorwerkes Kiekemal vom Oberst von Trachenberg an seinen Adoptivsohn dem Geheimen Kämmerer Fredersdorf, 1752": "Donation by Colonel von Trachenberg of a residential building and brewery in Köpenick as well as the outbuildings in Kiekemal to his adoptive son, the secret chamberlain Fredersdorf, in 1752."

So I went and looked up, who was that Saxon noblewoman who adopted Fredersdorf? And lo, it was Baroness von Trachenberg and her husband Colonel Baron von Trachenberg (who had transferred to Prussian service). And the adoption and transfer of the estate in Saxony were taking place in...drumroll...1752. There was this whole complex-sounding business arrangement between Fredersdorf and the Trachenbergs (unfortunately, pages are not included in the Google book sample, so I might have to order a copy).

Glancing at Wegfraß's account (which I have yet to read for myself), she is aware that Fredersdorf is Trachenberg's adoptive son, but doesn't say anything about any other business arrangements they have going on in 1752 in Saxony.

Nor does the author of the book that goes into great detail about the Saxon dealings seem to have any idea about Kiekemal beyond what's in Wikipedia.

So...One, further research is required. I obviously need to read Wegfraß (which is on my list for when I'm more actively working on this paper), and I think I need to order the book with the Saxon dealings and read it (relying on Wikipedia or at best Fahlenkamp, and not citing a source either way, is not great, and we found other issues with this book in the past, but it's better than nothing).

Two...is it just me, or did the appearance of prearranged dealings just get more pronounced? I'm not saying Fredersdorf intentionally embezzled the colonists, I'm just saying his relationship with Trachenberg is not a one-off limited to this affair. They seem to be deep in each other's pockets. My Poirot spidey sense is tingling and saying this lead should be explored.

Curiouser and curioser!

From:

selenak

I dimly seem to recall Wegfraß thinks the adoption business was done for the Kiekemal occasion specifically. But yes, to me it looks like a part of a larger long term business arrangement between Fredersdorf and the Trachtenbergs.

Here's something tangentially I'm curious about: Did either of the Trachtenbergs outlive Fredersdorf? also, October 1752 is when Fredersdorf becomes engaged. I.e. before this point, presumably if he died his heirs would have been his biological family (surviving siblings, nieces and nephews), but would the adoption business also made the Trachtenbergs potential heirs? Because while usually the one who inherits is the one who gets adopted, not the one who adopts, I could see the Trachtenbergs (nobles) going as far as adoption of commoner Fredersdorf not simply for this one Kiekemal estate business or because that gives them an in with the powerful Chamberlain and Secret Councillor, but also because they think, he's really wealthy by now, but also very sickly, and if we're not v. old and sick ourselves, we might have the chance to outlive him and get part of that money.

...which would no longer be the case once Fredersdorf is actually married and doesn't only have a wife but the (theoretical) chance for children. But since the engagement doesn't happen until October 1752, earlier 1752 events would not have been affected by this from the Trachtenberg pov. Of course, I could be entirely wrong here, and the adoption would not have given the Trachtenbergs any claims on Fredersdorf's inheritance in any event, even if he'd died a bachelor.

From:

mildred_of_midgard

I dimly seem to recall Wegfraß thinks the adoption business was done for the Kiekemal occasion specifically.

Oh, interesting. Yeah, I need to read this.

Here's something tangentially I'm curious about: Did either of the Trachtenbergs outlive Fredersdorf?

Same thing I was curious about! But I couldn't find them in a quick google yesterday. I will have to put on my detective hat and try again.

Okay! She was 66 in 1752, childless, and the sole heir of her family (her brother had died unmarried). She was thrown out of a carriage thanks to a careless driver in April, she lay in bed in pain dictating her last will, she died June 1.

Her two heirs are her husband, Colonel Baron von Trachenberg, and her adoptive son, Fredersdorf. Her husband gets most of the inheritance, Fredersdorf gets an estate, but he has to pay Trachenberg 800 talers in cash every year, for his support in his old age.

Ah! He dies in May 1757, aged 68, so just after Fredersdorf retired (April 1757).

But, in 1752 Trachenberg is very concerned that Fredersdorf will die before him, so he goes and gets a notarized document from the Saxon authorities saying that the payment will be made even if Fredersdorf dies, and also that Fredersdorf's not allowed to sell or mortgage it. "800 talers a year," says the author, "that will be a heavy burden on Fredersdorf until the death of the baron."

Now to tie this in with the Kiekemal chronology, from the Rheinsberg post: "On July 7th 1752, Colonel von Trachenberg transfers all his claims on the Bock property plus the Kiekenmal land to Fredersdorf."

So first the Trachenbergs adopt Fredersdorf, then the wife leaves a property to him, then she dies, then her husband transfers the Kiekemal property to him, then a few months later (January 1753) Fredersdorf offers to sell the Kiekemal property to Frau von Marschall.

Then Fredersdorf dies a few months after Colonel Baron von Trachenberg. His heirs for the estate in Saxony are his surviving siblings and children of his predeceased siblings.

In conclusion, it was kind of a race for who would die first, the elderly Trachenberg or the sickly Fredersdorf, but it doesn't seem like Trachenberg was expecting an inheritance from Fredersdorf if he died childless (esp. since he was apparently very worried about not even being able to get any money from the estate that used to belong to his wife, never mind the stuff that had nothing to do with him).

That's what I've got so far! More discoveries no doubt await us.

I have to say, though, it is really interesting to be linking up the chronology of Fredersdorf and the Trachenbergs at Kiekemal with the chronology of Fredersdorf and the Trachenbergs at Rübenau in Saxony, which apparently no one has ever done before!

From:

cahn

Okay, I'm definitely curious about this complex-sounding business relationship! I'm still leaning towards "probably not entirely ethical but also not full-out embezzling" ~~entirely because I am a Fredersdorf stan~~ but I mean, you've got to find out now, right? :)

From:

mildred_of_midgard

Finding out is the plan! I mean, it was your Fredersdorf stanning and constant questioning of the claims in Wikipedia that finally led to me being irritated enough at the lack of citations to go on a quest to track this down. :D For which I thank you!

I am trying to hold off on researching this particular point right now, though, because 1) Peter Keith essay takes priority, 2) the Fredersdorf book I need is slightly expensive and I'm buying too many other books. So unless I suddenly become obsessed, I'm holding off until I have time and inspiration to focus on this topic, probably sometime next year.