Historical Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 40

[cahn]

I'm trying to use my other account at least occasionally so I posted about my Yuletide gifts there, including the salon-relevant 12k fic that features Fritz, Heinrich, Voltaire, Fredersdorf, Saint Germain, Caroline Daum (Fredersdorf's wife), and Groundhog Day tropes! (Don't need to know canon.)

Comments

Fritz/Fredersdorf anniversary (possibly)

[selenak]

Mes amies, just a reminder that while we can never be sure, 26h December (i.e. today) in the year 1731 was very likely the day Fritz and Fredersdorf first caught sight of each other if Fredersdorf was indeed part of the Christmas concert organized for Fritz in Frankfurt an der Oder. Kennenlernentag, as we'd call it in German. Here's to them!

Re: Fritz/Fredersdorf anniversary (possibly)

[mildred_of_midgard]

Awww. <3 Yeah, I should update the chronology: we have an entry for Fritz's letter of the 27th, but he's reporting events from the night before. That's why we didn't get an email reminder today, but will tomorrow.

Also, I'm delighted that we have both a wonderful fic about said concert and a brand-new Fritz/Fredersdorf fic as of yesterday to celebrate! <3333

ETA: Other things that delight me: We are on post number 40!!! Here's to us and another fabulous year of salon!

Diocletian/Maximian primer??

[cahn]

I was informed when I woke up this morning that there is a Diocletian/Maximian fic in Madness, and I read it and was highly entertained, and also read about the Tetrarchy as directed by the endnote, but I must admit that I still really do not have any idea as to the personalities involved and therefore am clearly missing most of what's going on. (My sole knowledge about this period is that Helena found the True Cross and was Constantine's mom, and Constantine was the first Christian(-ish?) emperor??)

So... O beneficent denizens of salon -- by which I mostly mean selenak because she's so skilled at this, but mildred_of_midgard or anyone else with period knowledge, feel free to reply at will -- please synopsize the tetrarchy and the related personalities in amusing simple words for me? :)

(Yes, I know, I should listen to the podcast, but this is going to take a while as I still am figuring out the German History podcast -- the happy thing is that I think listening in the car might work, though very slowly!)

(Also, I tried to at least leave a kudos and it tells me I left one but it's not showing up??)

(Also, would be happy for this to become a more general discussion thread for this fic if people want as mildred_of_midgard has somewhat indicated she would like to happen)

Re: Diocletian/Maximian primer??

[mildred_of_midgard]

(Also, I tried to at least leave a kudos and it tells me I left one but it's not showing up??)

I had the same experience! I wonder if the AO3 servers are just a bit overwhelmed by the amount of incoming kudos.

Primer: Okay, my Roman history is 10 years rusty, so I'm going to open with a simplified prelude, and then give Selena a chance to say stuff about Diocletian and Maximian proper, and then we can discuss!

The first thing you have to understand about Diocletian and Diocletian/Maximian is that what makes them so impressive is what happened before them. To give a very simplified account:

Phase one, there was the expansionist heyday of the Roman empire with the emperors you've heard of: Augustus, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Hadrian, Marcus Aurelius, etc.

Phase two, the empire reaches its greatest extent in circa 100 CE, and it looks like this That looks really impressive! But. Some problems ensue.

1. The Romans only have the communications and transportation technology of circa 100 CE, which means that even if they're militarily superior to any one of their enemies, that border is way way overextended. Can you imagine living in Rome and trying to administer all those provinces and defend all the outreaches of the that red area?

2. The Roman emperors are really, really bad at founding dynasties. They keep dying without male heirs. They try out adoption, but they don't have a really good stable principle of succession. The major principle of succession ends up being, "If you defeat the rival candidates, you win!"

"If you defeat the rival candidates, you win!" very easily translates into "If you're an army based in Gaul or Illyria or Africa or wherever, you can grab your general, go, 'Our general is emperor!' and fight everyone else to make your guy emperor so he will give you big bonuses."

By the mid 3rd century, you have phase three: anarchy. The main means of becoming emperor is being a general, promising your troops money and favors, and marching on Rome to get acknowledged by the Senate before any other generals who have the same idea get acknowledged by the Senate. Bloodline? Previous ruling experience? What's that?

If you make it, and you have a male heir, you can try to get him on the throne, but it's a tossup whether it works, and it doesn't work for long.

One day, another emperor dies, and this soldier guy who was the son of a slave or freedman from somewhere in the Balkans becomes emperor. We know little to nothing about him before he changed his name from Gaius Valerius Diocles to Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletianus upon becoming emperor. (It's really incredibly tantalizing: I want backstory!)

And the newly minted Diocletian decides that all this anarchy and chaos has got to go! In a nutshell, phase four of the history of the Roman empire is when Diocletian initiates a bunch of reforms, promotes a strong government, and stabilizes the empire reasonably well (and impressively considering the litany of problems he was facing), but also commits at least two major fuckups, which Selena will tell you about if she has time. :)

And once we've covered that, I will describe what led me to request Diocletian/Maximian in the first place. Diocletian for his (usual) competence, obviously, and Diocletian/Maximian for a loyalty kink that you're going to hear all about. :DD

Trivia Question: Re: Prince Eugene, Life of,

[selenak]

Guys, this being post reveal time for the main Yuletide, I can ask you something which Mildred's comment to my story made me wonder. The comment in question:

Fritz, we've read your letters demanding copies of the life of Prince Eugene!!

We have indeed. My question is - do you think FW's people did, and if so, what did they make of Fritz requesting multiple copies? And what did FW think, provided one of them showed him such a letter? "At last, the boy shows interest in a military man, but did it have to be a Catholic?" Or did he/they figure out what those requests were code for?

Re: Trivia Question: Re: Prince Eugene, Life of,

[mildred_of_midgard]

Ooh, this is a really good question!

I think that if FW had seen and figured out the code, we would know about it by now. I could be wrong! But I feel like it would have come up.

So either:

a) These letters never got intercepted.

b) The letters got intercepted, but whoever read them went, "Wow, this book is a bestseller!" (Remember, Fritz wants copies *for all his friends*; read: creditors.

c) The letters got intercepted, but whoever read them went, "Oh, thank god for plausible deniability, I'm going to pretend I think this is a book, because he could become king at any moment."

Post reveals

[mildred_of_midgard]

In case anyone hasn't seen this comment on "Prussian Doll", selenak continues to be a public service:

This was so bittersweet, equal parts laughs and tears!! I have literally never thought for one second about Frederick the Great but now I am OBSESSED. This gay little tyrant. I love him. And jesus, googling who Katte was when his name was mentioned.....this man has had trauma!!! This is one of those times I wish a fic was for a big fandom so I could read more, even though it wouldn't have existed without Yuletide...thank you so much for this. I love timeloops and to have it be used to help this very particular man angrily explore the rich inner lives of those closest to him, what a treat! Excuse me as I go back in time to cure Fredersdorf's mysterious illnesses

Another convert, way to go, Selena!!

Peter Keith in the archives!

[mildred_of_midgard]

My archive orders arrived yesterday! *happy dance*

I promise to get the files uploaded, I'm just doing my best to transcribe them, and also I need to reread what exactly I'm allowed to do with the images legally. I've also reached out to prinzsorgenfrei for help.

In the meantime, here are my discoveries so far:

1. For best cost-benefit ratio, we need to place orders of at least 10 USD at a time, since that is my bank's minimum for an international wire transfer, so my 4 euro order ended up costing twice as much. Not a big deal, but something to keep in mind in future: let's batch these orders.

2. Peter Keith has beautifully legible handwriting, bless him! It's not beautiful in the sense that it's copperplate or amything, but it's beautiful in that even this non-French speaker can read almost everything he wrote. *hearts* to you, Peter.

3. The archive catalog says 8 pages, but after you subtract blank pages and covers, it's 4 (v. short) pages.

4. The first document is a letter from August 17, 1745, asking Fritz to please release him from his idleness (proof Peter didn't go to war!), especially as he now has a new kid, and Peter would be so happy if Fritz could be the godfather.

What's interesting is that thanks to Family Search, we know the kid was born August 14, and that on August 15, he was baptized with Fritz as godfather. And of course we know that Fritz was waging war in Bohemia at the time. So Peter actually made Fritz (provisional?) godfather and then asked for acceptance afterward? Was that how it worked with royal godparents, you waited to see if it was going to survive, had them baptized with the royal's name in the register, and then asked to see if said royal would accept? Is that what Trenck did with Joseph?

5. The second document is from 1750, March 12 I think, and it's Peter asking Fritz for money. Apparently the pension he was paid by Queen Caroline of England was 3 years in arrears in 1740, plus he had travel expenses to get to Lisbon, so he had to borrow money while he was in Lisbon (the only debt he ever accrued!), and in the last 10 years it's been impossible to get the money he's owed paid by the British. And what little money his wife has is going toward their children's education. So can Fritz pleeeeeaaase?

6. The third document is 5 lines with no indication who it's by or to. It's barely legible, I can only make out a few words. I'm going to need help with this. Then there's a marginal note of a few words that's even less legible. My guess from context is the paragraph is a secretary making a note about what he has done or thinks they should do about Peter's request, and the marginal note is Fritz-the-illegible making a final decision. But I could be wrong!

Conclusions: my fanfic where Peter says in 1750 that he never asks Fritz for anything anymore was wrong! But I was right about most of the family money going toward the boys' education, and I was surprisingly right about his debts! I had him being financially responsible and not getting in debt while working for Fritz, which I later thought might be unrealistic because if you were at court, there were certain obligations, but if he can be trusted to tell the truth here, I was pretty close! Of course, I did not predict his British pension being 3 years in arrears nor his inability to get it back. I imagine that once he was living in Prussia, and especially after Fritz invaded Silesia a few weeks later, the British court went, "Not our problem."

7. We can order things!!! Once I get a reliable source or sources for transcription help, more orders will follow.

Re: Peter Keith in the archives!

[mildred_of_midgard]

Oh! And I forgot to mention, chronology is key here: In March 1750, Peter writes Fritz a "please give me a lump sum of money to pay off my debts" letter (which ends with "I really really just want to be useful to you and worthy of the greatest king in the world, that is my only ambition"), and then in summer/early autumn of 1750, Fritz surprises Peter with a box of coins and a letter recommending him to his mother-in-law. This was the first scene of my fic, you may recall. So now I think that surprise lump sum of money had to do with this letter!

"I have no other ambition than to be useful to you"--either Peter finally figured out the magic words to say to Fritz after the dismal failure of 1740, or else Fritz finally had 10 years of evidence to convince him that Peter wasn't pushing for high office or influence, or both.

Btw, almost all the chronology in that fic was either deliberately wrong or else I knew at the time that it was going to turn out to be wrong when we had more evidence--and so it has come to pass. But I'm delighted that we're finding answers to almost all my questions and connecting all these dots!

Biggest outstanding question: Where was Peter buried? Second biggest outstanding question I can think of: when did his younger son die?

Peter Keith: Won't you be my son's godfather?

[mildred_of_midgard]

This is the facsimile of the first document, a letter from 1745. If you can't see it, or the quality is low when you open it in a new tab, let me know.



This is my best attempt at a diplomatic transcription, with some brackets where I'm unsure.

[?]. 28^me Aug. 1745
Sire,

Je supplie Vôtre Majeste tres humblement de changer mon oisiveté, pourque je puis [?] meriter la grace de Vôtre Majesté et [des?] [pair?] dans ma patrie pour mes Enfens, dont le nombre vient s'augmenter encore d'un garcon, le quel je conterois heureux, si j'osois prendre la liberté de prier Vôtre Majesté d'etre son parain  je suis avec le plus profond Respect
Sire
de Vôtre Majesté
le tres humble et tres obeysent serviteur et sujet Keith

Berlin le 17^me d'Aut 1745

Notes:

1a. I'm guessing the first line is when the letter was received, but I can't make all the letters into a word or abbreviation that makes sense to me.

b. I'm also not 100% sure the scribble at the end of "28" is "me"--the months on this and the next letter are abbreviated in Latin, not French, but the way Latin writes ordinals I'm not sure it would make sense to put a suffix there, so maybe it is French. Anyway, the scribbles vaguely resemble Peter's clear "^me" below. I am sympathetic to the fact that the person who has to write all day has worse handwriting than the person who's carefully making sure the king can read his request, but damn!

2. "des pair dans ma patrie": This phrase would make more sense to me if it were "des pairs" ("of the peers"). I'm not sure if that's what's going on at the end of the first word, though. I also can't tell what's going on with the squiggle at the end of "patrie". It looks like kind of like an "s", but it doesn't make sense to me to have a letter there, so that might just be a slip of the pen?

3. There's a recurring character in places where I'm pretty sure I've seen a y or an i written in a transcription, like "conteroi", "osoi", and "obeysent" and it looks like a y with a dot over the first stroke, so like a combo i/y. There aren't two dots, so it's not a ÿ (nor would I expect one there). I'm not sure how to transcribe it, so I went with "i" for the "oi" (which would be "ai" after the spelling reform) in the verbs, because the y's tail isn't hooked, and "y" for the "obeysent", because that tail is definitely hooked at the bottom. But I don't know what the actual convention here is.

ETA: After looking more closely at the 1750 letter, I've decided it's "ois", and he's just written "conterois" where I would expect "conteroi". Because the second has to be "osois", I got misled by the parallel with "conteroi", but it's obviously not "oseroi".

4. If anyone can figure out what that word before "meriter" is, that would be great. "je" just doesn't make sense to me there, but the first letter doesn't look like an "s".

My best attempt at a translation:

Received Aug 28, 1745
Sire,

I beseech Vôtre Majeste very humbly to change my idleness, so that I can merit the favor of Your Majesty and of the peers of my country for my children, whose number has just increased by a boy, whom I would count happy if I dared to take the liberty of asking Your Majesty to be his godfather. I am with the deepest respect,
Sire
Your Majesty's
most humble and most obedient
servant and subject Keith

Berlin, August 17, 1745

ETA: Obviously, if you disagree with anything I put, say so! There may be typos (especially if I unintentionally corrected to a modern spelling or English interfered), and I'm not confident of all my readings, either.

Peter Keith: $$$$$

[mildred_of_midgard]

This is the facsimile of the second document, a letter from 1750.





This is my best attempt at a diplomatic transcription, with some brackets where I'm unsure.

[? ?] Mart 1750

Berlin ce 12me Mars 1750

Sire,

Pendant le sejour que j'ai fait hors de ma Patrie, feu la Reine d'Angleterre m'avoit fixé une pension de deux cents livres sterlings par ans, et lorsque j'etois assez heureux que Vôtre Majesté ordonna mon retour, il m'etoit deü trois annes de cette pension, come il ne faloit pas moins que 4000 ecu pour les fraix de cet longue voyage, et que je n'avois pas pu encore epargner faut de mes simples apointments je me voyois oblige de prendre de Mylord Tirawly ministre alors a la cour de Lisbon̄e 150 moinois d'or, les quelles je contois qu'il seroit rembourssés par la Cour.

Mais je vois par la lettre ci jointe que cela n'est point arrivé come je l'ai esperé, et qu'apres dix annes je me vois encore dans l'impossibilité de repayer cette petite som̄e, quoique la seule dette que j'ai jamais fait[s?]. Ma situation etant con̄üe à Vôtre Majesté, et le peu de bien de me fem̄e etant employé à l'education de les enfens, jai recours a la bonté et charité de Vôtre Majesté qu'Elle me metra en etat d'agire dans cett'affaire aussi en honethome.

La gloire de vous etre attaché, Sire, sert de relief dans les autres Royaumes, et j'espere que ma conduite ne m'en aura pas rendu indigne, je n'aspire qu'a l'honneur d'être utile au plus grand Roi de la terre, et je n'ai d'autre ambition que celle de me rendre digne de Vous servire avec desinteressement et plus d'attachement et de fidelité que beaucoup d'autres.

Je suis avec le plus profond Respect
Sire
de Votre Majesté
le tres humble tres obeissant 
serviteur et sujet Keith

Notes:

1. If you're not familiar with the "m̄" and "n̄", that's a shorthand for a following m or n, so read as "mm" and "nn". This one I know from grad school!

2. "moinois d'or" I've never seen this, phrase, I've seen "Louis d'or", but I also haven't read a lot of French, so I'm taking "moinois" to be modern "monnaies", meaning "money."

3. Not sure if that's an "s" or just a meaningless squiggle at the end of "fait". The "s" doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but hey.

4. "honethome": That famous "honnete homme" phrase we've seen so many times before!

My best attempt at a translation:

Received March ?, 1750

Berlin, March 12, 1750

Sire,

During the stay that I made outside my country, the late Queen of England had given me a pension at 200 pounds sterling per year, and when I was so fortunate that Your Majesty ordered my return, three years of this pension were owed me; as it took no less than 4000 ecus for the cost of this long trip, and I had not been able to save money because of my modest income, I saw myself compelled to borrow 150 louis? d'or from Mylord Tirawly, then minister at the court of Lisbon, which I was counting on being reimbursed for by the court.

But I see by the letter attached that it hasn't turned out as I hoped, and that after 10 years I still see myself in the impossibility of repaying this small sum, although it's the only debt I've ever made. My situation being known to Your Majesty, and the few possessions of my wife being employed in the education of our children, I am having recourse to the bounty and charity of Your Majesty to put me in a condition to be able to act as an "honnet homme" in this affair.

The glory of being attached to you, Sire, serves as a consolation in other kingdoms, and I hope that my conduct has not rendered me unworthy, I aspire to nothing but the honor of being useful to the greatest king in the world, and I have no other ambition than that of rendering myself worthy of serving you with disinterest and with more attachment and loyalty than many others.

I am with the deepest respect,
Sire
Your Majesty's
very humble and very obedient
servant and subject Keith

Same note about disagreeing, especially since this one was even harder!

Re: Peter Keith: $$$$$

[selenak]

No interpretation suggestions, just a few observations.

1.) I'm glad he got the pension from Caroline in the first place (and stand by my fictional interpretation as to why she might have been motivated to help him), but not surprised it wasn't continued after her death. (She died in 1737, so if he was owed three years of pension in 1740 when Fritz ascended to the throne, the payment must have stopped with her death exactly.) Peter might have been able to win a great many people on a personal level when interacting with them, but he was still without any big connections once Caroline was gone, and I can just see some court official deciding that yeah, no, let's use this as a saving item.

2.) There is something very sad in "I hope that my conduct has not rendered me unworthy" - because methinks it does reveal Peter being seriously afraid that having helped Crown Prince Fritz the way he did makes him look bad to King Fritz.

3.) Peter signing himself "Keith" is very era typical - i.e. just the use of the family name - , but given the sheer number of other Keiths in Fritz' life, I think one can make the case Fritz probably did not think of him as "Keith" the way Katte was "Katte". Or was Peter the primary Keith, Keith Prime, and the rest of the Keiths were the Keiths-plus-other-name?

Peter Keith: ????

[mildred_of_midgard]

This is the facsimile of the third and final document.



I can't do a transcription or translation here.

que quelque bonne volonté ? ?
avoir pour luy* [d'autry/l'autry despenses] ?
? l'obli? ? ?
? ? ? ? ? jusqu'au
S. M. ? ? ? ? favorable
pour ?

* ? ? donné des marques

All I can guess here from context is that some secretary is making a note that they would like to do something for him, but they have to wait until Fritz (S. M. = Sa Majesté) makes a decision? And maybe the marginal line is Fritz's note about giving him something?

But HEEEELLLPPPP! That's a total guess and it could literally be "Btw, Biche also chewed up his clothes" for all I know. :P

ETA: and something about other expenses on line 2?

Re: Peter Keith: ????

[selenak]

I'm full of admiration you got that much and alas completely lost in terms of providing more or alternate interpretations. Just that it may be the cover leaf of a letter (it looks like it was folded that way), afterwards annotated by some secretary, as you suggest.

Today in Frederician Fandom

[selenak]

As we‘ve been reminded,today at ten am Fredersdorf died, making both Karoline and Fritz widow(er)s. It wasn‘t a long life if you cmpare it with contemporaries like Louis XIV, but he did not die young, and he lived his best life. Hail and farewell.

Re: Today in Frederician Fandom

[mildred_of_midgard]

And so soon after we got the email for their Kennenlerntag. Hail and farewell, Fredersdorf. <3 I will try to clear your name!

(Psst: it still helps if people express an interest at regular intervals. Rigorously documenting claims is teeeeeedious.)

making both Karoline and Fritz widow(er)s

Funny and sad at the same time. Fritz, I recognize the validity of your marriage even if the state and church of your day did not. <3

Lochiel of the '45, by John Sibbald Gibson (1994)

[luzula]

I don't know how interested you guys will be in this Jacobite nerdery, but I wrote it up for my journal anyway and might as well post it here as well. cahn, if you're reading this: just as a refresher, the book is primarily about Donald Cameron of Lochiel, who was the clan chief of one of the largest Highland clans involved in the ‘45 on the Jacobite side.

I'd have liked something a bit more compressed, which did not rehash the events of the '45. But there were some good tidbits here.
- I knew hardly anything about Lochiel's father, exiled after the '19—I love the detail about him being seen as an unlucky chief because 'at his birth, the silver shoe which had come into the family's possession by supernatural means could not be made to fit the infant John's foot'! Hee. We also find out about the fourth of Lochiel's brothers (Ewen, emigrated to Jamaica).
- The info on the cutting of the forests round Loch Arkaig was interesting.
- I have speculated before on whether his brother Archie (Dr Cameron) had any estate, and here is the answer: he held a tack of Lochiel's lands in Glen Kingie, north of Loch Arkaig.
- It remarks on Lochiel's tolerant approach to religion (which BPC shared, of course). I did know that the Cameron regiment had both an Episcopalian, a Presbyterian, and a Catholic chaplain, but I didn't know that MacDonald of Keppoch, who was a Protestant, refused to let his large numbers of Catholics have a chaplain, which led to some desertion...
- OMG. The book says that at the end of May 1746, still wartime, Jean Cameron (Archie's wife) was 'heavy with child', as was also Margaret Murray of Broughton. No source though, arrrgh. Please give your sources! Hmm, trying to decide if this means I should edit my current fic. Also, I am speechless at this, because in September-October of the same year, I've read elsewhere that Jean was taking messages in the Highlands.
- This is actually connected to the surrender of Jean’s brother, Cameron of Dungallon. He was one of Lochiel’s senior officers, and standard bearer to BPC himself. It wasn't that he was taken during military action, no, he turned himself in voluntarily. The book speculates that he did this for the purpose of keeping the Campbell troops away from a place where Lochiel was hiding, and possibly also to protect the two pregnant women. On the other hand, Duffy quotes Campbell of Mamore's reports saying that Dungallon gave ‘very ingenious and satisfactory answers to such questions as I asked him’, and that he was ‘a person who procured very good in intelligence’. Would he really have done this if he gave himself up as a ruse?? Apparently he didn't tell them where Lochiel was, though. I guess we'll never know his motives. This also reminds me of Anne Mackintosh and her husband--I've seen speculations that they were not actually at odds, but that they were consciously each picking a side so that they had insurance whichever side won. Which of course many families did, but not as dramatically!
- Sir Steuart Streipland trained as a surgeon to earn a living after he lost his estates after the ’15. Which is nice, yay making himself a useful member of society. Perhaps this is an illustration of what Naomi Mitchison said about the Scottish land-owning classes not being as averse to taking up a trade as the English?
- This is a cute anecdote: Lochiel was with BPC when he came to the French court, and when a man came and threw his arms around BPC's neck, Lochiel drew his sword because he was afraid it was an assassination. In fact it was BPC's brother Henry--nice to see that the brothers were on such good terms.
- It's very interesting to read Lochiel's narrative Mémoire d’un Ecossais. I can't take it entirely at face value, though, since it obviously had some propaganda purposes--he wanted to influence the French court. For example, it starts with the blatantly false sentence: ‘There had been something close to complete accord among the Scottish Highlanders to serve their rightful king.’ Really? What about the Campbells? and the Munros and Mackays? Also, I am boggling at the epithet ‘bright spirit’ applied to Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat. Here's an interesting bit, though: Lochiel claimed that when general Campbell [Mamore, I think?] was ordered to make a search for BPC on the islands, he arrived, then told Clanranald ‘Tomorrow we are going to carry out some thorough searches. If there is any contraband I think you would do well to get it under undercover tonight.’ No idea if it's true or not, but it is true that the Campbells were generally more lenient than other government troops.

Re: Lochiel of the '45, by John Sibbald Gibson (1994)

[mildred_of_midgard]

This was great, thanks! Always keep the Jacobite material coming, even if I'm resisting the temptation to get sucked back in to researching it myself.

I didn't know that MacDonald of Keppoch, who was a Protestant, refused to let his large numbers of Catholics have a chaplain, which led to some desertion...

I did know this! It was why when I read the Outlander books in high school, I was indignant that Gabaldon has Keppoch bringing a Catholic priest along. But since then, I've encountered the opposite claim, e.g. in McLynn (big name Jacobite historian), that Keppoch himself was Catholic! I haven't been able to trace the "refused to let them have a chaplain" claim back further than the 19th century (although I haven't really tried, because resisting temptation). Does your book by chance give a source?

ETA: Note that Wikipedia says "allegedly" and gives a 1928 source.

nice to see that the brothers were on such good terms.

Yeah, my faint memories suggest they weren't super close and didn't have a lot in common, but they weren't on *bad* terms either, so an embrace doesn't surprise me. Aww at Lochiel trying to protect him, though.

‘Tomorrow we are going to carry out some thorough searches. If there is any contraband I think you would do well to get it under undercover tonight.’

Hahaha, there are similar stories about Katte's arrest! (Alas, he did not get undercover that night.)

Pop Quiz opportunity for Fredericians

[selenak]

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

Nothing like starting the day with a Lehndorff quote from 1785.:)

EC, the entertaining history YouTube channel I've linked a couple of times - last time with the Diocletian cartoons, has started to do a series on Fritz. His Monstrous Father is the title of the first installment. cahn, this one isn't as obviously wrong as the Bad Gays pod cast or the more recent BBC thing with Stephen Fry, it's reasonably good a start, in fact, but it does have a couple of tiny and not so tiny mistakes, including one about Mildred's favourite subject, Katte's execution, which, in fairness, is a mistake Tim Blanning also makes. I dare you to list all the mistakes you find in this first installment and enjoy (err, as much as one can the tale of an abusive childhood and youth) the show! mildred_of_midgard, Peter does get mentioned - not by name, and not in connection with the escape attempt, but he's referred to as the page Fritz got caught with and who was subsequently exiled to a border garnison. (BTW, the fact that he and Fritz were caught fooling around is stated as fact instead of "maybe?" is of course another issue, but at least he made it into the saga instead of being erased entirely!

Re: Pop Quiz opportunity for Fredericians

[mildred_of_midgard]

Katte's execution, which, in fairness, is a mistake Tim Blanning also makes.

Several authors make it! I was looking through a bunch of biographies for "who says what about Fritz and the candles?", and I was surprised at how many axes there were at Katte's execution. All fanfic writers are hereby forgiven.

Btw, I never did find the "it was his jailer" anecdote in any of those bios, just the Fouquet story. And that's weird, because the "it was his jailer" story is the one I remember recounting to other people before salon! Selena or Felis, do remember where you've run into this story in the past, and if so, which version? I'm not promising to write an academic essay on our findings, but I'm not promising *not* to, either. ;)

BTW, the fact that he and Fritz were caught fooling around is stated as fact instead of "maybe?" is of course another issue

We decided they weren't caught fooling around, though, remember? It turned out FW received an anonymous letter that tipped him off to Fritz's escape attempt plans. I mean, we don't *know* they weren't also caught, but we do know there was the anonymous letter at the time and that FW acted quickly. And that made a lot more sense psychologically of how FW reacted (we really thought it was an underreaction for the sin of sodomy).

French gossipy sensationalism

[mildred_of_midgard]

Who's who:

Olympe Mancini: Mother of Eugene of Savoy, lover of Louis XIV, niece of Cardinal Mazarin, exiled because of the Affair of the Poisons. selenak has more here.

Louvois: Minister of War under Louis XIV, showed up a lot in the Man in the Iron Mask episode, refused Eugene advancement in the French army, leading to Eugene's defection to Austria, with fateful consequences.

What's what:

According to Henri Pigaillem, author of a 2005 bio of Eugene that I am reading for French practice (and at this rate I will finish next year), Louvois actually had a thing for Olympe when she and Louis were an item, but she wouldn't give him the time of day. So he ended up with a grudge against her and started denying her and her children opportunities and money whenever possible.

Briefly he tried to reconcile with her, but then his resentment got the upper hand and he was the one who implicated her in the Affair of the Poisons and got her banned.

I don't know if it's true, mind you, but this is what I have read. Will let you know if the Eugene bio turns up anything else interesting (I found it because it was the cited as the source of the claim that an envoy called Eugene gay long before he left France and supposedly alienated Liselotte, whom biographers like to call the only person to ever refer to Eugene as gay).

Re: French gossipy sensationalism

[mildred_of_midgard]

I got to the "Eugene is gay" part and it delivered! I mean not with citations, there are no footnotes, only in-text references to memoirs and letters (but not where to find them), but it delivered on the gossip!

Google translated because I'm at work, but I did read it in French this morning. ;)

The friends have indeed founded a society with the aim of regularly celebrating orgies. One meets there favorites of Monsieur, brother of the King: the knight of Lorraine, the count of Guiche or the duke of Nevers. We also meet Eugène there, of whom Ezéchiel Spanheim, soon to be representative of Brandenburg in Paris, said bluntly: "It is certain that there is no greater sodomite in France than him and it would be a bad start for a young prince to begin his life with the most horrible debauchery in the world.”

Monsieur is of course gay Philippe, this Ezechiel quote is the one that we saw before. But it gets better!

The young androgynous François-Timoléon de Choisy recounts his "exploits" in his insolent Memoirs. Choisy does not hide his feminine nature. He bought a house, where "Madame" receives ladies and many gentlemen to whom she gives the opportunity to ascertain her sex. She has her self called herself by them the Comtesse de Barres. But at court he is a very neat abbot. However, Monsieur, the King's brother, shares part of his time with him because he likes cross-dressing and even more: "I was dressed as a girl every time the little Monsieur came to the house, and he came there at least two or three times a week. I had pierced ears, diamonds, beauty patches, and all the other little affectations to which one becomes very easily accustomed, and which is very difficult to get rid of. Monsieur, who also loved all that, always gave me a hundred marks of affection. In his Memoirs, the Marquis d'Argenson, future Lieutenant General of Police, to whom Choisy related his worst follies, wrote:

"The Abbé de Choisy kept as long as he could this impertinent habit of dressing as a woman, and we know all the follies he committed in this guise. “In his childhood,” said Sainte-Beuve finally, “his mother made him wear corsets which tightened him to the extreme and thus brought up a fat and chubby chest, so that, when he grew up, he had as much cleavage as a fifteen year old girl."

These follies, Choisy shares with Eugène, who has the opportunity to transform his deformed body into a more attractive silhouette thanks to the frilly outfits he likes to wear. At this same period, he already took a liking to tobacco, gambling and hunting, which he would love all his life. For the rest, the only times he would leave Vienna later, except to go to war, would be only to hunt down stags or wild boars. Even the court of France, which cannot boast of severity in this area, is indignant in the name of morality. The young princes take their friendships too far. The approximately 90,000 indiscreet letters left by Princess Palatine are not the only accounts we have. There is also a court document that relates the same incident. The princess, ugly, frustrated in her marriage to Philippe d'Orléans, ill-suited to the court of France, nostalgic for her German origins, compensates for her discomfort with an often outrageous prolixity. She speaks of the young Prince Eugene in these terms:

“When he was still very young, he was already called Madame Simone and Madame Lansiene (the old one) because, it was said, he often played the lady for young people."

But when the men say the same things about the same guy, they're not ugly and compensating? Sigh.

The small meetings in which one regularly finds the Choisys or the “Madames Simone” become a sensational affair when Louis XIV forces his fifteen-year-old son, the Count of Vermandois, to make revelations. He formed among his relatives a homosexual circle that almost all the young princes of the blood and their close friends are part of. Cardinal de Bouillon, brother-in-law of the poetess Marianne Mancini, the youngest of Eugène's aunts, is not absent. But the King cannot exterminate all the offspring of the high nobility. He must content himself with threats. He doesn't have time to think very seriously about purifying the mores of his court because he himself is too busy being dissolute.

*snort*

On the other hand, the Princess of Savoy-Carignan, Eugene's grandmother, outraged by his behavior, did not hesitate to kick her grandson out. Fortunately, the prince has too many friends in the capital to have trouble finding accommodation. Louvois writes to Condé that a certain Baigneur is giving him hospitality.

Le Secret du Roi

[mildred_of_midgard]

I've mentioned that that I've read several times that Louis XV had a secret service that was at odds with official French policy. Well, in my reading, I've finally come across a concrete example.

The "Secret du Roi" was headed by the Comte de Broglie (whom we've met, not the wave-particle guy ;)), who supported King August III in Poland in the 1750s/1760s, when he was having conflicts against the nobility in France. Whereas Choiseul, the official Foreign minister, supported the Saxons and Poles in their efforts to get *rid* of August III.

And the footnote says that it was, predictably, actually way more complicated than that! "This is only a brief and greatly simplified description of a far more complex internal and international situation." It then goes on to cite 8 different sources in English, French, and German, all of which look fascinating.

I might look into this at some point, you know how I am about complex foreign policy situations. ;)

But in the meantime, that does sound incredibly confusing for anyone who was getting orders from two French chains of command!

ETA: Oh, the book I got this from is Liaisons Dangereuses: Sex, Law, and Diplomacy in the Age of Frederick the Great. It hasn't been quite as exciting as I'd hoped from the title (what a title!), because it's focused on four obscure people in Hamburg and only tangentially mentions any events or individuals that we've heard of (Heinrich comes up a couple times as the former regimental commander of one of the individuals), but a lot of that is my concentration being absolutely shot and unwilling to do anything these days but write Medici fix-it practice German and to a lesser extent French. selenak might get more out of it. It does at least seem to be well researched.

Re: Le Secret du Roi

[selenak]

Okay, I note the title for future reference and spare time.

Euler and Fritz

[luzula]

I am currently reading a great book about the history of calculus, which, given salon’s interest in math, I might summarize here. : ) Meanwhile, I will give you the Frederician tidbit that Leonhard Euler (super important and influential mathematician) first worked in Saint Petersburg, but in 1741, Fritz offered him a job as director of his astronomical observatory. The book claims that Fritz was deeply disappointed with Euler who lacked the flair of Voltaire and several of his other collected intellectuals. Euler, in turn, was frustrated by the time-consuming tasks to which he was assigned. In 1766 he moved back to Saint Petersburg and Catherine the Great, who offered him a position where he was more free to do the math he wanted. No sources for any of this, though.

Re: Euler and Fritz

[mildred_of_midgard]

This is pretty much exactly what I've read, yes. (Also that Euler was pious and didn't fit in well at Fritz's freethinking, religion-trashing court.)

Also, when Fritz became king in 1740, one of his first requests (his first request?) to Suhm was, "Please try to get me Euler from St. Petersburg!" and Suhm DID. :D

(Do I need to explain who Suhm is, or are we good?)

Catherine the Great, who offered him a position where he was more free to do the math he wanted.

And paid better. This is why I have a fanfic whose title alludes to Catherine as the poacher of employees. ;) Fritz was tight-fisted and Catherine was generous and she poached good people from him.

Two Philippes, no waiting

[selenak]

Soooo, Voltaire has a story about the origin of the Philippe d'Orleans the (future) Regent, son of Liselotte and Philippe the Gay, vs Philippe "The Frog" V. rivalry of Bourbon cousins which you did not tell us, Mildred, and I was not aware, either. According to him, when things are dire for the French in the War of the Spanish Succession after a couple of lost battles (mainly Blenheim/Höchstädt and Malplaquet):

The duke of Orleans, the namesake of Philip , disgusted with the Spanish ministry , and still more displeased with the princess Orsini , who governed affairs, began to think that he might secure for himself the country which he was sent to defend ; and when Louis XIV . himself proposed to give up his grandson , and an abdication was already talked of in Spain , the duke of Orleans thought himself worthy of filling the throne which Philip V. would be obliged to resign . He had some pretensions to that place, which had been left unnoticed in the king of Spain's will , and which his father had supported by a protest.

That scheme is stillborn upon arrival, of course, even before the Allies overreach themselves in their victories by demanding Louis XIV actively fight his grandson.

Philip V. never forgave his cousin for thinking him capable of abdicating, and endeavoring to succeed him . In France the whole kingdom cried out against the duke of Orleans . The dauphin, father of Philip V. , proposed in council to bring the offender to justice ; but the king chose to pass in silence this abortive and pardonable scheme , rather than to punish a nephew , at the time that a grandson was on the verge of ruin .

Did I just forget this or did Horowski not mention it? Do the Philip V. biographies mention it? Did Voltaire make it up?

Re: Two Philippes, no waiting

[mildred_of_midgard]

I didn't tell you this because I didn't remember it! I don't remember it from Horowski (but checking will take a lot longer, because my German is still slooow), and it's way less dramatic in Kamen:

That autumn, the duke of Orléans returned to France. Philip had admired the duke as a general in Italy, and had personally requested that he be sent to Spain. But in the peninsula tensions arose between the two. Philip's lack of an heir at that time made Orléans into a likely successor to the Spanish throne; the king felt threatened by this. Moreover, Orléans got on well with the Spaniards, which created further tensions. His successful campaigns in the Crown of Aragon helped to increase suspicions. The day that the city of Valencia surrendered, 8 May 1707, on his own initiative as commander-in-chief Orléans issued a decree pardoning the inhabitants for their act of rebellion, an action he repeated on entering Saragossa at the end of the month. These measures gave rise to the suspicion that he was attempting to win favour in the Crown of Aragon for his claims to the Spanish throne. As if to endorse such fears, in 1709, the year after he had left for France, two of his secretaries, Regnault and Flotte, were arrested in Spain for allegedly taking part in a plot to assassinate Philip V. They had also been in touch with a group of grandees who appear to have promised Orléans their support as possible king of Spain in place of Philip. 'He told me', the duke of Saint- Simon wrote later, 'that many grandees of Philip V of Spain Spain and other notables had told him that the king of Spain could not persevere, and had proposed hastening his fall and putting himself in his place'. Further arrests were made two weeks after those of Regnault and Flotte, when the marquis of Villaroel, a general who had served under Orléans, was detained in Saragossa. Significantly, Villaroel later deserted the Bourbon side and joined the archduke in Barcelona. The king, always prone to suspicions, continued for many years to harbour fears of a personal threat to himself from the duke. Louis XIV, well aware of the conflicts within his family, commented in April 1709: 'I have found excuses for not sending my nephew back to Spain this year'.

Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1

[selenak]

Before all else, it's worth recalling why Voltaire's Age of Louis XIV was considered so innovative at its time of publication. Having read various 18th century anecdote collections and early biograpies by now, I can only confirm what, say, Orieux stated: what's new here is that Voltaire really does try to capture an age rather than the life of an individual. He uses Louis' life time as a rough temporal outline and keeps returning to Louis' actions, but that's using Louis as the red thread while attempting to draw a portrait of not just France but Europe during that era. The book's structure basically goes thusly:

- Introduction, explanation about ages/eras
- overview state of France and Europe when Louis was born, and why
- linear chronological European history, France-centric, but European, from this point till the end of the War of the Spanish Succession
- collection of non-political anecdotes about Louis
- Louis' last three years and the French and European reactions to his death

Both volumes are of course immensely quotable, and I shall do so in short order. As a historian, Voltaire occasionally footnotes (thankfully in two cases where I really thought, hang on, WHAT?), but really only occasionally, and it amuses me that the most extensive footnotes show up in volume 2 for the purpose of making mincemeat of the competition, err, of the then recently published fake "Memoirs of Madame de Maintenon". (These were "discovered" and published when Voltaire had basically already finished his book and he had a minor heart attack.As you would if what if genuine would be a key source to your work of years and years show up and call a lot of your conclusions into question. Thankfully for Voltaire, those memoirs really were fake.) He didn't redraft his book, but he added various footnotes in the second volume basically all saying "here's what rubbish the fake Maintenon memoirs have to say to this event, and here's why it's rubbish". As opposed to his various pamphlets (anonymous or not) or his Memoirs (of which a large section could be titled "Me and Fritz: A Bitter Romance"), the Age of Louis XIV doesn't have a particular enemy to be trashed, or an injustice to be attacked. It does try to be a serious historical work, aiming at fairness and more dimensionality for most, if not all historical characters showing up, though you can tell Voltaire's faves.

So, Voltaire's four ages: That of Philip and Alexander, that of Caesar and Augustus, that of the Medici and the Renaissance, and that of Louis XIV. Why is the last one worth studying?

It is perhaps that which approaches the nearest to perfection of all hte four; enriched by the discoveries of the three former ones, it has done grataer things in certian kinds than those three together. All the arts indeed were not carried farther than under the Medici, Augusts and Alexander; but human reason in general was more improved. In this age we first became acquainted with sound philosophy; it may truly be said that from the last years of Cardinal Richelieu's administration till those which followed the death of Louis XIV. there has happened such a general revolution in our arts, our genius, our manners, and even in our government, as will serve as an immortal mark to the true glory of our country. This happy influence has not been confined to France; it has communicated itself to England, where it has stirred up an emulation, which that ingenious and deeply learned nation stood in need of at that time; it has introduced taste into Germany, and the sciences into Russia; it has even re-animated Italy, whch was languishing; and Europe is indebted fo rits politeness and spirit of society to the court of Louis XIV.

You can just imagine Fritz nodding along to "we imported taste into Germany", but in fairness: every German princeling desperately wanted to be Louis XIV, built mini Versailles palaces and gardens, dressed in French fashion, and even outside of Brandenburg where most of the French Huguenot refugees ended up, hiring French teachers and servants to educate your kids became indespensible. Voltaire isn't simply boasting here but stating something which in 1740 looks to be self evident not just to patriotic French folk. And he'll offer enough criticism of French inner and outer politics, and even some of French culture, later on to make his work more than just an elogy to French gloire. Case in point:


FRENCH music, especially the vocal , is disliked by all other nations . It cannot be otherwise, because the French prosody or versification differs from that of every other country of Europe . The climate denies us that flexibility of voice which it gives the Italians , and it is not custom among us , as at Rome and other Italian courts , to make eunuchs of men, in order to render their voices finer than those of women . All these things , joined to the slowness of our singing, which, by the bye , forms a strange contrast with our native vivacity , will always make the French music disagreeable to any but Frenchmen.

Some of the best quotes about various European people and institutions pre Louis XIV:

Charles I. of England and Cromwell: (Charles) was too headstrong to be diverted from his projects, and too weak to carry them into execution. He was a good husband, a good master, a good father and an honest man, but an ill advised prince; he engaged in a civil war which lost him his throne and made him end his life on a scaffold, by an unparalleled revolution. This civil war, which was begun in the minority of Louis XIV, prevented England for some time from taking part in her neighbor's concerns; she lost her credit in Europe, with her quiet at home; her trade was obstructed, and other nations looked upon her as bured beneath her own ruins, till the time that she at once became more formidable than ever, under the rule of Cromwell, who had enslaved her with the gospel in one hand, the sword in the other, and the mask of religion on his face; and who in his administration concealed, under the qualities of a great king, all the crimes of a ursurper.

(Like Mildred, Voltaire has a competence kink and therefore likes Cromwell better than all the Stuarts put together, and thinks William (III) of Orange is chronologically underestimated in France when he doesn't have Louis' grandeur or lofty soul but wow, what competence! Unfortunately competence isn't inheritable, hence Cromwell's son Richard:

He was possessed of all the meek virtues which make the good citizen, and had none of that brutal intrepidity which sacrifices everything to its own interests . (...) This Richard, however, lived contented, whereas his father had never known what happiness was.

Then there's the church. Richelieu about the Pope (as an institution, not one particular pope) in the age of the Baroque:

His spiritual authority, which is always mixed with something of the temporal, is slighted and abhorred by one-half of Christendom: and though he is considered as a father by the other half, yet he has some children who resist his will at times with reason and succcess. It is the maxim of the French government to look upon him as a sacred and enterprising person whose hands must sometimes be tied, though they kiss his feet.

(You can say that again, son of France. #Popenapping #Avignon)

One thing Voltaire is decidely unimpressed by in the pre Louis XIV era is dueling:

This Gothic barbarism, which was formerely authorized by kings themselves and had become the distinguishing character of the nation, contributed as much as the foreign and domestic wars to depopulate the country. It is not saying too much, to aver that in the course of twenty years, of which ten had been troubled by war, more French gentlemen died by the hands of Frenchmen than by those of the enemy.

Richelieu, who officially outlawed duels, would agree. Speaking of the Cardinal, while Voltaire grants Richelieu that he did something useful for France while indulging his ego (namely, humbling the Habsburgs, starting to build up French reputation and also starting to build up a fleet), he's very negative about Mazarin, stating that Mazarin had between the end of the Fronde (the war of the nobility vs Anne the Regent and Mazarin) and his death absolute power in France and yet didn't do anything for anyone but himself and his own family, not for the country. He also claims that a) Anne fell out of love with him, and b) Louis himself was glad when Mazarin died. There goes a story with each which were the occasions where I wanted and got sourcing, because I can't recall that any of the modern works on Anne, Mazarin or Louis mentioned any such thing. According to Voltaire, who says he has it from the memoirs of Anne's lady-in-waiting Madame de Motteville, Mazarin did want to marry his niece Marie to Louis, sounded Anne out and only upon her spirited and indignant reaction pretended to be against it, too, and that he really never forgave her for this, nor she him. This, like I said, goes against every other presentation of the young Louis XIV/Marie Mancini story which I've read. (cahn, which goes thusly: Young Louis after his brief affair with her older sister Olympe falls in love for real, so much that he uses the M word, both Anne and Mazarin - who is at this point already busy negotiating a Spanish marriage - are horrified and Mazarin comes down like a hawk, says no to Louis and packs off his niece to Italy. Antonia Fraser in "Love and Louis XIV" also gives us a quote from Marie's later husband who was amazed to have found her a virgin.) Similarly, in every other presentation I've read, Louis has a good mentor/protegé, almost father/son like relationship with Mazarin, hence is tactful enough to wait with assuming absolute power until the Cardinal is dead, and Mazarin does his best to prepare young Louis, carefully educating him. Whereas Voltaire claims that Mazarin deliberately kept Louis as ignorant as possible in order to continue ruling, and that Louis was glad he was dead and said "I don't know what I'd have done if he'd lived much longer". For this, Voltaire sources the memoirs of Pierre de la Porte, who was a faithful servant of Anne and later a valet de chambre for young Louis. Again, goes against everythng I've read in modern biographies, but evidently Voltaire didn't make it up from stretch. I suspect he did what most of us do, went on the look out for quotes supporting his own opinion and ignoring the rest?

Anyway, as a sample, here's Voltaire comparing Cromwell and Mazarin:

Never had the trade of England been in so free and so flourishing a condition, nor the state so rich. Its victorious fleets made its name respected in every sea, while Mazarin, wholly employed in governing and heaping up riches, suffered justice, trade, navigation and even the revenue itself, to languish and decline in France. As much masteri n France as Cromwell was in England, afater a civil war, he might have procured the same advantages for the country which he governed as Cromwell had done for his; but Mazarin was a foreigner, and tho9ugh of a less cruel disposoition than Cromwelll, wanted his greatness of soul.

Another possibility is that Voltaire, who wants this book to be published in France, after all, is doing what many a writer did with histories, count on the fact his readers will see pointed parallels to the present, in which case Mazarin stands in for Louis XV's ministers. He exists the book with this Voltairian summary: Soon afterward he died, seemingly unregretted by anyone except the King, who had already learned the art of dissembling.

Voltaire is a fan of Queen Christina of Sweden, bisexual icon buried in the Vatican:

Everyone admired a young princess, so worthy of reigning, who had resigned the sovereign authority for the sake of leading a life of ease and freedom. It is shameful in the Protestant writers to assert, without the least shadow of proof, that she resigned the crown only because she could keep it no longer. She had formed this design from the timie she was twenty years of age, and had allowed seven years to bring it to maturity. A resolution so much above all vulgar conception, and which had been formed for such a length of time, should stop the mouths of those who reproach her with livity of disposition, and of having been compelled to this abdication. One of these accusations destroys the other; but everything great and noble is sure to be attacked by narrow minds. The extrarordinary turn onf mind of this princess is sufficiently shown by her letters. In that which she wrote to Chanut, who had formerly been ambassador from France at her court, she thus expresses herself: "I wore the crown without ostentation, and I resign it with readiness: after this you have nothing to fear for me, my happiness is out of the reach of fortune."

However, Voltaire's fave Christina is a problematic one. When she visits France:

She was admired at the French court, though she surpassed all the women there in understanding. Theking saw her, and did her the greatest honors; but he did not discourse much with her. He had been bred in ignorance, and his natural good sense made him bashful. The only extraordinary thing that hte ladies and courtiers remarked in this philosopohical queen was that she did not dress after the French fashion, and that she danced badly. T'he learned found nothing to condemm in her except the murder of Monaldeschi, her master of horse, whom she caused to be assassinated at Fontainebleau in the second journey she made to 'France, for some fault he had been guilty of toward her. As she had laid down the sovereign authority, she had no longer a right to impose a sentence. She could no longer be considered as a queen who punished a misdeameanor of state, but asd a private woman who ended a love affair by a murder. This infamous and cruel action sullied that philosophy which had made her quit a throne. Had she been in England, she would have been punished; but the court of France winked at this insult against the royal authority, the law of nations, and humanity.

(You may recall I mentioned this when we talked about Christina a while ago. Mazarin advised her to pretend Monaldeschi had died in a quarrel between courtiers; Christina said no, she owned it, she had him executed for his transgressions against her as was her right as Queen. Everyone else: *Gulp*)

After Mazarin's death, Louis takes the reign at age 22, and France becomes the 700 pounds gorilla of European politics. He wins one war after another, gets one concession after another. But:

In a word , Louis disturbed all Europe by his arms and negotiations ; but, after all , he could not prevent the emperor, the empire, and Spain from joining the Dutch , and publicly declaring war against him . He had so far changed the course of things that the Dutch , who were his natural allies , were becoming friends to Spain .

Which, as Voltaire repeatedly points out, given the Spain/Netherlands backstory, really took some doing.

Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 1

[mildred_of_midgard]

It is perhaps that which approaches the nearest to perfection of all hte four;

On a historiographical note, remind me how revolutionary this idea is? When did people start doing an about-face on the past being inherently better than the present? (Nostalgic coloring of the past is still a thing, obviously, but "progress" is more of a concept that's taken for granted than it used to be.)

FRENCH music, especially the vocal , is disliked by all other nations .

Fritz agrees! Per Blanning:

The Berlin opera house was...multinational: most of the singers were Italian, the dancers French and the musicians German. Although so often described as a Francophile, Frederick in fact had a generally low opinion of contemporary French culture. During the golden age of the mid-seventeenth century, he believed, French writers, led by Corneille and Racine, had produced dramatic works of unsurpassable quality, but since then their star had waned. Dismissing their music as “puerile,” he told Graun to stop composing overtures in the French style. Modern Italian music was mellifluous when sung properly but essentially “stupid.” What Frederick demanded was music in the Italian style but written by Germans. Ascribed to him was the dictum: “The French only know how to write drama and the Italians only know how to sing; the Germans alone understand how to write music.”

He also claims that a) Anne fell out of love with him, and b) Louis himself was glad when Mazarin died. There goes a story with each which were the occasions where I wanted and got sourcing

Interesting! Like you, I had definitely not encountered this before. Do you need me to track down those memoirs?

(You may recall I mentioned this when we talked about Christina a while ago. Mazarin advised her to pretend Monaldeschi had died in a quarrel between courtiers; Christina said no, she owned it, she had him executed for his transgressions against her as was her right as Queen. Everyone else: *Gulp*)

I do recall!

Which, as Voltaire repeatedly points out, given the Spain/Netherlands backstory, really took some doing.

I myself have always been impressed by this foreign policy development! Truly, the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 2

[selenak]

Speaking of Louis' wars, here's Richelieu's take on Philippe d'Orleans the Gay:


Monsieur ( as the brother of Louis XIV. was at that time called ) fought with a courage and presence of mind that was never expected from so effeminate a prince. There could not be a stronger proof that valor is not
incompatible with delicacy. This prince , who frequently used to go dressed like a woman , and who had the same inclinations, behaved on this occasion like a general and a soldier. It is said that the king was jealous of the reputation he acquired . He took very little notice of the victory he had gained , and did not so much as go to see the field of battle , though he was near by. Some of the staff of the duke of Orleans , who were more discerning than the rest, prophesied to him then that he would never again have the command of an army, and their predictions were verified.

(Voltaire doesn't discuss the question of Monsieur's first wife, Minette, and her death until the anecdote section in the second volume. Like most modern historians, he thinks that while the marriage was awful, Minette did not die of poison, but that it wasn't surprising there were rumors galore, between her state of marriage and the later Affair of the Poisons making everyone think "Poison!" about any death at the court. Also, he points out that the Chevalier de Lorraine, aka the most likely suspect after Philippe himself, was at that point in exile in Italy and would have had to organize it from afar and with weeks or months of delay.)

Louis XIV may have treated his Huguenots badly, but that doesn't mean he was cool with the Pope. At that point, Innocent XI wanted to get rid of two very costly privileges which envoys enjoyed - they could extend the right of franchise and asylum through a great distance (i.e. if someone had killed someone, they just could cry "diplomatic immunity! I work for envoy X!"), and anything brought into Rome under the name of an envoy couldln't be taxed. This was hell on the Roman economy and state of law.

At lenght Pope Innocent XI. prevailed ont he emperor, he kings of Spain and Poland , and on the new king of England, James II, who was Catholic, to give up these odious privileges. The nuncio Ranucci proposed to Louis to concur with these princes in restoring the peace and good order of Rome; but Louis, who in his heart hated the pope, returned for answer that he hever regulated his conduct by the example of others, who rather ought himself to serve as an example ot them.

Louis then sends the Marquis de Lavardin as an ambassasdor with 400 marine guards, hte same number of volunteer officers, and two hundred men in livery to make his entrance and basically make Rome into a French garnison.

All that Innocent XI. could do was to attack the Marquis de Lavardin with the worn-out weapon of excommuinication, a weapon which is now as little regarded in Rome as elsewhere.

At this rate, Louis shows an almost Fritzian eagerness to collect enemies, though since he spends French money liberally in the HRE, he also has lots of client supporters among the princes Elector. (Including the Great Elector of Brandenburg, until Louis kicks the Huguenots out.) And then there's James II.

James II., who succeded his brohter, Charles II, was a Catholic; but Charles did not consent to become a Catholic till toward the latter part of his life, and then only out of compliance with his mistresses and his brother. In fact, he acknowledged no other religion than that of pure deism. HIs perfect indifference in those points which divide mankind in thier disputations had contributed not a little to render his reign peacable among the English. James, on the contrary, attached by strong persuasion to the Roman Catholic religion in his youth, joined to his belief the spirit of party and seal. Had he been a Mahometan, or of the religion of Confucius, the ENglish would never have disturbed his reign; but he formed a design to estalibhs the Roman Catholic religion in his kingdom, which was looked upon witht he utmost horror by these republican royalists as a religion of slavery.

James II reigns, pisses off everyone, gets dethroned by William the ultra competent and Mary, and ends up in France with cousin Louis as a generous host.

Never did monarch appear so grand as Louis on this occasion , and James seemed as mean . Those of the court and city , by whose opinions the reputations of men are decided , conceived very little esteem for him .
He saw nobody but Jesuits .

Voltaire: Not a Jacobite. He'll grant there was some sympathy for James in France, and much hatred for William:

Most of the Parisians, who were born under the reign of Louis , and moulded to despotic sway , looked upon a king at that time as a demigod, and a usurper as a sacrilegious monster . The common people , who had seen James going every day to mass, detested William as a heretic . The idea of a son- in - law and a daughter, Protestants, driving their father, a Catholic , from his throne, and reigning in his stead , together with that
of an enemy to their king, transported the Parisians to a degree of fury ; but prudent people were of a more moderate way of thinking.

Because William is competent, people!

On to the Scouring of the Shire, err, the sacking of the Palatinate.

The king had resolved to make a desert of the Palatinate as soon as those towns were taken. His design in this was rather to cut off all means of subsistence from the enemy, than to take vengeance on the elector, whose only crime was that of having done his duty in joining with the rest of Germany against France. An order came to the army from theking, signed Louvois, to reduce the whole country to ashes. T'he French generals were then obliged to obey; and though it was in the very midst of winter, casued notice to be sent to the inhabitants of all these flourishing towns, and the villages round about, and to the masters of above fifty castles, to quit their dwellings; that they were going to destroy everything with fire and sowrd. Upon this dreaful summons, men, women, old people, and children, hurried out in the utmost haste; some of whom wandered up and down in the fields, and the rest took refuge in neighboring co9untries, while the soldiery, who always exceeds commands of rigor, and selfdom or never execute those of clemency, burned and pillaged their country. They began with Mannheim, the residence of the electors, whose residence they levelled to thegroun d, as well as the private houses of the citizens; broke open their very tombs, thinking to satisfy their avarice with the immense treasures they expected to find there, and scattered their ashes abroad. This was the second time that this beautiful country had been laid waste by Louis' orders; but the burning of two cities and twenty villages by Turenne was but a spark in comparison to this conflagration. All Europe was struck with horror at this action. The very officers who executed it were ashamed of being the instruments of such cruelty. The blame was thrown on the marquis of Louvois, who had contracted that insensibility of heart which arises from a long administration. He was certainly the person who advised this proceeding; but Louis had it in his power to reject or follow his counsel. Had the king been a witness to this spectacle, he would have gone in person to extinguish the flames. From his palace in Versailles, where he was surrounded by pleasures, he signed the destruction of a whole country, because he there behold only his own glory and the fatal right of conquest in the order he gave; but had he been nearer to the spot, he would have seen all the horror of it. The antions, who till then had only blamed his ambition, and admired his other qualifications, now cried out against his cruelty.(...)

This is a truly remarkable paragraph to be written by an 18th century French author about a 17th century French national icon and his wars. Especially re: the behavior of a French army in a minor German realm. Keep also in mind that the book as a whole isn't anti Louis XIV - the "had he been there, he'd have stopped it" may be overly optimistic, but this is how Voltaire in general portrays Louis, as proud and ambitious but not without feeling. Still, I can't think of something comparable written pre Voltaire or contemporarily to Voltaire (until Diderot at least) in a book meant for publication. I mean, Hervey may bitch about the royal family and some of the English politicis in his memoirs, but he's writing for a future audience, to be read after his death. Other contemporary authors decry war crimes by OTHER nations, not their own.

Also remarkable: Voltaire is aware of global consequences and is not a fan of colonialism, to put it mildly:

One of the effects of human industry and fury, of these two centuries past, has been that of not confining the havoc of war to our own continent of Europe. We drain ourselves of men and money to carry destruction against each other in Asia and America. The INdians, whom we have compelled by force or artifice to admit our settlements among them, and the Americans, from whom we have wrested their continent, after having dyed itwith their b lood, look upon us as the foes of humankind, who came from the farthest part of the globe to butcher them, and afterward to destroy one another.

This is said in the context of the Dutch outmanouvring Louis in the East Indies, but he clearly means it for his own mid 18th century present as well.

Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 2

[mildred_of_midgard]

Speaking of Louis' wars, here's Richelieu's take on Philippe d'Orleans the Gay:

Voltaire's take?

At that point, Innocent XI wanted to get rid of two very costly privileges which envoys enjoyed - they could extend the right of franchise and asylum through a great distance (i.e. if someone had killed someone, they just could cry "diplomatic immunity! I work for envoy X!"), and anything brought into Rome under the name of an envoy couldln't be taxed.

Interesting, I remember the taxation part (envoys were basically smugglers with a loophole) but thought diplomatic immunity came later. Wikipedia says we're both right: Britain first granted diplomatic immunity in 1709 due to an incident I'm familiar with from my Whitworth reading (he was tangentially involved), but the concept was evolving in the 17th century in Western Europe and gradually taking the form that we know. Ah, yes, even the Whitworth bio, which says that the 1709 act was very significant to the development of diplomatic immunity, says that "The quesetion of the immunity of diplomats, and their subordinates, from civil and criminal proceedings had been a matter of concern from the seventeenth century."

Voltaire: Not a Jacobite.

I feel like I've seen at least one beautifully snarky comment from him, but alas! I'm blanking. Will update if I think of it.

Also remarkable: Voltaire is aware of global consequences and is not a fan of colonialism, to put it mildly

A hundred years later, Macaulay: If colonialism meant Europeans were bringing wars to other continents, it was all Fritz's fault! You know, the guy without any colonies. Definitely no responsibility falls on us Brits!

Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 3

[selenak]

As in all the myths, our hubristic hero Louis XIV and his country now, with everyone else pissed off, get presented the bill in the War of the Spanish Succession. I already quoted how Voltaire introduces Eugene of Savoy to the saga. (With some national pride - of course it's a Frenchman who starts Operation Make Louis Humble Again.) Here's what he has to say about Eugene's bff the Duke of Marlborough, born John Churchill, married to Sarah "the Favourite".

He at that time governed the queen of England ; both by the occasion she had for his service, and by the authority his wife had over her affections. He had the command of the parliament by his powerful interest, and by that of the treasurer , Godolphin , whose son married one of his daughters. Thus having the direction of the court, the parliament, the war, and the treasury, more a king than ever William had been, as great a politician , and a much greater general, he exceeded the most sanguine hopes of the allies . He possessed in a degree superior to any general of his time that tranquil courage in the midst of tumult, and serenity of soul in danger, which the English call a cool head. It is perhaps to this qualification, the principal gift in nature for a commander , that the English are indebted for their victories over the French in the fields of Poitiers , Crécy ,and Agincourt.

Marlborough and Eugene are the dream military bromance at the age (Voltaire is also very much into Villars but shows how much infighting and self importance goes on on the French military side:

It now happened , as it too frequently does : the experienced officer was not sufficiently listened to , and the prince's counsel frequently carried it over the general's reasons . Hence arose two parties ; whereas , in the enemy's army, there was but one, that of the public good . Prince Eugene was at that time on the Rhine ; but when he and Marlborough were together, they had but one opinion .

But Marlborough, too, is due for a fall. Voltaire informs us that both Churchills, John and Sarah, were among the best looking people of their generation, but...

But the duke could never get the better of his thirst for riches , nor the duchess of her capricious temper. The queen loved her with a tenderness that went even to submission , and a giving up of all will . In attachments of this nature, we generally find that dislike begins first on the side of the monarch : caprice, pride, and an abuse of superiority are the things which first make the yoke felt, and all these the duchess of Marlborough heaped upon her mistress with a heavy hand . The queen , who could not do without a favorite , turned her eyes on Lady Masham , one of the ladies of her bedchamber. The duchess could not conceal her jealousy ; it broke out on a thousand occasions . A pair of gloves of a particular fashion which she refused the queen , and a jar of water that she let fall in her presence upon Lady Masham's gown , by an affected mistake , changed the face of affairs in Europe . Matters grew warm between the two parties . The new favorite's brother asked the duke for a regiment; the duke refused it , upon which the queen gave it to him herself.

Exit Sarah, exit Marlborough. Voltaire actually met Sarah in her old age when spending two years in England in the 1720s, I think.

Anyway, nothing new or other than what we've heard about how the War of the Spanish Succession ends up except for the "Philippe D'Orleans want to become King of Spain" bit which I already quoted elsewhere. Reminder: The Allies trounce Louis until they overreach themselves by demanding he actively joins in the effort to depose his grandson:

Louis XIV, when he heard the rigorous terms upon him, said to Rouillé: "Well then, since I must make war, I would rather it should be against my enemies than my children."

Which is how the French rally one more time, and the war is ended on honorable-to-them terms, though with devastation everywhere. Like I said, once the war is over and Philippe V. is recognized as King in all of Europe (Charles VI.: Ahem!), and before covering Louis' last three years of life, Voltaire makes a big interlude consisting of anecdotes re: Louis' mistresses throughout his life. With some additional witty remarks about cultural affairs and the state of the sciences in other countries, from Italy - the great Galileo having asked pardon at the age of seventy for being in the right - to, of course, England: In England the exploits of Cromwell are scarcely mentioned , and the disputes of the white and red roses are almost forgotten ; but Newton is studied for whole years together : no one is surprised to see in his epitaph that " he was the glory of mankind ; ” but it would be a matter of great wonder in that country to see the remains of any statesman honored with such a title.

Posting my Montesquieu write up at Rheinsberg, I was reminded again that the preface to Montesquieu's Roman history excuses him for blindly believing all his sources by saying that's what 18th century people with their love for ancient writers did. Meanwhile, guess who doesn't:

Plutarch's "Lives" is but a collection of anecdotes, rather entertaining than true; how could he have procured faithful acco9unts of the private life of Theseus or Lycurgus? Most of the maxims which he puts into the mouths of his heroese advance moral virtue rather than historical truth. The secret history of Procopius is a satire dictated by revenge; and though revengfe may speak the truth, this satire, which contradicts his public history, has not always the appearance of it.

(Voltaire: I know whereof I speak.)

We now are not allowed to imitate even Plutarch, much less Procopius. We admit as historical truths none but what are well supported. When contemporaries like the Cardinal de Retz and the duke de Rochefoucault, inveterate enemies to each other, confirmt he same transaction in both their accounts of it, that transaction cannot be doubted: when they contradict each other, we must doubt them, what does not come within the bounds of probability can deserve no credit, unless several contemporaries of unblemished reputation join unanimously in the assertion.

This is not a bad goal to have for someone writing a history. As mentioned earlier, the "anecdotes" part is also where Voltaire discusses questions like "was Minette poisoned", tells the tale of the Affair of the Poisons, and talks about the most important mistresses and their offspring. Why he places the anecdotes here and not after Louis' death, I don't know. Having told the anecdotes, he goes back to describing the final three years, Louis being a stoic as the doctors butcher him to death, and then rounds it off with this story about Philippe the soon to be Regent:

The duke of Orleans , who in his journey to Marly had no attendants , had now the whole court about him . An empiric , in the last days of the king's illness , gave him an elixir which revived his spirits. He ate , and the empiric affirmed he would recover . The crowds which surrounded the duke of Orleans began to diminish apace . “ If the king eats a second time, " said the duke of Orleans , “ I shall not have a single person in my leveé . ” But the disease was mortal .

Re: Voltaire: The Age of Louis XIV: 3

[mildred_of_midgard]

the great Galileo having asked pardon at the age of seventy for being in the right

Hahaha. Tangentially, allow me to remind everyone that when Cosimo III "the Bigoted" de Medici (father of Gian Gastone) did his Grand Tour and went to England, he had to sit through a whole speech praising his ancestors for their support of the sciences and specifically Galileo, while he of course thought the Church was in the right!

though revengfe may speak the truth, this satire, which contradicts his public history, has not always the appearance of it.

(Voltaire: I know whereof I speak.)

Selena the also witty!

This is not a bad goal to have for someone writing a history.

Yeah, good for him! I remember when he and Fritz had this exchange:

Voltaire: Who even knows if the myths of the Romans and Greeks are true.
Fritz: Me, I know! Let me tell you about Rheinsberg and Remus.
Voltaire: Allow me to explain the concept of source criticism.
Fritz, *backpedaling like mad*: Yes, that's what I meant! I just wanted to share this local German story with you. Who even knows if it's true. *cough*

Thank you as always for the amazing write-up! I might have to check this out in French someday.

Jürgen Luh, Fritz, and Potatoes

[mildred_of_midgard]

Can one of our German listeners check out this episode at their convenience? Blurb:

"Everyone should be blessed according to his style" This quote comes from Frederick II and shows a certain openness and tolerance that one would not necessarily expect from a monarch of his time (1712 - 1786). For example, although he largely abolished torture, the story of the spread of the potato is often at the fore when he is written about. Unfortunately, sometimes you have to say goodbye to stories you have grown fond of if they do not correspond to the truth. Frederick the Great tried to "bring the potato among the people" with his potato orders, but with only minimal success. In conversation with Dr. Jürgen Luh from the Research Center Sanssouci found out, among other things, that Frederick the Great would probably be happier to have cherries on his grave slab than potatoes. So, if you visit Sanssouci and the grave of Old Fritz, try cherries. The birds will probably be happy too.

I mean, we already know about the cherries, which are now obligatory in fanfics :D, but I would like to know more about the potatoes!

Re: Jürgen Luh, Fritz, and Potatoes

[selenak]

I'll listen when I can, but I've got a crowded week. Also, the second cartoon Fritz episode is up. I'm impressed: they get right that the Anti-Machiavell actually doesn't contradict later Fritzian politics so much as people think, because of that whole "preemptive strike war against some REALLY LARGE NEIGHBOR WHO IS SURE TO ATTACK YOU" thing, they mention Fritz (not FW!) had suggested marrying MT during his quest for alternate brides, and they include Algarotti. (Though not the orgasm poem.) Otoh: no Fredersdorf. At all. Boo, hiss!

Fritz/Peter fic

[cahn]

felis has three interconnected Fritz/Peter ficlets up on DW! :D

Re: Fritz/Peter fic

[mildred_of_midgard]

Peter!!

Thanks for the heads-up. :D

I'm alive

[prinzsorgenfrei]

HI! I'm sorry for dying on you, long form text communication stresses me out a bit and Uni is in the middle of murdering me :'D I'll write my Bachelor's thesis on depictions of the trial of 1730 in literature in the summer semester, so that's one thing to look forward to.
I was told you have some scans I could take a look at? ^^

Re: I'm alive

[mildred_of_midgard]

*waves enthusiastically*

No worries, we all remember our university days! And best of luck and many cheers from all of us to you.

I'll write my Bachelor's thesis on depictions of the trial of 1730 in literature in the summer semester

That sounds AWESOME, and I suspect at least two of us (me and selenak) will want to read it when it's done!

I was told you have some scans I could take a look at? ^^

We do! Oh frabjous day!

This is the most urgent one.

This is the most likely context for it, and I'd appreciate both a second pair of eyes on what I got and some help on what I didn't.

This is also something I'd appreciate a second pair of eyes on.

If you DM me your email address, I can send you some death records too. Otherwise, it might take me a bit to get them uploaded.

And now you can in good conscience tell Dr. Maria von Katte that you're collaborating on a biographical essay of Peter von Keith and thus you have a serious business scholarly need for her typescript of her father's manuscript on the Kattes! Lol.

Thaaaank yoooou! <333

strangest fanart project yet

[prinzsorgenfrei]

So last year I produced a Katte on horse portrait in acrylics, some stuff in colored pencil, very few digital pieces... and two felt dolls. Because a dear friend found out that I have made plushies before and asked for a Katte. Then in the last week of December my brain didn't really work well and doing repetitive physical tasks was something I could do and now I have a Katte plushie and a Fritz plushie made of atrociously cheap felt with some embroidery. Maybe they're fun to look at, so I'll share them with you too? :'D Here they are:



Katte is lacking one boot because I gave his original boots to Fritz and then didn't get around to making another one. He will, eventually, get another boot. Hopefully. Maybe.

Re: strangest fanart project yet

[mildred_of_midgard]

I know I keep repeating the word "awesome," but I am short on other words to express my !!!! at all your updates, each one better than the last!

The plushies are extremely fun to look at, and the boot backstory just makes it even better. Even felt!Katte's fate is to always be making sacrifices for Fritz. *tears of laughter*

Can I put this in Rheinsberg with the rest of your fanart?

(We would totally love to see last year's art pieces as well, if/when you have time to upload them. :D All of us are in awe of your ability to do magical things like art and reading handwriting!)

Speaking of boots and our boys! Can someone help me out with what "Stiefel-haden" means and why Kloosterhuis would put [!] next to the word in the inventory of stuff Peter left behind in his quarters when he deserted Wesel?

Byzantine tales, brought to you by virtue of me having finished the available podcast

[selenak]

Marcus Aurelius is excused! Turns out that while underestimating the damage your teenage son could do to the Empire is one (forgivable) thing, there is an Emperor who made a far, far worse mistake in letting a close relation live and thrive, and he had decades to appreciate the utter disaster his cousin was. And if the reign of Commodus started the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire, well, the reign of Andronikos led directly to the infamous sacking of Constantinople and the ensueing destruction of the (East) Roman Empire.

Backstory: So, when Basil II. died after the longest and one of the most successful reigns any Emperor had but without doing anything about the succession, his brother came to the throne, already over 60, reigned shortly and not successfully, and after his death, a whole series of co-Emperors ensued, picked by his daughters Zoe and Theodora (both past child bearing age). This coincideded with increasing raids in Anatolia by a new arrival on the scene, the Turcs, Norman invasions, uprisings in the Balcans etc., with the result not that the various top level Byzantine aristos and generals teamed up against all these dangers but that it was every general for himself, declaring himself Emperor, basically, loss of more and more territory, until total disaster was narrowly avoided when one of them, Alexios Kommenos, managed to stabilize what was left of the Empire and create a new dynasty. (This is the one whose daughter Anna wrote the Alexiad about him.) Alexios' solution to the problem of every grand aristocratic clan and general thinking they can go for the top job is to go back to being an Emperor leading the troops (not done since Basil II died) and give every important position in the admnistration to family members, thereby creating a new aristocracy (and the old aristocracy now has no choice but to intermarry with the Kommenoi if they want to get somewhere). In the short term, this works. No more backstabbing rebellions while he's on campaign elsewhere; in fact, it's his mother Anna (whom is daughter is named after), who's basically regent back in Constantinople and holds the clan together. In the long term, there would be problems, but we're getting to that.

Another big problem for Byzantium is that all the post Basil civil wars have seriously depleted the Empire's fighting force in addition to shrinking its territory, and the last few "Emperors" before Alexios even gave whole cities away to the Turks in order to hire them against each other, so the Turkish presence on the Anatolian plane is now a fixed thing. Of course, Alexios can hire mercenaries to supplement his troops, but even the fabled wealth of Byzantium is reduced to the minimum by all these civil wars, especially since most of Anatolia can't be taxed anymore (what with the Turks being there), and the Balkan provinces are partly in revolt. So what Alexios needs is a huge fighting force of experienced soldiers who are ready, willing and able to fight essentially for free. And lo and behold, he has an idea. This is after the schism has already happened, but Byzantine Emperors are still on diplomatic terms with the Popes, so Alexios writes to the Pope, and and asks him to ask the Western Europeans to support Team Constantinople in their fight against the Turks.

The Pope is Pope Urban, who isn't even in Rome, but in France, because it's one of those times when it's Pope vs (other Roman) Emperor, and there's even an Anti-Pope, Clement III, residing in Rome due to this situation. Urban needs something to boost his status as the one true Pope, leader of Christianity. Enter Alexios' messengers with letter. Urban also has a genius idea. He does publically call for help to all and sunder, for all Christians to stand together and take up arms - but the goal as given isn't "help Alexios against the Turks" (though that's mentioned ), no, it's "Take Jerusalem from the Muslims!" Why yes, this is what starts the First Crusade. Bear in mind Jerusalem isn't recently fallen into Muslim hands. Byzantium lost control of Jerusalem and the other "holy sites" in the 600s, and we're now in the 1000s. Anyway, what Alexios had been hoping for were a few neat contingents of Latin knights. What Urban started was a mass movement, especially once many other preachers took up the call and forgot to mention the whole "help Alexios against the Turks" part altogether in favor of "save Jerusalem, be free of all sin!" Up to 100 000 people, all in all, started a mass migration easatwards, and even if you can discount the so called peasant's crusade (who started out without any equipment and support, and basically all got killed en route and the rest when they finally arrived in Anatolia), there were still around 70 000 eventually arriving at Alexios' doorstep. As opposed to all later occasions and Crusades, he'd been prepared for their arrival (just not in that number), and so there were markets to sell supplies to the "armed pilgrims" outside of Constantinople, he did add some of his own troops, and made them swear an oath that any formerly Byzantine property they'd take from the Turks would be given back to Constantinople. Needless to say, this is not what eventually happens. What happens, many bloody battles later, is the establishment of a new Middle East state, Outremer, the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Cue increasing mutual suspicion and bad blood between Western Europeans and Byzantines.

Still, at least part of Anatolia (just not the plane) is back in Byzantine hands, and Alexios as well as his son John and grandson Manuel manage, with a mixture of good diplomacy and good generalship, to renew the Empire, not to old greatness a la Basil, but in a good shape, and as a force to be reckoned with around the Mediterranean. The Second Crusade is a disaster (that was the one Eleanor of Aquitaine and husband Louis took part in) all around, but it doesn't affect Constantinople (other than the French later trying to blame Manuel for part of said disaster in order to look better). But now we're getting to Manuel keeping the wrong guy alive and the terrible consequences it has.

The guy in question was his cousin Andronikos, whom he'd grown up with. They were about the same age, and since Manuel had started out as a fourth son, not expecting to become Emperor, they didn't grow up very unequal in rank. Andronikos must have been incredibly charming in person to get away with even half of what he did before ever reaching power. Highlights of his career include making his niece Eudoxia his mistress, failing as governor of Cilicia when Manuel gives him that job, narrowly escaping death at the hands of Eudoxia's brothers, joining a conspiracy against Manuel, being found out and imprisoned, escaping Trenck-style to the Rus and hanging out with them for a while, being forgiven and taken back by Manuel, refusing to recognize Manuel's then chosen successor (this was before Manuel had a son of his own, and the successor would have been King Bela of Hungary), leaving therefore the court but getting another shot at governing Cilicia, failing again and deciding to hang out with the Latins in Outremer for a while. To be specific, he goes to Antioch, where Eleanor of Aquitaine's Uncle Raymond ruled, and seduces the later's stepdaughter Philippa. Who is also the sister of Manuel's current wife, the Empress Maria. Manuel isn't happy. Andronikos doesn't care. He moves on to Jerusalem, though, where he spies a niece, Theodora Kommene, widow of King Baldwin III. of Jerusalem, dumps Philippa and instead puts the moves on Theodora, who falls for him, despite Andronikos being by now 56 years old.

Andronikos and Thedora run way together from Jerusalem to first the (Muslim) court of Damascus and then to Georgia, and produce some children during that time. They eventually settle down in border territory, which turns out to be a mistake, because the Governor of Trebizond (then still Byzantine) organizes a raid of Andronikos' castle, captures Theodora and the kids and sends them to Constantinople. Then Andronikos does the first and last unselfish thing in his entire existence; he presents himself in the medieval repentant outfit (hair shirt, string around neck, breast beating) to cousin Manuel in order to obtain the freedom of Theodora and the kids. Manuel's old soft spot for Andronikos is still present, because not only does this work, Andronikos gets forgiven (again), he's not harmed in any way. (Reminder: usually, failed high born rebels get blinded or get their noses cut in this realm. Not cousin Andronikos.)

Up to this point, it's easy to say "oh, that Andronikos!" with an eye roll and a smile. (Unless you're Eudoxia or Philippa, IL guess.) But then Manuel dies, and it gets really dark very quickly, as Andronikos switches archetypes from charming scoundrel to supervillain. Manuel's longed for son (another Alexios) is still a minor, so his widow Maria of Antioch (daughter of Raymond, sister of Philippa) is regent. Maria is quickly badmouthed as having an affair with her closest advisor; the main opposition to her regency are her stepdaughter, another Maria, and her husband Reynier of Montferrat. The Kommenoi, ever since Alexios I. the glue binding the regime together, now turn against each other. And who should offer himself as mediator and alternative? Andronikos. Now he's failed at every political task Manuel ever gave him, but hey, he's a guy, and also, like the late Manuel, in his 60s, so making him regent instead of one of the Marias - women, eh - is surely a good idea. Cue another massacre of the princes. Andronikos first kills Maria the stepdaughter and husband Reynier. Then he blames this on Maria of Antioch, forces her own kid son to sign his mother's death warrant and to make him, Andronikos, co-Emperor, then he kills the kid, Manuel's son. Little Alexios had been married to another child, by now 11 years old Agnes of France, as part of Manuel's diplomatic efforts; Andronikos marries little Agnes. Then he kills just about any other member of the Kommenoi who looks at him the wrong way. To keep the population of the capital with him, he starts out encouraging a massacre of the capital's Latin population by the mob. (By then, all the bad blood between Greeks and Latins that had started with the First Crusade had reached boiling point.)

Basically, Constantinople becomes a terror state, anyone could be next, of course foreign enemies see this and pounce, and any legitimacy to the succession os gone, because the immediate Kommenoi have all been wiped out by Andronikos. At last, one of the very distant cousins, Isaac Angelos, more or less accidentally becomes the trigger of the end of Andronikos. He's next on the death list. Androniko's sidekick Stephen comes to arrest him. Isaac has no doubt what his fate will be, with the courage of desparation gets on his horse, gallops towards Stephen and beheads him, to the great cheer of the populace, who by now has grown sick of Andronikos and his reign of terror. Isaac flees into the Hagia Sophia, demanding sanctuary. The remaining larger Kommenoi also get into the Hagia Sophia, as they don't doubt Andronikos will suspect them as co-conspirators. Now Andronikos isn't in Constantinople, he's on his way back, and that's crucial. When the next day dawns, and no one has removed Isaac from the Hagia Sophia, he emerges and appeals to the people. A town riot breaks out, they hail him as Emperor. The returning-by-boat Andronikos hears about this, wants to sail away, but is captured. Isaac Angelos hands him over to the city mob. To quote wiki, for three days he was exposed to their fury and resentment, remaining for that period tied to a post and beaten. His right hand was cut off, his teeth and hair were pulled out, one of his eyes was gouged out, and, among many other sufferings, boiling water was thrown in his face. At last he was led to the Hippodrome of Constantinople and hung by his feet between two pillars. Two Latin soldiers competed as to whose sword would penetrate his body more deeply, and he was, according to the representation of his death, torn apart; his remains were left unburied and were visible for several years afterwards.

This left Isaac Angelos as Emperor, but it also meant a return of the situation that had brought Alexios Kommenos to power a century earlier, where every ambitious general could feel themselves entitled to try for the top job as well, because Isaac Angelos' sole legitimation was basically the rising of the populace. He had no military or political experience, and it showed. He was in turn easily dethroned by his older brother Alexios, who was even less competent, and that was when the fourth Crusade happened, Constantinople was brutally sacked by fellow Christians, and what remained was essentially a City State. All of which could have been avoided if Manuel had gotten rid of cousin Andronikos all the way back when!

Re: Byzantine tales, brought to you by virtue of me having finished the available podcast

[mildred_of_midgard]

Bookmarked for later, sorry for the delay!

Frat Boys of Versailles: The Actual Quotes

[selenak]

As I am now in the possession of "The Court of Louis XIV in eye witness accounts", thanks to Mildred, I quickly looked up the chapters dealing with same sex affairs. The first one, "Madame est morte", is of course devoted to the Philippe-Chevalier-Minette triangle and Minette's gruesome death. (BTW, the further the temporal distance from the event, the more the memoirists go for the poison option, ending with Saint-Simon, who wasn't even alive at the time but provides us with an entire dialogue between Louis and the Marquis d'Effiat about whether or not Philippe knew Effiat & Lorraine teamed up to kill Minette. (No, because he can't keep a secret.) Whereas the contemporaries at the time are all cautious, and point to the autopsy as an exonoration, except for the British ambassador, who definitely thinks it was poison. (And we know Charles II's reaction upon receiving the news.) I'll transcribe and quote a bit more from that at a later point, because it does provide more of how Louis dealt with the Chevalier. But now to the immediate reason why Mildred got me the book, i.e. the question as to what the contemporaries say re: m/m orgies, with or without violence, and whether or not Eugene was a part of the gang.

To start with the last, none of the document quoted in the chapter "Games of Princes" names him, unless he's listed under another name/title, Eugene isn't named as a part of the gang. Sources: The memoirists and letter writers quoted as reporting about the events in question are Primi Visconti, Madame de Sevigné, Bussy-Rabutin, and Sandras de Courtilz.

The story which ended up in Angelique hails from Bussy-Rabutin, but not from his later book "France Galante" but from a letter to his son-in-law La Rivière, dated January 27th 1680:

Recently, when the Duke de La Ferté, Berain, the Chevalier de Colbert and d'Argenson were drunk in B-, they sent for a bakery vendor, whom they wanted to make into their catamite following their taste, as he was a pretty boy. When he defended himself, they dealt him two strokes with their swords. When the King learned of this, he ordered Monsieur Louvois to deal out precisely the kind of verbal abuse to the Duke de La Ferté which such a deed deserves. Monsieur Colbert locked up his son and beat him up infamously.

Bad as this is, I note castration isn't mentioned, nor whether the poor bakery vendor died of the two strokes. cahn, reminder, Colbert was of course Louis' most important minister (trade being his speciality), and Louvois was the minister of war. So these were sons of the elite. But none of the named is either Eugene or, for that matter, a Philippe boyfriend I've heard of or remember.

The French refered to m/m as the Italian vice, which actual Italians took offense to, like Primi Visconti, here reporting an unwanted pass by the Marquis de La Vallière, brother of Louis' first maitresse en titre:

One day he guided me to his room, approached me and said: "Monsieur, in Spain the monks do it, in France the elite, and in Italy, everyone... I withdrew and replied, jokingly, that this thought hadn't occured to me, that I was twenty five years old already and had a beard. He replied that Frenchmen of taste neither were bothered by the age nor the beard. In short, it took some effort on my part to escape. The Marquis died not long afterwards, and he died off an illness affecting the anus. This sickness was fairly wide spread in those days.

Lest we think Visconti is just making this up, the book adds a quote from Madame de Sevigné, writing on October 16th to her daughter:

Monsieur de La Vallière has died of I know not what. I always consider it ugly if men have an illness at their backsides.


Then there's the quote I already mentioned to you any a post ago, from the memoirs of Francois Hébert, chaplain at Versailles, who says he talked to Madame de Maintenon about these disgusting habits, and that she should use her influence on the King to make him punish these goings on:

"I have told him already", the lady in question replied to me, and one day, when I pressured him to get rid of these affairs, he answered to me: "Then I would have to start with my brother."

Bussy-Rabutin in France Galante describes the young crowd as fratboys of the worst type:

This youth was so devoted to drink that there wasn't a day at which one didn't hear gossip about their excesses. But no matter which debaucheries they committed, none was as vile as the one they committed in a decent house, where they, after they had treated those of the courtesans whom they liked best in the Italian way, tied one of them by force to the bed posts at her arms and legs, and then, when they inserted a rocket into her at a place which decency forbids me to name, they lit this rocked up without mercy, without being touched by the desperate screams of the unhappy woman. After such a rabid deed they pushed their ruthlessness to the limit, they ran through the streets the entire night, destroyed a lot of lanterns, and still didn't have enough until they arrived at the wooden bridge which leads to the island (presumably the Ile de la Cité), and where they wanted to crown their foolishness or rather blasphemy by tearing out the crucifix standing in the middle. Still not content, they wanted to set it on fire, but this, they didn't manage.

I'd say the treatment of the poor woman was worse than that of the crucifix, but have it your way, memoirist. (Makes you want to start the French Revolution immediately, doesn't it?) Moving over to another memoirist, here's the gang finally getting the bill to their deeds by the King according to the Marquis de Sourches' memoirs:

The start of the month of June 1682 was marked by the banishment of a great number of noble people who were accused of extravagant debauching. The King didn't banish them all at once, but first hte Prince de La Roche-sur-Yon, whom he sent to his uncle at Chantilly. Monsieur le Prince, then the Prince de Turenne and the Marquis de Créquy (son of the Marshal) was ordered to go to Straßburg and join the regiment whose colonel he was.
A few days later, the King banished the Chevalier de Saint-Maure, one of the six noble men whom the King had made part of the Dauphin's entourage, and who were supposed to follow him everywhere; the Chevalier de Mailly, who had been raised together with the Dauphin since childhood; Monsieur de Caillemotte, the son of Monsieur de Ruvigny, the member of Parliament for the Hugenots; Monsieur de Mimeurre, who had grown up as a page in the Dauphin's rooms and was still in his service with a thousand Taler pension; and the Chevalier de Tilladet, cousin of Louvois, who had been colonel of the dragoons and marchéchal de camp. The last one had had the hope to get back into favor just a few days earlier, and now he had to leave like the others. Finally, the King banished the Count de Roucy and the Vidame of Laon, the sons of the Count de La Roye from the House de La Rochefuoucault, one of the Hugenots, but one of the bravest, most honorable and best men of the Kingdom. The Duke de La Rochefoucault used all his cerdit with the King to spare his cousin, whom he loved very much, such a lethal pain. But the King remained merciless. He did give in to the fervent pleas from Monsieur de Grand that the Count de Brionne, his oldeest son, would not be banished like the others, despite being accused of the same offense. But Monsieur Le Grand could not save his brother, the Count de Marsan, who despite not being banished from Court lost any respect the King had for him. A greater number of courtiers were accused as well.
Monsieur le Comte de Vermandois, who was only fourteen or fifteen years old, had participated in these debaucheries. When the King interrogated him using all the authority of a father and a King, he could not remain firm against (the King), and confessed everything, which is how the King learned the names of the participants from him, which led to their banishments. There were some more accused, but on June 10th only these got banished whom I have named.

Footnote to Vermandois: This young prince got banished to Normandy. He died in the following year when with the army in Flanders at age 16 from a fever attack.

So: could Eugene have been among the unnamed "others" who got also accused? Sure. He was still in France at the time. But none of the documents quoted says so, and so if a biography gives this book as a source for Eugene having run with this crowd, it's majorly misleading. Mind you, while the letters quoted have no reason to name him - he's a younger son of a banished noblewoman - , the memoirs, written at a point where he's already a VIP and enemy of France, surely wouldn't have missed out on the opportunity?

Anyway, the chapter then moves on to the Duke of Vendome, who is an illegitimate great grandson of Henri IV, with an example of Louis XIV handwaving the gayness of people not his brother, according to Saint-Simon, who is very upset about his. (His servants and subordinate officers always satisfied his disgusting preferences, were well known for this and were thus flattered by his confidants and anyone who wanted to approach him.) Next, we get a Liselotte quote, who was very upset indeed when her husband wanted to make one of his boyfriends, the Marquis d'Effiat (aka the one whom Saint-Simon names as having poisoned Minette at the Chevalier de Lorraine's orders), into her son Philippe the future Regent's governor:

Monsieur replied to me: "I have to admit the Marquis d'Effiat used to be debauched, and that he loved boys, but he's abstained from this vice for a long time now. "It was just recently," I replied, "that a young and handsome German who was visiting made his excuses to me and told me he couldn't visit as often as he wanted anymore because d'Effiat was molesting him too much whenever he entered the Palais Royale.

The final quote isn't about any debaucheries, gay or het, but the editor telling us with relief that "the Crown Prince at least behaves normal" and quotes the description of Louis' first (legtimate) grandson's birth from the Abbé Choisy. And that's the end of the chapter.

Re: Frat Boys of Versailles: The Actual Quotes

[mildred_of_midgard]

Wow, this definitely delivered.

I need to clear up a misunderstanding, though:

so if a biography gives this book as a source for Eugene having run with this crowd, it's majorly misleading

I didn't find this book in the Eugene biography (which is not big on naming sources), I found it in Wikipedia. In the Liselotte article, as the source for the story you quoted us, which had no mention of Eugene. On that note:

But now to the immediate reason why Mildred got me the book, i.e. the question as to what the contemporaries say re: m/m orgies, with or without violence, and whether or not Eugene was a part of the gang.

That conversation is certainly how I found the book, but the reason I got it for you is just my general belief that any book with a title like "The court of Louis XIV in eyewitness reports" belongs in your hands. A belief with which I'm sure cahn will heartily agree. :)

The French refered to m/m as the Italian vice, which actual Italians took offense to

I laughed!

One day he guided me to his room, approached me and said: "Monsieur, in Spain the monks do it, in France the elite, and in Italy, everyone... I withdrew and replied, jokingly, that this thought hadn't occured to me, that I was twenty five years old already and had a beard. He replied that Frenchmen of taste neither were bothered by the age nor the beard. In short, it took some effort on my part to escape. The Marquis died not long afterwards, and he died off an illness affecting the anus. This sickness was fairly wide spread in those days.

Good lord!

I'd say the treatment of the poor woman was worse than that of the crucifix, but have it your way, memoirist.

You would, and I would, but I think I mentioned that this came up in the Cunegonde's kidnapping book: the author argues that in Catholic/Protestant conflicts, we moderns tend to see the Catholics as more violent, because they attacked humans, and the Protestant tendency to go for desecrating religious symbols doesn't parse to us as especially violent--but to Catholics, violence against symbols was violence against God, and arguably worse than violence against humans. Also, people (not just Catholics) believed that God would punish a whole community for the sins of the few. So desecrating a religious symbol was not just ruining an inanimate object, but an act that was going to bring down the wrath of God on everyone.

Would the woman with the rocket going off in her vagina agree? I hope not! I certainly don't (though I also don't believe in a divinity that's going to be especially offended by a personal attack on his symbols and take it out on innocent me--if I did, who knows what I would think). But there is some historical context for this (bad, wrong) attitude, the memoirist didn't invent it.

I've also seen the argument that that was one reason FW was so big on escalating punishments for things like sodomy: violating God's laws risked bringing down the wrath of God on everyone, including him. Whereas Fritz's attitude toward law was the more humanistic "So, there's this social contract according to which I get to make all the decisions," and thus he could afford to mitigate punishments or even look the other way.

the editor telling us with relief that "the Crown Prince at least behaves normal"

Lol! After reading your excerpts, I can imagine the relief of contemporaries and historians alike!

Math history (including Euler's "breathtaking dexterity")

[luzula]

This is totally 18th century relevant, I promise. : ) And sorry for posting new things while not having read all your new things (though I continue to read and appreciate the thread about Eugene and the terrible frat boys of Versailles).

Calculus Reordered by David Bressoud (2019)
Time for some math history! This was so great. A standard calculus course of today usually starts out with limits, then derivatives, then integrals. But this is not at all the order in which those concepts historically appeared. I knew some of what was in this book, but there was a lot of new detail-stuff for me!

So actually integrals were the first to appear, in the sense of adding up smaller and smaller pieces of easily calculable area or volume in order to find out the area/volume of some geometrical object. The ancient Greeks did this, and they were actually quite rigorous about it, in the sense that they showed that the area/volume of their object could be neither smaller nor larger than their formula showed. In that sense, they were quite close to modern math, even though in other ways their geometrical understanding was quite different. Derivatives were the next to appear, in the context of calculating velocities. In the 17th century, the connection between these two were realized by Newton and Leibniz (i e that you can calculate integrals by taking antiderivatives), which made it much easier since you don't have to find a tailored approach to every geometrical object.

There were tensions between the people who thought you had to keep to Archimedean rigor, and those who played fast and loose with infinitesimals. In the 18th century, Euler was one of the latter. Of him, the author says: ‘Euler carried the Bernoulli’s acceptance of infinitesimals and infinities to a dangerous extreme, yet he found his way through this minefield with a dexterity that is often breathtaking.’ There are some examples of his daring sleight of hand with infinite series that had my jaw dropping (and this is the guy that Fritz thought was boring! But perhaps he didn't have much appreciation of math.)

In the beginning of the 19th century, people realized that the foundation was shaky, and that this could lead to results that were false, or that were not understood. For example, Fourier, with the series named after him, found an infinite sum of continuous functions where the partial sums converge to a discontinuous f, and where the partial sum of the derivatives of the terms does not converge to the derivative of f. Abel said, in 1825: ‘My eyes have been opened in the most surprising manner. If you disregard the very simplest cases, there is in all of mathematics not a single infinite series whose sum has been rigorously determined. In other words, the most important parts of mathematics stand without foundation. It is true that most of it is valid, but that is very surprising.’ The person who pioneered putting all this on a rigorous foundation was Cauchy, who first came up with our modern definition of limit. People had been working with limits before, but with more intuitive definitions. Abel said of Cauchy: ‘Cauchy is crazy, and there is no way of getting along with him, even though right now he is the only one who knows how mathematics should be done. What he is doing is excellent, but very confusing.’ (Cauchy was born in the middle of the French Revolution, and his father was high up in the city police, so they had to flee Paris…)

Derivatives and integrals were then defined using this rigorous definition of limit instead, and continuity, a concept that mathematicians had not been much interested in before, came into focus. During the rest of the 19th century, people were more and more concerned about finding what were the actual assumptions needed in order to draw conclusions in calculus—Cauchy had not got everything right the first time. This entailed finding ever more complicated counterexamples, and finding that sets of real numbers can be stranger than anyone could have imagined. Poincaré lamented in 1889: ‘in earlier times, when we invented a new function it was for the purpose of some practical goal. Today, we invent them expressly to show the flaws in our forefathers’ reasoning, and we draw from them nothing more than that.’ But at the end of it, calculus had a truly rigorous foundation.

As well as being interesting, this book is very well written! The author has a talent for presenting math in a clear and easily understandable way. You just need to have taken (er, and retained) a beginning level university calculus course to read it.

Re: Math history (including Euler's "breathtaking dexterity")

[mildred_of_midgard]

Quick note because I am way behind on salon and also ordering from archives:

(and this is the guy that Fritz thought was boring! But perhaps he didn't have much appreciation of math.)

Fritz was about as math-phobic as they come. He appreciated other people doing math, but it was something he struggled with personally. I would be *shocked* if he ever had any understanding of calculus.

Note: His father treated applied math as something that allowed you to predict, say, where your cannonballs would land, and thus very important for warfare, so Fritz did have some math forced down his throat in the period in which he was rebelling against his father. So that *might* have played a role in his dislike of doing math. But given his sponsoring of people like Maupertuis and Euler, I'm going to conclude that he was also just not very good at math. The same way he had German forced down his throat, but it also turned out that he wasn't linguistically gifted enough to pick up Italian or Latin or anything once he was on his own.

You just need to have taken (er, and retained) a beginning level university calculus course to read it.

Me: Well, I definitely took it... :P

As well as being interesting, this book is very well written! The author has a talent for presenting math in a clear and easily understandable way.

That reminds me, a book cahn and I loved that you might also really like: Seduced by Logic: Emilie Du Châtelet, Mary Somerville, and the Newtonian Revolution. It's 18th century relevant! Emilie is a salon favorite! And the author has a talent for presenting math in a clear and easily understandable way.