![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnLast post, we had (among other things) Danish kings and their favorites; Louis XIV and Philippe d'Orléans; reviews of a very shippy book about Katte, a bad Jacobite novel, and a great book about clothing; a fic about Émilie du Châtelet and Voltaire; and a review of a set of entertaining Youtube history videos about Frederick the Great.
Re: 1740s and 1750s: Manteuffel, Silesia 1 & 2, Victory of Evil
Date: 2023-04-01 04:47 pm (UTC)Wow, this is not exactly intellectually honest!
Particlarly one lady in Ruppin seems to have been in Friedrich's favour at that time.
I wonder if this is the origin of Sabine.
managed to find out that Friedrich planned on immediately after his accession to the throne supporting the Polish anti King Stanislaus Lescynski with a corps of his troops, which amounted to an open attack.
Who is Fritz writing this to, I want to know?
Also, yeah, this would have been really weird in 1739, much less so in 1734!
the illegal opening of letters
Hoym: How come *I'm* the one who gets in trouble?
Thoughts, Mildred? The one thing I find hardest to swallow is supporting Stanislas L. with troops.
Yeah, I find it suspect that Fritz is putting this in writing at all, as you can see by my earlier comment. Any chance Deschamps is "copying" fake letters and passing them off as the real thing, a la Klement?
Not seeing anything about Fritz in a quick skim of Pichon, but 70 pages is a lot to skim in French and I could easily have missed something. I might slow down and try to actually read them, but that's probably more than one day's worth of French reading.
I will say that I would consider it a possibility, since I know very little about Fritz's politics circa 1735. It's definitely not the Fritz of 1740, though (even leaving aside the changed situation in which supporting Stanislas wouldn't make sense any more).
Self: Wow. Those are great conditions for Saxony, true, but are you telling me MT actually accepted this? This is as bad an extortion as what Fritz tried, almost.
AvB: Alas MT did not sign this treaty.
Haha, yeah. I remember this treaty (not all the details, but parts of it correspond to my memory), and I've seen different accounts of whether MT finally ratified it but by then the Saxons were no longer interested, or she never ratified it or what, but the treaty definitely got pretty far before being abandoned. I think it was signed by her ambassador, but was a big DNW to her.
But I guess MT was still inexperienced at this point.
*spittake*
The armchair quarterbacking here is really entertaining.
Brühl paid them better.
Now that I'll believe!
Unsurprisingly, AvB gives Brühl complete cedit for the Diplomatic Revolution. (Kaunitz who?)
Okay, wow, even Rene Hanke doesn't do that! (Just shows that Brühl started trying to make it happen from 1744 (iirc) on, right up until Kaunitz made it actually happen behind their backs.) Again with the intellectual dishonesty.
except for AvB's denial that the Saxony/Austria treaty in this case was an offensive one
I'm pretty sure Hanke says the same thing, and that the Saxons didn't get around to refuting the claim until 1870 (date is not accidental). What I got from Hanke was that Brühl kept trying to get everyone to make aggressive treaties against Prussia, but that he was so invested in making sure Saxony had its back covered with as many allies as possible, since it lived right next door to Prussia, that by the time Fritz invaded, Saxony was still officially, legally, neutral (although anything but in spirit) and had missed its chance to benefit from the anti-Prussian coalition when war broke out.
And Fritz, the bastard, is allowed to slander his reputation for centuries to come. But NO MORE! I submit my defense to you, dear readers. JUSTICE FOR BRÜHL.
Heee. Well, this was a super entertaining as well as informative read, thank you so much, O Royal Reader!
Re: 1740s and 1750s: Manteuffel, Silesia 1 & 2, Victory of Evil
Date: 2023-04-02 12:18 pm (UTC)My thinking precisely. I mean, maybe I'm overly suspicious, and everyone reading the book does pay attention to the date and gets it right, but I just am befuddled as to why AvB doesn't narrate this whole Manteuffel and bribery business earlier, when he started to mention him apropos the hilarious conversation with Fritz featuring "Prussia is not the playground of foreign powers" , but goes back to that after the Suhm chapter, when otherwise this is a linear biography. If it had been a thematic biography - which is how for example all the modern FW biographies I've read were arranged, and one of the F1 biographies - i.e. "Foreign Policy", "Inner Policy", "Private Life" etc, then the non linearity would have been par the course. But this is an old fashioned biography told in chronological order except on this one point.
I wonder if this is the origin of Sabine.
Possible, with the change from Ruppin working girl to innocent Rheinsberg Förstertochter being a very 19th century kind of clean up operation. "Sabine" as a name, btw, strikes me as something more likely for the former than for the later within the 18th century, because it's French in origin. Of course, it became massively popular, and I knew three Sabines in school (with their names pronounced in German), but outside of a Huguenot origin, I don't think an 18th century woodsman would have called his daughter Sabine.
the illegal opening of letters
Hoym: How come *I'm* the one who gets in trouble?
Having slept over it, I should point out a better translation for the accusation would be "violation of the confidentiality of letters" - "Brechung des Briefgeheimnisses". Now this could mean he opened some not meant for him (as did they all), but it might also mean he forwarded confidential letters or made copies for someone who wasn't Saxon. What I found intriguing about this whole Hoym business is that in AvB's version, the arrest is specifically due to his association with Fritz. At a point when Hoym is already out of favour and out of a job, i.e. no longer working for the Saxon government. And just a year or so later, Brühl has not problem entrusting known Fritz confidant Suhm with conducting super secret negotiations with the Russians. I mean, WE KNOW he made the right call in trusting Suhm, that Suhm didn't betray him, but if you were a contemporary, between Hoym and Suhm, the person most likely to be suspected to sell Saxony out to Prussia would certainly not be Hoym. And like I said, bringing up that Hoym kept mum about being approached by Fritz via Katte at Zeithain years after this had come to light is just weird. Which is why I'm curious whether AvB's sources actually claim this, or whether he interpreted something because of his Fritz dislike. Of course, it's also possible that Brühl just needed an excuse or several for getting rid of Hoym, and because this doesn't fit with AvB's idea of Brühl, he has to come up with an alternate explanation. I note he does not mention Manteuffel left Saxony explicitly because Hoym ousted him of power in the cabinet and was quick enough to have his files transferred to his estate before Hoym could search them. He always writes of Manteuffel as an envoy without making it clear that while Manteuffel had bene the Saxon envoy to Berlin earlier in FW's reign, in the 1730s he was officially a retired private citizen and his correspondence with Brühl and his spying was black ops, so to speak. I can't look it up because I had both of the Manteuffel biographies form the Stabi, but the way I recall the order of events from them was:
- Flemming dies, Hoym gets recalled from Paris, there's a brief period where he and Manteuffel are both on an equal level in the cabinet while pursuing very different policies (Hoym is pro France, Manteuffel is pro Habsburg), then the almost duel and almost war between G2 and FW happens where Manteuffel is annoyed that Suhm offers mediation because he's been hoping for dangerous Prussia getting a little less dangerous entangling itself in a war against Hannover & England, he travels himself to Berlin but gets sick on the way and thus doesn't arrive until everything has calmed down, in the aftermath Hoym has become well and truly head honcho among the Saxon ministers, Manteuffel sees the writing on the wall, gets his papers away to Sorgen, Frey and then quits before he can be sacked, Hoym has his office searched, finds nothing, and Manteuffel for good measure does not stay at Sorgen, Frey but moves to Berlin while remaining in mail contact with up and coming young Brühl. Then Hoym is ousted from power and arrested, which in the Manteuffel biographies isn't presented as happening years apart but in tandem.
Now if this was a spy novel, and Hoym's arrest really happened because of Fritz supposedly offering a job once he's King, I'd certainly suspect Manteuffel as the one with a good motive of getting Hoym framed, and the opportunity to pass a forged letter on to Dresden. But that all depends on there really being a Fritz related accusation, which, again, I find bewildering in the light of Brühl being so confident about Suhm's reliability.
Something AvB also doesn't mention is this whole philosopher business, i.e. Manteuffel promoting Christian Wolff at Fritz and getting mentor-of-future-philosopher-King type of ambitions, for which there is more than enough documentation via letters. In this Brühl biography, Manteuffel only spies on Fritz for Saxony's sake and never expects him to be a good King. Whereas while Manteuffel was certainly more jaundiced and sceptical by 1739/1740, in 1734 he comes more across as "hmmm, there's real potential here!"
managed to find out that Friedrich planned on immediately after his accession to the throne supporting the Polish anti King Stanislaus Lescynski with a corps of his troops, which amounted to an open attack.
Who is Fritz writing this to, I want to know?
AvB does not say. And again, there's nothing about this in the Manteuffel biographies, and Thea von Seydewitz at least had used the same Dresden State Archive material AvB has. (And since she's explicitly writing a political biography, you'd think this would have made the cut.) Otoh I can't imagine AvB completely inventing this Stanislas Lescyinski business out of the blue. I'm just bewildered.
Anyway: Fritz does come across as prematurely certain his time has come and FW will die in 1734, that's certainly true and there are the Wilhelmine directed letters to prove it, but I still doubt he'd been hubristic enough to pledge himself in writing to such a policy before FW has breathed his last. Not just a few years after FW accused him of treason for the meetings with Dickens, and the whole letter to Caroline pledging himself to marry only her daughter had been such a mistake, and he knew it had been a mistake, that I just can't see him handing out promises in writing while he's still Crown Prince.
Re: 1740s and 1750s: Manteuffel, Silesia 1 & 2, Victory of Evil
Date: 2023-04-02 04:07 pm (UTC)Same thought I had!
Having slept over it, I should point out a better translation for the accusation would be "violation of the confidentiality of letters" - "Brechung des Briefgeheimnisses". Now this could mean he opened some not meant for him (as did they all), but it might also mean he forwarded confidential letters or made copies for someone who wasn't Saxon.
Ahh, that makes more sense!
No, looking at Pichon, he does say that it was letter *opening* that was the problem:
Wishing to discover the mancuvres of his enemies, he caused the letters written to Saxony by the persons who surrounded the King to be opened; they knew it, were greatly angered, and informed the King. Despising the incapacity of his colleagues and the weakness of the King, he wished to do everything and to decide everything. He caused the despatches of certain ministers in other countries to be addressed directly to himself.
And actually, Pichon makes it look like this was all happening in 1731:
These commissioners went to Skaska on June 23, 1731, and presented him with a list of eighteen counts, leaving him the choice either to confess himself guilty of all “these crimes,” and to throw himself on the clemency of the King, or else to appear before a special commission and to be tried by it, and undergo the full penalties which it should pronounce against him.
Whereas your write-up made it sound like the 18 counts happened in 1735:
Hoym thus was arrested on Brühl's orders at his estate on Dec. 18th 1735 and transferred to Königstein. Hoym had been Saxon-Polish envoy in Paris in the years 1720 - 1729 and had been promoted to Cabinet Minister upo9n the death of Count Christoph Heinrich Watzdorf on September 3rd 1729. On March 23rd 1731, August the Strong had dismissed him in disgrace and banished to his estates. Now he got accused on 18 different matters, mainly because of disobedience towards the King, the illegal opening of letters, and corruption.
Oh, wait, more details on the letter openings:
Count tenth: “Crime Against the Mail.” It seems established that Hoym had compelled Poppelman, the postmaster, to deliver to him certain letters, written either by a journalist named Hamman or addressed to him, or from the Chancery of Vienna, from Manteufel and from Brühl. But Hoym said that he had acted with the authorization of the King ( as regards Brühl, this is hardly probable). It was then charged, and Monti in his letter of June 20 hastened to trans mit this malicious rumor to Paris, that he had besides opened letters which the King sent to foreign courts, and also some personal letters of the Elector and of the Electoral Princess ; but in Poppelman's report of April 3, 1731 ,—a report demanded from him after an audience with the King, during which it had been thought that he might be abashed by the august presence , — Poppelman said only that he once gave Hoym a letter which had come from Vienna for the Princess, and that Hoym kept it to give to her him self. He did not say that Hoym opened it. He saw nothing opened except a package addressed to Brühl from Vienna ; in regard to all the rest, he has heard it said, he is convinced, etc., — nothing positive. Zecht, one of the commissioners, and a mortal enemy of Hoym, whose father had been employed by Hoym's father as a tutor, but had been discharged, declared that this conduct, by discrediting the post, must have diminished the King's receipts, and that Hoym had thus injured the King. He did not say how those who feared the insecurity of the post managed to write to Vienna, to France, or to England, without having recourse to it.
Aha, here's the Zeithain charge!
Count twelfth: “Unseemly Conversation and Conduct During the Stay of the King of Prussia at Dresden, and in the Camp, and on Other Occasions." This article referred to the marriage ball of Countess Moginska, and to the remarks made (perhaps exaggerated) by Hoym to the King of Prussia. I have related this affair in detail at page 96. Hoym was charged with having risked involving the Kings of Prussia and of Poland in a quarrel, and of not having spoken of the project which the Prince Royal then formed of leaving his father's court.
Hoym, in the memoir cited, confines himself to saying that the respect due to crowned heads did not permit him to reply to this article.
So if Pichon is correct and this is all happening in June 1731, it makes more sense that it's being brought up here, than if AvB is saying it happened in December 1735.
Lol, turning the page, our passionate defender of Hoym Pichon (who responds to every point with a defense) still thinks it's ridiculous they waited more than a year:
Let us add that this conduct and these remarks, of which a crime was made in 1731, had occurred, so to speak, under the eyes of the King of Poland, who at this time had energetically upheld his minister against Seckendorff and Prince Eugene. If the King of Poland found them so reprehensible, how was it that he retained in power a minister guilty of them, why did he let more than a year pass before punishing him ?
Anyway, it does seem it was being held against him. Also, the bit about the marriage ball of Countess Moginska refers to a masked ball in Dresden that FW apparently attended, masked, in February of 1730. I had no memory of that, and I checked our chronology and it has no memory either.
Selena, I only have time for a quick skim, you might want to read through the 50-page account of his fall, starting on page 92 of this file, which I have uploaded to our library. (I read the first few pages in French, googled the masked ball, and thus discovered the English translation.) Of course, depending on your time and interest, you could also read the first 91 pages including the preface, as is your wont. ;)
Anyway, in that account of Hoym's fall, I only see one mention of Fritz, and that's the one I cited you. Lots of intrigues involving FW, Grumbkow, and Seckendorff (as well as French names we recognize, such as Fleury and his autre moi-meme Chauvelin), which might be of interest.
I can also give you Seydewitz's biography, for that one you did not get from the Stabi. You got the Bronisch bio from the Stabi, told us Bronisch cited Seydewitz and lamented not being able to get a copy, and since it was public domain, I uploaded it for you.
Seydewitz is on my to-read list, but you know how slow I am with that font, so I'm holding off. (I'm getting better, though! A couple days ago, I read Volz's article--note article, not book--in which he uncovered Heinrich's role in the partition of Poland.)
Okay, I turned up Beyrich! He definitely talks way more about Fritz. Let's see what he says...
Looks like he says much the same thing as AvB, but with a different emphasis: Manteuffel does get Fritz's letters opened and the young lady in question paid (thanks to the officer whom he's bribed), but he isn't able to find anything important in the letters, and in fact all he learns is that Fritz plans to send troops to support Stanislas. Apparently there was also a whole scheme proposed to publish an anonymous pamphlet to tell FW that this was what Fritz was planning, but Manteuffel was like, "No, FW supports Stanislas too, and he'll just laugh at it. Fritz will explain everything, and it'll be clear that we're just tring to cause trouble."
The bit about Dresden learning through other means that Hoym has offered his services to Fritz and that he got an answer from Fritz is here too, but Beyrich doesn't say anything about Fritz "offering him an important role." Maybe that's implied, but again, the emphasis is different between Beyrich and AvB.
Beyrich does say that this led directly to Hoym's December 31 arrest. He also mentions Koser and the Zeithain secret-keeping. Oh, hey, the footnote says Grumbkow wrote to his brother that Fritz and Hoym were on good terms and he thought Hoym would play a brilliant role after Fritz's acccession, and Grumbkow's brother passed on the info to a Saxon minister, who passed it on to Brühl. And Beyrich is heavy on the footnotes with archive sources.
To sum up, I think this is what we have:
1731 charges included 18 points (15 according to Beyrich), one of which was the Zeithain one (according to Pichon and Beyrich), 1735 charges included contact with Fritz (Beyrich).
Beyrich can now be read in the library here. There's probably more good stuff outside of these few pages, for those who are capable of reading German faster. And you should definitely read pages 117-120, I can tell there's some nuance here I'm missing, for example re what Beyrich thinks the real causes of the arrest(s) were.
Then Hoym is ousted from power and arrested, which in the Manteuffel biographies isn't presented as happening years apart but in tandem.
The problem is that Hoym is ousted from power in 1731 and arrested in 1735, which makes the chronology more complicated. Especially if you're AvB and doing some sleight-of-hand with the 1730s.
Who is Fritz writing this to, I want to know?
AvB does not say.
The way I read Beyrich, it's not clear this comes from a letter at all; it sounds more likely that Fritz said it out loud, and
Wartenslebenthe young officer in Manteuffel's pay passed it on. At any rate, there's a footnote with a letter from Manteuffel to Brühl as the source about the Stanislas claim. And while I don't see 1734 Fritz writing a letter to Stanislas committing himself, in 1734 when he's very much interested in the course of the War of the Polish Succession (and of course fighting on the Rhineland front), I could see him making a casual remark out loud, and this getting passed on.As for Brühl's trust in Suhm: yeah, that is interesting! Clearly what we need is to start reading the Dresden archives. :D
Re: 1740s and 1750s: Manteuffel, Silesia 1 & 2, Victory of Evil
Date: 2023-04-03 07:43 am (UTC)Also, the bit about the marriage ball of Countess Moginska refers to a masked ball in Dresden that FW apparently attended, masked, in February of 1730.
I dimly recall FW might have visited Saxony once more between the 1728 visit with Fritz and the Zeithain camp, but I could be wrong. Anyway, "Moginska" is Pichon's spelling for Moscynska, i.e. the same Countess, daughter of Countess Kosel, whom both H-W and "Sachsens Glanz und Preußens Gloria" have as Brühl's mistress. Otoh, I do recall that mutiny/escape attempt by various Prussian soldiers which has FW majorly upset and worried and where he crushes down hard, an event which FW apologists usually cite as contributing to his frame of mind re: Fritz later, happens in early 1730 as well as far as I recall, and of course Peter's promotion/transfer from page to the King to lieutenant in Wesel at the end of January. It doesn't look like a likely time for FW to leave Prussia to attend August the Strong's illegitimate daughter's wedding, is what I mean. But if documents say he was there, then he was, and her her wiki entry definitely says Moscynska married on February 18th 1730.
I had a very quick look - really don't have time for more right now - and it seems Pichon thinks Hoym was innocent in everything but wanting to do it all and expose his incompetent fellow ministers who struck back, while Beyrich thinks that the official reason given for the second arrest (Hoym taking up his old relations with France again) was official whereas anything implicating the Prussian Crown Prince would have kept secret for realpolitik reasons. Apparantly Manteuffel in addition to advising against the anonymous pamphlet idea also wrote that if any Fritz incriminating letters were found with Hoym, they should be returned to Fritz secretly, thereby building up goodwill towards Saxony
and Manteuffelwith Fritz. (Beyrich doesn't add but I do: certainly if Saxony had made a Hoym/Fritz correspondence with plans from Fritz for his future reign public, FW would have hit the roof out of general principle and taken it out of Fritz but would have not been any more friendly towards Saxony while Fritz would have a new reason to hate them, so there would have been nothing to gain for the Saxons, whereas without the benefit of hindsight, helping Fritz out by returning his letters looks indeed like a good method to build up goodwill with the next King of Prussia, so I see Manteuffel's point.(Seckendorff: Whereas I already had written to Eugene that it was pointless to hope for gratitude from Junior, and boy, was I ever right.)
Anyway, the way Breyer renders Manteuffel's letter to Brühl it sounds like Manteuffel himself isn't sure whether or not such letters exist, and Breyer just thinks that if there were such letters, Brühl would have followed Manteuffel's advice as what to do with them and under no circumstances publisized this as a reason for Hoym's arrest.
Then Manteuffel - like Suhm later in St. Petersburg - requests a Legationsrat to be send to him to tell him something he didn't want to put in writing, only in this case it's not his brother but a guy named Johann Christoph Walther, and Manteuffel tells him that while he currently doesn't need the bribery money for people in Fritz' circle anymore, if FW kicks it it will be necessary again, plus that yes, he's learned through those channels as well that Hoym has been earmarked by Fritz to be taken in his service once he becomes King, but that he didn't want to say so before because Hoym was in his known enemy back in the day and it would have looked like he simply wanted to avenge himself on Hoym. Then Breyer adds that Walther also talked to Suhm while he was in Berlin and speculates that Suhm probably wanted to get rehired by the Saxon court - this is after Suhm's time as Saxon envoy in Berlin and obviously before his time in St. Peterburg, so like Manteuffel, he's officially only a private citizen in Berlin - but that the Saxon government didn't at this point plan on doing so. (Footnote says that Suhm wrote repeated requests to get rehired into Saxon services following this visit which were not (yet) replied in the positive though he was given the hope of getting a pension since clearly he had incredibly useful connections.)
(I fastforwarded, and the book ends before Lynar gets replaced by Suhm as Saxon envoy in St. Petersburg, so it doesn't give us Breyer's own opinion as to why Suhm gets rehired.)
So, in conclusion, state of the Fritz letters:
re: supporting Stanislas Lescynsky: I agree with you Breyer doesn't phrase it as if there was an actual letter and it might simply have been a remark reported by
Wartenslebenthe young officer to Manteuffelre: letters Hoym: could have existed, if so were returned, but might also have not existed other than in Manteuffel's speculation. Since if Brühl had replied something definite like "yes, attached you'll find five Fritzian letters, please hand them over" , I assume Breyer would have quoted it. Otoh if he's sending a Legationsrat for a verbal report anyway, then that would have been the occasion to pass on any incriminating letters. Let's not forget, there's always the risk FW's people read the Saxon letters, and if the goal is to NOT make trouble between FW and Fritz, you don't want to risk something via a written confirmation Fritz was making plans with yet another foreign envoy about his future reign.
Hm. Maybe it's worth having another look at the interrogation protocols of Fritz and Katte to see what they said about Hoym and why Fritz thought Hoym would help him escape.
Clearly what we need is to start reading the Dresden archives. :D
That's assuming there are any of those files left. I mean, given the fate of Dresden aftr all these books were written. I note the current Saxon archive is at Leipzig, is what I'm saying.
Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-03 11:25 pm (UTC)Right? Maybe he was there to discuss something important with August and it just happened to be wedding time, so they couldn't not invite him.
Still find FW in a mask at a ball a weird mental image, but I guess when in Dresden, do as the Saxons do (but not too much :P).
Anyway, the way Breyer renders Manteuffel's letter to Brühl it sounds like Manteuffel himself isn't sure whether or not such letters exist, and Breyer just thinks that if there were such letters, Brühl would have followed Manteuffel's advice as what to do with them and under no circumstances publisized this as a reason for Hoym's arrest.
Thank you! This is the thing I knew I was missing the nuance of and didn't have time to slow down and figure out.
Hm. Maybe it's worth having another look at the interrogation protocols of Fritz and Katte to see what they said about Hoym and why Fritz thought Hoym would help him escape.
I had a quick look and didn't see an explanation of *why* Hoym, but then it's not only in the godforsaken font but also in convoluted 18th century legalese (I always find reading Hinrichs a little extra difficult), and I didn't have time to read everything slowly, so you might want to take a look yourself. "Hoym" is searchable under "Soym" in the Hinrichs volume, because
this font is ridiculousOCR is not an exact science.What I did find was Hinrichs footnoting this guy as Adolph Magnus von Hoym, saying he was in charge of the post. Wikipedia says our Hoym (Karl Heinrich) had a brother named Adolph Magnus, but he died in 1723. So if both Pichon and Beyrich think it's our Hoym, I think Hinrichs made a misidentification.
That's assuming there are any of those files left. I mean, given the fate of Dresden aftr all these books were written. I note the current Saxon archive is at Leipzig, is what I'm saying.
The gauntlet has been thrown down, and the detective is on the case. :P
First finding is that Rene Hanke has an encouragingly long bibliography of unprinted Brühl correspondence from the 1740s and 1750s that he found in the Dresden archive and consulted for his 2006 book. Google time.
Second finding is that a bunch of Brühl's 1730s correspondence is still searchable on the Saxon archive website.
Woo! Third finding is that a bunch of it (all of it?) is DIGITIZED. [ETA: no, not all. Amongst the not digitized material is "Varia, Briefe verschiedenen Inhalts von verschiedenen Personen an den Staatsminister Grafen von Brühl (u. a. Berliner Nachrichten de anno 1740)". When I saw that, I was like, come ON! What could be more important than Berlin 1740? :P]
Mes amies, I give you
https://archiv.sachsen.de/archiv/bestand.jsp?oid=01.05.01&bestandid=10026&syg_id=264812&_ptabs=%7B%22%23tab-gliederung%22%3A1%7D#gliederung
If you ctrl-f for "Manteuffel", click on the link (say, 1734), and then click the "Digitalisat" tab, you get images of facsimiles!
(I can just see the Dresden archivists thinking, "Better get this online! We had a narrow escape last time.")
And the handwriting is basically legible!
WELL THEN.
OMG, there's a letter from Suhm! There's a whole 3-part volume for "correspondence with people whose names begin with S", and I skimmed through the preview and went, "Wait, do I recognize that handwriting?"
Guys, I can recognize Suhm's handwriting in preview mode! :DDD
...There's a whole bunch of letters from Suhm!
Oh, hey, here's Nicolas Suhm, writing from Berlin in late 1740, giving thanks for the accommodation in allowing him to leave Warsaw quickly, stating that Fritz gave Hedwig and the kids a pension of 1000 ecus, and reporting that Suhm's oldest son had been a Saxon ensign for 4 years and is now asking for leave to go join Fritz.
(Man, I wish Suhm's handwriting was this good. I can make 95% of it out with effort, but the amount of guessing I have to do at the handwriting plus the French means I kept losing track of what he was saying. All I could tell was there was a series of letters corresponding to
Footnote says that Suhm wrote repeated requests to get rehired into Saxon services following this visit which were not (yet) replied in the positive though he was given the hope of getting a pension since clearly he had incredibly useful connections.
I did see a mention of Ruppin! I looked at the surrounding text, but didn't see anything obviously worth the effort of puzzling it out in detail.)
Bookmarked, and I'll come back to this when my French is better*, that will help tremendously!
* Who am I kidding, I'll probably come back to it before then, but it's definitely an extra motivator to improve my French!
Btw, I'm only seeing letters *to* Brühl, in both the Manteuffel and the letter S volume, no letters *from* Brühl so far. Let me see if Beyrich will point me directly to one.
Oh, yeah, now that I read the catalogue more closely, it's mostly letters "to Brühl" or letters from "other person", but the Manteuffel volumes says "correspondence with Manteuffel", and yet I only see Manteuffel letters.
Oh, huh, found one Beyrich mentions, and apparently Brühl does not sign his name.
Anyway, guys, I found the letter from Brühl to Wackerbart-Salmour discussing the reasons for Hoym's arrest! It's in a postscript:
P.S. Le Roi ayant dernièrement écrit de propre main un Ordre ^Secret, au General Miklau de faire arreter et transporter à Koenigstein le Comte de Hoym, et ne doutant pas que cela ne soit execute à l'heure qu'il est, je crois devoir dire confidemment a V. E. que Sa Majeste s'y est determinee parce que le dit Comte a offert ses services au Prince Royal de Prusse apres le mort de son Pere. V.E. en comprend les consequences et je la conjure que cela reste entre nous. [two illegible words I can't read appended.]
The King having recently written in his own hand a Secret Order to General Miklau to have the Count de Hoym arrested and transported to Koenigstein, and not doubting that this will be executed at the present time, I believe I must say confidently to V. E. that His Majesty decided to do so because the said Count offered his services to the Prince Royal of Prussia after the death of his father. V.E. understands the consequences and I implore him that it remain between us.
Interesting!
So now we see why Wikipedia long ago told us that historians believe the charge of impregnating his niece was trumped-up to cover the real charge.
One day I dream of reading through this handwritten-in-French archive like it's printed-in-English. In the meantime, enjoy the postscript.
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-04 02:16 pm (UTC)Still find FW in a mask at a ball a weird mental image, but I guess when in Dresden, do as the Saxons do (but not too much :P).
LOL, well, when I was screencaping Der Thronfolger, I did include a shot of FW in costume during the 1728 Saxony visit - check out my pic spam again.(The direct link to the photo in question is here.) It's carnival, after all. And hey, child!him had to pose as David for that painting Mom commissioned, so it's not like he hadn't done it before. Also I think Wilhelmine mentions it in her report on the Dresden visit (as given to her by Fritz, one assumes). The scene where he wears a carnival costume ends with the (in)famous occasion where he and Fritz gets presented with a naked lady, well, as naked as German tv allowed.
I'm absolutely thrilled all those documents survived Dresden getting flattened by the Royal Air Force. (I assume they were evacuated in time, like Fritz' and FW's dead bodies in their sarcophagi were?) And that the're now digitized.
Guys, I can recognize Suhm's handwriting in preview mode!
You're awesome, but we knew that. :)
So now we see why Wikipedia long ago told us that historians believe the charge of impregnating his niece was trumped-up to cover the real charge.
Yep. I'm still fascinated that Hoym gets arrested for corresponding with Fritz and being earmarked for working with him in the mid 1730s while Suhm, who's definitely corresponding with Fritz and very likely earmarked for working with him as far as the Saxons know gets first entrusted with the super secret Russia negotiations and then gets his wanted leave. Granted, Hoym is in Saxony and thus can easily be arrested, while Suhm is in St. Petersburg, but he's intending to travel via Poland and thus Saxon territory, and presumably if Brühl had distrusted him, he wouldn't have given Nicolas S. leave to meet up with his brother but would have set some soldiers to Warsow to receive him.
Now, mostly I suspect it's due to changed political circumstances. The Hoym stuff goes down either during or directly after the War of the Polish Succession, and if Fritz had become King then and had indeed allied with the French and Stanislas Lescynski, you do not want someone who was for a short time the most powerful minister of Saxony and Poland and knows all the defense stuff and the true state of the army at his disposal. In 1740, Stanislas Lescynski isn't an issue anymore and things are looking relatively good with the French, impending Saxon/French marriage alliance upcoming. Still - the Saxons want to overthrow the Polish constitution and Suhm doesn't just know about this plan, he's brokered it and partly developed it, and one would think THAT is not something Brühl wants to share with the new King in Prussia.
Maybe Suhm was just exuding trustworthiness. :) I mean, even Pichon in his passionate defense admits Hoym could come across as haughty, and an occasion gets mentioned and admitted in the initial 18 charges where he grabs people and shouts in their faces. Whereas Suhm presumably was soft spoken and nice to everyone.
Question: if Fritz actually liked Hoym, as opposed to finding him useful, could this be another reason as to why he had it in so much for Brühl later?
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-04 10:59 pm (UTC)I know! I was thinking of his 1728 visit, and especially the naked lady, when I said "When in Dresden...but not too much." It's still a weird mental image. FW in Saxony is just cognitive dissonance for me, what can I say? ;)
I'm absolutely thrilled all those documents survived Dresden getting flattened by the Royal Air Force.
Meeeee toooooo!
Now, mostly I suspect it's due to changed political circumstances.
Yeah, but as you pointed out, he got entrusted with the St. Petersburg assignment only 2 years later, and that included anti-Prussia negotiations! That's the more surprising part to me. Admittedly by that point, the War of the Polish Succession had mostly been settled in Augustus' favor.
It's possible that by the time it was 1740, he'd proven himself and you're right that they *wanted* him to go spy on Fritz. And I'm willing to believe they did want Lynar back in St. Petersburg, although admittedly that's not the same as letting Suhm go to Prussia as opposed to come back home.
Btw, Fritz and Suhm are pretty explicit in their letters in early 1740 about how Suhm is going to come join him.
February 4, Fritz writes:
I embrace the opportunity...to remind you of me, and to advise you, that in a short time the epocha will arrive, when I shall summon you to perform promises. I hope you are always in the same sentiments in which I have known you, and that you have not forgotten the agreement made the night of our separation.
While I wait for the pleasure of seeing you again, I send you a ring with my portrait, which I beg you will never part with.
Suhm writes a long discursus on how he is touched and also offended that Fritz needs the reassurance that his Diaphane is still faithful to him, and concludes:
...the unalterable sentiments of respect and devotion, which my heart has vowed to you, and which I desire to prove by my services to the last moment of my life; expecting with the warmest impatience, the epocha when I shall be recalled near to your person, never more to be separated from it but by death.
Considering they had to encode all the loans...I kind of think Suhm had at least gotten a verbal nod from Augustus and/or Brühl that he was going to leave as soon as Fritz became king.
It is kind of the exact opposite of Hoym!
OTOH, Suhm was never the most powerful minister, and after 4 years in Russia, he probably didn't know that many secrets about what was going on back home.
Still - the Saxons want to overthrow the Polish constitution and Suhm doesn't just know about this plan, he's brokered it and partly developed it, and one would think THAT is not something Brühl wants to share with the new King in Prussia.
I mean, August the Strong has been trying to overthrow the Polish constitution and partition Poland and has been telling FW and Peter the Great about it and trying to get them on board since...1720 at least, probably 1696. So that part's not a secret. But the specific "let's work with Russia to keep Prussia in line," yeah, that might be a secret. (Though it might not be, the Saxony/Prussia rivalry is kind of a known thing, and how early did the signs of the Fritz/Brühl antagonism begin?)
Re why Suhm was recalled, Fritz or Lynar: probably both.
July 2: Suhm reports that he didn't wait to ask for his dismissal after learning of FW's death, but asked immediately.
August 3: Suhm reports that he's finally gotten his dismissal.
August 23: Ivan VI born.
October (early): Ivan VI is named heir to the throne, with Anna Leopoldovna as regent.
October 28: Anna Ivanovna dies, making Anna Leopoldovna regent.
I don't have a date for exactly when Lynar was appointed envoy, but he arrived in January. I suspect the Saxons knew Anna Ivanova was on her last legs even in July, and so they were more willing to let Suhm go. They didn't have absolute certainty, though, and sickly monarchs have been known to hang on longer than you expect (Carlos II of Spain, Elizaveta, etc.). So the proximate cause was definitely
their desire to spy onFritz.I still suspect Suhm let his bosses know in advance, though, and that's why permission was so forthcoming, and why he and Fritz didn't hesitate to put their plans in plaintext in letters.
Maybe Suhm was just exuding trustworthiness.
I mean, that's my headcanon! (Other than the fact that he never had Hoym's power and access to secrets--he had been a private citizen for 6 years, then 4 years over in St. Petersburg--and the fact that he probably would have made a great spy, if he could be induced to do it (which I agree he probably wouldn't, but I'm sure he would have tried to smooth things over between Saxony and Prussia if opportunities arose, and would have been a useful contact for the Saxons in Prussia), but also, yes, he'd probably proven himself.)
Whereas Suhm presumably was soft spoken and nice to everyone.
Yeah, my headcanon was always that he was outwardly "diplomatic" and quiet, but in his head, a lot of wheels were turning.
Question: if Fritz actually liked Hoym, as opposed to finding him useful, could this be another reason as to why he had it in so much for Brühl later?
It's possible. We should keep an eye out for any signs he liked Hoym. I mean, driving someone you likedto commit suicide *would* be the kind of thing you'd hold a grudge over...
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-05 06:40 am (UTC)Also, thinking about the two cases further, there's a difference between Suhm being open about his friendship with Fritz and his ultimate intention of joining him once FW dies and Hoym conducting a secret correspondence and making a secret pledge (in addition to the differences between the two men's positions and state of knowledge about Saxon interior matters).
Given that Suhm wrote a solid Fritz assessment for Brühl 1739/1740ish (and on time when Brühl asked for it, as opposed to Manteuffel not finishing his), I could see Brühl seeing this as a furhter confirmation in his opinion that Suhm is trustworthy and solidly Saxon, and could be persuaded to continuing furthering Saxon interests (in whichever fashion) while he's with Fritz. (Again, it's not that I think Suhm would have necessarily done that but that Brühl in 1740 had reasons to believe he would based on Suhm's professional conduct in the last four years.)
It's possible. We should keep an eye out for any signs he liked Hoym. I mean, driving someone you likedto commit suicide *would* be the kind of thing you'd hold a grudge over...
Quite. We might be overthinking it and it really was just politics (i.e. blaming Brühl for being diplomatically foiled a few times plus his share in the Diplomatic Revolution plus a convenient scapegoat for the ruin of Saxony), but there was so much targetted viciousness that it's hard not to see it as personal. (Hence Hohenzollern historians feeling the need to explain it by noble Fritz being that indignant that evil favourite Brühl managed to squeeze so much money out of Saxony as to get himself all those palaces and avenging the Saxon people by destroying all the Brühl property.) I mean, I still like your idea that young Brühl might have tipped off FW at Zeithain, too, but in order for Brühl to having been in a position to do so, it would have needed him to be informed of Fritz and Katte approaching Hoym in real time, and if that had been the case, the accusation much later that Hoym kept the information to himself would not have worked. I mean, Hoym could have just said "but you and our King and the King in Prussia talked about this at the time, what do you mean, keeping it secret?!?" and he didn't.) (Pinchon quotes Hoym's defenses, and this wasn't it.)
Reminder
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-05 10:56 am (UTC)Yes, this is very true. That's part of how Suhm exudes trustworthiness, I say! :D
Given that Suhm wrote a solid Fritz assessment for Brühl 1739/1740ish (and on time when Brühl asked for it, as opposed to Manteuffel not finishing his)
Hahaha. Manteuffel: But I had so much to say that I ran out of time!*
* I am reminded of the time I got an A on the Latin historical linguistics qualifying exam in grad school and the guy who knew much more than I did got a B, because he ran out of time to write down everything he knew.
I still like your idea that young Brühl might have tipped off FW at Zeithain
That was Jürgen Luh's idea! He wrote a paper on it, which I reported to salon. I'm not even convinced, I just think it's a possibility.
it would have needed him to be informed of Fritz and Katte approaching Hoym in real time, and if that had been the case, the accusation much later that Hoym kept the information to himself would not have worked.
I'm not sure this is the case. Hoym being accused of not reporting things through official channels is not the same as a third party reporting that they've observed and/or heard rumors of Fritz and Katte acting shady around Hoym's tent. Brühl doesn't need to have told FW "Hoym told me what Fritz and Katte said," he just needs to have said, "Btw, a lot of suspicious activity going on, thought you might like to know."
I mean, everyone already knew Fritz wanted to escape, so putting 2 and 2 together would not have been hard.
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-05 01:18 pm (UTC)Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-06 02:13 pm (UTC)You're awesome, but we knew that. :)
So after downloading the whole volume, it turns out that I am awesome, but in a different way than we thought.
None of the letters in this volume are by our Suhm, all are by Nicolas. It's just that:
1. I was apparently right that Nicolas will break out his best handwriting when making an effort. Which means I think I was right that Hedwig and Peter Keith are doing the same, even though I don't have other handwriting samples in their case.
2. These two Suhm brothers have very similar handwriting when not making an effort. Maybe they had the same tutor growing up! (They were 6 years apart in age, so it's not impossible.)
So what this means is:
1. I don't actually know what Nicolaus was writing about in 1736 that made it look to me like he was repeatedly soliciting a position and there was talk of pensions (and Ruppin!), but it doesn't surprise me there's some overlap in the vocabulary. There is a fair bit of talk about FW (le roi de Prusse).
2. We don't actually have our Suhm's letters.
I might still see what I can do with the Nicolaus letters at some point: there is a lot of talk of Prussia, and maybe it will give us some interesting insights.
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-06 02:17 pm (UTC)- Mildred, obviously
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-06 02:45 pm (UTC)Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-06 05:21 pm (UTC)Enjoy your holidays with your family. :)
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-07 06:03 pm (UTC)Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-10 01:14 pm (UTC)Brühl's original instructions to Suhm: Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden, Loc. 3026, Vo. I.
Suhm's short note from September 15th where he says he had a extrarordinarily successful conversation with Biron but wants to report the content verbally to his brother is alas only paraphrased, not quoted, and thus not footnoted.
Suhm to Brühl about Anna Leopoldovna declaring she'd rather die than marry Anton Ulrich, otoh, is quoted and thus we have:
Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden, Loc. 3026
Suhm's letter from Dec. 18th 1739 where he prophecies the Russians will go after Poland one day and develops his own Realpolitik plan for Poland: Also
Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden, Loc. 3026.
Re: Saxon archives
Date: 2023-04-10 01:29 pm (UTC)Well, the plan is for me to finish reading up on the Danes, then go back to French, then acquire the ability to read handwritten French a whole lot faster. Then it might make sense to check out 7 volumes of Suhm correspondence. Maybe by then they'll have digitized it.
Thanks anyway!
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-04 06:24 pm (UTC)Then in 1737, shortly after Fritz moved into Rheinsberg, Suhm got an assignment to go be Saxon envoy to St. Petersburg. He really didn't want to go. But he convinced himself it was the right thing to do. Fritz really didn't want him to
Given that we now know the Saxon archive proves Suhm tried, repeatedly, not on an impulse but several times, to get back to being assigned as an envoy, as opposed to staying a private citizen with Fritz, shouldn’t one modify this to “he told Fritz he really did not want to go”?
Mind you: wanting to get back into Saxon services doesn’t mean he didn’t enjoy his time with Fritz. FW wasn’t really old, and despite his various health problems, for all Suhm knew, FW was going to live a decade or more longer. He had children to care for. I don’t know how his finances were in the mid 1730s, but that pension definitely was less than what he got as an envoy, I assume. He might even have hoped he’d be again appointed as envoy to Prussia, though I doubt that, given FW’s general attitude towards him and the fact the next officlal Saxon envoy got along with FW better. And it’s also possible he didn’t want to live the private citizen life any longer because he wanted to work, and he knew that FW aside, he was good at being an envoy.
In conclusion, I’m not saying that Suhm was like Algarotti, who really did want to leave in the end, but I also think whatever he told Fritz, the fact that he actively campaigned for that assignment means there has to be at least a question mark over his professed reluctance to leave, which could just as well be practised psychology and the awareness it is what you tell Fritz who has very blatant and understandable issues about people he’s attached to leaving…
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-04 07:12 pm (UTC)Now, maybe he actually wanted that particular assignment. But it wasn't uncommon for envoys to complain about the assignments they were given (or that they were sent as envoys at all instead of being given ministerial positions at home). But given that St. Petersburg *was* so remote you wouldn't see anyone back home for a long time (I was pleasantly surprised to see that he did get to see his brother Nicolas at all), given that complaining about the climate was common, and given that Russia was kind of not a prestigious assignment (this is the time of Anna Ivanovna), I'm willing to believe it came as an unpleasant surprise.
Do we know if Suhm
- Wanted an envoy position specifically?
- Wanted St. Petersburg specifically?
Because his brother had a position as minister in Dresden, and I had the impression that Suhm either wanted that (envoys usually do, with some exceptions), or some better envoy assignment, but I'm not the one who read AvB, and I could be wrong.
(One day I will be the one who's read Suhm's letters in the archives. If I download the images, that will help a lot; yesterday I was just browsing on the site to get a sense of what was out there.)
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-05 03:16 pm (UTC)Update: the website is scrapable! I can download whole volumes in one go with my algorithms!
This is beautiful.
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-04 10:31 pm (UTC)Suhm writes on August 6, 1736, from Dresden:
I have made use of the interval to ramble round the country, and renew some old connexions.--How melancholy it is, My Lord, at a certain age, to be reduced to seek an establishment!
Fritz writes back, August 15:
You will be surprised, astonished, perhaps, my dear Diaphane, that I do not pity such a man as you, reduced to seek an establishment. It is your Court I pity, whose eyes are fascinated in such a manner, that they cannot distinguish subjects useful and worthy of being employed, from those who are only distinguished by fortune, or the blind caprices of favour.--How is it possible, (let it be said without flattery) that a person of so much merit, sense, and knowledge, should be neglected, and even forgotten? and what idea can we form of a Court where the Suhms are not respected and fought after?
I can't speak for the Dresden court specifically, but my impression is that envoys rarely had a say in where they were posted. I remember Chesterfield, when he was made ambassador to The Hague (where his staff helped Peter escape), delayed his departure as long as possible because what he'd really wanted was a post at home.
Re finances, earlier in the year (Mar 10), Wilhelmine had written:
I suspect little Diablotin - for this is how we used to call Suhm back in the day, didn't we? - needs his own philosophy dearly; for he isn't popular at court, and in a bad financial position.
and Fritz wrote back (Mar 25):
"The circumstances of Diaphane or Diablotin have been ordered somewhat for the better, so he can dedicate himself more to philosophy now.
Which I assume is the pension: better than nothing but not as good as an "establishment."
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-05 06:18 am (UTC)BTW, Suhm's finances are another argument for him taking all his children and his sister with him when he goes to St. Petersburg, because otherwise, he'd have to pay for the upkeep of an entire household in Berlin in addition to his other expenses - and we know envoy salaries of envoys are notoriously slow to arrive.
Speaking of envoys to St. Petersburg, what was the name again of the English one in whose entourage Algarotti attended the Anna Leopoldovna/Anton Ulrich wedding?
BTW, I brushed up my Horowski, and saw that despite Elizaveta having made a show of kicking out many of the Germans which had accumulated in administration positions during Anna Ivanova's and Anna Leopoldovna's reign at the start of hers, there were will enough left so that speaking German was a major plus for envoys being sent to St. Peterburg (not to mention that of course Peter the not yet III. spoke it better than Russian for the obvious reasons) - and H-W even after his years in Dresden, Berlin and Vienna still did not speak a word of it. (Poniatowski did speak German, which was one of the arguments H-W used for P getting hired as his secretary at British government expenses.) And of course he did not speak Russian, either, and as he apologizes in his letters to Catherine, wasn't the best in French. But sure, Wilhelmine was the one only pretending to be learned.
Anyway: Suhm being fluent in French and of course in German certainly would have been a plus in the Anna Ivanova era, and AvB's argument as to why Brühl picked him for St. Petersburg once Lynar needed replacing (that the openly known Fritz friendship means even paranoid Prussia would not immediately believe Saxony is pursuing anti Prussian policies via Suhm) is plausible enough, but depending how up Suhm was on gossip, he might not have known Lynar did need replacing when asking for a job and thus very unaware St. Petersburg was even an option, so I see your point about the possibility of him being unpleasantly surprised at the nature of his post.
Re: Saxon archivess: Suhm
Date: 2023-04-05 10:15 am (UTC)Yes, and as I recall, the archive catalogue indicated that Hedwig was still trying to get the posthumous backpay owed her brother in the 1740s!
Speaking of envoys to St. Petersburg, what was the name again of the English one in whose entourage Algarotti attended the Anna Leopoldovna/Anton Ulrich wedding?
Lord Baltimore. As I recall, Fritz liked him too.
But sure, Wilhelmine was the one only pretending to be learned.
Hahaha. Look, it's hard to be an Anglophone where the system doesn't teach you languages! (I consider myself learned but unfortunately monolingual.)
depending how up Suhm was on gossip, he might not have known Lynar did need replacing when asking for a job and thus very unaware St. Petersburg was even an option
Matzke, author of the dissertation on Saxon diplomacy, says they didn't even inform Suhm after they gave him the post! Oh, look, checking again, Matzke also says Brühl totally planned to send Lynar back later, which could be what AvB is getting at.