![[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: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-15 08:59 am (UTC)Your Grace,
Dear Secret Chamberlain,
while investigating the belongings of the valet Glasow, Captain von Oppen and myself found among other things a completely new signet seemingly belonging to your Grace. Following his Majesty's orders, I therefore examined together with Captain v. Oppen where he (Glasow) might have obtained this newly crafted signet, the legitimatizatoin of which are among the things which he (Fritz, I think, not Glasow) wanted to know the truth about from your Grace. So I am given the task to ask whether you may have lost one of your signets; for such a signet has legalized the last dispatch sent by Glasow. Hoping a quick reply, I have the honour of remaning in steadfast friendship, your Grace's faithful friend and servant,
Leining
I am restructuring some sentences to make them more understandable to us modern readers, but have aimed to be faithful to the content as decyphered by you.
But I've gathered enough to conclude that the only way this letter could be consistent with Fredersdorf, Master Embezzler, is that he got caught helping Glasow embezzle...but he still stepped down before April 9, and the Glasow embezzlement has nothing to do with Kiekemal!
Yes, there seems to be no connection to Kiekemal at all so far. Now, I suppose if you want to play devil's advocate it could be possible that Fredersdorf is suspected of having embezzled through Glasow, the way one of the pro Glasow takes frames the coffeemaker guy as having done, but I don't think so, not least because then Glasow would not have needed an evidently new signet. (Presumably Fredersdorf would have had several old ones.) Even if you cast Fredersdorf as super Machiavellian and giving Glasow an evidently faked signet so that Glasow would take the fall if caught, it just seems very impractical to let Glasow do the embezzling from the front lines (where he is with Fritz, and has to send dispatches via courier) instead of using some other stooge to embezzle back home in Potsdam. And that's assuming Fredersdorf in his current state (in his final illness which we now have written contemporary testimony is known to be his final illness) has any interest in acquiring additional petty funds in his last months.
Also, I find it interesting that Glasow felt the need to use Fredersdorf's signet on a dispatch despite the fact Fredersdorf isn't even around Fritz to ostensibly send the dispatch in order to legitimize it, which would indicate that Henckel von Donnersmarck's impression of Glasow (before his fall) being the new almighty favourite not withstanding, Glasow himself seems to have been under the impression that Fredersdorf's authority (as symbolized by the signet) still beats his. I return to my old speculation that the idea Fredersdorf resigned (Lehndorff) or was actively pushed out (Henckel von Donnersmarck) because of Glasow happened because of the timing, i.e. Fredersdorf retiring due to literally not being able to do the job anymore because of his final illness and Glasow in visibly great favour and often seen around Fritz, plus high handed to his underlings. That's what caused the rumor that surely, Glasow must have ousted Fredersdorf or that Fredersdorf resigned because of Glasow. (Incidentally, note that Lehndorff while visiting Fredersdorf knows he's sick but doesn't know he's dying, he thinks Fredersdorf has been wise to fade discreetly into the background once it was his time, while Leining does know how seriously ill Fredersdorf is. Conclusion: Fredersdorf didn't yet look like a walking corpse, at least to a casual visitor, and while there was gossip the truth about his state was knowledge limited to people in his direct service and/or directly around Fritz (who semes to have told Leining).
Lastly: do we know anything about Captain von Oppen?
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-15 03:03 pm (UTC)THANK YOU. :P
(in his final illness which we now have written contemporary testimony is known to be his final illness)
Indeed, although there's an element of hindsight/confirmation bias here: our heroes and antiheroes often thought they were in their final illness, and they weren't. Voltaire's final illnesses lasted 50 years! :P Fritz's 40. Even Suhm willed his kids to Fritz years before he actually died, because he thought he was dying. Then when he really was dying (in hindsight), he kept hoping, and didn't concede he was dying until the last week.
In any case, we know from contemporary testimony that Fredersdorf was seriously ill, ill enough to think he was dying and not to be able to perform his job duties. We know from hindsight that he actually died, and with hindsight we can connect these facts.
Also, I find it interesting that Glasow felt the need to use Fredersdorf's signet on a dispatch despite the fact Fredersdorf isn't even around Fritz to ostensibly send the dispatch in order to legitimize it, which would indicate that Henckel von Donnersmarck's impression of Glasow (before his fall) being the new almighty favourite not withstanding, Glasow himself seems to have been under the impression that Fredersdorf's authority (as symbolized by the signet) still beats his.
Yes, that's an excellent point. *makes a note for the paper*
I return to my old speculation that the idea Fredersdorf resigned (Lehndorff) or was actively pushed out (Henckel von Donnersmarck) because of Glasow happened because of the timing
I agree, and that's the case I intend on making in the paper.
Lastly: do we know anything about Captain von Oppen?
Only this passing mention by Henckel von Donnersmarck:
On the 2nd (of April), the King had his valet and favourite put in chains. The valet had dismissed a servant who used to be employed by the page Willnitz who is now a Lieutenant at the Gardes du Corps. This servant went back to his former master, who sent him with some orders to Dresden. There, he had the misfortune of meeting Glasow (that's the name of the valet), who had him arrested and sent to the government of Spandau in the name of the King with orders to have him locked up in the Citadel. Herr von Willnitz, supported by von Oppen, wrote to the King in this matter, whereupon it was Glasow who got arrested and interrogated. In his trunk, there were found a thousand proofs of similar villainies.
ETA: I meant to add:
which he (Fritz, I think, not Glasow) wanted to know the truth about from your Grace
Yes, I read that as Fritz too when I was deciphering. I don't see any reasonable way to interpret that as Glasow.
Which, btw, means Fritz trusts Fredersdorf to tell the truth in a matter of embezzlement, which means the "terrible health, could die any minute" story isn't a big cover-up between Fritz and Fredersdorf to hide the fact from the general public that he's been dismissed in disgrace for embezzlement*! I mean, that was always unlikely from the summary on the box bills page, but now that we see not just *Leining* trusts Fredersdorf to tell him what really happened, so does Fritz...it would be a whole lot of special pleading to twist this around to Fredersdorf being dismissed on April 9, 1757, especially once Selena translates the April 10th letter for us. And I'm working on an April 14 one that makes it look like Fredersdorf is in fact still trusted with fiscal matters!
* Pace Des Champs.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 06:17 am (UTC)and also generous with Saxony's and Austria's money!Incidentally, if you want to refresh your mind on all the versions of the Glasow tale we've collected so far, including the most recent one until now (because I kept adding them in), AW's reply to Lehndorff by letter when Lehndorff asked him what the hell happened, they're here. Rereading this reminded me that Kalckreuth said Antinous was not more beautiful than Glasow, which is about the only thing his account shares with Henckel von Donnersmarck (since H v D thinks Glasow was guilty as sin while Kalckreuth thinks it was all the evil servant getting revenge on a master who justly fired him and some misunderstanding over the Countess Brühl inviting Glasow to have some chocolate with her that one time). Since whatever happened demonstrates Glasow wasn't the brightest, it really looks like Fritz went with his hormones on that appointment, big time. Yet another reason why I wish
Anyway, for readers who don't want to click the link, this is what AW wrote to Lehndorff: Mr. Glasow has forged several seals; he's opened letters addressed to the King, and which he answered; he was about to steal 100 000 Taler and to run off with them. He has reported all the news he could get his hands on to the Saxons, and when he was searched, two pocket pistols were discovered in his possession, which according to himself he only carried with him for the fun of it. Other than that, he didn't do anything.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 02:50 pm (UTC)Des Champs: And Fritz covered up Fredersdorf's misdeeds, because otherwise he'd have to pay back *everyone*'s salaries!
(The alleged coverup being what I was referring to.)
Since whatever happened demonstrates Glasow wasn't the brightest, it really looks like Fritz went with his hormones on that appointment, big time.
Truly. And given his age (43), does this scream "mid-life crisis" at anyone else?
Yet another reason why I wish [personal profile] felis' AU where he takes Peter on the Netherlands trip instead were true.
Aww, yes! I can imagine, though, that Peter is the *last* person Fritz would want to take to the Netherlands, the place Peter successfully escaped to and Fritz and Katte didn't. The trauma flashbacks would have been just ouch.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 03:16 pm (UTC)OMG, clearly Glasow was the equivalent of the shiny red Porsche, yes. One of these days I'll have to brave Zimmermann again to check how exactly he says Luchesini (at least we are guessing it's Luchesini) aka the closest confidant of Fritz' later years phrased Fritz having told him he had sex until directly before the 7 Years War in ye days before Zimmermann saw through this pretense and realised the truth of the broken penis.
BTW, going through the various versions of the Glasow tale, it occurs to me that the "Fritz didn't like Glasow consorting with women" bit only shows up in the versions based on Schöning who of course, having been in Fritz' service later, has reason to assume this, given how much of a fuss Fritz made about anyone marrying or having girlfriends. (Except Leining, clearly.) Because the gossip as heard by Lehndorff doesn't mention this factor (as opposed to the stolen money, seals and possible poisoning by chocolate, nor does the AW letter, the Henckel von Donnersmarck diary entry, or the Kalckreuth memoir. Lehndorff and Kalckreuth mention the Countess Brühl though not in a romantic context, while AW just says "the Saxons" in general.
Manger, author of the History of the Builders and Architects in Potsdam: At this point, I'd like to point out that Fritz was obsessed with people filching money from him. Even I was accused of this, and before you say anything, Des Champs, this was many years after Fredersdorf had died. I did join the Potsdam Baukontor in 1753, though, so I knew Fredersdorf and I probably knew Glasow in person, too. My own take on Glasow in my book was:
Glasow, a fireworker's son from Berlin. His father later as a Zeugleutnant was transfered to Brieg in Silesia, took him along, and put him, presumably because he wasn't very obedient, into the garnison infantry regiment stationed there. There, King Friedrich spotted him in 1755, took him along to Potsdam where he made him a chamber hussar and distinguished him with a special red uniform. In the year 1756 shortly before the campaign, Fredersdorf was ill and the valet Anderson was in disgrace, so the King made Glasow valet, entrusted his purse to him from which at times money was sent to the building adminstration, and showed him great favor. But in the following year, 1757, he was imprisoned for proven treason and betrayal against the King and sent from Dresden to Spandau, where he died in 1758 already.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 03:25 pm (UTC)You can see why the rumors that Fritz has ditched his faithful spouse of 20 years for the hot young model!
distinguished him with a special red uniform
Shiny red Porsche, shiny red chamber hussar... :P Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 03:38 pm (UTC)BTW, Kalkreuth's "Antinous wasn't more beautiful" (than Glasow) is one of those classical allusions (like years earlier Manteuffel comparing Fritz to Hadrian vis a vis Seckendorff the Nephew) which the educated contemporaries would have gotten immediately but apparently Charlotte Pangels and all the other "Voltaire was the only contemporary to ever say that Fritz was gay!" biographers did not. Meanwhile, I am wondering whether Kalckreuth speaks of personal experience. I mean, his insistence on Glasow's innocence doesn't, like Nicolai's, come with picking someone else as the true villain (i.e. the coffee maker Wöllner/Völker - has that guy shown up yet in the letters, Mildred) responsible for the misdeed(s), he just insists there were no misdeeds in the first place other than Glasow accepting a tea/chocolate invitation from the Countess Brühl and not reporting it, and that the sacked page made it all up. Since clearly there was at the very least some embezzling going on, I'm wondering about Kalckreuth's motives here. I mean, he was already Heinrich's boyfriend but not yet his AD (Henckel von Donnersmarck was), and while no Kaphengst, I bet he wasn't monogamous.
Re: Leining to Fredersdorf: Letter 2
Date: 2023-04-16 03:46 pm (UTC)Are we sure they've even read Kalckreuth? He's not mentioned in MacDonogh or Blanning, I just checked. I honestly think we of salon (by which I mostly mean you) have read reams of sources on Fritz that many of his biographers have not.
(i.e. the coffee maker Wöllner/Völker - has that guy shown up yet in the letters, Mildred)
I'm only 3 lines ahead of you, and so far no, but still almost 3 pages to go in this letter, so we'll see.
ETA: I finished my first passthrough of the first paragraph, and I'm only missing 2 words, and I can already tell it's only mentioning Glasow in passing; Leining's talking about the payment of the order for Champagne wine that he found in Glasow's papers. Nothing exciting yet. We'll see about the second paragraph, but these letters may have run out of interesting Glasow gossip.
Since clearly there was at the very least some embezzling going on, I'm wondering about Kalckreuth's motives here. I mean, he was already Heinrich's boyfriend but not yet his AD (Henckel von Donnersmarck was), and while no Kaphengst, I bet he wasn't monogamous.
Hmm! It's possible!