![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnNot only are these posts still going, there is now (more) original research going on in them deciphering and translating letters in archives that apparently no one has bothered to look at before?? (Which has now conclusively exonerated Fritz's valet/chamberlain Fredersdorf from the charge that he was dismissed because of financial irregularities and died shortly thereafter "ashamed of his lost honor," as Wikipedia would have it. I'M JUST SAYING.)
Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-27 01:57 pm (UTC)I've been periodically dipping into the book I mentioned a while ago, Monarchy, Myth, and Material Culture in Germany 1750-1950, the one about collecting royal souvenirs. I'm not really here for the scholarly sociological analysis, but I am *totally* here for the anecdotes.
Friedrich Wilhelm IV's response to the relic-gifts was ambivalent at best, and he often rejected these tokens of sympathy and affection. In some cases, the king refused the gifts because they crossed the line of good taste. In 1851, Adolf Zuckwer offered Friedrich Wilhelm IV a "family heirloom": the executioner's sword used to behead Hans Hermann von Katte for trying to help the young Frederick escape his father's court in 1730. To Zuckwer, it was an object of great "historical value" and family pride. To the king, it harbored too many unpleasant associations: not only did the sword mark one of the darkest, most distressing periods in Frederick's life, but the allusion to decapitation - a specter that had haunted Friedrich Wilhelm IV only three years earlier in 1848 – would not have gone unnoticed (at least by the king). And finally, it was surely unpalatable to the king to accept the largess of an executioner's son, reviled as that profession was. In this instance, Friedrich Wilhelm IV did not even attempt to be polite in rejecting the gift.
No quotes on what "did not even attempt to be polite" means, but the author is very good about citations, having ~100 footnotes per chapter, and she's quoting letters from the Prussian state archives here, so I will take her word for it.
So once upon a time, we learned that Fritz had to stop playing the flute in the late 1770s because of tooth loss, and I wondered why he didn't use false teeth, since they had definitely been invented (any American schoolchild knows about George Washington). Well, this anecdote proves that he did at least use false teeth, and tells us more about how he was losing his teeth in the late 1770s:
In Dr. Kuntzmann's case, the problem lay not in his personal background, but in the relics' intimate nature. The son of Frederick's dentist, Kuntzmann possessed two fake teeth that had graced the philosopher-king's mouth. As in other questions of hygiene, Frederick was notorious for his poor dental health; already in 1759, he complained to the Marquis d'Argens that he was missing half his teeth. Kuntzmann's false teeth, however, had filled a gap created not by decay, but by the king's violent passion for music. In 1777, the king had dropped a sheet of music while playing the flute. Bending down quickly to pick it up, Frederick had hit his head against the music stand and knocked out a front tooth. Kuntzmann's father had fashioned a tooth for him at that point, which was itself knocked out two years later in what Kuntzmann tactfully called "a very similar accident." Kuntzmann Sr. crafted a second fake tooth, which was returned to him , however, as it proved defective. Kuntzmann Jr. now sent the two teeth, in a jar, to Friedrich Wilhelm IV.
I didn't realize he'd had the ironic fate of not being able to play the flute in part because he had lost teeth while playing the flute! (I wouldn't be surprised if they were already loose at that point and that contributed to the accident.) Related, I also vaguely recall a riding accident in the 1740s or 1750s, where (I think) Wilhelmine advised AW to show some concern, it would make Fritz feel better.
This next part made me laugh:
In the late eighteenth century, J. F. Krieger, director of a royal demesne in Halberstadt, began collecting all images of Frederick the Great that passed his way, from frontispieces of monographs and engravings in hymn books to advertisements on tobacco wrappers and decks of playing cards, until his collection numbered in the thousands of images.
Mildred: Seems normal.
In the later nineteenth century, Krieger's passion would come to seem natural, in no way out of the ordinary; in the late eighteenth century, Krieger's forty year pursuit of "every picture with Frederick's visage, whether masterpiece or grimace (Fratze)," was still unusual enough that he had to excuse his hobby by styling it as an act of piety.
Mildred: Hahaha, well, THAT'S gonna change! :D
For example:
...two relics that Ledebur had formerly described as the alpha and omega of his collection: the box containing Frederick's umbilical cord and the cloth that wiped the sweat of death off his brow. In his "Wanderung" of 1833, Ledebur had described these "gems" as prompting a “moving empathy" in the viewer. Later, they would again elicit rapturous emotions from visitors to the Hohenzollern Museum.
In contrast, poor Heinrich gets short shrift:
In some cases, the objects were not even given the veneer of art or heirloom by the royal sellers. In 1804, Prince Heinrich's entire estate (furniture, bed sheets, and all) was auctioned off unceremoniously to the highest bidder, with the objects' prices set according to their practical value, not their symbolic import as having belonged to Frederick the Great's brother.
If I come across more fun anecdotes in my occasional dipping in, I'll pass them on!
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-28 08:22 am (UTC)the box containing Frederick's umbilical cord and the cloth that wiped the sweat of death off his brow.
...okay, Fritz-as-Jesus is something I haven't seen even from 19th century fans. Seriously, this is straight of a medieval relics playbook, complete with the fact these are bound to be forgeries, because come on, why should anyone keep the umbilical cord when Fritz was born? (Especially since the two male kids born before him both died as babies, and there was no guarantee this would not happen again.)
Heinrich's possessions being all auctioned off to the highest bidder I knew about, because that actually turned out to be a great benefit for posterity - there was a very detailed list including each item, how it looked like and where it had been placed in Rheinsberg, so when Rheinsberg got finally restored after having served as a sanatorium in the GDR, that was a primary source for the restauration. (Which is why with the exception of two rooms - Fritz' study and the big room with the "rising of the sun/son" painting - Rheinsberg looks like it did in Heinrich's time today.)
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-28 03:07 pm (UTC)I believe it!
why should anyone keep the umbilical cord when Fritz was born? (Especially since the two male kids born before him both died as babies, and there was no guarantee this would not happen again.)
Well, if the internet is to be trusted, that's exactly why they would have kept it. A quick google gets me the museum in Copenhagen having on display 8 silver boxes with the umbilical cords of the children of Frederik III (this is mid 17th century, about 50 years earlier than Fritz), and a comment that is echoed in other sites and books that popular belief of the time told parents to hang on to the umbilical cord as a protection against illness and death.
That said, I see no reason to believe they would have kept it past adulthood, and if that were common, I'd expect to get *more* hits for umbilical cords in museums. So this one may well be a fake.
(If this story is true, it's possible the majority of umbilical cords ended up getting used medicinally in recipes like the one I found cited from one 17th century source: powder the dried umbilical cord in wine and drink it. So maybe by sheer chance Fritz's survived like those of the 8 children of Frederik III, because they never ended up using it? But more likely, once Fritz relics became collectors' items, suddenly a dried umbilical cord turned up purporting to be his.)
Heinrich's possessions being all auctioned off to the highest bidder I knew about, because that actually turned out to be a great benefit for posterity - there was a very detailed list including each item
That's excellent for posterity, but what I'm saying is the highest bidder could have meant "the highest bidder who is interested in owning something that belonged to Heinrich" and not just "the highest bidder who wants an inkstand." But apparently there was not enough interest in Heinrich, which is why I say again: poor Heinrich.
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-29 05:22 am (UTC)This abruptly reminded me that when my second child was born, the doula I had for that birth asked me if I wanted the placenta saved so I could eat it.
Me: ????
Apparently this -- well, placenta, but I assume that includes the umbilical cord? -- is a thing people still sometimes do! Or at least did in 2015. (I did not.)
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-30 01:06 am (UTC)I wouldn't be surprised if enough pregnant mothers were historically so malnourished that this was actually a good idea. There has to be some iron or something in there, and there were probably times of year, with seasonal eating, that they might have been short on iron (or had blood loss from the childbirth, etc.)
I am less convinced about the virtues of umbilical cords in wine. ;)
well, placenta, but I assume that includes the umbilical cord?
I'm not sure. I suspect historically it was "mother eats the placenta; umbilical cord is dried and saved in case baby gets sick," but since there's probably less reliance on umbilical cords as medicine in 2015 even among placenta-eaters (lol, the things I write in salon), maybe it gets eaten too now, idk!
P.S. Apparently in the 17th century, midwives had to swear not to hang on to the umbilical cord or placenta, as they could be used in witchcraft. (Remember also the unbaptized babies' souls, which could also be summoned by witches.)
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-29 05:18 am (UTC)ahahaha, so it is, and I wouldn't ever have thought of that!
Heinrich's possessions being all auctioned off to the highest bidder I knew about, because that actually turned out to be a great benefit for posterity - there was a very detailed list including each item, how it looked like and where it had been placed in Rheinsberg, so when Rheinsberg got finally restored after having served as a sanatorium in the GDR, that was a primary source for the restauration. (Which is why with the exception of two rooms - Fritz' study and the big room with the "rising of the sun/son" painting - Rheinsberg looks like it did in Heinrich's time today.)
That's really cool actually. Sorry Heinrich, kind of sucks for you, but at least you did a favor for posterity!
Re: Royal souvenirs
Date: 2023-06-30 01:00 am (UTC)Okay, but what I'm saying is, you can have both! Fritz's rooms were inventoried after he died, I've seen it in the archive catalog, *and* his relics were auctioned on the basis of "chair that great man died in!" not "chair that doesn't have an owner anymore, does anyone want a chair?" which is what apparently happened to Heinrich.
Giloi tells me the chair Fritz died in, which several of us in salon have seen on display (reupholstered) in Sanssouci, was given away by Amalie after his death, and passed through several hands before eventually making its way back to a museum display. I had not realized that! (I hope the provenance has been traced and the one I saw was the real one.)