Historical Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 44

[cahn]

Not 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.)

Comments

Re: Catherine, Poniatowski, Hanbury-Williams

[selenak]

He was renowned for something, that's for sure.

LOL, yes. Speaking of turnarounds, as I said, his original attitude towards Fritz is not covered in this correspondendence, but we do see him from declaring the French the scum of the universe early on (when he wants to make sure Catherine won't befriend the new French Ambassador) to going "wow, the Austrians are so much worse because MT is a monster of ingratitude towards England! The French at least don't owe everything to us and were always open about being our enemy!"

He does give the occasional sensible advice (like when telling Catherine she should show herself with Paul in her arms because being seen as a devoted mother will benefit her with the Russian public (I mean, yes, but also, given Elizaveta is raising Paul, it's not really up to Catherine to be able to do that). And given that his original selling point for the Russia/England treaty was that it was an anti Fritz alliance to protect Hannover and Russian interests on the Prussian border, he's really swallowing personal pride and working hard to sell the new policy of "Fritz: Actually Best Ally Ever!" as best he can. (With the caveat that he's selling it to CAtherine whose husband thinks so anyway, whereas the most important person he needs to sell it to is Elizaveta, and no there he completely fails.) But still, as I said when reading the two books on him: he should never have become a diplomat, and how he got a couple of really important assignments is a mystery to me. Still the record holder for only envoy managing to personally piss off Brühl, Fritz and MT, the later two in record time.

(Maybe Rohan would have managed it as well if the French had sent him to Prussia after pissing off MT? But we'll never know.)

Viserys has zero charisma and doesn't manage anything like the 45 though? But I can see the post James II Stuart situation inspiring the Targaeryns in general now, when I couldn't before. Anyway, interesting to know the French were still considering a backed Stuart invasion this late in the century. (Is George Keith still the Prussian envoy in Versailles at this point?)

9 December 1757, per Wikipedia.

Ah, okay. So basically she must have been sired when H-W is writing "don't be alone with him and don't let him get caught visiting you!!!!"

Heee. Didn't Catherine kick Brockdorff out when she acceded? Or am I misremembering?

I have no idea, but I'm assuming she did, because why would she keep him around in Russia after Peter's demise? To possibly stage a counter coup in favour of Paul with himself as Regent? I also seem to recall that Lehndorff when reporting on the Holstein lady who claimed to have been Peter's mistress and nobly declining his marriage proposal because Catherine says that Catherine kicked out all the Holstein relations, though she did let the lady keep the stuff Peter had gifted her with, including land, in gratitude for the lady not having encouraged Peter's divorce intentions. Again, according to Lehndorff, who is reporting East Prussia gossip on the occasion of the lady's demise.

Yeah. Suhm also died with his image of Fritz intact, as you pointed out.

Now, here's a thought: Suhm vs H-W as envoys, compare and contrast. On the one hand, the both befriended Fritz/Catherine instead of FW/Elizaveta, i.e. the future instead of the present, which is a gamble that can pay off but also a risk and can mean problems in your job for the prsent. Otoh, as we've seen Suhm didn't let his Fritz love stop him from representing Saxon interests in Russia to Brühl's great satisfaction even if this included anti Prussian policies, whereas H-W (temporarilly) suceeded in exactly one diplomatic coup to the satisfaction of his bosses, the Russia/England treaty, which then became dead on arrival because of circumstances, and botched all over assignments.

Also I think Suhm would not have infected his wife with syphilis.

Re: Catherine, Poniatowski, Hanbury-Williams

[mildred_of_midgard]

But still, as I said when reading the two books on him: he should never have become a diplomat, and how he got a couple of really important assignments is a mystery to me.

The Count de Broglie has an entertaining opinion on that too!

Sir Charles Hanbury Williams appears to have been one of those dissipated diplomatists who are not unfrequently met with in the English legations; whither they are banished by British scruples, which, holding them unworthy to fulfil the serious duties of parliamentary life, consider them fit for the looser ways of the Continent.

In other words, if you have an STD, you get to piss of Fritz and MT??

Anyway, this book is suuuuper entertaining, both the content (Louis XV is telling his diplomats to do the opposite of what the minister of foreign affairs is telling them to do!) and the author's commentary, and I'm going to have to do a write-up on the hilarity so far. :D

Viserys has zero charisma and doesn't manage anything like the 45 though?

Indeed, but specifically the post-45 part, where he's wandering around deluded about his prospects and about how much people back "home" are really invested in getting his family back, and the foreign powers he meets are like, "Look, it's not necessarily that I don't want to invade your country, it's that...nothing about meeting you is inspiring confidence that you would be a great partner in this endeavor." Wikipedia tells me that Charles was reportedly too drunk to talk coherently in the 1771 meeting, so further discussions were canceled. (Not that Viserys was an alcoholic, but BPC's charisma levels dropped way off after 1746.)

(Is George Keith still the Prussian envoy in Versailles at this point?)

No, in 1759, France and Prussia are at war, so no diplomatic representation, and in 1771, Wikipedia tells me the envoy is Wilhelm Bernhard von der Goltz. George Keith's years as envoy were apparently 1751-1754.

Ah, German Wikipedia tells me this Goltz is the same Goltz who was Fritz's ambassador to Peter III. I knew I recognized that name!

Also I think Suhm would not have infected his wife with syphilis.

I mean, it's clear which envoy *I* prefer. :D