![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnUnfortunately, there was then at Berlin a King who pursued one policy only, who deceived his enemies, but not his servants, and who lied without scruple, but never without necessity.
(from The King's Secret - by Duke de Broglie, grand-nephew of the subject of the book, Comte de Broglie, and grandfather of the physicist) )
(from The King's Secret - by Duke de Broglie, grand-nephew of the subject of the book, Comte de Broglie, and grandfather of the physicist) )
Re: The King's Secret: fighting Fritz
Date: 2023-08-06 01:11 am (UTC)[Poniatowski] was often vilified as a tool of the Russians. However, his position was impossibly difficult, and he has more recently been given credit for his efforts on behalf of his country.
Polish Partitions
Date: 2023-08-06 04:02 pm (UTC)In other news from flipping through books, I am *attempting* to read the 18th century essays from The Polish-Lithuanian Monarchy in European Context, but the performance of the Perlego interface has degenerated back to where it was a year ago, after having improved slightly, and it's basically unusable, so I've ordered a physical copy. However, I managed to make it far enough to discover this passage:
In earlier historiography it is often repeated that [August the Strong] proposed the partition of the Commonwealth and the creation of a Wettin legacy from a part of it. The latest archival research does not confirm this but shows instead that such proposals were continually put forward by the Prussian court. Prussian diplomacy was riddled with ruses presenting its plans as propositions from Augustus II.
You may remember that I myself have repeated this claim in salon (both versions, actually, that Prussia proposed it and that August the Strong proposed it). You may *also* remember that Fritz proposed a partition in 1769 saying he got the idea from Count Lynar, and that at least one scholar says there is no record of this in Lynar's papers.
I also, in yet another book that turned out to be amazingly informative--Russia and the Outbreak of the Seven Years' War--read that Fritz, circa 1753-1755, was extremely interested in an alliance with GB, but refused to act interested because he wanted them to make the first move (as indeed happened).
I am *increasingly* convinced that his whole "No, Heinrich, let us not partition Poland, for the Russians will object" was a ploy to mean "Let us not look like we want to partition Poland, but let us play coy so that we can totally get a piece of Poland without starting a 3-and-a-half-front war." *Not* that he told Heinrich that--I agree with Volz there. But I am seeing a consistent theme here of "trying to get what you want by not acting overly interested," and I think Volz took the exchange at face value.
(Ha, look at me not taking something at face value for once. :P)
Updates for those eagerly awaiting the next installment of our Broglie drama: I am currently taking notes on foreign policy from Russia and the Outbreak of the Seven Years' War and The Russo-Turkish War, as well as reading the Chevalier d'Eon bio up through the parts where it overlaps with the secret diplomacy of Broglie (I have gotten halfway through the Poniatowski bio by doing the same, and have set it down for now), and then I plan to return to Broglie once I have some points of comparison.
My Brühl bio also arrived yesterday, so that will give me some German practice and may distract from Broglie, but I have not forgotten! (Still trying to get my hands on the August III bio by the revisionist historian, but that may have to wait until Royal Patron gets back to UCLA end of next month and can scan the library's copy. We have Royal Patron to thank for the King's Secret, btw.)
Btw, said revisionist historian, who is a Pole who spent a lot of time in the Dresden archives, is the citation for the claim that August II never proposed a partition and that was all Prussian gangsters seeking good PR, so I'm inclined to give the claim some credibility.