![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnBackground: The kids' school has a topic for "Unit" every trimester that a lot of their work (reading, writing, some math) revolves around. These topics range from time/geographic periods ('Colonial America') to geography ('Asia') to science ('Space') to social science ('Business and Economics'). (I have some issues with this way of doing things, but that's a whole separate post.) Anyway, for Reasons, they have had to come up with a new topic this year, and E's 7/8 class is doing "World Fairs" as their new topic.
Me: I know E's teacher is all about World Fairs and I know she is great and will do a good job. But I feel like if we had a different teacher who wasn't so into World Fairs, they wouldn't do such a good job and another topic would be better.
Me: Like... the Enlightenment!
D: Heh, you could teach that! But you'd have to restrain yourself from making everything about Frederick the Great.
Me: But that's the thing! Everyone does relate to each other in this time period! Voltaire -- and his partner Émilie du Châtelet, who was heavily involved in the discourse of conservation of energy and momentum -- well, I've told you Voltaire had a thing with Fritz -- and then there's Empress Maria Theresa, who went to war with him a few times -- and Catherine the Great --
D, meditatively: You know --
Me: *am innocently not warned even though this is the same tone of voice that is often followed by, say, a bad pun*
D: -- it's impressive how everyone from this 'the Great' family is so famous!
Me: *splutters*
D, thoughtfully: But of course there's probably selection bias, as the ones who aren't famous don't get mentioned. You never see 'Bob the Great' in the history books...
Me: *splutters more*
Me: I know E's teacher is all about World Fairs and I know she is great and will do a good job. But I feel like if we had a different teacher who wasn't so into World Fairs, they wouldn't do such a good job and another topic would be better.
Me: Like... the Enlightenment!
D: Heh, you could teach that! But you'd have to restrain yourself from making everything about Frederick the Great.
Me: But that's the thing! Everyone does relate to each other in this time period! Voltaire -- and his partner Émilie du Châtelet, who was heavily involved in the discourse of conservation of energy and momentum -- well, I've told you Voltaire had a thing with Fritz -- and then there's Empress Maria Theresa, who went to war with him a few times -- and Catherine the Great --
D, meditatively: You know --
Me: *am innocently not warned even though this is the same tone of voice that is often followed by, say, a bad pun*
D: -- it's impressive how everyone from this 'the Great' family is so famous!
Me: *splutters*
D, thoughtfully: But of course there's probably selection bias, as the ones who aren't famous don't get mentioned. You never see 'Bob the Great' in the history books...
Me: *splutters more*
Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-01 11:12 am (UTC)Charles Etienne Jordan, as a reminder to
His handwriting is reasonably good, not as good as Løvenørn's at its best, but orders of magnitude better than Maupertuis's! This represents my first pass at it, without an attempt to decipher anything I couldn't get on the first go.
This morning I saw Capitane de Blumenthal: curious to know news of the fugitive. I asked about him, he assured me that he was not in correspondence with him; that he had received letters dated [something], to which he had not responded. I'm supposed to have dinner at his house this evening, and see his wife for the first time. I am impatient, Sir, to [several legible words that neither Google nor Mildred can figure out how to interpret]. I play or rather, I try to play chess, I read, I drink, I eat, I [something]; and I do all this, to deceive my poor mind, which often gets bored. In Berlin, I do the same thing if you want, but all that makes it more economical [Mildred: costs more money?]; and I end my day better than I did here. The King is coming back today for dinner after the little trip to Rhinsberg. My respects to Madame de Cnyphausen; I am impatient to learn news of his health, and that of your kind wife, Monsieur your son, does he still cry in the same tone, and does he continue to speak? I recommend that the frail Hedewig carefully collect the first words he utters. I present my very humble duties to these ladies. The Latin country will please receive my assurances of friendship. I have the honor to be, Monsieur and very respectable friend, with all the dedication possible,
Your most humble and obedient servant
Jordan
My duties to M. de Kraut.
February 22 1744
Potsdam
So! Jordan appears to be an actual friend of the family. This letter is much more personal than the Maupertuis letters, and the Algarotti condolence letter reads like a a letter of obligation. (I've written condolence letters with similar strings of cliches, just modern-day cliches instead of Rokoko cliches.) Jordan is like, "Collect your kid's first words!"
Note that this is Carl Ernst, born November 1743; Friedrich Ludwig will not be born until August 1745. Given that Carl Ernst is less than 3 months old, I assume "continue to speak" means continue to babble 'Ma! Ma!' and the like.
Interesting that Hedewig is frail; I haven't been able to find any other meaning for "frêle". She will get married and live until 1804, so it can't be too serious. Also worth noting that Peter and Ariane lived with Ariane's mother until her death, so presumably all the unmarried Knyphausen siblings, or at least the girls, are living with them. Unsurprisingly, Auntie Hedwig has been roped into nanny duties!
Not sure about the Latin country; I *think* I've deciphered that right. Mostly the handwriting is clear enough if I've got context to back my readings up; if a reading comes along making no sense, I start second-guessing whether I deciphered it correctly. It does look like "le pays Latin", though.
Finally, not sure who M. de Kraut is.
Unrelated: Løvenørn has pretty good Kurrent, too! Enough for me to sight-read to determine when a letter isn't relevant to our interests, and enough that when something interesting comes along, I can get at least the gist in one pass (so far). I'm glad most of his stuff is in French, though, it's definitely going a lot faster than otherwise. (Why, Germans, why??)
Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-01 05:46 pm (UTC)Kraut: don't know about Monsieur, but Lehndorff I think mentions "little Kraut" (female) a few comes at being a loose woman and hot stuff.
Le pays Latin: possibly he means the scholarly friends/the Academicans?
Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-02 02:16 pm (UTC)Lehndorff: I said he was "liebenswürdig"! [Presumably "aimable" in the original.] I know whereof I speak!
I think Des Champs was either jealous or thought he was the only decent guy of Fritz' friends at Rheinsberg or both?)
Both!
He also makes friends with Jordan, who, however, will reveal himself as deeply treacherous in the future, and as scum just as many another member of Fritz' circle and household.
Kraut: don't know about Monsieur, but Lehndorff I think mentions "little Kraut" (female) a few comes at being a loose woman and hot stuff.
Interesting. I hesitated before I put "Monsieur", because it's "M" followed by a flourish, but after staring at it I decided it probably wasn't Mme or Mlle, so I went with M or Mr.
Le pays Latin: possibly he means the scholarly friends/the Academicans?
That was my only guess, so if it's yours too, it might be that. Poor Peter not knowing Latin, though.
It's also worth mentioning that the Academy of Sciences has (finally) recently been reconstituted by Fritz, in January, and Peter has just become an honorary member, on February 16. So the Academicians might be very much on everyone's minds.
Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-03 09:12 am (UTC)(Even years later, it keeps baffling me that the editor in her lengthy English preface to the memoirs takes everything Des Champs claims as the truth without questioning it once, no matter how contradictory the claims are...)
Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-03 09:51 am (UTC)Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-05 09:47 am (UTC)Munching some more over how partisan editors are (or not): Schmidt-Lötzen in his original preface gives Lehndorff much credit for being fair about Fritz and his greatness despite feeling himself ill treated/neglected by same and despite being Team Heinrich in every sense, and conversely doesn't doubt Lehndorff's reports on such stuff as the Marwitz triangle or Fritz making that "Madame has gained weight" remark to EC upon seeing her again. He cautions the reader that everyone is more emo in the Rokoko age and also that the diaries reveal sex scandals among the nobility didn't just show up in manly chaste Prussia when FW2 took over from Fritz but were there in the Fritz times a plenty, and when he does think Lehndorff is wrong about something, he footnotes this - as when Lehndorff years later hears the story that the Abbé des Prades was totally innocent and Fritz just fired him and locked him up as a traitor because AW had liked him - but these are not "Lehndorff is lying here" but "that story Lehndorff is buying into is clearly rubbish" footnotes. So I would say he's an editor who has come to trust his author (in the sense of said author writing what he himself believes) but also took the trouble to do his research so he can countercheck and tell the readers when something just isn't factually true.
Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-07 09:29 pm (UTC)Re: Jordan letter: February 22, 1744
Date: 2024-01-07 09:58 pm (UTC)