Historical Characters, Including Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 49

[cahn]

Celebrating 5 years very soon?! :D

Comments

Random 1730 and 1740 findings

[mildred_of_midgard]

Still tracking down citations, I turned up the 18th century Lisbon newspaper Gazeta de Lisboa, which has been wholly digitized online! This was useful, because you may remember I was making the case that Peter decided to stay in Portugal and wait anxiously for FW to die rather than leave for the East Indies. That means I have to have a good idea of how long the delay was for news from Berlin to Lisbon. (About 6 weeks, it turns out.)

While I was browsing the 1740 newspaper, I also saw FW's death notice. I think it's the earliest source I've seen for Fritz referred to with a given name of "Karl" (Carlos Federico). Previously, that record was held by Samuel Johnson's "Memoirs of Charles Frederick" (written 1756, published (or republished?) 1786--both dates for obvious reasons).

I do wonder where the idea that he was named "Karl/Charles/Carlos" came from. I think selenak once found a more reliable source stating that his sole given name was Friedrich?

In other news, the fire that burned down the entire town of Rheinsberg (but not the palace) shortly before FW's death also made it to Lisbon, the only Berlin news other than FW's death for the first half of 1740.

It also says he left his best horse to the Alte Dessauer on his deathbed, saying, "My dear friend, this is the last present I will ever make you." I knew I'd read he left him his hunting dogs in January (knowing Fritz was never going to use them for their intended purpose), but I don't remember reading about the deathbed horse.

But it may not be true, because the same death notice goes on to report that immediately after FW's death, the Alte Dessauer received an order to leave Berlin within 24 hours, and Prussia as quickly as possible.

Which, no. Fritz wasn't a fan personally, as we know, and he didn't want anyone to think the Alte Dessauer was pulling the strings behind the throne, but he continued to make use of him in the army (although not as much as the AD wanted).

Btw, having another glance at Johnson's memoirs reminds me of a few things I had forgotten or not properly appreciated:

Johnson has FW breeding tall women to tall men.

The 1786 editor's sources are obvious: the details on Fritz's imprisonment conditions go back to Guy-Dickens, presumably indirectly, but that's obviously the account that was current in England.

Likewise, the 1786 editor has been reading Voltaire:

The king at first imagined his daughter the Princess Wilhelmina had been privy to the whole affair; and, as he was remarkable for dispatch in the executive part of justice, he proceeded to kick her out of a large window which reached from the floor to the cieling [sic]. The queen, however, with great difficulty saved her from the fall, but the princess received a hurt in the left breast, which is said never to have left her.

The 1786 editor has Peter eluding his captors by only a few minutes (I think Nicolai's source does too?) and escaping directly from Holland to Portugal. Like I've said, Peter's story is subject to simplification and dramatization.

1786 editor not only has FW making Fritz watch Doris Ritter get whipped, he has FW present with Fritz at Doris's whipping *and* Katte's execution! I remember a fanfic on AO3 that had FW present at Katte's execution, but not that this version was already making the rounds in the 18th century. A natural dramatization, I suppose.

Separately but on a related note, I can't find a reliable source for FW dragging Fritz by his hair at Zeithain. Here's what I've found:

- Seckendorff writing to Eugene in Decemer 1729, saying FW just dragged Fritz by his hair.
- Rochow during his 1730 interrogation saying that FW had dragged Fritz by his hair the previous winter.
- The 1731 Grumbkow protocol in which FW says he treated Fritz in the harshest and rudest manner at the Saxon camp (Zeithain) in 1730.
- Fritz telling Mitchell that FW dragged him by his hair, threw him in the dirt, and made him appear at the parade in that state, which made him determined to escape.

If this happened in December, and in January 1730, FW got that anonymous letter tipping him off to Fritz's escape plans, which inspired him to send Peter to Wesel, I could well understand Fritz seeing that episode as the one that made him determined to escape.

Is there a source I'm missing that explicitly states that FW dragged Fritz by his hair at Zeithain? I'm willing to believe he did it more than once! After all, he was "remarkable for dispatch in the executive part of justice."

Re: Random 1730 and 1740 findings

[selenak]

I think [personal profile] selenak once found a more reliable source stating that his sole given name was Friedrich?

I think it may have been in the letters between F1 and Sophie of Hannover when the kid was born. Again, would have to check, do not have the time right now.

LOL about the deathbed horse. Considering FW's state in the last years of his life, I doubt he got much riding done, whereas Fritz did the avarage Prussian nobleman thing of daily riding, so in that case, if he gave the horse to his buddy, it couldn't have been because Fritz had no use for it.


Separately but on a related note, I can't find a reliable source for FW dragging Fritz by his hair at Zeithain. Here's what I've found

Interesting. I do remember biographies claiming he did this, but direct source quotations linking the event to Zeithain in particular, hm, not sure. One possibility where it might have come up: the interrogation protocols of both Katte and Fritz in 1730? At any event Katte talks a lot about Zeithain there, so might have included that.

Wilhelmine's memoirs

[mildred_of_midgard]

Next "What is the source for this?" question from the person writing a Peter Keith biography: what is the source for Wilhelmine's memoirs being believed to be fake until they were shown to be in her handwriting? Am I remembering correctly that this happened?

Re: Wilhelmine's memoirs

[selenak]

I think it's in Uwe Oster's Wilhelmine biography, but it's been years, so don't rely on it without checking.

Hating on FW

[mildred_of_midgard]

These are excerpts from two envoy reports from Chesterfield, courtesy of the British Archives.

To Lord Harrington,
September 5, 1730, N.S.

I received on Friday night last the honour of your Lordship's very secret letter of the 18th OS with the inclosed letters from Mr. Guydickens, which I communicated the next day to the Pensionary and Greffier, who had both been informed before by Monsieur Ginckell of all that had happened between the king of Prussia and the Prince Royal, and I asked them according to his Majesty's orders, whether they thought any thing could be done to mitigate the Prince's misfortunes? They said they thought it a very delicate matter, and that considering that king's suspicious and cruel temper, any interposition of England & Holland might exasperate him rather more against the Prince, and make him suspect a secret concert between them; but that however if I approved of it, Mons. de Ginckell should have orders to represent to the King of Prussia with how much concern the Republick had heard of the unfortunate difference that had arisen between his Majesty and the Prince Royal; and of His Royal Highness's confinement at Custrin, to recommend mildness and moderation to His Majesty in this affair, and to lay before him the ill consequences of a contrary conduct, together with a great deal about the Protestant Religion, and concluding with an offer of their good offices to accommodate this unhappy difference. I told them I thought such an application could do no harm, tho considering the Person to whom it was made, I did not expect much good from it. Orders are accordingly sent this day to Monsieur Ginckell to that effect.

Every body here is extreamly incensed against the King of Prussia, & wishes well to the P. Royal, but at at the same time they are all so much afraid of so powerfull & dangerous a neighbour, that they will be as cautious of offending him, as they are cordiall in detesting him.

Chesterfield

Notes:

N.S.: "New Style", the Gregorian calendar in use on most of the Continent (but not Russia).

O.S.: "Old Style", the Julian calendar in use in Great Britain. It lagged behind New Style by 12 days.

Pensionary and Greffier: titles held by ministers in the Netherlands.

Ginckel: The Dutch envoy to Prussia.

The Republick: The Netherlands.

The one thing that was new to me in here is I didn't know they tried talking religion to FW! Nice try, but the Brandenburg pastors tried it with Gundling's funeral and they tried it with Wilhelmine's marriage. No dice.

To George Tilson,
October 10, 1730, N.S.

Monsieur Masch has made a visit to General Keppell no doubt with a design to let him know his orders about the Prince Royal's affair. The General told him that it was reported that a manifesto was to be published and he named in it as having concerted the Prince's escape with Sr. Chas. Hotham, and that complaints were to be made to the States General upon this account. Mr. Masch said to him that he did not know any thing about such maniesto, nor had he orders to make complaints to the States against him, but that his orders were to declare in case he was spoke to about the Prince Royal, that it had been necessary to confine him closely on account of his pernicious designs and intention of making his escape, and that England & Holland had favoured his schme, especially he (General Keppell) & Sr. Chas. Hotham, and to declare also that his Prussian Majesty had broke off all transactions with England about either single or double matches, & what had passt about them was void. The General justify'd himself by saying htat it was false that he concerted the said escape, and that if Mr. Keith was come to him, he had no notice of his errand, & received him publickly and with regard to his being a Prussian officer, as he had done Col. Du Moulin, shewing them all manner of civilitys on account of his Prussian Majesty, who had always honored him with his friendship, without concerning and troubling himself about the reasons of their coming or going.

Holzendorf

Notes:

Masch: The new Prussian envoy to the Netherlands after Meinerzhagen died of a stroke right after learning of Peter's escape. Pointedly makes visits to all the envoys except Chesterfield, to the point where Chesterfield has to tell him, "Don't bother coming over unless it's to make reparations, you have offended me and my master with your disregard for etiquette."

General Keppel: Former Dutch envoy to Prussia; had lunch with Peter Keith in The Hague and probably gave him money and all kinds of support in escaping, and then denied it.

States General: The governing body of the Netherlands.

Col. Du Moulin: Prussian officer sent to hunt down Peter and bring him back.

Holzendorf: Chesterfield's secretary, who was at home when the "servants" took Peter in and hid him from the Prussian, and who later claimed he had no authority over the servants and couldn't help Du Moulin and Meinerzhagen in their quest.

In other words, "We totally didn't help Peter escape, we were just nice to him because of our deep respect for you, FW, and anyone in your army!"

Re: Hating on FW

[selenak]

The one thing that was new to me in here is I didn't know they tried talking religion to FW! Nice try, but the Brandenburg pastors tried it with Gundling's funeral and they tried it with Wilhelmine's marriage. No dice.

This is why in the AU where William of Orange adopts 12 years old FW, it's an open race as to whether FW once he's King of England first offends to aristocracy by lecturing them on how to live an austere manly life or the Anglican clergy by telling them they've been doing Protestantism all wrong, and hey, since he's now head of their Church, he'll tell the Archbishop of Canterbury exactly how to run things. The excuse for the Peter aiding and abetting is hilarious.

James Keith and Eva Merthen

[mildred_of_midgard]

Selena was wondering a while back why James and Eva never married. Well, I still don't have a definitive answer, but Varnhagen von Ense says he would have married her, but for the class differences.

I also have been curious about their children's names, since liriaen thinks she may be descended from James, but I've never been able to find them. However, through use of Google Translate, I managed to translate a Finnish biographical dictionary entry, and it at least clears up why I can't find them, and gives a possible clue:

Eva Merthen probably married Johan David von Reichenbach, nine years her junior, in Berlin in 1759 or 1760, and lived happily with him in Stralsund in Swedish Pomerania, where von Reichenbach was a castle bailiff and land councilor. The couple had a beautiful home with a considerable collection of paintings. Von Reichenbach died in 1807, four years before her husband.

All sources about Eva Merthen, even those published while she was still alive, say that she had children with Keith, but these have not been identified. There is no indication that the two sisters who initially followed Eva Merthen cared for the children. It is possible that the heirs of the childless von Reichenbachs, JD von Reichenbach's sister and nephews, were actually Eva Merthen's children.

Since this was exactly what Melusine and G1 did, pass off their daughters as her nieces, that sounds very plausible to me!

Other items of note about Eva from this entry:

Eva Merthen was born in Turku in 1723 to a merchant Carl Merthen, one of eight children. Her grandfather and her father were also merchants in Turku, where the latter had apparently come from Lübeck. This Anders Merthen is mentioned as a burgher of Turku in 1624. His son, from his marriage to Katarina Gerdner, was Anders Merthen, who served as a university librarian. The merchant family's connections to the academic world are demonstrated by Carl Merthen's marriage to Helena Kristina, daughter of law professor Matthias Svederus.

Carl Merthen was the city's leader during the Russian occupation of 1742-1743 and was appointed assessor of the Russian imperial court. He died during the occupation.

During the celebrations during the Russian occupation, Eva Merthen attracted attention with her beauty and pleasantness, which led to a love affair with the then 47-year-old commander-in-chief, General James (Jakob) Keith. Already in Turku, Eva Merthen seems to have become his unregistered wife, a position in which she accompanied Keith for the rest of his life. Keith's occupation administration was based on the general instructions of Empress Elisabeth, and its gentleness and flexibility were also credited to the Merthens, father and daughter.

Eva Merthen was, according to contemporary accounts, dark and handsome; she had particularly beautiful eyes. The charming and cultured Eva Merthen spoke French well and read Tacitus, which was apparently the result of her cultured home, and she continued study while living with Keith. In addition, Keith and Eva Merthen shared a Scottish background, as the aforementioned Katarina Gerdner was of Scottish descent.

Keith went over to Sweden in 1743 with the Russian troops and remained for some time as ambassador in Stockholm, but in 1746 he resigned from Russian service, transferred the following year to Prussia and became commander of Berlin and field marshal. He fell at the Battle of Hochkirchen against the Austrians in 1758. James Keith and Eva Merthen lived in Potsdam near Sanssouci, and their union lacked only the "external forms of marriage". George Keith, head of the clan and hereditary Earl Marshal of Scotland, was also in Prussian service.

According to biographers, the brothers' high social status prevented Keith and Eva Merthen from publicly legalizing their relationship, but after Keith's death, Eva Merthen largely won the inheritance process against George Keith in accordance with the deceased's will.

Which we know all about because of my decipherment efforts!

And some info re biographies and historical fiction:

Eva Merthen was already mentioned in CF Paul's Keith biography, published in German in 1759 and in Swedish in 1761, and based on it in the Turku magazine Mnemosyne in 1822. In 1844, KA Varnhagen von Ense's more extensive biography of James Keith was published, and it inspired Zachris Topelius to write his novel Hertiginnan af Finland, romantisierad berättelse, jemte en historisk skildring af Finska Kriget aråen 1741 - 1743, which was first published as a sequel in Helsingfors Tidningar and then as a book in the summer of 1850. This work by Topelius is the first historical novel to achieve popularity in Finland and to have an impact by its example, and the oldest of Topelius' historical novels.

The historical continuation novel was a literary genre that had recently become extremely popular, and Topelius referred to Walter Scott and Alexandre Dumas as his role models in his journal; the former, he said, had written a masterpiece on this subject, the latter a twelve-part novel. But the novel was a dangerous literary genre because of its political nature, which had aroused special concern from the Finnish government, and in the spring of 1850 it was specifically forbidden to publish novels in Finnish. Topelius's novel, which emphasizes the gentleness and humanity of the "petty" Russian conquest and explains how the Finns, in contrast to the Swedes, had learned the value of patience and peaceful cultivation in comparison with conquests, fit well with Topelius's line of loyalty. Topelius revised the work from the newspaper version to the printed novel and then again in later editions. The Duchess of Finland was first published in Finnish in 1874.

Re: James Keith and Eva Merthen

[selenak]

Since this was exactly what Melusine and G1 did, pass off their daughters as her nieces, that sounds very plausible to me!

Same here. Good for Eva to find love again! And Stralsund is a pretty town to live in. BTW, I see Eva was 19 to James' 47 when they met, which is a big age gap but back then not that unusual. Otoh, her finding a younger man after his death was.

Wilhelmine Encke: I managed.
Barbarina: So did I.

Selena: I seem to recall both of these relationships ended in a breakup despite involving nuptials. Unlike Eva's.

So google chooses "unregistered wife" for what I assume is common law wife?

Re: high social status as marriage impediment - hm. Well. I mean, if the Old Dessauer, who was a Prince of Anhalt-Dessau, i.e. from one of the oldest German noble families, could marry his apothocary's daughter, I think high social status alone does not explain it. More likely either George, as clan chief, said no, and James didn't want to push things to a breaking point with his brother, given they were both in exile.

I'm curious where the tidbit about Eva having read Tacitus comes from. That's awfully specific instead of a general "liked the ancients", so maybe a letter or something like that?

Katte lost all countenance

[mildred_of_midgard]

Remember when Stefan Hartmann claimed "In his report from November 5th, 1730, Løvenørn describes that when the death sentence was read to him, Katte had lost all 'contenance' and burst into tears," but we couldn't find this report? Even when I spent $350 ordering scans of Løvenørn's reports from the Danish archive?

And then I suspected the passage might actually be in von Johnn's reports, and was trying to recruit luzula to go photograph all the reports from the relevant time range for me?

In the last week, I even started planning a Europe trip for next year, in which I was going to visit the Copenhagen archives myself, if Luzula didn't have time by then!

Well, look no further: it *is* Johnn and it is digitized! And here is what Johnn wrote:

On the 2nd of this month, all the members of the said Council, who had come here the day before, assembled at the Office of the Auditor General, at the Grand Guard of the New Market, and having summoned Lieutenant Katte, they read before him first the sentence of the Council of War, which he listened to with great sang-froid, but when they then came to read the King's order, stating that his head would be cut off, he lost all composure to the point of shedding tears in abundance; which extremely touched the whole Council.

Cahn, remember that the council of war recommended life (i.e. until FW died) imprisonment, and FW upgraded the sentence.

So now neither Luzula nor I have to go to Copenhagen! More time for other places to visit!

Reading Johnn's reports a little further, I didn't remember or had forgotten that Grandpa Wartensleben wrote *two* letters to FW begging for mercy. To the first one, Johnn said he got the reply that we know about, that Katte deserved an entirely different kind of death (i.e. to be torn apart with red-hot pincers), but out of consideration for his family, FW went with a clean beheading. To the second letter, FW made no reply.

I also hadn't realized that in Berlin, no one was sure why Katte was being taken to Küstrin, though Johnn wrote that nobody could think of any other reason than to make Fritz watch. It would be strange, Johnn wrote, to send him there in order to pardon him.

But on November 8, while Johnn thinks that this young man's head is already off (he is correct), some people are apparently still holding out hope for a pardon from FW at the very moment of execution. They don't get the news until November 8.

Oh, wow, Johnn is saying Seckendorff appears very annoyed at not having been able to obtain mercy from FW for Lieutenant Katte, who was his (Seckendorff's) relative. I didn't know that!

You know what's great about these reports from Johnn? They're in clean enough handwriting, and my French is good enough, that I can sight-read them! Not as quickly as English, obviously, but enough to be able to do some real research. Having them digitized is cool! Thank you, Danes!

Though I can't find anything about Suhm stepping down as envoy, which is annoying. Johnn talks about Polentz's arrival as envoy, and then Lynar's, but nothing about Suhm's departure.

Re: Katte lost all countenance

[luzula]

Very glad to hear that you were not limited by my failure to get to the Copenhagen archives, and that you found the info you needed!

So now neither Luzula nor I have to go to Copenhagen! More time for other places to visit!
Ha ha! More time to spend on doing stuff around my farm, more like.

Re: Katte lost all countenance

[selenak]

On the 2nd of this month, all the members of the said Council, who had come here the day before, assembled at the Office of the Auditor General, at the Grand Guard of the New Market, and having summoned Lieutenant Katte, they read before him first the sentence of the Council of War, which he listened to with great sang-froid, but when they then came to read the King's order, stating that his head would be cut off, he lost all composure to the point of shedding tears in abundance; which extremely touched the whole Council.

Yet another reminder that "boys/men don't cry" didn't really become engrained until the 19th century, even in militaristic cultures like Prussia. It is of course very human to cry when hearing your death sentence, especially after hearing a reprieve right before that. (I mean, prison isn't great, either, but undoubtedly Katte, like FW himself, assumed "for life" would mean for FW's life, not Katte's, and that Fritz would commute the sentence as soon as he got on the throne. So basically he first hears he's going to live, and then he's going to die, which must have been additionally heavy.

I did renember the two letters from Granddad Wartensleben, they come up in Jürgen Loh's account.

I also hadn't realized that in Berlin, no one was sure why Katte was being taken to Küstrin, though Johnn wrote that nobody could think of any other reason than to make Fritz watch. It would be strange, Johnn wrote, to send him there in order to pardon him.

I don't know about "no one", but Stratemann the eternal optimist and Disney-fier of FW certainly was convinced FW would pardon Katte (and interpreted the back and thro of messages between FW and the military tribunal as the tribunal wanting to condemn Katte and FW wanting to pardon him - right until the end and until he got the news of the beheading. I'm not sure how he interpreted the move to Küstrin, but it might have been "to commute Katte's sentence to imprisonment", too.

Anyway, no wonder that Katte told the guy from his regiment when the later wanted to cheer him up and talked about a last minute pardon "no, the tyrant will see blood". He may have doubted it and hoped for mercy right unil hearing his sentence, but not therafter.

Oh, wow, Johnn is saying Seckendorff appears very annoyed at not having been able to obtain mercy from FW for Lieutenant Katte, who was his (Seckendorff's) relative. I didn't know that!

Me neither. I mean, with all the nobility intermarrying for centuries, it doesn't surprise me, but if they are really closely related (as in, within the last two generations before Katte), it would, because you'd think it came up before. Seckendorff, as a reminder, is not Austrian himself though in Austrian/Imperial service at this point, he's Franconian, specifically, from the Ansbach area, and Ansbach is currently ruled by a sideline from the Hohenzollern family (which Fritz' sister Friederike marries into), so I could see some cross connections of Brandenburg and Ansbach nobililty happening.

I don't think it comes up in the correspondence between Eugene and Seckendorff, though? Otherwise I doubt Eugene would have been as tactless as to say "I was sorry for Katte, but now I've read the punctae, I guess he was guilty"?

Re: Suhm's departure - maybe I misremember, but I think it was Stratemann who heard the (wrong) rumour he'd end up in Königsstein because he'd lost his patron? If so, there might be more in Stratemann that I overlooked back when I read his dispastches, as Suhm wasn't my priority back then.

Re: Katte lost all countenance

[mildred_of_midgard]

But on November 8, while Johnn thinks that this young man's head is already off (he is correct), some people are apparently still holding out hope for a pardon from FW at the very moment of execution. They don't get the news until November 8.

That should say they don't get the news (or at least Johnn doesn't report it) until November 12.

Karl Ernst's death

[mildred_of_midgard]

A year ago, I reported Karl's death thusly:

3) I also got a little detail on Carl Ernst's death in 1822: it was quick, in that he was active during the day (maybe visiting friends?) and ate with a good appetite, and died of a stroke at 11 pm. The author of the letter calls it a lucky death. There are a couple words I can't read, but something along the lines of: he normally went to bed at 10 pm, but that day he had stayed up until 10:30 talking with friends, and then [rode home?] and didn't stay talking any later.

So I'm guessing he got home just in time to die and didn't die in the street or at a friend's house? Something like that. There are 9 whole words of which I can't make out much more than "ritt[?] er auf[?] dem XXXX sXXXXd mit[?] dem kXXXXX" without spending a whole lot more time on this than I'm willing to right now.

2025 Mildred has better handwriting decipherment skills than 2024 Mildred, and since I got to the part of the Peter draft where I'm working on his son's death, I came back to this passage. Still hard but now doable. This is what it says:

He had a very fortunate death, by the way, because he stayed up, although he usually went to bed promptly at 10 o'clock, and talked with Madame Telle and M[...] At half past 10, he nodded his head while sitting on the sofa and said nothing more.

So I guess the "fortunate" part is that he didn't die alone: he had friends over and was enjoying himself when the stroke hit, and the stroke was instantaneous. (We talked last time about an instantaneous death being okay in his case, because the need to make a proper confession wasn't imperative.)

Re: Karl Ernst's death

[selenak]

Congratulations to your superior decyphering powers, and yes, your last observation makes much sense.

Fredersdorf letters: translation questions

[mildred_of_midgard]

There are 2 remaining words in the Fredersdorf letters that have resisted transcription. After solving (or at least coming up with an educated guess I'm happy with) a mystery word in the description of Karl Ernst's death yesterday, I realized that the "ni" of "nickte" (nodded) there looked exactly like the first two characters of one of the elusive Fredersdorf words. With that in mind, I'd like to propose the following transcription for our mystery word:

D. H. Brautigam Gentze macht sein großtes Compliment undt er ist bereit dero Befehle nach zu leben woran ich ihn gewiß nicht stören will. er nimbet nichts vor der Compagnie.

Assuming "et" is a normal 18th century German verbal ending, and "mm" is sometimes written "mb" (it happens!), would "er nimmt nichts vor der Compagnie" make any sense in context?

Re: Fredersdorf letters: translation questions

[selenak]

It would help to be reminded of the preceeding sentences. Maaaaaybe the sense is Gentze not participating much in social life, if that's what "Compagnie" indicates, OR maybe the word is Campagne, i.e. military campaign, and what Gentze doesn't do is putting himself much in the way of danger, since he's recently married and/or a groom?

A duel for science...or insanity??

[mildred_of_midgard]

One of my greatest detective triumphs yet!

As a refresher, Peter's son Karl was recalled from his position as envoy to the court of Turin after fighting a duel and lightly wounding Chevalier Fresia, an officer at court. Karl's uncle Hertzberg wrote, "I have represented the matter to the king in a report from the Ministry in such a fashion that he had to recall him, but that he has not given evidence of greater displeasure than the fault that our young people have of follies and crazy heads."

Trier confirms this by including Fritz's reply: "It's necessary to recall him. These are the follies and the crazy heads that all your young people [have]."

Then Karl got back and wrote to Fritz that honor required him to do what he did, even though it was incompatible with his position as envoy.

Karl also said that he did a complete write-up of the affair in a report he made to the Ministry, but I haven't been able to find it.

If I make it to Berlin next year, I'll visit the archives in person and see if it turns up, but since it's not in the place it should be (Karl's reports to the ministry), I'm betting it was disappeared by Hertzberg as not being to Karl's advantage.

So then I tried finding an Italian version of events, but the Turin government website, with the state archives and library, has been down for months and months, it's very frustrating. I can't even get started on a quest to figure out where it might be.

Tried looking for 18th century newspapers in Turin, no luck.

Then it occurred to me: if I have learned *one* thing from the last 6 years in salon, it is that what is a gold mine? Envoy reports are a gold mine! They may not be accurate, but they contain all the gossip. And surely *some* envoy at Turin wrote down the gossip about this duel!

So, which archive to consult? Not my go-to, the Prussian state archives, already checked there and I can't find it. Plus, while I'd love to have Karl's biased-in-his-favor report, I'd like to have a counterpoint from a different perspective.

Not the French, because the French archive charges 25 euros per page to scan. (I emailed them and they confirmed. How anyone gets research done is a mystery; it's legit cheaper to go to Paris.) Of course, if I make it to Paris next year, this will be high on the list of things I look for! But for now, no.

And Turin is a small enough state that I'm not sure if all the smaller German principalities (like Brunswick or whatever) would have an envoy there. Austria, maybe, but I would need to figure out how their archives work.

But then I remembered that Great Britain would definitely have had an envoy at Turin in this period (which they didn't before War of the Spanish Succession), and I've been placing several orders with the British national archives!

So I tracked down who was British envoy to Turin in 1778, and ordered scans of his reports from January and February.

This morning, I received a batch of scans that included the following two gloriously dramatic accounts.

January 28, 1778

Sir,

I have the honor to acquaint you that the Baron Keith, envoy from the King of Prussia to his Sardinian Majesty has been forbid the court, & is preparing to leave this capital. These steps have been taken in consequence of a very extraordinary event, which has lately taken place & in which this unhappy gentleman has behaved in so very strange a manner, that the disorders he has been guilty of, and the outrages he has committed, admit of no palliation, but such as may be drawn for the supposition that he is, or was at least for the moment, actually deprived of his senses. I shall take the liberty of giving you a short but authentick account of the whole affair.

Mons. Keith was last Friday evening at the assembly of Madame la Marquise d'Aglie, where were present the lady of the house, the Comte de St. Paul, a gentleman of this country, the Chevalier Rinco, one of the equerries of the Princess of Piemont, the Marquis Caluzzo, son to the Sardinian ambassador at the court of Madrid, and the Chevalier Fresia, a captain of the queen's regiment of dragoons, and a younger brother of a very good family of the same name. The company being seated in a circle, the conversation for some time was general, but soon fell upon chemistry, and was more particularly taken up by the Prussian minister & the Chevalier Fresia. The former having advanced some propositions relative to the qualities and properties of fixed air, which the latter did not seem entirely to assent to, a difference of opinion arose between them, but without any apparent warmth or animosity on either side, on the contrary Mons. Keith with seeming politeness told him if he would come any day to his house, he would show him some experiments which would convince him of the reality of what had been advanced. This was accepted by the Chevalier, and the greatest politeness observed on both sides. The arrival of a visitor put an end to the conversation. The gentlemen arose and stood round the fire.

After the space of a few minutes, Mons. Keith took hold of the Chevalier Fresia by the arm, and told him he had something to say to him in the next room. This, tho remarked by the company, did not produce the least apprehension of the extraordinary scene which was soon followed, as it was observed that when they were at the door, the usual compliments were made of who should go out first. When they were in the antichamber, Mr. Keith shut the door, and addressed himself to Mr. Fresia in the most indecent terms and at the same time struck him a violent blow on one side of the head and immediately drew his sword. The Chevalier was staggered with the blow, he endeavoured to recover himself, but suddenly turning round his foot, slipped, & he fell to the ground & could never raise himself sufficiently to put himself in a posture of defence or indeed draw his sword out of the scabbard. The Prussian envoy attacked him with fury, but fortunately, such was his rage and passion, that of above fifty thrusts which he made at him, none took place, except a few slight scratches, which the Chevalier received on the hand with which he parried the strokes, & one in the thigh, which might have been of consequence, had not it luckily struck against a bunch of keys in his pocket which entirely destroyed its effect.

The noise they made soon brought out the other gentlemen, who interfered and put an end to this unequal conflict. The Marquis d'Aglie came out of an adjoining cabinet, and said to him, "Mon Dieu, Monsieur Keith, what are you doing?" He answered, "Monsieur, I beg your pardon for what has just happened in your house, but I could not do otherwise, because this man spoke to me," & having said this he left the house.

[The dialogue is all in French: "Mon Dieu, Monsieur Keith, que faites-vous?" and "Monsieur, je vous demande pardon de ce qui vient de passer dans votre maison, mais je ne pouvois pas faire autrement, car cet homme m'a parlé."]

I will now do myself the honor to communicate to you the steps which this government has since taken. The Comte Rebuf, Major de la Place & acting officer under the governor of this town, was privately sent to him to talk to him about it. The Prussian minister at first spoke of it as a rencontre, which might very soon be settled between him and the Chevalier Fresia, but upon being told that it was not looked upon in that light, & that his character of foreign minister would debar him from adopting any proceedings of that kind, he said "What do you want? It's a delirium, a fit of madness, it's not the first time." ["Que voulez vous? C'est un délire, un accès de folie, ce n'est pas pour la première fois."]

His Sardinian Majesty was immediately informed of this affair, and that very night or the next morning Ct. Perron by order of the King of Sardinia wrote to Mr. Keith to the following purports: that has he had been guilty of an excess, the reasons for which did not yet sufficiently appear, it was thought proper to forbid him to appear at court till further notice, that notwithstanding what had passed, his person should be respected and left at liberty; that if he choose to stay quietly at home, their government would effectually secure him from any personal accidents or insults, but that if he went out, it would in no wise be responsible for what might happen to him; at the same time he was given to understand that if he proceeded to make any further attacks upon the lives or honor of any of the subjects of these dominions, His Sardinian Majesty would be obliged to look upon them in their proper light and act accordingly.

This message was officially communicated to the corps diplomatique at this court, and they were asked, whether it contained anything contrary to their privileges, or whether they had any objections to alledge against it? They unanimously answered in the negative. A regular proces verbal has been made of the whole and sent off by an express to Berlin, before he was dispatched Count Perron sent word to Monsieur Keith that a messenger would soon set out for that place, & that he had orders to take care and deliver any packet which he might want to send upon this occasion. The Prussian Minister thanked him for, but declined the offer, and in a private note which he sent at the same time, intreated him to employ his good offices, that the court of Turin might not demand any satisfaction eclatante of the King his Master. This I understand will be complied with.

Since that he has returned a written answer to the message I have related to the following purports: that has the intimation he had received from the King of Sardinia through the channel of the Secretary of State's office for foreign affairs, had put it out of his power to discharge one of his principal duties as foreign minister, which was to pay his personal court to the sovereign of the country where he resided, his longer stay here was become unnecessary; he therefore gave notice, that unless he should, contrary to his expectations, meet with any impediment, he was preparing for his departure, & should set out as soon as his affairs would permit him; it is not known where he will retire to, or whether he will quit these dominions, or wait somewhere in the neighbourhood, 'till he receives the orders of his Prussian Majesty.

This Sir is the precis of the very extraordinary affair. I have not entered much into particulars, because Ct. Perron has told me the whole account will be sent to the Marquis de Cordon, who will be instructed to communicate it to Lord Weymouth.

Wm. Deane Poyntz

February 18, 1778

Sir,

As a supplement to the letter which I did myself the honor of writing to you a few posts ago about the Prussian minister at this court, I will now take the liberty of informing you that the courier, who was dispatched to Berlin upon that occasion, returned to this place on Sunday last. His Prussian Majesty in his answer expresses his surprise at and utter disapprobation of the very extraordinary behaviour of his minister, and attributes it entirely to the state of insanity, of which it now appears that gentleman had given many proofs in the younger part of his life; that he could not but be much displeased with his family, who had hitherto concealed this circumstance from him, and suffered their relation to undertake a commission, for which they knew he was so improperly qualified. That he would endeavour to atone for the involuntary error into which he had been led by recalling the Baron Keith immediately, but that as he had had such bad success in the choice of his first minister, he had ever sent to this court, he would wait a short time before he replaced him, and would do his utmost to pitch upon a proper person, whose behaviour should make ample amends for the rash and unguarded conduct of his predecessor. His Prussian Majesty acknowledges himself highly sensible of the moderation of the court of Turin, and is particularly pleased with the attention & politeness with which this government treated Monsieur Keith, considered as his minister. This latter left this place about ten days ago,and was met by the Sardinian courier at Verona, who delivered to him his letters of recall.

The Chevalier Fresia had been under arrest ever since the affair happened, but was immediately set at liberty upon the receipt of the answer of his Prussian Majesty.

Wm. Deane Poyntz

Okay, this is *completely* not how our previous accounts had led us to perceive the matter! Instead of Karl saying, "Honor required me to act as I did," he's saying, "Temporary insanity, what are you going to do?" and instead of Fritz going, "Those young hotheads of today," he's going, "The family deceived me! This guy suffers from regular fits of temporary insanity!"

So. Poyntz. He was not an eyewitness, he could as be poorly informed as Dickens, Lovenorn, Johnn, and Stratemann in Berlin in 1730. However, he seems to have two separate data points: one about the duel shortly after it happened, and one about Fritz's reply, and the two accounts seem compatible with each other on the most major point.

Karl: could easily be lying to Fritz to try to keep his job.

Fritz: could also be lying! He could be just passing the buck onto the family in a "Not all Prussians!" strategy to keep the Sardinian king from thinking Prussian envoys are just hotheads like this. On the other hand, Fritz could have acquired new information between when he replied to Hertzberg about the young hotheads and when he replied to the king of Sardinia about Karl's congenital insanity.

Either way, this is VERY DRAMATIC and everything I dreamed of, and it's going into the bio of Peter!

Also, when I was looking at the instructions to Karl's successor as envoy to Turin in the Prussian catalogue, I seem to recall that the instructions dated from 1780, two years later. So I'm not surprised to see Fritz saying he's going to wait a little while and take his time choosing his next envoy. Looks like he took 2 years.

I was looking at them, btw, as part of my quest to find more details on the duel: I was hoping they included instructions along the lines of "And remember to make amends for your idiot predecessor" with hopefully some detail on what the idiot predecessor did.

I was unable to order those instructions, but they're on my list to check out if I make it to an archive in Berlin in person. I doubt they'll have any gossip as sensationalist as this, though!

I'm going to try to see if I can find the even fuller account Poyntz talks about, and of course if I make it to Paris, I'll see what I can do about the French envoy's account.

Meanwhile, enjoy the popcorn, and I'm so stoked that I've got more exciting fodder for the bio!!

ETA: I meant to add, one possible way to reconcile the accounts is that after the two men entered the room together, Chevalier Fresia said something that Karl took offense to (and overreacted to), something he could later point to when writing to Fritz about how honor totally required him to do what he did!

Uncle of ETA: Oh, and one of Karl's uncles did say that Karl was unsuited to diplomacy and pointed to the letter-opening incident that I told you about. But nobody talked about insanity in all the many letters I've read! Which, of course could easily be covered up by the family as long as possible, even when writing amongst themselves. Especially with letters prone to being opened.

Oh, and speaking of Knyphausen family letters, I have a lot more interesting Knyphausen family gossip to share from another batch of letters I got a few weeks ago, but since I'm short on time, I'm thinking of just letting you read about it in the Peter bio. I'm hoping to have a draft ready for you two this summer. I finished the second draft about 10 days ago and just want to polish the prose (and incorporate today's duel findings! and maybe do a bit of Schwerin research) before passing it on to you.

Re: A duel for science...or insanity??

[mildred_of_midgard]

Ran into the comment limit, so addenda here:

I meant to say that the comment title is because I was reading along and got to the part where they were talking about chemistry, and I genuinely thought they were going to fight over scientific theories! A duel for science! Then I got to the next part and realized I didn't know *what* they were dueling (if you can call it that) for.

But if it did happen happen anything like Poyntz describes, it's funny, because I've seen numerous descriptions of Karl as interested in science, including one that said that after he withdrew from society, he spent his last decades living for science and the arts.

Living for science! Assaulting for science!

if he choose to stay quietly at home

Also, at first I thought: this should be easy for him, since he's been staying home by preference since he returned from university in his early 20s!

Then I thought about his near total withdrawal from society, sometimes even refusing to see family and only agreeing to see his paintings and some painters he had over...if there *was* an element of fits of temporary insanity (whether poor anger management or some more neurological disorder), and I'm not saying there was, but maybe he was worried about this happening again?

Counterfactuals...

[(Anonymous)]

aella_irene here, having login issues.

I'm in Berlin, and I find myself wondering...if Fritz and EC had somehow conceived a child during the Rheinsberg years, what happens? Other than trauma.

Re: Counterfactuals...

[selenak]

Good lord. Definitely trauma. The best case scenario I can see is that it‘s a girl, because generally Fritz (despite the misogyny) did better with his female relations. In rl, his niece had good memories of him, and his younger sisters got along better with him than his younger brothers, which is a sort of precedent for this AU. Also, if he has a daughter, he won‘t feel threatened by her or want her to be exactly like him or would resent her if she is like him. If this daughter has some musical talents and likes literature, he might be tempted to make her into the second Wilhelmine, and if she doesn‘t and is more like EC, he still won‘t be that disappointed because of the general low opinion of women. EC will most likely be happy and love a daughter as well, and at any rate will feel more like there was a point to her existence.

If it‘s a boy, then FW will feel very happy and justified and Fritz will start with the resentment on that count alone. (EC will be very happy, and the angst won‘t start until the kid starts to talk.) He might still want a childhood for the kid that is unlike his own, but unfortunately unless the kid is a very bright toddler that will probably result in what happened with real life nephew FW2, who got all the teachers and lessons Fritz couldn‘t (openly) have because of FW‘s own issues with learning and was completely overwhelmed. Now Fritz did love the younger of his nephews, Henricus Minor, so there is a positive rl example as well as a negative, but unfortunately we don‘t know much about Henricus Minor due to his dying so young. I would guess that if the hypothetical son of Fritz and EC is shy - like rl FW2 was - we get the worst case scenario of the kid being given the same treatment (i.e. Fritz orders the teachers to tease and bully him out of the unbecoming shyness), only multiplied because it‘s his own son. If the kid is more the kind of extrovert adorable imp that apparently both AW and (at a guess) Henricus Minor were, then once FW has died and can‘t play the proud grandfather who alwys knew what the wretched son needed was a proper wife and kids anymore, there might be a shot for a more positive than negative father-son relationship because Fritz responded well to the outgoing affectionate and gregarious types. But if the kid is more an introvert, let alone shy: DOOOOOOM. TRAUMA.

AW: If Fritz has a son, does that mean I can divorce Luise and marry the love of my life? (Whoever she might be, either Sophie or Mina.)

Fritz: NO.

Heinrich: If a son of Fritz is the Crown Prince and I thus will not be able to hope for a future where I am AW‘s consigliere, I will see my existence pre 7 Years War as even more pointless and will probably be even more rebellious. Unless I‘m not forced to marry because Fritz is busy roleplaying Dad and himself with his own kid instead of me?

Fritz: Don‘t count on it.

MT: I pity any offspring this man might have. However, I suddenly see some potential for a return of Silesia a generation later if the kid is properly influenced. Maybe more. Hm. Which of my daughters might make a good Queen in Prussia?

Marie Antoinette (TV Series, Second Season)

[selenak]

Since I did comment on the first season, I thought you might like a follow up. Like the first, the second isn't must watch tv, but does some interesting things along with the mundane and the bewildering in terms of how the use history. Reminder: this series is a French/British coproduction made by the same company that produced the three season series Versailles (aka the one on Louis XIV and courtiers which has the distinction of being the very first historical take that makes Philippe the Gay, Monsieur, into a (gay) hearthrob and the best thing about which is that he, the Chevalier and Liselotte (due to him and the Chevalier being nicer than in rl and Liselotte being without her rl loathing af the later) ending up as a golden trio. Marie Antoinette season 1 basically made Dubarry into the Marquise de Merteuil (from Dangerous Liasons) though MA wisened up before going full Cecile, had Joseph do marriage counselling instead of sex counselling (the sex counselling is done by a prostitute - I joked at the time clearly the French part of the production would not stand for a German/Austrian Emperor having to explain sex to the King of France), i.e. he makes MA and Louis talk to each other by locking himself up with the two of them once a day and not letting them out until they talked, and made Louis' two brothers into one brother (Provence, the later Louis XVIII) while giving part of the adapted out brother Artois (aka future Charles X, clearly not existing in this verse)'s stuff to cousin Chartres, aka future Duke of Orleans and future Philippe Ègalité. (To wit, the part where he at first befriends and flirts with MA but then reveals his true scheming colours.) The series in its first season also included both of MA's most famous female friends/favourites, the Duchesse de Lamballe and Gabrielle Polignac, here called Yolande, with MA first favouring one and then the other, and briefly Axel Fersen, making his usual first appearance when young MA visits Paris in disguise. The first season ended with MA and Louis reconciled and having produced their first son.

The second season covers the (ruinous for French finances) support of the Americans in their war for Independence, the Affair of the Diamond Necklace, the first production of the Marriage of Figaro (Beaumarchais, who was introduced in the first season and then suddenly disappeared from the scene, actually gets stuff to do here) and things going ever quicker wrong for the royals at an ever increasing pace until Louis calls the General Estates and the Bastille is about to be stormed in the finale. As in s1, a great many historical characters are played by far better looking actors (Louis and his brother Provence, and now Cardinal Rohan being the most obvious examples),but that's par the course. The series is reasonably good with shades of grey; the sole boo-hiss figure is Chartres, now the current Duc d'Orleans, aka the future Philippe Égalité, who almost never gets a good press in Marie Antoinette fiction, which usually goes with her own conviction he was behind everything. (Though he usually in other versions just acts from ambition, here from ambition and scorned love resentment since she didn't let herself be seduced by him in the last season.)

(Historical sidenote: From what I remember from non fiction books, while the Duke certainly enjoyed trolling his royal cousin and very deliberately used the legal status his Paris residence, the Palais Royal, had, to have anti MA and Louis pamphlets printed there, plus he was a huge Anglophile, but it's hard to see how he could have seriously plotted to get on the throne via crowd control. For starters, Louis had two living brothers and two sons, then one son, all coming before Orleans in the succession. And in 1789, most of the reform-minded people, including Robespierre, didn't want to abolish the monarchy, they wanted a constitutional monarchy a la GB. What made and makes good old Philippe Égalité loathed in so circles is a) that he voted for cousin Louis XVI''s death in the National Assembly - and since the Assembly was pretty evenly split, that, that definitely was fatal -, and that later, when he was heading towards the guillontine himself, he tried to save himself by claiming his real father had been a carriage driver, not the late Duc D'Orleans. Brave, he was not. But most likely not an evil mastermind, either.)

Anyway, other than Chartres/Orleans, everyone else comes across as more dimensional, including surprisingly Provence who though in the first half of the season still busy scheming so Louis has a nervous breakdown and he'll be appointed Regent discovers mid season a) he actually has some hidden affection for his brother, and b), more importantly to him, this all has gone way beyond palace intrigue and is heading towards destroying the monarchy, and if he doesn't change tactics and seriously supports Louis and MA now, there won't be a Crown left for him to inherit. Another shade of grey character is the show's version of Polignac. While Lamballe seriously loves MA, Polignac starts out using her for ambition, catches feelings (for MA and Louis both, as the later ahistorically comes to confide in her as well, non-romantically so), and feels increasingly torn between ambition and affection, but still at key points chooses her own benefit. (Whereas Lamballe despite feeling sort of dumped or at least in second place for Polignac proves her true love by staying at MA's side when things get tough. Which will condemm her to a terrible fate come the French Revolution.) Lamballe is also in some episodes taken in by the enterprising Jeanne de la Motte, conwoman of the decade, but MA forgives her for that, drawing a parallel between her own relationship with Polignac and Lamballe's with Jeanne.

BTW: MA and her female favourites get to have intense romantic friendships but stop just this side of subtext becoming text. (Not because this series doesn't do same sex relationships; Provence's wife Josephine is characterised as a lesbian in requited love with lady-in-waiting Marguerite, for example.) But those relationships come across as within the series universe believable and well drawn. Meanwhile, MA's relationship with Fersen does not. It really feels like the scriptwriters treating MA/Fersen as an obligation they need to get through and keep to the absolute minimum. Which is a problem because simultanously we're meant to believe that MA despite having established a good partnership with Louis as the result of season 1, aware she has plenty of enemies at court and that she's now becoming unpopular among the people, is risking everything by having an affair with Fersen.

It's not like Fersen is written as a bad guy, don't get me wrong. But the show, in marked contrast to how it treats MA/Louis as well as MA/Polignac and MA/Lamballe, doesn't give them getting-to-know you type of scenes, it has them fall for each other on sight, and later they only get "we can't, we shouldn't"/but they do anyway" type of dialogue. Off screen, Fersen is in dialogue referred to doing supportive and brave things, but not on screen. Perhaps if the actor were one of those who can exude sexual chemistry, you'd buy it, but he's not. It's like the show does not want anyone to actually ship them because they don't want to take away from the show's central relationship, which is MA/Louis.

Speaking of whom: since the scriptwriters clearly are aware of the various historians and biographers pointing out that in previous regimes, the mistresses along with the evil advisors are getting blamed for the King's mistakes, and since Louis is a faithful husband, that option isn't there, which means MA gets blamed instead, they have Polignac point this out to Louis and offer to be his mistress in order to function as a lightning rod for the populace, and he declines. Where other takes on this tale have post Joseph's visit no more sexual problems between MA and Louis and leave it at that, this series not unreasonably postulates that while Louis now knows how to do it and does, he's not actually very into sex, full stop, despite adoring his wife, and she in turn likes him and supports him but is not in love, and the simply functional sex does not help making her so, either.

The show also milks the deaths of MA's and Louis' first son and of the youngest daughter Sophie for full tragedy, but goes with Fersen as the biodad of the later two children. This is presented as something Louis realizes and after some emotional struggle not just accepts but welcomes because he anachonistically had a doctor pointing out to him that their eldest son's fragile health might be due to all the Bourbon inbreeding, not to mention the Habsburgs. (Whereas Fersen: new genes! you can see Louis think.)

The series is reasonably good in getting across why the French economy is in such a bad state (with all the money spent to support the Yankee Tax Dodgers being a major factor, in addition to all the inherited debt from Grandpa Louis XV and some terrible weather and failed crop), but can't resist adding to it by Orleans actually secretly hording grain (as MA and the King are accused of doing) in order to make himself more popular and them less so. Like I said, Orleans is the one genuinely boo-hiss villain on this show.

Jeanne de la Motte, by contrast, is not. Nor is she a misunderstood heroine. In sharp contrast to the movie starring Hilary Swank where she's a woobie whose story about being a Valois are true and who has a childhood trauma of seeing royal troops kill her dad and burn their chateau down - not only did this not happen, but even real Jeanne de la Motte, who invented a lot, did not claim this -, this series thankfully doesn't shy away from making her simply a gifted 18th century conwoman out for herself. She doesn't want to bring the monarchy down or has anything to avenge, she just wants to have a piece of the cake, as much as she can get, and Rohan is a great mark because he's just that arrogant and dumb and egotastic. Most of the time, you cheer for her pulling this off. The show even lets her trashy memoirs be someone else's idea at first (to wit, the idea of the Duc d'Orleans mistress to trash MA some more), with Jeanne going along with it because hey, it pays, she needs the support the lady promises to get out of prison and out of France, and it's not like the Queen has made her a better offer. She's cheerfully amoral, and probably the most vital character of season 2.

(Rohan: no notes. I think he's the rare character who is basically the same in any take on this story, at least I have yet to meet a version that doesn't go for "'he had it coming".)

The trial session after the necklace affair is very anachronistically anglofied - I mean, I'm no expert on 18th century legislation beyond what Voltaire wrote in the Calas affair, but I recognise a US style courtroom in costume when I see one - , and the show adds a second charge to make it clear to the non historically knowledgeable audience why the outcome was such a disaster for MA personally and the monarchy in general, but I can handwave that since it did get across quite how much of a PR disaster this was and how it contribute to the overall damage the French monarchy took in the 1780s.

Notably missing: any future famous revolutionaries. Even in the scene where Louis is opening the Estates General in the season 2 finale and later in the one where the representatives of the Third Estate try to corner him, the men we see look middle aged (and none of them ugly enough to be Mirabeau, who was middle aged but also a noble and thus not part of the Third Estate representatives anyway), nor do they get introduced by name. I don't know whether the show stops here or will have a third season, so perhaps they didn't want to cast notable actors yet if they don't get a third season. (I could see the point of stopping here. It's more or less what Sofia Coppola did in Marie Antoinette the movie. Once Versailles is stormed, and the royals have to move to Paris, it's another era. (And also this show as its predecessor lives from its Versailles location. It's far harder to find locations that look like Revolutionary Paris did.)

All in all, I'd say my prefered cinematic or tv take on the Marie Antoinette (barely) pre revolutionary side of things remains the film version of Farewell to the Queen, which is told from the pov of the Queen's reader, is the only one to get across how incredibly crowded and cramped Versailles was (as our heroine the reader constantly has to use the secret passages the servants do to get anywhere), manages to get across a lot even with its glimpsed side characters like the Marquis who lives to see the King once a day in the mirror gallery and above all manages to show MA herself as neither martyr nor foolish idiot. In that movie, which deals with exactly the same era like the last few episodes of season 2, her reader has a crush on her the way you have on a film star today, which is a pretty good equivalent to how an Ancien Regime royal was seen, and MA does something which manages to be very selfish and very selfless at the same time when she is worried about Polignac, sure her beloved (in that movie, definitely not just a platonic favourite) is in serious danger, and sends her away despite knowing she might never see her again and thus lose her love for good. (Poor Lamballe and Fersen do not exist in this movie.) But the way MA saves Polignac is by asking her reader to change clothes with her, and that she takes her reader's loyalty for granted and evidently sees this woman's life as expendable, as opposed to Polignac's, is the "very selfish" part of the equation and makes a point about the system without any exposition needed.

Re: Marie Antoinette (TV Series, Second Season)

[mildred_of_midgard]

Thank you for this write-up! I really need to brush up on my French Revolution. Hopefully I'll still have time after I finish the current draft of Peter Keith.

It really feels like the scriptwriters treating MA/Fersen as an obligation they need to get through and keep to the absolute minimum.

I see they have not been reading their Zweig! He would teach them how to ship those two. ;)

Point taken about them wanting MA/Louis as their OTP, though.

(Rohan: no notes. I think he's the rare character who is basically the same in any take on this story, at least I have yet to meet a version that doesn't go for "'he had it coming".

Hahaha.

MA does something which manages to be very selfish and very selfless at the same time when she is worried about Polignac, sure her beloved (in that movie, definitely not just a platonic favourite) is in serious danger, and sends her away despite knowing she might never see her again and thus lose her love for good. (Poor Lamballe and Fersen do not exist in this movie.) But the way MA saves Polignac is by asking her reader to change clothes with her, and that she takes her reader's loyalty for granted and evidently sees this woman's life as expendable, as opposed to Polignac's, is the "very selfish" part of the equation and makes a point about the system without any exposition needed.

Wow, yes, that's very three-dimensional.

Sorry for the brevity, real life plus Peter Keith are calling!

Question for luzula

[mildred_of_midgard]

The 18th century British navy is synonymous with harsh discipline, floggings and whatnot. Do you know how much of that would have applied to an officer?

If you don't know about the navy but can speak to the army instead, I'll take it.

Re: Question for luzula

[luzula]

Pretty sure corporal punishment would not have applied to officers! That is, the punishments were class-based, and to flog a gentleman would be to demean him. But he could be court-martialed and lose his commission, or executed.

But I'll link two fannish friends here who know a lot more about the Navy than I do, and they can give you more detail. Much of my knowledge of the British navy comes second-hand from historical fiction.

(Re-posting comment so it ends up in the right thread.)

Question for Selena

[mildred_of_midgard]

Back to Fredersdorf translation questions (I finally found a journal willing to consider something of this length, so I need to get to work on conforming to their style guidelines and then I can submit):

Wegen der Battallie des Pr. v. Preußen ist falsch es ist nur ein Posten angegriffen worden und wie es heißt nicht zu unserm Vortheil, es muß mit uns wider beßer gehen sonst taugt es nicht Adieu

Literally, that's "otherwise, it's no good" or "otherwise, it's not good enough," but given the context, would "otherwise, we're in trouble" be okay? I feel like it sounds more fluent*, but I just want to check that it's not *too* loose of a translation?

* Less for grammatical/native-speaker reasons, and more because I feel like it's not tautological to the point of sounding stupid? Like, of course losing military conflicts is no good? But something that means "if things don't turn around for us, we're not currently doing well enough to win this war" is an actual assertion with some content to it.

Re: Question for Selena

[selenak]

Literally, that's "otherwise, it's no good" or "otherwise, it's not good enough," but given the context, would "otherwise, we're in trouble" be okay? I feel like it sounds more fluent*, but I just want to check that it's not *too* loose of a translation?

No, it isn't. It captures what is meant in a way that (non native speaker that I am) I think sounds more natural in English.

Calumny! Karl von Keith's side of the story

[mildred_of_midgard]

Having obtained the Prussian documents on the 1778 duel for science/fit of insanity/whatever it was, I have more details!

First and foremost: Karl says the part where he randomly beat up a guy for no reason so totally did not happen like that! He writes angry letters issuing formal denials that he threw the guy to the ground, and insisting that they both drew their swords at the same time.

He includes a clipping from a gazette in Florence demanding that the account so detrimental to him be withdrawn.

What does he say actually happened? Well, he's extremely cagey about the *cause* of all this ruckus. He neither says "I admit to fits of insanity" nor does he say the other guy insulted him. It's all about what physical violence did and did not happen.

And then I'm having trouble parsing what he says happened. As best I can read his scrawls, it goes like this:

Cependant le peu du vraisemblances des circonstances contraires en aura déjà fait apercevoir la fausette: Votre Excellence sait bien qu'on n'assassine pas un officier auquel on donne un soufflet et auquel on fait mettre l'epee a la main. Il est sur qu'a pres le coup nous avons tire l'epee l'un et l'autre avec la differences qu'il avait un epee d'uniforme et que j'en avais une avec laquelle j'aurais a peine pu tuer une poulet, il est absolument faux que je l'ai jette par terre.

However, the lack of likelihood of the contrary circumstances will have already made the falsehood apparent: Your Excellency knows well that one does not assassinate an officer who is slapped and made to draw a sword. It is certain that after the blow we both drew our swords, with the difference that he had a uniform sword and I had one with which I could hardly have killed a chicken; it is absolutely false that I threw him to the ground.

And he concludes:

"This is how they seek to ruin the fortune of an honest man in Turin by turning into a court affair a personal matter, which should have been [treated] as such."

He wrote to Choiseul (not that Choiseul, one of his relatives), the French ambassador in Turin, requesting that Choiseul publish Keith's side of the story. Karl's writing to everyone, he's furious.

But at no point does he attempt to justify himself, even to Fritz, he just keeps insisting that it's a personal quarrel.

Maybe Selena was right! Or maybe he did have a fit of insanity that he didn't want to admit to. Whatever it is, I can only assume that it wouldn't make him look good. (It would be perverse, though I suppose not impossible, for it to make him look good but he's insisting that it must remain a personal affair out of principle. Even just to vaguely say the other guy insulted his honor intolerably would be better than his BECAUSE REASONS!)

As for the other side of the story, I was right that it was a bunch of Italians deciding the Italian was the purely innocent victim. We have in the Prussian archives a copy of the eyewitness accounts, in which the authorities gathered everyone who had been at the salon and made them write up their memories. It matches what the British ambassador said so closely that I was like, "There's no way he hasn't seen this document." Then I got to the Florence gazette, which said that the Italian minister of foreign affairs made the eyewitnesses write down their accounts, and then he shared the eyewitness accounts with all the ambassadors.

Yep, uh huh, that was definitely a one-sided account going around Europe.

Btw, now that I have the mayor of Turin's full account and not just the British ambassador's summary, I can flesh out that account a litle bit. Google-translated for speed:

Having learned from the servants of the aforementioned minister [Karl] that he had returned home and had retired to his apartment, I had myself announced as a friend, and not as Mayor of the City, authorized to do so by past circumstances, which had put me into some kind of acquaintance and particular connection with him, and having entered his room with the aforementioned adjutant to take precautions in everything, and particularly against the violent agitation of mind, into which I knew that he had fallen, as soon as he saw me, he greeted me with an almost indifferent air, making however a kind of smile, and having entered into conversation with him on what had just happened, I represented to him the consternation that this had caused, the regret that I had, and the orders that I had on this subject. He answered me very coldly, "What does all this mean? Well I insulted a gentleman, I am one too, I will give him satisfaction, and all that is nothing."

Upon which, having replied that the King had given me the order to place Chevalier Fresia under arrest at his house, with a sentry at his door, I had to warn him that this affair could never take this turn and this end, since his character as a public minister was entirely opposed to it (a reflection into which he never wanted to enter, although I tried to represent to him with all the gentleness and manners possible, the delicacy that it contained) and seeing that he could not detach me from this opinion, he proposed to me for all that I renounce his character as a public minister, and on the new opposing representations that I made to him on this subject, he went to his table, as if to write down his declaration, which he undertook several times to do, notwithstanding all the difficulties that I raised with him on this idea, and to conclude this question, I ended by telling him, that even if he made this declaration, I believed that the religion of the King, and the principles of the government did not would never be useful to the subject he had in mind. Then he began to take on a deranged and threatening air and, having risen from his seat, he began to walk hurriedly, saying to me, "Well, what do you want me to tell you? I admit that I did something foolish, I had a delirium, it happens to me sometimes; but in the end, I am a gentleman, so is Chevalier Fresia, I will give him satisfaction. I don't see what that has to do with other people, and what interest anyone else should have in it?" His wandering eyes and his extremely altered words, having made me fear that he might fall into some madness, I redoubled my gentleness, and recalled to him the feelings of friendship and the good offices which I intended to render both to his person and to his respectable character, he answered me many times, that I had to protect him by my position from all insult, and that in any case he had his pistols loaded, and that he would defend himself in his house against whoever came to seek him there and that for all good ends I had to place a guard at his door, to which having replied several times, I answered him, that if he wanted one, he had to ask me for it, since it was never customary to place guards at the doors of the houses where public ministers live. He persisted in not wanting to ask me for one and in replying to me that I had to put one there, which, however, I was not prepared to do. This conversation having lasted more than an hour, and seeing the state that he was in, I announced that I must take my leave.

There are some other fun bits, as when he's wandering around northern Italy, and both the Italians and Prussians are trying to figure out where he is and where he's planning to be, so that they can send him mail (like, "you've officially lost your job" mail). The Prussians and Italians are even contacting each other trying to figure out where Karl is these days. Even Fritz, writing to Hertzberg and Finckenstein (the heads of the foreign ministry) about Karl's successor, at one point is like, "And guys, I seriously need to know where Keith is these days and what he's up to. You haven't given me any updates in a while, and this is not acceptable!"

So he's AWOL, and that's fun.

And Hertzberg and Finckenstein finally write to Keith in Mantua going, "Having received the LACONIC reports you've given about the unfortunate affair in Turin, we are forced to recall you. Please proceed to Frankfurt."

Voltaire: Frankfurt, huh?

I think that's all the new material I have to share, but since there were numerous documents in this batch, if I think of anything else of interest, I'll be sure to share it. Curious what others think about Karl's relentless silence on the subject of the reason for the duel.

Oh, right, I believe he wrote that he withdrew to his apartment in Turin to not offend anyone by the sight of his person, and then when he was in Mantua a couple months later, somebody (I forget who) commented that they've heard he's living a very retired life. Since immediately upon his return to Berlin, the only thing we hear about him for the next decades is that he lived a very retired life, the Turin episode was definitely the trigger for some decision not to rejoin society.

Of course, as mentioned, he was extremely withdrawn and hardly ever left his house except for visits to his aunts' house immediately after returning from university, this was also a personality trait. But he did pursue a career and travel in the 60's and '70s, and after the duel, no more of that.

Oh, right! Remember how when he first arrived in Italy, he had permission from Fritz to travel around and make the Grand Tour? He must have met Casanova in Venice, because we have a letter to someone in Venice that has a postscript asking the recipient to give Karl's compliments to Monsieur Casanova. No further details, alas!

Re: Calumny! Karl von Keith's side of the story

[selenak]

Curious what others think about Karl's relentless silence on the subject of the reason for the duel.

Well, you know what I think. :) More seriously, could be the classic case of him wanting to protect the name of a married woman, OR the insinuation was about himself and a boyfriend, in which case he also needs to be discreet and can't say without getting the guy in trouble with the law, but six years of Salon have just conditioned me to believe that if Fresia made an insinuation about Peter and Fritz, there is no way Karl can repeat it to anyone as an explanation without having to fear it would get back to Fritz. And sure, an Algarotti or a Voltaire would not mind doing that, but Karl, who must have grown up under the impression that Frederick the Great has disawowed his youth etc.?

Or Fresia himself is the boyfriend, and we're talking about a fallout between boyfriends? #

Casanova in Venice: in 1780? Huh. I thought he was already stuck in Bohemia as a Librarian by then, but I could be wrong.

Archive updates

[mildred_of_midgard]

In addition to getting the British envoy's take and now the Prussian take on this affair, I have finally made contact with the Turin archives! There is a letter from the minister of foreign affairs in Turin to his envoy in Britain detailing the *second* duel, which the Italians are going to send me a scan of for a reasonable price.

That was inexplicably and incomprehensibly difficult to get, because I couldn't get the Italian ministry for culture website to load (and neither could my wife in Brazil or a friend in Germany, though for some reason Selena could). I had to get a VPN. And then the first VPN I tried had no servers in Italy, and the servers I tried in Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands couldn't load the website either. So I had to pay for yet another VPN, one with servers in Italy, and I was finally able to load the website, browse the archive catalogues, and find the email address for the ministry! Fortunately, even though I didn't have an exact reference number, the citation info I had from another scholar's footnote was enough, and the archivists were able to track down the letter I needed. Score!

Furthermore, a friend in Vienna has offered to go to the archives in Vienna later this year (October or November) and scan whatever the Austrian ambassador wrote. Now that I realize that the ambassadors were all given the same account, I'm not expecting a wildly different version, but it'll still be interesting to see, and good to check just in case. Maybe he has some interesting personal commentary! Especially since Austria and Prussia are just about to go to war (Bavarian Succession).

Finally, and most excitingly, a friend in Stuttgart has agreed to go to Paris and scan the price-gouging (25 euros per page!) French archives for me! That's most exciting not because of the Karl von Keith affair, but because of the earlier envoys! I'm hoping to get Rottembourg's takes on Fritz and FW in the 1720s, Sauveterre in 1730, Valory in 1740, and maybe even Rottembourg and Rottembourg's successor on the king who thought he was a frog!

We don't know when she'll be able to go, but since I'm paying her travel expenses, a per diem, and hourly labor for all this scanning, she's pretty stoked about a free trip to Paris. She's also a former academic, so the thought of being in archives scanning things is more appealing to her than it would be to many people.

So hopefully salon gets a bunch of French sensationalist gossip in the next year!

MT: The Musical

[selenak]

Mes amies, I just discovered that after "Friedrich - Mythos und Tragödie", MT will now also get her very own musical, to premiere this year. The English language version of the website I wasn't surprised to discover that Fritz is a main character (he's named third after MT and FS), but you know who will also be included? One Michael Gabriel Fredersdorf (to be played by the same actor/singer who plays MT's Dad, but still: Fredersdorf isn't a guarantee in an MT musical (hell, he was completely left out of the Fritz musical). So thank you, libretto writers, for including him. I'm hoping for a dramatic quartet where MT and FS are duetting on one end of the stage and Fritz and Fredersdorf at the other.

The kids seem to be all represented as well (i.e. not just Joseph and Marie Antoinette as the two most famous ones), though note Joseph has his own actor while Leopold is played by Fredersdorf's understudy. And MT's beloved governess (the one buried with her in the Habsburg crypt), Countess Fuchs. What amazes me is that among the ministers, Bartenstein is there (and his understudies are some of the lesser boys), but no Kaunitz! OMG Kaunitz would be so insulted by that.

The composer, it seems has previously composed a musical about the late Falco (not the Roman detective, the Austrian rock star) and feels MT is the next logical icon to tackle. I note it will premiere mid October and will just say this is a signifant date.

Re: MT: The Musical

[cahn]

!! WHAT That's amazing! I am shocked that Fredersdorf is included (especially given that he wasn't in the Fritz musical, lol). No Kaunitz?? But, like. MT is surely a natural for a musical, I'm actually kind of surprised there isn't already one!

Clearly you need to research this, by which I mean you need to go see this musical and report back! And where is prinzsorgenfrei?? (Aren't they active on tumblr? Do they know about this?? Will they find a bootleg with English subtitles so I can watch it too??)

Amalia von Schönhausen

[mildred_of_midgard]

A while back, I said I had some more findings on Amalia von Schönhausen and why I thought she might actually be the illegitimate child of Peter's mother-in-law, Charlotte von Knyphausen, but I had no time to write my findings up.

Well, now I finally have some time. The details are in the bio, but to summarize them here...

Oriane and her siblings acknowledged that they paid Amalia support for a long time for no apparent reason (they called it charity). Then, years later, when she started claiming to be their illegitimate sister and demanding more money, they went all, "NO, Mom never had an illegitimate child! How dare you slander her like that?! We will only pay you extra money to help preserve her posthumous reputation, so that you don't go dragging her name through the mud with these abominable claims!" They never take the stance of "Yes, Mom had an illegitimate child, we're not covering that up, we're just saying you're not it." The "Why do we pay your bills? Uh, Because Reasons!" argument adds to the fishiness.

The one sibling, Tido, who was already disinherited and had nothing to lose, was the one sibling who thought her claims were legit. Not that he would necessarily know for sure, but he was definitely old enough to know what was going on when Manteuffel reported the pregnancy (he was about to turn 19), so he would have had a clear memory of the rumors going around (and possibly some direct evidnece from his own eyes and ears). There's a clear division of the siblings along "has something to lose and denies the relationship" and "has nothing to lose and accepts the relationship" lines that makes me extra suspicious.

Yes, Amalia was supposedly born in 1737, but that's not a birth record. That's a marriage record saying she's 32 in 1769. That's absolutely subject to being off by a year. Also, Charlotte may have had (and is supposed to have had) multiple children.

Evidence that Charlotte had illegitimate children: the idea that Fritz was paying her back the fine she paid is just too strong. We have:

- Manteuffel's contemporary report that Crown Prince Fritz didn't think he could keep the money in good conscience.
- Voltaire's letter from 1750 (not to Madame Denis!) that Fritz refunded her the money via a box of coins, *while* Voltaire was living in Berlin and in a position to know.
- Hanway's nearly contemporary travelogue indicating that the box of coins episode took place exactly as Voltaire described, with the difference that Hanway emphasizes Peter as the reason (but agrees that the money itself went to his mother-in-law).
- Knyphausen correspondence from the 1770s indicating that Oriane benefitted financially from a gift from Fritz relating to the birth of Amalia, which I take to be the gift of the box. Even if the Knyphausens' claim originates with Amalia, it's still a separate piece of evidence from Manteuffel, Voltaire, and Hanway.

selenak, back when we discovered Fritz had said that to Manteuffel, and you asked if that cast the box of money gift in a different light, I said no, I didn't think so. It was, per Hanway, for Peter. Well, I was wrong, Hanway was wrong, you were right. I believe Voltaire, even as a guest, had the correct story here. It *also* makes sense of the thing that was puzzling me, why Lehndorff, 3 years later, tells a story of Peter getting money from Fritz and says this was the first time Fritz had recognized Peter. It makes sense if you assume Hanway was an outsider passing through and didn't realize the backstory.

Now, I wouldn't trust Voltaire, who had *just* arrived, either, without corroborating evidence, but we have Hanway for corroborating evidence of the facts of what happened, and Manteuffel and the later Knyphausens for corroborating evidence of why it happened.

So, in the end, I think there's strong evidence that Charlotte had one or more kids and paid the fine, that Fritz reimbursed her, and that the Knyphausens wanted to cover it up later for their mother's reputation and their own financial gain; and there's weaker evidence that Amalia was one of the illegitimate kids, and that her siblings damn well knew it and were covering it up for their own gain.

Re: Amalia von Schönhausen

[selenak]

Yes, Amalia was supposedly born in 1737, but that's not a birth record. That's a marriage record saying she's 32 in 1769. That's absolutely subject to being off by a year.

True enough, and people have been known to cut off years from their ages when marrying, i.e. on their marriage certificate. If you want near contemporary examples, Napoleon and Josephine did it in their marriage entry in both directions - he made himself a few years older, and she made herself a few years younger, in oder to cover up the age difference between them. And even a century later, when Ellen Ternan, who as a young woman had been Charles Dickens' lover in his last few years, married years after Dickens' death, she made herself ten years younger, possibly so her husband would never find out she and Dickens were an item.

While none of this definitely proves that Amalia was Charlotte von Knyphausen's illegitimate child, it makes a plausible case, and yes, does clear up why both Hanway and Lehndorff think three years apart Fritz' gestures are the respektive first ones in Peter's direction.

Mind you, it's interesting that Fritz would pick 1750 as the date to return that ill-gotten money. Maybe talking to Voltaire reminded him of the old scandal and he decided to follow up on his then determination? Or enough time had passed since the whole Tido affair, whether or not it included some Mollwitz trash talk?

[levante]

Hi everyone! You can call me Lev :) I am still getting used to how this site works, so hopefully this reply shows up in the right place.

I recently left a few comments on some wonderful Hohenzollern fics on AO3 and then was directed here by Mildred! I've started reading the Blanning biography of Fritz but keep getting distracted by the travel diaries and correspondences of Alexander Von Humboldt. They just make for such compelling reading - so i'm steadily making my way through all of them and it's taking up all my reading time 😄 If anyone wants to talk Alex with me I'd be delighted. But I'm also looking forward to learning more about Fritz and co.

Yesterday I visited the Stabi Kulturwerk in Berlin. I was able to look at original sheet music of a concert for 5 Joachim Quantz wrote for Fritz.
As well as a Faksimile of an aria embellished and written down by Fritz himself.

[selenak]

Well, if anyone is a great and powerful distraction, it certainly must be Alexander von Humboldt. :) To my shame, I must confess that I am more familiar with his fictional versions, i.e. both Daniel Kehlmann's Alex and Robert Löhr's version in the hilarious and entertaining Das Erlkönig-Manöver, where he gets to hang out and have an adventure with Goethe, Schiller, Achim von Arnim and Bettine Brentano and have an affair with Heinrich von Kleist. Unlike you, I haven't tackled his actual writings yet-

Thank you so much for these pictures. That is fantastic; Quantz is another character who'd be worth a film or miniseries of his own, rising from obscurity to being one of the best known musicians and composers of his day, playing for Saxon and Prussian courts alike. (And providing us with one of the few Katte stories that aren't about his execution via the anecdote he told Nicolai about almost getting caught teaching Fritz by FW, with Katte on the lookout spotting the approaching FW in time to hide Quantz and himself and the flutes.)

The Florentine diamond

[mildred_of_midgard]

A few years ago, we talked about the Habsburg takeover of Tuscany, and the resulting disappearance of the Florentine diamond:

Anna Maria Luisa, was responsible for the Medici "family pact. It ensured that all the Medicean art and treasures collected over nearly three centuries of political ascendancy remained in Florence. Cynthia Miller Lawrence, an American art-historian, argues that Anna Maria Luisa thus provided for Tuscany's future economy through tourism. Sixteen years after her death, the Uffizi Gallery, built by Cosimo the Great, the founder of the Grand Duchy, was made open to public viewing.

"It is known that the new Grand Duke did not respect this 'family pact' signed in Vienna on October 1737 - three months after Gian Gastone's death and confirmed in her will on April 5, 1739 -. As soon as he was in possession of the property, while Anna Maria Luisa was still alive, and not very discreetly, he began to sell large parts of it. When Maria Theresa became Empress* of Austria, she had a large part of the donation transported to Vienna, including the Florentino, the famous Medici diamond, which was considered the largest in the world at the time. This diamond later mysteriously disappeared and was never heard of again."

* We talked about the inaccuracy of this title; this book was obviously written by an Italian.

I was recently told by a professor that the diamond has now surfaced! You can read about it here. Basically, it was sent for safekeeping to Canada during WWI, it was placed in a bank vault, and everyone was sworn not to reveal its location until 100 years after the death of Charles I. He died in 1922, the diamond surfaced again in 2022, and its location became public knowledge just this month!

Re: The Florentine diamond

[selenak]

Diamonds are forever! Also, the three FS biographies I've read since we last talked about this all point out that FS also took over the (considerable) Medici debts along with the Medici property, which he had to pay and did pay, and that the story of him heartlessly selling heirlooms came largerly from Florentine nobles who had bet on Don Carlos succeeding and having ingratiated themselves with the Spaniards now were miffed that Team Lorraine took over (literally in some cases, since FS brought in various of his Lorraine nobles who themselves had to leave because Stanislaw Lescynsky took over Lorraine.