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.
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?
Wow. I can't believe, after I corrected this typo a million times in the bio, I come into salon and write "von Schönhausen" in the comment title and the text. She was not a "von"; I have not seen "von" in any of my research! She was merely Amalia Schönhausen.
True enough, and people have been known to cut off years from their ages when marrying, i.e. on their marriage certificate.
Yep, exactly what I was thinking! Probably women especially, though I don't have hard data on that (there's more social pressure on women to conform to a standard of "youthful").
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.
Oh, neat, thank you! I might use this.
yes, does clear up why both Hanway and Lehndorff think three years apart Fritz' gestures are the respektive first ones in Peter's direction.
Been bugging me since at least 2020. :D The trick to historical research is to investigate unrelated or loosely-related things, and then the historical record comes full circle and solves little mysteries for you.
Also explains why Peter's memoirs in 1751 don't indicate any change in Fritz's attitude toward him. Not that they would necessarily *have* to, being so concise, and 10 years of neglect could easily outweigh one gift via your mother-in-law, but I was a little surprised.
Mind you, it's interesting that Fritz would pick 1750 as the date to return that ill-gotten money.
Varnhagen von Ense said the foreign policy scene vis-a-vis Russia was getting a little tense, and Fritz decided to get on Schwerin's good side in case war broke out. No idea if that's true or not.
Oh wow this is really interesting! (I haven't got to this part yet.) The evidence does seem rather telling...
I believe Voltaire, even as a guest, had the correct story here.
WHAT :D
But I guess Voltaire didn't have any ulterior motive at this point in telling this story to make Fritz look bad or himself look good (or grinding an axe in some other way), and my thought is that he is usually pretty accurate when he's not filtering through those lenses...
IKR? I would never have believed Voltaire of all people would have the correct story! And we still don't know for sure, but there's so much corroborating evidence.
Tido was definitely old enough to know what was going on when Manteuffel reported the pregnancy (he was about to turn 19)
Just noticed a typo in my write-up: he was born in 1719, so he was just about to turn 17.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Amalia von Schönhausen
Date: 2025-08-10 08:10 pm (UTC)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.
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
Date: 2025-08-11 04:05 pm (UTC)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?
Re: Amalia Schönhausen
Date: 2025-08-11 11:12 pm (UTC)True enough, and people have been known to cut off years from their ages when marrying, i.e. on their marriage certificate.
Yep, exactly what I was thinking! Probably women especially, though I don't have hard data on that (there's more social pressure on women to conform to a standard of "youthful").
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.
Oh, neat, thank you! I might use this.
yes, does clear up why both Hanway and Lehndorff think three years apart Fritz' gestures are the respektive first ones in Peter's direction.
Been bugging me since at least 2020. :D The trick to historical research is to investigate unrelated or loosely-related things, and then the historical record comes full circle and solves little mysteries for you.
Also explains why Peter's memoirs in 1751 don't indicate any change in Fritz's attitude toward him. Not that they would necessarily *have* to, being so concise, and 10 years of neglect could easily outweigh one gift via your mother-in-law, but I was a little surprised.
Mind you, it's interesting that Fritz would pick 1750 as the date to return that ill-gotten money.
Varnhagen von Ense said the foreign policy scene vis-a-vis Russia was getting a little tense, and Fritz decided to get on Schwerin's good side in case war broke out. No idea if that's true or not.
Re: Amalia von Schönhausen
Date: 2025-08-18 03:11 am (UTC)Re: Amalia von Schönhausen
Date: 2025-08-18 03:10 am (UTC)I believe Voltaire, even as a guest, had the correct story here.
WHAT
:D
But I guess Voltaire didn't have any ulterior motive at this point in telling this story to make Fritz look bad or himself look good (or grinding an axe in some other way), and my thought is that he is usually pretty accurate when he's not filtering through those lenses...
Re: Amalia von Schönhausen
Date: 2025-08-18 03:19 am (UTC)Tido was definitely old enough to know what was going on when Manteuffel reported the pregnancy (he was about to turn 19)
Just noticed a typo in my write-up: he was born in 1719, so he was just about to turn 17.