Glasow

[mildred_of_midgard]

Who is Glasow?

- Fritz's batman.
- Accompanied Fritz to the Netherlands on the incognito trip in 1755.
- Lehndorff really wanted to go with Fritz on the Netherlands trip.
- Lehndorff said Fredersdorf retired because he was jealous of Glasow.
- We're not sure about Fredersdorf, but pretty sure Lehndorff is jealous of Glasow.
- Imprisoned for something, historians debate what.
- Maybe attempting to poison Fritz.
- Maybe unauthorized use of his seal.

So basically another Marwitz or Trenck, possibly less exciting (but possibly very exciting if only we had more data).


selenak: How long did Glasow stay imprisoned for whatever it was?

mildred_of_midgard: All I have is this. No primary sources. "He was seized, judicially interrogated in the presence of the king, and dispatched the following day in chains to Spandau, where he was immured in a dungeon in solitary confinement, and in a short time after ended his days. It appeared so necessary to the king, to keep secret the names of all the persons connected with this crime, that he would not allow him even to be attended by a physician, in his last moments."

Um, hi, Trenck-lite? I guess Fritz does this from time to time. No mention of being chained to a wall or made to sit on his own gravestone, though.

selenak: Going back to Lehndorff brought Glasow results! Seems during my first quick reading, I must have skipped this paragraph. 1757, 9 - 12th April:

Easter Holidays. One enters church and leaves it. One only talks of the Glasow matter. This fellow, the son of a soldier from the Brieger Garnison, had been hired as the King's batman a while ago. The King has overwhelmed him with kindness and even made him his valet, so he could come and go into the King's rooms whenever he wanted. The villain has now abused his gracious master's kindness by doing nothing but steal and rob, and even more, he's betrayed the King's secrets by making copies of all the writings he could get his hands on. There's even talk of him having tried to poison the King. At last, his villainy was uncovered by his servant, and he was caught red-handed. They found a lot of money and jewelry with him; rumor also has it he was the Countess Brühl's spy. This lady has been brought across the Polish border a few days after her arrest. There's also a rumor that Count Wackerbart has been arrested and has been brought to Küstrin. In short, we live in extrarordinary times.

I dare say. Now, Lehndorff obviously wasn't present at the arrest, nor is he in charge of the interrogation; he's simply reporting the stories making the rounds at court, and I suppose there's the possibiliity that Glasow was framed. At the same time, "being caught red handed" - auf frischer Tat ertappt - sounds like they caught him incriminating himself by doing some of the things he was accused of. And if he did steal, spy and try to poison Fritz, it would have definitely made the later conclude that it's not paranoia when they're really after you.

So one thing led to another, as it does, and selenak produced this amazing description of hypothetical literature, movies, and essay assignments that could exist in an AU where Glasow poisons Fritz in order to make Heinrich king.

It all started with two things:

1) A running joke we have where people are flirting with two of the royal siblings at once, based on a couple actual historical examples and a couple borderline examples.

2) A discussion about the prospect of Heinrich murdering his hated older brother and staging a coup to seize power in Prussia.

selenak: In historical context, of course, a coup would have been impossible; Catherine could succeed with hers because her husband had given a great many people the impression that he prioritized another country's interest over that of theirs and didn't care for Russia. Whereas Fritz was solidly supported both within the army and by the population. I suppose you could imagine a scenario where Heinrich makes his move directly after Kunersdorf, exploiting Fritz' depression and suicidalness, as well as everyone's shock about the lost battle. And the fact that Fritz at that point had written a last will naming Heinrich regent in the case of his death. But that's about the only historically plausible point in time where I could see a coup succeeding. And that's still just in terms of mechanics, not psychology, because part of the passionate hateship was that I'm not sure Heinrich could have willed himself to actually kill Fritz (anymore than Fritz had been willing to kill FW).

mildred_of_midgard: Agree re Fritz, Heinrich, and coups. Come think of it, poisoning Fritz with an opiate overdose would be particularly evil...

Cahn, Fritz carried a small box containing a lethal dose of opium in case he ever wanted to commit suicide. He showed it to Catt (who claims he was the Only One so privileged, of which I have always been highly skeptical). He's also, as we know, recently been writing "want to commit suicide letters together?" to Wilhelmine, and had to be talked out of suicide by various people, including Voltaire, just a couple years before.

A sufficiently motivated Heinrich could make this look like suicide, is what I'm saying.

Oh, ha.

Remember when I was half-jokingly wondering what sibling Glasow was hitting on? AU where it was Heinrich, and Glasow was trying to make his boyfriend regent by poisoning Fritz.

Hmm, the timing. Lehndorff's entry about the Glasow scandal is from April 1757. Kolin, when Fritz starts being suicidal, is June 1757. The suicidal letter to Wilhelmine is September. Unless he was also talking suicide before that and I've missed it.

This isn't actually more chronological fudging than I did for "Pulvis et Umbra," where I moved around events from February through June of 1747 as needed for the story.

selenak: A sufficiently motivated Heinrich could make this look like suicide, is what I'm saying.

Now I'm imagining an Elizabethan playwright - or for that matter good old Schiller, who had no trouble altering history so Jeanne d'Arc dies in battle, not on the stake - letting loose and giving Heinrich a "Should I avenge AW, stop a war and kill den einzigen Godbrother, yes or no?" monologue. And generations of school children having to write essays about all the subjects raised:

"The death of August Wilhelm and the sacrifice of Iphigenia. Heinrich and Clytaimnestra naming their motives. Are they telling the truth or deluding themselves? Compare."

"Loyalty in war time versus tyrannicide. Heinrich does not just contemplate fratricide but the betrayal of his sworn oath as an officer of the Prussian army at a time the country is at war. Does the prospect of ending the war justify Breaking this oath? Can Heinrich claim preservation of the Nation supersedes loyalty to his commander? Does tyrannicide apply when Friedrich is an enlightened Monarch? Discuss."

"How honest about his motives is Heinrich, even to himself? Henri de Catt, who functions as a Greek chorus in the play, later calls him "envious, scheming wretch" whose "jealousy of the great Friedrich, whose lofty grace he never could achieve" was his true motivation. Is he right? Discuss."

A movie scriptwriter would not bother with a monologues and motivations. Heinrich is a younger brother of a powerful king with issues about his older brother. What purpose does he serve in the character cast if not to scheme and be defeated? And there would be no problem reversing the order of the dates so Glasow can act on Heinrich's behalf. As for a playwright, I predict the following:

1.) Classical version. Glasow is a minor villain who gets dispensed with easily ("Off with his head; so much for Glasow") while the main showdown is between the Brothers.

2.) Revisionist 20th century and onwards version, first written by Brecht: Glasow is the hero, who starts out as a naive common man full of ideals who gets caught up in the psycho power game between two royal brothers. He first gets disillusioned by Fritz and too late realises Heinrich is not much better, and that he was but a tool and success would not have brought a free Prussia but just a change of tyrant. In the final scene, the actor playing Glasow removes his historical coat and adresses the audience, calling for revolution by the people, since there is no such thing as reformation from above and rulers fancying themselves enlightened monarchs can never be trusted.

(21st century essay theme: "Is Brecht's depiction of Heinrich's and Friedrich's homosexuality as part of their exploitation of the working man homophobic? Discuss.")