![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenak posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
rheinsbergI.e. "Frederick the Great and Maria Theresia: in eye witness accounts." This actually was/is a series of books devoted to a particular era or historical figure(s); the first one of those I've read was "The French Revolution: In Eye Witness Accounts". The advantage is obvious: these are all either excerpts of primary sources, written at the time, or memoirs, written none too much later, arranged by subject, many of which might be difficult to track down individually. On the down side, you're also at the mercy of the editor, in terms of what he chooses to highlight or edit out.
In the case of this editor, it's also soon obvious from his editorial comments that while respecting Maria Theresia, he's definitely favoring the Prussian side of things. When we get to the 7 Years War, there are accounts of civilians suffering through Austrian, French or Russian soldiers, but not through Prussian ones, which after reading Mitchell's dispatches - and Mitchell sided with the Prussians! - relatively recently is especially glaring.
This is how Jessen summarizes Silesia 1:
MT’s Dad dies.
Fritz: really really wants Prussia & Austria to team up against the French (editor believes this claim of his in a letter to FS completely), and when not hearing any offers in that regard, kidnaps Silesia to enforce his offer of „protection“ to FS and MT.
MT: No, you gangster. Go to hell, and take your protection racket with you.
Editor: „Friedrich war erschüttert über so viel Hass.“ („Friedrich was stunned by so much hatred.“)
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, Jessen.
The other downside, especially for newbies, is that all the sources get quoted without telling us whether or not they're generally regarded as reliable. Which means that Friedrich's own accounts, Wilhelmine's memoirs or Catt's memoirs all share the distinction of getting quoted from without as much as a footnote indicating that, um, some contemporaries might disagree, and/or: some historians have since discovered event X did not happen on that day, and quote Y can't have been said by someone who wasn't there, etc.
All these nitpicks aside, though, it's a great source book, and in addition to containing by now familiar documents it had a lot of documents from which I only knew individual phrases, but not the entire texts, which sometimes recontextualize previously known quotes quite differently. I've excerpted some especially intriguing gems.
Hot or Not: Portraits of Fritz
Nearly always intriguing are the portraits - both in the sense of physical and in the sense of character descriptions - given by foreign envoys or visitors to the court. I've already quoted Prussian Ambassador's description of Maria Theresia elsewhere. Here are two pen portraits of Friedrich, first a briefer one from 1742 - i.e. he's about 30 years old - , by a son of the Duke Charles-Philippe de Luynes.
„The King of Prussia is small, pretty plumb but not fat. He has the appearance of a wit, beautiful eyes, a full, vivacious face, pretty good teeth, thick, brown hair, and a noble nature. He has wit, and a somewhat superficial general education; he has neglected the sciences with which he appeared to occupy himself as a crown prince recently. (…) He asks vivid, witty questions that demand, even force concise answers. He is eager for knowledge about the customs of other countries, and asks thoroughly about them, especially the military habits which he investigates intensely; for he wants to test the uniforms, the armory, the manoeuvres, drills and habits of all troops. He has military talent, and knows it, so he doesn’t want to use that of others, nor listen to their advice.
He is polite and tries to say pleasant things, though at his core he is arrogant; the efforts others make are regarded as nothing by him. He himself shoulders hardships admirably, even the toughest life. He lives soberly. He can’t resist needling and maliciously mocking where he notices ridiculousness, but he doesn’t mind getting a reply, even a strong one, as long it is a good one.“
Ten years later, there's a far longer account by the French envoy, Charles-Guy Marquis de Valory. Valory had known Fritz at this point for a decade. He was the French ambassador during Silesia 2 between Silesia 2 and intermittently (i.e. switching with other envoys) until shortly before the 7 Years War. Friends with the Divine Trio (Friedrich's three younger brothers). Got nearly captured by Austrians during Silesia 2, which his secretary Darget prevented by claiming to be Valory, which got Darget hired by Fritz thereafter and later meant both Darget and Valory co-starred in Fritz raunchy satiric poem "Palladion" about Darget getting buggered by Austrians for the cause.
Now I've seen quotes from this particular Valory dispatch before, but never the entire letter. Even Jessen doesn't give us the entire letter, but he quotes more from it than I've ever seen, and it's absolutely fascinating as a not unsympathetic (imo) but highly critical psychological dissection of Fritz in the early 1750s. Valory also provides a source for a "Friedrich Wilhelm about Fritz" quote which I had seen only once, in a work of fiction, and thus didn't know whether or not it was authentic until finding this letter in Jessen's anthology.
I beginn with his portrait. His face is compelling. He's small and of noble bearing. His figure isn't regular; his hips are too high, and his legs are too strong. He has beautiful blue eyes which are a bit too strongly pronounced, but easily reflect his moods, so their expression varies depending on his state of mind. If he's dissatisfied with something, their gaze is threatening, but nothing is more soft, gracious and captivating than if he's in a mood to please. His hair is thick, mouth and nose agreeable, his smile charming and witty, but often bitter and mocking. When his soul is peaceful, the softness of his gaze can charm anyone. His health varies, his temper heated, and his personal life style contributes quite a lot to heating his blood. He used to drink incredible amounts of coffee. One day, I dared to tell him that he drank too much coffee; he admitted as much and said he was trying to abandon the habit. "I now drink only six to seven cups in the morning", he said, "and after supper only one."
The King is extreme in anything he does. His main character flaw is his misanthropy. A virtuous and enlightened man is his ideal, and in his opinion the most foolish people are called honorable men. In general, he finds only a few to have wit, and he doesn't esteem the so colled common sense which as opposed to wit can provide a right and sound judgment. Anyone has their share of the later, and only a ruler of judgment can esteem everyone correctly, and if a man has his right place, he can surprise even the most witty people. The King talks a lot and very well, but he listens very little, and mocks every objection.
One can be hardly more daring than he is; hence his contempt for humanity. He speaks out against vice with surprising eloquence. The same is true for morals, the most beautiful traits of which he seems to have learned to name by heart. But he's so little consequential and believes so little in what he says that his own claims refute him only fifteen minutes later.
He does have principles regarding administration, and, if I may say so, even about temper and disloyal reports. Fortunately what he decides when in a mood isn't set in stone; he usually returns to a correct judgment. If, however, his decision is made, he has no regard for etiquette. As soon as something he has come up with and pondered thoroughly appears right to him, he abandons all restraint in order to execute it. He is extremely suspicious; if he was less so, he'd be content to have come up with good ideas and would delegate their execution to his ministers, who are more sensible than he is and would soften any too great harshness.
Again: he has contempt for humankind and believes people are born to obey without talking back. This explains the excess in his behavior and the obvious paradoxes which amaze all who managed to get closer to him. I always have tried to analyze the immediate causes he named for his rejections, as well as the reasons why he hurt or flattered those close to him. In most cases, I had to admit his reasons were good, though not the form they took.
He owes the conquest of Silesia (...) to his boundless energy. (...) The good status of his troops and his magazines which were equipped with all that was needed to start a campaign with a strong army heightened his audacity and made him reckless for as long as he was confronted by only a handful of troops dispersed across a few Silesian fortresses. As soon as he was confronted with a proper army, he got conscious of all the dangers he faced. I dare to say he even exaggareted them in his mind. His consistent fortune has nourished his boldness for a while, but since then he thought about this and has admitted he owes much to luck. His enemy in a distance is always politics. The later often get scorned as being dependent on the moment, especially the Saxons, and yet during the campaign of 1744, they caused him the deepest trouble, but he punished them thouroughly for it in 1745. In this last campaign, he has shown the talents of a great general. But he believes to have all the talents, both those of a King and of a writer, which is a strange brew; we see the great man occupy himself with trifles.
The arts have become his weakness, in the same way as his royal father had a weakness for anyone above six feet. He pursues the reputation of a polymath - the poet, the orator, the musician are starting to dominate the King in him. His many troops force thriftiness on him, and yet I dare say he's too thrifty. It is impossible to possess more ésprit than he does, but very possible to make a better use of it. He's never more charming than if he wants to please you, and he always wants this to flatter his love of self. Once he has charmed you, he neglects you and regards you as his slave, who is there to obey him in a servile manner and to put up with all his moods.
He's harsh and masterful towards his brothers. He holds them in an utter dependency which he himself never got used to when having it on his father who made everyone tremble. This father knew him very well and once told him: "When you are lord and master here, you will betray everyone, for you can't help yourself. You are false to the core of your being, and a betrayer. Be careful, Friedrich! Make that first betrayal as complete as possible, for you won't manage to fool them a second time." I have a trusthworthy second source for this anecdote, for it has been confirmed to me by the crown prince, his worthy brother. I hope thus to have drawn some traits of his character for you. In totem, he remains an enigma.
Since the emphasis on this collection is on the Friedrich/Maria Theresia arch nemesis relationship, we get treated to several of the things they said and wrote about each other.
He said, She Said: Our Younger Years
Fritz‘ idea of a pep talk on 27th April 1745 (this would be during Silesia 2):
„Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman, has not given up hope when her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna, when they had conquered her richest provinces – and you don’t want to show as much courage as this woman, and in a moment, too, when we haven’t lost a single battle and made a single loss!“
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean? Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this woman" of courage later that same year, it's the
most dire betrayal...
On the MT side of things that same year, here she is in conversation with Venetian ambassador Errizzo reporting in the September of 1745 (i.e. when she's about to meet Wilhelmine and see her husband Franz Stephan crowned: "(Friedrich) she called a prince who, despite the ease with which he breaks his word - and that he does so can't be called a minor flaw - can't be denied to possess a great acumen, a comprehensive talent and a relentless occupation with his duties as a ruler. As a general, he adds to these qualities an always alert vigilance, which she judges to be absolutely essential for the profession."
Given the examples of marriage Fritz was familiar with, it's not surprising that the one of MT and Franz Stephan baffled him. As with Valory's letter about Fritz, bits and pieces from the following letter were already familiar to me, just not this amount. The letter is written by Louis-Marie de Fouquet, Comte de Gisors, who was the nephew of the Marshal Belle-Isle (France's main military man during the Austrian War of succession) and in September 1754 attended first an Austrian manoeuvre (where MT and FS had been present) and then a Prussian manoeuvre.
As soon as Friedrich saw me, he pulled me aside and and bombarded me with questions about Maria Theresia (...) Above all, the King wanted to know how the Empress acted towards the troops. "Does she flatter them? Does she talk to the officers?"
I replied that I had seen her act graciously towards everyone, but without spotting those subtle differences who distinguish the one or encourage the competitive rivalry in the other. However, I added that I had never watched her talk to subaltern officers.
"And the Emperor?"
"Your Majesty, he is very polite and wears his uniform when in the camp. Basically, it seemed to me as if what happened during manouevres did not touch him deeply. He noticed the mistakes correctly, and joked without reproving them, and instead lead Field Marshal Browne act."
"Doesn't one want to say", Friedrich exclaimed, "that the woman has dressed up as a man and the man as a woman? At least the Emperor shows the behavior of a good honest househusband leaving all to his wife."
I looked down and returned that I had noticed that the Empress showed great consideration to the Emperor. (...)
"She must be a strange woman", the King remarked, "much more masculine than feminine. Does she come across as being very busy?"
"Your Majesty, she works from morning to late in the night, and given her strong willpower, she would accomplish very great deeds if she got supported by her ministers in the same way. Her behaviour in the last war proves her courage and her strength of character. Something I especially observed with her was the exquisite courtesy she showed towards everyone. She seemed to use all the advantages of her sex to charm those who come to her court. It is amazing how her face grows more beautiful when she talks, and in which degree she possesses the gift of talking graciously to people even if she feels very differently towards them."
As opposed to, you know, certain other monarchs the good Comte could think of. Fritz being Fritz, he made the "MT is totally the man in that relationship!" quip re: the MT/FS marriage to a lot of people. Unsurprisingly, FS heard about it, too. And had fun with Ambassador Podewils on August 31st, 1748:
(Franz Stephan) believes to know your majesty's character: you had a very energetic mind, and one shouldn't give you opportunity to catch fire. He also knows that your Majesty has said of him that he was a good man without any power and thus of no earthly use. I replied with urgency that one had given him wrong information. (...) He replied that he wasn't particularly gullilble, but that he had the observations your majesty had made about him from a good source; he still assured me that he wasn't insulted in the least; he would keep exactly the same friendship for your majesty your majesty showed him and would always have the sincere wish to contribute to the harmony between the Empress-Queen and your majesty.
Make of that what you will, Fritz. Fritz in the 1780s told Luchesini that he had at once regarded Franz Stephan as a mediocrity when meeting him in the weeks around Fritz' official engagement to Elisabeth Christine, when Franzl had been on the Grand Tour and passed through Prussia. This, however, is in strict contrast to what Fritz wrote at the time to his sister Wilhelmine:
Berlin, March 15th 1732. (...) The Duke of Lorraine has departed today. He is the most charming prince I ever met. He has so much wit, and a noble, free bearing. We have become very good friends, and when people see us together, they must believe us to be idiots because we can't stop laughing and joking with each other. The Duke shows so much ésprit that it is impossible to ever tire of him. He is a wonderful raconteur, and always high spirited. He is very vivacious and yet knows how to control his vivacity in a way that enable him to charm both more sedate people and those like him and me, the foolish ones. I'll tell you some of his zingers when we meet; they will delight you! (...)
The Duchess as Bevern will leave soon with her daughter. We're spending our time making presents to each other. THe King is very satisfied with his daughter-in-law, and gracious towards me. I have hinted to her she should tell me to reccommend herself to you, but she has left her mind and capacity to talk in Braunschweig.
I'm enclosing a little souvenir which I hope will be useful to you in your current situation. At least you can see from it that I love my dearest Mine still faithfully and and truly, and that one could hack me to pieces before claiming I don't adore you. Farewell. P.S. My regards to your husband. If you love me, send me a ribbon you have worn for fourteen days. Don't forget my best to Sonsine. Lolotte (Charlotte) has grown very pretty, and so has Sophie.
Franz Stephan died in the mid 1760s; his son Joseph became MT's co-ruler, and since the monarch he modelled himself upon was none other than his mother's arch nemesis, some of MT's most interesting and insightful comments on the matter of Fritz from her later years hail from her letters to her son.
Maria Theresia about Frederick the Great: Middle Age and onwards edition
From September 14th, 1766, in a letter which obviously isn't just about Joseph and could count as another portrait of the unnamed Fritz:
My dear Son -
(..) be careful to enjoy yourself by making malicious quips. Your heart isn't yet evil, but it will become so. It's high time not to indulge yourself in all the puns, all the witty sayings which only aim at humiliating other people, to make them look ridiculous; this is how you estrange yourself from all decent people and make them believe that humankind doesn't deserve to be respected, even while one has distanced through one's own actions everything which is good until only villains, imitators and flattering admirers of one's own talents are left, and only they are still getting entrance in one's heart.
After this long sermon which you will forgive my heart for - I do love you and my countries all too much - I will draw a comparison for you regarding your gifts and indulgences. You are a coquette of the mind, and wherever you think you can find ésprit, you run after it without applying judgment. A pun, a particularly adroit phrase occupies you, you may read it in a book or hear someone say it. Then you use that phrase at the next opportunity, without considering wether or not it really fits, perhaps like your sister Elisabeth with her beauty. She may please the Swiss guard or a prince, she doesn't care and is content and does not want anything else.
As I am closing this letter, I am taking your head with both hands, embrace you tenderly and wish you will forgive me for boring you with such long speeches; only look at the heart which has produced them - I want only for the world to love and esteem you as you deserve. I always remain
your good old mother
This is is one way of saying "Don't be like Fritz, you don't want to pay the human price" without ever mentioning his name. A more direct comment from MT to Joseph quote I worked into my Fritz & MT fanfiction is from 14th Sepember 1766: "But has this hero who won himself such fame, has this conqueror a single friend? Doesn't he have to distrust the entire world? What kind of life is this, that has humanity banished out of it?"
Jessen's book also has Joseph's report on his encounter with Fritz in Neisse, wherein he tries to demonstrate to Mom how he's kept his cool, because he's the rational fanboy. The letter is dated August 29th, 1769:
Dear Mother, at last you shall have some disconnected news about my strange journey to Neisse. (...) The King has overwhelmed us with politeness and friendliness. He's a genius and a man who talks wonderfully well, but he doesn't say a word which does not betray the rascal in him. I do believe he wants peace, not out of the goodness of his heart but because he recognizes that he can't win anything by going to war. I've asked him about all kind of things. (...) But I can't possibly tell you all, since we were in conversation for at least sixteen hours per day with each other. (...) Anyway, everything showed his fear of Russia's power, which he also wants to transmit to us. Regarding religion, he was very restrained, even with malicious zingers. He talked with the greatest respect about you, and with much respect of Kaunitz.
(Kaunitz is MT's and later Joseph's first minister.)
I must say, all the "I totally saw through Fritz, Mom!...during the sixteen hours per day we talked to each other" cracks me up to no end. (I mean. 16 hours? Per day?)
Incidentally, Fritz had brought Heinrich along on this first trip, but Joseph, unsurprisingly, had only eyes for Fritz. Something else the original documents in Jessen and Volz tell me is that in order to be polite, Fritz and his entourage wore the Austrian white uniforms "to spare the Austrians the sight of the Prussian blue (they) have encountered on the field so often", as one of the Austrian delegation was told, who in his letter snarked, you know, we could have born the sight, and also it wouldn't have showcased the King's tobacco snuff as much as the white uniform did.
BTW, MT also took some tobacco, though not as much as Fritz did. She does, however, mention it in a letter to a female friend as something good for keeping you awake and alert and sends snuff box with the stuff in it. Considering her working schedule had similar hours to Fritz' schedule, this is not surprising. It's a drug for sleepless workoholics, alright. (Neither of them considered smoking it, though.)
And here's MT, revealing herself to be either a secret Voltaire reader or just by sheer coincidence hitting up on a suspiciously familiar Voltairian phrase. Context: Joseph has forwarded her a letter from Fritz. Which is handwritten by Fritz, and thus really terribly spelled. Says Maria Theresia, educated by Jesuits:
I confess my weakness: this writing in his own hand when he's surrounded by 40 000 men, (...) sounding like a theatre king or theatre despot has amused me. So this villain is not as versatile as that, and he would, on this occasion, have been in dire need of someone to clean his dirty laundry again.
Not that Joseph's kind of being a Fritz fan ever went the Peter III. way. He believed in imitation via competition, which turned out to be even more disturbing to his mother than mere admiration would have been, since it affected the peace of her realms. Fast forward to more than a decade later, and Joseph is like Fritz in the worst way, i.e. by invading Bavaria. Here's Mom trying to argue him out of it, on March 14th, 1778, very much belying son Leopold's claim that she was half senile near the end of her life, for that letter, written two years before her death, shows Maria Theresia the politician at the top of her game:
Maria Theresia about why invading Bavaria and starting another war with Prussia is a terrible idea
The obstacles and dangers which were predictable from the moment things were set in march to Bavaria have now happened and keep piling up. Consequently, I would be unworthy to bear the name of Princess and Mother if I would not act according to circumstance - without considering how far my own existence could be affected. Nothing less than the loss of our House and Empire, perhaps even an upcoming revolt in Europe could be at stake. No sacrifice is too much to prevent this misfortune in time. I'll gladly play the scapegoat, even at the risk of my reputation. May people call me crazy, weak and cowardly - nothing will stop me from tear Europe away from this dangerous position. I don't know a better way of spending the rest of my miserable life. (...)
I must draw a picture of our military and political situation, and I am all the more obliged to do so as anything further will be the consequence of the step I am about to make, which I owe to my conscience, my duty and my love. The King of Prussia's army outnumbers ours by thirty to fortythousand men, especially in the cavalry. His position is far more advantagous, we have to march twice that far in order to get where we would need to get to. He has fortresses, we don't have a single one. We have to protect far stretched countries but we would have to withdraw all the troops form them and leave them unprotected to any invasion or uprising. This is the case with Galizia, in which less than two hundred horses and seven bataillons of old invalids remain. The province is open to anyone, after we hardly got it; it is anything but secured. The spirit of freedom there hasn't been soothed, and the nation has proven that it is determined if anyone fans the flame. The King of Prussia and for that matter the King of Poland and the en tire nation won't hesitate to use their advantage at the first given opportunity, especially since now the law of the strong prevails, and no one will feel it harder than we will.
Hungary, too, is free of troops, and in its close neighbourhood, the war between Russians and Turks will start anew. The Prussian dealings with Constantinople are known, and the latest letter of the King of Prussia don't leave any doubt that he won't leave any method untried in order to put this particular enemy in our backyard, too, who could take whatever he wanted in Hungary, since it is free of troops and fortresses. If our armies stood in Saxony, or even Silesia - which I doubt they would - or in the Upper Palatinate, it would be impossible to bring help to the two large kingdoms of Galizia and Hungary. We would have to leave them to their sad fate, to the whim of a barbaric enemy and to all the devastation which would be the consequence, and would destroy those countries for a generation. I won't even mention our provinces in Italy, the Netherlands and our new possessions in Bavaria. All of these would have to be given up, and where on earth should we take the means from to conduct this horrible war if we have to give up five countries right at the start? Where should the trust come from which would give us allies and financial resources? And why should our own countries trust us any longer if they see they are getting taxed heavily in peacetime for their defense, but are getting given up in the first danger of a war? Of a war which, once we've started it, would now end with our utter ruin, and this downfall would even be the only method to save Europe, and it would be our own fault. It is this which I will never agree to and never give my blessing to, for everything is at stake. Let's not indulge in delusions. Once the sword is out of its sheath, there won't be any time for reconciliation. The well being of thousands and thousands of human beings, the survival of our empire depend on this. After all which I have said I must tell you that I cannot permit myself to act against my conscience and my conviction; this is neither a mood nor cowardice.
Let's just say that after this letter, Joseph should not have been surprised that she went behind his back and unprecedentally reached out to Fritz when he didn't listen. What Jessen's collection of documents also tell me is that the official peace between Prussia and Austria was made on May 13th 1779, which was MT's birthday.
Jessen also quotes not one but two poems by Matthias Claudius. One is the "Sie machte Frieden" poem written after MT's death, which I'll quote later. The other was written directly after the (still bloodless) war of the Bavarian succession had ended instead of evolving into another 7 Years War, which was what everyone, including MT had been afraid of, and this one was new to me. It goes thusly:
Die Kaiserin und Friederich
Nach manchem Kampf und Siege
Entzweiten endlich aber sich
Und rüsteten zum Kriege
Und zogen mutig aus ins Feld
Und hatten stolze Heere,
Schier zu erfechten eine Welt
Und » Heldenruhm und Ehre « .
Da fühlten beide groß und gut
Die Menschenvater -Würde,
Und wieviel Elend , wieviel Blut
Der Krieg noch kosten würde,
Und dachten , wie doch alles gar
Vergänglich sei hienieden ,
Und sahen an ihr graues Haar . . .
Und machten wieder Frieden .
(The Empress and Friedrich/After many a fight and victory/were at odds again/and armed themselves for war/ They bravely went into the field/and had proud armies/to fight for a world/ and for 'heroic courage and honor'./ Then, both felt good and great/the dignity of being a parent to human kind/and how much misery, how much blood/this war would cost,/ and thought of how everything/was mortal on this plain/and looked at each their own grey hair.../and made peace again.)
Meanwhile, Poland: The First Partitioning as reflected by MT and Fritz
Fritz not reading any German literature, I doubt he ever saw it, but MT might have. This was her near the end of the 1770s. At the start of that decade, the first Partitoning of Poland - in which Prussia, Russia and Austria carved Poland up like the big scale robbers they were - was something she never quite managed to numb her conscience about. MT on the one hand thought this entire Poland partitioning was shameless robbery, which it was, but on the other wanted/accepted her share, which she did. There is a famous but apocryphal quip by Fritz which gets quoted on this a lot, but no one has ever been able to find it in any of his letters or even in his described conversations in other people's memoirs, so biographers were reluctantly forced to admit that it was probably invented after the fact by other people but sounded so much like something he would have said that it stuck. In several variations, this apocryphal quote goes "she cried, and the more she cried, the more she took".
Jessen does, however, have a letter from MT on the subject to one of her younger sons, Ferdinand (yes, she had a Ferdinand, too), dated September 12th 1772:
You will see the entire miserable development of this matter. I have refused it for a long time! Only the blows after blows in the forms of the Turks attacking, the lack of a prospect of getting support from France or England in this, the likelihood of having to conduct a war against both Russia and Prussia otherwise, misery, famine and sickness in my countries forced me to accept these bloody proposals, which throw a shadow over my entire rule. God will make me face my responsibility for this in the other world. I must admit to you that I cannot get over this matter, it lies heavily on my heart, haunts me and poisons my already sad days. I must stop writing about this in order not to get even more upset and not to sink into the blackest melancholia.
Meanwhile, Fritz and Heinrich (who'd negotiated the partitioning with Catherine to begin with) had no such problems enjoying their gains. The treaty of the First Partitioning of Poland is dated to March 4th, 1772. On June 12th, Fritz is on a tour through his newly aquired territories to inspect them and writes to Heinrich (sorry about the one somewhat antisemitic crack in this excerpt):
I have seen this Prussia which I basically received from your hand. It is a very good and advantageous aquisition, both for the political position of the state and for our finances. However, in order not to awake too much jealousy I'm telling everyone who wants to hear it that I have only observed sand, fir trees, bracken and Jews on my journey. In any case, this land will cause me a lot of work, too, for I believe Canada to be as civilized as Pommerellen; no order, no districts. The towns are in a pitiable state. Kulm, for example, is supposed to have eighthundred houses, but there are only a hundred standing. (...) As far as the army is concerned, I've found the entire cavalry of this area to be as good as hours. Regarding the infanty, the garnison regiments of the province equal the field regiments. The field regiments here are larger than those of Berlin. But there will have to be some personnel changes for the staff offficers and the subaltern officers. The great mistake in the drilling of the troops consists in them loading badly, don't fall into step easily and don't aim too well. But that can be practiced during the following year, and God willing, the entire army will be on the same level and equally organized next year.
Losing your best enemy
Neither MT nor Fritz lived to see Poland further divided, let alone experienced the consequences reaching through to the 20th century. Having brought the "potato war" of the Bavarian Succession to an early and peceful ending, MT died in the November of 1780, several of her children, including Joseph, at her side, after three days in which she and everyone else knew she was dying, and she refused to fall asleep, being determined to face her death full alert. Her last words vary from account to account, but personally, I've always favoured "Such ill weather for such a long journey". Matthias Claudius, a Protestant Northern German, wrote his second poem about her death which Jessen puts at the end of the last MT section of his book:
Sie machte Frieden ! Das ist mein Gedicht.
War ihres Volkes Lust und ihres Volkes Segen
Und ging getrost und voller Zuversicht
Dem Tod als ihrem Freund entgegen .
Ein Welteroberer kann das nicht.
Sie machte Frieden! Das ist mein Gedicht.
Rhymed translation by yours truly:
This is my poem: she made peace!
She was her people's blessing and delight,
went confident, comforted and at ease
To face her death. Her death, and not a fight.
No conqueror of the world can have such release.
This is my poem: she made peace!
The last Fritz section goes on for a while longer. Jessen has the letter from Fritz - to D'Alembert, as it turns out, dated January 6th 1781 - which has the famously revisioninstic "I was never her enemy" quote in it; what I hadn't known before reading the complete letter was that he then, bereft of his best enemy, transitions right to his next target, German literature. Writes he:
And yet, I have regretted the death of the Empress-Queen: she brought honor to her throne and sex; I have gone to war with her, but I was never her enemy. Regarding the Emperor, the son of this great woman: I know him personally; he seemed too enlightened to me to me to make overhasty steps; I esteem him and do not fear him. (...) To give you a proof of just how calmly minded I am, I include a little brochure which aims at showing the flaws of German literature and to explain the means by which it can improve. You will mock the care I'm taking to teach a people which until now has been good at nothing but eat, drink, make love and make war to have at least a little understanding of taste and Attic salt. But a man wants to be useful; often a word falls on fertile soil and bears unexpected fruit.
Yep, he announces his trashing of (unread by him) German literature in the same letter. (Also, Fritz, I thought Joseph "the son of this great woman" was the coming menace of Europe? That's what you've told all your other correspondants, at least.) And Jessen, bless, has the passage in "De La Literature Allemande" which is specifically aimed at Goethe (and Shakespeare, while he's at it). For a summing up of the Old Fritz vs German Literature affair, see here. And now, behold this glorious proof of just how calmly minded Fritz is:
To convince yourself of the utter lack of taste that to this day rules in Germany, you only have to go to the theatre. That's where you see the despicable plays by Shakespeare produced in the German language, see the entire audience swoon at hearing these ridiculous farces which are worthy of a Canadian savage. I call them thus because they go against every rule of theatre. These rules are not random! They are to be found in Aristotle's poetics. There, the unity of time, place and action are prescribed. But the English plays provide an action which takes place through years. Where's the plausibility there? Baggage carriers and grave diggers show up and hold speeches that suit their stations; and then, princes and Queens appear. This strange brewery of the elevated and the low, of slapstick and tragedy is supposed to please and touch people? One may forgive Shakespare such odd abberations; for the birth of the arts was never the time of their maturity. But now, a "Götz von Berlichingen" appears on the stage, a disgusting imitation of those terrible English plays, and the audience applauds and demands with enthusiasm more of these tasteless rubbish. I know, you can't argue about taste. But allow me to tell you one thing: who enjoys acrobats and puppets just as much as the tragedies of Racine just wants to pass time. He prefers something which appeals to his eyes to something which appeals to the mind and to the heart!
German writers of the day: *headdesk, as described in another entry*
(Herder: Go polish your rusty armor, old man. Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.)
Jessen also quotes a letter from Goethe to a buddy of his, Merck, like him and most Germans that age a (in Merck's case now former) Fritz fanboy, who asked "OMG, have you read what Fritz wrote?" ):
No one should have been surprised by the pamplet of the old King if one knew him for who he actually is. If the audience hears of a hero who has done great deeds, it forms him convenient to the common idea, subtle, high-minded and well educated; in the same way, one assumes a man who otherwise has done much to posses clarity and precision of the mind. One imagines him without bias and actually well informed and educated. This is what has happened with the King; but just as he has done great deeds in his shabby blue uniform and his humpbacked figure, he has forced the events of history by his stubborn, prejudiced and unteachable imagination.
I.e. he could not have done so with with a balanced and fair mindset. Elaborating further on the argument that the very thing which made Fritz great was his imperfection, Goethe replies to yet another correspondant asking him "OMG, have you read that?!?".
There's nothing strange to me about the King mentioning my play unfavourably. A powerful man who rules over thousands with a sceptre of iron, has to find the creation of a free and cheeky youth unbearable. Besides, a tolerant taste can't be the distinguishing characteristic of a King, and would not, had he possessed it, have allowed him to make a great name for himself; I rather think that the great and noble live by exclusivity.
If something de Luynes noticed about young Fritz - " he doesn’t mind getting a reply, even a strong one, as long it is a good one" - still held true of old Fritz, methinks he might have appreciated this riposte.
In the case of this editor, it's also soon obvious from his editorial comments that while respecting Maria Theresia, he's definitely favoring the Prussian side of things. When we get to the 7 Years War, there are accounts of civilians suffering through Austrian, French or Russian soldiers, but not through Prussian ones, which after reading Mitchell's dispatches - and Mitchell sided with the Prussians! - relatively recently is especially glaring.
This is how Jessen summarizes Silesia 1:
MT’s Dad dies.
Fritz: really really wants Prussia & Austria to team up against the French (editor believes this claim of his in a letter to FS completely), and when not hearing any offers in that regard, kidnaps Silesia to enforce his offer of „protection“ to FS and MT.
MT: No, you gangster. Go to hell, and take your protection racket with you.
Editor: „Friedrich war erschüttert über so viel Hass.“ („Friedrich was stunned by so much hatred.“)
He also says that cunningly, Austrian propagandists painted Fritz as a ruthless robber re: Silesia. I’m not sure where the cunning and the progaganda lie in that one, Jessen.
The other downside, especially for newbies, is that all the sources get quoted without telling us whether or not they're generally regarded as reliable. Which means that Friedrich's own accounts, Wilhelmine's memoirs or Catt's memoirs all share the distinction of getting quoted from without as much as a footnote indicating that, um, some contemporaries might disagree, and/or: some historians have since discovered event X did not happen on that day, and quote Y can't have been said by someone who wasn't there, etc.
All these nitpicks aside, though, it's a great source book, and in addition to containing by now familiar documents it had a lot of documents from which I only knew individual phrases, but not the entire texts, which sometimes recontextualize previously known quotes quite differently. I've excerpted some especially intriguing gems.
Hot or Not: Portraits of Fritz
Nearly always intriguing are the portraits - both in the sense of physical and in the sense of character descriptions - given by foreign envoys or visitors to the court. I've already quoted Prussian Ambassador's description of Maria Theresia elsewhere. Here are two pen portraits of Friedrich, first a briefer one from 1742 - i.e. he's about 30 years old - , by a son of the Duke Charles-Philippe de Luynes.
„The King of Prussia is small, pretty plumb but not fat. He has the appearance of a wit, beautiful eyes, a full, vivacious face, pretty good teeth, thick, brown hair, and a noble nature. He has wit, and a somewhat superficial general education; he has neglected the sciences with which he appeared to occupy himself as a crown prince recently. (…) He asks vivid, witty questions that demand, even force concise answers. He is eager for knowledge about the customs of other countries, and asks thoroughly about them, especially the military habits which he investigates intensely; for he wants to test the uniforms, the armory, the manoeuvres, drills and habits of all troops. He has military talent, and knows it, so he doesn’t want to use that of others, nor listen to their advice.
He is polite and tries to say pleasant things, though at his core he is arrogant; the efforts others make are regarded as nothing by him. He himself shoulders hardships admirably, even the toughest life. He lives soberly. He can’t resist needling and maliciously mocking where he notices ridiculousness, but he doesn’t mind getting a reply, even a strong one, as long it is a good one.“
Ten years later, there's a far longer account by the French envoy, Charles-Guy Marquis de Valory. Valory had known Fritz at this point for a decade. He was the French ambassador during Silesia 2 between Silesia 2 and intermittently (i.e. switching with other envoys) until shortly before the 7 Years War. Friends with the Divine Trio (Friedrich's three younger brothers). Got nearly captured by Austrians during Silesia 2, which his secretary Darget prevented by claiming to be Valory, which got Darget hired by Fritz thereafter and later meant both Darget and Valory co-starred in Fritz raunchy satiric poem "Palladion" about Darget getting buggered by Austrians for the cause.
Now I've seen quotes from this particular Valory dispatch before, but never the entire letter. Even Jessen doesn't give us the entire letter, but he quotes more from it than I've ever seen, and it's absolutely fascinating as a not unsympathetic (imo) but highly critical psychological dissection of Fritz in the early 1750s. Valory also provides a source for a "Friedrich Wilhelm about Fritz" quote which I had seen only once, in a work of fiction, and thus didn't know whether or not it was authentic until finding this letter in Jessen's anthology.
I beginn with his portrait. His face is compelling. He's small and of noble bearing. His figure isn't regular; his hips are too high, and his legs are too strong. He has beautiful blue eyes which are a bit too strongly pronounced, but easily reflect his moods, so their expression varies depending on his state of mind. If he's dissatisfied with something, their gaze is threatening, but nothing is more soft, gracious and captivating than if he's in a mood to please. His hair is thick, mouth and nose agreeable, his smile charming and witty, but often bitter and mocking. When his soul is peaceful, the softness of his gaze can charm anyone. His health varies, his temper heated, and his personal life style contributes quite a lot to heating his blood. He used to drink incredible amounts of coffee. One day, I dared to tell him that he drank too much coffee; he admitted as much and said he was trying to abandon the habit. "I now drink only six to seven cups in the morning", he said, "and after supper only one."
The King is extreme in anything he does. His main character flaw is his misanthropy. A virtuous and enlightened man is his ideal, and in his opinion the most foolish people are called honorable men. In general, he finds only a few to have wit, and he doesn't esteem the so colled common sense which as opposed to wit can provide a right and sound judgment. Anyone has their share of the later, and only a ruler of judgment can esteem everyone correctly, and if a man has his right place, he can surprise even the most witty people. The King talks a lot and very well, but he listens very little, and mocks every objection.
One can be hardly more daring than he is; hence his contempt for humanity. He speaks out against vice with surprising eloquence. The same is true for morals, the most beautiful traits of which he seems to have learned to name by heart. But he's so little consequential and believes so little in what he says that his own claims refute him only fifteen minutes later.
He does have principles regarding administration, and, if I may say so, even about temper and disloyal reports. Fortunately what he decides when in a mood isn't set in stone; he usually returns to a correct judgment. If, however, his decision is made, he has no regard for etiquette. As soon as something he has come up with and pondered thoroughly appears right to him, he abandons all restraint in order to execute it. He is extremely suspicious; if he was less so, he'd be content to have come up with good ideas and would delegate their execution to his ministers, who are more sensible than he is and would soften any too great harshness.
Again: he has contempt for humankind and believes people are born to obey without talking back. This explains the excess in his behavior and the obvious paradoxes which amaze all who managed to get closer to him. I always have tried to analyze the immediate causes he named for his rejections, as well as the reasons why he hurt or flattered those close to him. In most cases, I had to admit his reasons were good, though not the form they took.
He owes the conquest of Silesia (...) to his boundless energy. (...) The good status of his troops and his magazines which were equipped with all that was needed to start a campaign with a strong army heightened his audacity and made him reckless for as long as he was confronted by only a handful of troops dispersed across a few Silesian fortresses. As soon as he was confronted with a proper army, he got conscious of all the dangers he faced. I dare to say he even exaggareted them in his mind. His consistent fortune has nourished his boldness for a while, but since then he thought about this and has admitted he owes much to luck. His enemy in a distance is always politics. The later often get scorned as being dependent on the moment, especially the Saxons, and yet during the campaign of 1744, they caused him the deepest trouble, but he punished them thouroughly for it in 1745. In this last campaign, he has shown the talents of a great general. But he believes to have all the talents, both those of a King and of a writer, which is a strange brew; we see the great man occupy himself with trifles.
The arts have become his weakness, in the same way as his royal father had a weakness for anyone above six feet. He pursues the reputation of a polymath - the poet, the orator, the musician are starting to dominate the King in him. His many troops force thriftiness on him, and yet I dare say he's too thrifty. It is impossible to possess more ésprit than he does, but very possible to make a better use of it. He's never more charming than if he wants to please you, and he always wants this to flatter his love of self. Once he has charmed you, he neglects you and regards you as his slave, who is there to obey him in a servile manner and to put up with all his moods.
He's harsh and masterful towards his brothers. He holds them in an utter dependency which he himself never got used to when having it on his father who made everyone tremble. This father knew him very well and once told him: "When you are lord and master here, you will betray everyone, for you can't help yourself. You are false to the core of your being, and a betrayer. Be careful, Friedrich! Make that first betrayal as complete as possible, for you won't manage to fool them a second time." I have a trusthworthy second source for this anecdote, for it has been confirmed to me by the crown prince, his worthy brother. I hope thus to have drawn some traits of his character for you. In totem, he remains an enigma.
Since the emphasis on this collection is on the Friedrich/Maria Theresia arch nemesis relationship, we get treated to several of the things they said and wrote about each other.
He said, She Said: Our Younger Years
Fritz‘ idea of a pep talk on 27th April 1745 (this would be during Silesia 2):
„Just think that even the Queen of Hungary, a woman, has not given up hope when her enemies had arrived at the walls of Vienna, when they had conquered her richest provinces – and you don’t want to show as much courage as this woman, and in a moment, too, when we haven’t lost a single battle and made a single loss!“
Love the "Enemies had conquered her richest provinces". Whoever could he mean? Also, note that when Wilhelmine meets "this woman" of courage later that same year, it's the
most dire betrayal...
On the MT side of things that same year, here she is in conversation with Venetian ambassador Errizzo reporting in the September of 1745 (i.e. when she's about to meet Wilhelmine and see her husband Franz Stephan crowned: "(Friedrich) she called a prince who, despite the ease with which he breaks his word - and that he does so can't be called a minor flaw - can't be denied to possess a great acumen, a comprehensive talent and a relentless occupation with his duties as a ruler. As a general, he adds to these qualities an always alert vigilance, which she judges to be absolutely essential for the profession."
Given the examples of marriage Fritz was familiar with, it's not surprising that the one of MT and Franz Stephan baffled him. As with Valory's letter about Fritz, bits and pieces from the following letter were already familiar to me, just not this amount. The letter is written by Louis-Marie de Fouquet, Comte de Gisors, who was the nephew of the Marshal Belle-Isle (France's main military man during the Austrian War of succession) and in September 1754 attended first an Austrian manoeuvre (where MT and FS had been present) and then a Prussian manoeuvre.
As soon as Friedrich saw me, he pulled me aside and and bombarded me with questions about Maria Theresia (...) Above all, the King wanted to know how the Empress acted towards the troops. "Does she flatter them? Does she talk to the officers?"
I replied that I had seen her act graciously towards everyone, but without spotting those subtle differences who distinguish the one or encourage the competitive rivalry in the other. However, I added that I had never watched her talk to subaltern officers.
"And the Emperor?"
"Your Majesty, he is very polite and wears his uniform when in the camp. Basically, it seemed to me as if what happened during manouevres did not touch him deeply. He noticed the mistakes correctly, and joked without reproving them, and instead lead Field Marshal Browne act."
"Doesn't one want to say", Friedrich exclaimed, "that the woman has dressed up as a man and the man as a woman? At least the Emperor shows the behavior of a good honest househusband leaving all to his wife."
I looked down and returned that I had noticed that the Empress showed great consideration to the Emperor. (...)
"She must be a strange woman", the King remarked, "much more masculine than feminine. Does she come across as being very busy?"
"Your Majesty, she works from morning to late in the night, and given her strong willpower, she would accomplish very great deeds if she got supported by her ministers in the same way. Her behaviour in the last war proves her courage and her strength of character. Something I especially observed with her was the exquisite courtesy she showed towards everyone. She seemed to use all the advantages of her sex to charm those who come to her court. It is amazing how her face grows more beautiful when she talks, and in which degree she possesses the gift of talking graciously to people even if she feels very differently towards them."
As opposed to, you know, certain other monarchs the good Comte could think of. Fritz being Fritz, he made the "MT is totally the man in that relationship!" quip re: the MT/FS marriage to a lot of people. Unsurprisingly, FS heard about it, too. And had fun with Ambassador Podewils on August 31st, 1748:
(Franz Stephan) believes to know your majesty's character: you had a very energetic mind, and one shouldn't give you opportunity to catch fire. He also knows that your Majesty has said of him that he was a good man without any power and thus of no earthly use. I replied with urgency that one had given him wrong information. (...) He replied that he wasn't particularly gullilble, but that he had the observations your majesty had made about him from a good source; he still assured me that he wasn't insulted in the least; he would keep exactly the same friendship for your majesty your majesty showed him and would always have the sincere wish to contribute to the harmony between the Empress-Queen and your majesty.
Make of that what you will, Fritz. Fritz in the 1780s told Luchesini that he had at once regarded Franz Stephan as a mediocrity when meeting him in the weeks around Fritz' official engagement to Elisabeth Christine, when Franzl had been on the Grand Tour and passed through Prussia. This, however, is in strict contrast to what Fritz wrote at the time to his sister Wilhelmine:
Berlin, March 15th 1732. (...) The Duke of Lorraine has departed today. He is the most charming prince I ever met. He has so much wit, and a noble, free bearing. We have become very good friends, and when people see us together, they must believe us to be idiots because we can't stop laughing and joking with each other. The Duke shows so much ésprit that it is impossible to ever tire of him. He is a wonderful raconteur, and always high spirited. He is very vivacious and yet knows how to control his vivacity in a way that enable him to charm both more sedate people and those like him and me, the foolish ones. I'll tell you some of his zingers when we meet; they will delight you! (...)
The Duchess as Bevern will leave soon with her daughter. We're spending our time making presents to each other. THe King is very satisfied with his daughter-in-law, and gracious towards me. I have hinted to her she should tell me to reccommend herself to you, but she has left her mind and capacity to talk in Braunschweig.
I'm enclosing a little souvenir which I hope will be useful to you in your current situation. At least you can see from it that I love my dearest Mine still faithfully and and truly, and that one could hack me to pieces before claiming I don't adore you. Farewell. P.S. My regards to your husband. If you love me, send me a ribbon you have worn for fourteen days. Don't forget my best to Sonsine. Lolotte (Charlotte) has grown very pretty, and so has Sophie.
Franz Stephan died in the mid 1760s; his son Joseph became MT's co-ruler, and since the monarch he modelled himself upon was none other than his mother's arch nemesis, some of MT's most interesting and insightful comments on the matter of Fritz from her later years hail from her letters to her son.
Maria Theresia about Frederick the Great: Middle Age and onwards edition
From September 14th, 1766, in a letter which obviously isn't just about Joseph and could count as another portrait of the unnamed Fritz:
My dear Son -
(..) be careful to enjoy yourself by making malicious quips. Your heart isn't yet evil, but it will become so. It's high time not to indulge yourself in all the puns, all the witty sayings which only aim at humiliating other people, to make them look ridiculous; this is how you estrange yourself from all decent people and make them believe that humankind doesn't deserve to be respected, even while one has distanced through one's own actions everything which is good until only villains, imitators and flattering admirers of one's own talents are left, and only they are still getting entrance in one's heart.
After this long sermon which you will forgive my heart for - I do love you and my countries all too much - I will draw a comparison for you regarding your gifts and indulgences. You are a coquette of the mind, and wherever you think you can find ésprit, you run after it without applying judgment. A pun, a particularly adroit phrase occupies you, you may read it in a book or hear someone say it. Then you use that phrase at the next opportunity, without considering wether or not it really fits, perhaps like your sister Elisabeth with her beauty. She may please the Swiss guard or a prince, she doesn't care and is content and does not want anything else.
As I am closing this letter, I am taking your head with both hands, embrace you tenderly and wish you will forgive me for boring you with such long speeches; only look at the heart which has produced them - I want only for the world to love and esteem you as you deserve. I always remain
your good old mother
This is is one way of saying "Don't be like Fritz, you don't want to pay the human price" without ever mentioning his name. A more direct comment from MT to Joseph quote I worked into my Fritz & MT fanfiction is from 14th Sepember 1766: "But has this hero who won himself such fame, has this conqueror a single friend? Doesn't he have to distrust the entire world? What kind of life is this, that has humanity banished out of it?"
Jessen's book also has Joseph's report on his encounter with Fritz in Neisse, wherein he tries to demonstrate to Mom how he's kept his cool, because he's the rational fanboy. The letter is dated August 29th, 1769:
Dear Mother, at last you shall have some disconnected news about my strange journey to Neisse. (...) The King has overwhelmed us with politeness and friendliness. He's a genius and a man who talks wonderfully well, but he doesn't say a word which does not betray the rascal in him. I do believe he wants peace, not out of the goodness of his heart but because he recognizes that he can't win anything by going to war. I've asked him about all kind of things. (...) But I can't possibly tell you all, since we were in conversation for at least sixteen hours per day with each other. (...) Anyway, everything showed his fear of Russia's power, which he also wants to transmit to us. Regarding religion, he was very restrained, even with malicious zingers. He talked with the greatest respect about you, and with much respect of Kaunitz.
(Kaunitz is MT's and later Joseph's first minister.)
I must say, all the "I totally saw through Fritz, Mom!...during the sixteen hours per day we talked to each other" cracks me up to no end. (I mean. 16 hours? Per day?)
Incidentally, Fritz had brought Heinrich along on this first trip, but Joseph, unsurprisingly, had only eyes for Fritz. Something else the original documents in Jessen and Volz tell me is that in order to be polite, Fritz and his entourage wore the Austrian white uniforms "to spare the Austrians the sight of the Prussian blue (they) have encountered on the field so often", as one of the Austrian delegation was told, who in his letter snarked, you know, we could have born the sight, and also it wouldn't have showcased the King's tobacco snuff as much as the white uniform did.
BTW, MT also took some tobacco, though not as much as Fritz did. She does, however, mention it in a letter to a female friend as something good for keeping you awake and alert and sends snuff box with the stuff in it. Considering her working schedule had similar hours to Fritz' schedule, this is not surprising. It's a drug for sleepless workoholics, alright. (Neither of them considered smoking it, though.)
And here's MT, revealing herself to be either a secret Voltaire reader or just by sheer coincidence hitting up on a suspiciously familiar Voltairian phrase. Context: Joseph has forwarded her a letter from Fritz. Which is handwritten by Fritz, and thus really terribly spelled. Says Maria Theresia, educated by Jesuits:
I confess my weakness: this writing in his own hand when he's surrounded by 40 000 men, (...) sounding like a theatre king or theatre despot has amused me. So this villain is not as versatile as that, and he would, on this occasion, have been in dire need of someone to clean his dirty laundry again.
Not that Joseph's kind of being a Fritz fan ever went the Peter III. way. He believed in imitation via competition, which turned out to be even more disturbing to his mother than mere admiration would have been, since it affected the peace of her realms. Fast forward to more than a decade later, and Joseph is like Fritz in the worst way, i.e. by invading Bavaria. Here's Mom trying to argue him out of it, on March 14th, 1778, very much belying son Leopold's claim that she was half senile near the end of her life, for that letter, written two years before her death, shows Maria Theresia the politician at the top of her game:
Maria Theresia about why invading Bavaria and starting another war with Prussia is a terrible idea
The obstacles and dangers which were predictable from the moment things were set in march to Bavaria have now happened and keep piling up. Consequently, I would be unworthy to bear the name of Princess and Mother if I would not act according to circumstance - without considering how far my own existence could be affected. Nothing less than the loss of our House and Empire, perhaps even an upcoming revolt in Europe could be at stake. No sacrifice is too much to prevent this misfortune in time. I'll gladly play the scapegoat, even at the risk of my reputation. May people call me crazy, weak and cowardly - nothing will stop me from tear Europe away from this dangerous position. I don't know a better way of spending the rest of my miserable life. (...)
I must draw a picture of our military and political situation, and I am all the more obliged to do so as anything further will be the consequence of the step I am about to make, which I owe to my conscience, my duty and my love. The King of Prussia's army outnumbers ours by thirty to fortythousand men, especially in the cavalry. His position is far more advantagous, we have to march twice that far in order to get where we would need to get to. He has fortresses, we don't have a single one. We have to protect far stretched countries but we would have to withdraw all the troops form them and leave them unprotected to any invasion or uprising. This is the case with Galizia, in which less than two hundred horses and seven bataillons of old invalids remain. The province is open to anyone, after we hardly got it; it is anything but secured. The spirit of freedom there hasn't been soothed, and the nation has proven that it is determined if anyone fans the flame. The King of Prussia and for that matter the King of Poland and the en tire nation won't hesitate to use their advantage at the first given opportunity, especially since now the law of the strong prevails, and no one will feel it harder than we will.
Hungary, too, is free of troops, and in its close neighbourhood, the war between Russians and Turks will start anew. The Prussian dealings with Constantinople are known, and the latest letter of the King of Prussia don't leave any doubt that he won't leave any method untried in order to put this particular enemy in our backyard, too, who could take whatever he wanted in Hungary, since it is free of troops and fortresses. If our armies stood in Saxony, or even Silesia - which I doubt they would - or in the Upper Palatinate, it would be impossible to bring help to the two large kingdoms of Galizia and Hungary. We would have to leave them to their sad fate, to the whim of a barbaric enemy and to all the devastation which would be the consequence, and would destroy those countries for a generation. I won't even mention our provinces in Italy, the Netherlands and our new possessions in Bavaria. All of these would have to be given up, and where on earth should we take the means from to conduct this horrible war if we have to give up five countries right at the start? Where should the trust come from which would give us allies and financial resources? And why should our own countries trust us any longer if they see they are getting taxed heavily in peacetime for their defense, but are getting given up in the first danger of a war? Of a war which, once we've started it, would now end with our utter ruin, and this downfall would even be the only method to save Europe, and it would be our own fault. It is this which I will never agree to and never give my blessing to, for everything is at stake. Let's not indulge in delusions. Once the sword is out of its sheath, there won't be any time for reconciliation. The well being of thousands and thousands of human beings, the survival of our empire depend on this. After all which I have said I must tell you that I cannot permit myself to act against my conscience and my conviction; this is neither a mood nor cowardice.
Let's just say that after this letter, Joseph should not have been surprised that she went behind his back and unprecedentally reached out to Fritz when he didn't listen. What Jessen's collection of documents also tell me is that the official peace between Prussia and Austria was made on May 13th 1779, which was MT's birthday.
Jessen also quotes not one but two poems by Matthias Claudius. One is the "Sie machte Frieden" poem written after MT's death, which I'll quote later. The other was written directly after the (still bloodless) war of the Bavarian succession had ended instead of evolving into another 7 Years War, which was what everyone, including MT had been afraid of, and this one was new to me. It goes thusly:
Die Kaiserin und Friederich
Nach manchem Kampf und Siege
Entzweiten endlich aber sich
Und rüsteten zum Kriege
Und zogen mutig aus ins Feld
Und hatten stolze Heere,
Schier zu erfechten eine Welt
Und » Heldenruhm und Ehre « .
Da fühlten beide groß und gut
Die Menschenvater -Würde,
Und wieviel Elend , wieviel Blut
Der Krieg noch kosten würde,
Und dachten , wie doch alles gar
Vergänglich sei hienieden ,
Und sahen an ihr graues Haar . . .
Und machten wieder Frieden .
(The Empress and Friedrich/After many a fight and victory/were at odds again/and armed themselves for war/ They bravely went into the field/and had proud armies/to fight for a world/ and for 'heroic courage and honor'./ Then, both felt good and great/the dignity of being a parent to human kind/and how much misery, how much blood/this war would cost,/ and thought of how everything/was mortal on this plain/and looked at each their own grey hair.../and made peace again.)
Meanwhile, Poland: The First Partitioning as reflected by MT and Fritz
Fritz not reading any German literature, I doubt he ever saw it, but MT might have. This was her near the end of the 1770s. At the start of that decade, the first Partitoning of Poland - in which Prussia, Russia and Austria carved Poland up like the big scale robbers they were - was something she never quite managed to numb her conscience about. MT on the one hand thought this entire Poland partitioning was shameless robbery, which it was, but on the other wanted/accepted her share, which she did. There is a famous but apocryphal quip by Fritz which gets quoted on this a lot, but no one has ever been able to find it in any of his letters or even in his described conversations in other people's memoirs, so biographers were reluctantly forced to admit that it was probably invented after the fact by other people but sounded so much like something he would have said that it stuck. In several variations, this apocryphal quote goes "she cried, and the more she cried, the more she took".
Jessen does, however, have a letter from MT on the subject to one of her younger sons, Ferdinand (yes, she had a Ferdinand, too), dated September 12th 1772:
You will see the entire miserable development of this matter. I have refused it for a long time! Only the blows after blows in the forms of the Turks attacking, the lack of a prospect of getting support from France or England in this, the likelihood of having to conduct a war against both Russia and Prussia otherwise, misery, famine and sickness in my countries forced me to accept these bloody proposals, which throw a shadow over my entire rule. God will make me face my responsibility for this in the other world. I must admit to you that I cannot get over this matter, it lies heavily on my heart, haunts me and poisons my already sad days. I must stop writing about this in order not to get even more upset and not to sink into the blackest melancholia.
Meanwhile, Fritz and Heinrich (who'd negotiated the partitioning with Catherine to begin with) had no such problems enjoying their gains. The treaty of the First Partitioning of Poland is dated to March 4th, 1772. On June 12th, Fritz is on a tour through his newly aquired territories to inspect them and writes to Heinrich (sorry about the one somewhat antisemitic crack in this excerpt):
I have seen this Prussia which I basically received from your hand. It is a very good and advantageous aquisition, both for the political position of the state and for our finances. However, in order not to awake too much jealousy I'm telling everyone who wants to hear it that I have only observed sand, fir trees, bracken and Jews on my journey. In any case, this land will cause me a lot of work, too, for I believe Canada to be as civilized as Pommerellen; no order, no districts. The towns are in a pitiable state. Kulm, for example, is supposed to have eighthundred houses, but there are only a hundred standing. (...) As far as the army is concerned, I've found the entire cavalry of this area to be as good as hours. Regarding the infanty, the garnison regiments of the province equal the field regiments. The field regiments here are larger than those of Berlin. But there will have to be some personnel changes for the staff offficers and the subaltern officers. The great mistake in the drilling of the troops consists in them loading badly, don't fall into step easily and don't aim too well. But that can be practiced during the following year, and God willing, the entire army will be on the same level and equally organized next year.
Losing your best enemy
Neither MT nor Fritz lived to see Poland further divided, let alone experienced the consequences reaching through to the 20th century. Having brought the "potato war" of the Bavarian Succession to an early and peceful ending, MT died in the November of 1780, several of her children, including Joseph, at her side, after three days in which she and everyone else knew she was dying, and she refused to fall asleep, being determined to face her death full alert. Her last words vary from account to account, but personally, I've always favoured "Such ill weather for such a long journey". Matthias Claudius, a Protestant Northern German, wrote his second poem about her death which Jessen puts at the end of the last MT section of his book:
Sie machte Frieden ! Das ist mein Gedicht.
War ihres Volkes Lust und ihres Volkes Segen
Und ging getrost und voller Zuversicht
Dem Tod als ihrem Freund entgegen .
Ein Welteroberer kann das nicht.
Sie machte Frieden! Das ist mein Gedicht.
Rhymed translation by yours truly:
This is my poem: she made peace!
She was her people's blessing and delight,
went confident, comforted and at ease
To face her death. Her death, and not a fight.
No conqueror of the world can have such release.
This is my poem: she made peace!
The last Fritz section goes on for a while longer. Jessen has the letter from Fritz - to D'Alembert, as it turns out, dated January 6th 1781 - which has the famously revisioninstic "I was never her enemy" quote in it; what I hadn't known before reading the complete letter was that he then, bereft of his best enemy, transitions right to his next target, German literature. Writes he:
And yet, I have regretted the death of the Empress-Queen: she brought honor to her throne and sex; I have gone to war with her, but I was never her enemy. Regarding the Emperor, the son of this great woman: I know him personally; he seemed too enlightened to me to me to make overhasty steps; I esteem him and do not fear him. (...) To give you a proof of just how calmly minded I am, I include a little brochure which aims at showing the flaws of German literature and to explain the means by which it can improve. You will mock the care I'm taking to teach a people which until now has been good at nothing but eat, drink, make love and make war to have at least a little understanding of taste and Attic salt. But a man wants to be useful; often a word falls on fertile soil and bears unexpected fruit.
Yep, he announces his trashing of (unread by him) German literature in the same letter. (Also, Fritz, I thought Joseph "the son of this great woman" was the coming menace of Europe? That's what you've told all your other correspondants, at least.) And Jessen, bless, has the passage in "De La Literature Allemande" which is specifically aimed at Goethe (and Shakespeare, while he's at it). For a summing up of the Old Fritz vs German Literature affair, see here. And now, behold this glorious proof of just how calmly minded Fritz is:
To convince yourself of the utter lack of taste that to this day rules in Germany, you only have to go to the theatre. That's where you see the despicable plays by Shakespeare produced in the German language, see the entire audience swoon at hearing these ridiculous farces which are worthy of a Canadian savage. I call them thus because they go against every rule of theatre. These rules are not random! They are to be found in Aristotle's poetics. There, the unity of time, place and action are prescribed. But the English plays provide an action which takes place through years. Where's the plausibility there? Baggage carriers and grave diggers show up and hold speeches that suit their stations; and then, princes and Queens appear. This strange brewery of the elevated and the low, of slapstick and tragedy is supposed to please and touch people? One may forgive Shakespare such odd abberations; for the birth of the arts was never the time of their maturity. But now, a "Götz von Berlichingen" appears on the stage, a disgusting imitation of those terrible English plays, and the audience applauds and demands with enthusiasm more of these tasteless rubbish. I know, you can't argue about taste. But allow me to tell you one thing: who enjoys acrobats and puppets just as much as the tragedies of Racine just wants to pass time. He prefers something which appeals to his eyes to something which appeals to the mind and to the heart!
German writers of the day: *headdesk, as described in another entry*
(Herder: Go polish your rusty armor, old man. Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses.)
Jessen also quotes a letter from Goethe to a buddy of his, Merck, like him and most Germans that age a (in Merck's case now former) Fritz fanboy, who asked "OMG, have you read what Fritz wrote?" ):
No one should have been surprised by the pamplet of the old King if one knew him for who he actually is. If the audience hears of a hero who has done great deeds, it forms him convenient to the common idea, subtle, high-minded and well educated; in the same way, one assumes a man who otherwise has done much to posses clarity and precision of the mind. One imagines him without bias and actually well informed and educated. This is what has happened with the King; but just as he has done great deeds in his shabby blue uniform and his humpbacked figure, he has forced the events of history by his stubborn, prejudiced and unteachable imagination.
I.e. he could not have done so with with a balanced and fair mindset. Elaborating further on the argument that the very thing which made Fritz great was his imperfection, Goethe replies to yet another correspondant asking him "OMG, have you read that?!?".
There's nothing strange to me about the King mentioning my play unfavourably. A powerful man who rules over thousands with a sceptre of iron, has to find the creation of a free and cheeky youth unbearable. Besides, a tolerant taste can't be the distinguishing characteristic of a King, and would not, had he possessed it, have allowed him to make a great name for himself; I rather think that the great and noble live by exclusivity.
If something de Luynes noticed about young Fritz - " he doesn’t mind getting a reply, even a strong one, as long it is a good one" - still held true of old Fritz, methinks he might have appreciated this riposte.
