Revisiting Fredersdorf with Buwert and Fahlenkamp

[mildred_of_midgard]

Earlier in the year, mildred_of_midgard got in touch with one Wolfgang Buwert, a local historian in Frankfurt an der Oder, who had written an article demonstrating that Fredersdorf had been stationed in Frankfurt an der Oder, not Küstrin, when he met Fredersdorf, and therefore that the most likely story of their meeting is the December student concert put on for Fritz in 1731, rather than the other story, in which Fredersdorf was a soldier at Küstrin (sometimes even supposedly one of Fritz's guards).

Buwert acknowledges that we can't rule out that Schwerin sent Fredersdorf to Fritz as a favor, but he strongly prefers the Frankfurt a.d.O. origin story.

Selena summarizes Buwert
My first hasty looks immediately makes me long for something else because near the end the essay says good old Gustav Volz wrote a four page review of Richter's edition of the Fredersdorf letters in which Volz tore Richter a new one for a) misdating several of the letters, and b) cutting passages without indicating this. Said review is to be found in the "Forschungen zur Brandenburgischen und preußischen Geschichte“, in Verbindung mit Otto Hintze hrsg. von Melle Klinkenborg und Johannes Schultze, München und Berlin o. J., S. 163ff.

His key bits of evidence for Fredersdorf and Fritz meeting in Frankfurt, not Küstrin, are: -

- the Küstrin Garnison mostly consisted of soldiers who were invalids, too old, too small soldiers not under the command of Schwerin
- all the late 18th century sources describing Frederdorf mention he was tall, two mention he was drafted into the army for that reason, and all mention he was under Schwerin's command when Fritz asked for him (and got him)
- Schwerin was the commander of the soldiers stationed in Frankfurt an der Oder
- Fredersdorf's Dad Joachim writes a petition to the Gratz city council asking for help for his middle son, Johann Christian since he, Joachim, is now too old and weak to do his job properly (so son No.2 should get it); this petition also mentions his youngest son, Michael Gabriel, being "an apprentice in Frankfurt", to which place his wife had to travel for that reason, which meant further expenses
- our essay writer postulates that since Schwerin's regiments stood in Frankfurt, it would make sense for young Mike, err, Michael Gabriel, who in 1725 would have been seventeen and likely in his third year of apprenticeship and afterwards either voluntarily or by recruitment ("recruitment") afterwards joined the army
- the petition doesn't say what Michael Gabriel is apprenticed as, but given the sheer number of musicians in the family as well as Fredersdorf's musical abilities, it would make sense if he was apprenticed to the Frankfurt an der Oder town musician Martin Simon; this however is speculation on our essayist's part based on similar speculation by Preuss in the Ouevres
- and then there are all the quoted documenting that Christmas concert for Fritz in Frankfurt an der Oder 1731 did happen; the essay also reminds me this wasn't the first time the Frankfurt students tried to do something for Fritz; at the end of January, some of them came to Küstrin to give Fritz a musical birthday present and were refused access, but before departing cried "long live the crown prince!" (Source: Stratemann!)


The essay offers a better transcription of the entry in the Gartz baptism register than Fahlenkamp does, to wit: „den 3. Juny hat Herr Joachim Fredersorff Musicus instrumentalis
ein j. (= junges) Söhnlein tauffen lassen genant Michael Gabriel
Gevattern sind gewesen Herr Gabriel Dahl. Buch=Händler Herr Michael Voß Verwalter
zu Tanto Fr. Catharina Elisabeth Knüppel gebohrn: Friedebornin (= geb. Friedeborn).“

So: Fredersdorf's mother's maiden name was Friedeborn (from Schlochau, Pommerania), the essay says later, not "Flederborn", and certainly not "von Flederborn"). (The lady from the registry is his godmother/aunt, though, Catharina Knüppel, born Friederborn.) Also, as you can see from the fact that one of Frederdorf's godfathers is the local bookseller, Dad Fredersdorf, Joachim, was a big believer in education. He himself was the son of a fisherman, Hans Fredersdorf. Joachim had two brothers who became fishermen as well, whereas Joachim became the Gartz town musician ("Musicus Instrumentalis", which meant he was called "Herr" in the church registry, something that did not happen to fishermen. His wife Anna Christine Friederborn was a merchant's daughter. Of the children, oldest son Joachim Martin Fredersdorf became Hauboist and later „Kunsterfahrener und Wohlbestallter Kirch undt Stadt Musicus“ in Spandau. Second son Johann Christian succeeded Dad (following the petition) as "Musicus Instrumentalis" in Gartz. And the only child younger than Michael Gabriel, daughter Eva Eleonara who was to die as a child, had as a godmother the wife of a Swedish oboist named Anthon (remember, Gartz was still in Swedish-Pomerania, Fredersdorf was not born a Prussian subject), so it looks like Joachim befriended other musicians as well.

Something else this essay clarifies for me: Fredesdorf died in Potsdam and was then transfered for burial to Zernikow. (There's a copy in the Potsdam St. Nikolai church registry attesting to the transfer.)

Now, the earliest source the essay tracked down for the Fritz and Fredersdorf initial meeting (not mentioned by the envoy reports or Bielfeld) is something predating Manger's book, and it's not Voltaire's pamphlet. It's from 1761, three years after Fredersdorf's death, and says:

Dieser Fredersdorf hatte sein Glück der Flöte zu danken. Er war unter der vorigen Regierung (= von König Friedrich Wilhelm I.) noch Hautboist bey dem Regiment des Feldmarschalls von Schwerin. Dieser schenkte ihn dem jetzigen Könige und damaligen Kronprinzen zu einer Zeit, da ihm die Annehmlichkeit der Musik in einer verdrüßlichen Einsamkeit vielleicht sehr nothwendig war.“

(Source given in footnote: Geheimnisse zur Erläuterung der Geschichte unserer Zeit, B. 1761, S. 18)

"This Fredersdorf owes his fortune to the flute. Under the previous government, he was oboist in the regiment of Field Marshal Schwerin. The later gave him to the current King and then Crown Prince in a time, when (Fritz) was perhaps very much in deed of the pleasure of music in a distressing solitude."

This actually sounds like the Küstrin year, not the year after the Küstrin year, would fit with both Fritz requesting Frederdorf (or just any musician) or with Schwerin presenting him on his own initiative, and doesn't name the student concert bringing Fredersdorf to Fritz' attention. Still: it does fit with Fredersdorf serving under Schwerin in Frankfurt, not at Küstrin.

The essayist also points out Schwerin was the chairman of the war tribunal as well as one of the three general majors in it that voted on not being able to judge Fritz at all and for Katte to get life long prison, not death, and thus was intimately familiar with the entire saga, as well as FW's strict "no music at all in any way!!!" instructions for Fritz in Küstrin. If Schwerin in the full knowledge of all this pointed Fritz towards his good looking flute playing oboist or vice versa, that was some massive sympathy declaration.

Mildred points out details from Buwert
The article opens with a painting captioned, "only known painting to depict Fritz and Fredersdorf together," and I was excited, until I saw "Painted by Hermann Clementz (*1852 † 1930)," and I was like, "Well, if we're counting FANART, I have some sketches by prinzsorgenfrei I can point you to!" :PP

I had forgotten that Fritz wasn't even allowed to talk to HIS SERVANT in Küstrin in September 1730.

There's a 19th century drawing of the Küstrin Schloss with what I can only assume is the Weisskopf, before it was torn down! I've been wondering and wondering what it looks like, and this marks the first time I've actually seen it drawn and not just positioned on the map. It's lower than I thought; I thought it was supposed to be 3 stories high. (The Weisskopf is relevant to the question of whether Fritz could see Katte's execution, which is why I care so much.) Unfortunately, this drawing doesn't show the wall that Hoffbauer claims was there until it was torn down. Alas.

We have the names of Fritz's servants at Küstrin, after the pardon!

Valet: Wilhelm Rausch
Cook: Hellmund
Lackeys: Ulfert, Volbrecht, and Dörgen

Two pages mentioned here remain unnamed.

Music still forbidden after the August 15 reconciliation; that was something I wasn't certain of when we wrote "Counterpoint."

The details on Schwerin's regiment were new and good to have.

Fritz's itinerary in autumn 1731! (Not interesting to anyone but me, I know, but I might add it to the chronology if I have time this weekend.)

Sources for Fritz/Fredersdorf meeting:

1761/2 pamphlet: Oboist in Schwerin's regiment, given to Fritz by Schwerin at a time when he most needed it.
1790, Manger: Fritz and Fredersdorf met during the concert given by the Frankfurt students; Fritz asked for Fredersdorf.
1790, Schwerin bio by König: Fritz needed someone to accompany him on the flute, asked Schwerin in their correspondence, Schwerin sent Fredersdorf.

Later accounts go back to these 3 sources: Preuss, Rödenbeck, Kugler, Ledebur, Carlyle, Varnhagen von Ense, Richter, Pangels, Langfeldt. I am quite pleased I'm familiar with all these names except the 2012 one!

One source he doesn't give is the one felis turned up recently, Hanbury-Williams in 1750 saying Fredersdorf stood sentinel outside the door of Fritz's apartment when Fritz was crown prince. Now, we don't have any reason to believe this is correct and plenty of reason to believe it isn't, but I think it's something we know (thanks to Detective felis) and Buwert doesn't!

Instead, Buwert says one of the oldest sources placing Fredersdorf at Küstrin is Berghaus in 1855. The account Berghaus gives is the one we found in Burchardt's 1834 account: Fredersdorf as the son of a Franconian merchant, among the guards in Küstrin, played the flute for Fritz. Again, I think we have an earlier source than Buwert, who doesn't seem to mention Burchardt, at least from searching the file. He writes, "Die Quellen für seine Angaben benennt Berghaus nicht."

99% sure it's Burchardt's edition of Fritzian letters to Fredersdorf, the obvious place to look in 1855 if you're writing about Fritz and Fredersdorf!

Continuing on to evidence that Fredersdorf would have been at the December student performance, each company was allowed to have a certain number of men on leave at a time. Since they weren't paid during this time, and the head of the company had to pay for some military expenses out of his own pocket, there was a financial incentive for the head of the company to grant as much leave as possible.

As I'd told cahn back in the day of "Counterpoint" plotting, Prussian soldiers were allowed to work outside jobs to supplement their pay. (This was not true of all armies in Europe.) They tended to take advantage of this, since pay might have been regular but wasn't high.

Buwert argues that Martinmass (November 11) and Christmas are the times when the town musician is more in demand than usual; hence a good time for Fredersdorf to take leave and help out Martin Simon. This makes it even more likely that on the December 28 performance, Fredersdorf was performing.

Fritz was super nice to Schwerin when he came to power. He got a promotion to field marshal on June 30, 1740, and a promotion to count on July 31. Who does this remind us of? Hans Heinrich, getting his promotion to field marshal in late June (date I think is in Preuss, but too many volumes for me to check right now), and a promotion to count on August 6.

Oh speaking of! Wikipedia tells me FW promoted Hans Heinrich to lieutenant general on July 5, 1731, and gave him the Order of the Black Eagle on July 29, 1731.

Why is this interesting? Because Stratemann, that's why!

Berlin, June 31st 1731: Supposedly General Lieutenant v. Katte after leading his regiment at the revue before the King got off his horse and put his sword at the King's feet, and asked again for his demission, whereupon his majesty showed itself very much displeased. Rumor even has it (Hans Heinrich) got arrested as a consequence.

So no, he didn't get arrested, he got promoted and got the most prestigious order in Prussia. HMMM, I say. Does the timing look suspicious to anyone else? :P

Okay, back to Fredersdorf. Buwert thinks one of the reasons Fritz was so nice to Schwerin was the whole Fredersdorf thing. Given the similar timings for Hans Heinrich, I wouldn't be surprised. (I mean, whether or not Fritz met Fredersdorf at Frankfurt and then asked to keep him, or asked Schwerin to send him someone talented, Fritz would have been equally grateful to Schwerin. But not Doris Ritter, I guess.)

On to the birth date: I had been waiting for my copy of Fahlenkamp (still not arrived!) before looking up the baptismal date that selenak had mentioned it contained, but no need! June 3, 1708. So we estimate he was born May 31-June 1, but we just don't know for sure.

The stuff on his family is really cool, that was one of my favorite parts! Grandpa was named Hans and was a fisherman, we didn't know that! The von Fredeborn mystery cleared up!

Another point of uncertainty cleared up: I had found here that one of Fredersdorf's nephews, Gustav Christian Fredersdorff, was a Königl.-Preußischer Hofrat, but was unsure of the evidence. Burwert backs it and says that nephew built a grave monument in Frankfurt an der Oder for his own son, who was named Michael Gabriel, great-nephew of our Michael Gabriel.

Eight siblings, 5 girls and 3 boys, of whom Fredersdorf was the second youngest, but his younger sister died as a baby, so he grew up the youngest. The oldest son is Joachim Martin (church and town musician in Spandau), and the next son Johann Christian (town musician in Gartz). So all the sons took up music.

All in all, good article, glad I was able to track it down!

Then we turned up Volz's review of Richter's edition of the correspondence, as cited in Buwert.

Selena Volz
After Burchardt already published a selection of these letters, I'm thrilled the public is now able to read all of the preserved the Fritz/Fredersdorf letters, edited by the late Richter. Go him for this public service! With some minor nitpicks, to which I'll get in time.

Now, we Fritz researchers knew these letters before, of course. Koser, for example, had read all of them, as he told me himself back in the day when we debated Fritz. But now normal readers, too, can enjoy this correspondence, which is unique in Fritz' life, not just for the fact he keeps writing in German but because of the emotion shown therein. Mind you, of course his relationship with Frederdorf can't be compared to those he had with Jordan, D'Argens, Keyslerlngk, both because Fredersdorf was socially so far below him and because he wasn't intellectually his match at all. But wow, did he care regardless! And I'm telling you, readers, Fredersdorf deserved it, being tireless, dutiful and utterly trustworthy and unbribably in Fritz' service. (Since I'm writing this in the late 1920s, and there isn't a contemporary source I have not seen, this means that whatever caused the "Fredersdorf got fired for embezzling" story at wiki must have been published after my review.)

On to Richter's editing practices. He explains a lot, and keeps repeating himself, sometimes in small essay length. Also he has opinions I disagree with. Take the tragedy of Fritz' marriage. Here, Richter manages to miss both the times Fritz is scapegoating EC for the errors of her family (!), and the fact more recent biographers have demonstrated she wasn't such a saint herself. (I mean, I've helped my buddy Schmidt-Lötzen translate Lehndorff's diaries. I know whereof I speak.) And good lord, do I ever disagree with Richter's explanation for why Fritz & marriage were a doomed pairing. Even when Richter is defending Fritz, he gets it wrong. Look, to refute the broken penis theory, just point towards my essay on how this is rubbish. And we all know that there are only "the dirtiest of sources" for the accusation of same sex relationships, so why bother with that? (What do you mean, Lehndorff's diary entries on Marwitz and Glasow?) Fact is: Fritz got all the affection he needed via FRIENDSHIP. Marriage, as a social construct, was far too confining for his independent soaring spirit, and any woman, not just one forced on him by his Dad (which is the reason Richter gives for the marriage tragedy), would have been doomed. Oh, and while we're at it, he didn't hate women. He just hated the silly types. Just look at his letters to Countess Camas to see how much he respected women who deserved it

Back to Richter. Instead of eight pages on EC and the marriage, Richter, you should have written more background on theatre and music in the age of Fritz, because that's way more interesting (and also important for both Fritz and Fredersdorf). And what I really must chide you for is that you a) don't present the entire letters, and b) don't indicate when you cut and edit. Look, I've cut in my editions of the Fritz/Wilhelmine letters, too, but I goddam show it! Not indicating when there's a cut is just not cool, and no, it' s no comfort to hear a scienfic complete edition for academics is planned.

(selenak: it's no comfort for me, either, Volz, because it never got published, to this day.)

Especially since you cut some theatre stuff which I for one think is VERY INTERESTING INDEED, how often do I have to repeat this? And now, readers of this review, let me add some background stuff Richter didn't mention, because I'm cool like that. Fredersdorf's spy with the Austrians was Legationssekretär Weingarten. How do I know? Because there's a whole file on his reports in the Secret State Archive, complete with Fredersdorf's annotations and observations.

And good lord, does Richter fuck up with all the alchemy stuff. Those letters dealing with Fritz briefly actually falling into temptation and trying alchemy as well to beef up his budget all deal with an event happening in September 1753 and are directly connected, even if they are undated. See also Burchardt. Richter spreads them through the correspondence and misdates them, putting the last ones into November. Oh, and why isn't there more about Fredersdorf's role in the Voltaire showdown if you print the Voltaire-to-Fredersdorf's letter, Richter?

I won't even bother with minor errors like: no, Fritz did not attend Keyslerlingk's daughter's wedding. There was a war going on at the time. And wouldn't you know it, but Richter has unquestioningly accepted the completely faulty edition of Countess Voss' diaries which I made mincemeat of re: what that editor did with the misidentifications.

Still, all in all: that book is a must for any Fritz fan! I should have edited it, though.

We also turned up the 1762 pamphlet cited by Buwert.

Selena summarizes the 1762 Pamphlet
It plagiarizes way more than the Fredersdorf offices description from the Voltaire 1750s pamphlet. All the descriptions of Fritz' brothers are verbatim the same, for example, ditto of his mother. Ditto for the physical description of Fritz. And, get a hold of this! He quotes the Voltaire/Ulrike poems with a nudge, nudge, wink wink addition that readers will be able to guess the reply didn't come from Ulrike but had a royal author nonetheless. These poems were most definitely not in the original pamphlet, but the three people aware of them are Ulrike, Voltaire, and Fritz. Take your pick from whom the German author (tranlator?) of this pamphlet has them.

Also? This German pamphlet includes the "how long will he make me wash his dirty laundry?" quip from Voltaire (who is described as Fritz' "skeleton Apollo"), which wasn't in the original 1750s Voltairian pamphlet, to be sure. It also contains a somewhat accurate summary of Voltaire's time in Prussia (shady dealings with Hirsch, Maupertuis, bust up, Frankfurt), but then names a Voltaire pamphlet as the source for the Frankfurt episode, so that part is explainable.

Something that does NOT show up in this German pamphlet are all the bits about Fritz indulging wiht pages or handsome soldiers as part of his morning routine. The only hint re: sexual preference is saying that he supposedly kissed EC on the cheek and told the Berlin people "this is your Queen" after FW died and they appeared in public (they didn't), and that it's doubtable she got any other kisses from him in that marriage ever.

Otoh, there are a lot more Voltaire poetry quotes and the statement that his character may be low at times, but he's the greatest genius ever. Who ARE you, mystery author?

Ah, the next part is about the Saxons and has a go at Brühl, I'll read it later. And the entire thing is dedicated to an Austrian official, but in a satiric fashion, comparable to how Byron dedicated "Don Juan" to his enemy Southey, satirizing him and the other lake poets all through the dedication. Since this is published while the 7 Years War is still going on, I think it's one of many pro Prussia, anti Austria/Saxony/Everyone else pamphlets, but it is fascinating that on the one hand, it plagiarizes a really great amount of Voltaire's original anonymous pamphlet, but on the other, it contains that information about Fredersdorf (before quoting Voltaire's description of him) which wasn't there. Huh.

ETA: have now read the rest. After the the Prussian section, there's a Brühl-trashing Saxon section, and then a Pompadour-trashing French section, followed y a lengthy explanation on how the current war came to be and how it went so far (much Rossbach and Leuthen, not much Kolin and no Hochkirch or Kundersdorf). There is also ongoing Austrian bashing, but more general Catholic bigotry and haughtiness, not the personal venom Brühl and the Marquise de Pompadour get. I.e. MT is mentioned now and then as the Queen of Hungary who just won't let Fritz be Fritz, and is bigoted and haughty, but that's really mild compared with the bashing on how Brühl is both an uppity social climber (because ex page, which given most nobles start out as pages, I don't get the shamefulness of) and an incompetent statesman long before the current war (it's his fault Saxony changed sides on Prussia between Silesian Wars 1 & 2 instead of becoming bff with Fritz forever), and of course utterly corrupt. Meanwhile, Madame de Pompadour might have been pretty once upon a time, but now she's a hollowed out skeleton with pounds of make-up on her who just is still maitresse en titre because she's feeding Louis young girls and also he's lazy and lets her govern in his stead, and France getting into the war and still being in the war is also mainly her fault, AND she's the bastard daughter of a whore to begin with, AND women, politics, we know how that goes. For the entire France section, the German author admits he's mostly translating an old anti-Pompadour pamphlet from 1758.

There isn't a separate Czarina-Elizabeth-bashing section (poor Russia was deluded into joining this war by Saxon and French slanders! Also some Austrian slanders, of course!), which is interesting, until one recalls the 1762 date the title page gives for the publication. Persumably whoever is responsible for the pamphlet was told that maybe not trash the predecessor of the new ally, we really don't want to fight the Russians again?

Conclusion: I'm no closer to guessing which passionate Fritz partisan into Voltaire plagiarizing with unexpected knowledge of Fredersdorf's employment background wrote this than I was before.

And then Buwert put Mildred in touch with Dirk Fahlenkamp, author of this recent collection of the Fritz/Fredersdorf correspondence with plenty of commentary and gorgeous images. Fahlenkamp's book claimed that Fredersdorf was dismissed for embezzlement. Mildred and Buwert, unable to track down the source for this claim (Buwert confirms it's not in Weise 1944 either), asked Fahlenkamp what his source was.

Wikipedia.

So the embezzlement claim is getting more unsubstantiated by the day.

ETA: See our discovery of Wikipedia's source.