1. Wegfraß is not the only one to have found out that Pfeiffer was found guilty; in the same year as her book, 2003, a biography of Pfeiffer appeared* that had figured the same thing out. I'm still trying to get my hands on it for details, but today I obtained an article via ILL that cites this 2003 publication, so I at least know that it says he was guilty.
* In a local history booklet series for Friedrichshagen, which was founded under his administration. This is why I need a local history booklet series for Fredersdorf!
2. One of the things he was responsible for was paying spies that would go to Saxony and try to find families willing to emigrate to Prussia. This was considered a very dangerous activity, and when he was accused of embezzling, he argued that spies weren't cheap and sometimes demanded more money, because of the danger, and if he didn't get as many colonist families as he'd originally estimated, it wasn't because he was dishonest, it was because families that had originally committed to emigrating bavked out.
All this reinforces my impression that emigrating without permission in Germany was just not a thing. I don't think I had an example from Saxony, but now I do.
Anyway, I wasn't expecting the Spanish inquisition spies to show up in this document, and when I saw them, I had to research what that was all about and share it with salon.
All this reinforces my impression that emigrating without permission in Germany was just not a thing.
Looks like. Mind you, the huge immigration waves a century later both before and after the 1848 Revolution are another subject, but then laws were different in the 19th century anyway.
BTW, since you asked elsewhere: no, I can't make it to Berlin to read the Pfeiffer biography this year. Next year, we'll see. But this year is impossible.
Understood, thank you anyway! I'm trying other avenues. If nothing else, I can still include it in the paper, because of the article I got yesterday that tells me what it says.
Also, omg, you mentioned "huge immigration waves" and I had a duh moment. I *own* a book on a mass 18th century German migration: the Great Palatine Migration of 1709. It was the biggest migration to the pre-revolutionary American colonies. I learned about it as a child because my mother was the family historian and discovered that this is how one branch of our family came to the not-yet-United States. And I had a memory of them asking permission.
I searched "emigrate" in the book, and sure enough:
The principalities of the German southwest carefully regulated migration, requiring people to petition the government for permission to leave the territory. Once they received such permission, emigrants had to pay a departure tax and a tax on any property they removed from the territory. In addition Leibeigene had to pay a manu-mission fee before emigrating...Such regulations and fees caused many people to leave illegally without informing the government. Rulers tried to discourage illegal emigration by seizing property that was left behind, thus ensuring that it did not pass on to relatives or heirs remaining in the country.
It makes sense: every single thing I've read about the 18th (and previous) centuries agrees that everyone believed more population == better, for economic and military reasons. With 90+% of the population having to do agriculture just to keep the rest of the population alive, they weren't *wrong* (although there were exceptions, like the Dutch, who managed to at least temporarily generate wealth with a small population).
So naturally you're going to try to keep your own population from emigrating, and naturally, even before you try to destroy the Saxon economy in all possible other ways, you're going to have spies trying to lure Saxon families into your Prussian colonies.
Since I'm shameless...how do you feel about visiting the British Library in London? It doesn't appear to be possible to order scans or even view their online catalogue, since they suffered a cyberattack last year that brought their entire system down and is necessitating a complete rebuild for the entire library. Admiral Norris, he of the fleet that Peter Keith was on and who treated Peter "like a son", has a journal in the British Library Manuscripts Collection that, as far as I can tell, can only be viewed in person. (It's annoying, because the National Archives will let me order scans, but they don't have this item, even though it comes up in their catalogue.)
Probably, and also, many a year ago (more than a decade, in fact) I did do some research at the British Library, and not only did you have to describe your reason for wanting to see one of the handwritten manuscripts, but I also realised I suck ad decyphering what in this case was a mid 19th century diary written by a Scottish painter. Now I could claim to do research on Peter Keith, but I still would need at least half a day, if not more, for the the library visit, and I just don't have that at my disposal.
But to be clear, I wasn't asking you to decipher anything; just like luzula in Copenhagen, all I would expect anyone to do for me in an archive is identify the relevant pages by date and scan or photograph them. Easier and faster for you, much more valuable to me.
I'll see if I can find someone who has time (I'm kicking myself, because my dissertation advisor was in London last month, and I've been thinking about trying to get those Norris papers copied either by going to London myself or asking someone else to do it for *years*, and I just didn't think of it when she and I were emailing a month ago).
Now I could claim to do research on Peter Keith
You certainly could! I understand you need a reader's card with ID and proof of address, but the claim to be doing valid research should be the easy part. I don't think there's anyone, Kloosterhuis included, who's ever done more Peter Keith research than you, me, and felis! :D I mean, *I* certainly didn't read 6 volumes of Nicolai and find the Hertefeld-sourced account of the escape from Wesel. That was you, O Royal Reader!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Random Pfeiffer
* In a local history booklet series for Friedrichshagen, which was founded under his administration. This is why I need a local history booklet series for Fredersdorf!
2. One of the things he was responsible for was paying spies that would go to Saxony and try to find families willing to emigrate to Prussia. This was considered a very dangerous activity, and when he was accused of embezzling, he argued that spies weren't cheap and sometimes demanded more money, because of the danger, and if he didn't get as many colonist families as he'd originally estimated, it wasn't because he was dishonest, it was because families that had originally committed to emigrating bavked out.
All this reinforces my impression that emigrating without permission in Germany was just not a thing. I don't think I had an example from Saxony, but now I do.
Anyway, I wasn't expecting the
Spanish inquisitionspies to show up in this document, and when I saw them, I had to research what that was all about and share it with salon.Re: Random Pfeiffer
Looks like. Mind you, the huge immigration waves a century later both before and after the 1848 Revolution are another subject, but then laws were different in the 19th century anyway.
BTW, since you asked elsewhere: no, I can't make it to Berlin to read the Pfeiffer biography this year. Next year, we'll see. But this year is impossible.
Re: Random Pfeiffer
Re: Random Pfeiffer
I searched "emigrate" in the book, and sure enough:
The principalities of the German southwest carefully regulated migration, requiring people to petition the government for permission to leave the territory. Once they received such permission, emigrants had to pay a departure tax and a tax on any property they removed from the territory. In addition Leibeigene had to pay a manu-mission fee before emigrating...Such regulations and fees caused many people to leave illegally without informing the government. Rulers tried to discourage illegal emigration by seizing property that was left behind, thus ensuring that it did not pass on to relatives or heirs remaining in the country.
(Leibeigene are serfs,
It makes sense: every single thing I've read about the 18th (and previous) centuries agrees that everyone believed more population == better, for economic and military reasons. With 90+% of the population having to do agriculture just to keep the rest of the population alive, they weren't *wrong* (although there were exceptions, like the Dutch, who managed to at least temporarily generate wealth with a small population).
So naturally you're going to try to keep your own population from emigrating, and naturally, even before you try to destroy the Saxon economy in all possible other ways, you're going to have spies trying to lure Saxon families into your Prussian colonies.
Re: Random Pfeiffer
Will Feuchtwanger keep you too busy?
Re: Random Pfeiffer
Re: Random Pfeiffer
But to be clear, I wasn't asking you to decipher anything; just like
I'll see if I can find someone who has time (I'm kicking myself, because my dissertation advisor was in London last month, and I've been thinking about trying to get those Norris papers copied either by going to London myself or asking someone else to do it for *years*, and I just didn't think of it when she and I were emailing a month ago).
Now I could claim to do research on Peter Keith
You certainly could! I understand you need a reader's card with ID and proof of address, but the claim to be doing valid research should be the easy part. I don't think there's anyone, Kloosterhuis included, who's ever done more Peter Keith research than you, me, and