Bessler's Death

[WaltzCee]

• The legal penalties for copyright infringement are:
  
  • Infringer pays the actual dollar amount of damages and profits.
    The law provides a range from $200 to $150,000 for each work infringed.
    Infringer pays for all attorneys fees and court costs.
    The Court can issue an injunction to stop the infringing acts.
    The Court can impound the illegal works.
    The infringer can go to jail.

Hopefully Ken has a valid license for WM2D. I guess he knows what he's doing.

[Fletcher]

Gould's book was first published in 1928. If that mentions falling from a windmill to his death then that might be the earliest source. Haven't been able to find/read a free online version as yet, and check his references concerning that.

So let's summerise. I find this interesting as well. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Bessler wrote to his superior about the windmill in May 1745 .. in there saying that he had completed the table top model PM wheel on 14th April 1745. I presume that is the Baron Anton von Mannsberg wheel.

Sometime after his death 6 months later (30 Nov 1745) Fr. W Malsburg writes to King Frederic saying he has the wheel etc. And is told to hold on to it until further instructions but give the rest (sans machines) to the estate.

So can we assume the table top model (the bits and form they had) was passed to King Frederic ? Not like a King to forget such things.

And that Baron Anton von Mannsberg never received it in England ? He may not have known how it worked after all because no money had come Bessler's way from him ?

To answer Bill's question .. I would suggest that Bessler would not leave a completed wheel lying about. It was very simple (apparently). He was prone to destroying earlier wheels, presumably so that nobody could easily put it back together and work out how it operated. This apparent simplicity suggests to me that even one strategic part removed from the wheel not only made it inoperable, but perhaps unrecognisable as a potential runner. It looked like many other non-runners perchance ?

Added to that is that this completed model was only 10 zoll diameter - that's 10 inches or 25 cms. That is one of my hands span. Tiny ! There was nothing complex going on inside that wheel at that scale imo ! So removing an essential element to make it inoperable and unrecognisable as a runner seems plausible to me.

Presumably Mannsberg knew he had completed it. Malsberg and Frederick may have been told it was complete or not as the case may be ? They might have thought they had a complete wheel in their hands but was not ?!

Obviously some assumptions are made there - but is one explanation why it or the like never surfaced again. It didn't work because it wasn't fully complete, and it had no distinguishing or redeeming features from other non-runners which it also was, so held no further interest.

[Oystein]

Couldn't the harte falle etc. be a way of describing bad luck? Like for example several "hard blows", would usually NOT mean that a person is hit nor getting hard wind in his face.. but just meaning set-backs and bad luck..

Then accidents could mean happenings.. What about "happenings" of "bad luck"..

Language is seldom literally ;)

Best
ØR

[ovyyus]

By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper ... In may the PM is ready, and although it's just a model, driving two hammers, with a diameter of 10 Zoll, he is willing to sell it for a good price. This public offer was published one month after the "last letter" was written.

If this newspaper article is accurate then I think the argument that environmental energy was somehow capable of driving such a small wheel would be difficult. Also, arguments for a specific hammer/impact/mechanism count being somehow part of the secret seems weakened. Is a full translation of this newspaper article available?

[Oystein]

Bill, I agree.. interresting, and it also show that the 40 interconnecting rope version of Ken B, surely wasn't it ;)

Zoll is about an inch + or so?

If still made of wood, it is something to learn from the size.. much complicated and fine tuned stuff can be ruled out.. Even friction plays a much greater role here..

Best
OR

[Fletcher]

By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper ... In may the PM is ready, and although it's just a model, driving two hammers, with a diameter of 10 Zoll, he is willing to sell it for a good price. This public offer was published one month after the "last letter" was written.

If this newspaper article is accurate then I think the argument that environmental energy was somehow capable of driving such a small wheel would be difficult. Also, arguments for a specific hammer/impact/mechanism count being somehow part of the secret seems weakened. Is a full translation of this newspaper article available?

Bill, I agree.. interesting, and it also show that the 40 interconnecting rope version of Ken B, surely wasn't it ;)

Zoll is about an inch + or so?

If still made of wood, it is something to learn from the size.. much complicated and fine tuned stuff can be ruled out.. Even friction plays a much greater role here..

Yes .. if that news paper article can be verified then it means that the table top PM wheel was public knowledge for some time prior to his death. Even less chance he'd leave a fully complete wheel lying around, in case of thievery etc.

And I agree with you both. No guarantee that it was made mainly of wood, may have been a metal structure this time. A clock maker would have the skill set to achieve that scale and still have minimal frictions. But add in ropes and pulleys etc and friction is up, and space is at a premium. You'd need a good amount of imbalance (relative) to raise two stampers (presumably light weight) and turn itself at that scale, even if just a demonstration model that did no real work.

[Oystein]

Yes Fletcher, I thought about that, then my final thought was: In the light of his condition in the last letter, (if the machine was complicated, fine tubed and/or had many parts) why would he make a machine that was so tiny that it made him even more obstacles?

So, maybe was the basic principle so simple that it was just a train/series of weights and handles..

[Fletcher]

I'd like to thank Hotzenplotz for starting this thread and providing additional material to the curious saga.

The circumstances of Bessler's death and his last table top demonstration wheel, and who might have got their hands on it, has long intrigued me. The questions have long been asked with no definitive answers afaik, perhaps until now.

Hotzenplotz earlier in the thread said that he was not aware of anyone else publishing information about newspaper articles of sale of Bessler's last PM wheel, nor information on its dimensions etc, or a future wheel to be built in Furstenberg. And that this happened a month after his April 25/26th letter to Baron Schrader von Schliestedt, Karl I's right hand man. I'd have to say I also have no memory of that being the case. So thank you again for the new information. To see a translation of those articles would be very welcome.

The following are sourced and credited from Hotzenplotz's posts in this thread and John Collins PM-AAMS ?

Perhaps we can finally infer who ended up with B's. last wheel ?!

Tue 22 Oct, 2019 Post subject: re: Bessler's Death

Page 1-7: Papers concerning Peter Roman, who together with Fischer saw the machine in 1721.

Page 8: Title for the following three letters, somewhat like "Concerning the seizing of Orffyreus letters, 1746". Addition with pencil: Decease of Orffyreus in Fürstenberg in the county of Wolffenbüttel while building a windmill.

Page 9: First letter: Malsburg to King Frederic, 13 Dec 1745: O. died recently while building a special kind of windmill in Fürstenberg. Thought it could be a good idea to take care of his papers and did so. Waiting for further instructions.

Page 10: Envelope

Page 11: a few lines hard to read, see attachment. Seems to be a summary but nothing about O.s death

Page 12: Letter from Frederic to Malsburg, 15 Dec 1745: Well done, my friend. Please take care that nothing of the letters, the machines and other apparatus will get to any other's hands until you get another instruction.

Page 13: Letter from Frederic to Malsburg, 21 Feb. 1746: The widow and the children made a petition to release the furniture and other legacy. Now we want you to separate the letters, the machines and the apparatus from the rest, take good care of it until you get another instruction and send me the inventory. But for the rest as the furniture and so on, we want you to restitute it immediately to the heirs.

Thu 24 Oct, 2019 Post subject: re: Bessler's Death

By the way I discovered some announcements in a 1745 newspaper, afaik not known till now.

In February we are told, Bessler is now in Fürstenberg and is going to build a PM there, if his weakness is not going to prevent this.

He also announced to build some "Feuer-Spritzen" of a very special kind, so it is not a usual device we were talking about above. He also is looking for a publisher to publish pictures of his machines, drawn in copper (!) by his own hand.

In May the PM is ready, and although it's just a model, driving two hammers, with a diameter of 10 Zoll (10 inches, 25 cm’s), he is willing to sell it for a good price. This public offer was published one month after (circa late May / early June 1745) the "last letter" was written (25th/26th April 1745).

PM-AAMA ?

Bessler letter of 25/26th April 1745.

The letter is addressed to Baron Schrader von Schliestedt, Karl I's right hand man.

'Sir, Baron and Highly Respected Court Councillor,

I have written often and many times to you, Highly Honourable Sire, but I have not received any answer. Meanwhile, I lack strength and will, through hunger, grief, frost and chill, because for a long time I have not received a single piece of wood from the District Magistrate. Indeed, I have often had only dry bread to eat and water to drink. However, at last, thank God, I have had the good luck to finish preparing the model of perpetual motion which was commissioned from England, as demanded by the Senior District Magistrate, von Mannsberg. It was ready at midnight on April 14th, and on the same day I had travelled to Karlshafen, borrowing two gulden from the Rev. Pastor. On the 15th of the same month I had to return home from church to go to bed, because I suffered a violent attack of colica bilosia flatuente. It was the result of my cold, miserable life, and general anxiety about the Fürstenberg project. It afflicted me for 8-9 days, so that I was sure that death was near. All this was also accompanied by the effects of an accident suffered during the work at Fürstenberg. However, my God helped me to bring such a sudden change using only the good medicine of my mind, that I hope to return to Fürstenberg this week. To Him only be thanks and praise.

. . . it would be of great relief to me and help my health if I were to receive a pleasing reply from you, to my letters. Moreover, it would also please God, because nothing else has produced so much willingness in my heart, to be of service and to have honest intentions, and so there is much that I deserve. I would wish that Your High and Honourable self were to be made aware of and have insight into how matters really stand. You have the power to affect my life to an appreciable degree, either prolonging it or shortening it. Because if, in Fürstenberg, things continue as they have done, then I am absolutely certain to die of various heartbreaking anxieties. This could happen at any time and I am ready and willing; because I cannot live here any longer in absolutely unbelievable grief and privation, with mounting debts, and no money to repay the debts already incurred; and, in addition to the pain, trouble and other difficulties experienced with the mechanical construction, which was started so late, and which had had to be begun anew, there is nothing to eat for me and my family. The District Magistrate was unwilling to lend me one barrel or even sixteen pecks of grain, and so things have been impossible for a long time. It hurts my heart when I see and hear, sometimes daily, what is done or said against my Christian honesty, and there is nothing I can do, but only to bear it patiently. It all affects my spirit when rude comments are made in front of strangers, and am I to believe that you are my avowed foe? And this because steam engines have not been made! And yet when I ask where is the solemnly promised wood and other things for this, then they keep silent, but behind my back they repeat the same. Recently I asked the District Magistrate for just five thalers for expenses and I have received nothing. But he says, on the other hand, he had offered me ten, twenty thalers, and so on. I should not have to suffer like this at my time of life. There is so much more that I could say, but why bother? In short, I will state my honesty once and for all, and as well, recommend myself as a poor and weak man, who seeks your Honourable protection with due respect and honest modesty.

Your most humble servant.
Karlshafen, April 26th, 1745.’



Orffyreus' problems were insurmountable. Worry over the windmill; his lack of success with a steam engine; illness and mounting debt - these factors combined with an accident at work and the malicious insinuations about him, spoken loudly within his presence seem to have led to his death. I think it very likely that his death was not altogether involuntary. He may not have jumped, but I suspect he did not care if he lived or died, and with winter approaching, conditions for himself and his family must have been intolerable. Perhaps he was working on the top of the windmill, and a particularly strong gust of icy wind threatened to dislodge him, and on this last occasion, it was easier to just let go.

It is a sad letter and the treatment meted out to him seems unfair. He ends his letter by restating his honesty, and if his invention was genuine - doubly sad. It is worth remembering that he steadfastly maintained that he was innocent of any fraud throughout his life.

The reference to the steam engine implies that one was required by Karl I (the Duke), and as he was married to the sister of Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, he probably got the idea from him. Frederick wished to buy steam engines for the mines in his country, and the original drawings made for him, still exist.

The model of the perpetual motion machine which was ordered to be got ready for the commission from England is an intriguing. Von Mannsberg held the title to the land at Karlshafen, but worked in England as assistant to von Hatorff, and later to Ernst von Steinberg, both men being successively responsible for overseeing George II's German possessions. The new action to secure an Orffyrean wheel may have been initiated by von Mannsberg reading Desagulier's newly published lectures on perpetual motion. The curator of experiments at the Royal Society, of which von Mannsberg was an FRS, published his course of lectures, given years before, in 1745 and the reference to John Rowley and the Orffyrean wheel, may have struck a chord with Orffyreus' landlord. The name 'Orffyreus' would certainly have jumped out of the page at von Mannsberg, and he might well have recollected that the inventor working at Karlshafen had the same name. The thought that the man of whom Rowley had spoken of so convincingly was living and working on his own land back at home, must have roused his curiosity. He wrote directly to the inventor and commissioned him to build a new wheel for him. Whether he would have purchased the machine is debatable, in any case events overtook his plans. Fresh scares about another Jacobite rebellion surfaced in this year, and advice was given against traveling in Europe until the threat had passed. By then, of course Orffyreus was dead.

The misery in which Orffyreus finds himself is almost palpable. It is impossible not to feel sympathetic to his plight, especially considering how high his status had been, and how low it had sunk. There is little doubt that the windmill would have been a success if it had been built where he had intended. But it was not wasted. Two years after his death, the Duke's master of hunt, von Langen, who worked in Fürstenberg, offered his master some plans which he had drawn up which proposed the setting up of a porcelain factory. Von Langen had the hunting lodge in mind for the factory, but although the Duke gave his blessing to the venture, it was not the hunting lodge that he allotted to von Langen on the 11th January 1747, but the still unfinished windmill. It was from this small beginning that the famous Fürstenberg porcelain industry sprang. The original building that was constructed by Orffyreus has been incorporated into a folklore museum for the tourist industry.

According to Strieder, Orffyreus was buried as he wished, in the family grave in his garden at Karlshafen. However local rumours suggest that he was in fact, buried in the forest nearby, which was commonly done at the time. Certainly, to date, there is no evidence of his grave, despite the fact that a possible candidate for the original house has been found. The finding of this gravestone could have considerable importance for reasons which I shall go into shortly.

The widow of the inventor, his second wife, had no savings or income, so she received a weekly handout from the governmental administration of one thaler, twelve groschen and some firewood. It is said that she offered the Duke (Karl 1) the inheritance of her husband, which consisted of a model of the perpetual motion machine, which had predictably, been taken apart before his death. There was a collection of engravings, some mechanical and optical instruments and many books, which apparently were of no scientific value. The books may have been Orffyreus' reference books for the cure of various ailments, plus of course his Maschinen Tractate, which he had once planned to publish.

So it appears (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that Mannsberg commissioned the table top PM model from England, and was Bessler's landlord as JC said. Bessler obviously wrote Mannsberg it was complete but he did not come and collect or pay for it. So Bessler offered publicly to sell it only a month after completing it (a short time) for a fair offer in May 1745 which was recorded in a local newspaper (yet to be verified). In there a description of the model is given of sorts.

Thereafter Bessler's wife and widow six months later offers her 'governmental benefactor' (Karl 1) the 'inheritance' which included what was to become JC's MT and the model, which was taken apart, etc. Or perhaps incomplete to boot !

But we read in Hotzenplotz's post letter exchanges between Malsburg and Frederic, within a month of Bessler's death end of Nov 1745, in Dec-Feb 1745. Malsburg presumably the Furstenberg chief of the council or councilor (rath). And not the Duke (our Karls son and heir Karl 1) but presumably King Frederic of Prussia, young Karl's father-in-law ?! Because Frederic says keep the items from Bessler's estate that I want and return the rest to the widow. Yet according to JC's PM-AAMS she owed a debt to Karl 1 (the Duke).

It looks to me that unless it was normal policy for Karl 1 to sign off as King Frederic then it was indeed King Frederic pulling the strings - and this would be likely where the perhaps 'incomplete' and definitely taken apart (disassembled) model PM wheel ended up, via Karl 1 and his wife perhaps.

[Fletcher]

Yes Fletcher, I thought about that, then my final thought was: In the light of his condition in the last letter, (if the machine was complicated, fine tubed and/or had many parts) why would he make a machine that was so tiny that it made him even more obstacles?

So, maybe was the basic principle so simple that it was just a train/series of weights and handles..

Hi Oystein .. yes, if he was under so much duress and being 'squeezed' by the administration, severe ill health etc, why build a tiny wheel ? (My hand span from tip of my little finger to tip of my thumb is 23 cm's.) It would be hard to do under any circumstances. Especially so if it were complicated internally as we discussed. Most people make things smaller when either it isn't complicated to do so (why invite the headache) or when they know it so well that they have refined the design of something to it simplest and most elegant form. A certain pride factor I guess, certainly less expensive to build, easy to disassemble and hide. (I also assume for simplicity sake and scarcity of available space that it is only a one-way wheel.) It seems Bessler was at that stage, and resources were scarce.

Perhaps it was 'just a basic principle, as simple as a train/series of weights and handles' - MT9'esque ?!

FWIW, assuming the model had an outside covering or some sort, then that would be the outside diameter of 10 inches for the wheel/disk element. That makes the 'working' volume even smaller. Assuming that it had a height to thickness ratio similar to he public wheels then that could mean a disk width of only 1 inch. (roughly 10 : 1). How he attached the 2 stampers etc is unknown at this stage. I'd assume they were axle driven and located beside the wheel so the overall demo model could have been substantially wider. It was only a model. The newspaper description may have more valuable information ?

What is sure imo is that it better work as promoted for anybody to part with good money for it. So the initial thoughts of not environmental force driven (too slow and too weak), and the count of sounds of impact not significant to operation still stands in my book. And it ain't 3D reliant imo. If I bought that model I'd want to see it running day and night before I parted with any coin, under glass and monitored. Then I can be sure there are no springs driving it etc. I'd also have the money in escrow until mutually agreed terms are met like duration run time. Once I buy it I'm gonna look inside anyway and confirm that it is what the Bill Of Sale said. What I was lead to believe and that I paid good money for, else my goons are gonna get upset !

[Oystein]

Is this person not Frederick King of Sweeden, Karl 1 son, and Landgraffe of Hesse? Or is it Frederic, King of Prussia?

[MrTim]

Yes, knowing the width/thickness of the 10 zoll wheel would be a big help. And such a small wheel could be built with scrounged up scrap material (it's the craftsmanship that's more important.) Hoping more info turns up..,.! ;-)

[John Collins]

From memory, we are talking about Karl (or Charles) I, Duke of Brunswick
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles ... %C3%BCttel
It gets very confusing because the nobility insisted on using the same names!

The above Karl, founded the porcelain factory at Fürstenberg, but was not our Karl, the Landgrave of Hesse Kassel, who was dead anyway.

JC

[Krabat]

Thinking about Besslers heritage, it seems to be most important to be aware of the fact that Bessler at the time of his death was living in two countries. He still owned a house in Karlshafen, Hessen, but was working in Fürstenberg, Braunschweig. Although the distance are only about 18 km, Bessler did not drive (nor ride) to work every morning but was living in Fürstenberg, most likely in some room next to the windmill we do not know.

Due to these circumstances we have to deal with two different authorities:

1. Frederic, King of Sweden (not the prussian Frederic) and Landgraf von Hessen, and his servant Malsburg in Karlshafen.

2. Karl, Herzog of Braunschweig, not to be confused with the former Landgraf. According to JC, there had also been a certain "Mannsberg" in Fürstenberg.

There had been some confusion about Malsberg, Malsburg and Mannsberg: https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... g&start=30
It seems to me that there are different opinions how many different persons these are. Malsberg can be clearly identified as part of the Hessian administration. It would be good to know if it can be proven that there had another person called Mannsberg not only existed as part of the Braunschweig administration, but also was in contact with Bessler before or after hist death.

What is sure is:

a) The last PM had been built in Fürstenberg, not in Karlshafen, the last engravures, still missed today, were drawn in Fürstenberg, not Karlshafen, and the offer to sell the PM was referring to Fürstenberg, too. BUT:

b) The inventory after death and the surrounding letters are written by the hessian authorities, dealing with things found in Orffyreus Karlshafen house, not in Fürstenberg.

c) What happened to Besslers possessions he kept in Fürstenberg we do not know. But he must have head a room to dwell there and therefore some personal things.

As there is still no consensus, whether Besslere died by accident (that is: suddenly) or not, we do not know if he brought the PM from Fürstenberg to Karlshafen. But it has not been found there, and, seeing the cirumstances of his last months, it is not likely he did.

So my suggestion is: While the hessian authorities searched Orffyreus' house in Karlshafen, the more interesting part of his heritage was lying somewhere in Fürstenberg, not because somebody hid it, but just because this was Besslers last station to live at.

Looking at JCs book, I find this:

‘The widow of the inventor, his second wife, had no savings or income, so she received a weekly handout from the governmental administration of one thaler, twelve groschen and some firewood. It is said that she offered the Duke the inheritance of her husband, which consisted of a model of the perpetual motion machine, which had predictably, been taken apart before his death.

This seems to fit my thoughts above, but: There's confusion about Hessen and Braunschweig in it. If the widow, living in Karlshafen, got some support, this would be a hessian affair. The offer to the Duke, which I would be very keen to here more about, belongs to Braunschweig.

I would appreciate if JC told us his actual view on the question of Malsburg/Mannsburg identity and also on the widow's curious deals after Bessler's death.

[John Collins]

Adam von Mannsberg (sometimes with one n)was Bessler’s landlord. I contacted the descendent of this family many years ago and he agreed that there could be information within his huge library but as it has never been organised it would take years to find anything relevant.

von Mannsberg was a fellow of the Royal Society and had requested the construction of the wheel mentioned in Bessler’s last letter. Although it was completed it was never purchased as von Mannsberg was prevented from travelling from London, to see it.

I don’t know anything about the Malsburg name, but it’s possible the two names applied to von Mannsberg and was simply a misreading of the name.

Despite Karl the Landgrave son marrying the Swedish princess, I see no connection with Bessler’s world.

JC

[Oystein]

Question:

JC, who do you think/mean was the Frederick writing letters to Malsburg?

It doesn't seem likely that the Mannsberg in Bessler's letter was the same Malsburg as Frederick asks to confiscate the PM. If so Malsburg would have said that he was Mannsberg and that it already was his machine..or at least his by arranged deal.

---------------

By the way:

I found Malsburg to be a Noble family from Hesse.. if so, could the letter be from Frederick the Landgrave of Hesse-Kassel to Malsburg of Hesse? Wasn't Bessler still (for life) the Commerce Rath of Hesse-Kassel?

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malsburg_ ... eschlecht)

Best
ØR

(The attached crest has a very curious sheep.. some how relating to what all these people have to do with each other.. They kept the powers in their families, and the families kept marrying each other, and many had almost the same names.. and it can be proven why Bessler had to promise not to expose their secret..)