Again,translated from the article about the deafness of Princess Catharina:
"The deafness is something of a problem.
Well, it does not appear to be something very much problem, neither for Friis or Bruckner. But it's no wonder. They live both in a time when we had not seen the connection between deafness and language learning, as we have seen. But today we know that if it were, as Bruckner wrote somewhere that she was deaf from the age of nine month, she would have no language at all. It is therefore more natural that what she writes in the strange letter to Emperor Alexander is true, namely that she was deaf at eight years old.
But more: We know also that if she really was either completely deaf or hard of hearing so that she almost could not hear anything, so it would be impossible for her to learn any language. Mrs. Fabritius says that Princess Catharina was totally deaf, she spoke only Russian, because she had only had the opportunity to learn the Russian language in her captivity and that she interacted with "his" princess by standing in front of the princess and talk to her, the princess then repeated what you said to her, and only then could one be sure to have been correctly understood. (See letter!) With the knowledge we have today, we are forced to choose: Either Princess Catharina was not totally deaf, but has been able to hear the language's nuances clearly enough to imitate them with her voice so she could learn a new language, in this case German. Or else she has been totally deaf and could only learn to speak the languages she already knew.
Apart from what is available, it can be difficult to determine for which of the two options you want to rely on. Contemporaries did not distinguish, and this is what is the difficulty. But given that the princess learned to play piano, a 15 small hand pieces that Mrs. Fabritius writes, we must now probably think that anything she may well have been able to hear. The same must be shown to conclude from the fact that her language teacher, secretary Kleen, read out to the princess or spoke with her two hours each morning, a record that lady, Miss Kaas, took over after the death of Kleene (Friis page 200).
And is it true that she also tried to learn to speak Danish, so it can probably be understood only if she could hear anything. But it is remarkable that none of the evidence available, says that they had to speak loudly to her. We would be natural if she was deaf. Likewise, it is a little odd that she, if deafness she suffers, not taking the trumpet to use as she was sent from Copenhagen. (Friis, page 130).
When it's pretty important to get cleared up, how much Princess Catharina could hear, it is because she has written a most mysterious letter to the Russian Emperor in 1803. This letter gave the end of the 1800s led to minor conflict between Russian and Danish scholars. The Russian priest Teofan, who arrived at court in 1802, seems to have been an important person in this letter. He handed it to the emperor when he went back to Russia. It was placed in a snuffbox, which the emperor received as a gift from the small Danish court, but it is uncertain whether it ever been read by the emperor. However, it was considered in the Russian archives sometime in the middle of the 1800s, and it was published in a Russian historical journal. From there, it was drawn by the Danish historical journal "Historical Archive", 1873, pages 521-529, and translated in its entirety. The publisher, CV Smith, believed that it set the Danish administration in a bad light, which certainly is not anything to say, the contents of the letter taken into account. But he was a year later refuted by FC Granzow. (Historical Archive, 1874, page 106-120). There was kept accurate accounting of every penny in a hofholdningen, he says, so it's been very difficult if not impossible, for any of hofpersonalet to acquire anything. Granzow draws even the letter's authenticity into doubt, at least he could wish to see the letter in kind to compare skrifttrækkene with letters found in the Danish archives containing princess Catherine font. And already Granzow mention the Russian priest Teofan or Feofan, as the real instigator of the strange letter.
The same Friis, and so far they can understand, he managed to get the German and Russian writers historian Bruckner to some extent to change position. In his book's first edition, he (p. 47) repeated the accusation that the Russian journal based on Catherine letter directing at the Danish hofbetjening. But later versions provide him with an epilogue that takes into account Granzows objections from an article in a Russian historical journal of a Mr. Grot. (Pages 133-137). Yet he goes no further than to say that the objections have emerged (on Princess Catherine satisfaction and hospitality and hilarity) easy to reconcile with the present letter.
It is now a claim, it is very hard to take seriously. On the contrary, Princess Catherine letter saying the opposite of what we otherwise know about conditions in Horsens. She calls straight Cholmogory a heaven and a hell Horsens. She claims that she cheated by the Danes, who surrounds her. She claims that they force her to write letters for a pension. She mentions that she wants to come back to Russia to end his days in a nunnery. One can see in the letter, which is "here", commented by me in accordance with what Friis write, so you can see how almost all points are in contrast to what might otherwise know about conditions at the court.
What is the problem, if the letter is genuine (which it probably is now) is how on earth this Russian priest Teofan, has managed Princess Catharina to write what she writes. One of the things that causes me to believe that it is probably true, the fact that it is written in a very clumsy Russian, something that also characterizes other letters from Princess Catharina, both in Russian and German. (See eg the letter to the lady Miss Sehestedt). And if it is true, then show the letter to the Russian minister has had a much greater power over the princess, than the Danes imagined. He has actually been able to get her to express himself, as she does with her own words, that is, he has been able to talk to her so strongly that she, at least for a time, was convinced that this was indeed himself, as he said.
This is probably again with the four siblings were raised in a completely different strong religious faith, than the Danes imagined, and therefore apparently retained this strong and fervent piety also in this country. They have therefore had a more close relationship with their pastors, than a 1,700-century Dane would have to his priest. And they have more readily relied upon a minister, than their Danish courtiers found advisable. At least when court vicar named Teofan.
Mention may also Friis reports (in passing) that Prince Alexei in autumn 1787 was the thought that he would not survive that day in October, at the Princess Elisabeth died. The idea occupied him more and more, and he recovered that reason not of his illness, although he did not die on 22 October, not 20, as he had predicted. Friis call it an obsession, and that's probably what today we would be inclined to call it. But the question is whether this idea is an expression of his deep piety, though this piety has a completely different look than we Danes are used to."